>  * Origin: SFCBBS - Atlanta - 594-1315 (1:133/114)

Marshall --

Someone gave me a copy or your amusing FidoNet history. Alas, it contains
some rather serious errors.

--> Regions were defined in March 1985 AT THE SAME TIME as nets, and only,
strictly only, so that nodes not able to join a net for physical reasons
would have a "net/node"-like address. The only difference between a net
host and a region host is that a net host is required to route incoming mail
to its nodes. A region is not.

--> All the rot of region hosts other duties were added not by me. And I
think a lot of is is very, very bad.

--> Net hosts are REQUIRED to forward mail on to nodes within their own
net. This was WHY /0's were defined!!!!!!!!!

> Then, a lone disciple of FidoNet began sending large amounts of material host
> routed through the regional coordinators for delivery to the network
> coordinators for delivery to the masses - that was NOT good, and yea verily
> the Regional Coordinators did complain loudly and vociferously to the
> almightly TJ who sayeth, "Why art thou troubled, did you not know that you
> must pay the freight?" - and the regional coordinators did spit fire and

None of this happened... region hosts were never required, or even asked,
or suggested, tht they forward mail... whether or not individuals 
misinterpreted this is *another* story... :-)

> Another disciple of FidoNet was beginning to discover the true joy and
> ...
> he was not content to pay the
> resultant phone bill from the evil AT&T. So reluctant was he, that he began
> depositing his mail on his hosts system, so that his host would, brightly
> brightly and with beauty, deliver his personal mail to the far away lands of
> the other networks. The net coordinator spake unto this disciple saying, "Yea
> ...
> not be impure of thought and deed, but the TJ responded saying thus: "Sorry
> bozo, you are out of your mind - have I not created network coordinators so
> that people may communicate with you at less cost? Have I not put in place
> ...

Again, while people may have sdone all sorts of silly things, it was NEVER
a design feature. It was never implied nor stated that /0's would do 
anything more than route incoming mail. As a matter of fact, from the very
start (and I have dox) it was quite plainly stated that everyone is reponsible
for their outgoing phonecalls. (At the time intra-net costs were assumed to
be local calls; as long as net/0's arrange for intra-net delivery (call out or
require pickup, etc) it doesn't matter.)


So I hope you don't think I'm mad at you. I assume you protrayed what you 
thought the facts were. 

However, could I ask you to update your message/story and repost it? It's
gotten quoted around quite a bit (it *is* well-written and quite
funny!) (Though the position of god-hood makes me queasy, personally, it
also pokes fun at that very phenomenon... a good thing I tell you! :-)
