However, just not to barge in and cause more trouble than
effectively contribute, is there anything that I can go through, read and prepare myself for the next term?
Flavio,
However, just not to barge in and cause more trouble than
effectively contribute, is there anything that I can go through,
read and prepare myself for the next term?
If I understand correctly ... you accepted a nomination for something
you had no idea what it was about ?
Flavio was not a candidate in the most recent election.
Flavio was not a candidate in the most recent election.
Isn't he? Because he is one whom I'd support.
I have been following the developments of the last FTSC election,
and of course am interested to contribute and be a part of the
elected team in the future.
However, just not to barge in and cause more trouble than effectively contribute, is there anything that I can go through, read and
prepare myself for the next term?
To participate: next FTSC election will be in the end of 2018, so once you'd show your involvement, any RC (including your R80C) may nominate
you.
Some idiots do neither, but are elected for each next term for many
years.
However, just not to barge in and cause more trouble than
effectively contribute, is there anything that I can go through,
read and prepare myself for the next term?
If I understand correctly ... you accepted a nomination for something
you had no idea what it was about ?
If I understand correctly ... you accepted a nomination for
something you had no idea what it was about ?
Flavio was not a candidate in the most recent election. I read his message as expressing interest in running in the future.
Andrew,
Flavio was not a candidate in the most recent election.
Isn't he? Because he is one whom I'd support.
Isn't he? Because he is one whom I'd support.
I probably would as well. I wish he had expressed interest prior to
the election.
I just would like to be able to contribute in the future, and
was asking for guidance on what to read, in order to understand the
role and maybe be a candidate for future terms :)
I just would like to be able to contribute in the future, and
was asking for guidance on what to read, in order to understand the
role and maybe be a candidate for future terms :)
Note to candidates: The main task of the FTSC is to document current practise. Contrary to what the name suggests, the FTSC does not create standards out of the blue. Current Fidonet practise evolves and when
it has stabilized, it may become a standard through FTSC documentation. Also, the FTSC is not an enforcement body. Those who wish to join the
FTSC in order to "engineer Fidonet" may be in for a disappointment.
Our main job is that of a clerk. We write the technical manual, we do
not design the machine. To avoid disappointment, sysops interested in joining the FTSC are strongly advised to read the following documents:
http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1000.002
http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1001.007
I did not accept anything :)
I just would like to be able to contribute in the future, and was
asking for guidance on what to read, in order to understand the role and maybe be a candidate for future terms :)
On 12-11-17 11:41, Alexey Vissarionov <=-
spoke to Flavio Bessa about Future Applications <=-
here (yes, I see that English is not your native language,
but my own experience shows that sometimes non-native
spea^W writers find non-trivial issues which are not
mentioned by natives).
I see that English is not your native language, but my ownTrue, but there are also some whose native language is not
experience shows that sometimes non-native spea^W writers
find non-trivial issues which are not mentioned by natives
English that make wrong interpretations of what is written
in English to suit their own agenda.
here (yes, I see that English is not your native language, but my own
experience shows that sometimes non-native spea^W writers find
non-trivial issues which are not mentioned by natives).
True, but there are also some whose native language is not English
that make wrong interpretations of what is written in English to suit their own agenda.
To participate: next FTSC election will be in the end of 2018, so
once you'd show your involvement, any RC (including your R80C) may
nominate you.
Good ${greeting_time}, Flavio!
22 Nov 2017 14:57:12, you wrote to All:
I have been following the developments of the last FTSC election,
and of course am interested to contribute and be a part of the
elected team in the future.
To contribute: that's simple - you may write a FSP or participate in public proof-reading of some documents once they will be posted here (yes, I see that English is not your native language, but my own experience shows that sometimes non-native spea^W writers find non-trivial issues which are not mentioned by natives).
To participate: next FTSC election will be in the end of 2018, so once you'd show your involvement, any RC (including your R80C) may nominate you.
However, just not to barge in and cause more trouble than
effectively contribute, is there anything that I can go through,
read and prepare myself for the next term?
If you run large echomail distribution node, you most likely are ready. If you develop FTN software, you most likely are ready.
If you run large echomail distribution node, you most likely are ready you develop FTN software, you most likely are ready.
Alexey feels you have to be a current mail distributor to some 50 nets or coding mailers/bbs software. Fact is there is a need for folks with a deep understanding of a zone or nodelist issues and other things. Also a need t make sure Z4 works with anything new.
Let me ask the non-technical people here. You know who you are. Tell
me why we even need an FTSC anymore?
It is not the job of the FTSC to make sure Z4 works with anything new,
nor does the FTSC "hold hands" with people who cannot grasp how to properly run mailers or cannot understand how a nodelist works.
The role of the FTSC is to document new stuff that becomes accepted as standard,
and to clean up/help Michiel revise existing documents. Like him or
not, at the very least he keeps the interest going for maintaining
them.
But it would be very logical going on 2018 now to "call it day" and dissolve the FTSC altogether; it is highly unlikely a new Fido
technology is going to be adapted like BinkD was.
The existing documents for the most common, popular transfer methods
and storage of Fido mail is clear enough that a developer can write
his own mailer, tosser, nodelist compiler, editor etc.
What else is there now to do? Other than patchwork?
Cue now to the noise...
nor does the FTSC "hold hands" with people who cannot grasp how to properly run mailers or cannot understand how a nodelist works.
true... but it is the responsibility of all sysops to help others to understand technical aspects of FTN communications...
The role of the FTSC is to document new stuff that becomes accepted as standard,
mmmm... no... the role of the FTSC is to document how FTN works... period..
and to clean up/help Michiel revise existing documents. Like him or not, at the very least he keeps the interest going for maintaining them.
umm, wrong again... http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1001.007
Let me ask the non-technical people here. You know who you are. Tell me why we even need an FTSC anymore?
The role of the FTSC is to document new stuff that becomes accepted ml>NA> as standard,
mmmm... no... the role of the FTSC is to document how FTN works...
The FTSC administrator is appointed for a four year renewable term."""""""""
To be eligible for appointment, an individual must be a Fidonet
node, be actively involved in Fidonet, though not necessarily in a programming context, and should have proven organizational skills. A candidate need not be a member of the FTSC.
It is recommended that a
successful candidate not carry any *C or *EC responsibilities during
the term of office.
A successful candidate must receive
approval by at least a plurality of votes.
Let me ask the non-technical people here. You know who you are.
Tell me why we even need an FTSC anymore?
interesting question...
nor does the FTSC "hold hands" with people who cannot grasp how
to properly run mailers or cannot understand how a nodelist
works.
true... but it is the responsibility of all sysops to help others to understand technical aspects of FTN communications...
The role of the FTSC is to document new stuff that becomes
accepted as standard,
mmmm... no... the role of the FTSC is to document how FTN works... period... some things are raised from proposals to standards when they become "widespread in use" but there's no definition of "widespread use"...
and to clean up/help Michiel revise existing documents. Like him
or not, at the very least he keeps the interest going for
maintaining them.
umm, wrong again... http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1001.007
3. Structure
------------
3.1 FTSC Administrator
----------------------
The FTSC administrator is appointed for a four year renewable term.
To be eligible for appointment, an individual must be a Fidonet
node, be actively involved in Fidonet, though not necessarily in a
programming context, and should have proven organizational skills. A
candidate need not be a member of the FTSC. It is recommended that a
successful candidate not carry any *C or *EC responsibilities during
the term of office.
1. Ensuring FTSC Mandate is adhered to.
2. Facilitating communications links between members.
3. Maintaining document distribution links.
4. Coordinating all membership nominations and voting.
5. Developing Working Groups as required.
6. Ensuring that the FTSC seeks, accepts and responds to public
input.
7. Assigning FSP numbers to new Standards Proposals.
nothing in there about revising any documents or driving that aspect
of documenting FTN operations......
But it would be very logical going on 2018 now to "call it day"
and dissolve the FTSC altogether; it is highly unlikely a new
Fido technology is going to be adapted like BinkD was.
The existing documents for the most common, popular transfer
methods and storage of Fido mail is clear enough that a developer
can write his own mailer, tosser, nodelist compiler, editor etc.
What else is there now to do? Other than patchwork?
Cue now to the noise...
meh...
Reread about non-technical folk in the FTSC.., and study prior
messages from Michiel carefully. Yes, notwithstanding some of the more banal and inane logic arguements, even I think some of that is a
little cringe-worthy. But someone like him who is THAT logical and technical is example of what runs the FTSC.
Let me ask the non-technical people here. You know who you are.
Tell me why we even need an FTSC anymore?
I don't regard myself as non-technical, but just the same I want to answer your question.
With the present mandate, the FTSC is totally obsolete.
The way to go is of course to give the FTSC the mandate to decide,
not to just document. We could easily collect the hundreds of present documents and turn them all into one standard document.
But our hands are obviously tied. Ergo, hobby programmers all
around the world can happily invent all kinds of non-FTN stuff, and
then send them in to the FTSC and get the shit documented, if only
they have a few nodes (common practice) that are using their crappy software.
In a way that is a violation of P4 3.5 although you will respond that
the FTSC is not guided by P4 where-upon I will answer that FTSC is metioned 3 times in P4 with te P4 being the supreme document of
Fidonet, hence the FTSC falls under specific stipulations. Where-upon
you ... [I like things to move forward so I usurped your persona
already a bit ... 8-) ]
Ugh.. Fuck P4. Old and outdated, and nobody can agree to change it
because half of the people involved are too stubborn or don't even know what's going on at the time.
Nicholas Boel wrote to Bj}{rn Felten <=-
Nobody cares about the FTSC, especially in othernets.
Don't blame me for not having tried it.
I love P4 ... you can prove and disprove anything with it.
Nobody cares about the FTSC, especially in othernets.
You must care because you're in here bloviating about it.
I love P4 ... you can prove and disprove anything with it.
it. Sure there's still new software being developed, but most go by
the current standards. THEN as GAF sysops we have to intervene and
try to show them the new stuff that apparantly never made it to
standard, even though they should have been (we see people complain
about it on a daily basis!) and some of these proposals get forced
down the throats of new programmers by people in the FTSC.
I agree that there are proposals which should have become a standard. But if the majority of the FTSC members vote against it, I have to accept
that. For example, we had that with CDP, despite the fact that it is
still supported by a few nodes (and by much more in the past). It was ignored for about 10 years and then voted down.
I would say a standard becomes a standard because a sufficient number
of developers or users use it. That would shed a totally different
role on the mandate of the FTSC.
Take for example the case of IPv6 ... it's as good as nowhere in the nodelist, yet there is FTSC-documentation dealing with it.
There will always be people with an agenda.
Have I told you about my secret plan of world domination? :)
The role of the FTSC is to document new stuff that becomes accepted
as standard,
mmmm... no... the role of the FTSC is to document how FTN works...
period..
Accepted as standard amongst Sysops... you know, the people who
actually take the time to download, install and use the software that
a Fido developer writes. Features of that software find a good niche purpose or they don't.
wrote.and to clean up/help Michiel revise existing documents. Like him or
not, at the very least he keeps the interest going for maintaining
them.
umm, wrong again... http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1001.007
Good for you, you can copy and paste, completely oblivious to what I
And you as well.
But thanks for jumping in to try to take a cheap shot. As a matter of fact, I do care.
But thanks for jumping in to try to take a cheap shot. As a matter of
fact, I do care.
You have an odd way of showing it by insulting the very group you proclaim to care about.
there are also some whose native language is not English that make
wrong interpretations of what is written in English to suit their own agenda.
Simply ... texts should be written in a way that is unambiguous.
What do we learn from it??
Simply ... texts should be written in a way that is unambiguous.
On 12-28-17 13:32, Ward Dossche <=-
spoke to Richard Menedetter about Re: Future Applications <=-
Simply ... texts should be written in a way that is unambiguous.
Well said.
I am tired about this nonsense that I'm not a native
speaker so don't understand the language well enough.
What I was talking about was examples where it was quite clear that an
item was optional, but someone insisted that people were not in
compliance if they did not implement it.
For example, we had that with CDP, despite the fact that it is stillI would say a standard becomes a standard because a sufficient number
supported by a few nodes (and by much more in the past).
It was ignored for about 10 years and then voted down.
of developers or users use it.
Take for example the case of IPv6 ... it's as good as nowhere in the nodelist, yet there is FTSC-documentation dealing with it.
Richard Menedetter wrote to Ward Dossche <=-
Many ISPs do not offer public IPv4 addresses any more.
You get DS-Lite meaning public IPv6 and private IPv4.
In that light it makes much sense to have a solution for it.
Yeah, fortunately, however, my ISP, Comcast, offers BOTH IPv4 and
IPv6 addresses to those of us with Business Class service (which, for
the past two or so years has been nothing but flawless for me). The
only drawback is that you can have one or the other and not both IPv4
AND IPv6 in use at the same time.
What I was talking about was examples where it was quite clear that an
item was optional, but someone insisted that people were not in
compliance if they did not implement it.
For example, we had that with CDP, despite the fact that it is
still supported by a few nodes (and by much more in the past).
It was ignored for about 10 years and then voted down.
I would say a standard becomes a standard because a sufficient
number of developers or users use it.
CDP was in widespread use in germany.
Interesting. It would be great to get feedback from all regions about IPv4/6 deployment and things to watch out. We have to make sure that our network works fine with all the local peculiarities. BTW, we got a dedicated echo for IPv6: IPV6 ;)
| Sysop: | digital man |
|---|---|
| Location: | Riverside County, California |
| Users: | 1,038 |
| Nodes: | 15 (0 / 15) |
| Uptime: | 147:30:36 |
| Calls: | 500,200 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 95,197 |
| D/L today: |
394 files (42,350K bytes) |
| Messages: | 465,985 |