I have noticed, by pure chance, that  EARN versions of PEERS NAMES (ie the one
that  Turgut distributes  to EARN  sites)  is not,  as I  had always  thought,
identical to the one used for BITNET, despite what Turgut had originally said:
 
>Date:         Mon, 2 Oct 89 11:27:39 TUR
>Sender:       Revised LISTSERV forum <LSTSRV-L@CEARN>
>From:         Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@TREARN>
>
>>Turgut,
>>
>>Are you supposed to be sending a PEERS NAMES to all Listserv sites (both
>>EARN and non-EARN)?  Our Listserv is receiving the updates from you...
>>and rejecting them, of course.
>
> My apologies to those sites on BITNET who have received a PEERS NAMES from
> me.   Although nothing  is wrong  with  that file,  I am  not supposed  to
> distribute it to BITNET.
 
There  are in  fact 13  differences  between the  2  files. Some  of them  are
unimportant and  due to the fact  that the file  I distributed today is  a bit
more "up to date" than Turgut's (new DUKEVM server for instance), and for some
unknown reason  all the EARN  release 1.6 servers  as listed as  being release
1.5o. But you  can imagine my surprise  when I found that  UKACRL and ICNUCEVM
are listed as backbone sites in Turgut's file.
 
I have  to note with  extreme disappointment  that this difference,  which can
have a  serious operational  impact on the  LISTSERV backbone,  was introduced
without even INFORMING me (perhaps for  fear that I would react? Very clever).
I will not comment on the reasons  which led these sites or EARN Management or
whomever to ask  Turgut to introduce this difference, at  some unknown time in
the past,  leaving on  the backbone  sites with  tables 5  months old.  I will
simply say  that I cannot  accept to keep cooperating  with people who  act in
this fashion, and that the responsibility  for any problem resulting from this
change (or any similar change that EARN  might make in the future) lays solely
with the EARN Association. I have just  signed off from the LISTTECH list, and
this is where my participation in the LISTGATE project ends.
 
Finally, I would like  to remind you that IRLEARN, whose staff  asked me to be
restored to  the backbone, is  now a backbone server  on both BITNET  and EARN
files -  no fuss, no  muss. UKACRL and ICNUCEVM,  which took devious  steps to
sneak back into the EARN vision of  the backbone, have done the best that they
could possibly  do to make their  restoration into the BITNET  backbone a more
uncertain event.
 
And all  this happened  because someone,  someday, decided  that being  on the
backbone was a Prestigious Privilege reserved to a Few Worthy. Sigh.
 
  Eric