F I D O N E W S Volume 18, Number 01 1 Jan 2001 +----------------------------+---------------------------------------+ | The newsletter of the | ISSN 1198-4589 Published by: | | FidoNet community | "FidoNews" | | _ | 1-714-639-0377 1:1/23 | | / \ | 1-714-532-1586 1:103/301 | | /|oo \ | BinkD supported both above | | (_| /_) | | | _`@/_ \ _ | | | | | \ \\ | Editor: Warren Bonner | | | (*) | \ )) | editor@fidonews.org | | |__U__| / \// | wdbonner@pacbell.net | | _//|| _\ / | | | (_/(_|(____/ | | | (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. | | | -- JOSEPH PULITZER | +----------------------------+---------------------------------------+ *+*+*+*+*+* HAPPY NEW YEAR EDITION *+*+*+*+*+*+* Most prosperous year to ALL sysops in Fidoland! Table of Contents 1. HEADLINE ................................................. 1 Happy New Year one and all !!! ........................... 1 2. CHAT WITH EDITOR ......................................... 2 3. GUEST EDITORIAL .......................................... 8 ***WARD DOSSCHE INTERNATIONAL COORDINATOR*** ............. 8 4. LETTERS THAT CROSS THE EDITOR'S DESK ..................... 24 5. ARTICLES ................................................. 32 6. OL'WDB'S COLUMN .......................................... 39 -=+Ol'WDB's COLUMN+=- .................................... 39 7. FACTS IN HISTORY ......................................... 48 8. POET'S CORNER ............................................ 54 -=+++ Fido Poets Corner +++=- ............................ 54 9. HUMOR .................................................... 56 10. QUESTION OF THE WEEK .................................... 60 -=This weeks Question=- .................................. 60 11. ANSWERS OF THE WEEK ..................................... 61 12. NOTICES ................................................. 62 13. FIDONET BY INTERNET ..................................... 65 14. FIDONEWS INFORMATION .................................... 70 FIDONEWS INFORMATION ..................................... 70 FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 1 1 Jan 2001 ================================================================= HEADLINE ================================================================= ***International Coordinator Threatens Node Removal from Nodelist*** Ok folks, first let me tell you to disregard repeated quoted text and concentrate on WHO is commenting to WHOM as all opinions match. Well almost.... Secondly, today Ward backed down and corrected the nodelist error he had meddled in as International Coordinator. That kinda short circuited this issue as it has been building for days. Happy and prosperous New Year to ALL! Ed. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 2 1 Jan 2001 ================================================================= CHAT WITH EDITOR ================================================================= By: Bart Verhaeghe To: All Re: Ward Dossche The abuse Story. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear International Fidonet Sysop's. I am here to inform you of the abuse of Ward Dossche. Just some time ago I was a downlink of Ward. But the cable company was ready in Belgium so I took the cable and, I asked Johan Zwiekhorst (RC29) if I could poll his system instead by IP, That was fine for Johan and I informed Ward about my decision. But this was not to the liking of for Ward so he tried to trick me. * Like changing my password so I could not areafix to his system to disconnect my echomail. * Second he refuses to change his route file so the mail for me and my downlinks staid at his place instead of going to Johan Zwiekhorst. * Third after having a big discussion in natsysop.b he wanted to take me out of the nodelist. But in the end he gave in... Second chapter of this story: I have made friends outside Belgium like in R28, Z3(WWB), Z1 (animenet). I like reading a lot of R28 mail and such... So Mr. ward dossche was been pissed because I got r28 mail from the Netherlands without the need of his "historical" import of such (limited) mail.Again he is threatening me for removal from the nodelist again. He says that there is a historical rule that say's that the ic/zc2 has to take mail from the r28-bone. His whole mailer system is "historic"...no %rescan; no Msgid and he still strips seenbye's so his system lacks indeed dupe detection if there is parallel import...Several people advised him to upgrade to something better for mail-moving...he disregards everything except his own view:( Third Chapter of this story He made another people think I am a bad person by saying in a R29 area (west-vlaams.reg) with another college (Alfred Vossen) that he is not welcome because of his special Limburger accent and that's not true. All the facts are provable on netmail and echomail messages. Steven Leeman even wanted to write a story about this sick joke... So my dear fidonet sysop's I hope I've shed some more light on Ward Dossche's abusive power as ic/zc2. Groeten, Bart Verhaeghe Fidonet : 2:292/907 Web-Site : http://tsohbbs.dyns.cx E-mail : the-sources-of-hell-bbs@yucom.be Online Poll System : tsohbbs.dyn.dhs.org , BinkP +32-(0)50/81.52.94 (2:292/907) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (19483) Mon 25 Dec 00 9:20p By: michael kleerbaum To: Ward Dosche Re: Domains St: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Ward, FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 3 1 Jan 2001 Is it so, that -you have been acting as the International Coordinator- everybody who reserved a domain name including "fido" will have to ask you for permission, and will otherwise be removed from the nodelist? Yes or no, please. With one sentence: You just can't remove somebody from the nodelist because he reserved a _national_ www domain faster than you, and even less if he didn't have any opportunity to establish local communication about the contents of the concerning site. Michael ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Ross Cassell To: Steven Leeman Re: Your behaviour within Fidonet ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Steven! 25 Dec 00 21:13, you wrote to me: RC>> What demands were made to or of Steven? SL> give up fido.be & fidonet.be I suggest you not give them up, I'll give you a home in the nodelist if that is what it takes. Meanwhile Ward has set sail in his ship, let the winds blow him into the whirlpool. == Ross E-mail: rcassell@home.com ICQ = 5305939 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: "David Hallford" To: "Warren Bonner" Subject: Re: Steven Leeman Node Number put on HOLD by Ward Date: Sunday, December 24, 2000 9:59 PM Hi Warren! I agree with Joe Jared's well thought out response. The internet is not part of Fidonet and should never be used for any punitive action within Fidonet. Before I say anything deeper, I would like Ward to have a chance to respond. with warm regards, Dave ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ed: FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 4 1 Jan 2001 Dave, I couldn't agree more. When I received the Netmail from Steve Leeman early morning on December 22. I at first couldn't believe I was reading a plea to hopefully move the Snooze into battle position. So I phoned Joe and told him to watch his incoming netmail, then I listened to see if he got the same message I did, out of the broken English, although the more times I read it the better I understood Ward Dorsche acting God was removing his ability to receive or send netmail. Joe immediately replied that Ward could not do that by policy, and the Domains owned by Steven were not any part of fido or policy. I said, "you will as my NC pass this on to Brenda"? He said he would take care of it. He did quite well directly to all parties. Same thing happened to him with King Kohl a couple of years ago, so he had a mission. Ol'wdb ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Steven Leeman To: michael kleerbaum Re: Your behaviour within Fidonet ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello michael, Monday December 25 2000 22:17, michael kleerbaum wrote to Ross Cassell: mk> I can't believe, that this can happen in FidoNet 2001... :(( mk> Ward Dosche, the Emperor of FidoNet? SL> I even heard someone say "little ceasar" ? :-) [Algemeen.b] From : Dave Luyten 2:292/624.63 Mon 25 Dec 00 18:24 Ward> indeed, no discussions. You've received your extended netmail Ward> . Ter Attention of the innocent loser : dns.be is not a Ward> player here, the case is handled within Fidonet. So if my Ward> demands are fulfilled it'll be business-as-usual, if not I wish Ward> the domain holder much pleasure without a nodenumber \x/@rd At the moment that Ward Dossche (IC) deletes a nodenumber without a complaint going thru the hierarchies, Ward Dossche (IC) shows "excessively annoying behaviour". Excessive because Ward has done it on purpose :-) In which case it'll be possible to the ZC's to undo the decision on this case (qualified majority). (what's always the case , but in this case has the most probable solution) also Impeachment procedures will be possible then The simple case was that Ward Dossche (IC) in this case a direct complaint to himself Ward Dossche (IC) but that Ward Dossche (IC) this complaint had to disregard without any any prenotice. This is an automatism because by my knowing there wasn't any complaint to begin with at NC level. The NC that is the immediate higher in rank of FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 5 1 Jan 2001 Steven in the Fidonet Hierarchies. Further complaints on the decision of the NC must be made by RC, ZC and IC in that order... Neglecting the proper order is showing "annoying behaviour". So Steven can draw charges against Ward Dossche (IC) by his NC. And that can become even stranger if Ward Dossche (IC) has to defend himself at NC-level. But that isn't the case...because Ward has operated in function of IC... And the problem that Ward Dossche (IC) raised didn't hold too much. The having of domain names is to no matter for the working of Fidonet. You have to prove that those domain names by Steven can be "excessively annoying" to other nodes in the network what isn't the case! And having a DNS entry is to matter at all in Fidonet. Steven is not "excessively annoying". The only rightful way to become owner of fido.be & fidonet.be is via non-fido channels. Those that were especially setupped for this matter. File a complaint at DNS...which is already spoken for by Jan "IN MY HUMBLE OPINION" Have A Nice Day Dave Luyten ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Jerry Schwartz To: Dave Hamilton Re: Ward Dossche --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello, Dave... Dec 25, 2000 at 14:19, Dave Hamilton wrote to Janis Kracht: DH> Do you have an opinion of Ward Dossche's treatment of Steven Leeman? Does the RCC have an opinion? DH> I think it's obscene. If things are as they were reported, I doubt you'll find many who disagree with you. I had severe misgivings about Ward. Despite all kinds of assurances that he was really a nice guy, my long-distance opinion has always been that he's a bit overwound. Nonetheless, I'd like to hear more from other sources, if any exist. In particular, I'd like to hear from Ward. I don't think the "in your face" approach will work with him, in any case; so I'd like to see this handled diplomatically. Regards, Jerry mailto:jerryschwartz@comfortable.com http://www.writebynight.com --- Msged/NT TE 05 * Origin: Write by Night (1:142/928) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 6 1 Jan 2001 By: Peter Barandat To: Ross Cassell Re: Your behaviour within Fidonet ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Ross, On 25.12.00, 15:45:38 you've sent this message in outer space. An alien retrieved it on Tuesday 26.12.00, 0:51:13, and replied to it. *Establishing connection* PB>> Steven has to proof that he owns the rights to buy those domains. Now, I'm sure that even Ward doesn't own those rights, simply because they don't existe, in Belgium. If Steven can't get his hands on the rights before thursday he will be deleted from the nodelist. RC> To which, WARD does not have this authority whatsoever. Indeed :-( Greets, Peter ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Joe Jared To: Peter Barandat Re: Your behaviour within Fidonet ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: No copyright should be inferred from any portion of the embodiment of this message. This message is public domain, and all rights have been granted to publish this document anywhere or everywhere. Hello Peter! Monday December 25 2000 19:50, you wrote to Ross Cassell: PB> Hello Ross, PB> On 12/25/2000, 11:46:57 you've sent this message in outer space. An alien retrieved it on Monday 12/25/2000, 19:28:04, and replied to it. PB> *Establishing connection* PB> Translated it means: The node 2:292/624 is placed on hold (as of PB> now) in the fidonet nodelist en will be removed during following PB>>> week, together with all registrations of the same person. If PB>>> the sysop does not comply with former demands. RC>> What demands were made to or of Steven? PB> Steven has to proof that he owns the rights to buy those domains. PB> Now, I'm sure that even Ward doesn't own those rights, simply because PB> they don't existe, in Belgium. If Steven can't get his hands on the PB> rights before thursday he will be deleted from the nodelist. JJ> Simply put, Steven does have the right. He has money, and has purchased the domains. Ethically, I hope he does cooperate with the FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 7 1 Jan 2001 Zone, but nothing can be done within fidonet to force him. This point needs to be clearly identified, and opposed. It's as simple as Fidonet != Internet. For the c impaired, Fidonet <> internet. As for the effect this will have, first off, without the *C of the effective level's endorsement, the domain isn't official in my own list. Another point. Fidonet cannot be copyrighted by any other entity than Tom Jennings. If Ward would claim a copyright, my own argument would be that if anything, it was already Public domain, and that by his own reasoning in prior messages, he has no claim. You cannot post-mortem copyright that which is in the public domain, and prior art, the world's first fidonet nodelist, would be the prior art challenging the claim of copyright. Spilt milk. As a matter of precedent, fidonet.com is owned by someone who is almost a non-entity. The attack at Steven is simply because he is close to home for Ward. PB> In my opinion, Ward doesn't want the proof of the registration of fido. He wants those names to be erased from the dns-tables. But why I ask? Steven is committed to make something beautiful of those domains. Ward hasn't got the registrations, so he can't register the domains... (otherwise he has to place his own pc on hold, to be removed within a week.... =) So? What will he say if some dog food company registers the fido.be ?? Now a fido member has this domain... Ward should be proud!! When Ward asked me why I contacted Janis on this issue, the reasoning was simple. The ZCC (The 5 remaining ZC's excluding the ZC who is IC), can overturn his ruling. I don't see this situation as a resolvable one, but rather a ZCC will need to intervene on principles. It is however up to Mr. Leeman to appeal the IC Decision to the ZCC. Given that the ZC is also IC, he only gets one shot at this, so I'm hoping that the ZCC will act in fairness, or that Ward as IC will rescind his ruling. The positions of *C above NC are typically of appeal, not action. It would serve Ward well to back down from his current course of action, but I doubt he will. As such, many of us have asked our own ZC as a member of the ZCC to rescind Ward's decision for him. Hopefully, the other ZC's will act in kind. NC 1:103 joejared@osirusoft.com --- GoldED/W32 3.0.1 * Origin: telnet://telnet.osirusoft.com (1:103/301) ----------------------------------------------------------------- FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 8 1 Jan 2001 ================================================================= GUEST EDITORIAL ================================================================= A Sysops Plea for help -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Ward Dossche Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 11:23:31 +0100 From: "Leeman, Steven" To: editor@fidonews.org what happened in Z2 last month? (eg I'm not good at articles...so this is just to inform you...do with it as you please) *****Note: Some words and spelling corrected, but little as possible. ED. A few weeks ago the .BE internet domain was to be liberalized; eg you didn't have to be a company or institute in order to get a .be domain name... So as a fidonetter avant la letter, I immediately started, ask some of my friends, to buy domain names... It was a success in Belgium... the dns.be crashed on the first day under the tons of requests :-) A few weeks later...Ward Dossche gets xDSL and suddenly checks at dns.be who had tool fido.be (eg my instinct says : 18hours before he found out I had send a routed messages to an R29 sysop called Pablo Saratxaga who is very familiar with fido.belg.* and z2.mail.fidonet.org MX record keeping if he could send f624.n292.z2.fidonet.org to my fido.be or fidonet.be account)...I and some other sysops have always been very suspicious about his "inside" information...it's all too obvious.... he's also against sysops connecting to other sysops although I believed fidonet policy permits it you may lay connections to other sysops...(as long as it's for your netmail only) eg it's thesame like "crashing" to them... but you lay it out as a standard in your routing/tosser ... why redirect it through 6 nodes up till IC level when you connect every damn minute to that other sysop's system... in the WWB Ward has already received 0 on his request to stop this charade... he wants to have total control on fidonet... so Ward didn't file complaint or inform me by crashed netmail.... nope he just emailed it to me at 18h09... to put it with his own words (rough translation) "I'm no sysop that'll stick at the screen reading mail all day until my tongue will fall of" - or something... a R28 sysop can confirm that message... :-) It's also the same Ward Dossche that removed any trademark/copyright marks from the nodelist and it's decision was widespread in fidonews (1997) about that Fido/fidonet and Dog with diskette were no trademarks outside Zone 1... Today he shouts that he is not alone a Coordinator Fidonet-Belgium... HE IS THE *IC* (I can send his emails if you'd like... Fidopolicy doesn't handle those does it? :-) and that it's HIS domain name and I should give those domain names to him within 2 hours of his 1st email... he never responded to my netmails... but he states he received my netmail in an email with the last nodediff where i've been put on FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 9 1 Jan 2001 hold...this morning... he has also tried to block my domain names (fido.be and fidonet.be) at my registrar...which obviously refused... he's got a 24 page manual with smallwrite which doesn't give any rights to an IC of "fidonet"-WHAT? which doesn't have any jurisdiction affiliations in this country... (10 years ago Ward Dossche had one Bnet.vzw but ... it died...) so Ward Dossche had 10 years the time to get the .BE domain using his affiliation... but now a 3rd party has taken it...his worst enemy...it's my fault...? Even the belgian government has the same problem... www.belgie.be turned into DUTCH (The Netherlands) hands... a big "joke" in the Belgian Internet World ... I'd like your input about this subject... should I ask "asylum" in Z1 or other zones to get relisted? my points & downlinks won't just switch over because of this (one of many) Ward Dosschian fights... the Dns.be liberalization slogan was "First Come First Serve" where the rule was : you didn't had to have any affiliations any more... you could register www.water.be without getting a lawyer of some Water(H20) company on your head... Greetz, Steven Leeman (2:292/624) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Steven Leeman To: editor@fidonews.org Re: -Ed ===================================================================== * Forwarded by Steven Leeman (2:292/624) * Area : FN_SYSOP ([INTERBBS]) * From : Steven Leeman, 2:292/624 (Monday December 25 2000 01:21) * To : All * Subj : :-) ===================================================================== Hello All, does anyone still remember this fidonews article of Ward Dossche? hence why am I posting this? A few weeks ago the .BE internet domain name was liberalized...eg you didn't had to have a company in order to registrar your own domain...you could take www.yahoo.be if you wanted to have it :-) so I took also a few...eg www.fido.be , www.fidonet.be a few weeks later I get a nice email(multiple) from Ward Dossche (he doesn't like netmails anymore?) stating he is copyright holder and such of those names and asked me to dismiss ownership of those .be domain names... I send his own article to him by netmail... Now instead of his threats to start a DNS-complaint...he uses another card of his sleeve... "Although I'm not a Belgian Fido Coordinator...I AM THE INTERNATIONAL FIDO COORDINATOR ... Now free these domain names or you'll be removed from the nodelist...I'll await your answer in 2 hours"... the next day I was put on "hold" in the nodelist... next thursday I should be out of the FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 10 1 Jan 2001 Z2 nodelist as well...unless I free them up "I don't need a /polemique/" he said as last... sure every /master/ likes a slave that doesn't object to it's commands... He has spammed al my downlinks and points to inform them they should look for another uplink... they all ignored his netmail...even started a polemique on their own... it's not the first time Ward Dossche misuses his Nodelist-keeper power... eg he has already blackmailed moderators in the idle hope of getting moderatorship of that echo... he quotes Echopol nicely but if himself stands above it... no rules of his echo's; no listening to the rules of other echo's...; [....] -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mon 31 Mar 97 9:27 By: Ward Dossche To: David Moufarrege Re: Re: Copyright Notice ===================================================================== Hello David, > What is the background of your dropping the Copyright Notice of the > Z2-Nodelist? Some time ago a person wanted to write non-commercially something somewhere about Fido and kinda liked the art-work on the dog with the diskette. (name of the person escapes me, but I seem to recall a similar incident connected to the last Eurocon) So, truthfully believing Tom Jennings holds a trademark on this (as was mentioned in the nodelist and still is in Fidonews) he asks permission to use it, which Tom flatly refused. As I found this rather a strange reaction, out of curiosity I asked some of our corporate lawyers to look into the copyright- and trademark-issue of "Fido", "Fidonet" and the artwork of the dog-with- diskette. (FYI, I'm Deputy-Director at the Belgian telco, employing some 27,000 staff and we have acorporate-law- division who does nothing else than copyright and trademark stuff) As I so suspected for a long time, I received confirmation after researching relevant trademark-bureaus that no references to the above nor any trademark held by a Jennings Tom or Tom Jennings relating to Fidonet or something similarly sounding exists. Mark my words ... this covers the whole of Europe (east and west) including Israel and Turkey. It says nothing about the USA. We discovered however expired Fidonet-trademarks in the name of other individuals residing in Europe. A quick search was done for Japan (where ZC/6 resides) without any TJ- trademark. Same thing in Argentina (homebase of ZC/4) where TJ holds no rights but where, very puculiarly, another trademark called "Latin Fido" is held by a local sysop (this is also reflected in the Z4- nodelist). So let me summarize : FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 11 1 Jan 2001 There is _NO_ existing trademark in Europe in the name of Tom Jennings nor Jennings Tom for "Fido", "Fidonet" nor the "dog-with-diskette"- artwork. Then why write it in the nodelist? I don't see one single reason. Now let's not confuse "trademark" with "copyright". If TJ wants to have a trademark on all those items then as far as I'm concerned he can have it ... which means he must have his brand-names registered in each and every country - for zone-2 this means 35- countries to be precise - and agree to pay the periodical hefty sum on that. (worldwide 190+ ?) This he has never done, nor will he do it, nor will anyone else because it is just too expensive. "Control" over the nodelist can never warrant such a high price nor can anyone ever expect a return on that investment. If anyone ever has any bright idea here to register the trademarks to either "control" or "financially exploit" then I hereby post a claim to be first in line to laugh that person straight in his/her face. Less than a year ago there was the case of a company registering a trademark on the wording "world wide web" and "www", which mind you are nowhere legally protected. After initial astonishment by the internet-community the "owners" were quickly reduced to the laughing stock even while they followed correct legal procedures. They tried to exercise a claim and finally gave up because it was reasonably un-enforceable. With Fidonet it is exactly the same thing. Now one final word about "copyright". TJ does not participate in any way in the production of any of the nodelists nor any of the segments that comprise the nodelist. Hence there is not one square inch of legal ground for him to claim copyright over it. The NC's could have a copyright over net-segments, the RC's over region- segments and the ZC's over zone-segments. Since the ZC's also produce nodelists they could imo also post a copyright-notice for their version of the nodelist although I think all these notices carry little weight and are of little to no importance. Anyone in zone-2 having problems with the nodelist without a TJ-copyright/ trademark notification can always freq at this node the elements it takes to produce their own nodelist. Every current zone-2 region-segment can be freqqed here with the magic-name REGIONxx where xx = region number. On top of that every zone-segment can be freqqed here following the same logic : ZONEy where y = zonenumber. It enables everyone who wants that to build his/her own customized nodelist. FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 12 1 Jan 2001 If a person e.g. only wants R24, R50 and Z3, then he/she freqs REGION24, REGION50, ZONE3 and gives that to his/her nodelist-compiler. How's that for openness, availability, service, whatever you wanna call it? If they want to include the original notice they can equally freq "TJ" here so that bit of information is accessible as well although it makes no difference. As a sidenote, I already received threats for a court-case by one Randy Bush, the same person when slamming the Fido-door shut behind him stated it was nothing else but a litter-box reeking of cat-piss. I understand some valid concerns about intentions and motives, but I do have a more than full-time and well payed job so I don't need to try to squeeze some extra pennies (at what cost?) out of some peoples pockets. I believe it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for any individual to grab control of the nodelist and make a buck out of it. If that happens then it is because the sysops allow it to happen, personally I would just totally ignore such a person. There's a lesson to be learned from our German friends who would never take any shit like that. This they proved after some "grab control"- exercises there. I'm more worried about the censoring of Fidonews-worldwide by a ZC which recently occurred and nobody reacted upon it. Weren't you aware? Thanks for writing. If there's more you want to ask, please do. Take care, \x/ard Dossche ZC/2 Netmail (2:292/624.1) NETMAIL Msg : 755 of 768 Pvt K/s Trs A/s From : Ward Dossche 2:292/854 Fri 22 Dec 00 10:48 To : point 2:292/624.1 Fri 22 Dec 00 11:03 Subj : Status van de 2:292/624-node in Fidonet De sysop van 2:292/624 (jullie boss) heeft eenzijdig, zonder overleg en zonder enig akkoord van de copyright houder en/of zijn gemandateerde bij DNS.BE de domeinen "fidonet.be" en "fido.be" gereserveerd. Dergelijk usurperend gedrag wordt in een Fidonetomgeving niet getollereerd. De sysop in kwestie werd om uitleg gevraagd met inbegrip van aan te tonen dat hij de benodigde toelatingen heeft. Bij uitblijven van deze bewijsvoering wordthem vanuit de Fidonet hierarchie opgelegd dat de domeinen "fidonet.be" en "fido.be" opgegeven worden. De termijn voor hem om hierop bevredigend te reageren werd op 1 week gesteld. (deadline donderdag 28 december om 23h55 lokale tijd) FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 13 1 Jan 2001 Totnutoe kwam daar geen bevredigend antwoord op. Het nodenummer 2:292/624 werdt met onmiddellijke ingang op "Hold" geplaatst in de fidonet nodelist en zal volgende week verwijderd worden, samen met alle andere inschrivingen van dezelfde persoon, indien de sysop zich niet naar het bovenvermelde directief richt. .. Voor jullie creeert het de bijkomende moeilijkheid dat de pointaccess wegvalt. Om die te behouden en verder in Fidonet aktief te blijven zijn er 3 scenario's: 1) Jullie moedigen de sysop van 2:292/624, Steven Leeman, aan om zich bij de gestelde richtlijnen neer te leggen. Wanneer het bewijs geleverd werd dat de domeinen 'fidonet.be' en 'fido.be' daadwerkelijk verwijderd werden uit de dns-tabellen blijft alles bij het oude; 2) Jullie zoeken een andere sysop. Dit kan heel gemakkelijk gebeuren via de nodelist; 3) Jullie vragen node-status aan via een hub en worden volwaardige node binnen Fidonet. Mogelijke hubs zijn: * 2:292/100 (hub10010) Johan Zwiekhorst - Hasselt * 2:292/401 (hub10040) Freddy Verrezen - Mol * 2:292/706 (hub10070) Gilbert Doyen - Brussel * 2:292/865 (hub10081) Luc Sienaert - Mortsel * 2:292/854 (hub10084) Ward Dossche - Mortsel * 2:292/2009 (hub10200) Eric Vaneberck - Jodoigne * 2:292/4005 (hub10400) Yves Hennico - Montzen Ik hoop dat het allemaal zo geen vaart zal lopen maar indien de sysop van 2:292/624, Steven Leeman, niet inbindt en niet ingaat op de gestelde eisen zal bovengenoemd scenario onveranderd uitgevoerd worden. Ter info, ik ga hierover met niemand een polemiek voeren, de kaarten liggen zoals ze liggen. Met vriendelijke groeten, \x/@rd Dossche Fidonet International Coordinator Netmail (2:292/624.1) NETMAIL Msg : 754 of 768 Pvt K/s Trs A/s From : Ward Dossche 2:292/854 Fri 22 Dec 00 10:28 To : Steven Leeman 2:292/626 Fri 22 Dec 00 11:03 Subj : De toestand van 2:292/624 en 2:292/626 CC: Eddy Missoul, Eddy Missoul, Tom Gay, Jacek Pielesz CC: Tom Laermans, Davy Verhaeghen Heren, De sysop van 2:292/624 en 2:292/626 heeft eenzijdig, zonder overleg en zonder enig akkoord van de coyrighthouder en/of zijn gemandateerde bij DNS.BE de domeinen "fidonet.be" en "fido.be" gereserveerd. FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 14 1 Jan 2001 Dergelijk usurperend gedrag wordt in een Fidonetomgeving niet getollereerd. De sysop in kwestie werd om uitleg gevraagd met inbegrip van aan te tonen dat hij de benodigde toelatingen heeft. Bij uitblijven van deze bewijsvoering wordtopgelegd dat de domeinen "fidonet.be" en "fido.be" opgegeven worden. De termijn om hierop bevredigend te reageren werd op 1 week gesteld. Totnutoe kwam daar geen bevredigend antwoord op. De nodenummers 2:292/624 en 2:292/626 werden met onmiddellijke ingang op "Hold"geplaatst en zullen volgende week verwijderd worden indien hun sysop zich niet naar de bovenvermelde directief richt. Gezien die sysop ineens ook de hub 2:292/10060 uitbaat waaronder jullie resideren zal ook deze hub uit de nodelist verwijderd worden. Voor jullie continuiteit binnen Fidonet wordt dan ook aangeraden om zo snel mogelijk met een andere hub contacten te leggen opdat dit in de nodelist zou weerspiegelen. De andere mogelijke hubs in R29 zijn: * 2:292/100 (hub10010) Johan Zwiekhorst - Hasselt * 2:292/401 (hub10040) Freddy Verrezen - Mol * 2:292/706 (hub10070) Gilbert Doyen - Brussel * 2:292/865 (hub10081) Luc Sienaert - Mortsel * 2:292/854 (hub10084) Ward Dossche - Mortsel * 2:292/2009 (hub10200) Eric Vaneberck - Jodoigne * 2:292/4005 (hub10400) Yves Hennico - Montzen Indien er kandidaten zijn om de hub-functie waar te nemen dan kan NC292 steeds beslissen om in de zone-16 een nieuwe hub te creeren waarnaar jullie je dan ookkunnen richten. Ik hoop dat het allemaal zo geen vaart zal lopen maar indien de sysop van 2:292/624 aka 2:292/626, Steven Leeman, niet inbindt en niet ingaat op de gestelde eisen zal bovengenoemd scenario onveranderd uitgevoerd worden. Ter info, ik ga hierover met niemand een polemiek voeren, de kaarten liggen zoals ze liggen. Met vriendelijke groeten, \x/@rd Dossche Fidonet International Coordinator -----------8< dns.txt --------------------- o Steven Leeman, )/\,[_) Sysop SkyNET Bbs `T7 ]=[ http://welcome.to/skynetbbs (Dutch/English) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By: Ward Dossche To: Steven Leeman Re: Your behaviour within Fidonet ... FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 15 1 Jan 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Steven, SL> a few weeks later I get a nice email(multiple) from Ward Dossche (he doesn't like netmails anymore?) stating he is copyright holder and such of those names ... WD> You certainly have no problem in telling lies, do you? I wish to draw the attention of the active audience here to the fact that you, mr.Leeman, a few weeks ago intended to post an article in the Snooze litterally claiming that I was a racist ... in those exact words. WD> Since Belgium has very severe anti-Racism-laws I felt very strongly about that too and I still thank the person who scooped-up the article prior to publication because I could have been in a pretty nasty position owing to you. Another of your lies, mr. Leeman. SL> next thursday I should be out of the Z2 nodelist as well...unless I free them up "I don't need a /polemique/" he said as last... WD> That is absolutely correct and I wish to add that your RC, RC29 who comes highly respected throughout the Fidonet community (he was one of the very first in zone-2 many years ago), concurs that the proposals which have been made to you are consistent with your behaviour and attitude. SL> He has spammed al my downlinks and points to inform them they should look for another uplink... WD> All your downlinks and points received a very balanced and neutral communication explaining their situation. That was necessary since you manipulated the situation by telling them you were out already, hence they panicked. Indeed, you have no problem in telling lies. Have a nice day and Merry Christmas anyway. \x/@rd ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Re: Holding nodes for reasons outside of fidonet Dear Joe, Thank you for offering your opinion. Although my interference in zone-1 matters has been sollicited many times I have always elected to stay out of it. My advice to anyone being confronted with such a dillema is to act likewise since it is quite impossible to have the correct information. Nevertheless you have been quick to pass judgement based on "what"? FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 16 1 Jan 2001 There is an unresolved issue in zone2/R29. Steven Leeman has been briefed on the content of this issue and how to resolve it. It's his call. You will notice that I have left the cc's out. In this moment I don't believe it is productive and I would appreciate the same thing from everyone I talk with. It has been source for misquoting, qouting out-of-context, lies, inaccuracies which start leading their own life. This is happening exactly now too. You've made a few interesting suggestions to Steven, others have as well. Maybe he'll listen to them and act accordingly but I can't force him. I'll definitely not crumble under a mail-wall as he's trying to provoke right now. You need to explain me why you suggest to bring Janis Kracht on board and talk about overruling. There is nothing to be overruled and the worst thing I could do is to start ruling on zone-1 matters, so likewise .... This matter eventually will resolve itself, but not under a mail-campaign. I've been executive drector at Greenpeace, I know the force of mail-bombing-runs and I know how to resist them. Don't take this as a personal comment, it isn't. Exactly because I hold you in high esteem from other conferences it is that I'm writing this +/- extended reply since my official position is that I am not getting into polemics. For you there's an exeption to that rule. Nevertheless, have a Merry Christmas, Ward -----Original Message----- From: Joe Jared To: Ward Dossche Cc: editor@fidonews.org ; steven@hotrate.com ; steven_leeman@hotmail.com Date: Sunday, December 24, 2000 22:42 Subject: Holding nodes for reasons outside of fidonet Ward: I just received email regarding an individual who claims his node has been put on hold by you. Assuming it is legitimate, then my belief is that it was done outside the scope of policy and should be rescinded. As a victim of loss of an expired domain and the apparent theft thereof, I can empathize with your position, but respectfully disagree with your actions of holding a node hostage. Fidonet has nothing to do with the internet, and unless fido has been internationally trademarked, no illegal activity has occurred, and no excessively annoying behavior can be assumed. Therefore, I must ask that you rescind your hold status for Steven, and return the node to good FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 17 1 Jan 2001 standing. We cannot arbitrarily make rules that effectively cause excommunication, nor can we reasonably assume that any position of *C has the right to make rules based on events outside the scope of fidonet. What you're allegedly doing clearly steps beyond the realm of fidonet. As an outsider, my own inclination would be to go through the channels, and petition that Janis, our new Z1C, vote to overturn your position, assuming this situation does not resolve itself. Steven: In the states, no single entity owns more than one fidonet related domain, although it's not restricted. Given that you apparently own a good portion of the fido*.be domains, you've effectively established a monopoly on the name. It would be more than reasonable to respond positively with redelegating some of the domains to others with polite requests. Granted, these domains are yours until they expire, and I'm quite sure that as an interim measure that Z2.fidonet.org could be allocated to the official Zone 2 web site, as mandated by either the Z2C or the IC should such a request not be met with acceptance on your side. Given that fido.be appears to be a blank page, I personally don't see why said domain would be held hostage by you any more than Ward would hold your fidonet address hostage. http://relays.osirusoft.com http://www.osirusoft.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: "Joe Jared" To: "Ward Dossche" Cc: ; "Brenda Donovan" Subject: Re: Holding nodes for reasons outside of fidonet Date: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 2:42 AM Ward Dossche wrote: Dear Joe, Thank you for offering your opinion. Although my interference in zone-1 matters has been sollicited many times I have always elected to stay out of it. My advice to anyone being confronted with such a dillema is to act likewise since it is quite impossible to have the correct information. -------------------------- JJ> I've been here before. Note that I've included an alias for our ZC's email, as well as my RC. This issue needs resolution, and neither I nor the cc's are willing to let you blackmail our zone. WD> Nevertheless you have been quick to pass judgement based on "what"? JJ> Based on the facts. FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 18 1 Jan 2001 WD> There is an unresolved issue in zone2/R29. Steven Leeman has been briefed on the content of this issue and how to resolve it. It's his call. JJ> He has been briefed. I believe what you wrote on the topic. Understand, that in our region we had to deal with a tyrant. Note that Bob Kohl is no longer RC10. WD> You will notice that I have left the cc's out. In this moment I don't believe it is productive and I would appreciate the same thing from everyone I talk with. It has been source for misquoting, qouting out-of-context, lies, inaccuracies which start leading their own life. This is happening exactly now too. JJ> I don't believe in mushrooms. Only the interested parties are notified. Brenda as RC, and Janis, our ZC elect are cc'd because they are interested parties. Warren as Fidonews editor has his hands full and I'm sure he'll quote relevant articles on his own for this particular topic. I doubt seriously that the next issue of fidonews will be a small one. WD> You've made a few interesting suggestions to Steven, others have as well. Maybe he'll listen to them and act accordingly but I can't force him. I'll definitely not crumble under a mail-wall as he's trying to provoke right now. JJ> They were suggestions only. Obviously, if you don't endorse a zone level site, it won't get listed in my column of fidonews. Neither of us have authority over the .be zone, nor should we. WD> You need to explain me why you suggest to bring Janis Kracht on board and talk about overruling. There is nothing to be overruled and the worst thing I could do is to start ruling on zone-1 matters, so likewise .... JJ> She is the next and only remaining level of appeal. Should it ever get to a ZCC decision, it is my hope that not only does your decision get overturned, but you get impeached in the process. As near as I can tell, the former is 1 vote away. You still have time to change your course of action. WD> This matter eventually will resolve itself, but not under a mail-campaign. I've been executive director at Greenpeace, I know the force of mail-bombing-runs and I know how to resist them. JJ> This matter could resolve itself if you rescind your ruling on the matter. Anything less _will_ result in your impeachment. WD> Don't take this as a personal comment, it isn't. Exactly because I hold you in high esteem from other conferences it is that I'm writing this +/- extended reply since my official position is that I am not getting into poletics. For you there's an exeption to that rule. JJ> Thank you. However, the veiled threats in your response have been ignored as such. FIDONEWS 18-01 Page 19 1 Jan 2001 WD> Nevertheless, have a Merry Christmas, WD> Ward JJ>Thanks. And in the spirit of the moment, I wish the same to you. Did you hear the sincerity of the w