response 142 of 236:

Dec 28 21:06 UTC 2006

resp:141 Don't let this shock you too much- but I agree with your entire
post. I also agree, as you wrote in 139 that a suggestion for change
should not be met with wrath and a conversation about Oracle. ;)
Unfortunately, I don't have the technical knowledge to know where to
begin to make technical changes so that newuser can be reopened and so
mail can flow again.

response 144 of 236:

Dec 28 21:24 UTC 2006

Regarding #136; Frankly, Mary, I've come to believe that you look at the
situation through the lense of your own biases.  You've made it pretty clear
over the past several years (in fact, ever since I made a comment about
friends of mine who have had abortions later regreting their decisions) that
you don't like me, and since then, I think you've made little effort to
conceal that my opinions carry little weight with you.  So, that you feel
that I am attacking the organization carries very little weight with me.
I'm sorry, but that's how it is.  That said, as a (soon-to-be) board member,
if you'd like to make *constructive* comments and suggestions, I'm certainly
open to entertaining whatever you have to say.  But snippy comments such as,
``are we having fun yet?'' and ``what have you done for grex?'' and
statements of the form, ``all you do is complain and demoralize our
volunteers'' will be ignored from now on.  I campaigned on a platform of
change for grex; I intend to follow through on that.

As the other Remmers said of me, perhaps I need a thicker skin.  I'll grant
that that might be true.  But, if honest criticism -- not to be confused
with ad hominem attacks -- are going to drive away volunteer staff instead
of being accepted in the spirit in which offered, then perhaps it would
behoove those staff people to grow slightly thickers skins as well.  If they
can't do that, then perhaps the best thing for all is to thank them for
their service, acknowledge their extensive and important contributions to
grex, and encourage them to ceed the reigns to other people who have more
energy and will to move the organization forward in the direction that *it*
wants to go, rather than just those few people.  After all, there are tens
of thousands of grex users worldwide; the desires of 20 or 30 in Ann Arbor
Michigan should not, in my opinion, determine the direction for the rest.

Further, the fact remains that many long term grex users and contributers
are dissatisfied with the current state of the system.  That should not be
ignored just because (a) you don't like the manner in which they voice their
concerns, or (b) because you don't like them on a personal level.  To
paraphrase our own Jan Wolter, just because someone says something in a way
that *you* feel is abrasive or unproductive doesn't make them any less valid
or worthy of consideration.

As for building friendships based on respect --- that's an implicit value
judgement on your part that (a) I (or anyone else, for that matter) doesn't
already *have* respect for the parties in question, which I can only assure
you is untrue, and (b) that somehow it is more important for, say, me to
seek the respect of others than for them to seek mine.  You get the respect
you earn, Mary, and part of earning it is giving it.  I respect those who
have been on grex longer than me, but I'm not going to play Happy Happy Joy
Joy games when I honestly, truly, feel that it is not in the best interests
of the organization.  Your way has dominated for 15 years, but it is clearly
breaking down.  An organization either recognizes that and responds
accordingly, or whithers and dies.  Which would you prefer?

Finally, it would be a mistake to think that people ``aren't fighting back''
because such an idea is an absurdity: you can't fight *back* if no one is
*fighting* you in the first place.  And no one is fighting in the first
place.  Criticizing, perhaps, but the two are different.  If that criticism
is just ignored, however, then that *is* telling.

Regarding #137; Yes, I am agreeing with you that it's sometimes hard to see
the difference.  And clearly, sometimes the delivery of the message obscures
the message.  However, that doesn't mean that the message is wrong.

You know, I think some people have provided some pretty decent suggestions
for getting others to explore grex; in particular, scholar posted some items
about six months ago to encourage membership, including allowing hosted
graphics on web pages (for grex members), and for doing away or restricting
the ID requirement.  Some solid technical advice has been given for
alleviating some of the woes grex faces on the, er, technical side.  I think
all of these things are wonderful ideas, but *where* is the staff input?
Has staff responded to anything about making email opt-in, for instance, or
setting up a spam filter or virus filter, or setting up RT, or the continued
discussion about changing around the password hashing algorithm, or any of
the other things people have posted recently?  I think that the discussion
in item 27 in the garage conference is kind of telling.  I actually wrote
and tested code to make that change, but discussion just fizzled (and some
of Marcus Watts's responses sort of crystalize the demeaning of reputations
and such that Mary Remmers was referring to).

And I would definitely say that agreement that the current state of things
is not good is clearly not universal.

response 146 of 236:

Dec 28 23:38 UTC 2006

mic, it would be helpful if you spoke for yourself, and did not pretend to
be a spokesperson for the majority of members.  No one has elected you to
speak for the rest of us, nor have you made any attempt to elicit our
opinions.  

I, frankly, don't appreciate your negative, immature style and think that,
rather than providing leadership, you have heavily contributed to the
divisive atmosphere here.  Your "truth" is simply your opinion.  

I believe that cross has maintained a relatively level-headed response in
discussion the problems with Grex, and has consistently tried to keep us
focused on solving problems, rather than on personalities.  

The old way is not working.  Cloistering ourselves for almost a year has
simply lead to a faster decline of our community.  Forbidding users from
asking help questions because they don't have off-site priveleges is also a
fast way to reach a dead end.  

I don't think that mary's sweeping generalizations about the proposed changes
are helpful either.  Some changes to the current situation have to be made.
Not allowing new people to engage in our community is suicidal.  Having an
innactive staff, that cannot solve problems they have been working on for over
a year is also suicidal.  

I'm hoping that cross's election to the BoD will provide some impetus for
those changes.  Perhaps I was wrong to withdraw from the election.  I support
thoughtful changes that allow us to grow as a community.  I support cross as
he endeavors to help the board and staff reach consensus on the methods we
need to use to make those changes.  

I offer my talents to board and staff to try to get these changes made in a
positive way.  But changes have to be made.  The current isolation is not
healthy.  

response 148 of 236:

Dec 29 00:23 UTC 2006

Let's get back on topic.  What does staff need to get newuser working?
Give us a list of "these would make the best approach and scenario" so we can
offer solutions.

response 150 of 236:

Dec 29 01:23 UTC 2006

Clarification:  outbound access is not simply for email, but for ftp, etc,
etc?  

This is different from past practice.  We currently require verified ID to
grant outbound access to the internet.  In the past, we did not require
verified ID to send email outside the system.  

response 152 of 236:

Dec 29 01:36 UTC 2006

Not quite.  Traditionally and historically, we've allowed any one on grex to
use DNS, finger, http, whois, gopher, talk and ntalk.  Newuser was closed
because someone was using even that limited access to attack our ISP.

response 154 of 236:

Dec 29 02:54 UTC 2006

Ok, next clarifying question:  

The proposal for non-techie volunteers to grant outbound access will still
only allow email, DNS, finger, http, whois, gopher, talk, and ntalk.  

Verified ID will still be necessary for those wanting to use outbound ftp,
telnet, and other traditionally "members only" privileges.

response 156 of 236:

Dec 29 03:00 UTC 2006

Thanks, I'll still volunteer then *grin*

response 158 of 236:

Dec 29 04:51 UTC 2006

On the flip side, it would be nice to have some accountability and at least
know what staff is up to and what they are not up to.  Maybe there is a
timeframe for reporting they'd agree to?

response 160 of 236:

Dec 29 17:41 UTC 2006

I am resigning from Grex board and staff, effective immediately.
Although I have been a staff member for over fifteen years and a board
member for roughly half of those, the recent tenor of discussions in
this conference have clarified for me that my heart is no longer in
it and that I must take a break from Grex governance and staff
responsibilities.  My thanks to those who supported me in the recent
board election, and apologies for any inconvenience my decision may
cause.  I do plan to continue as an active user and member of Grex.

Article 4c of the bylaws provides for a special election to fill
vacancies on the board.  I presume that one of the first orders of
business of the new board will be to schedule such an election.

response 162 of 236:

Dec 29 20:33 UTC 2006

Given that Remmers resigned after being re-elected, but days before the
convening of the new board (and days before his old term on the board
expired), but after the election, I propose that we avoid another special
election and make scholar, who did come in 4th in the election, remmers's
replacement on the next board.

response 164 of 236:

Dec 29 21:47 UTC 2006

I would prefer to have a new election.  The board can still convene minus one
member.  Remmers, thanks for all your good work.

response 166 of 236:

Dec 29 22:57 UTC 2006

Nate is Right; Steve came in 4th.