response 146 of 367:

Feb 28 16:21 UTC 1997

It would take *much* longer than 15 minutes to scan item #27...it has 
nearly 600 responses, one of the longer items ever in a coop no doubt.

#144...brighn/babozita, I dont follow you, Mary drafted this vote and it 
counts?  and you still havent answered my previous query about what 
exactly it is you know about our current user base that makes you 
distrust cyberusers in general.

response 148 of 367:

Feb 28 19:26 UTC 1997

if adding 'explanatory text' to a ballot proposal - such as the
non-prejudicaial description/definition of the words included - if adding
such a clarifier to a proposal constitutes 'bias(ing) the outcome' then
there is a prejudice in the proposal <which the clarifier removes>.
  
btw, as far as i know <correction expected if wrong> only the status
of 'member' includes having 'supplied identification in accordance
with grex policy'. 
  
thefore i might conclude that the glossary is only 'close' at this time.

response 150 of 367:

Feb 28 20:52 UTC 1997

#147. ThanksJohn, that works.
  
Kerouac> You're making so many assumptions, child. I said I voted the way I
did because of what I know about the users of Grex. I can't answer your
questions if you're going to make assumptions. As to a vote counting, I meant
in the real world, i.e., an important vote in an important realm. This vote
is trivially idiotic, I've said as much before. Even within the functionings
of Grex, it's an idiotically trivial issue.

response 152 of 367:

Feb 28 22:46 UTC 1997

I see that Mnet hasnt cornered the market on whineybutts. It is amazing
too because grex's whineybutts arent even the same people as Mnet's
whineybutts. wow. 

Anyhow, since I cant figure out a way to piss everyone off with my vote, I
guess I will just have to vote based on my actual opinion of this issue
even though I feel funny voting over something so silly. I honestly am
surprised that people care about this so strongly one way or another. I
would almost consider this to be the kind of issue that the staff could
implement without a stamp of approval from the membership. <<shrug>>

This proposal gets a yes vote from me. 

(Just an aside: I didnt realize that so few members voted. I mean I
already feel funny about voting on issues here because I am a member but I
dont log on too often. Should my opinion on things carry more weight that
someone's who logs on every day but who isnt a member? And why would
someone who logs on every day not become a member unless they cant afford
it. Why would they let someone like me have such a large say in policy
issues here?)

response 154 of 367:

Mar 1 00:46 UTC 1997

Kerouac> That there are some good users out there and some prime shitheads
who don't respect me -- or anyone except themselves. And some malicious
bastards. And some wonderful people who are fun to disagree with because their
intellects match mine. And others that are fun to tease because they're stupid
and gullible and make dumb assumptions about things. =} And there are people
with short attention spans... that affected my vote, too. Gee, Kerouac, this
is fun, teasing you. Maybe you'll get me to get to my point before the voting
is over. And maybe not. We'll see.

response 156 of 367:

Mar 1 02:41 UTC 1997

I just voted- still no explanatory text, and as it wasn't there when the vote
started, this vote MUSt be considered invalid! The proposal makes no sense:
"MOTION:

 

 To allow unregistered users to read all Grex conferences

 except the Staff conference."
Sure, one could read through here and get the OPINION of what an unregistered
user is, but if there is no definition in the motion, ESPECIALLY in a motion
that is so arrogantly simplistic in it's assuming wording, the wording of that
motion is INVALID. All you can get here in coop is the OPINION of what this
motion means- but the actual motion is so very vague that MY opinion of what
it says is just as valid as Mary's!

response 160 of 367:

Mar 1 19:16 UTC 1997

Someone (pfv, I think) entered an item in the M-Net general
conference reporting on the "unregistered reading" controversy
on Grex, which has prompted discussion (surprise, surprise) of
what M-Net should do. I entered a response detailing my
viewpoint on the issue, and it occurred to me that it might be
reasonable to post it here as well, as one more effort to say
why I think this proposal is a good idea and why I hope it
passes. So here's what I said on M-Net:
----------
 Speaking as one who's been participating in the Grex discussions of
 this all along: I favor unregistered reading (i.e. reading any public
 conference on Grex via the web, without a login id) as it establishes,
 in effect, a "guest account" with an easy interface that people can
 use to check out Grex. Right now, to do that you have to run newuser
 and create an account to do that. There lots of people who do that,
 log in once, and never come back -- and until their account is reaped
 they're using Grex resources: space in the passwd file, space on the
 disk. With the proposed read-only web interface, they wouldn't be
 using resources if they decided not to come back.
 
 More important than the resource usage issue: Maybe with an easier
 interface, we'll attract more people who find a discussion interesting
 and are motivated to run newuser (which also has a web interface on
 grex) so that they can contribute to the discussion and, thereby,
 become part of the community -- people we wouldn't have gotten if
 they'd had to go through the extra step of taking out an account
 in order even to *read* anything.
 
 There's currently a member vote underway on Grex on this issue. The
 concept has certainly elicited a lot of vocal and emotional opposition,
 although my sense is that the majority of members favor unregistered
 reading. We shall see.
 
 The compromise of making an "intro" or "best of Grex" conference 
 web-readable has been proposed, but what's "interesting" or "best" to
 one person is not necessarily so to another. So I much prefer making
 everything open and letting folks decide what they like without having
 somebody pre-filter it for them.
 
 The opposition to this seems to be based, as best I can tell, that
 unregistered reading would be "less private" in some significant
 sense than the kind of access that people have now. Given that
 anybody can run newuser on Grex (just as on M-Net), not give any
 correct personal information, and can then read *and post to* any
 conference -- anonymously -- this argument just doesn't hold water.
 If people think that what they enter in conferences *now* on Grex
 or M-Net is in any sense private, then they are kidding themselves.

response 162 of 367:

Mar 1 22:48 UTC 1997

I think if Mary's proposal passes, and robh announces he's resigning, that
the board should decline his resignation offer.  Keep rob on in name as a
board member for the rest of his term.  Probably wont have problems making
quorum anyway.  Or make rob a "board member-emeritus"  

response 164 of 367:

Mar 2 02:15 UTC 1997

I agree with richard. Jeff, please reconsider. We do not want to lose robh!

response 166 of 367:

Mar 2 08:36 UTC 1997

re #139 - Valerie, I'm glad to hear that.  However, having strongly
reconsidered my vote, I think I still am going to vote against the
measure.

re #162 - What kind of hypocrites would the board be by declining robh's
resignation?  For a board that is striving to improve the grex community
and open it to others, it would be a total reversal to not allow a board
member to decide his own fate upon the board.  (A newbie may enter Grex
on his/her free will, but a board member cannot leave it?)

If robh resigns, and the board declines it - I will most likely *not*
renew my membership when it comes due, because that action is the
antithesis of any open-minded community.

response 168 of 367:

Mar 2 10:43 UTC 1997

Issues of personal choice aside, if the Board wants to decline
my resignation, they have every right to do so.  It even says
so in the By-Laws.  (Yes, some of us have read the whole thing.
>8)  They should probably consider, though, that I would not be
attending any future Board meetings from that point on, which
would make it that much harder for them to make quorum for a meeting.
It would better serve Grex's needs (IMHO) if I were replaced as
quickly as possible, to keep things running smoothly.

(The funny thing is, if my resignation is accepted, then the 2/3
quorum will temporarily drop to 4 Board members until my replacement
is elected.  Another good reason to accept it ASAP!)

Of course, I'm still hoping that I won't have to resign.  I'm not
exactly eager to leave.