I would like to nominate Deon George (3:633/509) for another term.
I would like to nominate Andrew Leary (1:320/219) for another term.
Hello everybody!
I hereby nominate Jason Bock (1:267/310) for a position as a Standing Member
of the FTSC.
Thank you,
Andrew Leary
RC16
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240209
* Origin: From the Desk of the New England Janitor (1:320/219)
Hello everybody!
I hereby nominate Jason Bock (1:267/310) for a position as a Standing Member of the FTSC.
Thank you,
Oli wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
I hereby nominate Jason Bock (1:267/310) for a position as a
Standing
Member of the FTSC.
Thank you,
Thanks but no thanks. He failed the basic competency test:
poll 1:267/310
$ -d 1:267/310@fidonet
+ 19:19 [6769] call to 1:267/310@fidonet
+ 19:19 [6769] outgoing session
- 19:19 [6769] SYS SiliconUnderground - ProBoard / FuNet WHQ
- 19:19 [6769] ZYZ Jason Bock
- 19:19 [6769] LOC Rochester, NY
- 19:19 [6769] NDL CM,IBN
- 19:19 [6769] TIME 2025/02/08 13:19:08 -5:00
- 19:19 [6769] VER Internet Rex 2.31 Win32 (binkp/1.1)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:1/101@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/311@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
[....]
? 19:19 [6769] called 1:267/310@fidonet, but remote has no such AKA
+ 19:19 [6769] done (to 1:267/310@fidonet, failed, S/R: 0/0 (0/0 bytes))
But hey, at least you have just enough candidates for more years of nothing.
Oli wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
I hereby nominate Jason Bock (1:267/310) for a position as a Standing Member of the FTSC.
Thanks but no thanks. He failed the basic competency test:
poll 1:267/310
$ -d 1:267/310@fidonet
+ 19:19 [6769] call to 1:267/310@fidonet
+ 19:19 [6769] outgoing session
- 19:19 [6769] SYS SiliconUnderground - ProBoard / FuNet WHQ
- 19:19 [6769] ZYZ Jason Bock
- 19:19 [6769] LOC Rochester, NY
- 19:19 [6769] NDL CM,IBN
- 19:19 [6769] TIME 2025/02/08 13:19:08 -5:00
- 19:19 [6769] VER Internet Rex 2.31 Win32 (binkp/1.1)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:1/101@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/311@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
[....]
? 19:19 [6769] called 1:267/310@fidonet, but remote has no such AKA
+ 19:19 [6769] done (to 1:267/310@fidonet, failed, S/R: 0/0 (0/0
bytes))
Hello,
I'd like to nominate Tim Schattkowsky, 2:2/29
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
in my binkd config file and this works. He is doing nothing wrong and in fact maybe more correct
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
in my binkd config file and this works. He is doing nothing wrong
and in fact maybe more correct
More correct?
http://ftsc.org/docs/frl-1028.002
deon wrote to Sean Rima <=-
Re: Re: Nomination
By: Sean Rima to Oli on Sat Feb 08 2025 07:29 pm
Howdy,
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
in my binkd config file and this works. He is doing nothing wrong and
in
fact maybe more correct
More correct?
http://ftsc.org/docs/frl-1028.002
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
in my binkd config file and this works. He is doing nothing wrong
and in fact maybe more correct
More correct?
http://ftsc.org/docs/frl-1028.002
As Andrew beat me to it, but this is not a standard.
deon wrote to Sean Rima <=-
Re: Re: Nomination
By: Sean Rima to Oli on Sat Feb 08 2025 07:29 pm
Howdy,
+ 19:19 [6769] addr: 1:267/310@fidonet.org (n/a or busy)
in my binkd config file and this works. He is doing nothing wrong and
in
fact maybe more correct
More correct?
http://ftsc.org/docs/frl-1028.002
As Andrew beat me to it, but this is not a standard.Hello,
Sean
... A woman drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her.
--- BBBS/LiR v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: TCOB1: https/binkd/telnet binkd.rima.ie (2:263/1)
@PID: ProBoard 2.32 J
@TID: FastEcho 1.46 43281
On <09 Feb, 10:40>, Sean Rima wrote to deon :
I changed the domain to make it align with values and morals.
BinkD itself has long had functionality to work around problems caused by nodes specifying domain names improperly.
MvdV> No MSGID
MvdV> No REPLY
MvdV> No TZUTC
MvdV> No CHRS
The software is rom the 90's. I am actually working on updating the message system with the correct standards. ;)
One man's standard is another man's error.
Are all these covered by standards?
Jason,Ward,
MvdV> No MSGID
MvdV> No REPLY
MvdV> No TZUTC
MvdV> No CHRS
The software is rom the 90's. I am actually working on updating the message system with the correct standards. ;)
One man's standard is another man's error.
Are all these covered by standards?
\%/@rd
--- DB4 - 20230201
* Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
The software is rom the 90's. I am actually working on updating the message system with the correct standards. ;)
09 Feb 2025 23:20, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:Carlos,
MvdV>> No MSGID
MvdV>> No REPLY
MvdV>> No TZUTC
MvdV>> No CHRS
MvdV>>
The software is rom the 90's. I am actually working on updating the message system with the correct standards. ;)
Nice. Good luck! ;-)
I suggest you start with supporting MSGID/REPLY (FTS-0009), as they are the most important kludges, and leave the others for later.
Carlos
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: cyberiada (2:341/234.1)
MvdV> No MSGID
MvdV> No REPLY
MvdV> No TZUTC
MvdV> No CHRS
The software is rom the 90's. I am actually working on updating
the message system with the correct standards. ;)
One man's standard is another man's error.
Are all these covered by standards?
Two of them are covered by corrupted standards; the TZUTC and the CHRS kludges. The TZUTC kludge would require very little to make it
compatible with timezone offsets while the CHRS kludge is almost
totally a joke as far as standards go.
Keep in mind that FidoNet Technical Standards cover current
practice in FidoNet.
Hello,
I'd like to nominate Tim Schattkowsky, 2:2/29
I accept.
--- WinPoint 415.0
* Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)
@MSGID: 2:2/29 37c543d1^^^^^
@REPLY: 2:335/364.3 67a3a78d
@CHRS: IBMPC 2
--- WinPoint 415.0
* Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)
Hmmm, configuring a node number into a point program, doesn't really
make you a "node of good standing"... :-(
//Hello Fabio,//
on *05.02.2025* at *18:01:49* You wrote in Area *FTSC_PUBLIC*
to *All* about *"Nomination"*.
Hello,
I'd like to nominate Tim Schattkowsky, 2:2/29
I accept.
Hi Tim,
On 2025-02-26 16:49:30, you wrote to Fabio Bizzi:
I accept.
--- WinPoint 415.0
* Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)
Hmmm, configuring a node number into a point program, doesn't really make you a "node of good standing"... :-(
I accept.
Acknowledged. And yes, we got the conforming acknowledgement late, but we all
saw the acknowledgement before and now Tim has demonstrated that he has the
knowledge and ability to comply with the rules of the election.
--- WinPoint 415.0
* Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)
Hmmm, configuring a node number into a point program, doesn't really make
you a "node of good standing"... :-(
Isn't a "point node" still a node?
And seriously, what does this have to do with Tim's ability to review
and contribute technical documents? It doesn't.
MvdV> ^^^^^@MSGID: 2:2/29 37c543d1
@REPLY: 2:335/364.3 67a3a78d
@CHRS: IBMPC 2
Hi Rob,
On 2025-02-26 11:50:53, you wrote to Tim Schattkowsky:
I accept.
Acknowledged. And yes, we got the conforming acknowledgement late,but we all
saw the acknowledgement before and now Tim has demonstrated that hehas the
knowledge and ability to comply with the rules of the election.
Hardly...
Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
Isn't a "point node" still a node?
A "point node"? Since when is that a thing?
this area we see clearly that in reality there is almost no CP437 and a busload if IBMPC ...
Send Tim a netmail to his address and see what comes back.
Send Tim a netmail to his address and see what comes back.
How?
There is no contact information for 2:2/29 in the nodelist.
,29,WinPoint_Help,D,Tim_Schattkowsky,-Unpublished-,300
I have to review the voting/nomination rules, but he does have a node,
just cannot crash to it. Maybe, the rules need to state that there
has to be a way to crash mail to the operator.
Hi Jason,
On 2025-02-27 06:15:07, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
,29,WinPoint_Help,D,Tim_Schattkowsky,-Unpublished-,300
I have to review the voting/nomination rules, but he does have anode,
He doesn't have a node, only a node-number. And that is not the same thing.
just cannot crash to it. Maybe, the rules need to state that there has to be a way to crash mail to the operator.
Maybe the rules should state points can become members?
Bye, Wilfred.
--- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
How?
There is no contact information for 2:2/29 in the nodelist.
The same way you would send NetMail to any Private node, routing it
via his uplink.
He doesn't have a node, only a node-number. And that is not the same thing.
just cannot crash to it. Maybe, the rules need to state that
there has to be a way to crash mail to the operator.
Maybe the rules should state points can become members?
You do have a valid "point". lol
If you send a netmail to 2:2/29, it should go to Ward's system and sit there until Tim polls Ward's system since Tim does not have a url/IP listed in his nodelist entry.
Maybe the rules should state points can become members?
Sysop: | fluid |
---|---|
Location: | wickliffe, ohio |
Users: | 4 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 88:36:58 |
Calls: | 52 |
Files: | 15,838 |
Messages: | 53,762 |