response 1 of 99:

Dec 22 11:45 UTC 1994

----------
(56) #20  Kent Nassen (kentn)
Tue, Dec 20, 1994 (23:15).   9 lines.
 What is Grex's policy regarding slanderous or "let's pick on Joe X"
 items?  If I were Joe X and an item had been entered about me for the
 purpose of making me look bad or to stir up trouble for me, I'd be
 a bit upset about having to depend on the item's perpetrator's good
 will in retiring and freezing the item (given that person's original
 intent in entering the item).  On the other hand, Grex has never been
 a system that went in much for censorship, which freezing an item
 might be considered if done by staff.
   There's potential trouble here (any way you look at it, it seems).
----------
(56) #26  Rane Curl (rcurl)
Wed, Dec 21, 1994 (11:02).   10 lines.
 "the people at Grex who make such decisions" are all of us, members and
 nonmembers. There are tiers, of course, of those that can take action,
 those with root at the top. As one of the general herd of "people", I
 would prefer if private battles are waged in private, which means to me
 that when vituperation spills onto the public arena, that it is logical to
 sweep up the blood and guts, and dispose of them. Otherwise, they smell,
 besides being unsightly. Therefore, if more than momentary emotion is
 evident, and slander or falsehood are propagated, I think the Item should
 be swept away after the fever peak of battle has subsided. 
----------
(56) #27  Mary Remmers (chelsea)
Wed, Dec 21, 1994 (13:16).   13 lines.
 
 It is my *strong* feeling that for a FW to simply remove an item from
 sight because someone is offended by comments made in the item is 
 bad policy.  If the author agreed, or if the post involved illegal 
 activity or Grex security issues, that is another story.  But other than
 those examples the best course is to try to negotiate a reasonable
 solution. 
 
 I will not be part of censoring items as a way of resolving people
 problems.
----------
(56) #28  Marcus D. Watts (mdw)
Wed, Dec 21, 1994 (18:47).   34 lines.
 I hope lettermn doesn't freeze this; because I think the general
 question of what if a person picks fights/whatever is well worth
 discussing.  I think I can pretty much speak for all of the roots in
 saying that we do not see anything roots can do as an appropriate means
 of resolving personal issues, public or private.  We would be happy to
 offer advice in terms of how to resolve problems, but we would not be
 interested in passing or enforcing any kind of judgement against either
 party.  Our job is to keep the system up & running, not to control
 people.
 
 By & large, that also applies to the conferences.  The only reason a
 staff person might directly intervene in a cf would be if the software
 or hardware itself broke or something else representing a clear &
 present danger to the system were to happen.  4 letter words or even a
 fairly ugly argument between two persons would almost certainly not
 constitute such a threat.
 
 I see the board as being the place where funding and other non-technical
 operational issues are handled - but I would hope the board would see
 itself as acting as custodians of the system; making every effort to act
 as they believe the members would act if they had the same amount of
 time to learn about the issues & make an informed decision.
 
 The members should be where the ultimate power rests - and for decisiosn
 that are not routine and likely to be controversial, I believe the board
 should be seeking out the opinion of the membership and making every
 effort to acquaint them with the facts so that they can make an informed
 decision.  As part and parcel of that, it's important the members elect
 board members who feel this sense of responsibility towards the members;
 if the members don't care who is on the board, or feel alienated by the
 board, then the board could easily come under the control of persons who
 have a much more authoritarian view of things, are not willing to seek
 out the opinions of the members, and are instead only bent on pushing
 their own agendas at the expense of the system.
----------
(56) #29  Valerie Mates (popcorn)
Wed, Dec 21, 1994 (23:36).   5 lines.
 Hm.  I think Kent raises a good question here, a question with no easy
 answers.  I'm half-inclined to say it's up to the fair witnesses to
 decide when to kill such an item, but that really doesn't cover all
 the possibilities.  Maybe it would work to leave things to be dealt
 with on a case-by-case basis?
----------
(56) #30  STeve Andre' (steve)
Thu, Dec 22, 1994 (00:23).   3 lines.
    Yes, each case is different, and deserves special consideration.  I
 know it can be a pain not to have a blanket rule for things like this,
 but they're all different.
----------
(56) #31  A.J. LoCicero (cicero)
Thu, Dec 22, 1994 (00:54).   7 lines.
 In this case I think avi's right to privacy is the strongest factor.  I do
 not believe that we as a community have much to loose if this item is frozen/
 retired, but I think avi may be injured if it is not.  Since anyone can 
 always start a new item for any purpose, I do not think that free speech
 is really an issue.  Unless someone has a STRONG reason for not getting
 rid of this particular item (and someone may--Speak up!) I would urge that it
 be removed.  I think the FW would be the appropriate person to do it.

response 3 of 99:

Dec 22 13:06 UTC 1994

After some further reading, if staff (not a fw) can decide
to +tell+ a user to delete a file - a file that was not used
by the owner, not advertised by the owner, and simply resided
in publically readable space, staff/fw can, with equal validity
(given the validity of the first demand) demand that an item
be retired/frozen.
  
Granted, a suggestion or a request might be more appropriate,
but a demand can be just as supportable.

response 5 of 99:

Dec 22 21:18 UTC 1994

Is this a big problem here?  Have there been many online assaults?

response 7 of 99:

Dec 22 21:58 UTC 1994

Re #5:  No, I don't think there have been.  Grex has been a pretty
polite system on the whole.

response 9 of 99:

Dec 22 23:03 UTC 1994

...and hopefully will stay that way.

response 11 of 99:

Dec 28 15:18 UTC 1994

I think the fairwitness(es) have the responsibility to maintain some
degree of decorum in their assigned area, and that deliberate personal
attacks involving slander or whatever should be, at the discretion of
the fw, made unreadable to the general public.  The fws have done a
good job over the years, IMO, and should continue to do so.  It's not
a perfect world, and it is best to let the fws draw the lines as they
see fit.  New users should not be allowed to go away feeling like a 
large percentage of users are bile-spitting vipers  - an impression I
remember having at one time regarding mnet.  I almost stopped using the
system for a year or so as a result.  The fws do fine, let them do it.

response 13 of 99:

Dec 29 01:15 UTC 1994

You've got a fire burning now.
I think someone had best teach you the difference between censorship and
slanderin this case.

response 15 of 99:

Dec 29 03:01 UTC 1994

I haven't got any idea.
I'm not a lawyer.
*I* think it was slander.
The words were NOT spoken by Bhelliom.
If I went and fabricated a party log with say your name, or remmers, or
a staffer, I tend to think this might be a different story.
You say this is a system run by the members and users, and yet
the majority of users have voiced there strong desire that
the item be removed.
I'm forced to believe that this is a system run by the boatrd and staff, and
that they will do what they damn well please. It really doesn't matter now. I
think the damage is done and only perhaps bits and peaces beyond it will occur.
I suggest that the people who run Grex take a hard look at this 'censorship'
policy before someone who has the means and who will not take the treatment
decides to file a lawsuit against Grex. This could happen in the future in a
much more nasty way, and someone may decide to take you to court. As for me, I
couldn't. As for what you've all allowed to happen.... I'm sure it makes no
difference to you, because it hasn't hurt you. I hope you can prosper here,
nonetheless... but I don't think you will if you keep up these policies.

response 17 of 99:

Dec 29 03:27 UTC 1994

The only difference is the board is being blind the other way
in this issue.
As I said, however, yanking it now won't really make a hell
of a lot of difference.

response 19 of 99:

Dec 29 04:43 UTC 1994

I don't even know or care any more.

response 21 of 99:

Dec 29 05:29 UTC 1994

I think you might be missing something...
The fact is that Bhelliom NEVER SAID what was in that log.
This is more than an issue about a private conversation.
It's a bunch of issues and i think the most
dangerous one is the potential for an accusation of
allowing slander to exist on grex.
I really think the issue needs to be addressed.

response 23 of 99:

Dec 29 06:02 UTC 1994

Oh what sophistry.

The fact is that garbage shouldn't be there.
The fact is it's not you you don't care.
The fact is no one seems to care about the poeple.
It's all a question of 'issues' to everyone.
No one cares that some people have even felt so bad they've
talked about killing themselves.
I hope you never have your private life displayed for whoever.
You WOULD change your tune.
As for Mary, I question how relevant her situation was.
SHE didn't care.
I CARE.
SYLVIA CARES.
SUN CARES.
GET RID OF IT.