|
Grex > Coop12 > #113: Cyberspace Communications finances for June 2002 |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 271 responses total. |
cross
|
|
response 150 of 271:
| 
Jul 7 02:50 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 151 of 271:
|
Jul 7 05:04 UTC 2002 |
I just want to make sure everyone reads #149. Ric's not kidding.
|
scg
|
|
response 152 of 271:
|
Jul 7 06:35 UTC 2002 |
Grex's 501(c)3 is of the providing services to people who couldn't otherwise
afford them variety.
|
scg
|
|
response 153 of 271:
|
Jul 7 06:52 UTC 2002 |
(continuing my last thought)
Of course, in defense of those who are picking on those who don't want to
donate, there's a difference between providing free services to those who
couldn't otherwise afford them, and providing free services to those who could
afford them but don't want to pay. I don't think anybody would consider it
acceptable if I showed up at some charity providing free food to the homeless
and told them that as a charity they needed to feed me too. I suspect I would
be told to go buy my own food, or at least I hope I would. Likewise, it's
a bit strange for somebody to first claim they could fund Grex entirely by
themselves if they needed to, but then say that as a charity Grex should be
serving them for free instead.
However, I'm not sure that really applies in the case of Grex. What Grex
really provides, or at least what Grex provides in the useful sense now that
free e-mail is so widespread, is a community. That community is greatly
enriched by the people who participate in it, whether or not they contribute
money or volunteer time. It would certainly be nice if there were more
financial contributors, either so Grex could make its unspecified hypothetical
improvements, or so the long term supporters could back off and let new people
take their turns at supporting the system. I hope nobody here's been
suggesting that people who are short on cash should feel obligated to
contribute, and I certainly wouldn't want to see those who could contribute
but don't want to feel guilty to the point of leaving. But, I can see why
there might be some resentment from people making donations in an attempt to
provide free access to those who can't afford it, when they find out they're
instead donating money to provide access to thsoe who could afford it easil.
|
other
|
|
response 154 of 271:
|
Jul 7 07:09 UTC 2002 |
re: 152
...which makes Joe right about "paying your share," except that that is
coming from a user and member, not "the organization," and as such,
reflects the views of the person making the statement (and possibly
others as well), but not a stated position of the organization.
Mark is legitimately concerned about a decline in membership over a
sufficiently long period to be more than just the occasional hiccup. My
own impression is that it is reflective of the overall economy more than
of any definitive localized trend.
Colocation is something that Grex may consider, but it is not and does
not need to be a priority for us now because the patterns our staff have
settled into in the way they maintain and operate the machinery would be
upset dramatically by such a move, and the need for cost reduction hasn't
justified that "cost." Granted, the new patterns resulting from such a
change could possibly be more efficient, but that result is only
speculation. This is kind of a bird in hand/bird in bush scenario.
Frankly, I give the $60 a year to Grex because I make it a point to
donate some money to the (non-governmental) public good each year, and
Grex is something I enjoy using. I don't donate to Grex out of any sense
of obligation, or because I expect to see my money put to some specific
use. I know that my donation will go toward keeping Grex functioning,
period.
<scg slipped in>
|
mary
|
|
response 155 of 271:
|
Jul 7 10:50 UTC 2002 |
Seldom does a response on Grex have the power to bum me out
when I'm off-line. But Michael's #133, third paragraph does.
Now I feel like I've paid for what he's given. And it's morning
and I don't respect either of us.
Yuck.
|
mary
|
|
response 156 of 271:
|
Jul 7 10:52 UTC 2002 |
Get out your checkbook, Michael, and make it right. Please.
|
md
|
|
response 157 of 271:
|
Jul 7 12:10 UTC 2002 |
Oh please.
|
md
|
|
response 158 of 271:
|
Jul 7 12:14 UTC 2002 |
Look at it this way, Mary: you're paying for Joe, not for me! But if
it bothers you that much, there's a simple solution: stop contributing.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 159 of 271:
|
Jul 7 15:50 UTC 2002 |
Re #154: Mark's the Treasurer, right? So he's speaking for Grex when he
talks about "paying your share," especially in an item where he's
been posting financial reports and stats in his official capacity.
Or at least it sure looks that way.
|
scott
|
|
response 160 of 271:
|
Jul 7 16:00 UTC 2002 |
Re 159: Well, then are you speaking for M-Net? Or are we allowed to have
our own opinions?
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 161 of 271:
|
Jul 7 16:13 UTC 2002 |
1. I'm not a member of the M-Net Board or Staff.
2. I didn't enter this item in an official capacity, which Mark did.
3. Mark is talking about donations and Grex's funding, which is also his
"job" on Grex. This isn't my job.
If you can't understand why Mark's statements look like official Grex policy
and mine don't look like official M-Net policy, you're one of those people
Russ thinks the public schools shouldn't waste their time on.
If Mark wants to express personal opinions mixed in with his official
statements as Treasurer, and cares whether potential donors can tell the two
apart, he needs to say "this is my personal opinion" or something similar.
I'm not the only person who was confused by the Grex Treasurer, in the Grex
financial statement item, talking about people letting other people pay
their share.
|
jp2
|
|
response 162 of 271:
|
Jul 7 17:02 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
md
|
|
response 163 of 271:
|
Jul 7 17:08 UTC 2002 |
Even better, Mary: Jamie is paying for me.
|
jp2
|
|
response 164 of 271:
|
Jul 7 17:17 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
md
|
|
response 165 of 271:
|
Jul 7 17:26 UTC 2002 |
Okay, will be paying for me soon. I thank you, Jamie, and I'm sure
Mary thanks you.
|
scott
|
|
response 166 of 271:
|
Jul 7 17:29 UTC 2002 |
Joe, if you're not speaking as a representative of M-Net, then why are you
basing your advice on what M-Net has done? You (and others) have been arguing
that (essentially) you've made all the mistakes on M-Net, managed to survive
them, and are now presenting the results as what Grex "must do" to survive.
I really don't get how that would help Grex, since we already have a much
better record of management results.
I mean, come on: "We've fucked up more often, so that means we're smarter than
you"?
|
jp2
|
|
response 167 of 271:
|
Jul 7 18:01 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
cross
|
|
response 168 of 271:
|
Jul 7 18:57 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 169 of 271:
|
Jul 7 21:52 UTC 2002 |
[Hauls the topic back to the focus _she_ wants.
Is it true a decision has been made on the OS?
If so, what does that imply about our hardware choices?
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 170 of 271:
|
Jul 7 23:41 UTC 2002 |
Re #166: That's a ridiculous distortion of what I'm saying, assuming you've
actually read my posts in the first place. I do base my advice in
part on my experience as a board member, VP, and President of
Arbornet -- but I also base it on my 18 years of BBSing in Ann
Arbor, my experience with technology policy, and my JD. And, of
course, all of my other life experiences, just like everyone else
does.
I think M-Net's mistakes and experiences are relevant to Grex --
not that things will necessarily happen the same way here, but
because there are enough similarities that it's worth hearing.
In the present case, I think M-Net's refusal to consider co-lo
until our back was against the wall was a mistake. Will Grex
ever *need* to co-lo? Who knows... but it's worth hearing what
a similar system did wrong. When I was on the M-Net board, I
looked at Grex practices; your experience with open conference
creation was one of the things that led me to push for abolishing
the conference committee.
If you aren't willing to learn from the experiences of others,
you're a fool, Scott.
|
jp2
|
|
response 171 of 271:
|
Jul 7 23:46 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 172 of 271:
|
Jul 7 23:47 UTC 2002 |
Shut up -- you haven't paid for the right to speak here.
|
jp2
|
|
response 173 of 271:
|
Jul 8 00:06 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 174 of 271:
|
Jul 8 00:19 UTC 2002 |
I don't think you're helping the tone of the discussion either, frankly.
|