|
Grex > Coop13 > #77: Member Initiative: Do Nothing For Four Weeks. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 56 responses total. |
willcome
|
|
response 12 of 56:
| 
Jan 10 09:20 UTC 2004 |
What if someone enters an initiative saying the Board can't do that?
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 13 of 56:
|
Jan 10 13:41 UTC 2004 |
resp:0 It has seemed that matters of diplomacy and negiotation have
suffered a bit. I have read carefully through the mass of these
debates, trying to make the best sense of it all. I have offered some
of my experience rather than to openly enter the debate. Perhaps I am
idealistic, but I think this proposal allows us some time to consider
such discussion rather than make decisions that might appear quick or
hasty later.
resp:3 As long as everyone agrees the script should be suspended as
part of this proposal, I have no problem with it.
|
willcome
|
|
response 14 of 56:
|
Jan 10 14:32 UTC 2004 |
Of course, there's no-way to "suspend" the script.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 15 of 56:
|
Jan 10 14:47 UTC 2004 |
To "suspend" the script, I would ask Valerie or another staff member to
make sure no one could run it on Grex. I would also ask that anyone with
the skills to create another script that achieves the same effect (robotic
removal of all posts created by a single login and uid) refrain from doing
so for the same time period.
It may be that this becomes a type of robotic action that is forbidden under
our no-bots policy.
|
mary
|
|
response 16 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:16 UTC 2004 |
People here are very angry, just like Valerie was angry.
I think they need to be allowed to vent even if that means
removing all of everything they've ever posted. Even if
it means they walk away or take a break from Grex.
This will settle down. Grex will survive. I find it reassuring,
actually, that people care enough to get upset.
I'd *not* try to meddle with any additional rules at this time
or try to calm things down until they're ready to calm down.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 17 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:29 UTC 2004 |
Re #15: Minor point: Valerie is not a staff member.
|
willcome
|
|
response 18 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:44 UTC 2004 |
Re. 15: There's still no-way to disable or hinder anyone who wants to run
the script.
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:54 UTC 2004 |
Donning by voteadm hat...
The fact that there are now three conflicting member proposals on the
table entered at about the same time raises some interesting procedural
questions that the bylaws don't address. I'd appreciate some guidance
from the board about how to procede.
|
jp2
|
|
response 20 of 56:
|
Jan 10 16:10 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 56:
|
Jan 10 16:40 UTC 2004 |
Re #17: That's true, and not a minor point.
Re #20: Jep gets to "worry about" it too, since he made one of
the proposals.
|
naftee
|
|
response 22 of 56:
|
Jan 10 17:19 UTC 2004 |
The GreX staff should prepare a list of blacklisted scripts, and post it
somewhere, so we can all balk at how long it would be.
|
gull
|
|
response 23 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:29 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:2 and resp:3: I think that would be silly. Valerie's script
only automates something that everyone can already do. It's ridiculous
to tell people, "Okay, you can go scribble all your responses by hand,
but don't you dare automate it!" It's also unenforcible.
|
scott
|
|
response 24 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:30 UTC 2004 |
We apply that rule to other operations, like sending mail.
|
other
|
|
response 25 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:33 UTC 2004 |
1) This proposal is well intentioned, but I think that the delays
already built in to our voting process are sufficient to serve the
purpose for which it was proposed.
2) Because the posting-removal script only automates a process that
any user can freely engage in anyway, and it won't run without the user
being logged in to run it (correct?) depermitting the script or
otherwise prohibiting other similar scripts sets an unclear precedent
and may be worse than leaving it alone.
3) The people posting most vehemently in the aftermath of these events
are those with the least at stake. If you take those noises out of the
picture and reevaluate, you'd find that there is much concern being
expressed, but that the process is not proceeding any differently from
any other controversial matter we've dealt with in the past.
As far as I can tell, this was coming sooner or later anyway, and it
was bound to be a test of the ability of Grex to survive growing pains.
This is a process all small organizations go through as they grow, in
some form or other, and either they survive it and go on, or they don't
and something else comes along to fill the niche. You can't short
circuit this process and be doing Grex any favors. And changing the
rules of the game as this proposal does is just that.
|
other
|
|
response 26 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:37 UTC 2004 |
24: Thea reasons for that particular prohibition are distinctly
different.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 27 of 56:
|
Jan 10 20:02 UTC 2004 |
Earlier, I expressed some support of this proposal. I've now reconsidered.
I think Mary and Eric have made good points, and I will have to get caught
up on the other items before the vote. The voting period is two weeks, as
I recall, which doesn't begin until after the discussion period. If that
is insufficient time, I can always vote to preserve the status quo ante. :)
|
richard
|
|
response 28 of 56:
|
Jan 10 21:47 UTC 2004 |
de-permitting the script for valerie's program or otherwise disallowing
automated scribbling is a matter of avoiding reckless behaviour. Suppose
somebody goes on a flaming spree in Agora and insults everyone in site and
gets in fights and has people responding to him upset. And then he runs this
script and has all his posts automatically removed. This single handedly tears
up the conference and makes people with posts responding to him potentially
look bad because all of a sudden there is no context for their own heated
responses. Only allowing scribbling one message at a time makes removing so
many posts from any one conference impractical. It could still be done but
it would take so much time few would do it. It is a safety net and would
encourage users to have to go slowly and think more about scribbling post
after post.
These conferences are what Grex is all about. Staff should want them kept
intact as much as possible because without them, what is Grex? Those
conferences aren't just a collection of individual posts, they are WHOLES,
they are a collective work. This just brings up the whole copyright
debate again, but I think people who post here do so knowing that their
words are being in effect published, that they give permission to Grex to
spread their words over the web as part of Grex. And as such when you
scribble or delete posts, it affects more than just you. Grex should not
encourage mass scribbling by allowing it to be too convenient to do so
|
naftee
|
|
response 29 of 56:
|
Jan 10 22:17 UTC 2004 |
But by only allowing a whole conference, you're also warranting the deletion
of conferences in their entirety. A contradiction on your behalf.
|
jp2
|
|
response 30 of 56:
|
Jan 10 22:39 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 31 of 56:
|
Jan 10 23:32 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:28: How likely do you think your hypothetical situation is? And
how would it be any worse than someone just posting a bunch of flames in
agora and leaving them there? It's not as if that's never happened.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 32 of 56:
|
Jan 10 23:55 UTC 2004 |
(I've seen such behaviour before. The 'victims' quickly 1) remove their
now-contextless comments and 2) learn to think before responding. Sometimes,
it takes a few iterations for 2) to occur.)
|
gull
|
|
response 33 of 56:
|
Jan 11 01:10 UTC 2004 |
That doesn't seem like such a terrible outcome. ;>
|
keesan
|
|
response 34 of 56:
|
Jan 11 01:17 UTC 2004 |
People can't scribble what other people quoted from their responses, so
perhaps we should all start each response by quoting the previous one?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 35 of 56:
|
Jan 11 01:18 UTC 2004 |
The _real_ fun begins when people can edit their past responses: put up some
flame-bait, garner a few flames, then switch the bait to something completely
innocuous. The learning is a bit faster in those situations, I think.
'Twas this scenario that garnered so much opposition during the censored-log
debate.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 36 of 56:
|
Jan 11 02:36 UTC 2004 |
Richard, I think that you see Grex in a very different light than I do. I
NEVER have thought of it as "publishing" my words. I felt that I was talking
in a limited medium that would eventually be erased and forgotten.
|