----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 5 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 5 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 3 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hi Andrew!

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

02 Mar 2022 13:51, from Andrew Leary -> All:

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 5 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 5 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 3 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

CU, Ricsi

... You're just an empty cage, girl, if you kill the bird. -Tori Amos
--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: I'm one step away from being rich. All I need is money. (2:310/31)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 5 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 5 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 3 | |
----------------------------------------------

I Vote for James Coyle 1:123/120, Dont if I can But Hey what the heck.
I know go look in the rules.
Sam


Bye for now...
Sam

--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)

Hello Sam!

04 Mar 22 15:38, you wrote to Richard Menedetter:

I Vote for James Coyle 1:123/120, Dont if I can But Hey what the heck.
I know go look in the rules.
Sam

NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible voter.

Regards,

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hello Richard!

04 Mar 22 08:38, you wrote to me:

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him repost?

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hi Andrew!

06 Mar 2022 01:19, from Andrew Leary -> Richard Menedetter:

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him repost?

Sent him a Netmail.

This was his post:

==== Begin "helm" ====
= ftsc_public (2:310/31) ======================================================
Msg : 1936 of 1969
From : Helmut Renner 2:313/41 28 Feb 2022 00:35
To : Election Coordinator
Subj : Vote =============================================================================== @MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | X | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | X | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | X | |
----------------------------------------------

br
Helmut

-+- FleetStreet 1.27.3.8d
+ Origin: DonHelmi's Datendienst (2:313/41)
SEEN+BY: 30/0 103/705 124/5016 153/757 154/10 203/0 221/0 1 6 240/12
SEEN+BY: 240/1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003 5006
SEEN+BY: 280/5555 292/854 8125 301/1 113 303/0 310/31 313/41 335/364
SEEN+BY: 341/66 234 371/0 396/45 423/120 460/58 712/848 770/1 2432/390
SEEN+BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/545 1042 5058/104
@PATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464
==== End "helm" ====


CU, Ricsi

... Army food is very tasty. After 10 years, you can still taste it!
--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: Fibonacci Numbers: The mathematical explanation of life (2:310/31)

On 2022 Mar 06 14:12:26, you wrote to Andrew Leary:

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him
repost?

Sent him a Netmail.

This was his post:

==== Begin "helm" ====
= ftsc_public (2:310/31) ====================================================== Msg : 1936 of 1969 From : Helmut Renner 2:313/41 28 Feb 2022 00:35 To : Election Coordinator Subj : Vote ===========================================================================
==== @MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote

i can confirm that this post was received here on that date...

)\/(ark

"The soul of a small kitten in the body of a mighty dragon. Look on my majesty, ye mighty, and despair! Or bring me catnip. Your choice. Oooh, a shiny thing!"
... I couldn't wait for success.. so I went ahead without it.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 06 Mar 2022, mark lewis said the following...

i can confirm that this post was received here on that date...

Ditto here:

From: Helmut Renner
To: Election Coordinator
Subj: Vote
Date: 02/28/22 00:35

@MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
@PATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 229/426

Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No | |----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | X | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | X | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | X | |
----------------------------------------------

br
Helmut

--- FleetStreet 1.27.3.8d
* Origin: DonHelmi's Datendienst (2:313/41)

Jay

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/03/04 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Northern Realms (1:229/664)

Andrew,

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

\%/@rd ***************************************************************************** Date: 28 Feb 22 00:35:40
From: Helmut Renner
To: Election Coordinator
Subj: Vote ____________________________________________________________________________ Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | X | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | X | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | X | |
----------------------------------------------

br
Helmut

-+- FleetStreet 1.27.3.8d
* 0rigin: DonHelmi's Datendienst (2:313/41)
zEEN-BY: 1/123 15/0 30/0 80/1 90/1 92/1 103/705 105/81 106/201 120/340
zEEN-BY: 123/131 129/330 331 153/7715 154/10 218/700 221/1 6 226/30
zEEN-BY: 227/114 229/110 200 206 317 400 424 426 428 452 664 700 240/12 zEEN-BY: 240/1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 266/512 280/464
zEEN-BY: 280/5003 5555 282/1038 292/140 789 854 8125 301/1 113 303/0
zEEN-BY: 313/41 317/3 320/219 322/757 335/364 341/66 342/200 371/0
=======
zEEN-BY: 396/45 400/2992 410/9 421/79 790 460/58 463/68 633/280 712/848 zEEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/715 1042 5058/104

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hello Andrew!

Sunday March 06 2022 01:19, you wrote to Richard Menedetter:

Hello Richard!

04 Mar 22 08:38, you wrote to me:

Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him repost?

Can confirm it arrived here on 28th.


Vincent

--- Mageia Linux v8 X64/Mbse v1.0.7.24/GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Air Applewood, The Linux Gateway to the UK & Eire (2:250/1)

Hello Sam!

NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible voter.

Regards,

Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Rules need to be changed.
Sam


Bye for now...
Sam

--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)

Hi Sam,

The FTSC members require a level compentcy to do their work which is why only RC's can vote as they are assumed to have a better level of compentcy to judge the canidates.

Having all of Fidonet being able to vote would just complicate the process.

Your RC should have asked for opinions from the nodes in his Region just like mine did, but in the end it's his call.

Terrry

On Mar 06, 2022 09:06pm, Sam Penwright wrote to Andrew Leary:

Hello Sam!

NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible
voter.

Regards,

Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Rules need to be changed.
Sam

Bye for now...
Sam

--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.

You are. Well, if your RC does his job, that is...



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Ward!

06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC
message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot arrived a week after the
polls had closed, indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.

Well, it sure as hell cannot be my system, since we have the closest connection ever due to the Fidonews connection:

From: "Helmut Renner -> Election Coordinator" <2:313/41>
X-Comment-To: Election Coordinator
Newsgroups: FTSC_PUBLIC
Subject: Vote
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:35:40 GMT
Message-ID: <1103$FTSC_PUBLIC@JamNNTPd>
X-JAM-From: Helmut Renner <2:313/41>
X-JAM-To: Election Coordinator
X-JAM-MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
X-JAM-SEENBY2D: 30/0 103/705 124/5016 153/757 154/10 201/0 203/0 2 124 412 221/0 1 6
X-JAM-SEENBY2D: 230/0 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003
X-JAM-SEENBY2D: 280/5006 5555 292/854 8125 301/1 113 303/0 310/31 313/41 320/219
X-JAM-SEENBY2D: 335/364 341/66 234 371/0 396/45 423/120 460/58 712/848 770/1 X-JAM-SEENBY2D: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/545 848 1042 5058/104 X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2
X-JAM-Attributes: Sent TypeEcho
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit






..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Good ${greeting_time}, Ward!

06 Mar 2022 20:53:06, you wrote to Andrew Leary:

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

Being in the SEEN-BY doesn't prove anything. In the worst scenario, this may indicate a SEEN-BY lockout in transit due to some broken link.

Being in the PATH is much better. Getting the answer is ideal.


--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... :wq!
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)

Alexey,

Being in the SEEN-BY doesn't prove anything. In the worst scenario, this may indicate a SEEN-BY lockout in transit due to some broken link.

Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Andrew,

On 2022-03-07 04:18:11, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for
me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere
in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.

Helmut's mail arrived here 3 times, with the following $een-by's and p@th's:

$EEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464 1203 $EEN-BY: 280/1208 2040 5003 5006 5555 301/1 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0
$EEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12
P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 280/5003

$EEN-BY: 30/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003 $EEN-BY: 280/5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 335/364 341/66 371/0 460/58 2432/390 $EEN-BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/1042 5058/104
P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1

$EEN-BY: 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003 301/1 $EEN-BY: 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12
P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 2452/250

I don't see your node(s) in the $een-by's here... Maybe it helps to solve the mystery. ;)

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Hello Andrew,

On Monday March 07 2022 04:18, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for
me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere
in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.

It did arrive here. With the following Bath and Zeenby:

ZEEN+BY: 30/0 154/10 203/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 ZEEN+BY: 240/8005 280/464 5003 5006 5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 320/219 ZEEN+BY: 335/364 341/66 371/0 460/58 712/848 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 ZEEN+BY: 3634/12 5019/40 5020/545 1042 5053/58 5058/104
BATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/5555

Not that you are in the Zeen-by. Plus that 301/1 is in the Bath...


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)

Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?

ROTFL! Yeah, that sounds almost as asking MAGA fanatics "who won the election" to smoke them out. :)



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Good ${greeting_time}, Terry!

07 Mar 2022 12:36:58, you wrote to Sam Penwright:

The FTSC members require a level compentcy to do their work which is
why only RC's can vote as they are assumed to have a better level of compentcy to judge the canidates.
Having all of Fidonet being able to vote would just complicate the process. Your RC should have asked for opinions from the nodes in his Region just like mine did, but in the end it's his call.

In general, the votes should have a weight based on both region size and the sysops' opinions distribution (aggregated by RC).

For example, is one region has 100 sysops and another has 50, and they vote for 4 candidates with [-2, -1, 0, +1, +2] ballots (meaning "distrust", "not this time", "unsure", "let's see" and "full support", accordingly), the results may appear like this:

Candidate R1 R2 Total
A +0.23 +0.34 0.23*100+0.34*50 == 40
B +0.09 +0.08 0.09*100+0.08*50 == 13
C -0.17 +0.32 -0.17*100+0.32*50 == -1
D +0.11 +0.12 0.11*100+0.12*50 == 17

Obviously enough, the candidate C wouldn't pass.


--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... god@universe:~ # cvs up && make world
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)

Good ${greeting_time}, Ward!

07 Mar 2022 11:28:26, you wrote to me:

Being in the SEEN-BY doesn't prove anything. In the worst scenario,
this may indicate a SEEN-BY lockout in transit due to some broken
link.

Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?

No. Only one old arse (I'd like to call him a friend if he doesn't object) I really want to drink a liter or two (or, possibly, three) of beer with.

And with another old arse (same as above applied) living approx. 100 km away from there.

:-)

--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... :wq!
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)

Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.

On Mar 07, 2022 04:23am, Andrew Leary wrote to Ward Dossche:

Hello Ward!

06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Hello Michiel!

07 Mar 22 11:16, you wrote to me:

Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound
for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched
my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year
Helmut's ballot arrived a week after the polls had closed,
indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is
an issue.

It did arrive here. With the following Bath and Zeenby:

ZEEN+BY: 30/0 154/10 203/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001
8002 ZEEN+BY: 240/8005 280/464 5003 5006 5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 320/219 ZEEN+BY: 335/364 341/66 371/0 460/58 712/848 2432/390
2448/1021 2452/250 ZEEN+BY: 3634/12 5019/40 5020/545 1042 5053/58
5058/104
BATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/5555

Not that you are in the Zeen-by. Plus that 301/1 is in the Bath...

It appears that Helmut is linked to this conference via Ulrich Schroeter at 2:240/1120. All of the posted PATHs verify that. The fact that I'm in the SEEN+BY on your system doesn't mean much, since we are connected for the echo. There's no way to tell if it arrived on your system with me already listed or your system added me. Most likely I was already listed, because otherwise your system should have forwarded the message to me.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hello Wilfred!

07 Mar 22 11:24, you wrote to me:

Helmut's mail arrived here 3 times, with the following $een-by's and p@th's:

$EEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464 1203 $EEN-BY: 280/1208 2040 5003 5006 5555 301/1 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 $EEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41
240/1120 280/5003

$EEN-BY: 30/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005
280/464 5003 $EEN-BY: 280/5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 335/364 341/66
371/0 460/58 2432/390 $EEN-BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/1042 5058/104 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1

$EEN-BY: 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003
301/1 $EEN-BY: 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 2452/250

I don't see your node(s) in the $een-by's here... Maybe it helps to
solve the mystery. ;)

Helmut's last messages that arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC came via this PATH:

313/41 240/1120 335/364 221/6 221/1 320/219

It would seem that Ulrich's system has forwarded the message on, so that leaves Fabio Bizzi and Tommi Koivula (x2) as potential bottlenecks. I am linked to 221/1 (AKA 221/0) and have connects there as recently as today.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hi Alexey,

Fidonet has never done this in the past and probably never will.

The present system ensures that each area (RC) gets a vote which means big areas can't dominate the vote, it's like the senate system in the US.

There are a lot of negatives to idea of wieight system like who is going to ensure the vote is valid and not manipulated, how sure are Nodes voting
even real.

The main reason is it is a an overkill for the FTSC as there are only a few canidates and room for a lot more.

Just my 5 cents worth.

Terry


On Mar 07, 2022 01:20pm, Alexey Vissarionov wrote to Terry Roati:

Good ${greeting_time}, Terry!

07 Mar 2022 12:36:58, you wrote to Sam Penwright:

The FTSC members require a level compentcy to do their work which is
why only RC's can vote as they are assumed to have a better level of
compentcy to judge the canidates.
Having all of Fidonet being able to vote would just complicate the
process. Your RC should have asked for opinions from the nodes in his
Region just like mine did, but in the end it's his call.

In general, the votes should have a weight based on both region size
and the sysops' opinions distribution (aggregated by RC).

For example, is one region has 100 sysops and another has 50, and they vote for 4 candidates with [-2, -1, 0, +1, +2] ballots (meaning "distrust", "not this time", "unsure", "let's see" and "full support", accordingly), the results may appear like this:

Candidate R1 R2 Total
A +0.23 +0.34 0.23*100+0.34*50 == 40
B +0.09 +0.08 0.09*100+0.08*50 == 13
C -0.17 +0.32 -0.17*100+0.32*50 == -1
D +0.11 +0.12 0.11*100+0.12*50 == 17

Obviously enough, the candidate C wouldn't pass.

--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... god@universe:~ # cvs up && make world
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?

No.

Then why behave like one ... explaining things we already know?

I really want to drink a liter or two (or, possibly, three) of
beer with.

There's no really good Dutch beer ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.

Maybe it was in one of the badly addressed Star-PKT files which I hear about ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Terry,

About wheighted votes ...

Fidonet has never done this in the past and probably never will.

Actually, it was introduced by IC-decree already a long time ago, never repealed but also never invoked. There were the times with a zone with only 1 sysop, a zone where the ZC did not understand english (that situation still exists, though it be a different zone), a zone with hardly nodes which Carol desperately tried to salvage at the time when Z2 had something like 7-8000 listed individual sysops.

That equality principle ensured that 50-60 sysops could grab the whole of the nodelist in a strangle hold ...

The present system ensures that each area (RC) gets a vote which means
bid areas can't dominate the vote, it's like the senate system in the US.

Odd comparison because big areas do dominate the presidential vote ....

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Andrew,

On 2022-03-07 05:50:30, you wrote to me:

Helmut's mail arrived here 3 times, with the following $een-by's and
p@th's:

$EEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464
1203 $EEN-BY: 280/1208 2040 5003 5006 5555 301/1 303/0 313/41 335/364
371/0 $EEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41
240/1120 280/5003

$EEN-BY: 30/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005
280/464 5003 $EEN-BY: 280/5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 335/364 341/66
371/0 460/58 2432/390 $EEN-BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/1042
5058/104 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1

$EEN-BY: 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003
301/1 $EEN-BY: 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250
3634/12 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 2452/250

I don't see your node(s) in the $een-by's here... Maybe it helps to
solve the mystery. ;)

Helmut's last messages that arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC came via this PATH:

313/41 240/1120 335/364 221/6 221/1 320/219

It would seem that Ulrich's system has forwarded the message on, so that leaves Fabio Bizzi and Tommi Koivula (x2) as potential bottlenecks. I am linked to 221/1 (AKA 221/0) and have connects there as recently as today.

I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you should have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one of them. He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the seen-by's in the packet I received from 301/1, so it's very likely that was the case for Michiel also, so his system should have sent it to yours... Maybe it's a case of a false positive dupe detection on your system? Do you have backups of all incoming pkt files? If yes, have you searched them for Helmut's msgid "621c1972" ?

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you should
have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one of them. He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the seen-by's in the
packet I received from 301/1, ...

I'm beginning to have a knee-jerk reaction every time I see that 301/1 ... it's becoming so prominent everywhere and causing issues all over the place that people should start seriously consider to de-link from it ... worldwide ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2022-03-07 13:19:15, you wrote to me:

I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you
should have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one
of them. He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the
seen-by's in the packet I received from 301/1, ...

I'm beginning to have a knee-jerk reaction every time I see that 301/1 ... it's becoming so prominent everywhere and causing issues all over the place
that people should start seriously consider to de-link from it ... worldwide ...

In this case I'm saying 301/1 doesn't seem to be the cause of the problem!

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Shit happens :)

On Mar 07, 2022 12:38pm, Ward Dossche wrote to Terry Roati:

Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.

Maybe it was in one of the badly addressed Star-PKT files which I hear about ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed
(2:292/854)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Hi Ward,

On Mar 07, 2022 12:52pm, Ward Dossche wrote to Terry Roati:

Actually, it was introduced by IC-decree already a long time ago, never repealed but also never invoked. There were the times with a zone with only 1 sysop, a zone where the ZC did not understand english (that situation still exists, though it be a different zone), a zone with
hardly nodes which Carol desperately tried to salvage at the time when
Z2 had something like 7-8000 listed individual sysops.

My 5 cents worth, I beleive it will never be invoked, probably why the idea died at the time it was proposed. No Zone wars no problem.

That equality principle ensured that 50-60 sysops could grab the whole
of the nodelist in a strangle hold ...

My 5 cents worth, I beleive it will never happen now.

The present system ensures that each area (RC) gets a vote which means TR>> bid areas can't dominate the vote, it's like the senate system in the
US.

Odd comparison because big areas do dominate the presidential vote ....

I said Senate, where each state gets the same number of votes so the
population of each state doesn't come into it. Thhe US presidental vote is completely different and a mystery to outsiders like me :)

Terry

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Terry,

My 5 cents worth, I beleive it will never be invoked, probably why the
idea died at the time it was proposed. No Zone wars no problem.

With the advent of the new ZC1 a lot of things changed ... suddenly ...

Thhe US presidental vote is
completely different and a mystery to outsiders like me :)

But listening to the speeches can be a lot of fun ... for example someone claiming he was going to turn the country 360 degrees around ... and still getting votes ... 8-)

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

A: Because it destroys the logical flow of a thread of comments,
and makes it difficult to keep up with a conversation.

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

Terry Roati wrote to Andrew Leary <=-

Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.

On Mar 07, 2022 04:23am, Andrew Leary wrote to Ward Dossche:

Hello Ward!

06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

In this case I'm saying 301/1 doesn't seem to be the cause of the problem!

Well, I'm not so sure:

From: "Helmut Renner -> Election Coordinator" <2:313/41>
X-Comment-To: Election Coordinator
Newsgroups: FTSC_PUBLIC
Subject: Vote
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:35:40 GMT
X-JAM-To: Election Coordinator

X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | X | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | X | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | X | |
----------------------------------------------

br
Helmut

--- FleetStreet 1.27.3.8d
* Origin: DonHelmi's Datendienst (2:313/41)




..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hi Bj”rn,

On 2022-03-07 15:12:19, you wrote to me:

In this case I'm saying 301/1 doesn't seem to be the cause of the
problem!

Well, I'm not so sure:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

There is nothing wrong with this path, and you got it. The problem is Andrew didn't get it.

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

On 2022 Mar 06 21:06:04, you wrote to Andrew Leary:

NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible
voter.

Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Rules need to be changed.

you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide on how they will vote...

)\/(ark

"The soul of a small kitten in the body of a mighty dragon. Look on my majesty, ye mighty, and despair! Or bring me catnip. Your choice. Oooh, a shiny thing!"
... Chicago has the best politicians money can buy.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

There is nothing wrong with this path, and you got it. The problem is Andrew didn't get it.

Rest assured, I'm not trying to point finger at anyone, I'm only curious. Every message I get from Andrew is the same:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 320/219 203/0 2

And almost the same from every other Fidoweb connected system, like e.g. yours:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 280/464 203/0 2

So why does Helmut's path look like the above?

And the same for a Z1 node like Dan's:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 123/115 3634/12 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

Why didn't I get that directly from Andrew?

Then we have the messages from Terry from down under:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 640/1321 1384 221/1 203/0 2

Yes, Tommi is often the fastest system in the Fidoweb, so no surprise that I get the message the fastest from his system. But I got it.

So, somewhere in our Fidoweb there seem to be a system that adds s-b lines without being properly connected to our Fidoweb. And the only new links I can find in any of the path lines I have looked upon is:

-> 240/1120 -> 301/1

Usually it works, sometimes it does not?

Well, I guess only Andrew can properly investigate the reason that he did not receive this (for once) important message. Maybe that intermediate 240/1120 system is one of those rabid NAB systems, that refuse to handle the Fidoweb properly?



..

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hi Björn,

On 2022-03-07 16:19:23, you wrote to me:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

There is nothing wrong with this path, and you got it. The problem is
Andrew didn't get it.

Rest assured, I'm not trying to point finger at anyone, I'm only curious. Every message I get from Andrew is the same:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 320/219 203/0 2

And almost the same from every other Fidoweb connected system, like e.g.
yours:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 280/464 203/0 2

So why does Helmut's path look like the above?

What do Helmut's path have to do with Andrew's or mine? (If Helmut isn't directly connected to you, that is.)

And the same for a Z1 node like Dan's:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 123/115 3634/12 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2

Why didn't I get that directly from Andrew?

It was a message from a random Z1 system, why would you get that from Andrew (it could, but it doesn't have to).

Then we have the messages from Terry from down under:

X-JAM-PATH2D: 640/1321 1384 221/1 203/0 2

Yes, Tommi is often the fastest system in the Fidoweb, so no surprise that I get the message the fastest from his system. But I got it.

So, somewhere in our Fidoweb there seem to be a system that adds s-b lines without being properly connected to our Fidoweb.

I have yet to see any evidence of that! So that conclusion is very premature.

Well, I guess only Andrew can properly investigate the reason that he
did not receive this (for once) important message. Maybe that
intermediate 240/1120 system is one of those rabid NAB systems, that refuse to handle the Fidoweb properly?

That is Ulrich Schroeter, he has one of the most reliable systems out there!

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

On 2022 Mar 06 21:06:04, you wrote to Andrew Leary:

you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide on how they will vote...

)\/(ark

Okay Then Send me you email please. 1:123/120
I have some other stuff to discuss with you.
Thanks Mark


Bye for now...
Sam

--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)

Feel better now?

On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

Terry Roati wrote to Andrew Leary <=-

Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.

On Mar 07, 2022 04:23am, Andrew Leary wrote to Ward Dossche:

Hello Ward!

06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:

Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.

... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Feel better now?

On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

Feel smarter now?

Don't act like a n00b. It makes you look ... ignorant.


... Nothing's foolproof - the idiots are too ingenious.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Definitely smarter, maybe I am ignorant, get over it.

On Mar 07, 2022 08:09pm, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Feel better now?

On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

Feel smarter now?

Don't act like a n00b. It makes you look ... ignorant.

... Nothing's foolproof - the idiots are too ingenious.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

On 2022 Mar 07 16:19:22, you wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

Maybe that intermediate 240/1120 system is one of those rabid NAB
systems, that refuse to handle the Fidoweb properly?

wow... just wow... 240/1120 is 2:240/1120, ulrich schroeter...

FWIW: the NAB is dead and gone...

FWIW2: no fidonet systems should have any problems handling dupes being circulated al la the so-called fidoweb...

)\/(ark

"The soul of a small kitten in the body of a mighty dragon. Look on my majesty, ye mighty, and despair! Or bring me catnip. Your choice. Oooh, a shiny thing!"
... Has anyone seen my jacket? It is white with sleeves to hug yourself.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 2022 Mar 07 14:18:10, you wrote to me:

you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide
on how they will vote...

Okay Then Send me you email please. 1:123/120
I have some other stuff to discuss with you.

you should already have it since i'm also your NC... netmail to any of my addresses also works, ya know ;)

Thanks Mark

you're welcome...

)\/(ark

"The soul of a small kitten in the body of a mighty dragon. Look on my majesty, ye mighty, and despair! Or bring me catnip. Your choice. Oooh, a shiny thing!"
... Figures. First time on the Core and what do I get to do? Dig through trash. ---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Definitely smarter, maybe I am ignorant, get over it.

On Mar 07, 2022 08:09pm, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Feel better now?

On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

Feel smarter now?

Don't act like a n00b. It makes you look ... ignorant.

Definitely ignorant, and almost certainly *NOT* smarter.




... Some people are born stupid, others work to acquire it.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

I realize what I'm doing is the equivilent to when people reply-all telling people to stop replying-all, but...

Would you please be the bigger man and stop replying to him? It's just clogging up the echo with nonsense, and he's certanly not going to be the one to stop replying.


- Andre
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Radio Mentor BBS - bbs.radiomentor.org (1:154/70)

On 2022 Mar 07 14:18:10, you wrote to me:

you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide
on how they will vote...

I understand that but thanks for the reminder!

you should already have it since i'm also your NC... netmail to any of my addresses also works, ya know ;)

Thanks Mark

you're welcome...

Well I had it but my mail program crashed and I lost alot of address
and messages, The only reason I wanted your email is before you told
me that was the best way to contact you rather than Netmail, But no
worries I'll send you a netmail!

Thanks Sam


Bye for now...
Sam

--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)

Andre Robitaille wrote to Dan Clough <=-

I realize what I'm doing is the equivilent to when people
reply-all telling people to stop replying-all, but...

Would you please be the bigger man and stop replying to him? It's
just clogging up the echo with nonsense, and he's certanly not
going to be the one to stop replying.

Yep, I will.

I would point out that the nonsense from this little thread is quite a
small percentage of the general nonsense that goes on here. ;-)



... All the easy problems have been solved.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Hello Wilfred!

07 Mar 22 13:08, you wrote to me:

I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you should have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one of them.
He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the seen-by's in
the packet I received from 301/1, so it's very likely that was the
case for Michiel also, so his system should have sent it to yours...
Maybe it's a case of a false positive dupe detection on your system?

I have verified that it was not discarded by my system as a duplicate; I don't have a copy of it in my DUPEMAIL area. Incidentally, Paul Hayton's ballot that I received today I ended up with 6 copies in my DUPEMAIL area.

Do you have backups of all incoming pkt files? If yes, have you

I don't keep backups of incoming packets except when I'm testing new changes to mbfido. Initial testing is conducted on my development system, but when I need to test under full load I back up incoming to ensure nothing is lost if I miss a bug.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 9 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 9 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 7 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12
RC41
RC29
RC57
RC31

Regards,

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Good ${greeting_time}, Terry!

07 Mar 2022 21:22:56, you wrote to me:

Fidonet has never done this in the past and probably never will.

Please see my answer to Bjorn: there I've explained why the voting procedure should be revised and likely changed.


--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii

... that's why I really dislike fools.
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)

Hi Alexey,

On Mar 09, 2022 09:20am, Alexey Vissarionov wrote to Terry Roati:

Please see my answer to Bjorn: there I've explained why the voting procedure should be revised and likely changed.

I understand your proposal, I just don't think it will every happen because it would rekindle the zone wars. Trying to get changes in Fidonet have failed
for some time now, let's how many of the RC's even bother to vote in the FTSC election.

Terry

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

Terry,

... let's how many of the RC's even bother to vote in the FTSC election.

I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...

Of course, I am at an age where it is a right to forget ... even a perk I would say ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

I use the same excuse.

Terry

On Mar 09, 2022 12:45pm, Ward Dossche wrote to Terry Roati:

Terry,

... let's how many of the RC's even bother to vote in the FTSC election.

I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...

Of course, I am at an age where it is a right to forget ... even a perk
I would say ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed
(2:292/854)

... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
* Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)

On 09 Mar 2022, Ward Dossche said the following...

I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...

Duty calls, here we are.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Fidonet Brasil - R80 Internet Gateway (4:80/1)

I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...

Duty calls, here we are.

Not one, but two even ... Andrew will be sp happy ... 8-)

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

On 10 Mar 2022, Ward Dossche said the following...

Not one, but two even ... Andrew will be sp happy ... 8-)

The more, the merrier!

... What does it mean to pre-board? Do you get on before you get on?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (macOS/64)
* Origin: Saturn's Orbit BBS - Private System (4:801/188)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 9 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 9 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 7 | |
----------------------------------------------

I have a question, Andrew...

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes? And
if not, why? Also, why are the abstentions not being listed in these updates?

It seems to me that if a group of people cast a vote on something, a majority of *all* votes being yes (or no) is crucial. A majority of 'only' yes versus
no (or the reverse) does not properly represent the entire vote, of which
there are three, not two, options.

Can I get some clarification on this, please?

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes?
And if not, why? Also, why are the abstentions not being listed in these updates?

RTFM ... in this case the election rules ...

"Candidates must receive more "yes" than "no" votes to be elected."

So, from your POV 'not casting a vote' is an 'abstention' ?

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

RTFM ... in this case the election rules ...

"Candidates must receive more "yes" than "no" votes to be elected."

So, from your POV 'not casting a vote' is an 'abstention' ?

Always as ascerbic as ever, Ward?

From my POV, 'not casting a vote' is not casting a vote. Casting a vote for any one candidate, but not another, is an abstention of that other. It is unreasonable to assign abstentions when someone simply isn't taking part, and these should *not* be counted toward the total number of votes. However, abstentions, where it is clear that a voter is abstaining, *should* be
counted and should have an impact. Otherwise, what's the point of even including it as an option?

Now, if you don't mind, I'd like to hear from the person who is actually running this election, rather than the one who only thinks he is. Good day, sir.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Hello Shaun!

10 Mar 22 16:58, you wrote to me:

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 9 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 9 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 7 | |
----------------------------------------------

I have a question, Andrew...

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of
votes? And if not, why? Also, why are the abstentions not being listed
in these updates?

Each ballot received and counted is listed below the results that you quoted. A vote submitted without a Yes or No for any candidate is considered an abstention on that candidate.

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Hi Shaun!

10 Mar 2022 16:58, from Shaun Buzza -> Andrew Leary:

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of
votes?

One can vote for, against or abstain (ie. not vote at all) per person.

Persons with more yes than no votes get in.

Why do you want to count an abstain as a vote??
Abstain simmply means that that person neither voted yes or no. (ie. because there were people for YES and also for NO in the region of that RC)

CU, Ricsi

... The trouble with ignorance is it picks up confidence as it goes along.
--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: Secret negotiations are usually neither. (2:310/31)

I have a question, Andrew...

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes? And if not, why? Also, why are the abstentions not being liste in these updates?

Each ballot received and counted is listed below the results that you quoted. A vote submitted without a Yes or No for any candidate is considered an abstention on that candidate.

That's all fine and good, but it doesn't answer my question. Well, in a way
it does, because I can count the recieved votes against the tallied
votes...But it feels like you're avoiding answering the more important part
of what I was asking...

Thanks for your time.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes?

One can vote for, against or abstain (ie. not vote at all) per person.

Persons with more yes than no votes get in.

Why do you want to count an abstain as a vote??
Abstain simmply means that that person neither voted yes or no. (ie. because there were people for YES and also for NO in the region of that RC)

I've already mentioned one reason why. Discarding abstentions literally makes an option for abstention pointless, and therefore shouldn't be an option at all.

Also, there are *zero* 'no' votes, at least in this current election. Does
that mean a single 'yes' vote would mean a win? Or the flip side; if everyone abstains on a candidate, except one 'no' vote, does that candidate automatically lose? How does that make any more sense than discarding abstentions?

There is a reason that real-world politics count abstentions along with yes
and no votes. It has to be a majority vote; the majority of *all* votes, including abstentions, must be either yes or no.

I get that this isn't real-world politics. But does that mean we shouldn't emulate a system that has worked around the world for literal centuries?

However, I am not privy to the internal workings of this election, which is
why I asked for clarification in the first place.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Hi Shaun!

11 Mar 2022 06:20, from Shaun Buzza -> Richard Menedetter:

Also, there are *zero* 'no' votes, at least in this current election.
Does that mean a single 'yes' vote would mean a win?

Finally you got the meaning of more yes than no ... it took you sime time, but now you habe it.

Or the flip side; if everyone abstains on a candidate, except one 'no' vote, does that candidate automatically lose?

You finally really got it.
Let us practice a bit:

10 yes, 12 no -> no
8 yes, 5 no -> yes
0 yes, 1 no -> no

How does that make any more sense than discarding abstentions?

Yes means, the region thinks, that the candidate should be taken.
No means , the candidate is deemed unfit, and should NOT be taken.
Anstain means, the region does not have an oppinion, so it does say nothing with regards to that candidate, but says yes or no to others (maybe).

Because nobody thought the candidate was good, and 1 region thought he/she was not good.
So NO.

CU, Ricsi

... If a man calls you a horse, he's a fool. If 3 men do, buy a saddle.
--- GoldED+/LNX
* Origin: I t#ld yo#, "Never#touch #he flop#y disk s#rface!" (2:310/31)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 11 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 12 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 9 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12
RC41
RC29
RC57
RC31
RC92
RC80
RC13

Regards,

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Also, there are *zero* 'no' votes, at least in this current election. Does that mean a single 'yes' vote would mean a win?

Finally you got the meaning of more yes than no ... it took you sime
time, but now you habe it.

No, sir, I do not habe it. If I did, I wouldn't have be asking questions.

Or the flip side; if everyone abstains on a candidate, except one 'no vote, does that candidate automatically lose?

You finally really got it.

Still no...(o_O)

How does that make any more sense than discarding abstentions?

Yes means, the region thinks, that the candidate should be taken.
No means , the candidate is deemed unfit, and should NOT be taken.
Anstain means, the region does not have an oppinion, so it does say nothing with regards to that candidate, but says yes or no to others (maybe).

And now *you're* getting it! (^_^)

If two people vote yes, three vote no, and, say, ten abstain, it doesn't mean the same as only five people voting. In the case of a 'majority decision',
this would be considered a failed vote, and would result in a second round of voting, or maybe a default decision.

Abstaining is different from not voting. An abstention is still part of the total number of votes. It says exactly that, maybe. Instead of yes *or* no, it is yes *and* no. That's exactly how an abstention is tallied in many
real-world votes, one for each. I would imagine this is done to avoid the situation I described above.

I wasn't seeing that in this election, which is why I started asking
questions. I am not being purposefully obtuse...I'm just seeking clarification on something that appears, at least to me, to be ambiguous.

Perhaps, as someone else got chided for, I am simply overthinking this whole thing. What else am I gonna do when I find myself waking up extra early on my day off?

...need...more...coffee... (v_v)

$#!t..outta cream... (x_X)

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-

There is a reason that real-world politics count abstentions
along with yes and no votes. It has to be a majority vote; the
majority of *all* votes, including abstentions, must be either
yes or no.

This is not correct, at least for elections that I'm familiar with,
in the USA. We count *ONLY* YES votes. You do not need a majority
of all votes, you simply need more YES votes than the number of YES
votes that your opponent gets. That's it. There are no NO votes, and
there are millions of abstentions, which just means.... nothing.


... If not for the last minute, nothing would get done.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Shaun,

Abstaining is different from not voting.

Do you have any idea how many times we must've had that discussion? Because I don't know either but a correct answer would be "Often".

Just wanting to make certain you don't believe you invented the hot water...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

There is a reason that real-world politics count abstentions
along with yes and no votes. It has to be a majority vote; the majority of *all* votes, including abstentions, must be either
yes or no.

This is not correct, at least for elections that I'm familiar with,
in the USA. We count *ONLY* YES votes. You do not need a majority
of all votes, you simply need more YES votes than the number of YES
votes that your opponent gets. That's it. There are no NO votes, and there are millions of abstentions, which just means.... nothing.

Um, wouldn't a vote for your opponent automatically be a vote against you, or
a 'no'? Just sayin...

It is basically the same for our Prime Minister. However, I wasn't speaking specifically about elections, but voting in a broader sense. It is not an activity restricted only to an election. For example, NATO members voting on creating no-fly zones.

Unfortunately, the FTSC election has already stepped out of the realm of the presidential election you're familiar with/referring to. There are three candidates, and any combination of the three could be voted in. This would be more akin to voting in members of a city council, wouldn't it? And in that case, it is indeed a majority decision, at least in the small part of the
world I call home.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Abstaining is different from not voting.

Do you have any idea how many times we must've had that discussion? Because I don't know either but a correct answer would be "Often".

Just wanting to make certain you don't believe you invented the hot water...

Of course not! This is why I asked; I was certain the discussion had already taken place in the past, and the answers would be forthcoming. I was at least half right, I suppose. (^_^)

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

I was at least half right, I suppose. (^_^)

You mean then you were equally half-wrong ... do I get the tie-breaker?

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

You mean then you were equally half-wrong ... do I get the tie-breaker?

\%/@rd

You don't get a vote. There's already too many voters in my mind. (o_-)

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-

There is a reason that real-world politics count abstentions
along with yes and no votes. It has to be a majority vote; the majority of *all* votes, including abstentions, must be either
yes or no.

This is not correct, at least for elections that I'm familiar with,
in the USA. We count *ONLY* YES votes. You do not need a majority
of all votes, you simply need more YES votes than the number of YES
votes that your opponent gets. That's it. There are no NO votes, and there are millions of abstentions, which just means.... nothing.

Um, wouldn't a vote for your opponent automatically be a vote
against you, or a 'no'? Just sayin...

Well, in effect it would be, sort of. But, that wasn't the point. I
was debating your claim that in real-world politics, "no" votes and abstentions are counted. They are not, because there *ARE* no "no"
votes. When I look at my election ballot, I can choose to vote for
*ONE* candidate, which is a "yes" vote. There is no choice to pencil in
for a "no" vote. It is NOT a majority vote to win an election. It is
simply a matter of getting more YES votes than your opponent(s). Which
is what I said there above...

Unfortunately, the FTSC election has already stepped out of the
realm of the presidential election you're familiar with/referring
to. There are three candidates, and any combination of the three
could be voted in. This would be more akin to voting in members
of a city council, wouldn't it? And in that case, it is indeed a
majority decision, at least in the small part of the world I call
home.

Yes, the FTSC example is more like a city council thing. The point is
that you don't need a majority (of all the people voting) to get in, you simply need more YES votes than NO votes. There is a difference.



... All the easy problems have been solved.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Yes, the FTSC example is more like a city council thing. The point is that you don't need a majority (of all the people voting) to get in, you simply need more YES votes than NO votes. There is a difference.

What Shaun is describing is called an "absolute majority," where the 'yes' votes need to be one more than half of the eligible voters.

There is only a single reference that I can find in the FidoNet Policy about needing an absolute majority, and that's the Zone Coordinator election. Other than that, all voting mechanics are extremely vague.

And FWIW, that document has been in effect for thirty years and FidoNet is still here.


- Andre
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Radio Mentor BBS - bbs.radiomentor.org (1:154/70)

Yes, the FTSC example is more like a city council thing. The point is that you don't need a majority (of all the people voting) to get in, you simply need more YES votes than NO votes. There is a difference.

This has been made clear by more than one person. At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so. I strongly feel that it *should* be a majority decision due to the nature of the election in question. This is simply
personal opinion.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Well, in effect it would be, sort of. But, that wasn't the point. I
was debating your claim that in real-world politics, "no" votes and abstentions are counted. They are not, because there *ARE* no "no" votes. When I look at my election ballot, I can choose to vote for
*ONE* candidate, which is a "yes" vote. There is no choice to pencil in for a "no" vote.

Realistically, one could vote for both candidates, or otherwise invalidate the ballot card, which would be considered a 'spoilt vote', or essentially an abstention. I know, I'm picking nits here, but I did find reference to specifically this while doing my due diligence on the word 'abstention':

"In another manner, an intentionally spoilt vote could be interpreted as an active abstention. An intentionally spoilt vote is caused by a voter who turns to an election and invalidates the ballot paper in some way."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstention]

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so.

Because then you’ve have to chase everybody down to vote or you’d never get people elected.

For things like a zone coordinator, definitely. Regional, maybe? Standing member, especially if there aren’t enough standing members currently, no way. It’s not worth it.

FidoNet is made up of volunteers then put it less effort the lower you go in the hierarchy. You’ve got to take what you can get from people that are willing to put in effort, even for something like voting.


- Andre
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Radio Mentor BBS - bbs.radiomentor.org (1:154/70)

What Shaun is describing is called an "absolute majority," where the
'yes' votes need to be one more than half of the eligible voters.

More or less. I was calling it a "majority decision", but that's what I had in mind, at least one more 'yes' (or 'no') than half of all votes.

There is only a single reference that I can find in the FidoNet Policy about needing an absolute majority, and that's the Zone Coordinator election. Other than that, all voting mechanics are extremely vague.

Yes, extremely vague indeed! This ambiguity is what caused me to start this whole discussion in the first place!

And FWIW, that document has been in effect for thirty years and FidoNet
is still here.

I wouldn't expect Fidonet to immediately implode if that document were to be changed, either. After all, we have seen our Election Coordinator blatantly ignore that document once already, in this very election.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so.

Because then you’ve have to chase everybody down to vote or you’d never get people elected.

For things like a zone coordinator, definitely. Regional, maybe?
Standing member, especially if there aren’t enough standing members currently, no way. It’s not worth it.

FidoNet is made up of volunteers then put it less effort the lower you
go in the hierarchy. You’ve got to take what you can get from people that are willing to put in effort, even for something like voting.

That's a valid point. However, I have always specified 'recieved votes'
instead of 'eligible votes'. I've said at least once that a a complete lack
of voting should not be considered an abstention, but rather a non-vote.

And again, if there's no majority decision rule, why even mention 'abstain'
as an option? I might have had different things to say to my RC during his deliberations, if that had been clear from the start.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Well, in effect it would be, sort of. But, that wasn't the point. I
was debating your claim that in real-world politics, "no" votes and abstentions are counted. They are not, because there *ARE* no "no"
votes. When I look at my election ballot, I can choose to vote for
*ONE* candidate, which is a "yes" vote. There is no choice to pencil in for a "no" vote.

Realistically, one could vote for both candidates, or otherwise
invalidate the ballot card, which would be considered a 'spoilt
vote', or essentially an abstention. I know, I'm picking nits
here, but I did find reference to specifically this while doing
my due diligence on the word 'abstention':

"In another manner, an intentionally spoilt vote could be
interpreted as an active abstention. An intentionally spoilt vote
is caused by a voter who turns to an election and invalidates the
ballot paper in some way."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstention]

While this is probably true, it is also irrelevant to the discussion at
hand. Again, on a real-world ballot, there is not a place to vote "NO".

Disclaimer: The above refers to voting for candidates for an elected position. I do realize that sometimes ballots contain yes/no votes for
things like referendums or propositions. There, that should save you
some time... ;-)


... A woman drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Yes, the FTSC example is more like a city council thing. The point is that you don't need a majority (of all the people voting) to get in, you simply need more YES votes than NO votes. There is a difference.

This has been made clear by more than one person. At this point,
though, I am wondering why this is so. I strongly feel that it
*should* be a majority decision due to the nature of the election
in question. This is simply personal opinion.

If you disregard abstentions, it is a majority decision. More yes's
than no's means you get in. I think the voter should have to pick one
or the other, and not be allowed to abstain from any candidate(s).

I also wonder how it was decided that only RC's can vote for these
candidates. Why not NC's also. Why not the peasant-class of
nodelisted sysops? I saw somewhere in this conversation recently (I
think) that it was deemed that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to know if a particular candidate was qualified
for such a job. I disagree with that assumption very strongly.

Oh well. I shall go back to my peasantly duties now.


... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Disclaimer: The above refers to voting for candidates for an elected position. I do realize that sometimes ballots contain yes/no votes for things like referendums or propositions. There, that should save you some time... ;-)

No need to save my time, it's the only thing I have to spend. (^_^)

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

This has been made clear by more than one person. At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so. I strongly feel that it *should* be a majority decision due to the nature of the election
in question. This is simply personal opinion.

If you disregard abstentions, it is a majority decision. More yes's
than no's means you get in. I think the voter should have to pick one
or the other, and not be allowed to abstain from any candidate(s).

Effectively, that's the current vote. The voter is *not* allowed to abstain,
if any abstention is not counted toward the total.

I also wonder how it was decided that only RC's can vote for these candidates. Why not NC's also. Why not the peasant-class of
nodelisted sysops? I saw somewhere in this conversation recently (I think) that it was deemed that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to know if a particular candidate was qualified for such a job. I disagree with that assumption very strongly.

I, too, remember someone saying that recently. Personally, I cannot disagree with that assumption, as I fit the description a little too well. However, in theory, the RC votes are supposed to be an aggregate of all the votes in the controller's region, in a similar fashion to how a House Representative is supposed to (but doesn't) vote.

Oh well. I shall go back to my peasantly duties now.

Yes, let's both be pleasant peasants! (o_-)

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-

There is a reason that real-world politics count abstentions
along with yes and no votes. It has to be a majority vote; the
majority of *all* votes, including abstentions, must be either
yes or no.

This is not correct, at least for elections that I'm familiar with,
in the USA. We count *ONLY* YES votes. You do not need a majority
of all votes, you simply need more YES votes than the number of YES
votes that your opponent gets. That's it. There are no NO votes, and
there are millions of abstentions, which just means.... nothing.

Um, wouldn't a vote for your opponent automatically be a vote
against you, or a 'no'? Just sayin...

Well, in effect it would be, sort of. But, that wasn't the point. I
was debating your claim that in real-world politics, "no" votes and abstentions are counted. They are not, because there *ARE* no "no" votes. When I look at my election ballot, I can choose to vote for
*ONE* candidate, which is a "yes" vote. There is no choice to pencil in for a "no" vote. It is NOT a majority vote to win an election. It is simply a matter of getting more YES votes than your opponent(s). Which is what I said there above...

I ha e a question, are spoilt ballots not reported in the US?

The way I see the election, there are X number of RC's in the nodelist. Y number have sent in a vote of whatever sort. That's a simple percentage of who had voted and who hasn't. it has nothing to do with abstentions


Then if someone votes. they have the three candidates listed and vote either yes or no for two of them. the tied one listed with no vote recorded is an abstention.


Listing the yes, no and abstentions is easy enough. it would be purely for information as the rules are clear. only yes and no voted count.

JD
--- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
* Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)

Effectively, that's the current vote. The voter is *not* allowed to abstain, if any abstention is not counted toward the total.

No. Someone choosing not to vote is not an abstention. An abstention is only when someone indicates th y are refusing g to cat a vote for either party. It's easier to understand in the cont of a meeting. Of the people who are physically present,some vote and some do not. This who do not vote have abstained. Those who stayed at home are not counted as abstentions.
on this case, submitting a ballot with no yes or no vote for a candidate is an abstention. Simply ignoring the process and not sending in a ballot is NOT an abstention.


JD

--- AfterShock/Android 1.6.8
* Origin: Firecat Mobile (4:920/69.1)

Hi Dan,

I also wonder how it was decided that only RC's can vote for these candidates. Why not NC's also. Why not the peasant-class of
nodelisted sysops? I saw somewhere in this conversation recently (I
think) that it was deemed that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to know if a particular candidate was qualified
for such a job. I disagree with that assumption very strongly.

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I fully concur with that statement ... I can list some RCs in 3 of the zones which are unqualified to vote under the assumption that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to vote.

That's what you meant, right?

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

I also wonder how it was decided that only RC's can vote for these candidates. Why not NC's also. Why not the peasant-class of
nodelisted sysops? I saw somewhere in this conversation recently (I think) that it was deemed that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to know if a particular candidate was qualified
for such a job. I disagree with that assumption very strongly.

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

I fully concur with that statement ... I can list some RCs in 3 of
the zones which are unqualified to vote under the assumption that
only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to vote.

That's what you meant, right?

LOL! No, not exactly.... (and you knew that). ;-)

While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's
should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may also
have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).



... I was wondering why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

I ha e a question, are spoilt ballots not reported in the US?

I am not certain of this, but I think they are not. I don't live there, so I cannot be certain.

The way I see the election, there are X number of RC's in the nodelist.
Y number have sent in a vote of whatever sort. That's a simple
percentage of who had voted and who hasn't. it has nothing to do with abstentions

That's how I see things, too. Those who have not voted should not count
towards the total number of votes.

Then if someone votes. they have the three candidates listed and vote either yes or no for two of them. the tied one listed with no vote recorded is an abstention.

Listing the yes, no and abstentions is easy enough. it would be purely
for information as the rules are clear. only yes and no voted count.

This is very true. However, that was only a minor point in my original
concern. Again, my bigger concern is this: why are abstentions being ignored, if it's an option? If this isn't a majority decision, why even mention abstaining at all?

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may also have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.

While I concur that probably quite a number of sysops even are able to provide an intelligent vote on the subject, I don't think that should materialise for the simple reasons that it's not a popularity poll and this is a technical mandate only...

For the first time in many many FTSC-elections there are competent candidates, nothing but competent candidates. In the past there have been nominations for pure political reasons, or to make certain there was a balance between Z1 and Z2 standing members while that is totally irrelevant, or simply to upset or annoy an opponent, etc... No political shit-show this time ...

Plus, a full nodelist-wide election (in my opnion) would make this way too top-heavy for its intended purpose....

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

The FTSC itself decides upon that "intra muros". Check 'www.ftsc.org' to find the procedures ...

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).

Has your quest for knowledge been satisfied or do you need Gandalf's number?

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Effectively, that's the current vote. The voter is *not* allowed to abstain, if any abstention is not counted toward the total.

No. Someone choosing not to vote is not an abstention. An abstention is only when someone indicates th y are refusing g to cat a vote for either party. It's easier to understand in the cont of a meeting. Of the people who are physically present,some vote and some do not. This who do not vote have abstained. Those who stayed at home are not counted as abstentions. on this case, submitting a ballot with no yes or no vote for a candidate is an abstention. Simply ignoring the process and not sending in a
ballot is NOT an abstention.

Sir, we are in agreement here.

However, as it has been explained to me, abstentions have exactly *zero*
impact in these proceedings. Therefore, a voter might as well have stayed
home, rather than abstaining.

Again, what is the point of including 'abstain' as an option, if those votes are just being discarded?

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

I fully concur with that statement ... I can list some RCs in 3 of the zones which are unqualified to vote under the assumption that only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to vote.

Of course you can, you opinionated old fart! What surprises me is that you limited yourself to only three zones!

There is a big difference between intelligence and knowledge. A person can memorize the entire dictionary and still be as dumb as calling a rock a 'pet'. Please don't say "intelligence/knowledge" in the future; these words are
*not* interchangeable. It is a fact that I am very intelligent. I can provide various test scores, if anyone wishes to challenge that fact. Yet, I have
very little knowledge of the inner workings of Fidonet due to my limited experience.

Having said that, I am, once again, forced to agree. I have too little knowledge of Fidonet to be a valid voter. This is why I discussed this
election with my RC, before he cast his vote. However, I say again, had I
known that 'abstain' meant exactly *zero*, I probably would have said
different things in that discussion.

Ward, I seriously question your motives in this election. Please contact me
via Netmail if you wish to hear my thoughts, as they may not be relevant to this current discussion.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).

As would I. I am very concerned about the way this document is currently
being interpreted.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may als have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.

While I concur that probably quite a number of sysops even are able to provide an intelligent vote on the subject, I don't think that should materialise for the simple reasons that it's not a popularity poll and this is a technical mandate only...

I disagree. It is not just a 'technical mandate'. If it were, why even
pretend to have an election? Again, I find myself questioning your motives here.

For the first time in many many FTSC-elections there are competent candidates, nothing but competent candidates. In the past there have
been nominations for pure political reasons, or to make certain there
was a balance between Z1 and Z2 standing members while that is totally irrelevant, or simply to upset or annoy an opponent, etc... No political shit-show this time ...

I cannot speak about past elections, as I was literally not present at the time. However, this very much seems like a 'political shit-show' to me. It seems like people may be 'adjusting' the rules of this election in order to
get the results they wish to see.

To be clear, I have not, nor will I ever, suggest that any of these
candidates are incompetent. However, the question has been raised (and blatantly ignored) about their legitimacy. This is something that bothers me.

Technically, this isn't about politics, it's about technicalities. (o_-)

Plus, a full nodelist-wide election (in my opnion) would make this way
too top-heavy for its intended purpose....

That is very easy to agree with, at least in this specific context.

However, I believe you wouldn't even have your current ZC title without a full nodelist-wide election, if I've read the Part 4 document correctly.

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

The FTSC itself decides upon that "intra muros". Check 'www.ftsc.org' to find the procedures ...

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).

Has your quest for knowledge been satisfied or do you need Gandalf's number?

Shoot, if you got his number, fork it over! I got plenty of Gray magic questions!

Was Part 4 written in stone? Is it immutable? Should it be updated? Dan
Clough isn't the only one who asks these questions.

(Damn it, Gamgee, stop making me agree with you! (>_<) )

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 14 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 16 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 10 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12
RC41
RC29
RC57
RC31
RC92
RC80
RC13
RC90
RC17
RC11
RC40

Regards,

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

I fully concur with that statement ... I can list some RCs in 3 of SB>WD> the zones which are unqualified to vote under the assumption that
only RC's would have the requisite intelligence/knowledge to vote.

Of course you can, you opinionated old fart!

I can also pee straight without getting my feet wet ...

What surprises me is that you limited yourself to only three zones!

That's because there's a zone that generally is well run and doesn't have shit in its zone-segment.

Please don't say "intelligence/knowledge" in the future; these words are *not* interchangeable.

Correct. And had you followed the thread and not just jumped on it because you saw my name you would know that I was merely quoting someone else, hence the double quotation marks.

I have too little knowledge of Fidonet to be a valid voter. This is why
I discussed this election with my RC, before he cast his vote.

Ward, I seriously question your motives in this election...

And they are "what" my motives? Other than having technically qualified people participating unlike previous years (with certain exceptions) ? Remember, I do not run this election ... I'm an "interrested bystander".

Please contact me via Netmail if you wish to hear my thoughts, as they
may not be relevant to this current discussion.

I'm open to your comments. You know my address ....

Take care,

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Of course you can, you opinionated old fart!

I can also pee straight without getting my feet wet ...

To be clear, sitting doesn't count...(o_-)

Please don't say "intelligence/knowledge" in the future; these words a *not* interchangeable.

Correct. And had you followed the thread and not just jumped on it
because you saw my name you would know that I was merely quoting someone else, hence the double quotation marks.

Ward, how much have you smoked today?

The 'double quotation marks'...or, y'know, regular quotes as opposed to
single quotes...were added by me, in order to specify the particular portion
of your own message that I was referring to. I am literally the OP of the
whole 'abstention' thread! I have certainly been following along!

I have too little knowledge of Fidonet to be a valid voter. This is wh I discussed this election with my RC, before he cast his vote.

Ward, I seriously question your motives in this election...

And they are "what" my motives?

I have no idea! But, as an outside observer, I can clearly see that you are trying your level best to influence this proceeding. And that is exactly why
I am wondering...

Other than having technically qualified
people participating unlike previous years (with certain exceptions) ? Remember, I do not run this election ... I'm an "interrested bystander".

A little *too* interested, in my opinion...

I really think this particular discussion should take place via Netmail, as I suggested. This is definitely straying far off the topic that I had brought up.

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Ward, I seriously question your motives in this election...

And they are "what" my motives?

I have no idea! But, as an outside observer, I can clearly see that you
are trying your level best to influence this proceeding. And that is exactly why I am wondering...

Wipe-off your spectacles then ...

This is the current composition of the FTSC with Deon George vacating his seat...

Name Node Term ends
--------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Leary 1:320/219 29 Mar 2023
mark lewis 1:3634/12 29 Mar 2023
Richard Menedetter 2:310/31 29 Mar 2023
Carol Shenkenberger 1:275/100 29 Mar 2023
Nick Andre 1:229/426 29 Mar 2023
Deon George 3:633/509 06 Jan 2022
Maurice Kinal 1:153/7001 29 Mar 2023
Dale Barnes 1:106/201 29 Mar 2023

7 remaining ... without the names put forward by the ZCC Nominating Committee there would be an empty election. Meaning if the ZCC doesn't move next year those 7 mandates will also expire ... that would mean the end of the FTSC according to its charter.

Yes, of course, the minumum required number can be lowered and there may be a few nominations just to fullfill that minimum requirement but I doubt if people like Nick Andre, Andrew Leary, Dale Barnes ... can be motivated for another term of '2 years nothing' which in fact would make the complete concept of an FTSC useless.

You should not be questioning me for my motives to keep the FTSC as a functional body, instead you should be questioning all the RCs (minus Jay Harris) why they are sitting on their asses and not thinking about the continuity ...

2 weeks into the voting period of 3 weeks with the ballot closing like 7 days from now, Andrew recorded 16 votes out of 34 RCs listed. Isn't that worrysome? Some will still roll-in, but nevertheless ...

Remember, I do not run this election ... I'm an "interrested
bystander".

A little *too* interested, in my opinion...

"Daddy, what did you do during the war?"

I really think this particular discussion should take place via Netmail,
as I suggested. This is definitely straying far off the topic that I had brought up.

Not my monkey, not my circus. You started this. Write echomail, I will reply in echomail. Write netmail and ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

However, I believe you wouldn't even have your current ZC title without a full nodelist-wide election, if I've read the Part 4 document correctly.

Then I suggest you go and read that P4-document again, because my version states verbatim ...

1.2.5 Zones and Zone Coordinators
......
Zone Coordinators are selected by the Regional Coordinators in that zone.

If you have a different text, then you're looking at the wrong thing.

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

I have no idea! But, as an outside observer, I can clearly see that yo are trying your level best to influence this proceeding. And that is exactly why I am wondering...

Wipe-off your spectacles then ...

This is the current composition of the FTSC with Deon George vacating his seat...

Name Node Term ends
--------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Leary 1:320/219 29 Mar 2023
mark lewis 1:3634/12 29 Mar 2023
Richard Menedetter 2:310/31 29 Mar 2023
Carol Shenkenberger 1:275/100 29 Mar 2023
Nick Andre 1:229/426 29 Mar 2023
Deon George 3:633/509 06 Jan 2022
Maurice Kinal 1:153/7001 29 Mar 2023
Dale Barnes 1:106/201 29 Mar 2023

7 remaining ... without the names put forward by the ZCC Nominating Committee there would be an empty election. Meaning if the ZCC doesn't move next year those 7 mandates will also expire ... that would mean the end of the FTSC according to its charter.

Yes, of course, the minumum required number can be lowered and there may be a few nominations just to fullfill that minimum requirement but I
doubt if people like Nick Andre, Andrew Leary, Dale Barnes ... can be motivated for another term of '2 years nothing' which in fact would make the complete concept of an FTSC useless.

Thank you for bringing me further insight into the internal mechanisms of the FTSC. I really do appreciate having someone provide me with much-needed knowledge.

To be clear, I was not referencing your use of the ZCC nomination clause. I agree, there wouldn't be enough candidates (especially after the first one withdrew) if you hadn't done that.

I was commenting about what is visible to the 'public', in this echo, after that nomination. After all, this is the only source of current information
upon which to make a choice about a current election.

You should not be questioning me for my motives to keep the FTSC as a functional body, instead you should be questioning all the RCs (minus Jay Harris) why they are sitting on their asses and not thinking about the continuity ...

2 weeks into the voting period of 3 weeks with the ballot closing like 7 days from now, Andrew recorded 16 votes out of 34 RCs listed. Isn't that worrysome? Some will still roll-in, but nevertheless ...

I agree with you once again on this point. It is a little discouraging to see apathy from the very people for which this election matters. But, this isn't exactly fresh news. It happens in real life, too, where voter numbers aren't anywhere close to maximum.

Remember, I do not run this election ... I'm an "interrested
bystander".

A little *too* interested, in my opinion...

"Daddy, what did you do during the war?"

Um...what? (o_O)
I'm Gen X. My daddy was a letter in someone's pocket during The War. Oh, wait...which war did you mean? There's so many, these days! (o_O)

I really think this particular discussion should take place via Netmai as I suggested. This is definitely straying far off the topic that I h brought up.

Not my monkey, not my circus. You started this. Write echomail, I will reply in echomail. Write netmail and ...

Okay, but does that mean there is a monkey and circus that ARE yours? Somehow, I feel like you would make a great clown! (o_-)

I also feel like some would say the same about me, but that *is* my monkey, my circus, and not yours.

Okay, McDoob...time for bed...you've had enough...

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may also have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.

While I concur that probably quite a number of sysops even are
able to provide an intelligent vote on the subject, I don't think
that should materialise for the simple reasons that it's not a
popularity poll and this is a technical mandate only...

Upon further thought, that actually does make sense.

For the first time in many many FTSC-elections there are
competent candidates, nothing but competent candidates. In the
past there have been nominations for pure political reasons, or
to make certain there was a balance between Z1 and Z2 standing
members while that is totally irrelevant, or simply to upset or
annoy an opponent, etc... No political shit-show this time ...

Agreed and more sense. Careful, you don't want to make that a habit.

Plus, a full nodelist-wide election (in my opnion) would make
this way too top-heavy for its intended purpose....

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

The FTSC itself decides upon that "intra muros". Check
'www.ftsc.org' to find the procedures ...

Good, thanks.

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).

Has your quest for knowledge been satisfied or do you need
Gandalf's number?

I already have him on speed-dial, of course, and yes, my quest is
satisfied. For now. ;-)


... A woman drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?

(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).

As would I. I am very concerned about the way this document is
currently being interpreted.

Well, there's nothing very new about different interpretations of P4.
Been going on for decades. Still has a LONG way to go before reaching
the seniority of how the U.S. Constitution is similar. :-)

Perhaps masterful documents are that way by nature...?



... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Shaun,

I feel like you would make a great clown! (o_-)

Being a great clown is not easy, I think it is a difficult job...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Dan,

Agreed and more sense. Careful, you don't want to make that a habit.

Indeed ... Someone must protect my reputation, thank you for reminding me and keeping me on the right track ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

Re: 2022 FTSC Standing Member Election - Votes Received
By: Björn Felten to Sam Penwright on Mon Mar 07 2022 07:15 am

Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.

You are. Well, if your RC does his job, that is...

..

They do. I saw netmail fly through for 1:275 nodes some 2 weeks or so ago? Also vote stats in our region echo. It's a little funny in that we all voted publically (an option there). So far, unanimous response sent in from R13 members to our RC. Vote is by node now here in R13.

xxcarol
PS: I saw the Z2 RC vote here on the 28th too. I can backtrack on my 1:275/1000 node for paths if not already resolved.

--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
* Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)

Well, there's nothing very new about different interpretations of P4. Been going on for decades. Still has a LONG way to go before reaching the seniority of how the U.S. Constitution is similar. :-)

Perhaps masterful documents are that way by nature...?

Huh...may be...certainly food for thought...

McDoob
SysOp, PiBBS
pibbs.sytes.net

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: PiBBS (1:229/110)

Perhaps masterful documents are that way by nature...?

Huh...may be...certainly food for thought...

If you see the writing and style and artistry of the US Declaration of Independance ... that stuff is not written anymore today.

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary
for one people to dissolve the political bands which have
connected them with another

It's just perfect ... I think it's even possible to put it to music, so well distributed and rithmic ...

\%/@rd

--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)

----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 17 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 19 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 13 | |
----------------------------------------------

Ballots Received
----------------

RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12
RC41
RC29
RC57
RC31
RC92
RC80
RC13
RC90
RC17
RC11
RC40
RC34
RC54
RC20
RC16

Regards,

Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)