[Noisebridge-discuss] FidoNet Policy as community history

Naomi Most pnaomi at gmail.com
Mon Mar 31 21:21:04 UTC 2014

Yep, that's a valid criticism.

Was your point to shut down this entire thread?  Because it really
feels like that.

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Historical stuff is fun, but please keep in mind that the fidonet
> community although flamey and enraging, had an underlying motivating
> thing - you could just be disconnected. So there's still a power
> hierarchy present there.
> -a
> On 31 March 2014 13:36, Naomi Gmail <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Submitted for the consideration of Noisebridgers interested in a Better Way, the FidoNet workings came to the mind of a coworker when i told him about what's happening at NB lately.
>> http://www.fidonet.org/policy4.txt
>> (This is a discussion topic, not a proposal.)
>> Interesting aspects of FidoNet:
>> * a hierarchical tree structure where regional nodes branch from a center.
>> * concerns and complaints are raised at the smallest node level, and escalated if they can't be resolved.
>> There are echoes here of systems proposals for NB that involve working groups.
>> Just something to ponder.
>> --Naomi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss

Naomi Theora Most
naomi at nthmost.com

skype: nthmost


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list