Just make sure they're not taking P4 too seriously.
Whenever I hear that bullshit statement quoted my stomach turns ...
Then you are breaking Felten's Rule #4 (as per above).
Unfortunately a bunch of RCs came out of the woodwork and hijacked our policy change attempt, adding all kinds of more or less stupid additional changes. Needless to say, it all crashed miserably, leaving us with the present dinosaur in effect still today.
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
Bjrn Felten -> Ward Dossche skrev 2019-04-02 09:26:
Unfortunately a bunch of RCs came out of the woodwork and
hijacked our policy change attempt, adding all kinds of more or
less stupid additional changes. Needless to say, it all crashed
miserably, leaving us with the present dinosaur in effect still
today.
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
It's almost 20 years too late. :(
Ward Dossche wrote to Bjrn Felten <=-
Unfortunately a bunch of RCs came out of the woodwork and hijacked our policy change attempt, adding all kinds of more or less stupid additional changes. Needless to say, it all crashed miserably, leaving us with the present dinosaur in effect still today.
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
Yeah what a damn shame that democracy overcame dictatorship, eh?
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
Wait, aren't you guys that are totally against ANY changes in
FidoNet, NO-MATTER-WHAT?
I guess it's just that you're against any change that *YOU* don't
initiate.
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't anymore. Plus some loudmouthers as well...
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't anymore.
Plus some loudmouthers as well...
OK, let's play.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the ZCC
and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the DD>BF> ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
David Drummond wrote to Bjrn Felten <=-
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
Bjrn Felten wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Yeah what a damn shame that democracy overcame dictatorship, eh?
Let me see now. The dictators overcame all the grunt sysops
and you call *that* democracy? Figures...
Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Wait, aren't you guys that are totally against ANY changes in
FidoNet, NO-MATTER-WHAT?
I guess it's just that you're against any change that *YOU* don't initiate.
The success, or lack of it, in a Fidonet context has always been
decided by people voting with their feet. They either went one
way or they went another way.
The concept of power related to a coordinator position, and hence
the abuse of such imagined power, is nothing but a figment of
your imagination. The higher the *C is in the hierarchy, the more
of a victim he/she is. You don't have to take my word for it.
Just ask your own ZC.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the ZCC
and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
What "figures" is that you selectively snip
needed as per P4.8.1
What would the IC's role be?
The concept of power related to a coordinator position, and hence
the abuse of such imagined power, is nothing but a figment of
your imagination. The higher the *C is in the hierarchy, the more
of a victim he/she is. You don't have to take my word for it.
Just ask your own ZC.
Nothing of what you wrote above does anything to address the question/statement that I wrote. Just more diversion and
deception, as usual.
needed as per P4.8.1
What would the IC's role be?
Take a wild guess. 8-)
Make certain there's enough beer? 8-)
Make certain there's enough beer? 8-)
I always have more than enough!
On 3/04/2019 06:05, 2:203/2 wrote:
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't
anymore.
Plus some loudmouthers as well...
OK, let's play.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
--
Gang warily
David
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
Coin Tosser?
anymore.Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't
Plus some loudmouthers as well...
OK, let's play.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
Unfortunately a bunch of RCs came out of the woodwork and hijackedour
policy change attempt, adding all kinds of more or less stupidadditional
changes. Needless to say, it all crashed miserably, leaving us withthe
present dinosaur in effect still today.
Yeah what a damn shame that democracy overcame dictatorship, eh?
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
Wait, aren't you guys that are totally against ANY changes in
FidoNet, NO-MATTER-WHAT?
I guess it's just that you're against any change that *YOU* don't initiate.
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
It's almost 20 years too late. :(
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't anymore. Plus some loudmouthers as well...
Unfortunately a bunch of RCs came out of the woodwork and hijacked our
policy change attempt, adding all kinds of more or less stupid additional
changes. Needless to say, it all crashed miserably, leaving us with the
present dinosaur in effect still today.
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't
anymore.
Plus some loudmouthers as well...
OK, let's play.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
I thought you knew everything?
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the ZCC
and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
really? have you still not read the policy document that defines our network?
the ICs role is clearly defined in there...
needed as per P4.8.1
What would the IC's role be?
Take a wild guess. 8-)
Make certain there's enough beer? 8-)
I always have more than enough!
Coin Tosser?
Terry
What would the IC's role be?
OK, let's play.
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
To scratch his own balls?
We could always have another go at it ... 8-)
It's almost 20 years too late. :(
Just for fun ... A number of the powers that used to be, aren't anymore.
Plus some loudmouthers as well...
Where is Roy Witt when you need him most?
David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-
What are the chances that the present ZC structure can revive the
ZCC and select an IC (needed as per P4.8.1?
What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
Only if one has a copy to hand - or do you have the entire
document memorised?
I thought you knew everything?
I guess you're wrong again...
Another clue that you missed was where Bjorn even stated where the
IC role is discussed in P4 (even though he got the section wrong).
Only if one has a copy to hand - or do you have the entire document memorised?
What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
Only if one has a copy to hand - or do you have the entire
document memorised?
Your logic is quite flawed. Whether one has a copy at hand or not
does not change the fact that the IC's role is clearly defined in
P4, which is what I said.
Read what somebody *SAYS*, not what you
think they said, or what helps you twist things up to make a
point.
Another clue that you missed was where Bjorn even stated where the
IC role is discussed in P4 (even though he got the section wrong).
Another clue that you missed was where Bjorn even stated where the
IC role is discussed in P4 (even though he got the section wrong).
I never get anything P4-related wrong. That can only lead to one conclusion...
I never get anything P4-related wrong. That can only lead to one
conclusion...
Dan was mistaken again.
David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-
What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
Only if one has a copy to hand - or do you have the entire
document memorised?
Your logic is quite flawed. Whether one has a copy at hand or not
does not change the fact that the IC's role is clearly defined in
P4, which is what I said.
And if one does not have a copy to hand nor has the document
memorised then how does one know the documented role?
If a tree falls over in the forest and no-one witnesses it, did
it make a noise.
Read what somebody *SAYS*, not what you
think they said, or what helps you twist things up to make a
point.
You would well benefit from the same advice.
Another clue that you missed was where Bjorn even stated where the
IC role is discussed in P4 (even though he got the section wrong).
Read it again = he did have it right.
Bjrn Felten wrote to David Drummond <=-
I never get anything P4-related wrong. That can only lead to one
conclusion...
Dan was mistaken again.
That would be my conclusion, yes. 8-)
The IC's role is layed out in Section 7. Not in 8.1 as you said.
Nope. Section 8.1 that he references describes how a Policy
change might be initiated.
The *ROLE* of the IC, which is what this whole thread is about
What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
Only if one has a copy to hand
What would the IC's role be?
really? have you still not read the policy document that defines our
network?
I have never considered the document of sufficient importance that I should memorise it.
And I did not have a copy immediately to hand.
the ICs role is clearly defined in there...
Pol 4.8 discussed the IC's role as facilitator of Policy changes
(yes, I located a copy).
Coin Tosser?
Gott wirft keine Wrfel.
..
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125 * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
And if one does not have a copy to hand nor has the document
memorised then how does one know the documented role?
That's a seperate question that was not the topic of discussion.
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, so I'll try to
lay it out more simply for you:
What you claimed (right there above, since I didn't Bjorn-snip it
out), is that the IC's role is only defined in P4 *IF* one has a copy
of P4 at hand. That is false. The IC's role is clearly defined
in P4 *WHETHER* *OR* *NOT* you have a copy of P4 at hand. See?
Another clue that you missed was where Bjorn even stated where the
IC role is discussed in P4 (even though he got the section wrong).
Read it again = he did have it right.
Nope. Section 8.1 that he references describes how a Policy
change might be initiated.
The *ROLE* of the IC, which is what this whole thread is about
(regardless of the diversion attempts), is described in Section 7.
I never get anything P4-related wrong. That can only lead to one
conclusion...
Dan was mistaken again.
That would be my conclusion, yes. 8-)
You're both wrong, again.
The IC's role is layed out in Section 7. Not in 8.1 as you said.
hummm...What would the IC's role be?
That is clearly defined in P4.
Only if one has a copy to hand
your NC should have it available... oh, wait... you are your NC...
What would the IC's role be?
really? have you still not read the policy document that defines our
network?
I have never considered the document of sufficient importance that I
should memorise it.
no one has said that it should be memorized... only that it should be available if someone needs a copy or even just to read...
And I did not have a copy immediately to hand.
that can easily be remedied... i have copies of all four policy
documents and can easily drop one or more off in your inbound if you
like ;)
the ICs role is clearly defined in there...
Pol 4.8 discussed the IC's role as facilitator of Policy changes
yes, that's one part of the role...
(yes, I located a copy).
yay! :)
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 73:27:33 |
| Calls: | 6,657 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,332,384 |
| Posted today: | 1 |