[consume-thenet] consensual consumates

[Ian Morrison]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 06:11:57PM +0000, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:

> I'm saying I'm not going to participate unless there's something I can get
> as well as give. I'm not being isolationist, however, I don't for a second
> believe that ad-hoc (between people) networking works. And especially not
> on a London-wide scale. I object to your use of the epithet "isolationist"
> because I do want to be a part of something bigger, however, I do not see
> ad-hoc connections to be the way to achieve this. Please distinguish the
> means and the end.

How can ad-hoc (between people/wangs) networking not work?  Maybe you
don't understand.  TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBOURS AND MAKE A PLAN.  EVERYBODY
SHOULD DO THIS ON AN AD HOC (WANG SOCK) BASIS.

> Sir, I think you'll find that with the bickering that goes on here, it's
> not.

I'm currently active on a number of nodes, and have 4 operational in
strategic places.  You clearly don't know what you're talking about, as
a number of very active consumers aren't on the list.  The areas I'm
working in have secured funding and venues, and will not only help
install nodes but teach people how its done too.  We're subsidising
nodes that are of infrastructural importance, with the explicit aim of
connecting them.  

What exactly are you doing, other than stroking yourself in an impure
way?

> This is a pity, and it's not a state of affairs that I feel is good,
> however, I suspect that if you remove your head from a particular part of
> your anatomy you'll find that there is not so much out there as you think.

I've been there, son.  I'm out there on a mission.  I'm not talking
about it in fancy words on a list; I'm defending my viewpoint by
correcting your inherent wrongness.

Hanging out on #WANGCOLON is not the same as going to a gallery and
talking to a stranger.

> You're not trying to seriously tell me that renumbering my network is a
> benefit? It's an ongoing process that can *only* work if there is someone
> who has the bigger picture.

If you have to renumber your network, that's down to your weak network
design.  I'm certainly not allowing the world to connect to my private
lan, and any renumbering on the consume side is hardly a serious issue.
For me, anyway.  Your milage will, i'm certain, vary.

> Right. But I think if you (as I say above) remove your head from somewhere
> else, and ask most of the people on this list, you'll find that internet
> access is at least somewhere in the consume plans.

It is somewhere.  It's a service that may be offered my node owners.  Do
you know what self provision means?  I will have no difficulty securing
internet access through consume.  It's a byproduct, however; it's not
the goal.

> > Consume is a network in its own right, and being connected to it brings
> > differing rewards depending on your community. 
> 
> Possibly

This is fact.  I humbly suggest you go outside and make some friends.
Then you can start to build an infrastructure to connect you to wherever
it is you want to go.  Also, do not attempt to fellate me; your mouth
is dirty, bitter and sad,

Wang in your face teasing,


ian
-- 
:: darq.net /#/             :: to start press any key | where's the