🚀 go-pugleaf

On 5 Sep 1999 20:29:23 GMT, jstewart@alfred.carleton.ca (John A.
Stewart) wrote:

>In <37d2b505.1993608@news.newforce.ca> darrell@newforce.ca (Darrell) writes:
>>What it boils down to is most of the NCF costs seem to be way out
>>of line. They amount to an small ISP with 10,000-11,000 (smaller than
>>Magma,Cyberus, IGS etc) users that requires a huge volunteer base to
>>run... WHY? The overhead of NCF is lower than the real ISP's as NCF
>>doesn't have to pay market prices for local loops, T-3 and other
>>connections through the good graces of Carleton University, they have
>>Mitel providing almost a complete PRI phonebank.
>
>It requires more effort to operate the NCF because 
>   1) It provides a text based interface

Unix shell interface isn't too tough, most BBS had a text based
interface

>   2) It provides content in the form of menus and newsgroups.

Newsgroups, ok so do most ISP's! Menus? Yes they make newsgroup
navigation easier

>   3) Commercial providers are not providing a full year of service for
>      anything approaching $24.  The reality is that the NCF is seriously
>      underfunded for what it is trying to do and for the most part is 
>      trying to make do with dated hardware.
>
>BTW, the NCF has to pay Carleton for Internet connectivity.

At what rate? 
>
>> But the simple fact
>>of the matter is Other ISP's can and do other better services for more
>>users with less man-power (person-power?) than NCF, why is that. IMHO
>>NCF seems to be modelled after a federal government agency, top-heavy
>>with management.
>
>   The NCF has a grand total of one management person.  
>
>>NCF as a business is a failure, they have succeeded in reducing (based
>>on their own figures) their user base from 65,000 down to about 11,000
>
>A lot of the original freenets are either gone or planning to shutdown
>so the NCF has been relatively successful in comparison to similar
>organizations.  Given that Internet connectivity has become a relatively
>cheap commodity I would have to say that the current model of the NCF 
>may not be sustainable.
>
>>There is some secret backroom dealings where board members are getting
>>paid as consultants (on contract I heard of was $80,000) but there was
>>no word whether this money went back into NCF. I have a real hard time
>>with a "community based, non-profit" group bidding on commercial
>>contracts,  while holding their hands out to local businesses for
>>support. Give us money so we can compete against you!
>
>I would have thought that you'd have more of an axe to grind with 
>Industry Canada who is the party handing out the contracts than with the
>NCF.  Or do you have some personal vendetta against the NCF?
>
My beef with NCF is it is becoming more secretive, the last couple of
boards seem to ignore the users. The original concept was NCF was
not a commercial ISP/Network solutions provider. The Industry Canada
is a good example. What was the contract, how much money was paid
to who, and why? Contracts like this will erode support that local
ISP's provide NCF. Debate is healthy, IMHO closed doors are not.

I have been an NCF user since the beginning (ad607), but when various
issues are discussed in-house (ncf. newsgroups) a board member will
usually squelch debate

I also have a beef with Carleton University hosting various commercial
websites, as that isn't in the school's mandate but that is a much
different issue. 

Overall NCF is a success, but some board decisions seem counter
to the NCF Mission Statement


>-- 
>John Stewart -- Computing and Communications Services, Carleton University
>Internet: jstewart@ccs.carleton.ca                       613-520-2600x3707
>"Why are so many people trying to get ahead when they already have one?"