|
|
| Author |
Message |
kami
|
|
New Fair Witness for Synthesis?
| 
Mar 20 18:36 UTC 1997 |
Hi folks! Our illustrious and long-time fair witness, Robh, has gone away
from Grex conferencing. He is responding to a controversy over giving
anonymous read-only access to people coming in over the web. He is
irreplaceable and his input will be sorely missed.
Since Chris Bartlett, our other previous fw, disappeared long ago when
his laptop committed suicide, that leaves Bruin, our newest fw. This
conference more-or-less runs itself, and Bruin does a fine job, but in the
interest of having more than one semi-responsible body, I'm volunteering to
take on being a fw in this conference. It is traditional on Grex for anyone
offering such service to start an item for the discussion of their appointment,
so this is it.
If you want more background on the conference, fair witnessing it, or
the occasion of Rob's resignation, go to items # 84, 85, and 106. If you
want to see more about my participation in the conference, well, I guess I'm
in just about every item...:}
|
| 55 responses total. |
e4808mc
|
|
response 1 of 55:
|
Mar 20 19:02 UTC 1997 |
Kami, I think you'd be great as a fw. Thanks for offering to help.
|
birdlady
|
|
response 2 of 55:
|
Mar 20 19:25 UTC 1997 |
I agree! =)
|
bruin
|
|
response 3 of 55:
|
Mar 21 00:32 UTC 1997 |
Reading, willing and able to work with you, kami.
|
faile
|
|
response 4 of 55:
|
Mar 21 03:06 UTC 1997 |
Sounds fantastic to me!
|
bjorn
|
|
response 5 of 55:
|
Mar 21 15:42 UTC 1997 |
I hope this doesn't sound like butt-kissing. ;-)
You'd certainly make an excellent fairwitness, Kami.
|
kami
|
|
response 6 of 55:
|
Mar 21 17:18 UTC 1997 |
My butt doesn't need to be kissed, Bjorn, and thanks for the positive
opinion. <g>
|
bruin
|
|
response 7 of 55:
|
Mar 21 18:44 UTC 1997 |
BTW, how do we remove Rob Henderson's name from the heading?
|
kami
|
|
response 8 of 55:
|
Mar 22 01:01 UTC 1997 |
I'll ask Popcorn. Also, there's now a conference for fw's which probably
has that question in it. And "help" will probably also elicit that answer.
|
bjorn
|
|
response 9 of 55:
|
Mar 23 03:04 UTC 1997 |
It's not all that hard to alter the login display of a conference - or the
logout for that matter. It's the rf that can get interesting - learned a hard
lesson there when my conference was born. But anyway I'm setting the drift
off.
|
jenna
|
|
response 10 of 55:
|
Mar 26 16:04 UTC 1997 |
I don't really think the conference needs 2 fw's.
It's just an ego trip for someone. But Kami
(among a lot of other people) would not do a bad job.
|
kami
|
|
response 11 of 55:
|
Mar 26 20:07 UTC 1997 |
Jenna, the reason a conference ought to have two fair witnesses, is that
sometimes a person loses access unexpectedly- such as one of this conference's
origional fw's, and that would leave no one (except, I suppose, those with
root access, so it's a non-problem) to run it. Then too, in some of the
other conferences I gather that there is a more active oversight such that
more than one opinion helps to keep things moderate. You're right that this
is not one of those. But please explain where you're getting the "ego trip"
comment from. How so?
Also, who else would you propose as a second fw for this conference?
|
mta
|
|
response 12 of 55:
|
Mar 28 01:55 UTC 1997 |
I think you'd be an excellent FW, Kami. It never hurts to have a couple of
backups. ;)
|
kami
|
|
response 13 of 55:
|
Mar 28 04:20 UTC 1997 |
Ok, Backup! <g>
Thanks.
And how're you, anyway?
|
jenna
|
|
response 14 of 55:
|
Mar 29 05:24 UTC 1997 |
I don't think this conference moves enough for 2 fws.
There's plenty of conferences with only one FW that are fine.
THERE is hardly ever anything TO moderate here.
There are enough people here for mob scenes. This is
nmore like a coffee shop... quiet, same debates
between the same people all the time, quiet backround
wurr. If the quad doesn't NEED 2 FW's, making 2 people
fw (especially like this) is nothing more than giving them
a title and power that they don't need. Don't get me wrong,
I don't think it'll hurt anybody if we have 2, or if kami
is one of them, or even if kami was the ONLY one...
its just unnecessary. When one FW resigns, if they[re
the only fw, they usually either handle that before leaving
or just vanish and leave it open to the users of the
conference to decide. THIS conversation is nothing more
than that decision of who should take over,exce[t that
we don't really NEED anyone to take over, because we already
have someone in charge.
This, though, is exactly the same conversation we'd be
having if robh had been the only fw. NO more hastle,
no less. You're asking for opinions, mine is that we
dopn't need a second FW.
|
jazz
|
|
response 15 of 55:
|
Mar 29 06:59 UTC 1997 |
Two FWs can serve, though, to generate a good amount of conversation.
|
jenna
|
|
response 16 of 55:
|
Mar 30 05:46 UTC 1997 |
so can any too people. if we went sheerly on amount of
words generated, jazz... you and brighn would have to be
fw's by far.
|
jazz
|
|
response 17 of 55:
|
Mar 30 10:24 UTC 1997 |
That's true, any interested participant can generate conversation.
As can any unusual or offensive statement made in a conference. But a
dedicated FW position can really help to give a person a reason to be
active, to maintain and care for the conference in a way that the casual
user quite often does not. Semi-moderated conferencing works.
|
bjorn
|
|
response 18 of 55:
|
Mar 30 15:52 UTC 1997 |
A single fw can be corrupted by their power, which I have learned from
experience. This is why I hav a second fw in my conference, and have not
dared to kill items except for restart.
|
jazz
|
|
response 19 of 55:
|
Mar 30 19:49 UTC 1997 |
So in your system, the purpose of the second FW is to kill the first
if they become corrupted? :)
|
mta
|
|
response 20 of 55:
|
Mar 30 21:36 UTC 1997 |
I still think adding Kami as co-FW is a fine idea.
|
jenna
|
|
response 21 of 55:
|
Mar 30 23:33 UTC 1997 |
*laugh (for 19) THAT would be an interesting system...
when they pick a 2nd fw, you KNOW you're in trouble... ;}
Like I said, I don't think it would hurt anything
and if I wasn't bopred silly, I don't think it would
merit this much conversation. Have 2 or don't...
*shrug* it doesn't really change the end result
much, in THIS conference as it has been the entire
time I've read it.
|
kami
|
|
response 22 of 55:
|
Jul 13 02:06 UTC 1997 |
Judging by the header of the conference, it might be time to re-open this
discussion...
|
bjorn
|
|
response 23 of 55:
|
Jul 13 03:49 UTC 1997 |
Yeah perhaps, after I finish draining the energy from Molly. ;)
|
kami
|
|
response 24 of 55:
|
Jul 13 04:02 UTC 1997 |
Bjorn, maybe I'm in a crabby mood just now, but could you refrain from
drifting in this conference for a wee bit? I mean, if you want to start an
item on the implied rules of magic in "Sailor Moon" here or in the Fantasy
conference, that would be cool, but random asides are just confusing. Maybe
I'm being easily confused just now, I've got the cold my boys had last
weekend, sigh.
|