Re: *** VOTE *** Permlink of cookies

Wow, right back to the beginning eh. I did make this comment, though it is
taken out of context. When asked to join blitzed after finally giving up
on xnet I did say I needed more of a network structure than a couple cable
modem servers slapped together (or something along those lines). This was
very near the birth of the network. I do not remember who I would have
been talking to, most likely it was in an open channel directed either at
epsilon or cryptr. I may have made an incorrect choice
but that was mine to make. If there is resentment still from this, theres
nothing I can really say but I realize that it would have been a better
choice to join blitzed from the very beginning rather than after all of
the hard work has been done to get to where blitzed is now. For that I do
apologise, and I know I should have made that choice.. but it is easy for
anyone to say 'ya I should have done that'. The choice was made long ago,
wrong or right. I am sure that you could pick apart everything I have ever
said on irc and find a few good off the cuff remarks about various things,
as I am sure is true with everyone. This is one of the reasons I do not
bring up things in the past, because stupidity or lack of insight in the
past does not mean I do not value things in the present.

As for my mistake on the bopm.conf, It was a mistake, I am not arguing
that. I may have to be shown exactly where I garfed something but I do
admit when I am wrong. I did not see what you were talking about, and I
did not realize that I had just cut and pasted From: into the line for the
config. I had thought that is what was in the config, but now I figure I
copy and pasted. I really do not think that is what is at issue here. My
emails were all very short, and mostly expressed my lack of knowing what was
wrong. Instead of working with me to show me what the error was you said I
was 'trying to be annoying'. I am sorry if I get a tad defencive after
something like that.

I will continue to work with anyone on blitzed for any reason. I do not
believe that after a very small confrontation like this that anyone should
'pledge never to work with so and so again'. If irc networks worked like
that efnet would be in fifty pieces. You may think I am dense and
'annoying' but in reality not everyone is going to understand, interpret,
or react the way you want or expect them to.

I can only offer what I can, if people wish to believe I am rude,
unworkable, or whathaveyou thats fine. It is your opinion and all I can do
is continue to attempt to work with everyone on any matter. If you have
issue with the stability of my server, all I can say is after some minor
hardware problems in the beginning, I have been pretty happy with the
connectivity myself. This is a new network (nac.net) and a new location
for my two servers I have on this particular network. Overall I am happy
with it, if it has not been good enough for blitzed, that is another
question and it is up to you.


Thanks
andy


On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Andy Smith wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 11:41:32AM -0700, Erik Fears wrote:
> > > as "a network of cable modems" to multiple people hoping to link
> > > here in the past.
> >
> > To be quite honest, at one point blitzed was a network of cable modems. Perhaps it was an exaggeration on his part, but it wasn't exactly false.
>
> Can you explain when that was?
>
> As far as I can remember we have never had more than one cable modem
> linked at a time (crazyspence's) and even then it was subjected to
> our usual expectations of stability and probably spent less time
> depooled in its entire history than cookies spent so far.  Even that
> was in the first year of Blitzed, years before these things were
> said.
>
> To say that Blitzed has ever been "a network of cable modems" is
> grossly inaccurate and misleading, and aside from that was
> deliberately intended to put people off linking here.
>