I don't want (and I can't) enter the political implications of the recent FRMOP11 affaire. However, 1. When a site installs LISTSERV, it can only do so if it has previously read, understood and accepted the copyright notice and installation memo (this is true of any other product, BTW). There it is clearly stated which are the conditions to become (and to keep being) a backbone node. That FRMOP11 has violated these rules, by whichever reason it may be, is a fact and should not be discussed. Please read carefully the installation memo if you still have doubts. 2. FRMOP11 does not only serve EARN sites, as any network-wide DISTRIBUTE stream (and thus also a huge number of distribution lists) originating or having a peer in EARN with recipients in the other side of the atlantic had to pass thru FRMOP11. Although I cannot speak for BITNET and Netnorth people, I strongly believe that they would never accept to have to suffer the consequences of a problem in an EARN node. ALL non-EARN would suffer, as much as EARN, and therefore this can not be a decision taken only by EARN. 3. Eric is right that he's the person responsible for updating global files and to determine who is on the backbone. In the past, a number of other sites have also been removed from the backbone, always for good reasons, including the complaints of other nodes served by the 'bad' backbone site. If EARN were to negotiate with Eric a change in the responsibilities for determining who's and who's not a backbone, such a negotiation should include BITNET and NetNorth representatives, as an unilateral EARN change would be likely to hurt also BITNET and NetNorth. 4. My personal opinion as a technical person is that there should be ONE SINGLE person coordinating the backbone, and that this person should do the coordination for the whole network. Else, technically speaking again, I guess we should go back to plan 1. Please don't flame Eric as this was the ONLY thing he could reasonably do. Jose Maria