BBS: TELESC.NET.BR Assunto: Re: #1 in Google De: Ward Dossche Data: Sat, 14 Mar 2026 14:20:10 +0100 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dan, DC> Of course it opens up other issues... So the requirement for an FTSC DC> member to be a nodelisted sysop is "met" by doing this, but it's really DC> not a true/honest representation. He's *NOT* a nodelisted sysop, but DC> this allows him to be on the FTSC anyway. Does that seem right? If the requirement is to be nodelisted, then in his case the requirement is fullfilled. Yes. DC> I see your reasoning to some extent, because we probably shouldn't lose DC> the FTSC because of a 40-year-old obsolete document. The requirement is not in P4 but in the FTSC-charter which previously had a higher number of required participants but had to be lowered down more than once in view of declining numbers and competence on my suggestion. Please remark, "I" do not change these numbers, it is an FTSC-decision. The nomination was not based on competence. I remember Carol once nominating someone because there would be an imbalance of Z1-members versus Z2. Total nonse of cours ... even Sean Dennis got nominated and elected at one point for crying out loud. DC> Here's an honest question - why can't P4 be changed? What's stopping DC> that from happening? Or is this FTSC requirement defined in the FTSC DC> "charter" (if that's the right word), rather than in P4? What I'm DC> getting at is how can the minimum number of FTSC members be DC> changed/reduced to avoid having to resort to Nodelist fuckery to DC> "illegally" keep it alive? Again, these are serious questions, if you DC> don't mind answering them. Thanks in advance. I think I cleared up the requirement issue, so did Michiel, it is an FTSC-decision. It would have been so easy to let the FTSC collapse, but I respect Andrew Leary a lot and he wants to attempt to keep it going, So who am I (or anybody else) to not allow him that opportunity? The real challenge is going to come next year when the mandates of Andrew Leary, Deon George, Tim Schattkowsky, and Jason Bock expire. 4 out of 5 ... will they still be available and willing? It is up to the FTSC, I think, to decide in the coming year which direction this story takes... As for changing P4, it has been attempted in the past and while technically feasable it was then viewed as a Z2-thing to grab power ... Aaahhh ... the 'power' in Fidonet ... I wish people one day would understand there is no power. The attempted changes were bare-minimum and the procedure was run 100% as described in P4. It eventually came down to a disturbing situation and depended upon one single RC to vote against or in favor ... again, we were talking here about nothing basic nor dramatic. Eventually that RC voted against and when I asked "why?" the answer was "Because I could" ... After an effort which took weeks/months I lost my appetite to try again. \%/@rd --- DB4 - 20230201 * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854) ----------------------------------------------------------- [Voltar]