From: pozar@kumr.lns.com (Tim Pozar)
Newsgroups: comp.org.fidonet
Subject: FidoNet Newsletter, Volume 9, # 47
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:45:18 GMT
Organization: Late Night Software (San Francisco)

F I D O  N E W S --         |        Vol. 9 No. 47 (23 November 1992)
  A newsletter of the       |
  FidoNet BBS community     |        Published by:
          _                 |
         /  \               |       "FidoNews" BBS
        /|oo \              |        +1-415-863-2739
       (_|  /_)             |        1:1/1@FidoNet
        _`@/_ \    _        |        editor@fidonews.fidonet.org
       |     | \   \\       |
       | (*) |  \   ))      |        Editors:
       |__U__| /  \//       |          Tom Jennings
        _//|| _\   /        |          Tim Pozar
       (_/(_|(____/         |
             (jm)           |        Newspapers should have no friends.
                            |                        -- JOSEPH PULITZER
----------------------------+---------------------------------------

For information, copyrights, article submissions, obtaining copies and
so on, please refer to the end of this file.



                          Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL  .....................................................  1
   Editorial: Same old same old  ..................................  1
2. ARTICLES  ......................................................  2
   Why not some "Common Folk"???  .................................  2
   Zone Coordinator Wanted - Sysops need not apply  ...............  3
   Balancing National Interests  ..................................  6
   A_THEIST Echo now on Backbone!  ................................  8
   Yet Another Special-Interest Network : the BigNet (zone 17)  ...  9
   HOLYSMOKE Echo is available on the Zone 1 Backbone!  ........... 11
3. FIDONEWS INFORMATION  .......................................... 13
FidoNews 9-47                  Page 1                      23 Nov 1992


======================================================================
                              EDITORIAL
======================================================================

Editorial: Same old same old...

by Tom Jennings (1:1/1)


Boy are people pissed off about this Z1C business. Rightly so, I
think. I'm sure we'll hear more on the subject. I think it would be
instructive to those involved if they received a few THOUSAND MESSAGES
A WEEK EACH from ordinary sysops AND users regarding the 14th century
process they're using to pick a new king. This time though us peasants
have really nice pitchforks, ie. netmail.

                         * * * * *

Just so's you don't think I notice only when things go wrong, a
resounding THANKS! to all the FidoNews article submittors these last
few months. I haven't received a badly formatted file for FidoNews
inclusion in a while. I do appreciate it. For a while there it was
getting annoying. It's fine now. Thanks everyone for reading
ARTSPEC.DOC!

                         * * * * *

Well, in my informal call for suggestions for renaming FidoNews
filenames for distribution, the overwhelmingly popular solution was
to use FNWSvvnn.NWS.

However, in standard discordian manner, I'm not going to do that.
There's a reason though. I'm going to stick to the current format,
with one character for the volume "number", and start with A...Z.

My reasoning: it allows existing filesystems to keep the same
indexing systems (FNEWS???.NWS matches FidoNews), sorted filename
lists work as before, etc. It doesn't take much documentation to say
that A == 10, B == 11... Algorithmic indexing systems won't drop dead
or require non-linear changes for volumes > 9...

PS: Thanks to Steve Crager@1:130/103 for reminding me weeks ago of
the upcoming dillema.

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

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 2                      23 Nov 1992


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


Zone Coordinator Selection:  Policy or Dynasty?
by Howie Ducat
1:278/0
Howie@its.brooklyn.cuny.edu

After watching this go on for a few years now, it's time someone started
asking questions.

As an NC, I have to apply Policy 4 on a daily basis.  New nodes must agree
to abide by it in order to be assigned a node number.  Nodes in conflict
with each other use it to resolve their disputes.  Policy 4 is supposed to
be the governing document for Fidonet.

Then why do the people who serve us (that's right, SERVE US IN OUR
HOBBY), like some ZC's, some RC's and some NC's ignore it... with the
support of those above them?

I have to tell you from the start that I believe there are inherent flaws
in Policy 4, and that it can be greatly improved upon, but while I don't
agree with it, I must abide by it, since my membership, and everyone's
membership in Fidonet (yes, even the *C's) is contingent upon following it.

Policy 4 is quite clear about choosing a Zone Coordinator.  Section 1.2.5.
states that "Zone Coordinators are selected by the Regional Coordinators of
that Zone."  Section 6.2 states "The Zone Coordinator is selected by an
Absolute Majority Vote of the Regional Coordinators within that Zone."

Forget for a moment the fact that the RCs select the ZC and the ZC selects
the RCs - thus creating what I think of as "The Home Boy's Email Club", or
the Zone 1 Dynasty.  Mind you, I'm not saying that some of these people are
not upstanding contributors to Fidonet and the hobby - but there seems to
be a movement to keep it "in the family".

Nowhere else in Policy 4 is the selection process of a ZC referred to.  The
current situation in Zone 1 is unfortunate.  The current ZC can not fulfill
his term, so a new ZC must be found.  Suddenly, in the Zone 1 nodelist, a
diatribe with "selection criteria" appears.  This farce about nominees for
the position having to be current or past RC's is a slap in the face to any
NC, HUB and Sysop in Fidonet.  And those of you in Zones 2-6, pay attention
to how this turns out - because your Zones may be next.

I myself wouldn't mind doing the job of ZC outlined in Policy 4.  I can run
a local Network here (Net 278) and my "real" job I run several LANS, with
gateways to an SNA WAN of mainframes attached to BITNET.  But according to
the current Z1C, none of that matters - since you supposedly must be an RC
or former RC (which means you have to be a friend of the current ZC,
because the ZC selects the RC's, and the RCs select the ZC, and we all have
nothing to say about who serves us....  you get the idea..)

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 3                      23 Nov 1992


Someone from within my Net, Rich Wood, has been nominated.  He is not a
former RC.  With the "make-em-up-as-u-go" rules we're getting from those
who are supposedly serving us and the hobby, 99.9% of us will never even be
able to be considered for being an RC.

In the United States, we just elected a new President, because we couldn't
take anymore of the "old" ways.  If we want to change something in Fidonet,
we have to open our mouths (or keyboards and Netmail) and be heard.  I am
sure I am not the only one who feels this way.  If you feel this way, or
even if you don't, you should take some time and let your RC, your ZC,
your IC, your NC know exactly how you feel.

I wouldn't mind hearing from you either, no matter what side of it you're
on.

There.  I feel much better now.

Howie Ducat


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


by Glen Johnson
Media Executive Rejected in bid for Zone Coordinator

You may have seen George Peace's announcement in the nodelist that
he's resigning as Zone 1 Coordinator on November 26, 1992. At least
I HOPE you saw it! Probably the best way to inform the masses that
something significant is taking place in Fidonet is to put it in
Fidonews. Which is probably why it wasn't announced here.

So, are you interested in trying out the ZC hat on for size? Well,
forget it. You can't. You're not eligible. Oh, I know that your a
Fidonet sysop; I know that you can route mail and run MAKENL with
the best of 'em; and you just might make a damn good ZC! But, none
of that matters. Because you see, you're not allowed to be ZC. As
a matter of fact, you're not even allowed to CHOOSE who the next ZC
is. And its not because you're a Fidonet sysop, its because you're
JUST a Fidonet sysop!

See, in direct contradiction to Policy 4, George Peace has decided
that the person that replaces him HAS to be a current or former
Region Coordinator. What that means is FIDONET SYSOPS NEED NOT APPLY.
It doesn't matter HOW qualified you are, after all, we don't want
qualified people running Fidonet, do we? OF COURSE NOT. What we
want is our BUDDIES running Fidonet!

Did you see Tom Jennings' little blurb in Fidonews 946? I'll quote
some of it in case you missed it:

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 4                      23 Nov 1992


"SURPRISE! A new Z1C! With no notice. A complete secret. Sorry,
notification via the dreck in the nodelist file doesn't count. (I
distinctly remember asking if the generator of that information could
supply it to FidoNews. Does this let me off the hook for not seeking
it out?) Well, all is not lost. They're looking for a temporary
replacement, until 13 people out of 10,000 in North America pick a
new fearless leader "for you", next April? I think."

Think he was kidding?

Nope. He's not kidding.

See, there are thousands of sysops in Zone 1. Now, it doesn't take a
brain surgeon to figure out that there wouldn't BE a Zone 1 if there
were no sysops in it. And of those thousands of good people in Zone
1, George Peace is saying that only 13 of them are allowed to have
ANY CHANCE WHATSOEVER of serving as Zone Coordinator. Actually, it IS
a bit more than 13. If you were a Region Coordinator for week or two
four years ago, YOU TOO are eligible! Wow!

WHAT??? You're NOT an RC??? Whoa, we can't have people like YOU
in charge of Fidonet! Not only do we not want people like you running
Fidonet, we don't want you to have ANYTHING TO SAY about WHO DOES!
So sit there behind your keyboard, keep your mouth shut, and take
what we give you. If you don't like it, GET OUT.

Are you angry enough yet? No? Ok, well let's take a real life
situation.

A regular 'ol sysop saw the announcement in the nodediff that the
ZC position was going to be vacated. He also saw the statement in
there that says that only an RC can have the job. Not believing
that our good friend the Zone Coordinator was capable of such
blatant discrimination, he decided to send in his "resume" and
throw his hat in the ring.

The nodediff announcement said to send your "resume" to Don Dawson,
so that's what this guy did. Here's a copy of his netmail to Dawson:

------------- cut here ------------

Don,
  Please consider this message to be a formal nomination of myself
for the ZC position being vacated by George Peace. It is my opinion
that nothing in Policy 4 prohibits my inclusion in this election.

  My qualifications are as follows:

  I was instrumental (along with Howie Ducat) in the formation of Net
278 and have continued my involvement in its growth, both technically
and in policymaking as well as in the resolution of network disputes.

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 5                      23 Nov 1992


  I've acted as Net 278's NEC for nearly 2 years and have been, since
the net's formation, its cost recovery treasurer. The fact that mail
has flowed with virtually no interruption during that time should be
a good indicator of my technical capabilities.

  I am also the Northeastern hub for the Ham Distribution Network, a
network that distributes files related to Amateur Radio.

  I was also the New York Network Coordinator for Eggnet.

  My professional background also enhances my qualifications for the
position. I am Director of the WOR Radio Network, a national Talk
Radio network delivered by satellite to radio stations nationwide.
I was hired to create the network a year ago and it is now the fastest
growing network in the industry. Prior to taking the WOR position I
was Director of Station Relations for the ABC Radio Networks. Its
duties primarily involved affiliating stations, providing network
services and resolving disputes resulting from technical failures in
the satellite systems.

  I believe these qualifications are well within the requirements for
the ZC position.

Sincerely,

Rich Wood
------------- cut here ------------

Well, to make a really long story not so long, Rich got a note back
telling him that he can't have the job. Simply because he's not a
Region Coordinator.

Now here we have a major network media executive, who has spent his
entire life in the communications industry, who also happens to be
a technically adept Fidonet sysop. But that ain't good enough to
be Zone Coordinator. But hey, if we had a convicted felon, or a
serial killer or rapist, or computer terrorist, or a six year old
interested in the job, he COULD be Zone Coordinator as long as he
is or was, a Region Coordinator!

Hey, it ain't WHAT you know, its WHO you know. You know?

One thing Rich Wood didn't mention in his nomination letter is that
the Wall Street Journal found out that he was involved in Fidonet
last year. So they sent a reporter to his apartment in NYC to
INTERVIEW him about it. Know what resulted from that interview? The
Journal ran a FULL PAGE on Rich's interview, Fidonet and BBSing. It
actually covered a couple of pages if I recall correctly. It was
something that's becoming real scarce these days; a POSITIVE review
of the BBS community.

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 6                      23 Nov 1992


But SCREW YOU RICH! What you're capable of, and what you've done for
Fidonet and BBSing in general doesn't make ANY DIFFERENCE! You are
not one of the Gang of 13, so you CANNOT BE ZONE COORDINATOR.

I don't know about you folks, but I think its pretty disgusting.

There's also been a growing grass roots movement lately supporting
Rich in his David vs. Goliath bid for ZC . Lots of sysops have
been lining up behind Rich in support of his quest for the job.
But wait, sysops have no say; I forgot.

Anyway, don't you think its about time we break this closed control
circle? The RCs pick the ZC, and the ZC appoints the RCs! Now its
even worse, the ZC discriminates against the very people that make
up Zone 1, by placing additional restrictions on WHO can and can't
be the Zone Coordinator.

If that kind of discrimination is practiced OPENLY, I wonder what
kind is practiced PRIVATELY.

Its time Zone 1 had a coordinator that came from the rank and file.
Its time we picked a Zone Coordinator based on his or her ABILITY
instead of based on his/her node number.

Because the additional restrictions Peace has placed on this
appointment, a policy complaint has been filed against him with
the International Coordinator, Matt Whelan (3:3/1000). And sysops
are already starting to write to Matt in support of Rich Wood, and
against discrimination.

Write to Matt yourself, and tell him what you think. Write to your
RC too (don't know what good the latter will do, but what the hell).

End the tyranny.

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


From: Dave Farber <farber@central.cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: from RISKS

Reprinted with permission ("do with it as you wish.  Granger")

A "Viewpoint " piece in  The Institute, November 1992

Balancing National Interests

  The September/October issue of The Institute carried a front page
story reporting that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is promoting
legislation that would require all telephone systems to be designed in
such a way that they can be wiretapped by law enforcement officials.
The argument is that wiretapping is a key tool in much of law
enforcement, particularly in fields such as drugs, racketeering,
conspiracy and white collar crime, and that unless care is taken in
the design of future telecommunications systems, this tool may become
difficult or impossible to exercise.  To solve this problem the FBI is
FidoNews 9-47                  Page 7                      23 Nov 1992


promoting legislation that would establish design requirements on
future telephone systems.  Not surprisingly, civil liberties groups
and telephone companies are reported to be less than enthusiastic.

        While interesting and important in its own right, this
controversy is perhaps even more important as a symbol of a broader
set of conflicts between a number of important national interests. As
a country, we want to promote:

  * Individual privacy (including the right of citizens and other
residents of the U.S. to keep personal records private, hold private
communications with others, and move about without being "tracked".)

  * Security for organizations (including protection of financial
transactions, and the ability to keep corporate data, plans, and
communications confidential.)

  * Effective domestic law enforcement (including the ability to
perform surveillance of legitimately identified suspects, and the
ability to audit and reconstruct fraudulent activities.)

  * Effective international intelligence gathering (including the
ability to monitor the plans and activities of organizations abroad
that may pose a threat to the U.S. or to other peaceful states and
peoples.)

  * Secure world-wide reliable communications for U.S. diplomats and
the military, for U.S. business, and for U.S. citizens in their
activities all around the world (including the ability to maintain and
gain access to secure, reliable, communications channels.)

        Just as with most of our society's other fundamental
objectives, these objectives are in conflict.  You can not maximize
them all because getting more of some involves giving up some of
others.  A dynamic tension must be created that keeps the various
objectives properly balanced.  That socially optimal point of balance
may change gradually over time as world conditions and our society's
values evolve.

        An electrical engineer who thinks for a moment about the
problem of achieving any particular specified balance among the
various objectives I have listed will quickly conclude that
communications and information technology design choices lie at the
heart of the way in which many of the necessary tradeoffs will be
made.  We would like easy portable communications for all, but doing
that in a way that allows people to keep their legitimate travels
private poses significant design challenges.  Banks and other
businesses would like secure encrypted communications world-wide, but
promoting the general availability of such technologies all around the
world severely complicates the signal intelligence operations of
intelligence organizations.

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 8                      23 Nov 1992


        The troubling thing about the FBI's legislative proposals is
not that they are being made, but that we lack a broader institutional
context within which to evaluate them.  In making such choices, we
need to look systematically at all the legitimate interests that are
at stake in telecommunications and information technology design
choices, consider the ways in which technology and the world are
evolving, and integrate all these considerations to arrive at a
reasoned balance.  In the old days, if things got too far out of line
in some balance (for example, between freedom of the press and
protection against liable), the courts simply readjusted things and we
went on.  Today, and increasingly in the future, with many of these
balances hard wired into the basic design of our information and
communication systems, it may be much harder to readjust the balance
after the fact.

        There are several organizations that should be working harder
on these issues.  On the government side the Telecommunication and
Computing Technologies Program in the Office of Technology Assessment
should be doing more systematic studies of these tradeoffs to help
inform the Congress; The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration in the Department of Commerce (or some appropriate
interagency committee) should be doing similar studies to develop more
coherent and comprehensive executive branch policy; and the Office of
Policy and Plans in the Federal Communications Commission (which is an
independent regulatory agency not directly subject to executive branch
policy) should be giving these issues more attention so it can better
support the Commissioners when they confront such tradeoffs.  On the
non-government side, the Office of Computer and Information Technology
at the National Research Council might appropriately mount a
comprehensive study.  There is an ideal opportunity here for a private
foundation to fund an independent blue-ribbon commission.  Finally,
the computer and telecommunications industries, both individually and
collectively through their industry associations, should be taking
more interest in how the country will strike these all important
balances.
                                                        M. Granger Morgan

M. Granger Morgan (F) is head of the Department of Engineering and
Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University where he is also a
Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and
in the H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management.  He
teaches and performs research on a variety of problems in technology
and public policy in which technical issues are of central importance.

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


Christopher Baker
Rights On! 1:374/14

                      A_THEIST Echo Available

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 9                      23 Nov 1992


A_theism means free of religion in the way a_political means
free of politics or a_sexual means free of sex
characteristics or drives.

With that in mind and ever cognizant of the continued
pressure of religion to intrude itself into our government
and its operations, the A_THEIST Echo is provided to inform
and alarm and hopefully wake up the sleeping and too long
silent majority to the peril on our doorstep.

It is now a Zone 1 Backbone Echo Hosted and Moderated
by Rights On! [1:374/14] and Christopher Baker [card
carrying member of American Atheists, Inc.]. Initial links
may be obtained from your local Backbone source connection.
Zone 3 is being fed through 3:800/857 and Zone 2 through
2:241/6001 via a Gate at 1:374/14 until direct links can be
made to those Zones via the international Backbone links.
The Zone 3 Hub sends it into Zone 6.

The Echo is open to anyone who can discuss, without
proselytizing, the extreme desirability of maintaining the
absolute separation of State and church in this country as
provided for in our Constitution.

A sample of the first few messages and the statement of
purpose of the Echo is available as A_THEIST.ZIP from this
system anytime except 0100-0130 ET and Zone 1 ZMH [USR HST
V32 online] if you wish to get an idea of whether to commit
disk space to the Echo. An archive of the past traffic from
the Echo is also available as A_ECHO1.ZIP, A_ECHO2.ZIP, and
A_ECHO3.ZIP, A_ECHO4.ZIP, etc.

It has been on the Backbone for months. Ask your Backbone
connection to get it for you! The complete info is available
in the current ELISTnnn.XXX file available from your NEC or
REC or here. [Request ELIST.]

I hope you will join us or ask your Sysop to request a link
via their regular Backbone connections!

TTFN.
Chris


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


Announcing BigNet, a Net for BIG folks and their friends

By B.L.U.T.O.

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 10                     23 Nov 1992


1:215/606

The Blurb:

Are you amply built?  Big, burly, or buxom?  Plump, plentiful,
or even ponderous?  Or maybe just one of those who admire and
desire the fuller figure? Fat and Proud?  Where does a big
person, or a lover of the large, go to find a "fat-friendly"
forum?

The search ends here in BigNet, a safe place for fat folks,
their friends and allies!

The Story:

When I first started modemming, the first BBS I called was a
system by the name of The BIG Board.  I found a lot of big folks
there who were no longer accepting the stigma that modern
society puts on fat people, and a lot of not-so-big folks who
were friends, lovers, and allies.

I never thought of myself as belonging to a "minority group"
before (although I certainly have experienced plenty of
prejudice based on my size), but I really liked being in a safe
online environment where I could be assured that I would not be
dissed for being overweight.  Discovering that there were a lot
of folks who actually prefer to associate with and have
relationships with big people was also not bad for my ego.

Eventually I became a co-sysop here at HalfLife BBS, and got to
know all five of the BBSs dedicated to us extra-large types.
Five?  In all of the US?  Judging from the number of bear-like
builds I have seen at most user meets and local Net functions, I
figured there must be sufficient demand for more than five such
systems, and so I got together with a couple of other systems
and formed BigNet.  I posted a message in the OTHERNETS echo
every month or so and called that advertising, and we are now up
to about a dozen member systems, with two more in process. I
figure that we can handle expanding a bit faster now, so that's
why this article in the 'Snooze....

Information

We carry a dozen or so echos, from adult-only explicit to
cooking, politics of fat acceptance, health, etc.  The BigNet is
open to systems and users of any and all sizes, persuasions, and
sexual preferences.  The only major requirement is that a
prospective member be technically competent to run a Fido-type
mail system and that they be committed to communications free of
bigotry.

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 11                     23 Nov 1992


We currently have hub systems in the SF Bay Area, Seattle,
northern Kansas, Phoenix, and Providence, RI.  Most are 9600+
baud.  We have no geographical or other restrictions on your
choice of feeds.

For further information, applications, etc. f'req BIGNET from
1:215/606 (please note that this is a PART TIME system,
available nights and mornings ONLY from 20:00 to 11:00 Pacific
time).  The info/propaganda file is only about 28k long, in PKZIP
format, a 2-minute transfer at 2400 baud.

Thank you for your interest....
B.L.U.T.O.
Zone 17 (BigNet) ZC/IC


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


Frederick Leff
Styx Allum
Out in the Styx, 1:152/20

             HOLYSMOKE Echo is ready and waiting!

HOLYSMOKE is now a Backbone Echo that originally sprang
forth from Out in the Styx of Oregon. It is carried on the
Zone 1 Backbone and sent into Zones 2, 3, and 6 via
2:241/6001 and 3:800/857. HOLYSMOKE is Moderated by
Frederick Leff on 1:152/20. It is Hubbed out of Zone 1
by 1:374/14.

If any of you or your Sysops are interested in obtaining
this Echo, you or they should contact their regular,
Backbone Echo source! HOLYSMOKE now appears in FIDONET.NA
as of 26 Jul 92.

HOLYSMOKE is an Echo for debating the merits/demerits of
religions of all kinds in a friendly but contentious way.
It is open to anyone who cares to argue or cajole without
proselytizing or personal attacks. Wear your NOMEX undies!

The Echo is now fully activated and waiting for those with
an interest in fire or brimstone or a bucket of cold water.
The complete rules are posted regularly in the Echo and are
available in the current ELRUL archive published at 1:1/201.

Come and join us in the great debate!

Frederick Leff, Moderator
Styx Allum, Host
1:152/20

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 12                     23 Nov 1992


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

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 13                     23 Nov 1992


======================================================================
                         FIDONEWS INFORMATION
======================================================================

------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------

Editors: Tom Jennings, Tim Pozar
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello

"FidoNews" BBS
    FidoNet  1:1/1
    Internet  fidonews@fidosw.fidonet.org
    BBS  +1-415-863-2739,  300/1200/2400/V.32/HST

(Postal Service mailing address) (have patience)
    FidoNews
    c/o World Power Systems             <---- don't forget this
    Box 77731
    San Francisco
    CA 94107 USA

Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.

Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
copyright 1992 Tom Jennings. All rights reserved.  Duplication and/or
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
(we're easy).

OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)

BACK ISSUES: Available from FidoNet nodes 1:102/138, 1:216/21,
1:125/1212, 1:107/519.1 (and probably others), via filerequest or
download (consult a recent nodelist for phone numbers).

INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
FidoNet, please direct them to deitch@gisatl.fidonet.org, not the
FidoNews BBS. (Be kind and patient; David Deitch is generously
volunteering to handle FidoNet/Internet questions.)

FidoNews 9-47                  Page 14                     23 Nov 1992


SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/1 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it.



"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings, Box 77731, San Francisco CA 94107, USA and
are used with permission.



    Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
    M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".

-- END

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

---
Remember Campers!!!

To send mail from an Internet site or smart UUCP Site TO a user 
            	  that calls a Fido-Net system.

  You need to know the name of the person and node number of the 
  Fido-Net system that the person uses.
     
  The address of a FidoNode looks like this: 1:105/302.0. Usually
  the 1: and .0 are left off, but they are there by default. (In
  Europe it is 2: and in the Pacific Basin it is 3:.) That
  address can be translated as "Zone 1, Net 105, FidoNode 302,
  Point 0." or p0.f302.n105.z1. Add the FidoNet domain of
  .fidonet.org to the end of that, chop off the p0 (it is again,
  a default) and you have f302.n105.z1.fidonet.org - the "Fully
  Qualified Domain Name" of a FidoNode. Another example is
  1:105/4.3 which would be written as p3.f4.n105.z1.fidonet.org
  (since there is a point number other than 0, we have to specify
  it). Note also that we are only using zone 1.  This will also
  work for zones 2 and 3, just use z2 or z3 as appropriate.

  FidoNet uses full names of the callers.  Multi-part name folks
  (eg. First Last, ie. "Dale Weber") will have a period '.'
  seperating their names.  So, lets say you wanted to send mail 
  to Dale Weber at 1:105/55.0, you would address your letter to:
        Dale.Weber@f55.n105.z1.fidonet.org.

************************************************************************
	 Submissions to comp.org.fidonet should be addressed to 
			   pozar@kumr.lns.com
************************************************************************


-- 
Internet: pozar@kumr.lns.com               FidoNet:  Tim Pozar @ 1:125/555
UUCP:     ...!uunet!kumr.lns.com!pozar
Snail:    Tim Pozar / KKSF / 77 Maiden Lane / San Francisco CA 94108 / USA
Voice:    +1 415 788 2022