NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/misc/emergse/5704

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-06 | 3.2 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!nwnexus!remote!UUCP
From: [e-mail] (David Stark)
Newsgroups: misc.emerg-services
Subject: Private messages and flames
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 17:54:00 -0800
Sender: [e-mail]
Lines: 58

 > From: [e-mail] (Ian J Gardner)

 > So, let's hear it - Fido people, CAN you send personal email?  If

    Yes and no.  Fidonet does include that capability.  In fact, it was
the original basis of the network; echomail came later.

    However, in Fidonet the individual node picks up the operating cost,
including long distance phone charges if any, wear and tear on their own
personal computer system and, in many areas, cost sharing for the
distribution of echomail traffic.

    Some Fidonet regions allow and encourage the private email (called
"Netmail" in Fidospeak) to be routed along with the echomail.  Other
regions and some individual systems require that Netmail be sent direct
to the receiving system at the expense of the sender.

    The situation develops two more complications at this point.  One is
the private Sysop like myself who may have no BBS users and must decide
whether a particular message is worth the long distance cost to send it.
(In my case, we can route our Netmail through the area server, so that
cost is not an issue. It is elsewhere.)  He then has two options.  He
can send the message direct at his own LD expense, or he can reply in
the echomail conference where the conversation started.

    The other complication is the full BBS with multiple users having
access to echomail conferences.  A very large number of Fidonet boards
do not allow users access to Netmail.  The ONLY way they have to
communicate via Fidonet with other users is via public echomail in the
conferences. The reasons for this denial of access vary.  In areas where
all Netmail must be sent direct, the Sysop is under no obligation to
allow his users to run up his phone bill.

    This is not a huge problem within Fidonet, since we all pretty much
know the situation.  A conference Moderator may encourage participants
in particularly long discussions to "take it to Netmail", but there is
really nothing anyone can do if those people can't get access to
Netmail.  The real problem occurs in conferences that are gated to other
networks with differing operating styles.

    That is the case with FIRENET, which is not only gated to
misc.emerg.services but to other networks and newsgroups across the
Internet. People in CEMS-L have posted messages complaining about all of
the non-EMS messages, believing incorrectly that they are participating
in an all-EMS newsgroup.

    Members of a particular network or newsgroup who have a problem
with the content of messages coming across from other networks or
newsgroups should be encouraged to contact their own network
administrators.  Those people are the ones responsible for agreeing to
the gateway arrangements and for ensuring compliance with network
policies. They are also the ones who should be handling the complaints.

    Anyone wishing to continue a private email discussion of these
issues can reach me at [e-mail]

 * Origin: URMCFB Captain (1:2613/322)