I realize that I forgot to forward Hank's not to LSTSRV-L, and I apologize for
the confusion I may have created /Eric
 
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
 
I have been away for the past 2 months but it appears that people
are losing their ability to have patience with people away from
their jobs.  During my absence a large number of GONE requests
arrived which were stored for when I return.  I have since processed
all pending requests.
 
During that time I answered one of the requestors that when I return
I will process all requests.  This past week I went over his request
and determined that his id was not listed in BITNET NAMES (BITEARN NODES)
and therefore I was unable to determine if he was from the computer
center or not.  I requested that he have someone from the computer
center contact me and verify that he is with the computer center and
I would then send out GONE (I have also had cases with students posing as
computer center personnel and my only ability of checking a person is
via BITNET NAMES or by sending mail to the system contact of the node
and checking whether the person is telling the truth.  I use the
BITNET NAMES file as the easiest and most efficient method of determining
whether a person belongs to a computer cennter or not).  His reply
follows:
 
>Date:         Sun, 22 Jan 89 10:17:35 EDT
>From:         SSAT@PACEVM
>Subject:      Re: GONE
>To:           Hank Nussbacher <HANK@BARILVM>
>In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 22 Jan 89 10:22:00 O
>
>I got GONE directly from TAUNIVM, not off the network as you said!
>Do not bother adding me to your list. Since the version I have works
>perfectly, (Yes every single command has been tested and checked) I feel
>it safe to say that it does not contain any bugs. The person at TAUNIVM
>who sent it to me felt sorry I had been waiting and trying for so many
>weeks.Since you refuse to support it, and refuse to update it, I
>will use it, and distribute it as I see fit. A GONE EXEC list has now been
>started on a server in the United States and we have enough competent
>people to handle any possible bugs that might pop up!
>I tried to be polite about this but you have made it impossible!
 
The rules I use for distribution are based on 3 years of trial and
error.  Originally I sent out GONE to whoever requested it, but I
quickly found out that many users would request the package from the
same node.  I also found out that students were making local mods, and
then redistributing GONE to their friends.  After a while I would get
letters from users throughout the net complaining of bugs and problems
with GONE.  After spending many long hours tracking down the bugs I
would discover that the code was altered by some sophmore to add in
some well intentioned function.  Therefore I have been adding the
following caveat at the beginning of GONE:
 
>  Distribution:
>  This exec and all its utility programs should not be redistributed.
>  Please refer all requests to [log in to unmask]  GONE is distributed
>  free of charge to any computer center that requests it.
 
The "new" version now being distributed has the following altered
caveat:
 
>   Distribution:
>   THIS EXEC AND ALL ITS UTILITY PROGRAMS ARE PUBLIC DOMAIN SOFTWARE.
>   MAY BE PLACED ON ANY SERVER OR LISTSERV OF YOUR CHOICE AND DSITRIBUTE
>   FREE OF CHARGE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO USE IT.
 
Based on the fact that a new server is now distributing GONE and
my code has had its caveat altered, the GONE-L list is hereby
closed down and GONE is no longer supported.  I would like to thank
all people who supplied me with suggestions and code fragments.
To the 135 people who did manage to comply with my rules: sorry.
 
For those who have been following Eric Thomas's discussion in EARN
about volunteer code: for me the age of volunteer code is over.
 
Regretfully,
Hank