Hi everyone,

The current bullshittery in FTSC_PUBLIC is proof that Fidonet is starting
its death spiral. Some may say that's been coming for a long time but with Zone 2 declating Fidonet is dead is amausing but the only thing dead is
their so-called power trip.

Zone 2's usual suspects make me laugh.

I'll admit, a lot of those people were the reason I founded Micronet.

-- <8D~



--- MBSE BBS v1.1.0 (Linux-x86_64)
* Origin: Outpost BBS * Johnson City, TN (618:618/1)

Hello digimaus!

The current bullshittery in FTSC_PUBLIC is proof that
Fidonet is starting its death spiral. [...]

The ftsc voting thing is a bit over-rated, and too serious.

The documentation system called ftsc is not in itself a bad
thing, but some of the debate between what is a standard and is
not, and whether an established standard is MUST or a SHALL or
a MAY, seems overly complicated.


--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.64
* Origin: (} Pointy McPointface (618:250/1.9)

Hello August!

23 Feb 25 14:55, you wrote to digimaus:

The current bullshittery in FTSC_PUBLIC is proof that
Fidonet is starting its death spiral. [...]

The ftsc voting thing is a bit over-rated, and too serious.

The basic problem is that too many people see the FTSC as a political organization/group. It is not, and was never intended to be. It is supposed to be a purely technical group which documents how FidoNet works, and the information that software developers need to create working FidoNet compatible software. There is no advantage to any particular zone or region in having representation on the FTSC. If the current slate of candidates are elected, we will have 3 members from Zone 1, and 1 each from Zones 2 and 3.

The documentation system called ftsc is not in itself a bad
thing, but some of the debate between what is a standard and is
not, and whether an established standard is MUST or a SHALL or
a MAY, seems overly complicated.

Certain individuals seem to think that the FTSC is an enforcement body, with the power to ban non-compliant software or compel changes. It is not, and most likely never will be. All it can do is document what currently is being used, with an eye toward future implementations (if any) being compatible with current software.

The fact is, FidoNet Policy only requires the ability to send and receive mail using an FTS-0001 session over a POTS connection during the designated Zone Mail Hour. Any additional capabilities are a bonus, not a requirement. Back when Internet Only nodes were first proposed, there were some who fought against them being included in the nodelist, as they technically do not comply with the requirement to accept inbound FTS-0001 sessions on a POTS connection. Now it's virtually impossible to get a real copper phone (POTS) line in most areas. Virtually all phone providers these days are selling some sort of VoIP product, which may or may not work properly with a traditional modem.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240209
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (618:100/2)

Hello Andrew!

The basic problem is that too many people see the FTSC as a political organization/group. It is not, and was never intended to be. It is supposed to be a purely technical group which documents how FidoNet
works, and the information that software developers need to create
working FidoNet compatible software. [...]

All understood. At some point, there is a paradox. On one hand
ftsc documents what people are doing, and on the other, it
expects people to meet conditions for compatibility.

eg. the IBMPC 2 vs CP437 thing.

I suppose IBMPC x describes an impartial charset, whereas,
CPxxx is the more specific and thus *more* correct?

Yet.. the use of IBMPC x doesn't really break anything.

Pershaps the ftsc approach ought to be to nudge developers to
adopt updated nomenclature, and not make it sound like there is
some terrible violation.

--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.64
* Origin: (} Pointy McPointface (618:250/1.9)

Hello digimaus!

23 Feb 25 14:41, you wrote to all:

Hi everyone,

The current bullshittery in FTSC_PUBLIC

It's an unpleasant flamewar to read, and a good reminder that hobby and meddling-in don't mix well at all. I look at FTN like kinda being an equivalent to something like HAM radio, where the stations are people who enjoy putting private time and creative effort into keeping a technology in use. Theirs is radiowaves, and they also incorporate modern tech into their world (WebSDR). Ours is bulletin boards and FTN. They send QSL cards when a test-connect succeeds, we send an echo-reply with kludges. It's a hobby. We do it like we want, and i'm glad you and others started your own network.

Best,
Floris


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20170303
* Origin: ----> Fidian on Azure West-Europe (Holland) IPV6. (618:500/66)

The current bullshittery in FTSC_PUBLIC is proof that Fidonet is starting
its death spiral. Some may say that's been coming for a long time but with Zone 2 declating Fidonet is dead is amausing but the only thing dead is
their so-called power trip.

If they really think it is dead I wonder why they don't just leave? Not
saying that to be mean but, if I thought it was really dead I would
probably just stop posting/connecting vs. sticking around to tell everyone
that it is dead.


Mike

* SLMR 2.1a * Governments absorb 100x their weight in excess liberties.
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

On 24 Feb 25 08:40:00, August Abolins said the following to Andrew Leary:

Pershaps the ftsc approach ought to be to nudge developers to
adopt updated nomenclature, and not make it sound like there is
some terrible violation.

I preferred if the FTSC was entirely shut down, archived, handed over to Andrew with oversight from ZCC and "thats that".

Too late now... maybe next time.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (618:500/24)

Floris van Unen wrote to digimaus <=-

It's an unpleasant flamewar to read, and a good reminder that hobby and meddling-in don't mix well at all. I look at FTN like kinda being an equivalent to something like HAM radio, where the stations are people
who enjoy putting private time and creative effort into keeping a technology in use. Theirs is radiowaves, and they also incorporate
modern tech into their world (WebSDR). Ours is bulletin boards and FTN. They send QSL cards when a test-connect succeeds, we send an echo-reply with kludges. It's a hobby. We do it like we want, and i'm glad you and others started your own network.

Thank you for your thoughts. I started Micronet so I could get away from
the crap (25 years late, same crap).

Fidonet will be Fidonet until there's nothing left.

Are you a ham? My callsign is KS4TD. I hold an Extra-class license here in the States.



... WinErr 004: Erroneous error: nothing is wrong.
--- MultiMail/Linux
* Origin: Outpost BBS * Johnson City, TN (618:618/1)

Mike Powell wrote to DIGIMAUS <=-

If they really think it is dead I wonder why they don't just leave?
Not saying that to be mean but, if I thought it was really dead I would probably just stop posting/connecting vs. sticking around to tell
everyone that it is dead.

The troublemakers are all old men who don't have a place in the world
anymore. Bjorn and Ward are widowers and that must be terrible to deal
with. Michiel is just a crank (he's a ham radio operator also) and
Winifred, I mean Wilfred, just likes to pretend he's a devloper; in Fmail,
he hasn't actually fixed anything. he's just put his name in it as its developer.

They're hanging on for their halcyon days when they "had power" and
supposedly mattered. Fidonet dies off 29 years ago when the Internet (DARPAnet) was declassified by Clinton. These idiots started Fidoweb which basicly into a lawless wasteland.

I'm still in Fidonet because of one caller I have. He's 84 now and when he falls off his log, I may disconnect from Fidonet.

-- Sean

... I married Miss Right. I didn't know her first name was Always.
--- MultiMail/Linux
* Origin: Outpost BBS * Johnson City, TN (618:618/1)

Andrew Leary wrote to August Abolins <=-

accept inbound FTS-0001 sessions on a POTS connection. Now it's
virtually impossible to get a real copper phone (POTS) line in most
areas. Virtually all phone providers these days are selling some sort
of VoIP product, which may or may not work properly with a traditional modem.

I checked last week and the only way I can get a POTS line now is if I get
an overpriced "business plan" from Brightspeed (which is notorious for bad system and customer service).

-- Sean

... I just can't handle automatic doors.
--- MultiMail/Linux
* Origin: Outpost BBS * Johnson City, TN (618:618/1)

Hello digimaus!

24 Feb 25 18:48, you wrote to me:

Floris van Unen wrote to digimaus <=-

Thank you for your thoughts. I started Micronet so I could get away
from the crap (25 years late, same crap).

But we're all still reading along on fidonet, for some reason. I'm just a hoarder of FTN networks, got twelve and they are all a bit quiet.

Are you a ham? My callsign is KS4TD. I hold an Extra-class license
here in the States.

I find it interesting, but living in an apt doesn't make it easy to get an antenna positioned correctly so currently not, but never saying never.

Floris


--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20170303
* Origin: ----> Fidian on Azure West-Europe (Holland) IPV6. (618:500/66)

*** Quoting Nick Andre from a message to August Abolins ***

I preferred if the FTSC was entirely shut down, archived, handed over
to Andrew with oversight from ZCC and "thats that".

How do we get the process started to do that? Would it have to be initiated from current FTSC members?

This seems to be a bunch of fighting/bickering to elect a group of people
that seemingly do/produce nothing. I'd be in favour of putting this up as a wiki but archiving it would also work.


Jay

... Nothing is true. Everything is permitted

--- Telegard v3.09.g2-sp4/mL
* Origin: Northern Realms (618:400/23.1)

Re: Re: Fidonet
By: Warpslide to Nick Andre on Tue Feb 25 2025 05:51 pm

Howdy,

How do we get the process started to do that? Would it have to be initiated from current FTSC members?

To be honest I dont think it could be "achieved" "democratically". When ever anything about a standard, a process is brought up - it immediately starts a shit fight, and ends with abuse.

IMHO, we need to be real - we live in the 21st century where things are done by a motivated person, and adoption determines success.

This seems to be a bunch of fighting/bickering to elect a group of people that seemingly do/produce nothing. I'd be in favour of putting this up as a wiki but archiving it would also work.

There is nothing stopping anybody putting up a "new way" of managing these standards - it doesnt guarantee a resolution to the current situation (that results in the bickering).

Heck I've thought of doing it, and the only reason I havent is a have too many other things I "prefer" doing, because I get more satisifaction by doing them.

The existing standards are 30+ years old, anytime sometime comes up with ideas to "improve" things, its shot down because its concluded it will break something old, and IMHO, there is no benefit updating the "old" documents. That old software wont change, the code is lost and/or the author is no longer with us.

Re-documenting something that wont lead to change as a result is a waste of cycles IMHO.

Think about it, the requirement to join the FTSC is to demonstrate technical support of this hobby - and the mission, fix spelling or "interpretation" mistakes for a technology that is 30+ years old that isnt evolving. The more I think about it, Im surprised that there are 4 people who have put their name in the ring...


...oEoN
--- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
* Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (618:510/2)