Volume 8, Number 14 8 April 1991 +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | _ | | / \ | | /|oo \ | | - FidoNews - (_| /_) | | _`@/_ \ _ | | FidoNet (r) | | \ \\ | | International BBS Network | (*) | \ )) | | Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// | | / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / | | (________) (_/(_|(____/ | | (jm) | +---------------------------------------------------------------+ Editor in Chief: Vince Perriello Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings Copyright 1991, Fido Software. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact Fido Software. FidoNews is published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet (r) International Amateur Electronic Mail System. It is a compilation of individual articles contributed by their authors or authorized agents of the authors. The contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the rights of the authors. You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from node 1:1/1. 1:1/1 is a Continuous Mail system, available for network mail 24 hours a day. Fido and FidoNet are registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of Fido Software, Box 77731, San Francisco CA 94107, USA and are used with permission. Opinions expressed in FidoNews articles are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Editor or of Fido Software. Most articles are unsolicited. Our policy is to publish every responsible submission received. Table of Contents 1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1 WorldPol ... A good excuse to start on Policy6 ........... 1 2. ARTICLES ................................................. 5 WorldPol is no nonsense .................................. 5 WorldPol: Not Perfect, but the Best so Far ............... 11 Zone 1 Echomail Coordinator Election ..................... 12 R U Canajan Eh? The CanaChatter Echo .................... 13 Zone 1 FidoCon '91 Update ................................ 15 The Unfulfilled Promise of Fidonet ....................... 22 3. LATEST VERSIONS .......................................... 27 Latest Software Versions ................................. 27 And more! FidoNews 8-14 Page 1 8 Apr 1991 ================================================================= EDITORIAL ================================================================= For the past two weeks I have been trying to figure out just how to tell you what I think about the new Policy proposal. The exact method that would best serve my need to get it all off my chest, and your need to figure out whether my comments were best ignored or heeded. Before I push you to the point of making that decision regarding my words, please at least heed this advice: read the proposed Policy carefully, read the Policy it replaces, and do some "what if" scenarios. Consider some situations where someone was kept from doing something by present Policy; determine whether you feel that person should be able to do that thing; see if the new Policy addresses it. Consider the additional freedom of action offered by the new Policy. Good or Bad? Look at what effect the changes will have on the day-by-day operation of the net. Do they seem to be positive or negative? Discuss it with others. Pass on your advice to your NC. Be a part of this process. OK. Thanks. Now I'll cut to the chase. Worldpol seems to me to be a well-intentioned effort to correct a few perceived flaws in Policy 4. For some reason, the resultant document seems to have basically started from a blank sheet of paper, without considering the reason for any of those sections of Policy 4 which demonstated those perceived flaws. Without going completely Luddite on you, let me still point out that Policy1-Policy4 seem to have been a fairly good set of rules. After all, they got us here. I don't see why all of a sudden the entire fabric needed to be torn out in favor of a new one. Perhaps I'm just not farsighted enough. Hell, some mornings I can't even remember the name of the kid who played Pugsley. Right up front, let me tell you what the biggest problem with this document is. There are a lot of noises swirling around these days with words like "liability" and "punitive damages" in them. This document blows enough of the structure of FidoNet away to make a number of lawyers very rich and send a few coordinators to a new home in a cardboard box. The fact that it was written by a person for whom English is a second language (although his command of it is better than many Americans of my acquaintance) really doesn't hold a single drop of water in a court of law. To add to this problem, the disclaimer stating that fact is in a section that will be deleted should the vote be in favor of ratification. Sic transit NC's. FidoNews 8-14 Page 2 8 Apr 1991 Next problem: the concept of "areas" is diluted to the point of being meaningless. This works great in combination with another feature which I'll address in a minute. But for now, consider this: there is nothing in Worldpol to keep someone from being RC of every region in a Zone. All that person has to do is maintain a node in every region, which is perfectly allowable under the new Policy -- and that makes him/her part of the "area" which she/he would be coordinating, and eligible for election. Yeah, sure, that could never happen. And O-rings never burn through and the Libyans are only manufacturing pharmaceuticals. How about the local net policies? Did anyone notice that local net policy is not subordinate to regional policy? But the RC has to deal with policy disputes. Now that's fair, isn't it? Harry has already mentioned a number of the things that bother me most about this one. I'll bet anyone five dollars that there will be at least one white-only net in North America by the end of the year if this policy passes. I'll bet anyone ten dollars that Zone 4 will have communists-not-allowed nets and regions in less time than that. Would the Z4C care to comment on whether Cubans should be allowed in FidoNet? And how convenient it will be to have a policy that lets you tell them where to stick their modems? Has anyone heard from Russia recently, and will prospective members of FidoNet have to show a prison tattoo or a burned-up party card to join? What is a Western-style democracy for the purposes of Worldpol? The United States? Let's put that to the test. I'll send in a voter registration form to Duluth, Minnesota. I'll say that while I actually live and work in New Hampshire, I like Minnesota best and I want to vote and pay taxes there. I bet New Hampshire will go along with it, too. Here's another thing: There is a substantial body of legislation and judicial action which helps to dampen the "tyranny of the majority" in the United States. This takes the form of representation in local governments by the minority party, affirmative action quotas, and many other things which if just left to a popular vote would probably fail resoundingly. Ask the people of Boston or Yonkers if they favor busing. If the United States worked like Worldpol, there would be no such thing. If not the United States, then perhaps El Salvador? Haiti? Cuba? (Forget I said Cuba, I just remembered that Communists live there) This is an important point. You can't just say "Western standards" and expect that to suffice. FidoNews 8-14 Page 3 8 Apr 1991 Worldpol says that FidoNews is the official newsletter. It says that members of an area (whatever that is) can vote not to receive it. Did anyone mention that since FidoNews is the official newsletter, the *C is liable in any case involving prior notice, if FidoNews was not provided? If the person who did not receive that prior notice (and because of the "official newsletter" clause, FidoNews is the only place that has any legal standing) in FidoNews wasn't in favor of dropping it, the *C loses and some lawyer gets rich. Why didn't the authors didn't put something in Worldpol saying that I didn't have to accept FidoNews submissions from an area that has voted not to receive it? After all, why should the rest of the net have to pay to move, or to read, something submitted by someone who never intends to read it her/himself? Most of my other objections have been voiced equally well or better by others. I'm glad to be able to say that. I'm not a lone voice in the wilderness. Perhaps I'm one of a few hundred such voices, but I suspect the real numbers are very different. Hello, Jack? Jack Decker? I have an answer to your question from last week. Why weren't people such as myself involved in the effort to pull Worldpol from the ashes of Policy4? Perhaps because unlike yourself, we saw no ashes. There is some need for improvement in the document, but it neither needs nor deserves to be discarded just because you and a few dozen others don't understand why it is the way it is. Discussions leading to corrective surgery would have garnered a great deal more interest from myself and others than what we observed to be the case: the proposition that the basis of FidoNet's "new world order" was the scrapping of previous documents and a fresh start with fresh minds, unencumbered by outmoded views. In other words, smart young turks at work, old fogies stay out! So many of us did (BTW, Harry asks me to note that he sent comments after each published revision to his NC, RC and ZC). Since the net continued to work all the time you guys were plugging away at this, we figured there was no need to fix anything right away. I still feel that way. Almost. I think that Worldpol needs a LOT of fixing before it should be adopted. Democracy in FidoNet is a great idea. But just like every great thing, it's best in moderation. Worldpol proposes too much of that good thing. We'll all get tummy aches if we have it. Worldpol is not a keeper. Throw it back and let it mature a bit. FidoNews 8-14 Page 4 8 Apr 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 5 8 Apr 1991 ================================================================= ARTICLES ================================================================= Folks Who Oppose Democracy In FidoNet Are Nervous But... WORLDPOL IS NO NONSENSE A lot has been said about WorldPol. Both recently and before. WorldPol was first released in October of 1989 and published on FidoNews. Since then, all comments by anyone interested were happily received and considered. The document was re-released in 7 other opportunities as changes were been proposed and critics were made. All versions have been published on FidoNews. It is the first time in FidoNet history that a policy document is written by the network's sysops and not just by coordinators. The first time that anybody interested was able to participate and actually invited to do so. It is the first time that democracy is proposed for FidoNet. In an article by Harry Lee on a past number of FidoNews, he says that WorldPol changes too many things at one time. Whereas it's a fact that many things are changed, I can well sit and argue if it's really "too many things". I would rather say "many", but never "too many". The comparison of WorldPol and Policy4 as two mailers with different codes and different protocols does only to the purpose of creating a bigger confusion. Things are not really like that. And the contradiction comes later in the same text: the author subsequently claims that WorldPol uses a lot of Policy4 wording, which is true. Policy4 besides being an evolution of Policy3 as Harry likes to say, is also a degeneration of the latter. How did the authors know that FidoNet (and by that I refer to "the sysops members of FidoNet") wanted a system of elections analogous of the most popularly known dictatorial regimes in the world? Yes, that's what Policy4 proposes: John ZC elects Jim RC, Peter RC and Paul RC. And then Jim RC, Peter RC and Paul RC elect John ZC! Added to this is the fact that then Jim RC, Peter RC and Paul RC go and choose their respective regions' NCs. In between, where are the FidoNet sysops? They are right there: forgotten and ignored. But according to those that defend Policy4, the poor sysops like to be forgotten and ignored! Excusez-moi, but I simply don't buy that. Democracy is probably the point that, along with "geography", doesn't let WorldPol's most staunch opponents sleep at night. So let's talk about "geography:" I am not a supporter of non-geographic nets and never was. In Zone-4, where I belong, there aren't any non-geographic networks at all. FidoNews 8-14 Page 6 8 Apr 1991 But I know very well that across the Ocean, in Europe, things are different. The two biggest regions there: Holland and Germany, have non-geographic nets. Should I, from Buenos Aires, tell the guys in Antwerpen and Hamburg that what they do is wrong? I rather chose to sit and watch. It is their experience and if they do it that way, it's maybe because that is the best for them. It does not and will not in any way, harm the rest of FidoNet... So why should I complain? Why should anyone complain? I will probably support establishing geographic restrictions in Zone-4, when we write our Zone policy. I believe it will be better that way for us but why in the world should I pretend to indicate somebody thousands of miles away what to do? Telling many strangers what to do is it precisely what Policy4 intends to do, and unquestionably fails. Policy4 is not enforced in many parts around the world because it is unenforceable! And this does not only refer to smallZone-4, it also refers to Zone-2, Zone-5 and Zone-6. Not aiming at describing all the reasons why Policy4 is not fully enforced worldwide, let me just mention a few assorted examples: . Zone-2: overlapping nets, according to geography, in several regions. . Zone-4: we don't use English for any of our 'official stuff' as we use instead Spanish and Portuguese. All the coordinators are elected by the common sysops, not appointed as Policy4 establishes. . Zone-5: single-node regions because of political motivations. . Zone-6: at least one region officially charges a fee to member sysops according to its regional policy document. One thing particularly annoying on the text by Harry Lee is when it says that "the problems with WorldPol are rooted in an absolute lack of understanding of history." I see it as a token of the arrogance used throughout the article to attack this independently-written policy proposal. As painful as it is to me, it gives those around me yet another reason to say that the fact that WorldPol emerges from the Third World goes along with the fact that Policy4 is yet another example of "imperialismo yanqui". No, I don't coincide with that point of view and will not. But it is sad that some people think that it is correct to impose procedures on others without bothering to inform themselves about what are the necessities of those others. Policy4 was written in North America by North Americans, and while Europeans did not participate or support it, we Latin Americans were denied a say. And Zone-4 did exist even before Policy4 was approved. FidoNews 8-14 Page 7 8 Apr 1991 I will refer quickly to the list of credits: ALL the persons that in one way or another -including Bill Bolton- contributed to the document, usually by questioning it and proposing changes, were listed. The reason why Thom Henderson, Harry Lee and maybe others were not included regards to the fact that the parts WorldPol have in common with Policy4 were extracted from "FidoNet's current policy document" and not from an article written by either of them. Policy4 does not indicate who wrote it and one is not supposed to know the list by heart. Let me now refer to a few other points made by Lee: - Different Social Orientation It is NOT true that WorldPol was written by a fundamentally different society, Zone-4. WorldPol contains input from people from all over the world. And that is surely more appropriate for an international network than a group just from North America. It is not a problem of "Zone sizes" as Europe played a big role on WorldPol development too. And there isn't a zone around the world containing so many countries and different languages as Zone-2. When Harry Lee says that Zone-4 is the writer of WorldPol he is just helping to confuse, because the statement is anything but reality. - A case of tail wagging the dog? Again, this is not a case of minority (Zone-4) trying to impose a document on the majority (Zone-1). Since the sysops without a coordinator title were never consulted in Zone-1 with regard to Policy, is he referring to a voteless majority? On the other hand and again I say it, even Zone-1 and Zone-3 are represented on WorldPol. And there is probably more from Zone-2 on WorldPol than from myself or others in Zone-4. FidoNet Latin America hasn't been around since the times of TJ's Fido version 8 but it has for almost four years. And Zone-4 has existed within FidoNet since before Policy4 was adopted. Now: is sustaining democratic values a symptom of adolescence? - Mediator Insanity The above referred title Mr. Lee has used is already prejudice. The mediation mechanisms proposed in WorldPol simply state that the natural mediator should be the coordinator of the smallest structure that contains accuser and accused. Is that so insane? Antidemocratic? Give me a break! FidoNews 8-14 Page 8 8 Apr 1991 - Coordinator Requirements Harry Lee poses a very significative question when referring to a supposed problem here: "what happens if a net sets up requirements that cannot be attained or sustained?" This simply shows how much he trusts the criteria of the common FidoNet sysop member. If a net's policy is written by the members of a net, would they self-impose unattainable or unsustainable requirements? Do you really believe this is likely to happen? - Elimination of FidoNews Requirement "The tyranny of the majority strikes again" he said, and I agree. Official notices, to my understanding, are published on the nodelist itself (on the nodediffs), which is mandatory. Problem with FidoNews: while it costs $0.30 a week to a sysop (*C) in Anytown,USA to get it, it costs $30 a week to a sysop in Lima,Peru, where international communication prices are now skyrocketing, and costs around $10 a week to a sysop (*C) in my own country or Brazil. I believe that in some countries in Eastern Europe, they don't even have direct-dial to the United States to be able to file request FidoNews if they wanted to. Some other sysop around there mentioned once that though he could dial direct to the United States, the telco bills him $30 for each minute. How can we dictate that every net in the world should spend that money for something apart from technical operation of the network? What happens if -like happened to us under hyperinflation a number of times- we simply can't afford it? Are we violating policy? Are we out? - Unanimous Election of IC Here's the requested explanation: The IC should be someone 'okay for all zones'. That's the purpose of the unanimous vote and the majority for removal. The ZCC acts as a council of Zone Coordinators. If there is no agreement, there is no IC and the ZCC is in charge. Having the IC as executive allows the possibility of not having to vote each decision that reaches the top of the coordinator structure. But he who decides must be an 'okay figure' to all the zones he represents. Remember that the ZCC members are the ones that process the nodelist and ultimately the network's highest authority. The IC coordinates ZCC work and executes what is decided at the top level, but -I hope it doesn't happen- if the ZCC decides to have no IC, it will have to determine how things work at that level and probably vote on each decision instead of letting an IC decide. FidoNews 8-14 Page 9 8 Apr 1991 - Transitional Problems I don't agree with Harry's claim that it created contradiction. WorldPol reads clearly: ---start of quote--- 7.3 Transition to a 'Worldwide Policy environment' After the approval of this Worldwide Policy, the previously existing policy will still be in effect for the Zone level until the approval of a new Zone policy, according to the methods provided in this document. All the procedures introduced by this Worldwide Policy document adjourn the procedures existing in the previous policy document. ---end of quote--- ... it says ALL the procedures ADJOURN the existing in the previous policy document. Clear as water. - Not Final And Yet We're Voting On It? You are voting on what you are reading. That leaves no doubts. This document is something concrete and, if approved, will probably be modified by the network's sysops in the future, as FidoNet progresses. This, according to the prescriptions on the document itself for updating. As final words, I would like to remind some, explain to others, that WorldPol is an independent effort originated in the need of a worldwide enforceable policy. This fact has been disregarded and ignored by much of the past and current individuals rejecting it nowadays. I don't know what will come up from the vote, but in one way or another, they know there is a group on FidoNet that advocates to democracy and the rights of every sysop in the network. These rights include the possibility of the groups of sysops in different parts of the world to organize and operate according to their customs and not to which some intend to dictate from some faraway place. This ideal, today expressed by the current policy proposal WorldPol, is likely to win. Sooner or later. The sooner, the better for FidoNet. Pablo Kleinman Democratically Elected Zone-4 Coordinator April 5, 1991 FidoNews 8-14 Page 10 8 Apr 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 11 8 Apr 1991 Alejandro Hopkins FidoNet 4:900/211.0 WORLDPOL: NOT PERFECT, BUT THE BEST SO FAR A very important discovery seems to have been made in FidoNet, and we have read a lot about it in the last three issues of FidoNews: WORLDPOL ISN'T PERFECT. Gee, you don't need to be Stephen Hawking to find that out: I could have told you. WorldPol is far from perfect, but it's also far better than Policy 4, and that's what counts in the current situation. It was written to change the aspects of the Policy 4 administration that require immediate solution, not to be THE policy document until the end of times. That's why it makes it much easier for the ones proposing new policy documents to get them voted. It was very tough to get WorldPol voted: we had to beat the whole boureaucracy intalled by Policy 4. If WorldPol doesen't become Policy 5, people proposing other documents will have the same trouble that we overcame. And they might not be that lucky. There are some things in WorldPol that may need changing. The language IS vague, granted. It's a pity that nobody pointed that out before the final version was released for vote. Maybe point operators should be considered different from other users, and maybe there's no such thing as a "Western Democracy". What won't change in OUR Policy 6 project is the base of WorldPol: democratic and universal vote. But that might not be so in other Policy 6 proposals. If the majority of the network doesen't want to vote, then be it. Some say it will be difficult to count the votes of the whole network. That is (at least) a silly argument. I remember having voted on the IFNA affair, and no big problems arised. Democracy should be the next step in the evolution of FidoNet. It's strange that it will come so late in an organization that was born in America. Maybe that's because people there are so used to democracy, that they fail to understand how vital it is. You have to lose it to really know how much it's worth. I lived in a non-democratic regime for too long, and now that we regained democracy in our country, I'd like to have it in FidoNet, too. Let's give it a shot, OK? ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 12 8 Apr 1991 Zone 1 Echomail Coordinator Election Final Results George Peace 1:1/0 We finally made it to the end of the Z1EC election. I learned a little more about "democracy" in FidoNet. I certainly hope the experience was one of growth. Here are the final votes by region: Davis Nissan None Other Region ----- ----- ----- ----- 10 11 2 1 - 11 36 - - - 12 - 2 - - 13 11 2 3 - 14 3 4 - 1 15 3 2 - - 16 11 - - - 17 4 - - - 18 3 71 - - 19 50 4 - - total 132 87 4 1 Congratulations to Tony Davis, our new Zone 1 EchoMail Coordinator. I once again extend my sincere Thanks to all Z1EC candidates for your continuing efforts on all our behalf. Rick McWilliams, outgoing Z1EC, deserves credit and praise for all that he accomplished behind the scenes as Z1EC. Thanks! Peace to All, George ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 13 8 Apr 1991 Joe Lindstrom 1:134/55 @FidoNet 99:9305/55 @EggNet 201:5500/55 @MetroNet The CanaChatter Echo ==================== Some time ago, we began an echo conference with the tagname CANACHAT. The idea was a general-discussion echo, but with a topic of "Canada" (you know, that wasteland to the north?). Pretty much anything is acceptable, just so long as it has something to do with the Great White North. Conversations have ranged from the Gulf War (and Canada's rather limited partici- pation in it) to capital punishment to Star Trek. Barring the latter topic, the signal-to-noise ratio is quite high and I think you will find it an excellent forum to air your views and to debate others on theirs. This echo, up until now, has been essentially a private echo with my system as the top-star. A few systems have been polling me regularly for this and other echoes, and we have managed to build quite a following. However, as traffic levels increased, so did phone bills for the systems pulling it in directly from my system. I have in mind, specifically, Russell McOrmond of 1:163/109 and Richard Hatfield of 1:342/16, who have spent some hard-earned CanuckBucks so that they and their Nets could participate. In Russell's case, he was in turn feeding other nets, so he was sending traffic two ways. So we decided to go to the backbone. My primary concern here was the fact that FidoNet isn't the only network that is carrying this echo. After speaking with John Souvestre, the REC for Region 19, about this at length, we now feel that the time is right. With John's help, we've managed to jump through all the required hoops, including listing the echo in ELIST and getting the support of two REC's. In short, the echo may be on the backbone by the time you read this. I've had several sysops in the U.S. netmail me in regards to getting a connection to CanaChatter. I'm sorry to all of you that wrote and didn't get a reply back from me: had I done so, my local phone company would probably have sent me a letter of sincere thanks! They'd address it to the poorhouse... anyways, the response has been rather overwhelming. I've had letters from Canadians who are now living in the U.S. and want CANACHAT on their systems, sort of as a link "back home". One fella who wrote me was doing so on behalf of a couple of users of his, and goodness knows how they found out about the echo. They wanted it, he couldn't care less but could I connect him? FidoNews 8-14 Page 14 8 Apr 1991 Hopefully this new backbone linkup will solve all of these problems, and alleviate some rather expensive weekly connections for Richard and Russell. A tip of the toque to you both for making CANACHAT what it is today! I should also point out that CANACHAT will be available to you folks in OtherNets (TM) via authorized zonegates. Systems in either EggNet or MetroNet may optionally come straight to my system (if they can handle the expensive of 20-40 messages a day), I am "zone-gating" the echo to these two nets already and adding you will be a simple matter. It will, however, be cheaper for you and technically simpler if you can get the echo via a closer echo hub. A final few words on the echo itself: although I was the original moderator of the echo, I've passed that duty on to those better able to monitor it on a daily basis. Since Canada has two official languages, English and French, CANACHAT has two official moderators, one for each language. Messages in either language are ACCEPTABLE (note that this is one of the few backbone echoes where this holds true). Your CANACHAT moderators are: English/Anglais: Racey Sealock of/du 1:134/42 99:9305/42 201:5500/42 French/Francais: Peter Donald of/du 1:249/126 We hope to see you there! [~] Sarek [~] ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 15 8 Apr 1991 FidoCon '91 Committee @Fidonet 1:1/91 FidoCon '91 August 16th through 18th, 1991 1:1/91@Fidonet {or something like that} FidoCon '91 Membership P.O. Box 486 Louisville, CO 80027 Contact telephone (303) 426-1847 FidoCon '91 VIP Membership $104 US* Banquet 25 US === $94 US * After July 15, $169 *NEW* A "No Frills", good from 9am to 6pm, for Seminar and Dealers Rooms ONLY membership (no Convention Hospitality Suite access or ticket for the SuperSystem Drawing) is available for $45 US for the three days or $20 US per day. Full credit can be applied to a VIP membership if you elect to upgrade. *NEW* A "Supporting Membership" for those unable to attend, is available for $25 US. Supporting members Will receive the progress reports and program book. Hotel: Sheraton Lakewood 690 Union Blvd Lakewood, CO (303) 987-2000 Rooms: Single/Double $59 US per night Adjoining Rooms (Pseudo-Suite) 118 US Triple/Quad 78 US Adjoining Rooms (Pseudo-Suite) 156 US Suites from 450 US FidoCon '91 is a limited attendance event. Guests of Honor: Tom Jennings -- FidoCon '91 Guest of Honor Tim Pozar -- Gateway Guru FidoNews 8-14 Page 16 8 Apr 1991 Ray Gwinn -- The Fossil master his self Vince Perriello -- President of Bit Bucket Software & publisher of FidoNews. Alan Applegate -- VICE-President of Bit Bucket, Writer of the infamous Binkley Docs & Technical Support for eSoft. Bob Hartman -- From Bloom County to you. Phil Becker -- CEO of eSoft .. publisher of TBBS/TDBS/TIMS Steve Jackson -- CEO of Steve Jackson Games .. Publisher of GURPS CYBERPUNK and center of Secret Service attention for over 8 months. John Perry Barlow -- Internet Guru, one of the founders of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Guests of Dishonor: Terry Travis -- Vince and Alan's prime target in the SYSOP Mud pie Fight Those indicating they will be attending: Tom Tcimpids Several notable writers of computer columns Several popular Science fiction authors Mitch Kapor Founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation Invited and not yet committed: Steve Wozniack The WOZ, one of the founders of Apple Convention Hospitality Suite by: Kevin "DOC" McNeil and the FidoNet COOKING echo {newsgroup} Featuring: Seadog Casserole, Zip-Tarts, Pak-Man Cookies, Roast Opus Paid Memberships: George Peace & Steve Jackson Christine Keefer Charlie Bass Eric L. Smith & Rodney A. Aloia Diane B. Smith Girard Westerberg Marshall Barry & Daniel D. Segard Michelle Weisblat Russell Anderson Jim Burt & Brian P. Bartee Karen Burt Tom Jennings Scott Munhollon & Ray Gwinn Tammy Munhollon Tim Pozar Peter N. White & Terry Travis Cheryl Gordon Phil Becker FidoNews 8-14 Page 17 8 Apr 1991 Thomas Pat Nefos & Bob Hartman Judy Nefos Alan Applegate Peter Stewart & Chris Anderson Michele Hamilton Jeff P. Brothers Daniel L. Bonner & Andrew Milner Linda L. Bonner James F. Smith Terry N. Rune' & Joaquim Homrighausen Wayne A. Rune' Joe Dehn James H. Dunmyer & Bruce H. Kirschner Janice L. Dunmyer Ken Zen Mike Ratledge & Ben Cunningham Donna Ratledge John P. Roberts Jr. Michael Kanavy & Chris Rand Elizabeth Kanavy Norman B. Henke Bob Whiston & Stanley A. Hirschman Cheryl Whiston John R. Souvestre William M. Van Glahn & Steven L. Rusboldt Janet Van Glahn Emmitt W. A. Dove Sam Saulys George R. Cornell Bill Bacon Zhahai Stewart Michael Pratt John Johnson Brenda Donovan Ed Moore Mike Eckles Don Marquart Jeff Tensly Thomas Lange Attending Banquet Jim Burt & Charlie Bass Karen Burt Rodney A. Aloia Peter N. White & Girard Westerberg Cheryl Gordon Daniel D. Segard Daniel L. Bonner & Russell Anderson Linda L. Bonner Brian P. Bartee James H. Dunmyer & Jeff P. Brothers Janice L. Dunmyer Andrew Milner Mike Ratledge & James F. Smith Donna Ratledge Joaquim Homrighausen Michael Kanavy & Ben Cunningham Elizabeth Kanavy John P. Roberts Jr. William M. Van Glahn & Norman B. Henke Janet Van Glahn Tom Jennings FidoNews 8-14 Page 18 8 Apr 1991 Marshall Barry & Phil Becker Michelle Weisblat Bob Hartman John R. Souvestre John Johnson Brenda Donovan Ed Moore Don Marquart Alan Applegate Tim Pozar Ray Gwinn Seminars: Surviving Government Scrutiny The Ultimate BBS/BBSing in the future. Network evolution TBBS\TDBS\TIMS Getting the most from BinkleyTerm AMAX made easy Gateways - the internetwork connection Dealing with SYSOP burnout BBSing in the 90's and beyond The Ethical Software Hacker For this I gave up my Love Life? How to moderate an Echo Copyrights demystified Software Development Roundtable DOS 4/5, Windows Developers Roundtable Modem Roundtable file your own copyrights for $10 XRS/RAX/QMX/SeX/XOR/OREO /MORE Association of Shareware XRS (the Universal Off-Line Reader Editor Professionals BBS Role Playing Gaming Forum Promoting your BBS BBS Business Sense Network Ethics BBS Users Groups Activities: TBBS Users Group will be convening as FidoTUG '91 during the convention. AlterCon will be sharing the facilities. FidoNews 8-14 Page 19 8 Apr 1991 AlterNet Costume Banquet Royal Court Meeting of the Dukes Fun Activities: Traditional Hard Diskus Throw Floppy Fling The Big Three Brewery Bash National SYSOP Mud Pie Fight Air Force Academy Tour Garden of the Gods Psychic and Physical Tours Golfing Tours of of Colorful Colorado Colorado We are scheduling additional seminars and social activities. Fire off a message letting us know what you'd like to see and do. If you would like to see someone special, let us know as well. *** FidoCon '91 Dealers Room will be open from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm *** Friday and Saturday, 9:00 am to 3:00 pm Sunday Manufacturers Invited: AAC Telecomm Adaptec, Inc. Alloy Computer Products, Inc. American MiTAC Corporation Anchor Automation Artisoft AST Research, Inc. ATI Technologies Inc. Bit Bucket Software BIX Borland Chesterfield Financial Corp. Clark Development Company, Inc Coconut Computing, Inc. Compucom Connect Tech, Inc DigiBoard Everex Systems, Inc. Fujitsu Galacticomm, Inc. Gates Distributing GVC Technologies Inc. GW Associates Hayes Microcomputer Products Hitachi Microcom, Inc. Microsoft Motorola Computer Group Multi-Tech Systems, Inc. Online Communications, Inc. Practical Peripherals Prodigy Services Quarterdeck Office Systems Searchlight Software Supra Corporation Surf Computer Services System Enhancement Associates Telebit Corporation U.S. Robotics, Inc. VSI Telecommunications, Inc. Western Digital Zoom Telephonics, Inc. Confirmed dealers Bit Bucket Software CDB Systems eSoft Mustang Software, Inc. Drawings & Prizes Including: FidoNews 8-14 Page 20 8 Apr 1991 16 Line TBBS/TDBS/TIMS Sysop Dream SYSTEM CPU with a 486 or a 386, at least 3/4 Gig disk, 16 ports and several modems .. depending on number of attendees. A portion of the memberships go to purchasing this system. Autographed copies of the books that made Steve Jackson a household name, GURPS CYBERPUNK. For the SYSOP that has everything 300 baud acoustic Sysop Nightmare System All kinds of donated equipment and software, some even working. Hospitality Suites eSoft Bit Bucket Software More as it comes to being. Subscribe to the FIDOCON_91 Echo. This will be THE BBSing Event of '91, BE THERE. ================== FidoCon '91 Registration Form ================ Name: ___________________________________________________________ Street Address: _________________________________________________ City: ________________________ State/Province: __________________ Postal Code: ________________________ Country: __________________ Voice #: ___________ Data #: ______________ Net Address: ________ Name: ______________________ Membership Type: _____ Amount: _____ Name: ______________________ Membership Type: _____ Amount: _____ No. of T-Shirts: ___ Sizes(S/M/L/XL): _______ @ $15/ea = _____ Complaints (Print): ______ Banquet Tickets: ___ @ $25/ea = _____ TOTAL $ _____ Visa/Mastercard Number _____________________ Expire Date: _______ Signature: _______________________ Date: ________ Please make checks payable (in U.S.A. Dollars) to FIDOCON '91 and Mail To: FidoCon '91, P.O. Box 486, Louisville, CO 80027-0486 FidoNews 8-14 Page 21 8 Apr 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 22 8 Apr 1991 Jack Decker 1:154/8 Fidonet The Unfulfilled Promise of Fidonet I guess in some ways this article is my "one last attempt" to try and explain some things about Fidonet that have bothered me for a long time. I've been in Fidonet for a few years now, and have observed certain things that continue to happen even though, in my opinion, they are destructive to our hobby. This is not my "farewell to Fidonet" but in some ways it comes close. My role in Fidonet henceforth will be much lower key, unless something happens to cause me to take much greater interest. One thing I have noticed is that from time to time we quietly lose some good people. They just can't put up will all the B.S. anymore so they either leave Fidonet or quietly retire to the sidelines. Nobody seems to care. I can understand why these people leave. You can only beat your head against a stone wall for so long before you decide that the wall isn't going to move, and you might as well get on with more profitable (and less painless!) pursuits. Unfortunately, there are also those people who, in my opinion, do things that are more destructive than helpful for Fidonet. I won't name names, but some of them seem to have been around nearly forever, and haven't changed their opinions much in that time. What bugs me is that Fidonet has so much potential, but in most cases it's underutilized. Take a look at the echo conferences. In many of them, you have at least a 50% signal to noise ratio (for every on-topic, well-thought-out, valuable message, there's at least one that is of no real use to anyone). Also, development of truly NEW technology in the net seems to have come to a standstill. I feel this is partly due to the proliferation of various software from different authors, coupled with a lack of clear, enforceable standards. It's no longer possible to pick a node from the nodelist at random, dial it with your mailer, and expect that 99.5% of the time you'll make a good connect. Three years ago, if you couldn't complete a mail session, it was most likely due to bad phone lines. Now many of the phone companies use all digital circuitry that has almost totally eliminated static and noise in many areas, but now our mailers have their little quirks that may keep them from talking to each other, unless the guy on the other end is running the exact same software you are. FidoNews 8-14 Page 23 8 Apr 1991 And once you've exchanged mail, the echomail scanners/tossers don't view it all the same way. Various software has its own little quirks that in many cases cause perfectly valid messages to be discarded as dupes. So, there is (in my opinion) an unacceptably high error rate in the system, mostly again because of a lack of any will to adhere to standards. You could blame the software developers for this, and in a few cases it is their fault (one author blatently refuses to even look at SEEN-BY lines when processing echomail, except to add a node to them, in violation of every accepted practice of echomail handling. Unfortunately, this author's software is used a lot in Fidonet). BUT, in most cases it's because we don't have a viable mechanism for reviewing and officially sanctioning new standards. In most cases the authors are doing things far ahead of existing standards, and each is doing their own thing, and it's just a happy coincidence if two pieces of software from different author happen to work together at anything more than the most basic level. In the meantime, mail is being lost, but it's no big deal, right?! And, our present technological level (that everyone accepts) still has plenty of limitations, many of which were originally due to political decisions rather than technical ones. In my opinion, political decisions should be enforced by the political types, and not by software. For example, in Fidonet there's no easy way to attach a file to a message and forward it through an intermediate system, NOT because software can't be written to do it (in fact we've developed much more kludgey ways to move files around) but because "way back when" some political types decided that files should not be forwarded... never mind that in certain instances (such as a local net or a private net), someone might actually be willing to allow forwarded files to pass through their system. And will we ever be able to use character sets other than English, or send graphics or even audio data as part of a message? I'll bet that some folks would love to have the capability to run BBS's that could actually support voice messaging in addition to written messages, especially within a local calling area, but the current Fidonet message formats won't accept such extensions and I see little hope of getting any real agreement on any new standards. How about interfacing Fidonet with FAX machines? During the recent experiment in sending messages to the troops in Saudi Arabia (which, you may note, had to be carried out in a private Fidonet-technology network due to Fidonet politics), only those with computer modems could participate. Wouldn't it have been nice if those with FAX machines could have dialed up a system and the Fidonet mailer would have recognized an incoming FAX transmission and accepted it, stored it, digitized and compressed it (possibly even using OCR techniques to convert typewritten documents to ASCII, and extract addressing information), and then sent it on to its destination, with FidoNews 8-14 Page 24 8 Apr 1991 minimal or no human intervention? Or maybe the reverse is possible - receive a message off the net and automatically forward it to a FAX machine in the local calling area. These types of challenges (designing the hardware and software to allow such things) would really excite some folks, but when you keep getting told "we don't do things that way and if you design such a system, nobody will use it, and you're some sort of real lowlife for even suggesting it", you soon figure out that there's better ways to spend your time. If you need an example of this, take a look at GroupMail. It really IS a superior system (to Echomail) for handling conferences (with one exception, that being a relatively low message size limit of 8K, but that could be gotten around, too). Between the folks who haven't looked at GroupMail since version 1.01 and therefore haven't the slightest notion of the current capabilities (but think they do), and those who had a grudge of some sort against the author, and the political types who didn't like it because geographic restrictions on where one obtained conferences couldn't be enforced, and those who simply didn't want to bother with it, it all but died in Fidonet. And we are all the poorer for it. Let me digress just a moment: Some people didn't like GroupMail because they felt it could be used for "censorship" by a conference moderator. Well, in the first place, there are times when removing one message from the message stream can save a whole lot of off-topic or flame messages that everyone has to pay for. Everyone (well, almost everyone) accepts the notion that a sysop can selectively remove messages from a local conference area on his BBS, but a good sysop rarely uses that ability. What is the difference if a conference moderator has that same ability, as long as they don't use it too often? And in the second place, censorship is alive and well in Fidonet. I hate to tell you folks this, but if you have opinions that are not "politically correct", you WILL be removed (or your speech severely restricted) from certain conferences. Don't believe it? Try espousing a politically conservative viewpoint in many conferences, and folks will be trying to get rid of you almost immediately. Or if you REALLY want to draw fire, just try explaining (not even necessarily advocating) the Biblical (fundamentalist) viewpoint on feminism or homosexuality. Unless you happen to follow your message with a strong denial ("this is what THEY believe and I totally reject it"), you'll have people calling for your head! The concept of "Freedom of Speech" in Fidonet is very, very sick... if you say the RIGHT (or, I should say, the left) things, you'll have folks defending your freedom of speech against all comers. Express an unpopular viewpoint, and suddenly an entirely different standard is applied ("this is a private echo, you have no freedom of speech here"). My point is that TRUE freedom of speech is a myth in Fidonet anyway, and it is less than honest to say that we shouldn't use certain software because it might make a conference moderator's job a bit easier. Once again, this is a political consideration and FidoNews 8-14 Page 25 8 Apr 1991 should be handled by political means, not by crippling the software we use. The whole real problem with Fidonet is that the politicians are making technical specs, and the software people are writing political considerations into the software. Let me give you just one example: Suppose that you are running a BBS, but for whatever reason you want to get your echo feeds from out of town and, as it happens, a different geographic reason. Now, if you are willing to be a point off of the system that feeds you, you can do that, but then you can't be listed in the nodelist. Or, if you are listed in the nodelist, your freedom to get echoes from wherever you want is restricted by policy. This is absolutely NUTS... in most cases, the folks making such decisions are not paying your phone bill, YOU are... and yet they come up with some of the stupidest reasons I've ever heard for maintaining geographic restrictions. If I were some of these folks, I'd be ashamed to show my ignorance in making some of the statements they've made in support of continued geographic restrictions. The most idiotic one I've heard goes something like this: If I have a system one block away from you, but for some reason I'm in a net from across the country (so my net host is a long distance call to you), then you have to make a long distance call to send me netmail. Now in the first place, who says you have a God-given right to send me netmail in the first place? But the fact is that any technically competent sysop can figure out how to bypass host routing and send mail direct, where it is less expensive to do so (and some of the folks making these statements definitely have been around long enough to know how to set up such routing), and besides, if I opt to be a point rather than a full node, not only will you have the same problem but you won't have the convenience of finding me in the nodelist. But what you are really saying to those in this situation is this: "You have no right to get your echomail from the most cost-effective source for you because I *MIGHT* - just *MIGHT*, mind you - decide to send you some netmail someday." How arrogant and selfish can you get? I just wish that those folks who were so defensive of freedom of speech were as concerned about freedom of association - that is, the right to sysops to associate with each other based on their wants and needs, and particularly on least-cost-routing concerns, and not because of the desires of some coordinator structure that can't understand topology unless it follows lines on a map (again, if I were that mentally incompetent, I'd be ashamed to admit it!). So what do we have? A network of several thousand nodes, but few high quality conferences. A network where certain political viewpoints are actively suppressed. A network where technology is stagnating because the politicians are trying to set technical restrictions, and the technically astute are given little say in setting new technical standards, which aren't enforced anyway. FidoNews 8-14 Page 26 8 Apr 1991 It seems as though there is a lack of balance in Fidonet. I would like to close with a thought adapted from a writer named Larry Johnson in a business publication I received recently. Mr. Johnson states that he believes in guidelines, standards, and accountability to authority, but he also believes in personal initiative, creativity, and resourcefulness. He then goes on to say: "These two basic aspects must be KEPT IN BALANCE. Lack of balance in either direction IS THE MARK OF IMMATURITY. Neither anarchy, nor dictatorship has been proven useful in the human endeavors OF ANY FIELD. That is true in religion, government, social fields, medicine,..." and, I might add, it certainly applies to Fidonet! Mr. Johnson then gives the following advice: "AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE people in any walk of life who encourage a state of either anarchy or dictatorship. I don't care how good their intentions seem to be. Anarchy is an absence of law and structure. Dictatorship is when law and authority is presented for its own sake." In Fidonet we have many who advocate total anarchy, and others who want to impose a particular structure for its own sake (or worse yet, because they feel it will empower them or their little group in some way). I hope that neither of these extremes will gain (or stay in) control, because if that happens, Fidonet will never reach its full potential. It will remain an unfulfilled promise, a technology that could have benefited many but that was misused and abused by those with their own particular special interests, while the voice of the common sysop was all but ignored. I want to quickly add that I do NOT advocate another IFNA type structure (may it Rest In Peace!) because that just attracts "control freaks", but just because we don't have that structure does not mean we should accept total anarchy, or "government by who can scream the loudest, longest, and make the biggest pain of themselves." I apologize for the negative tone of this article, but I hope it will cause some of you to think about what's been happening (or not happening, as the case may be). If you feel that Fidonet isn't quite what you expected or hoped for when you got into it, maybe the answer is here somewhere. I leave it to the reader to judge whether there's and validity in these comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 27 8 Apr 1991 ================================================================= LATEST VERSIONS ================================================================= Latest Software Versions MS-DOS Systems -------------- Bulletin Board Software Name Version Name Version Name Version DMG 2.93 Phoenix 1.3 TAG 2.5g Fido 12s+ QuickBBS 2.66 TBBS 2.1 GSBBS 3.02 RBBS 17.3B TComm/TCommNet 3.4 Lynx 1.30 RBBSmail 17.3B Telegard 2.5 Kitten 2.16 RemoteAccess 1.00* TPBoard 6.1 Maximus 1.02 SLBBS 1.77A Wildcat! 2.55 Opus 1.14+ Socrates 1.10 WWIV 4.12 PCBoard 14.5 XBBS 1.15 Network Node List Other Mailers Version Utilities Version Utilities Version BinkleyTerm 2.40 EditNL 4.00 ARC 7.0 D'Bridge 1.30 MakeNL 2.31 ARCAsim 2.30 Dutchie 2.90C ParseList 1.30 ARCmail 2.07 FrontDoor 1.99c Prune 1.40 ConfMail 4.00 PRENM 1.47 SysNL 3.14 Crossnet v1.5 SEAdog 4.60* XlatList 2.90 DOMAIN 1.42 TIMS 1.0(Mod8) XlaxDiff 2.35 EMM 2.02 XlaxNode 2.35 4Dog/4DMatrix 1.18 Gmail 2.05 GROUP 2.16 GUS 1.30 HeadEdit 1.15 InterPCB 1.31 LHARC 2.10 MSG 4.1 MSGED 2.06 MSGTOSS 1.3 Oliver 1.0a PK[UN]ZIP 1.20 QM 1.0 QSORT 4.03 Sirius 1.0x SLMAIL 1.36 StarLink 1.01 TagMail 2.41 TCOMMail 2.2 Telemail 1.27 FidoNews 8-14 Page 28 8 Apr 1991 TMail 1.15 TPBNetEd 3.2 TosScan 1.00 UFGATE 1.03 XRS 4.10* XST 2.2 ZmailH 1.14 OS/2 Systems ------------ Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Maximus-CBCS 1.02 BinkleyTerm 2.40 Parselst 1.32 ConfMail 4.00 EchoStat 6.0 oMMM 1.52 Omail 3.1 MsgEd 2.06 MsgLink 1.0C MsgNum 4.14 LH2 0.50 PK[UN]ZIP 1.02 ARC2 6.00 PolyXARC 2.00 Qsort 2.1 Raid 1.0 Remapper 1.2 Tick 2.0 VPurge 2.07 Xenix/Unix ---------- BBS Software Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version BinkleyTerm 2.30b Unzip 3.10 ARC 5.21 ParseLst 1.30b ConfMail 3.31b Ommm 1.40b Msged 1.99b Zoo 2.01 C-Lharc 1.00 Omail 1.00b FidoNews 8-14 Page 29 8 Apr 1991 Apple II ---------- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version GBBS Pro 2.1 Fruity Dog 1.0 ShrinkIt 3.2 DDBBS + 4.0 ShrinkIt GS 1.04 deARC2e 2.1 ProSel 8.65 Apple CP/M ---------- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Daisy v2j Daisy Mailer 0.38 Nodecomp 0.37 MsgUtil 2.5 PackUser v4 Filer v2-D UNARC.COM 1.20 Macintosh --------- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Red Ryder Host 2.1 Tabby 2.2 MacArc 0.04 Mansion 7.15 Copernicus 1.0 ArcMac 1.3 WWIV (Mac) 3.0 LHArc 0.33 Hermes 1.01 StuffIt Classic 1.6 FBBS 0.91 Compactor 1.21 TImport 1.92 TExport 1.92 Timestamp 1.6 Tset 1.3 Import 3.2 Export 3.21 Sundial 3.2 PreStamp 3.2 OriginatorII 2.0 AreaFix 1.6 Mantissa 3.21 Zenith 1.5 FidoNews 8-14 Page 30 8 Apr 1991 Eventmeister 1.0 TSort 1.0 Mehitable 2.0 UNZIP 1.02c Amiga ----- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Paragon 2.082+ BinkleyTerm 1.00 AmigArc 0.23 TransAmiga 1.05 TrapDoor 1.50 AReceipt 1.5 WelMat 0.42 booz 1.01 ConfMail 1.10 ChameleonEdit 0.10 ElectricHerald1.66 Lharc 1.30 MessageFilter 1.52 oMMM 1.49b ParseLst 1.30 PkAX 1.00 PK[UN]ZIP 1.01 PolyxAmy 2.02 RMB 1.30 RoboWriter 1.02 Skyparse 2.30 TrapList 1.12 Yuck! 1.61 Zippy (Unzip) 1.25 Zoo 2.01 Atari ST/TT ----------- Bulletin Board Network Node List Software Version Mailer Version Utilities Version FIDOdoor/ST 2.12* BinkleyTerm 2.40l* ParseList 1.30 QuickBBS/ST 1.02 The BOX 1.20 Xlist 1.12 Pandora BBS 2.41c EchoFix 1.20 GS Point 0.61 sTICk/Hatch 5.10* LED ST 1.00 MSGED 1.96S Archiver Msg Format Other Utilities Version Converters Version Utilities Version FidoNews 8-14 Page 31 8 Apr 1991 LHARC 0.60 TB2BINK 1.00 ConfMail 4.03 ARC 6.02 BINK2TB 1.00 ComScan 1.02 PKUNZIP 1.10 FiFo 2.1j* Import 1.14 OMMM 1.40 Pack 1.00 FastPack 1.20 FDsysgen 2.16 FDrenum 2.10 Trenum 0.10 Archimedes ---------- BBS Software Mailers Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version ARCbbs 1.44 BinkleyTerm 2.03 Unzip 2.1TH ARC 1.03 !Spark 2.00d ParseLst 1.30 BatchPacker 1.00 + Netmail capable (does not require additional mailer software) * Recently changed Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-14 Page 32 8 Apr 1991 ================================================================= NOTICES ================================================================= The Interrupt Stack 12 May 1991 Fourth anniversary of FidoNet operations in Latin America and second anniversary of the creation of Zone-4. 15 Aug 1991 5th annual Z1 Fido Convention - FidoCon '91 "A New Beginning" Sheraton Denver West August 15 through August 18 1991. 8 Sep 1991 25th anniversary of first airing of Star Trek on NBC! 7 Oct 1991 Area code 415 fragments. Alameda and Contra Costa Counties will begin using area code 510. This includes Oakland, Concord, Berkeley and Hayward. San Francisco, San Mateo, Marin, parts of Santa Clara County, and the San Francisco Bay Islands will retain area code 415. 1 Feb 1992 Area code 213 fragments. Western, coastal, southern and eastern portions of Los Angeles County will begin using area code 310. This includes Los Angeles International Airport, West Los Angeles, San Pedro and Whittier. Downtown Los Angeles and surrounding communities (such as Hollywood and Montebello) will retain area code 213. 1 Dec 1993 Tenth anniversary of Fido Version 1 release. 5 Jun 1997 David Dodell's 40th Birthday If you have something which you would like to see on this calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1. -----------------------------------------------------------------