FIDONet policies

[S. Boxx]

>If a user sends a "private message", the user has no control over the number
>of intermediate systems through which that message is routed.  A sysop who
>sends a message to another sysop can control this aspect by sending the
>message direct to the recipient's system, thus guaranteeing that only the
>recipient or another individual to whom that sysop has given authorization
>can read the message.  Thus, a sysop may have different expectations than a
>casual user.

translated: we have a hierarchy of rights. sysop-gods have a right and
expectation to private mail. the user-peons have neither.

>Disclosing or in any way using information contained in private netmail
>traffic not addressed to you or written by you is considered annoying
>behavior, unless the traffic has been released by the author or the recipient
>as a part of a formal policy complaint.

"annoying behavior" -- what a cute PC euphemism. who's the idiot
academic who came up with that? try "moral & ethical bankruptcy" instead.

>As far as I can tell, the ability (perhaps the right) to fuss around in
>other folks' business and other folks' mail is one of the factors (along
>with the ability to create and enforce any number of rules and regulations)
>which makes people think it's fun to run a BBS.

the "paternal paranoia instinct". ask wells or kleinpaste for a lecture on it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help at anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin at anon.penet.fi.