Call for a vote on pseudo membership privileges.

Oct 29 18:05 UTC 1991

    I propose that:

Pseudos be allowed all membership privileges, if they meet the
other criteria for membership.

--
let the debate begin.
We have 10 days.

response 2 of 49:

Oct 29 23:56 UTC 1991

   I cast my vote in favour of letting psuedos vote.

response 4 of 49:

Oct 30 00:08 UTC 1991

In favor, if they promise to only vote once.
 :)

response 6 of 49:

Oct 30 02:37 UTC 1991

  I'm not a member, so I don't get a formal vote, but I agree that 
pseudos should be able to vote.

response 8 of 49:

Oct 30 03:52 UTC 1991

I don't wan't to stay in the way of grex getting more money, but I don't
agree that pseudos can't obtain real accounts for voting, and be pseudos
the rest of the time. I don't see the point why someone has to be totaly
anonymous. What if someday other boardmembers say that 99 votes say that the
system be closed and hardware sold for $1 to person xyz. There is no way
of verifying anything any vote for ever if totaly anonymous pseudos vote.

response 10 of 49:

Oct 30 05:14 UTC 1991

As the person who entered the item, I'd like to point out that:

1) You can't vote yet. We are in the official 10 day discussion
period, on the proposal as it is worded.

2) Anyone on the system can enter the discussion, it's not
restricted to members.

response 12 of 49:

Oct 30 14:16 UTC 1991

I am in favor of letting pseudos vote.  Marcella, would you be willing to
abstain from this vote to satisfy the dissenters?  :-)

response 14 of 49:

Oct 30 22:36 UTC 1991

As stated on #0, I'd have to vote no.  I'd like any proposal addressing
pseudos holding membership and voting privileges to incorporate the following:

Users are encouraged to enjoy the system anonymously, should they wish to
do so, and even to support the system by contributing to Grex under a
pseudo account.  But in the event a person has multiple accounts they
are asked to only use one account (with one vote) on each issue.

response 16 of 49:

Oct 31 07:08 UTC 1991

I'd like to see a definite legal opinion on this regarding
"non-profit" status.

response 18 of 49:

Nov 5 00:46 UTC 1991

  I think that anyone voting No should explain how they are going
to enforce there rule.  

response 20 of 49:

Nov 5 03:00 UTC 1991

   I wandered over to the library, and looked up the relevant
laws as well as I was able, not having proper legal training
and all that.  What I found was:

  1) Corporations and other kinds of non-human 'persons' are
legally allowed to become members of non-profit corporations
unless expressly disallowed by the organization's bylaws.

  2) We are required to keep a formal list of members' names
and _addresses_.

  3) On-line 'meetings' are permitted (via 'teleconferencing'
and similar technology).  But 10 days notice must be given before
every such meeting.  Lucky us, we have a 10-day discussion
period.  However, such meetings have a requirement that all the
participants be identified to each other.  I don't know
whether that rules out pseudos or not.

   4) There didn't seem to be anything applicable under
'assumed names', or 'impersonation'.

   5) It is _illegal_ to wander around Michigan wearing a mask
or partial mask, unless you are:
 -- a child out trick-or-treating on Halloween
 -- on your way to a masquerade party
 -- part of a theatrical production
 -- part of a parade
 -- part of an historic re-enactment or something similar
 -- some other obscure loophole(s), which I forget.  Maybe something
about fraternal orders?

   Are pseudos out in public?  Is this a public place?


   

response 22 of 49:

Jan 22 02:31 UTC 1992

I don't see any reason we need to be members.

response 24 of 49:

Jan 22 23:26 UTC 1992

   Yes, you're right, it could happen.

   But so could a "real" person buy memberships for people, and influence
them in voting decisions.  I saw that happen right here in Ann Arbor about
10 years ago--someone spent about $600 on $20 memberships to a club for
his friends and they were able to turn the club upside down and oust long
time members from it.

   So everything has risks--which I hope we all realize--but what is the
best thing to do on a BBS?  This isn't a business, its a hobby.  I'm
hoping that it will always be run in the spirit of something *neat*,
something willing to take on new things, and at least try them, before
saying no.

  If we decided later on that psuedos voting was a bad idea, it would
be possible to change things at a later date.

  I again being up the can of worms about insisting on "real" people
only--how do we do that?  Insist on drivers licenses?  What about the
younger folks?  Is a system that is insistent about verification of
people the type of system we want?