     Volume 6, Number 21                                   22 May 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 will be rejected which is properly attributed and legally
     acceptable.    We   will  publish  every  responsible  submission
     received.


                        Table of Contents
     1. ARTICLES  .................................................  1
        FidoNet Hits a New Low  ...................................  1
        GOOD DEALS FOR SYSOPS: Minitel offers free software!  .....  4
        Reflections on Policy 4  ..................................  6
        Making a Point  ........................................... 11
        What IFNA Means to Me!  ................................... 13
        Sysops take on a worthy cause: Youth At Risk Program  ..... 15
     2. COLUMNS  .................................................. 19
        The Veterinarian's Corner: Cosmetics Industry Testing  .... 19
     3. LATEST VERSIONS  .......................................... 21
        Latest Software Versions  ................................. 21
     And more!
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 1                   22 May 1989


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

     FidoNet Hits a New Low

     by Phil Buonomo, 1:107/583, 7:520/583, 9:807/1

     Well, it just goes to show you what can happen when you don't
     take the time to read FidoNews.  Miss a couple of issues, and
     BLAMMO!  It's like missing an episode of "Dallas".  In other
     words, you miss "who shot whom".  In this case, however, its the
     basic purpose of FidoNews that gets shot.

     Recently, a number of *C's have apparently expressed displeasure
     to Vince about several columns that have appeared in FidoNews
     that THEY seem to think are not "FidoNet related".  They would
     have such columns (as defined by them) removed from publication
     so they don't have to foot the bill for distributing it.

     I'm not going to spout any First Amendment stuff here, after all,
     this is FidoNet, not the government.  Nobody ever mistook FidoNet
     for a democracy, after all.

     But it has always been the basic right of nodes in FidoNet that
     they could submit virtually ANYTHING and have it printed in
     FidoNews, and get their message out.  Now, some bright person
     recently asked if the readers thought they should allow KKK
     announcements in FidoNews.  Well, I'll tell you...  I don't think
     so, but then again, who am I to say?  I'm not God.  I'm not the
     government, and I'm not the Editor (of FidoNews, anyway), and
     until *I* sit in THAT particular hot seat, I can't give you a
     definitive answer.  I can tell you this, however: THE ANIMED
     SERIES IS NOT A KKK COLUMN AND ANY COMPARISON OF THE TWO IS
     RIDICULOUS.

     I have found that column to be both interesting and informative,
     particularly since when I first started reading it, I figured
     that I'd get about three sentences into it and hit PgDn.  The
     first column, however, was about how you can kill a dog by
     feeding it a comparitively small amount of chocolate.  This, I
     never knew, and it being printed on Easter week impressed me even
     more with its timeliness.  Since then, the column, most
     intelligently written, has further impressed me with articles on
     the abuses of animals in laboratories, the dangers of summertime
     anti-freeze to dogs and cats, and yes, even how to keep your dog
     and cat from getting fleas.  Another contributor to this
     'magazine' sneered at the column, stating that if he wanted to
     learn about fleas, he'd pick up the conference.  Well, *I* found
     it interesting, and enjoyed reading it.  I guess that means I'm
     not as important as an *C?  I guess it means that you aren't,
     either, since he feels he shouldn't have to pay for sending the
     file to you.

     As I said before, for something I didn't think I'd be interested
     in, I've been rather fascinated by the column.
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 2                   22 May 1989


     But let's look at it another way.  The *C's who've expressed
     displeasure at the column jump up and down about it not being
     'FidoNet related'.  My response is, "So what?".  Did THEY found
     FidoNews?  Are THEY the editors, or is Vince?  They seem to feel
     they have the right to limit the topics printed about because
     they foot the bill for the distribution of FidoNews.  My response
     is, "You wanted to be an *C, right?  Distributing FidoNews is
     part of the job.  You don't like it?  Don't be an *C."

     I fail to see why these people, who've contributed very little in
     terms of the content of the magazine, feel they have the right to
     determine its content.  Don't get me wrong, we owe EACH and every
     *C thanks for its distribution, but that distribution STILL comes
     with the job.  I don't like the fact that I have to be on call
     for the Data Center I work at 24 hours a day, but it comes with
     the job, and I can't change it just because its inconvenient for
     me.  For the *C's to attempt to change the policy of FidoNews
     just because THEY aren't interested in reading about Animal
     Medicine is wrong, immoral, and a slap at each and every node in
     FidoNet.

     The funny thing is that the ANIMED column has averaged less than
     a page, sometimes a page and a half.  The interesting point that
     everyone seems to have glossed over is that, in the interests of
     shortening FidoNews by attempting to change its editorial policy,
     these *C's have generated more lines of commentary on their
     actions than ALL THE ANIMED COLUMNS PUT TOGETHER.

     Seems kinda self-defeating to me!

     One more point.  FidoNews has been relatively self-running for
     years.  The type of editorial policy the *C's wish would defeat
     this, by effectively making Vince approve each and every article,
     column, and ad that goes into it.  It seems to me that if the
     *C's want to enfo*Ce such a policy on Vince that THEY be the ones
     to edit the magazine.  Then we shall see who's willing to 'play
     God' and say which article is "FidoNet related", and which isn't.

     I guess the thing that I'm most disappointed about is, with all
     the problems FidoNet faces today, you'd think the *C's had more
     to worry about than a column in FidoNews.  I guess that's just
     the way FidoNet's been run for the past couple of years.  In the
     service, we called it "chickenm$wx%".  That means that the people
     in authority worry about the little problems and let the big,
     important ones slide.

     The motto of the Alliance newsletter, AlterNews, is "All the news
     that fits, we print!"  That's the way its been for FidoNews for
     years, and it should not be changed for something so trivially
     small.  Would you have people saying that AlterNet is more open
     than FidoNet?

     Finally, let me just remind those who would change it that
     FidoNews is STILL an IFNA publication.  And the last thing I
     heard, the IFNA BOD determines FidoNews policy, not the *C's.  I
     for one, don't want to see that, or the FidoNews policy changed.
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 3                   22 May 1989


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 4                   22 May 1989


     WHAT IS MINITEL?

          In France, over 4 million people use Minitel terminals to
     search through the National Electronic Telephone Directory and
     access a wide range of information services.
          These services range from financial and business
     transactions to communications services such as electronic
     chatlines.
          The success of these services with consumers in France
     remains unparalleled in the world up to now.

     HOW DOES MINITEL WORK IN FRANCE?

          French consumers have easy access to all these services with
     their dedicated terminals and their connect charges are placed
     directly on their phone bill.  They do not need different
     accounts with each information provider like subscribers to
     American information networks must have.

     WHAT DOES MINITELNET HAVE TO OFFER ME?

          Access to these same French services is available to users
     outside France thanks to Minitelnet which now provides the
     gateway to more than 10,000 French information services.

           *   During 1989 and 1990, Minitelnet will also give you
               access to other European countries, including Belgium,
               Italy, Spain, Germany and Finland.

          *    By the Summer of 1989 you will be able to dial up
               Minitel from nodes around the world.

          Minitelnet connects you to French information services from
     your home or your office through a simple dial-up procedure.

     WHAT EQUIPMENT DO I NEED TO HAVE TO ACCESS MINITEL?

          *    An IBM compatible, Macintosh, Apple II
               or Commodore 64/128 computer

          *    A modem

          *    Minitel Software for your computer.

     WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF USING MINITELNET?

          Minitelnet offers an array of user friendly services from
     banking to home-shopping, from instant ticket reservations to
     instant travel arrangements.

          Here are just a few of the many advantages of Minitelnet:

          *    access electronic services in France for
               the price of a local phone call

          *    non-stop service; available all day, any day
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 5                   22 May 1989


          *    simple to use

          *    inexpensive - you pay as you use the service -
                      starting as low as 17 cents a minute

          *    access to 1000's of French services not available
               through other gateways

          *    you don't need to upgrade your computer!

     HOW DO I GET STARTED?

          You need a copy of the Minitel software and a
     directory to the services online.  THESE ARE AVAILABLE FREE!

     HOW DO I GET MY FREE COPY OF THE MINITEL SOFTWARE
           AND DIRECTORY?

     Here's what to do:

          *               Dial 800 999 6163
               from Canada or the continental U.S. with
               your modem set at 1200 baud, 8/N/1

          *    At the login prompt type: MINITEL107

          *    Supply all information requested of you so that
               Minitelnet can send you the software and directory.



     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 6                   22 May 1989


     Jesse David Hollington
     1:225/1


                      What's wrong with Policy 4?
                      ---------------------------

      After perusing Policy 4, and discussing it with several people,
     I have become convinced that it is not necessarily the great
     long overdue revision of policy that it seems to be.

      To get something straight, actually, at first I was kind of
     undecided as to what to vote on this document.  However, now
     that I've really sat down and *looked* at it and thought about
     it, some very serious problems with it suddenly occur to me.

      Let me paint a little picture...

      We have, at the top of the whole mess, The International
     Coordinator.  Who decides who the International Coordinator
     should be?  Not the majority of FidoNet, which is the way
     things really should be, but a very small group of people.
     The Zone Coordinators.

      However, at the Zone Coordinator level, the problems begin to
     occur.  Who decides who the Zone Coordinator should be?  Again,
     not the Sysops, not the vast majority of Coordinator positions,
     but the Region Coordinators.  Again, a very small group of
     people.

      But now, here's the catch, who decides who the Region
     Coordinators should be?  None other than the Zone Coordinator.

      Where do the Network Coordinators come from?  Simple, they're
     appointed by the Regional Coordinators.

      Do the Sysops in FidoNet actually have any say in what is going
      on?  Not really.

      Now, very simply, what's wrong with this picture?

      What this creates is a system by which only the senior officers
     are voted in.  Who votes in the senior officers, but the people
     they have appointed, either directly or indirectly.  What this
     does very simply is to ensure that all the top brass in FidoNet
     have their positions virtually as long as they want them for.

      This is not designed to put down anybody, or point the finger
     at anyone.  There are, however, some interesting things about
     human nature that don't make this a good system.  For one thing,
     a Zone Coordinator, whether consciously or not, is going to
     appoint Region Coordinators under him that will support his
     position.  This is simply human nature.  I'm not saying that I
     wouldn't do the exact same thing if I were in such a position.
     Nobody's perfect.

     FidoNews 6-21                Page 7                   22 May 1989


      So who gets the best side of this deal?

      Certainly not the Sysops, they have virtually no say in what
     goes on.  Even the Network Coordinators have very little say in
     what happens in FidoNet.  The power of a Network Coordinator is
     limited to Policy revisions, and ZC impeachments.  Even these
     powers were intially a farce because of the idea of the dual
     majority.  That at least was progress.  The dual-majority
     getting scrapped was a step in the right direction.

      How about the International Coordinator?  Certainly the IC is
     in a nice position, however, his say in what happens has been
     significantly reduced.  I'm not necessarily saying that it
     shouldn't be reduced.  However, the IC is voted in by the ZCs,
     and therefore, indirectly, by the RCs.  It is all well and good
     that the International Coordinator *should* be elected (how else
     would we decide?), but I think that there is very little sense
     in having only the upper echelons vote.

      Now, what about the Zone Coordinators?  Certainly they have a
     good side of the deal.  But the decisions of a ZC can still be
     reversed by a majority of the RCs voting against it.  The ZC is
     elected by the RCs as well.  The Zone Coordinator can, however,
     place the right people as Regional Coordinators under him.  Yet
     wouldn't a decision to have an RC replaced still be subject to
     reversal by the other RCs?  If this was the case, then all the
     RCs would have to do would be to stick together, and they would
     essentially control FidoNet.

      The bottom line is that the Regional Coordinators are probably
     getting by far the best end of the deal.  The can control the
     Zone Coordinator, and they don't have to answer to the Network
     Coordinators under them.  Has it yet occurred to anybody out
     there exactly why the Regional Coordinators aren't votable
     positions?  The whole idea of voting for the position above
     stops at the RC level.  The whole idea of decision reversal
     stops at the RC level.  The Network Coordinators end up having
     very little say in the matter.

      Now, let us consider exactly who it is that makes FidoNet work.

      The answer is simple.  At the very bottom are the Sysops.  The
     nodes.  Without Sysops at the bottom of the whole chain, all the
     admin positions in the world would be pointless.  The Sysops who
     are a part of FidoNet, and who are the vast majority of FidoNet,
     however, have very little say in what goes on.  Does this imply
     that it is believed that an average Sysop is not intelligent or
     responsible enough to make decisions on how FidoNet should be
     run?

      However, the next level up on the ladder are the Network
     Coordinators.  It's the NCs who really make FidoNet work.  This
     is in a different way.  The NCs coordinate mail movement in and
     out of their areas of responsibility.  They maintain the
     nodelist fragments, they distribute nodediffs and FidoNews.
     Most importantly, however, they encourage the formation of new
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 8                   22 May 1989


     FidoNet nodes in their areas.  I would venture to say that a
     very sizeable portion of the Sysops who have joined FidoNet
     have done so because there was somewhere nearby where they could
     get FidoNet software, documents, nodelists, help, and a node
     number.  The Regional Coordinators certainly could not do this.
     Not that I'm knocking the Regional Coordinators, it's just that
     a Region is by far too large to effectively manage without
     smaller subdivisions.  Someone who lives in an area, say, 500
     miles away from a Regional Coordinator, would have loads of fun
     trying to get a network number, nodediffs, FidoNews, help,
     advice and software, if it weren't for the Network Coordinators
     who do all this.  You could almost say that the NCs are the
     unsung heroes of FidoNet.

      Now, let's get something straight.  I'm a Network Coordinator.
     When I got this position, I didn't know what I was getting
     myself into.  I've put a lot of work into FidoNet, and spent a
     great deal of time encouraging local sysops to connect as
     FidoNet nodes.  I have spent many long hours connecting Sysops
     to mailers, debugging systems, solving problems, etc.  I have
     spent almost as long trying to keep my computer from going crazy
     on me.  At least twice a week my hard disk threatens to fill up.
     I'm not knocking the Regional Coordinators, Zone Coordinators,
     or other administrative positions at all.  They certainly do a
     lot of work, and we'd be equally lost without most of them.
     I'm simply trying to point out that we have other administrative
     positions in FidoNet as well.  The whole administrative realm of
     FidoNet does not, contrary to popular belief, end with the RCs.

      Yet Policy 4 tends to imply that it does.

      This document is not meant as a put-down.  I'm not trying to
     convince anybody of anything.  I'm simply attempting to provoke
     some thought out there.  I myself was of the attitude, "Well,
     a Policy revision is long overdue.  Let's all vote yes, approve
     it, and get it out of our hair."  When I really started to think
     about it, however, I started to seriously ask myself if I really
     agreed with what was in it, and if I really agreed that that was
     the way FidoNet should be run.  I decided to write this article
     when I came up with the answer, and saw what problems there
     really are in Policy 4.

      Consider how little has *really* changed in Policy 4.  There
     are definitely some very good clarifications, and minor
     technical modifications.  However, the only thing that strikes
     me as a major change is the political structure.  Details of
     which I have gone into already.

      Now, who wrote Policy 4?  The Administration.  Particularly,
     mostly the Regional Coordinators.  I am not saying that if I
     were in such a position that I'd do anything different than
     what they did, and that was to extend their power.  Again,
     human nature.  Now, naturally, the policy documents have to be
     written by somebody.  Administration is a logical choice.  It
     would, however, be much more logical to appoint a committee out
     of various positions, from the Sysop level up.  Maybe a few
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 9                   22 May 1989


     Sysops, a few NCs, a few RCs, the ZCs, and the IC.  That would
     definitely be the most democratic way to get things accomplished

      In closing, my advice for how any form of voting structure
     should work is that it should apply to virtually everybody, or
     virtually nobody.  There are always exceptions at the top and
     bottom in either of these cases.  Basically, if the upward
     structure is to be used, it should travel right down to the
     Sysop level.  In other words, the Sysops vote for their NC (or
     at least have some portion of relevant say in who he is), the
     NCs vote for their RC, the RCs for their ZC, and so on.  The
     more logical method, however, would be to simply have everybody
     in FidoNet vote for the IC, or everybody in a zone vote for
     their ZC, and then they can take care of appointing the levels
     below them, indirectly.  Basically, in other words, the same
     way it worked before Policy 4, except that everybody who has
     a Node address should be eligible to vote.

      This would be democracy.  The system as it is now is *not*
     democratic.  It is more or less, an aristocracy bordering on a
     dictatorship.  Admittedly, this is strong language, but it
     becomes clear that the administration is power mongering with
     this revision of Policy.  Again, I'm not blaming anybody in
     specific, save for that old entity known as human nature.
     I must admit that if I were a part of the high-level admin in
     FidoNet, I might agree with Policy 4 wholeheartedly.  The fact
     is that I'm not, I'm just a Network Coordinator of an obscure
     little network that sees the potential problems that could
     develop if the policies of FidoNet follow this pattern.

      Adolf Hitler was a prime example of somebody who wrote himself
     into power.  He began as Chancellor of Germany, and was the
     greatest thing that ever happened to Germany for a while, but he
     eventually, through various forms of legislation, put himself in
     such a position that he was Chancellor for life.  It is not an
     entirely adequate comparison, but does give us an example of
     what can happen when one person or specific group of people are
     put in charge of creating policies.  History shows it doesn't
     work.  Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it,
     and I think that it's possible to say that this is where we are
     now heading in FidoNet.

      We need democracy in this structure.  Not anti-democracy posing
     as democracy, which is the vein that Policy 4 is written in.
     And if counting 5700 votes is a problem, I have a number of
     suggestions as to how that could be handled.

      I certainly hope I haven't offended anyone in the writing of
     this.  I have just stated a number of things that I felt needed
     to be said.  Policy 4 is a great document in many ways, and has
     a number of promising aspects.  I disagree with the political
     structure it outlines, however, because it is simply not
     acceptable in a democratic system.

      The problem is that too many people out there don't want to
     get involved in the politics in FidoNet, and I can't say that I
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 10                  22 May 1989


     blame them.  However, sitting back and pretending that
     everything is okay when it isn't is not going to make the
     problems go away.  It's going to do nothing but compound them.
     I would implore the Sysops, and especially the Network
     Coordinators out there to get involved and pay attention to
     what is happening around them.  And please don't fall into the
     trap that I nearly fell into and get the attitude of, "let's
     just vote yes on it and get it over with."  That is a very
     dangerous attitude to have.  Think about what you're voting
     on.  Ask yourself if you really want FidoNet to be run how
     Policy 4 implies it will be run.  Base your vote upon your
     answer to that question.

      End of Political Discourse.

      Again, I honestly hope I haven't offended anyone through this.
     It was not meant as a put-down of any person or category of
     people.  It is very simply some constructive criticism on what
     I think is wrong with things as they now stand.

      (And to think that I missed the final episode of "Family
       Ties" to sit here and write this <grin> ).


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 11                  22 May 1989


                                     Making A Point
                                        jim nutt
                                 'the computer handyman'
                                        1:114/30

         Setting up a point is actually a lot easier  than  you  might
         think.  It  requires  some time,  patience and a fair deal of
         hard disk space, but in general, not much hair.

          The  first  step  in setting up a point is finding a fidonet
          sysop who is willing to act as a 'boss' node  for  you.  The
          boss  node  is essentially your link to the rest of fidonet.
          In a basic point,  all your mail flows through the boss  and
          you call only the boss.  It is generally a good idea to make
          sure  that  the  boss node is a local call and that they are
          someone you can work with.

          The next step  is  to  collect  the  software  you  need.  I
          personally recommend the following for a basic point:

          BinkleyTerm version 2.20
          ConfMail version 3.31
          oMMM   version 1.40
          msged  version 1.99
          Arca/Arce any version

          I recommend using confmail version 3.31 instead of version 4
          because  3.31  can  also do all your message maintenance for
          you, while those functions have been eliminated from version
          4.  The easiest way to set all this stuff up is to create  a
          subdirectory  on  your  hard  disk  called  "POINT" and dump
          everything  into  it.   You'll  need   to   create   a   few
          subdirectories under point as well:

          \point\inbound             where inbound mail goes
          \point\outbound            where mail is held to be sent
          \point\mail                where the messages are stored

          And  of course,  if you want echomail,  you need to create a
          subdirectory for each echomail area you want to pick up.

          Now you need to get on the phone and talk to  the  sysop  of
          your  boss  node.  You  need to find out what your 'private'
          network address is and you have to decide what password  you
          want  to  use  on  your  sessions  with  the boss node.  The
          private network address is the address  your  boss  uses  in
          talking  with  you,  it  is  never  seen  by the rest of the
          network.  Once you  have  that  information  you  can  begin
          editing the configuration files for your point.  There are a
          total  of  seven of them and unfortunately,  a great deal of
          the information is duplicated in them.  The programs use the
          following configuration files:


               BinkleyTerm          Binkley.Cfg
               ConfMail             Areas.Bbs, Mail.Sys
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 12                  22 May 1989


               msged                Binkley.Cfg
               oMMM                 oMMM.ctl, oMMM.cfg, Binkley.Prm

          Of all of  these,  Binkley.Cfg  is  the  most  important  as
          Mail.Sys  and  Binkley.Prm  are  created  from it (using the
          btctl.exe  utility)  and  BinkleyTerm  and  msged   use   it
          directly.  Fortunately,  it's also the best documented.  The
          easiest way to set it up is to take the  sample  Binkley.Cfg
          and   change   it  to  fit  your  system.   The  BinkleyTerm
          documention covers this in fair detail.  Once you have  that
          file   set  up,   you  run  btctl  to  create  mail.sys  and
          binkley.prm.  You now have installed BinkleyTerm and  msged.
          The  next  thing  to  do  is  to  create  and  oMMM.ctl file
          containing a single line:

               ArcCm     bnet/bnode     All

          Where bnet/bnode is your boss  nodes  address.  Then  change
          the   values  in  the  sample  ommm.cfg  to  point  to  your
          subdirectories and you're all set  for  netmail.  The  final
          configuration  file,  Areas.Bbs,  is a bit more complicated.
          It tells confmail where each of your echomail areas are.  If
          you aren't doing any echomail,  then  Areas.Bbs  can  be  as
          simple as:

               'the computer handyman' (home of msged) ! jim nutt

          Of  course,  you'll want to change that to reflect your name
          and system.  If you are running echomail, you'll need a line
          for each echo area in the form:

               subdirectory     echotag          bossnet/node

          Subdirectory is where the echo message will be put,  echotag
          is  the  official  name  of  the area and bossnet/node tells
          confmail that you want this echo sent to your boss node.

          If you've gotten this far the rest  is  easy!  All  that  is
          left  is to write a simple batch file to control packing and
          unpacking mail,  your boss probably has one he can give  you
          or  can  help  you  with  one of your own.  Other than that,
          you're pretty much  ready  to  go.  I  can't  stress  enough
          though....  READ  THE  DOCUMENTATION  for your software,  it
          wasn't written just to waste space  on  the  disk!  It  will
          help  you get through the tight spots and figure out some of
          the wierdness that can happen.


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 13                  22 May 1989


     Tom Hendricks, Sysop of Avi-Technic BBS, 1:261/662,
     (301) 252-0717

     What IFNA Means to Me:

         I am writing this article after reflection on the many
     changes and troubles that the International FidoNet Association
     has endured over the last few years.

         IFNA, the organization, has survived a turbulent period, and
     its continued existance is still far from a certainty.  It was
     formed originally to help offset some of the costs of running the
     FidoNet, and of helping the people who do so.  Upon its creation
     it was beset with confusion and mixed ideals, effectively
     hamstringing its operation at every turn.  Detractors took refuge
     in "Alternative" networks and took potshots whenever possible.
     IFNA, in an attempt to counteract these detractors became a
     responsive organization, declaring itself separate and apart from
     the day-to-day FidoNet operations, and became centered on special
     interests.  Finally, these seem to be dissolving, leaving only
     the shell remaining.

         Did you know that the International FidoNet association
     appoints the International Coordinator?  It does.  However
     complaints aimed at the IFNA Board of Directors caused them to
     divorce themselves somewhat from actual FidoNet Operations.  Did
     you know the IFNA Board of Directors appoints the chairman of the
     FidoNet Technical Standards Committee (FTSC)?  Did you know this
     committee has several sub-committees, including high-speed
     modems, software certification and others?  Did you know that the
     IFNA Board of Directors has listened to comments from anyone (not
     just FidoNet members) about anything related to the FidoNet?  Did
     you know that the IFNA Board of Directors appoints the Membership
     Services Committee Chairman, and that the Membership Services has
     a sub-committee which selects the site of FidoCons from year to
     year?  (This year's winner was San Jose, California).  Did you
     know these conventions are partially funded in startup, or seed
     money from the IFNA treasury?  Did you know there was a IFNA
     Publications committee which oversees the publishing of the
     Weekly FidoNews?

         With all this is mind, what does IFNA mean to you, the
     "Average" FidoNet sysop?  I'm not too sure many of us know IFNA
     exists.  Too often we take for granted something without
     understanding the need for it, and the necessary investment of
     our time and energies to keep it there for us.   Honestly, the
     most any of us have heard about IFNA, was what a lot of
     hot-headed detractors have been saying about it.  All we remember
     is that this problem or that problem exists, while very few
     people realize there are a lot of positives involved as well.

         Did you know for instance that the International FidoNet
     Association was the holder of the copyright on the term 'FidoNet'
     as assigned from Tom Jennings, the creator of the net?  Did you
     know IFNA was a non-profit corporation?  Donations of money,
     equipment or time can be accepted and put to good use.
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 14                  22 May 1989


         Did you know that IFNA is your best bet in terms of a single
     body representing all of us?  Even though the paid membership of
     IFNA is small in comparison to the number of systems contained in
     the nodelist, IFNA is the only organization which effectively is
     available to be a 'WatchDog' on our hobby for us.  Do you
     remember the scares of Texas, where Bulletin Board Systems were
     deemed businesses and had to pay business telephone rates?  How
     about the instance in D.C. where all the bulletin boards were
     called part of pipe-bomb making network?  Or else, what about the
     child-pornography and pediphile networks?  Although we are large
     in numbers, there is no effective organization available
     presently to counter this flood of misrepresentation about our
     hobby.  IFNA, is our only option now, and they do their best by
     explaining the good things, how electronic communications helps
     enrich the environment, not detract from it.


         I started writing this article in response to several
     comments like "IFNA may not exist much longer", or listening to
     the constant chatter of something someone somewhere doesn't like
     today.  Tomorrow will see new people complaining about other
     things, other people, other situations.  Bottom line is:  Who,
     What, and How will they complain about IFNA when it isn't there
     anymore?  Will it take losing something valuable (but still in
     its infancy) to realize that they need to save it, to nurture it,
     and to force it to grow?

         This brings me to my question, "What does IFNA mean to me?"
     Well, let me tell you, or did I do just that?

                            -Tom Hendricks-

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 15                  22 May 1989


     Sysops participate in the Youth At Risk Program

     by The Captain of the King's Navee, 7:520/583, 1:520/583, 9:807/1
        and the Newark Youth At Risk Program

     One of the reasons I joined the Alliance was to work with others
     in doing some good for people.  Being a charitable organization,
     one of the goals of the Alliance is to help others.  I've watched
     as our organization has grown over the past year or so, and
     waited eagerly for the opportunity to take part in some of these
     proposed activities.  As you can imagine, much of the Alliance's
     energy has been spent just getting started and growing over the
     past months, but we are now organized to the point where our
     members can start to do some of the good work that our Code of
     Chivalry mentions.

     Several members of AlterNet 520 have recently gotten involved in
     a worthy program called "Youth at Risk".  His Majesty the
     Archduke, Karl the First, has been involved for over a year with
     this program, and introduced it to our network.  As you will see,
     however, this program is taking place on a NATIONAL level, giving
     ALL Alliance members an opportunity to participate.

     The Youth At Risk Program was designed as a community
     intervention into the problem of juvenile delinquency.  It was
     begun in Oakland, California in 1982 in response to the demands
     of an anguished community frustrated by its inablility to deal
     with this problem.  Since that time Youth At Risk Programs have
     been conducted in cities across the U.S. with over 25 cities
     currently participating.  Youth At Risk offers a real prospect of
     making a substantial impact on the problem of juvenile
     delinquency in this country.  Members of Net 520 are currently
     dealing with the program based in the city of Newark, N.J.

     The Breakthrough Foundation of San Francisco is the source of the
     Youth At Risk Program.  Breakthrough provides the professional
     staff necessary to stage a program in each city and, over a 2
     year period, trains about 350 volunteers in the skills required
     to insure its success.  In addition, the Breakthrough staff
     actually conducts much of the hands-on work with the youths.

     Each community's Youth At Risk Program is incorporated separately
     from the Break through Foundation, allowing it to receive tax
     deductible contributions directly.  Each Youth At Risk Program
     must raise the funds to pay Breakthrough for its services.

     HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS
     ---------------------

     There are approximately 85 youths in each Youth At Risk Program.
     They are selected through a process of consultation with school
     officials, probation officers, social workers and other community
     professionals.  No youth is forced to do the program.  The one
     overriding requirement for participation is the willingness to
     have one's life turned around, to be open to new ideas and
     alternatives.  Each youth is made fully aware that this program
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 16                  22 May 1989


     is tough and demanding and will require commitment and integrity
     on his or her part.  Few appreciate the full meaning of those
     words until they begin the program.

     THE 10 DAY COURSE
     -----------------

     The 10 Day Course is an intensive, rigorous experience for 85
     youths at risk and 20 adult professionals in the youth services
     field.  The adult professionals actually participate in the couse
     with the youths, creating a common experience that leads to
     broadened communication and understanding.  The 10 Day Course
     takes place in a rural setting within a few hours driving
     distance of the youths' community.  During the Course
     participants break throught the limitations they have imposed on
     themselves and the judgements and attitudes they have formed
     about each other.  At the end of the 10 days both the youths and
     the adult professionals, who work with the youths back in the
     community, are fully aware of possibilities for their lives that
     they had not previously seen.

     THE FOLLOW THROUGH PROGRAM
     --------------------------

     Back at home the environment has not improved.  Therefore, Follow
     Through activities are specifically designed not only to
     accelerate the breakthroughs achieved during the 10 Day Couse but
     to do so in ways that are relevant to the reality of day-to day
     life and to the issues the young people confront.

     The Breakthrough Foundation, in partnership with local social
     service agencies and supported by volunteers, manages the year-
     long Follow Through Program.  During the Follow Through each
     participant, supported by an adult volunteer "committed
     partner", works on personal and community service projects.
     Special attention is paid to performance in school or on the job,
     to family relationships, and to relationships with the juvenile
     justice authorities.  The youths attend monthly day-long group
     meetings, led by Breakthrough staff, and are in communication
     with their committed partners at least 3 times a week.

     THE RESULTS
     -----------

     Who are these youth at risk?  61% of the applicants for the Youth
     At Risk Program in cities across the U.S. reported that they had
     been caught by the police committing a crime; 89% of these said
     they would probably do it again; 33 had been shot, stabbed or
     beaten people; almost all reported problems in school and at
     home; 60% had used drugs.

     Independent studies show that the Youth At Risk Program produces
     dramatic results:

          1. Truancy down 75%
          2. Hours per week at work up 300%
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 17                  22 May 1989


          3. Arrests down 50%
          4. Substantial improvement in grades
          5. Improved relations with parents and teachers
          6. As reflected in standardized "locus of control" tests an
             increased willingness to accept responsibility for their
             own lives and a decreased tendency to blame others for
             their problems.
          7. Substantially reduced drug use.

     To quote Connecticut Superior Court Judge Sidney Landau, "this is
     the thing that really works.  The results here are so good I
     can't believe it.  I've been in the criminal justice system for
     30 years.  I deal with an 85% recidivism rate in Bridgeport.
     Here, it's more like 35%.  People I tell this to in my business
     say 'you're lying - it can't be true'.  But it is."

     THE COST
     --------

     It costs about $400,000 to fund EACH Youth At Risk Program.  This
     money goes for local operations (phone, stationary, electricity,
     office rental, etc.), consultation services from the Breakthrough
     Foundation (training volunteers in fundraising and program
     organization), 10 Day site expenses, including compensation to
     Breakthrough for the staff people who conduct the 10 Day Course,
     and the year-long Follow Through Program.  Donated goods and
     services from local suppliers can substantially reduce this cost.

     CONCLUSION
     ----------

     The possibilities for Youth At Risk are exciting.  Youth At Risk
     Programs, done on an on-going basis, can have a considerable
     impact on the quality of life, both for the participants and for
     the community at large.  These take support in monetary
     donations, and in vounteer time to get these programs rolling.
     I urge sysops everywhere to seek out the closest Youth At Risk
     Program and contribute and volunteer, or if there isn't a program
     locally, start one yourself!

     Programs are underway in the following US cities: Albuquerque,
     Atlanta, Boston, Bridgeport, Chicago, Chapel Hill, Dallas,
     Denver, Detroit, Hartford, Honolulu, Los Angeles, Miami,
     Minneapolis, Monterey, New Haven, New York, Newark, Philadelphia,
     Phoenix, Portland, Rochester, San Jose, Seattle, San Antonio, San
     Diego, Springfield (Mass), and Washington DC. For information, on
     how to contact YAR in these cities, or start a program in your
     own city, contact The Breakthrough Foundation at 1-800-669-0171.

     Your local Youth At Risk organization will be happy to help you
     to sponsor a youth in the program. On the average right now, it
     takes about $3,000 per youth to put him (or her) through the
     program.  Multiply that by 85 youths, and you can see the type of
     dollars this type of program needs to run.  But I think you'll
     agree that the results speak for themselves.  It's worth it!

     FidoNews 6-21                Page 18                  22 May 1989


     If you'd like to send a contribution, seek out your local YAR
     program, or contributions can be sent to:

     Newark Youth At Risk, Inc.
     PO Box 32333
     Newark, N.J. 07102

     or call (201)687-0352

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 19                  22 May 1989


     =================================================================
                                  COLUMNS
     =================================================================

     The Veterinarian's Corner
     Excerpts from the ANIMED GroupMail Conference

     by Don Thomson, 1:102/1005


     I think that it is time that pressure be brought to develop
     alternative testing means for the cosmetic industry to screen
     potential new products prior to marketing. As time as gone on,
     medical science has been able to develop sensitive and relatively
     sophisticated means for the detection of mutagenic potential of
     compound in specialized bacterial cultures, rather than the
     massive number of laboratory anmials once used for screening many
     food and pharmaceutical products for cancer causing potential
     (Ames Test). While this does not ELIMINATE the use of animals, it
     GREATLY reduces the number of animals utilized for the lower
     levels of the screening process.

     I believe that the use of some animals in medical research is a
     pragmatic necessity. I believe that we have the moral and ethical
     responsibility to use the fewest number of animals possible, in
     the most humane manner possible. We must continually search for
     alternative technologies and computer simlutations and
     extrapolations where appropriate.

     The realistic approach for today is somewhere in the middle of
     the discussion. Those crying for the immediate end to all use of
     animal models in research, ignore the fact that as of now in many
     cases there is no alternative means yet devised to obtain the
     needed information that ultimately is of a higher benefit to man.
     (Not sure that 'cosmetics' quite fits this bill....) Yet I have
     seen the definate move towards development of new technology,
     largely because of the mobilization of public opinion, first
     raised by those on these extreme views. The end result IS better.

     On the other hand, callous use of "such animals as rats, mice,
     and rabbits" [quote from cosmetic industry spokesperson] "is far
     less important than consumer safety issues," to me is a calloused
     view on the other side which demeans respect for 'non-human'
     animal life. I would rather hear the industry come to open
     examination of alternative means of irritant screening, rather
     than defensive posturing.

     I do not know of the specific types and choices we currently have
     in utilizing these alternative modalities, but I know that we are
     resourceful enough people that we can at least limit the extent
     of animal use, rather than continue to rely upon a crude biologic
     screen that has changed little over the last 45 years.

     Don Thomson, DVM
     1:102/1005
     9:871/16
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 20                  22 May 1989


     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 21                  22 May 1989


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

                          Latest Software Versions

                           Bulletin Board Software
     Name        Version    Name        Version    Name       Version

     Fido            12m*   Opus          1.03b    TBBS           2.1
     QuickBBS       2.03    TPBoard         5.0    TComm/TCommNet 3.4
     Lynx           1.30    Phoenix         1.3    RBBS         17.1D


     Network                Node List              Other
     Mailers     Version    Utilities   Version    Utilities  Version

     Dutchie       2.90C    EditNL         4.00    ARC           6.01
     SEAdog         4.50    MakeNL         2.12    ARCmail        2.0
     BinkleyTerm    2.20    Prune          1.40    ConfMail      4.00
     D'Bridge       1.18    XlatList       2.90    TPB Editor    1.21
     FrontDoor       2.0    XlaxNode       2.32    TCOMMail       2.2
     PRENM          1.40    XlaxDiff       2.32    TMail         8901
                            ParseList      1.30    UFGATE        1.03
                                                   GROUP         2.07
                                                   EMM           1.40
                                                   MSGED         1.99
                                                   XRS            2.0

     * 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 6-21                Page 22                  22 May 1989


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

                          The Interrupt Stack


      5 Jun 1989
        David Dodell's 32nd Birthday

      2 Aug 1989
        Start of Galactic Hacker Party in Amsterdam, Holland. Contact
        Rop Gonggrijp at 2:280/1 for details.

     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 1/89
        for info.

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

     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.

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

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

     FidoNews 6-21                Page 23                  22 May 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   1:147/1
     Nominations & Elections        David Melnick   1:107/233
     Public Affairs                 David Drexler   1:147/1
     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     1:147/1       (vacant)
      2  Henk Wevers       2:500/1      David Melnik    1:107/233

     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     FidoNews 6-21                Page 24                  22 May 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.

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