     Volume 6, Number 33                                14 August 1989
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
     |                                                  _            |
     |                                                 /  \          |
     |                                                /|oo \         |
     |        - FidoNews -                           (_|  /_)        |
     |                                                _`@/_ \    _   |
     |        International                          |     | \   \\  |
     |     FidoNet Association                       | (*) |  \   )) |
     |         Newsletter               ______       |__U__| /  \//  |
     |                                 / FIDO \       _//|| _\   /   |
     |                                (________)     (_/(_|(____/    |
     |                                                     (jm)      |
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
     Editor in Chief:                                  Vince Perriello
     Editors Emeritii:                                     Dale Lovell
                                                        Thom Henderson
     Chief Procrastinator Emeritus:                       Tom Jennings
     
     FidoNews  is  published  weekly  by  the  International   FidoNet
     Association  as  its  official newsletter.  You are encouraged to
     submit articles for publication in FidoNews.  Article  submission
     standards  are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC,  available from
     node 1:1/1.    1:1/1  is  a Continuous Mail system, available for
     network mail 24 hours a day.
     
     Copyright 1989 by  the  International  FidoNet  Association.  All
     rights  reserved.  Duplication  and/or distribution permitted for
     noncommercial purposes only.  For  use  in  other  circumstances,
     please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067. IFNA may also be contacted
     at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141.
     
     Fido  and FidoNet  are registered  trademarks of  Tom Jennings of
     Fido Software,  164 Shipley Avenue,  San Francisco, CA  94107 and
     are used with permission.
     
     We  don't necessarily agree with the contents  of  every  article
     published  here.  Most of these materials are  unsolicited.    No
     article submitted  by  a  FidoNet SysOp will be rejected if it is
     properly attributed and  legally  acceptable.    We  will publish
     every responsible submission received.


                        Table of Contents
     1. EDITORIAL  ................................................  1
        We need a fresh look at Excommunication  ..................  1
     2. ARTICLES  .................................................  3
        Does the I in IFNA mean Anything?  ........................  3
        A New Echomail Backbone System  ...........................  6
        How Did This Happen?  ..................................... 11
        Hasn't This Gone Far Enough?  ............................. 12
        Democracy?  Who needs it?  ................................ 15
        Vervan's Gaming Net  ...................................... 19
        Words from Zone 1 Coordinator  ............................ 22
     3. LATEST VERSIONS  .......................................... 25
     And more!
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 1                   14 Aug 1989


     =================================================================
                                 EDITORIAL
     =================================================================


     Excommunication.   It's the only punitive measure we have to deal
     with problems in  FidoNet.   Is that a Good Thing?  I don't think
     so.

     Now, before you think  this  is  going  to turn into some kind of
     attack on the *C's, let  me make it very plain that I am entirely
     supportive  of  their attempts to keep  things  going  with  what
     they've got.  I don't agree with  a  lot  of  what they have done
     (and probably will differ with many things that  they  will do in
     the future) but they're trying. Very hard.

     I think the problem lies in the lack of  good tools.  And perhaps
     just a bit too much authoritarianism.

     Why  is  there  such  a  thing  as  excommunication?  Its primary
     purpose was  originally  to deal with technical problems, such as
     nodes that didn't  answer  the  phone  any more, or had answering
     machines on their lines,  or  whatever.   That makes sense.  If a
     node isn't functioning as one, then it should be removed from the
     nodelist.

     But even THEN, there was "The Dog House".  A  nonfunctioning node
     wasn't removed right away.  It was listed in The Dog  House for a
     few  weeks,  and  then  taken  out  of  the nodelist if it didn't
     resurface as a working node.

     What ever happened to The Dog House?  And doesn't that make sense
     for at least SOME of the non-technical situations for which nodes
     have been removed from the Nodelist?

     I  know  that there are social and other reasons why someone in a
     "position of authority"  must  get involved in the way FidoNet is
     interfaced to and/or used  by  someone  on occasion, but for most
     situations, " a misused node  number"  sounds  a  lot like "a non
     functioning node". Maybe the same logic should apply.

     What  ever happened to the "don't  be  easily  annoyed"  part  of
     Policy?  Isn't that ever taken into account?  Harry Lee suggested
     once that a "You Bet Your Node Number"  clause should be added to
     Policy to reduce the number of frivolous complaints.  Interesting
     thought.  But the goal should be to keep BOTH  nodes,  if  at all
     possible.

     Why  are  the  *C's  so  heavily  involved  in personal squabbles
     between nodes?   Is there some reason why "This isn't a technical
     or legal (Yes,  Virginia,  there are litigious people in FidoNet)
     issue and it isn't  affecting  the flow of mail.  You two work it
     out on your own" shouldn't  be  a  valid  response  to  a  Policy
     complaint?

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 2                   14 Aug 1989


     So what should we do?  How about cleaning up Policy4?  Get rid of
     most if not all of the parts that have no technical basis.  Let's
     put  The  Dog  House  back.    Let's    allow   reinstatement  of
     excommunicated  nodes (with suitable confirmation that the reason
     for removal has been addressed).

     Most importantly, this idea that an  excommunicated  SysOp should
     not be allowed to post into an echomail  area carried anywhere in
     FidoNet is unenforceable and should be set aside.   Echomail  has
     its own enforcement tools and those can be employed in  the event
     that the excommunicated SysOp creates a nuisance.

     I'd sure like to see a  worldwide  synchronized  nodelist.  Isn't
     that  what  the  *C's  are supposed to  be  in  the  business  of
     producing?    Can  we  get some attention to  that  issue,  guys?
     Thanks.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 3                   14 Aug 1989


     =================================================================
                                 ARTICLES
     =================================================================

     Bill Bolton
     3:711/403

                     Does the I in IFNA Mean Anything?

     As the  1989  Fidocon  draws  near, so does another IFNA Board of
     Directors meeting.   Having served on the IFNA BoD for 12 months,
     as Director for Division  12,  I  have  come  to  appreciate  the
     frustrations that have caused many  good  people  in  the Fidonet
     give up and to walk away from IFNA.

     My specific goals in seeking election  to  IFNA  were to make the
     organisation live up to the "International" part of its name.  To
     date I have been almost totally frustrated in making any progress
     at all towards those goals.

     Firstly, all the BoD meetings are held in North  America.   It is
     not  financially  possible for me to attend these meetings as  it
     would  cost me approximately 5 days (due to time zone differences
     and jet lag) and somewhere in the region of $2500 dollars.

     Secondly,  there  is no provision in the structure of IFNA for me
     to appoint a proxy to attend and vote at BoD meetings.  Under the
     IFNA bylaws  I  am  able  to appoint an Alternate Director for my
     District, however an  Alternate  has much more responsibility and
     potential power than a  proxy  does  and  I  am  not  prepared to
     consider appointing an Alternate who  do  not  come from Division
     12....  and of course anyone from Division 12 will generally also
     have the same financial and time restrictions  on  attending  BoD
     meetings as I do.  Catch 22.

     Thirdly,  no  minutes have been published for the  past  two  BoD
     meeting,  so  I  have  no way of knowing what  really  transpired
     there.   Fortunately  Matt  Whelan,  the  At-Large  Director  who
     resides close by to me, is usually able to time business trips to
     coincide with Fidocon so  at  least  I  have  some  idea  at what
     happened on the last Fidocon BoD meeting.

     The lack of minutes has been a significant problem for the BoD in
     that  we  cannot  agree in electronic  discussions  on  what  was
     actually agreed on at the last face to face meeting because there
     are no minutes to refer to!

     Fourthly, when the last set of by-laws amendments  were  put  out
     for  voting  on  by  the  IFNA membership, all the  international
     members  had their voting papers SURFACED MAILED to them....   so
     they  did  not arrive until after the closing date for the  vote.
     Those  amendments  created a new Division 3 for Australia and New
     Zealand, but  the IFNA members in this part of the world were not
     given any opportunity  to vote on whether it was what they wanted
     or not.  Division  12  now covers the remainder of Fidonet Zone 3
     and I am in the  somewhat difficult position of not living in the
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 4                   14 Aug 1989


     Division that I now represent.

     So, here I am, a member  of the IFNA BoD who is completely unable
     to  actually  do  anything as far as  influencing  IFNA  for  the
     members I represent.  From my experience on  the  BoD  to  date I
     cannot  realistically  see  the  I  in  IFNA  as anything  but  a
     farcical.

     Another major concern for me is the attempt by some  BoD  members
     to  spread  the  role  of  IFNA to cover networks other than  the
     network called  Fidonet.    I  joined  IFNA  because  it  was  an
     organisation for the  network  called  Fidonet  and  I  have zero
     interest in IFNA trying  to represent other networks.  Apparently
     there was some discussion about  this  at  the  Fidocon  1988 BoD
     meeting but as there are no minutes the recollections of what was
     agreed or not amongst the BoD at  that time seem to depend on who
     is doing the recollecting.

     I have asked the secretary of IFNA to  place  the following items
     on  the  Agenda  for  the Fidocon 1989 BoD meeting  in  one  last
     attempt to try and make IFNA pay anything more than  lip  service
     to both the I and FN in it's name.  Time  will  tell whether this
     will be any more successful than my other attempts.


      [The following 3 line quote is extracted from a message to BoD
       members by Kris Veitch, the IFNA secretary]

      > BTW - I am also accepting ideas and items for the Agenda that
      > I would like to publish by the 10th of August if possible.
      > Thanks in advance.

     Item 1.

     This organisation resolves  to disband itself within one calendar
     month  if  minutes of  this  Board  Meeting  are  not  publically
     published within 10 working days of the end of the meeting.

     Item 2

     This organisation resolves to disband  itself within two calendar
     months if minutes of the previous  two  Board  meetings  (Fidocon
     1988 and February 1989) are not publically  published  within  20
     working days of the end of this Board Meeting.

     Item 3.

     IFNA  resolves  to give up the pretence of  be  an  international
     organisation  and  rename  itself  to  the North American Fidonet
     Association.

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 5                   14 Aug 1989


     Item 4.

     Should  Item  3  be adopted, that all NAFNA districts outside  of
     North America be dissolved immediately.

     Item 5.

     Should  Item  3 not be adopted that IFNA immediately implements a
     method that allows IFNA directors not located in North America to
     participate meaningfully  in  voting at BoD meetings.  (Assigning
     an Alternate who does not come from the area represented in order
     to get a vote a BoD meetings is a complete farce.)

     Item 6.

     Should item 3 not  be  adopted, that provision for the payment of
     IFNA dues by internationally available credit cards, as discussed
     and agreed in principle at the  BoD Meeting at Fidocon 1988 (if I
     had  the minutes I could quote the  resolution),  be  implemented
     immediately.


     Item 7.

     That IFNA (or NAFNA) affirms that it solely  exists  to serve the
     technical  advancement  of the network called Fidonet and has  no
     interest in serving other networks which may be based on  Fidonet
     technology.

     Item 8.

     The  IFNA (or NAFNA) affirms that it abhors politicisation of the
     technical administration of Fidonet by ANYONE.

     Item 9

     I wish to advise that should Items 1, 2 and 5 not  be  adopted my
     resignation  as  a member of the BoD is tendered immediately as I
     cannot meaningfully  participate in any aspect of BoD activities.
     If items 1,  2  and  5 are not adopted the organisation will have
     proved itself morally bankrupt unless it does adopt item 3.

     Bill Bolton
     Vice President - Technical Co-ordinator
     Division 12 Director

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 6                   14 Aug 1989


     Jack Decker 154/8 (via 154/0)
     LCRnet 77:1011/8

                      A NEW ECHOMAIL BACKBONE SYSTEM

     I can  just  bet  that  some  of  you, having read the title, are
     already thinking that  this  is  going  to be a) an attack on the
     present echomail backbone, and  b)  an  attempt  to  replace  the
     current backbone system with something  resembling total anarchy.
     Well, please hold on for a  moment before you pass judgement, and
     hear me out.

     Despite  the  differences I've had with certain  folks  over  the
     attempts  to  impose  geographic  restrictions over echomail (and
     over Fidonet in general, I might add), I have  a  lot  of respect
     for  the guys that operate the Fidonet echomail backbone and  the
     Star  system.    In  many cases these guys have volunteered their
     equipment and  their  time to the mostly thankless task of making
     sure that echomail  flows  smoothly.  Even though we may disagree
     on various points of  what  should or should not be in Policy, we
     have to give these guys  a lot of credit for the job they've been
     doing in moving the echoes around.

     What concerns me, however, is the  attempts  to  make the Fidonet
     echomail  backbone  an  "enforcement  arm"  for  the  Fidonet  *C
     structure.

     For those of you that may not have  heard,  certain  Fidonet *C's
     (notably  David  Dodell  and  Justin  Marquez, the former IC  and
     former Region 19 RC respectively) have decreed that if a  node is
     excommunicated from Fidonet, they may not participate in any echo
     that is  carried  on  the Fidonet backbone.  Not even if the echo
     originates in another  network.    Not even if the excommunicated
     sysop calls in as  a  user on another board.  And, any board that
     allows an excommunicated sysop access  to an echo area that might
     be  carried  on  any  Fidonet  node    is    itself   subject  to
     excommunication.

     The logic behind this is that if a sysop is expelled from Fidonet
     for  being  a  troublemaker, it sort of defeats  the  purpose  of
     excommunication if he can get right back into the  Fidonet echoes
     by  joining  another  network.  While that is a valid  point,  it
     leaves so many loose ends as to be a nightmare to  enforce.  Just
     some of the questions left hanging by this decree include:

     * Does  the  reason  for the excommunication make any difference?
     For example, should  a sysop excommunicated for technical reasons
     (running a mailer that  won't  properly observe ZMH, for example)
     be barred from participating in  Fidonet  echo  conferences  as a
     user  of another system?  (The  decree  left  no  room  for  such
     distinctions,  all  excommunications  are  treated as though  the
     sysop  in  question is a twit that does  not  deserve  access  to
     Fidonet).

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 7                   14 Aug 1989


     *  Is  there any time limit, after which the  sysop  in  question
     would be eligible to participate in Fidonet echoes again?  (Under
     the decree as stated, a sysop excommunicated at age 13 for  being
     a twit would still be denied access to Fidonet echoes at age  65,
     should anyone care  to  keep  track of excommunicated sysops that
     long.  In other  words,  an excommunication is considered a "life
     sentence" under current Policy).

     * What if a "John  Smith"  manages  to get himself excommunicated
     from Fidonet?  Must Fidonet Sysops all over the world deny access
     to every John Smith in the world, in order to keep the name "John
     Smith"  from  appearing  in  the "From" line of  a  message  that
     originates from their board (on the chance that it  might  be the
     excommunicated  John  Smith,  accessing  an  echo area from their
     board which  would  make  the  sysop  of  that  board  subject to
     immediate excommunication?) Will  we,  as one sysop asked, now be
     required to receive an  "excommunicated  sysops  list"  each week
     that contains a list of  user names that must not be permitted to
     have access to echomail areas?   (The  irony  of this is that the
     REAL excommunicated "John Smith" could just log onto other boards
     (or set up another BBS of his own) using an assumed name, so that
     other    "John    Smiths"  would  get  hassled  while  the  real,
     excommunicated John Smith could keep on posting under a different
     name!).  By the way, if you don't appreciate the possible  impact
     of  this, substitute YOUR name for "John Smith" in this paragraph
     (and pretend you're NOT the one that got excommunicated!).

     My personal  feeling is that Fidonet is beginning to take on some
     of the traits of a religious cult (this latest dictum sounds just
     like a practice known as "shunning" which is practiced by several
     cults.  It's an attempt  to  keep  those who have been inside the
     organization  and  then  left  from  communicating    with    the
     "faithful", and possibly exposing them to thoughts and ideas that
     those in charge would rather suppress).

     In any event, I have to wonder how  the *EC structure feels about
     being pressed into service as an "enforcement arm" for  the  *Cs.
     This  is  truly  a  situation where the backbone and Star  system
     operators have an opportunity to be part of the problem, or  part
     of the  solution.   The Echomail coordinators hold the true power
     in Fidonet, whether  they  realize  it  or not (consider how long
     Fidonet might last if, for example, the Echomail backbone decided
     to  align themselves with another  network.    Without  echomail,
     there would not be much left to attract sysops to Fidonet).

     If the majority of the backbone sysops (or possibly even just ONE
     Star system) were to announce itself as  independent  (no  longer
     aligned  exclusively  with Fidonet), the *C structure would  lose
     most of its power in one fell swoop.   Therefore,  it seems to me
     that  the  *C  structure  ought to be treating the *EC's  with  a
     little more  respect,  instead  of  just  handing  down  dictates
     (unenforceable ones at that) all the time!

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 8                   14 Aug 1989


     In the case of an excommunicated Sysop, I would at the very least
     suggest to the *EC's  that you ought to insist that there be some
     sort  of  time limit on  any  excommunication,  after  which  the
     excommunicated  node is eligible to apply  for  reinstatement  to
     Fidonet, or if he chooses not to do that, to receive echoes again
     through another network.  The way the current  dictate  reads,  a
     guy  could  lose  access  to  echomail  for  life  if    he    is
     excommunicated  and chooses not to try to rejoin Fidonet at  some
     later date, and YOU could be excommunicated if he happens to  get
     echomail  from  your system.  Do you really want to be keeping  a
     list  of  everyone that's  ever  been  excommunicated  since  the
     beginning of Fidonet, and having  to check that list every time a
     new sysop wants to get echoes from you?

     Perhaps it's time for a new  echomail  backbone system that's not
     exclusively aligned with Fidonet.  I know  some  *EC's  and  Star
     nodes might be opposed to this, but I  imagine that others may be
     chafing  under  the  layers and layers of Policy that  are  being
     imposed  by  the  *C structure (after all, the *EC's are  sysops,
     too).    I  imagine  right about now that a lot of  sysops  would
     really appreciate access to a non-aligned backbone system.

     I  have an idea for how such a structure might operate, and  it's
     SIMPLE.  So simple, in fact, that it can be explained in a couple
     of paragraphs:

     You have  a  few  Star nodes (as at present) that carry virtually
     all available echo conferences.  These in turn distribute them to
     the "backbone" nodes (which  in  turn feed individual nets) or to
     individual Net echo hosts.   In fact, the whole system is similar
     to the present one, with a  couple  of major differences.  First,
     Net echo hosts can go to the  least  cost echo feed, they are not
     required to go to only one particular feed,  but they may NOT get
     echoes  from  two  different feeds at the same time.    In  other
     words, each Net echo host sticks with one feed (no  matter  where
     it is), changing feeds only if there is a cost savings to the net
     to  do  so,  or  in  the  case  of  an irreconcilable personality
     conflict  with   the  present  feed  (the  latter  would  not  be
     encouraged, but would  be  permitted.   Why force individuals who
     despise each other to  have  to  communicate with each other on a
     daily basis?  That's just  guaranteed  to  increase  the level of
     flames and conflicts within the net).  The restriction on getting
     your echoes from only one feed maintains  a  proper topology that
     avoids the infamous "dupe loops." Please note that  geography  is
     *not* a factor here, and there is no reason it should be.

     The second difference is that each Star system would  maintain  a
     list  of  Nets that it feeds (either directly or indirectly)  and
     these lists could be used to facilitate netmail handling.  If you
     wanted  to  send  netmail  to  another  system,  you (or your net
     echomail host) could send it to the Star system serving your net,
     who would in turn forward it either to a) the destination net (if
     served by the same  Star),  b)  the  Star serving the destination
     net,  or  c) the Zonegate  (actually  to  the  Star  serving  the
     Zonegate  system,  for  mail  destined  to    nodes   in  another
     continent).  This would give us a  FULLY connected network, which
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 9                   14 Aug 1989


     is something we don't have now (despite claims to the contrary).

     A further note on that last paragraph.   For some reason, certain
     backbone  system  operators  have  a  marked aversion to handling
     netmail.    In  my  opinion,  if  the echomail hubs would  handle
     netmail along  with  echomail, it would ultimately decrease costs
     for everyone.   Consider  the  following  situation:   A BBS user
     (remember users?) sees a  message  in  an  echo area and wants to
     reply to it.  His reply is really something that could be private
     and that does not need to  be  in  the  echo  conference,  BUT, a
     netmail reply costs money (if he can access netmail at all, which
     in my experience is the exception more often  than the rule).  So
     he leaves the reply in the echo.  That  message goes out to EVERY
     system receiving the echo, perhaps accumulating nine or ten lines
     of  SEEN-BY's as it goes, and costing EVERY sysop, backbone node,
     and  Star  system carrying that echo money.  Then, if the message
     contains anything  that  is  the  least  bit controversial (or is
     perhaps considered "off topic" for that echo conference), someone
     else jumps on it  and  the  REPLIES to that message start flying,
     each accumulating nine or ten lines of SEEN-BY's and each costing
     money for EVERY sysop handling that echo.

     If netmail could be "piggybacked" along  with echomail and travel
     via the Stars and backbone nodes, a private or questionable reply
     to an echomail message would only travel through  the  few  nodes
     necessary to get the message passed (e.g.  Net  echo host to Star
     to  destination  Star to destination Net echo host), saving money
     for all the other nodes not in that path.  The  message would not
     accumulate  any  SEEN-BY's as it travels, nor would it generate a
     string of  replies.    Would  this  save  money  for the echomail
     backbone?  You  betcha.    Would  it help cut a lot of extraneous
     crap out of many  echo conferences?  Sure would!  Are the present
     backbone nodes in favor of  such  a  plan?    Not  on  your life,
     judging from the reaction I've seen  whenever  someone  dares  to
     suggest such a scheme in an echo  conference  (they seem to be so
     worried  that  someone  might pass some "free" netmail  at  their
     expense that they fail to consider the obvious savings that would
     accrue from such a scheme.  It's a case of  not seeing the forest
     for the trees...).

     Many  SYSOPS tend to send netmail Crash anyway (they want to  get
     it  there  quickly,  and  would  find  the possible 2-3 day delay
     through the  echomail  system  unacceptable)  so  I  really don't
     anticipate a large amount of netmail being dumped on the Stars by
     sysops.  On the  other  hand, USERS will send the message one way
     or another, and if they  can't send netmail they'll put it in the
     echo so that it goes out  to  everyone,  so  the  Stars  wind  up
     handling the message either way.

     But getting back to the present controversy...    In  the "ideal"
     backbone  structure,  conference MODERATORS would be the ones  to
     decide who is allowed in any given echo.   That's  the way it was
     intended  to  be in Fidonet (in fact, the last draft  of  Echopol
     specifically gave this  authority  to  conference moderators) but
     somewhere  on  the way  to  Policy4,  someone  decided  that  the
     echomail  system  should  act  as   an  enforcement  arm  against
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 10                  14 Aug 1989


     excommunicated sysops.  While this arguably  might be appropriate
     for    LIMITED  amounts  of  time  under  certain    well-defined
     circumstances  (that  would related to bona fide misbehaviour  on
     the part of a sysop), the blanket prohibition against a sysop who
     has  been  excommunicated  from Fidonet for ANY reason EVER AGAIN
     participating in  an  echo  conference  certainly goes beyond the
     boundaries of reason.

     Anyway, that's the  whole proposal.  Not a major change from what
     we have now, just  a  couple of common sense modifications to the
     present scheme that would save  money, increase the efficiency of
     the net, and eliminate about 95%  of the echomail-related flames.
     I  wish somebody would try it before  they  flame  it.    If  the
     Fidonet  backbone  won't,  perhaps  an independent "all-networks"
     echomail backbone  should  be  set  up that would try it.  It may
     come to that anyway, if the *C's start using Echomail feeds as an
     enforcement tool.

     Remember, any time a  system  is excommunicated, or is prohibited
     from accessing an echo area,  it  could potentially hurt YOU more
     than the excommunicated sysop.  That  sysop  (or one of the users
     of his or her BBS) might be  the  person  who has the solution to
     whatever problem you last posted a message about in an echo area.
     Maybe they even wrote you a detailed reply that  would  fix  your
     problem and save you money to boot, only you never saw it because
     the  sysop  was  excommunicated  and the echomail links were cut.
     Most of  us  are  in  Fidonet because we want to COMMUNICATE with
     others, and when  others  are  EXcommunicated,  that  hurts US as
     well.

     Just some ideas for your consideration and discussion...

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 11                  14 Aug 1989


                           How Did This Happen?
                          Tom Jennings 1:125/111

     Let's  keep  this simple:  at no time  have  the  sysops  of  our
     FidoNet  network given /0's the privilege of determining how  our
     network  is  run.    They  are not representatives of anyone  but
     themselves;  they  are  merely  administrative  nodes to generate
     nodelist  fragments,  help new  sysops  get  online  and  act  as
     repositories of the necessary network  files.   They are ordinary
     nodes with more work to do.

     A  dangerous thing has been attempted,  and  is  undermining  the
     trust that we rely on.  "POLICY4" is simply not in effect, it was
     not voted upon by the members at large.  I, and many many others,
     are simply ignoring the supposed policy "change".  How  did  this
     happen?

     POLICY4  is terrible policy.  It takes the right to  choose  your
     own net host way!  It entrenches /0's as positions of  authority.
     This is  insane  and  does  not facilitate our communications.  A
     "smoothly running network"  is  not  our  goal;    we are here to
     communicate, that is all.    We do that well now.  Even voting on
     POLICY4 is insane, it certainly  will  not benefit the 6000 or so
     sysops in the network!

     I've  had  FidoNet  users  tell  me    that  their  host  doesn't
     automatically route them their host-routed mail.   This  was  the
     most  basic  purpose of a net host to  begin  with!    The  whole
     concept  of  host-routing  was to make FidoNet more effecient  by
     concentrating calls!

     Anyways,  If  a  few-dozen  or  -hundred  /0's  can vote, then  a
     few-thousand can represent themselves just as simply.  So what if
     it takes a long time, expediency is not a goal.  If we don't have
     the tool(s), write  them  or do it by hand.  Freeze a nodelist as
     the  "list of registered  voters".    Have  everyone  send  in  a
     message.  Check them off the list.  Hold redundant votes, compare
     results.  Give it a month.    The net runs fine, there is no need
     to implement bad policy just to satisfy some bureaucratic urge!

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 12                  14 Aug 1989


                     Hasn't This Gone Far Enough?
                           by Daniel Tobias
                                1:380/7

     A couple of months ago, I jumped into the arena of FidoNet policy
     debate with a  series  of articles.  I'm not sure what effect, if
     any, they had, but  I  ended  the  series  when  I had said all I
     needed  to  say.   Since  then,  things  have  gotten  even  more
     acrimonious than before, and I shudder  at  participating in this
     debate, but recent articles impel me to  jump  in once again with
     an opinion, which could get me hated by all factions.

     We're now in the midst of a spectacle  in which an excommunicated
     node claims unfair treatment on the part of the *C's, and in turn
     the *C's claim malicious activities on the part of the  sysop  in
     question.  I don't know if this situation will ever be untangled,
     but it's clear that one or both of the parties to this dispute is
     either  lying,  mistaken,  misunderstands  the  situation,  or  a
     combination of all of these.   Determining  the  actual  truth is
     nearly impossible, since the scads of net-  and echomail messages
     (public  and  private)  put  forth as evidence by  the  different
     parties  could  be real, fake, altered, used out of  context,  or
     misinterpreted.  E-mail is a perilous medium;  in the  absence of
     encryption  schemes which are not presently in wide use, there is
     no  way  of  verifying  that  a message was really written by the
     person it purports to be from, and since messages do not transmit
     "body language" they may easily be misunderstood even if no fraud
     or offense is intended.

     At this point,  I don't know if I really give a damn who is right
     and who is wrong  in this particular controversy.  I'd rather see
     the net work together in  a spirit of friendship rather than slit
     one another's throats in an effort  to  ensure  that  "right" and
     "justice"  (as  defined  by  whomever is speaking  at  the  time)
     prevails.

     In this and other disputes, both sides need to back off a little,
     and stop assuming the other side is evil.  There may be some true
     evildoers lurking, but they can't do much damage if the  rest  of
     us  don't  let them.  However, most disputants in such cases  are
     more likely to be well- intentioned people, even "nice guys", who
     through some  misunderstanding  or personality conflict end up at
     loggerheads with one  another.    The  solution is to cool down a
     little:  "chill out", as the expression goes.

     Maybe that sysop's excommunication  was  unjust;  however, it was
     upheld by the chain of  command,  so  it must be allowed to stand
     without further damaging agitation.  Maybe  someday  when  things
     cool down a bit he can try  for  readmission, if he even wants it
     after the way FidoNet treated him.  But  now  that the IC has had
     his  say,  there's  no further appeal under any present  or  past
     policy document, so the sysop in question is just out of luck.

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 13                  14 Aug 1989


     On the other hand, the attempt by the *C's to  forbid  this sysop
     from  participating  in  any  message  area  on  any FidoNet BBS,
     whether as  a  user  or  as  a  member  of an alternative network
     participating in a  gateway to FidoNet, is simple vindictiveness,
     and shouldn't be tolerated.    If  he  is causing trouble through
     such messages, by doing things  that  are "excessively annoying",
     then THAT would be a valid subject for a policy complaint against
     whatever FidoNet sysop allows his messages to be gatewayed.  Such
     a complaint would have to be separately adjudicated  as  with all
     policy complaints.

     But,  to simply make him an "unperson" (in Orwellian  terms)  and
     forbid  his name from ever intruding on FidoNet, is an  offensive
     swipe  at  the  rights  of  all  sysops  and  echomail conference
     coordinators.   If  I  wish  to  allow this guy on my system as a
     user, what right  does  any  *C  have  to deny it, so long as his
     participation is peaceful and friendly?  His past behavior is not
     relevant here;  his punishment has already been meted in the form
     of excommunication.  Any further sanctions  against  him  or  his
     friends must be based on actual, proven, new offenses.

     As for echo conference coordinators, they too  have  the right to
     determine the content, tone, and rules of their  conference,  and
     who to allow or disallow.  If the backbone  systems,  which spend
     lots  of  money  to distribute the conferences (as noted in  last
     week's  FidoNews),  decide that the tone of a conference makes it
     unworthy  of  their  distribution,  it is their right to drop it,
     with or  without  just  cause.  One would hope, though, that they
     make such a  decision  for  more  rational  reasons than a grudge
     against a particular individual.    At  any rate, the backbone is
     NOT equivalent to the *C  structure,  and the IC is not empowered
     to speak on their behalf.

     The  *C's action with regard to  excommunicated  sysops  is  very
     scary.  It threatens to impose a  reign  of terror on all sysops,
     particularly  those  who are involved in setting up  gateways  to
     other  networks.    Such  gateways are likely to be  increasingly
     numerous  in  the  future, connecting FidoNet not only with other
     Fido-compatible networks, but also with other networks like UUCP,
     InterNet, BitNet, MCI  Mail,  etc.    Will  all  such gateways be
     forced to place electronic  censors  screening  out  all  traffic
     from, to, or mentioning any  excommunicated  person?    Will  ALL
     sysops be ordered to screen incoming  new users against a list of
     the excommunicated?  Maybe there will be  a  "bulletin list" like
     that of stolen credit card numbers, and sysops  will be forbidden
     to allow anyone on the list full access to their system lest they
     enter an echomail message?

     I'm  starting  to  feel  like  FidoNet  is  degenerating  into an
     authoritarian cult.   Some  religious groups forbid their members
     from even speaking to  an  excommunicated former member;  I would
     never join such a group,  since  I  believe in freedom of inquiry
     and like to hear all sides  to  any  dispute  before making up my
     mind.  I hope this is not  the direction FidoNet is heading.  For
     the  first  time  ever,  I'm  starting  to  seriously  wonder  if
     resignation    from   FidoNet  might  not  be  the  best  course.
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 14                  14 Aug 1989


     Hopefully, FidoCon  will  help  "rejuvenate"  my  interest;   I'm
     attending for the  second  time,  and  found  last year's to be a
     refreshing show of friendliness  and  cooperation  in contrast to
     the tone of echomail conferences and FidoNews articles.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 15                  14 Aug 1989


                         Democracy?  Who needs it?

                   By Daniel O'Callaghan (3:634/383.451)


             Bob stared  glumly  at  his  cornflakes.  Suddenly, their
     crispiness annoyed him.  He took a sip  of coffee, hot and black,
     the way he liked it, and decided that it  was too hot, too black,
     and  very  annoying.  Bob pushed away his breakfast and,  burying
     his face in his hands, heaved a sigh of despair.  Jane, his wife,
     came up to him and put her hand on his shoulder.

             "Bob, come  on.    Don't  get  so  upset.  I really think
     you're over-reacting."

             "Over-reacting?  I'm  a  Californian!  I was born in L.A.
     I've lived most of my life here  in San Diego.  The wines we sell
     are Californian and we're proud of it.  We use the fact that they
     are produced in California to sell them.  People trust wines from
     California.

             And now?  Now I'm not from California;  I  don't  live in
     California;  our wines are not produced in California."

             "Yes,  dear,"  sighed  Jane,  "I know that state pride is
     very important to you, but you have  to  think  of everyone else.
     The  decision  to form the United North America  was  made  in  a
     properly democratic manner, and a majority of States and Canadian
     Provinces  voted in favour.  You have to respect democracy,  Bob.
     That's what's made America so great."

             Bob could hardly believe that his own wife was sincere in
     what she had just  said.   Sure, Democracy was the best system of
     government anywhere.  Even the Canadians knew that, despite their
     Legislative Council.  But something went  wrong.   Something went
     terribly wrong, only he could not put  his finger on just what it
     was.  Was he the only person to miss being a Californian?  Surely
     New  Yorkers wanted to remain New Yorkers;  people  from  Florida
     wanted  to  be  able  to  say,  "I'm  from Florida," with  pride.
     Definitely  the Quebecois would not be happy with the unification
     of all states and provinces into one, undivided country.  And yet
     it had been a democratic decision.

             At work there  was  a  vague,  uneasy  quietness.  People
     chatted and talked, but less  than  usual,  and all talk was work
     based or very superficial.

             Bob's telephone rang.  It was  Anne,  an  old friend from
     New York.

             "Anne! Hi, where are you?"

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 16                  14 Aug 1989


             "At work, here in sunny Manhattan.   I just had the worst
     workday of my life.  Nobody spoke.  I had an argument with George
     this morning and I had to talk to someone.  This UNA  thing.   Do
     you really think it will work?  Bring us all closer together like
     they said?"

             "UNA is  going  to destroy the way we think.  It is going
     to take away our individuality.   We  will  be  a  people without
     identity.  Oh, sure, when we go  overseas  we can say we are from
     United North America, but how can we individualise  ourselves  at
     home?"

             "That's  how  I feel," agreed Anne.  "Even the  Europeans
     weren't stupid enough  to  stop people from saying, "I'm French,"
     "I'm German," when they unified Europe back in '92.  This is just
     ridiculous."

             "But it was a democratic  decision, Anne, and that's what
     I don't understand."

             "Democratic?  Hah!  Who needs  democracy  if this is what
     it does?  Anyway, It's good to know  I'm  not  the  only  one who
     dislikes UNA."

             "OK Anne, I'll call you later and we can  discuss  it  at
     more length then.  Bye."

             As  Bob  carefully  replaced the handset in its cradle he
     noticed that everyone was staring at him, but they quickly turned
     away.  He thought he heard a muffled, puzzled voice say, "Doesn't
     like it?"

             But Anne had lifted Bob's spirits.   "I'm not crazy after
     all," he thought.

                                   *

             Over the next month massive changes in  the  structure of
     the country were announced.   With no states to collect them, all
     State income and sales taxes were abolished and replaced with new
     or increased national taxes.  "Now  everybody  pays the same tax,
     wherever they live," said the newspapers.

             All building construction approvals had to be approved by
     a committee in Miami, so everyone could live as one  big  family,
     and  nobody  would  feel  that  his home was not as good  as  his
     neighbour's.

             All universities, colleges and institutes  of  technology
     were to be united into a single  United  North  America  Tertiary
     Institute  Education  (UNATIE).  All UNATIE campuses would  teach
     all  courses  and follow standard syllabuses so that no  graduate
     would be disadvantaged in not being able to pursue the  career of
     his or her choice.  The elitism of Yale, Harvard, MIT,  UCLA  was
     to be a thing of the past.  "Everyone is the same,  has  the same
     ability, and will be educated as such."
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 17                  14 Aug 1989


             Local shopping store chains  were  forced  to merged into
     nationwide  chains  to improve efficiency by bulk  purchasing  of
     stock.  The stock control of all stores was managed in Fairbanks.

             A  programme  was  announced  which would standardize the
     language spoken in UNA.   It was a mixture of Spanish, French and
     English.  All schoolchildren would be  given elocution lessons so
     that  they  would not feel ashamed of  their  accents  when  they
     visited another part of the country.

             Bob  reflected  on these changes ruefully.  Already  wine
     sales had dropped.  Overseas buyers were turning to Australia and
     New Zealand where the wines varied from state to state, region to
     region, and the region  name was clearly marked on the label.  He
     read in the paper that  people in the northern UNA town of Ottawa
     were being given nice new houses  with  large  windows to let the
     light  in, as decided by the Residential  Building  Committee  in
     Miami,  who  also  declared that double glazing was  wasteful  of
     resources, unnecessary and would no longer be installed.

             Bob could not take his kids to the beach  anymore because
     they had fair skin and burned easily.  Sunscreen was unobtainable
     because people in Fairbanks could not see any point in putting it
     on  the  shelves.  The department stores carried mittens and  fur
     coats,  instead  of  beach towels and swimwear.  Bob had heard  a
     rumour that  people  in  Seattle and Vancouver were wearing these
     fur coats instead  of  raincoats, because there were no raincoats
     to be bought.

             On a business trip to Reno, Bob saw that the only differ-
     ence between Reno and San Diego was the weather.  The casinos had
     gone  because people throughout UNA did not want casinos in their
     neighbourhoods.   To replace the casinos a Zoo was built, because
     people liked zoos.  The Reno Zoo was filled with animals from San
     Diego, and the extra  space  in  San Diego, which the animals had
     taken up looked lonely and bare.

     Bob reached for the phone and rang Anne in New York.

             "Hi Anne, How are you?  I had to ring.  All this stuff in
     the papers.    It's crazy." He knew she had the paper.  There was
     now only the  UNA  National  Times.   Local publications had been
     disbanded because they did  not  show  or share the events of the
     world.  "Yes," said Anne  glumly,  "But  I've been thinking.  UNA
     was not formed democratically."

             "What!"  Bob  was  shocked  that Anne  would  utter  such
     blasphemy.

             "Listen.   A majority of States and  Provinces  voted  in
     favour of UNA, but only the Governor or Premier actually voted in
     the final ballot.  They decided on how to vote by how the members
     of  their  respective  congresses voted,  but  because  of  party
     solidarity, they only needed a majority  of government members to
     decide the vote."

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 18                  14 Aug 1989


             "Sorry, I don't follow that," interrupted Bob.

             "Look,  if most of the party who  controls  the  congress
     voted 'Yes' then  all  congressmen in that party would vote 'Yes'
     because of party solidarity.   That means that the congress votes
     'Yes' even if a minority  wanted  it.   So really, the Governor's
     vote was not necessarily the wish  of the people who elected him,
     or his congress.

             "Also, if you look at who voted  how, you'll see that New
     York, California, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ontario  and Quebec all
     voted 'No' but while they contain  more  than  one  third  of the
     people,  they  only  had  6  votes out  of  58.    That's  hardly
     democratic, is it?"

             Bob leaned forward, excited.  "You're right, Anne.    And
     the  'Yea' or 'Nay' system made it worse.  People had  to  choose
     the  whole,  even  if  there  were  parts they did not like.   It
     stinks.  It really does."

             "Well, Bob, can we do anything about it?"

             Bob sighed.  "We have to, Anne.  It will take a long time
     to undo the damage,  but  we  have to make a start for everyone's
     sakes.  Come on, Anne,  let's  start  on  the  slow  road back to
     individualism.  Vive la difference."

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 19                  14 Aug 1989


     Ed Branley
     Fido 1:396/10.1


                          Vervan's Gaming Net


     Using a  computer to play games is certainly nothing new, but one
     aspect of computer  gaming that tends to be overlooked is the use
     of the computer as a tool to enhance multi-player games, both war
     and role playing.  There  are two roles where the computer does a
     splendid job.

     First is the concept of computer-moderated  games.    I'll  never
     forget  the  first time I wrote a  check  out  for  over  hundred
     dollars  to  pay  for my addiction to Compuserve's  on-line  game
     Megawars, an advanced version of Decwars.  Playing computer games
     wasn't  a new experience for me (even back then on  my  old  grey
     Color  Computer),  but using the computer to play against another
     human opponent was an unbelievable thrill!  Of course, electronic
     bulletin boards now  do their best to provide this thrill through
     on-line games such as  Trade Wars.  While it's not real time like
     CIS, it's certainly much less expensive.

     The second role of the  computer in multi-player games is the use
     of electronic mail in the playing  of  traditional board wargames
     and various role-playing games.  At first  glance this might seem
     to  be  an  impractical  idea,  but  consider  that  play-by-mail
     wargaming  is now a well established hobby.  Using  the  computer
     for mail is merely a replacement for written letters sent via the
     Postal Service.    Role-playing games normally require a group of
     people in the  same place for an extended period of time (usually
     a  minimum of three  or  four  hours).    Gamers  with  irregular
     schedules normally find it difficult  to join in a D&D group that
     gets together on a regular basis.    Using  a BBS as the 'meeting
     place'  of  the gaming group eliminates the  need  for  gathering
     everyone together.  Sure, some changes have to  be  made  in  the
     play of the game, and certainly the game takes  longer,  but such
     is the way of all play-by-mail games.  Using a  BBS  to conduct a
     game  only  requires  that  all  players have regular access to a
     computer and modem, and call the BBS regularly.

     Using  fidonet  to  expand this concept is the next logical step.
     The AD&D echo on the national backbone is a good example of this.
     With the game  set  up  as an echo, players don't even have to be
     calling the same BBS.

     Playing RPG's via echomail has expanded into more than one or two
     backbone echos.  Carl Evans  of Vervan's War Board (1:207/105 and
     8:911/201) in Cucamonga, CA has been  running  multi-player games
     on  his PCBoard BBS since January 1987.    In  March  1989,  Carl
     expanded  this  concept  by  establishing Vervan's Gaming Network
     (V-NET),  a  private  echomail  network consisting of fidonet and
     RBBSnet  boards whose users and sysops enjoy playing multi-player
     games.   Essentially  what  Carl did was to allow other boards to
     participate in the games that originated on his system.  This has
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 20                  14 Aug 1989


     expanded now, with game  moderators coming from boards other than
     Vervan's.

     Here's a sample of some  of  the  games  currently in progress on
     Vervan's Gaming Net:


     * Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (three campaigns: two are
       first edition and the third a second edition)

     * Avalon Hill's Diplomacy

     * Imperial Space Command, a 'play by file' wargame

     * Mega-Traveller, a RPG set in the far future

     * Star Fleet Battles, Played by E-Mail/Files

     * Star Trek, the Role Playing Game

     * Villians & Vigilantes RPG

     In addition, another Diplomacy game and  a  game of Twilight:2000
     are in the formative stages.

     Along  with  the  gaming  echos,  Vervan's  net    also  includes
     discussion   echos  for  gamers,  sysops,  discussion  of  gaming
     strategy  and  tactics,  and  discussion  of the network.   Also,
     Vervan's  War  Board  is a beta test site for most  on-line  door
     programs (games, non-games and door managers), so there is a good
     bit of discussion on this topic as well.

     Topology:  Vervan's  is  loosely structured at this point.  There
     are three nodes that  carry  all of the net echos, in addition to
     Vervan's  War Board.  These  boards  serve  as  'hubs'  for  echo
     distribution.  At this time, membership  in  Vervan's Net is open
     to any BBS that can establish a  link  with  one  of these nodes.
     (List  of  net/node  #'s  to  follow).  In  addition  to  fidonet
     distribution,  the  net  is  available  to  RBBSnet (Zone 8)  and
     HYPERLINK (a PCBoard only echo network).

     If  you  are  interested  in multi-player gaming via computer, we
     invite you to join us in Vervan's Gaming Net.  To access the net,
     sent  netmail  to  any  of  the  'hub' nodes, and we'll see about
     getting you hooked up:

     BOARD NAME          NETWORK ADDRESSES       CITY/STATE
     ------------------  ----------------------  ---------------
     VERVAN'S WAR BOARD  1:207/105  8:911/201    Cucamonga, CA
     Minas Tirith        1:396/10                New Orleans, LA
     StarBase 23         1:202/603  8:913/1      San Diego, CA
     Dragon's Cave       1:296/102  7:520/802    Towaco, NJ

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 21                  14 Aug 1989


     To  wrap this article up, I'd like to encourage even the skeptics
     in the group to investigate Vervan's.  You'll be surprised at how
     much fun AD&D  or  Traveller can be via echomail.  Not to mention
     the fact that you  might  be able to get your favorite game going
     (if it already isn't!)

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 22                  14 Aug 1989


     Steve Bonine
     115/777 (1:1/0)

                     Words from the Zone 1 Coordinator


     It has  taken longer than I anticipated to find time to submit an
     article to FidoNews.   I was planning a more leisurely transition
     into the job of  Zone  Coordinator  for  zone  1, but a lightning
     strike in Phoenix and a  motherboard  failure  on  my  own system
     changed that.  I believe that  the  technical  details are pretty
     well set, and I have a couple  of  nodelist  generations under my
     belt, so I wanted to share some information and thoughts.

     First things first.  FidoNet owes a giant  debt  of  gratitude to
     David Dodell.  Most of you cannot begin to  imagine how much time
     and effort David has poured into FidoNet during the time  that he
     was ZC1/IC.  Even if you do not agree with every  decision  which
     he  made,  please understand that each action was taken after due
     consideration (and often painful consideration), and was taken in
     what David believed  was  the  best  interest  of  FidoNet.   His
     sacrifices were made for all of us, and we seldom had the decency
     to express our gratitude.   I  don't think that a personal "thank
     you" to 114/15 would be inappropriate.

     FidoNews
     --------

     Nothing I say in this section  should be interpreted as criticism
     of Vince Perriello, who is doing a  super-human  job  of carrying
     out  the duties of the editor of FidoNews,  as  defined  by  IFNA
     policy.

     In  Policy4,  FidoNews  is described as "the glue that  holds  us
     together";  lately it has been more like the wedge that drives us
     apart.    Frankly, I'm appalled at what I've been seeing for  the
     past several editions of FidoNews.  To say that the articles fail
     to present  an  objective  viewpoint  is  a gross understatement.
     With all the  accusations that have been flying back and forth in
     recent editions, why should  a  reader  believe  anything?   That
     makes FidoNews useless for everyone.

     I do have a suggestion.    No, it has nothing to do with changing
     the IFNA editorial policy.  But  it  does  have to do with making
     FidoNews  look  more  like the newsletter of  a  respectable  BBS
     network, and less like the National Enquirer.   In  a  group  the
     size of FidoNet, it should be possible to find  a few persons who
     are willing to serve as REPORTERS for FidoNews.  These  individu-
     als would do their best to get all the facts and  prepare  objec-
     tive articles.  On any given issue, it should be possible to find
     someone with  no vested interest who could contact all the inter-
     ested parties and prepare an objective report.

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 23                  14 Aug 1989


     BIX
     ---

     Those of you  who  read the SYSOP conference are aware that plans
     are under way to  offer  FidoNet  echomail  conferences under the
     auspices of BIX (Byte Magazine's  dialup  service).  I don't want
     to steal any thunder, or to cause undue concern.  More details of
     this project will be forthcoming.  At  this  point, all I want to
     do is try to assure the members of  FidoNet  that the coordinator
     structure is aware of the development, and is working towards the
     best  interest  of  FidoNet.  If you have no confidence  in  that
     coordinator  structure, nothing I say will reduce any anxiety you
     may feel;    if  you DO have that confidence then I've said all I
     need to at this point.

     Policy4 Vote
     ------- ----

     Several weeks ago,  Doug  Thompson  made  serious  accusations in
     FidoNews  that  irregularities  had  occurred  in  the  vote  for
     Policy4.  In actual fact, what happened was that Doug sent a long
     message to his RC (Tom Kashuba)  explaining  that he did not feel
     that the coordinator structure had any right  to  vote on policy,
     and stating his objections to Policy4.  His  vote was recorded as
     "NO".  This is not a case of a "NO" vote being recorded as "YES".
     It is a case of a vote being recorded when  it  was the desire to
     have no vote recorded.  (Not a vote of "NO", but  no vote.  There
     is a distinct difference.)

     After investigating  the  facts,  my conclusion is that both Doug
     Thompson and Tom Kashuba have very strong opinions on this issue.
     Both of them believe  that  they  are  doing  the right thing for
     FidoNet.  Tom insisted that  the  NC's  vote,  and that they vote
     either "YES" or "NO".  Doug felt that any vote was inappropriate.
     Both of them did what they felt was the best thing for FidoNet.

     I have received no specific complaints that  Tom  Kashuba  is not
     fulfilling  his  Policy4 responsibilities as RC.  Tom  takes  his
     responsibilities  very    seriously.     If  there  are  specific
     complaints on Tom's performance, or the performance of any zone-1
     Regional Coordinator, I encourage  any  sysop to make me aware of
     them.

     The End
     --- ---

     This article has gone too  long  already.   There are a number of
     other important issues facing FidoNet, and  I  will  be  covering
     them  in  subsequent articles.  These include  the  size  of  the
     nodelist,  private/redundant  nodes,  democracy, a review process
     for excommunications, and choice of the next IC.

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 24                  14 Aug 1989


     Let me emphasize that my netmail door is always open.  One of the
     most difficult tasks  of  any coordinator is judging the "mood of
     FidoNet" on any issue.    I consider netmail my best indicator of
     how people feel.  Use it.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 25                  14 Aug 1989


     =================================================================
                              LATEST VERSIONS
     =================================================================

                          Latest Software Versions

                               MS-DOS Systems
                               --------------

                           Bulletin Board Software
     Name        Version    Name        Version    Name       Version

     Fido            12n+*  Phoenix         1.3    TBBS           2.1
     Lynx           1.30    QuickBBS       2.04*   TComm/TCommNet 3.4
     Opus          1.03b+   RBBS          17.2A    TPBoard        5.2


     Network                Node List              Other
     Mailers     Version    Utilities   Version    Utilities  Version

     BinkleyTerm    2.20    EditNL         4.00    ARC           6.02
     D'Bridge       1.21*   MakeNL         2.12    ARCmail        2.0
     Dutchie       2.90C    ParseList      1.30    ConfMail      4.00
     FrontDoor       2.0    Prune          1.40    EMM           2.02
     PRENM          1.47    XlatList       2.90    GROUP         2.10
     SEAdog        4.51A*   XlaxDiff       2.32    LHARC         1.13*
                            XlaxNode       2.32    MSG            3.3
                                                   MSGED         1.99
                                                   PK[UN]ZIP     0.92*
                                                   QM             1.0*
                                                   TCOMMail       2.2
                                                   TMail         1.11
                                                   TPBNetEd       3.2
                                                   UFGATE        1.03
                                                   XRS            2.3*
                                                   ZmailQ        1.09*

                               Apple Macintosh
                               ---------------

     Bulletin Board Software   Network Mailers     Other Utilities

     Name            Version   Name      Version   Name       Version

     Red Ryder Host   v2.1b3   Tabby         2.0*  MacArc        0.03
     Mansion             7.0                       ArcMac         1.3
                                                   StuffIt       1.51
                                                   TImport        1.0
                                                   TExport        1.0
                                                   Timestamp      1.6
                                                   Tset         1.0.2
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 26                  14 Aug 1989


                                                   Timestart      1.1
                                                   Tally          1.1
                                                   Mehitabel      1.2
                                                   Archie        1.60
                                                   Numberizer    1.5c
                                                   MessageEdit    1.0


                               Commodore Amiga
                               ---------------

     Bulletin Board Software   Network Mailers     Other Utilities

     Name            Version   Name      Version   Name       Version

     Paragon            1.00+* BinkleyTerm  1.50   ConfMail      1.00
                                                   ChameleonEdit 0.10




     + Netmail capable (does not require additional mailer software)
     * Recently changed

     Utility authors:  Please help  keep  this  list  up  to  date  by
     reporting  new  versions  to 1:1/1.  It is not our intent to list
     all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 27                  14 Aug 1989


     =================================================================
                                  NOTICES
     =================================================================

                          The Interrupt Stack


     24 Aug 1989
        Voyager 2 passes Neptune.

     24 Aug 1989
        FidoCon '89 starts at the Holiday Inn in San Jose,
        California.  Trade show, seminars, etc. Contact 1:1/89
        for info.

      5 Oct 1989
        20th Anniversary of "Monty Python's Flying Circus"

     11 Oct 1989
        First International Modula-2 Conference at Bled, Yugoslavia
        hosting Niklaus Wirth and the British Standards Institution.
        Contact 1:106/8422 for more information.

     11 Nov 1989
        A new area code forms in northern Illinois at 12:01 am.
        Chicago proper will remain area code 312; suburban areas
        formerly served with that code will become area code 708.

     23 Nov 1989
        26th Anniversary of "Dr. Who" - and still going strong

     30 Dec 1989
        Telephone area codes (5, 3 and 0) are abolished in Hong Kong

     If you have something which you would like to see on this
     calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.

     -----------------------------------------------------------------

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 28                  14 Aug 1989


            OFFICERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION

     Mort Sternheim 1:321/109  Chairman of the Board
     Bob Rudolph    1:261/628  President
     Matt Whelan    3:3/1      Vice President
     Bill Bolton    3:711/403  Vice President-Technical Coordinator
     Linda Grennan  1:147/1    Secretary
     Kris Veitch    1:147/30   Treasurer


            IFNA COMMITTEE AND BOARD CHAIRS

     Administration and Finance     Mark Grennan    1:147/1
     Board of Directors             Mort Sternheim  1:321/109
     Bylaws                         Don Daniels     1:107/210
     Ethics                         Vic Hill        1:147/4
     Executive Committee            Bob Rudolph     1:261/628
     International Affairs          Rob Gonsalves   2:500/1
     Membership Services            David Drexler   1:147/47
     Nominations & Elections        David Melnick   1:107/233
     Public Affairs                 David Drexler   1:147/47
     Publications                   Rick Siegel     1:107/27
     Security & Individual Rights   Jim Cannell     1:143/21
     Technical Standards            Rick Moore      1:115/333


                      IFNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

         DIVISION                               AT-LARGE

     10  Courtney Harris   1:102/732    Don Daniels     1:107/210
     11  Bill Allbritten   1:11/301     Mort Sternheim  1:321/109
     12  Bill Bolton       3:711/403    Mark Grennan    1:147/1
     13  Irene Henderson   1:107/9       (vacant)
     14  Ken Kaplan        1:100/22     Ted Polczyinski 1:154/5
     15  Scott Miller      1:128/12     Matt Whelan     3:3/1
     16  Ivan Schaffel     1:141/390    Robert Rudolph  1:261/628
     17  Neal Curtin       1:343/1      Steve Jordan    1:206/2871
     18  Andrew Adler      1:135/47     Kris Veitch     1:147/30
     19  David Drexler     1:147/47      (vacant)
      2  Henk Wevers       2:500/1      David Melnik    1:107/233

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 29                  14 Aug 1989


                                                        __
                                   The World's First   /  \
                                      BBS Network     /|oo \
                                      * FidoNet *    (_|  /_)
     FidoCon '89 in San Jose, California              _`@/_ \    _
       at The Holiday Inn Park Plaza                 |     | \   \\
            August 24-27, 1989                       | (*) |  \   ))
                                        ______       |__U__| /  \//
                                       / Fido \       _//|| _\   /
                                      (________)     (_/(_|(____/ (tm)


                     R E G I S T R A T I O N   F O R M


     Name:    _______________________________________________________

     Address:    ____________________________________________________

     City:    _______________________ State: ____ Zip: ______________

     Country:    ____________________________________________________


     Phone Numbers:

     Day:    ________________________________________________________

     Evening:    ____________________________________________________

     Data:    _______________________________________________________


     Zone:Net/
     Node.Point:  ___________________________________________________

     Your BBS Name:  ________________________________________________


     BBS Software:  _____________________ Mailer: ___________________

     Modem Brand:  _____________________ Speed:  ____________________

     At what hotel will you be staying:  ____________________________

     Do you want an in room point?  (Holiday Inn only) ______________

     Are you a Sysop?  _____________

     Are you an IFNA Member?  ______

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 30                  14 Aug 1989


     Additional Guests:  __________
     (not attending conferences)

     Do you have any special requirements? (Sign Language translation,
     handicapped, etc.)

               ______________________________________________________


     Comments: ______________________________________________________

               ______________________________________________________

               ______________________________________________________


     Costs                                   How Many?   Cost
     ---------------------------             --------    -------

     Conference fee $60 .................... ________    _______
        ($75.00 after July 15)

     Friday Banquet  $30.00 ................ ________    _______

                                             ========    =======

     Totals ................................ ________    _______

     You may pay by Check,  Money Order,  or Credit Card.  Please send
     no  cash.   All monies must be in U.S.  Funds.   Checks should be
     made out to: "FidoCon '89"


     This form should be completed and mailed to:

                         Silicon Valley FidoCon '89
                         PO Box 390770
                         Mountain View, CA 94039


     You may register by Netmailing this completed form to 1:1/89  for
     processing.   Rename  it  to  ZNNNXXXX.REG where Z is  your  Zone
     number, N is your Net number, and X is your Node number.  US Mail
     confirmation  is  required  within  72  hours  to  confirm   your
     registration.

     If  you are paying by credit card,  please include the  following
     information.   For  your own security,  do not route any  message
     with your credit card number on it.  Crash it directly to 1:1/89.


     FidoNews 6-33                Page 31                  14 Aug 1989


     Master Card _______     Visa ________


     Credit Card Number _____________________________________________


     Expiration Date ________________________________________________

     Signature ______________________________________________________

     No  credit  card registrations will be accepted without  a  valid
     signature.


     Rooms  at the Holiday Inn may be reserved by calling the Hotel at
     408-998-0400,  and mentioning that you are with  FidoCon.   Rooms
     are $60.00 per night double occupancy.   Additional rollaways are
     available  for $10.00 per night.   To obtain these rates you must
     register before July 15.

     The official FidoCon '89 airline is American Airlines.   You  can
     receive  either  a  5%  reduction in supersaver fares  or  a  40%
     reduction in the regular day coach fare.  San Jose is an American
     Airlines  hub  with direct flights to most  major  cities.   When
     making reservations, you must call American's reservation number,
     800-433-1790, and reference Star number S0289VM.

     The official FidoCon '89 automobile rental agency is Alamo Rent a
     Car.  Rates are as described below. All rates  include  automatic
     transmission, air conditioning, radio, and unlimited mileage.

     Economy car (example: Geo Metro)  $32 day/$109 week.
     Compact car (example: Chevy Cavalier) $34 day/$120 week.
     Midsize car (example: Pontiac Grand Am) $36 day/$135 week.
     Standard car (example: Buick Regal) $38 day/$165 week.
     Luxury car (example: Buick LeSabre) $40 day/$239 week.

     To take advantage of this rate, call Alamo at 1-800-327-9633  and
     request  the convention rate. Mention FidoCon '89,  the  location
     and dates.


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-33                Page 32                  14 Aug 1989


                                      __
                 The World's First   /  \
                    BBS Network     /|oo \
                    * FidoNet *    (_|  /_)
                                    _`@/_ \    _
                                   |     | \   \\
                                   | (*) |  \   ))
                      ______       |__U__| /  \//
                     / Fido \       _//|| _\   /
                    (________)     (_/(_|(____/ (tm)

            Membership for the International FidoNet Association

     Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
     pays  a  specified  annual   membership  fee.   IFNA  serves  the
     international  FidoNet-compatible  electronic  mail  community to
     increase worldwide communications.

     Member Name _______________________________  Date _______________
     Address _________________________________________________________
     City ____________________________________________________________
     State ________________________________  Zip _____________________
     Country _________________________________________________________
     Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
     Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________

     Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________
     BBS Name ________________________________________________________
     BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________
     Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________
     Board Restrictions ______________________________________________

     Your Special Interests __________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________
     Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in
     US Funds to:
                   International FidoNet Association
                   PO Box 41143
                   St Louis, Missouri 63141
                   USA

     Thank you for your membership!  Your participation will help to
     insure the future of FidoNet.

     Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
     and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
     membership in January 1987.  The second elected Board of Directors
     was filled in August 1988.  The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
     established on FidoNet to assist the Board.  We welcome your
     input to this Conference.

     FidoNews 6-33                Page 33                  14 Aug 1989


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
