The following is in response to Doug Scott's file/message called INTLWRN.ZIP.
- Cliff Watkins -
<DOUG> ! Hi I run a PCBoard BBS in Indianapolis, and have been running BBS's for ! 10 years now. I have one of the origional PCBoard serial numbers, my BBS ! is of good size "18 public nodes, 4 gigs, and around 900 conferences". I ! do know what I am doing. This is not an ad for my BBS, so I will not leave ! a phone number.
Well... most of us know who this guy is... For those who do not, this is Doug Scott of Data Central BBS in Indiana. I will respond to each of his (marked with the !'s) very ludicrous statements with my own rebutals. Those who know me, I'm confident, know that what is being spewed forth by this inividual is pure balderdash. Those who do not are more than welcome to call any of our member boards and view for themselves the response that Doug's babyish behavior is bound to generate. Anyway, on to the rebutals.
<DOUG> ! After careful consideration I have come to the conclusion that I should ! warn everyone about Intelec and Cliff Whatkins. I have had numerous ! problems with his flagrant authority and the way he runs his network.
Flagrant authority? Well... this is one point that only the members of Intelec can refute. Anyone is more than welcome to view what goes on in our 100% open/public NetAdmin conference.
<DOUG> ! I joined his network because he said it was a lot less hassels than RIME.
I said no such thing to him or anyone to 'get them to join'. Intelec has been known for it's quality and that is all I ever stress to anyone. This is an obvious attempt by Doug to stir things up between RIME and our network. So, am I calling this man a liar? Do systems like to crash when you're not home?
<DOUG> ! I was not allowed to get mail for over 2 months because I had an ! incorrect tag line.
OK, he loves to exaggerate too... His mail was held up for 8 days, not two months, and it was not just the fact that he had an incorrect tagline. I sent him 3 messages in our NetAdmin conference to correct the duplicates problems he was having, as well as the wrong tagline which he had for months... Why did I not see the tag problem sooner? Well, for an 18 node system his board had contributed less than 7 messages a week on average. So I never saw it until the time I had initiated my *many* messages to him to correct it. The reason he was held up for 8 days was *his* failure to upload his Rnet configuration file to me. I require this now, as is common practice of several of our hubs, to look over a config file prior to starting relays. It's a practice that I recommend to most any QWK hubs out there.
<DOUG> ! I sat here calling him at least 24 times, and he was never in.
Let's play the Doug's Exxageration game... I must have left him a gazillion different messages at his store, about the problems, and he never got any of them... Anyway, he did call me about 3 times 'during the day' while I was away at work, so sure, I wasn't home. But he was never at the store, where he said he would be... *Once* he called on a Saturday afternoon, and even though our local laws forbid me to leave the house, I did anyway, I'm sorry Doug, I was out on a Saturday...
<DOUG> ! Finally I got him to look at my config file and let me back on.
He finally sent it to me, so yes, I did let him back in. I should have seen the writing on the wall then, but....
<DOUG> ! 2. I was notified about 4 weeks ago that he had too many sysops getting ! mail from his system. I was told bluntly to call another system ! of his choosing to get the mail.
And he was not singled out, he was one of several hubs, calling in direct to the host system, that was asked to switch over to another regional for failure to relay on a daily basis. No regional anywhere can get away with relaying 3 times a week. NODES relay more than he did.
<DOUG> ! I told him it would take me a little while to reconfigure rnet for ! another bbs system. The next day I no longer had access to get onto ! Cliffs BBS.
Do I have to say it? Nah... He told me it would take him a couple of days to make the transition and I said fine. He dragged an Rnet config change out for two weeks. Did I remove his BBS access? No... I did however remove his Net Status after failing to switch in that 2 week period. Did I go too far? I don't think so... I was not about to run up my daytime phone bill *more* trying to get in touch with him *again* for something he should have completed two weeks before.
<DOUG> ! The guy he gave me to does not have the same mail door, nor does ! he have the conferences numbered the same.
He *did* when Doug (finally) switched there but *DOUG* opted to use Qmail instead of the MarkMail like he used on my board. His hub then proceeded to take down the MarkMail door when no more net hubs or nodes were using it. Let's see, how much further this guy can sink in the mud...
<DOUG> ! I was notified by the new guy that his system is so busy "SMALL ! 2 LINES" that I need a time slot to call in to get the mail.
Bigger is better? Not in his case, not by a longshot, as evident from his ineptness and inability to get a simple config right... With the exception of some top notch operations like Channel 1, Exec-Net and Rose Media, I've rarely seen a large BBS system that can handle configs as well as smaller systems. Doug's setup is this rule, not the exception. Does he think I should give preference to him at 18 nodes than Dave at 2? (Which he had the audacity to actually ask). And... is a 'timeslot' for mail runs so utterly unheard of? Come on Doug, buck up and stop being a whiny little baby!
<DOUG> ! He also does not carry all of the conferences that I picked up from ! Cliff Watkins at Intelec. I just recieved a message from the sysop ! of the new system that he talked to Cliff and Cliff said "TOUGH".
The following is the actual messaging between Doug and his Regional.
Date: 07-22-91 (02:42) Number: 6224 of 6677
To: DOUG SCOTT Refer#: NONE
From: DAVE CALMER Read: 07-23-91 (06:36)
Doug, I have two time slots open right now just before my Intelec run, you can take your choice between the 1:45-2:00am slot or the 2:15 to 2:30am slot (central time). Just let me know which works out best for you (please, I need to assign the slot you won't be using to another node <g>). Here's the way we work it here for now, I have all nodes scheduled for a 15 minute window, these scheduled times run between 1:00 am and 5:30 am Central time. You're free to play "hit and miss" anytime before 1:00 am or after 5:30 am. My nightly run to Intelec is sheduled at 3:00 am, it's also the time I do all of my other network transfers so the board is down until 4:00 am.
I'll try and get the Vnet conferences reinstalled sometime this week if time permits. This is a very busy part of the year for me with a couple of other projects so it may take me a few days to get it all in place, I'll drop you a note in Net Admin as soon as they're all set.
— þ RoseReader 1.50à: Press <CTRL>-<ALT>-<DEL> to continue …
Date: 07-28-91 (02:30) Number: 6554 of 6677
To: DOUG SCOTT Refer#: NONE
From: DAVE CALMER Read: 07-29-91 (19:25) HAS REPLIES
Doug, After some careful thought and research on the subject I have decided *NOT* to add any of the Vnet conferences at this time. These conferences have been tried here before and there simply wasn't any use of them, since they are not Intelec conferences as such, even as a hub I have no obligation to carry them. The main reason for this decision is cost, I simply can't afford to increase my phone bill just for a single system to carry the conferences. I have talked this over with Cliff and it does have his approval. I'm sorry, perhaps in the future I will be able to provide these conferences for you, at the present time it is just not possible. I hope you understand.
— þ RoseReader 1.50à: If you can't make it good, make it big. (Then PKLITE it!)
Date: 07-29-91 (21:37) Number: 6648 of 6677
To: DOUG SCOTT Refer#: 6643
From: DAVE CALMER Read: NO
→ I understand. Thanks. BTW I do not have a time slot yet.
I posted that last week <g>. Anyway, take your choice between the 1:45 to 2:00 am or 2:15 to 2:30 slots (Central Time). Let me know which one you'll use, I'll need to assign the other later in the week.
<DOUG> ! If you are thinking about joining Intelec, then think twice! This is ! what I just went through and thought that I should warn everyone.
I let the above actual messages and rebutals speak for themselves and I thank you for taking the time to read this 'stuff'.
Sincerely, Cliff Watkins Intelec Network Coordinator