|From||Bill McGarrity||0:0/0.0||Date Write||2018-06-21 14:21:00|
|To||Michiel van der Vlist||0:0/0.0||Date Arrived||2018-06-21 21:40:08|
|Subj||Keeping it private.|
-=> Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-21-18 14:15 <=-
MvV> On Sunday June 17 2018 20:33, you wrote to me:
BM>> Yet there were members of Z2 who did vote
MvV>> So you say. But where is the list of voters to confirm it?
BM> Again, you use cliched symantics to justify your cause. Show me where
BM> they didn't vote?
MvV> That fact that you label it as a clichee does not invalidate it. You
MvV> know very well that in general proving a negative is impossible. It is
MvV> you that claimed there were votes from Z2. The onus of proof is on you.
Actually, Ward stated there was no objection to P4 and as I said, you both have
disagreed with each other so y'all need to work it out.
MvV>>> So why did Z2 have to abide by the results if they never agreed
MvV>>> to hold an election in the first place?
MvV>> And your answer to that is?
BM> Well, Lee has been preaching for who knows how long that the overall
BM> good for 'Fidonet' is how the game should be played. Are you not a
BM> part of Fidonet?
MvV> I am. But Lee is not. he is a user. His opinions are just that: the
MvV> opinions of a user. I am not bound by Lee's "rules".
Then let him know his rambling is not how you or anyong else in Z2 feels.
That's the easy way to stop it.
BM> You see, none of the other three zones who accept P4
BM> can assume responsibility for a lack of interest, desire or concerns
BM> when it can to the vote. If Z2 was that strongly against it,
MvV> Z2 was strongly against because P4 was incompatible with how things
MvV> were done in Z2.
Then why couldn't Z2 create a list of their objections on the ZC platform?
Silence, just as ignorance, is no excuse.
BM> why did you just come out and vote it down?
MvV> We did not have the numbers to do that. Besides, why should we be
MvV> forced to participate in an election when we never agreed to decide the
MvV> matter by a fidonet wide vote anyway?
Again, there lies a discrepency. You say one thing, Ward says another. Work it
out and let us know.
BM> Maybe Z2 is to blame for having the current document because of Z2's
BM> lack of initiative or concern.
MvV> There certainly was no lack of concern!.
So you're blaming initiative to speak out? Silence is not a very good excuse.
BM> As an old tv character once said, ôLogic clearly dictates that the
BM> needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
MvV> That amounts to dictatorship of the majority. Ram it down the throat of
MvV> the majority even if it severely hurts them...
As I'm saying for the third time and hopefully the last, your silence in the
matter is no excuse. I am sure discussion could have allowed for certain
concessions with regard to your needs.
BM> ö Back then you may not have had the #'s but today you do in a general
BM> election IF you can get it by the remaining ZCs. Your choice...
MvV> It is too late and it does not matter any more. the damage is done. :-(
In your eyes...
BM>>> being Fidonet is a "family" under democratic rule, z2 would have
BM>>> to abide by the resulting vote whether it be yay or nay.
MvV> Fidonet is not and never was a democracy.
Really? Then why were you so concerned in the last Z1C election?
MvV>>> Duh.... Z2 doesnt do it that way.
MvV> That was a response to XXCarol writing the same with Z1 and Z2
Exactly, which only goes to prove her point.
BM> You fail to understand the point. Z1 as a individaul entity of Fidonet
BM> can control it's business as it sees fit. Just as Z2 can and has.
BM> When dealing with a system wide decision, then ALL zones share the
MvV> There is and never was an agreement to make a system wide decision the
MvV> way it was done.
According to Ward there was... again, take it up with him.
BM> Now, as I said, none of the other ZCs can take responsibility for Z2's
BM> lack of effort. Who knows, if you got the #'s you could ahve upset the
BM> apple cart but you didn't. Live with it.
MvV> "Live with it"....
MvV> That is exactly the attitude that evokes feelings like "it was rammed
MvV> down our throat". Z2 was vehemently against it. The then ZC2 Henk
MvV> Wevers made it cristal clear. And he also explained why it was damaging
MvV> for Z2. It was ignored and Z1 pushed it through by choosing "democracy"
MvV> as a decision method so that needs of the minority could be overruled.
I'm pretty sure if Henk would have developed a concise strategy for Z2's
concerns there would have been open ears or at least allow modifications to
Z2's plights until that day when it didn't exist anymore.
MvV> "Live with it"....
MvV> Eventually we did. But at great cost and damage to the zone and
MvV> fidonet in general. The rigid geographical structure imposed by P4 was
MvV> incompatible with the cost structure of the telephone network in many
MvV> countries. We had no free local calls and the cost of national and
MvV> internationlal calls was sky high and eh.. chaotic. P4 ruthlessly
MvV> demolished the cost sharing and sponsoring that we had.
Again, these obstacles could have been reconciled with a structured gameplan on
how things would run smoothly within Z2's system that would work within P4.
MvV> In Germany it led to a schism. There was "Fido classic" and "Fido new
MvV> style" each with their own nodelist. In The Netherlands it lead to a
MvV> seven year CSO war. The CSO war ended with Fido over IP when the cost
MvV> of distribution dropped from sky high to almost zero.
Which I would expect.
MvV> Yes, we eventually adapted and learned to live with P4. But the pain it
MvV> took is not forgotten. The throat still feels soar when someone opens
MvV> up the old wounds... :(
Well, all I can go is by what you and Ward state. As soon as a unified
explaination is given, all I can do is satnd by my opinions as I see the
IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
... Look Twice... Save a Life!!! Motorcycles are Everywhere!!!
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
* Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)