Some notes about the LISTSERV/LISTEARN split:
 
* It's  supposedly  clear that  EARN  and  BitNet  should separate  some  day.
  However, we don't even have the slightiest indication of when this day could
  be. We don't even  know what are the full OSI migration  plans for EARN, and
  then we  don't know  what does  the BoD mean  when they  say that  they will
  'preserve  the NJE  service',  or how  much  time this  will  last. We  know
  absolutely nothing about the future of  EARN. I'm much better informed about
  the future of BITNET  than about the future of EARN  or of EARN-Germany, for
  example.
 
  I'm therefore  not sure it's the  same to split LISTSERV  now because anyway
  the networks will be split soon. "Soon" could be in five years, or never, as
  far as I can see.
 
  And  as an  EARN postmaster,  I  would hate  to  see LISTSERV  split in  two
  separate backbones (for  technical reasons), as much as I  would hate to see
  LISTSERV (or LISTEARN) supported by someone different from Eric.
 
* Said that, one can  ask: why are we offered now to vote  about such a split?
  It's obvious:  because EARN is  making so much  noise about the  embargo and
  about their  moral rights to have  LISTSERV unrestricted and free  of charge
  that Eric is spending more time  discussing with EARN that in anything else.
  Now  why has  the embargo  been  applied? Because  of a  number of  reasons,
  including the fact that Eric's paper (and also mine, for that matter) passed
  directly from  the last  EARNTECH meeting to  the trash as  soon as  it took
  contact with  the EARN BoD. Eric's  paper presented a number  of problems of
  the current  EARN and proposed some  solutions, and was approved  (with some
  amendments)  by the  vast majority  of the  Technical Group.  Since the  BoD
  refused even to address  it, it's clear that the current BoD  is a danger to
  EARN.
 
  Therefore we have to vote on  a solution which is technically unsatisfactory
  as a result of the complete inadequacy  of the current EARN management. If I
  had to choose between belonging to the abstract entity called EARN (assuming
  that I  could be still connected  to the network, maybe  under another name)
  and having LISTSERV instead of LISTEARN, I for sure would choose LISTSERV. I
  am not getting any benefit from belonging  to EARN -- only problems, most of
  them created by the politicians who are mismanaging it.
 
  All the  preceding is to express  how I would  like that we could  find some
  other solution that would not technically hurt the present network.
 
* Assuming that Eric's proposal is succesful,  I'd pay to get LISTSERV instead
  of LISTEARN. EARN  has *some* money to pay for  development and maintenance,
  but they  don't even  know what are  the tasks they  should assign  to these
  people. This is why they didn't still contract anyone, even if there is some
  (limited) budget assigned for that this year.
 
  And given  the continuous  battles and  differences between  EARN countries,
  major problems can be  expected with the LISTEARN software as  soon as it is
  touched by EARN.  This without considering that it's  almost impossible that
  they can find a  programmer like Eric for the salary  and stability they can
  offer.
 
I just came back  after a quite nasty influenza, and my  thoughts are not very
clear today -- you'll have to excuse  any reiteration or obscurity in my mail.
But I felt unable to stay silent in view of what's going on.
 
  Jose Maria