response 1 of 24:

Mar 19 04:53 UTC 1996

  And also, when an item is linked, with the intention of deleting it
from the original conference and moving it, is it not reasonable to 
expect an explanation from the fw as to why he is making this decision.
No explanation was made in Brighn's post announcing his intent to
move my item.  Also isnt it reasonable to expect that a linked item
should be maintained in both confs for a decent amount of time, so that
people are aware it is being moved.  This decision was made on Friday,
grex was down all weekend, and I went to cflirting today and found my
item moved.  I asked brighn, since very few people could have been on
between friday and monday morning, to relink the item if for no other
reason than to make sure people know where its now located.  He said
no flatly and unequivocally.  
  Therefore I think he hasa bused his authority as a fairwitness.  Being
an FW does not give Brighn the right to ignore my rights as the poster
of the item in question to have the chance to give my side of the argument
over whether it should have been moved.  I dont mind that it was
linked, in fact it made sense to link it, but the fw shouldnt delete an
item entirely from a conf over the objections of the poster, especially
when the poster had no input into the decision.

response 3 of 24:

Mar 19 07:02 UTC 1996

Moving an item isn't exactly the same as deleting it.  At a minimum a slower
move ("this item has been linked to 'hsex' and will be deleted from 'cflirt'
in four days") would be appropriate.  I dunno.

response 5 of 24:

Mar 19 11:45 UTC 1996

I do not see why the posting was not appropriate for the cflirt conf.  

response 7 of 24:

Mar 19 15:32 UTC 1996

That's the answer for now. This discussion should also make it known to
fws that fooling around with users' items is a serious matter. I consider
moving it also high-handed. The person that entered it is the best judge
of where it is entered, and even if they made a "mistake", it is *their*
mistake. 

response 9 of 24:

Mar 19 17:06 UTC 1996

Or an e-mail request from the f-w.  Just moving it is rather rude.

response 11 of 24:

Mar 19 18:22 UTC 1996

The move *was* too fastand rude, I'll admit now.  I've got a trigger
finger of late and have been trying to control it.  Hross, the third
FW of After Dark, also agrees taht the item is inappropriate, but he
feels that moving it was also out of line.  Freezing it wouldn't have
worked, since that would freeze both ends of the link, but I suppose
I could have retired it.
I gave four days warning, and Grex was down two of those days.  *shrug*
As far as items getting killed, Rane, when the split between After Dark
and Human Sexuality was complete, Selena warned me (and the conference)
of her intended FW kills so I could move whichever ones I wanted to
After Dark.  One of my items was killed in accordions based on a FW
grudge against me.  If FWs can't kill items not created by them, why
give them that power?  If libel is the only justifiable cause for
killing an item, then !kill should only work for the entrant and 
root.  *shrug*
Carson, that's the third bloody time you've asked that.  Get a clue.
*g*

Anyway, I'll post a pointer from After Dark to Human Sexuality.
*If* Kerouac had addressed the matter in a less hostile manner, I'd
consider relinking.  *If* Kerouac re-enters the item, I'll leave it
alone.  

I feel like FW roles do in fact need to be better defined.  The accusations
I've gotten in the last few months, and the user treatment, not just
from Kerouac but from certain others (the certain others being the ones
who gave me the damn trigger finger) have amounted to giving the FW the
following rights:
-- advertise the conference
-- stimulate conversation that is appropriate
And gives the FW the following obstacles:
-- ignore or forget any itemor thread that is inappropriate
-- put up with flames and insults without so much as defending oneself

In short, in the eyse of some users, they can come and rampage a conference,
do as they please, and the FW can't say "boo" without being accused of abuse
of power.  I'm sorry, I thought the FW's role was steering away from
inappropriate conversation.

response 13 of 24:

Mar 19 19:26 UTC 1996

  I did not feel the item was inappropriate.  It was about cyberflirting
IN the cyberflirting conference.  There have been items in the poetry
conf that were not poems, but were just about poems.  This is no
different. In fact, I didnt intend for this item to be in hsex...it is
not about sex but about relationships and how they are interpreted in
real life when they occur in cyberspace.  When I created the item, I
was going to put it in Oathbound, which is the "relationships" conf, but
it deals directly with what cflirting is about.  The item was about
how people have reacted to other people flirting in cyberspace.  I
feel I had the right as the poster to put that where I felt it was
appropriate.  Just because there is a conf about a subject, does not mean
that subject cannot be discussed elsewhere.  I'm fw of politics, but
I dont get in a huff when political items show up in other confs and 
insist that the items be linked and deleted.  I just link them for the
benefit of anyone who might come to politics not knowing these items
showed up elsewhere.

I do not believe the role of the fw is to act as censor and tell posters
what they can and cannot post.   Cflirting has maybe 60 messages in it,
my post was relevant and it was not harming anyone there.  If the conf
had 1000 messages and there was some huge space problem, or if items
were being retired en masse to bring the conf up to date (which happened
in sexuality) that is different.  But barring those extraordinary 
circumstances the FW shouldnt be involved at all in making editorial
decisions about content.

I'd like to see cfadmin develop some loose fw guidelines that prospective
fw's agree to follow before they are given fw status.  I think such
clarification would help avoid these matters.  Also, Brighn became
a co-fw of sexuality because selena, who was the fw, decided he should.
I didnt know fw's could decide who else could be fw's but then again
none of this is spelled out.

response 15 of 24:

Mar 19 20:16 UTC 1996

  Brighn...the fw can comment about what posters say just as anyone
else can comment.  The fw is not allowed to censor what anyone else says.
Your having fw files doesnt give you that right.  The purpose of the fw
is to start the conference, do login/logout screens and do the admin
fuctions or requests necessary for re-starting and updating a conf
when absolutely necessary.  That is all.  Period.  FWs are  NOT the owners or
proprietors of the conference, they are participants like anyone else.  Fws
shouldnt be making deciosns for other people about which items they can read or
where they can read them

response 17 of 24:

Mar 19 21:36 UTC 1996

*shrugs*  I'm no lnger acting as FW on Grex, at least for the time being.

response 19 of 24:

Mar 20 00:04 UTC 1996

As I see it, except for Agora and Co-op, fair witnesses have a lot of
lattitude in what they want to do with a conference.  If I have a major
problem with a fair witness, I'll avoid that conference and leave the fw
to be annoying without me.  If this happened in a conference with a topic I
still wanted to talk about, I'd start another conference with an overlapping
topic and have conversations there, instead.

I'm not comfortable with making fws all swear to abide by a set of Rules
before they can be fair witnesses.

response 21 of 24:

Mar 20 00:42 UTC 1996

This item should be linked to the cyberflirt conference so 
the participants of that conference can be made aware of 
the FW's behavior and be able to comment on how they'd 
like to see the conference managed.

response 23 of 24:

Mar 20 02:12 UTC 1996

The item in question now seems to be back in cflirting as well
as in hsex.  That's nice.  But this discussion, about what is
appropriate use of FW power in the cflirting conference should
most certainly be discussed in that conference with input
from the cflirting participants, don't you think?

I've mailed cflirts listed fairwitnesses asking for this
item to be linked.