@@34==================================================================
Date:
Wed, 11 Oct 1995 19:20:34 Est
Reply-To:
"Pimienta Daniel " <[email protected]>
From:
"Pimienta Daniel " <[email protected]>
To:
"Percy van Kanten" <[email protected]>
Cc:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
Subject:
Re: The Caribbean Connection
X-Mulbri:
00**0000000000

Percy,

<... Daniel, could you again relay this message to the rest of the <group,
OK.

Now, I really agree with you that if this on line discussion is going to extend in the time, some listserv is urgently required. I 100% agree with you that the best would be to have active Caribbean users participating. Furthermore, it sounds like part of the exchanges are not sent to everybody; that would limit this factor.
I had the tentation to copy the [email protected] listserv but the susceptibilities are very high and I decided not to.

The correct way could be to:
1) Compile the previous public exchanges in a gopher site and make them available from FTPmail.
2) Open a listserv, subscribe all of us who agree, invite directly or in other forums like SALSA active Caribbean users to join (and indicate them how to read the elapsed debate).

Larry, would you help us with the two items in your node?

<... Daniel, who by habit is in ANY discussion about ANY topic :-)) I wish I had the time :-)...

Caribbean networking is in the very center of the institutional interests of FUNREDES. We consider we have both proven methodology and grassroot experiences in USER and PTT policies. However we perceive an unjustified barreer between our group and the CUNET sites as well as with the regional policiy makers and funding agencies. We believe the first is a consequence of a wrong concept about cooperation and competition. We are convinced that the last is a consequence of an erroneous diagnostic about the real situation of networking in the Caribbean. This is why we decided to publish, months ago, a strong (and documented) position statement, in SALSA and <gopher.psg.com>. This statement which have indirectly triggered this on-line discussion when a neutral person (Larry Press) tried to conciliate different estimates on Caribbean users.

To conclude this parenthesis, I can sense how painful is
this discussion, and I feel upset when CUNET node administrators or coordinators take the facts as personal attacks. In spite of that, (in spite of the "heat" as said Larry), I persist to consider it is a necessary task to put the light on Caribbean Networking. Because, there is a lot at stake in terms of regional integration.

If networks were doing their job they would not divise, they would integrate and federate. If networks were doing their job they would not isolate users, they would gather them. If research and NGOs networks were different from commercial networks, that
should be in
tariff,
content
and
also
scientifical attitude
in
front of the
facts.
 
 
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 

<What criteria have been used to determine "active" or "very active" ? <Daniel has suggested to use the last 2 days of logging in to determin "very <active". I disagree with him.
I got your point, although I consider the phenomenon you well explained have a marginal effect in the global result.
But would you agree that "active" is at least once a week? By the way, I just sent the list of users from Santa Lucia before reading your mail and I did use "once a week" as the key factor for measuring. In that case, as I already said, my projection methodology is giving figures coherent with the facts. I wish we could have all the user lists to go from diagnostic to constructive action as you express.

<The next question of course would be, what to do with those statistics. <... But could we for instance start working out a good <way of doing something about it? Exchange experience? ... Of course this is the real goal. But without diagnostic or with the wrong diagnostic there is no push.

saludos,
Daniel
.