|
Grex > Coop9 > #55: Motion: To allow unregistered reading of all conferences | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 367 responses total. |
pfv
|
|
response 182 of 367:
| 
Mar 3 04:16 UTC 1997 |
Minimizing my Kerouacs...
Of course it is "closed": it has rules, and accounts, and
authoritative figures that can reap (execute) you for abusing
your welcome..
Unless, of course, you don't consider "newuser" closed, and thus
the entire argument is specious.
This Net-love and "Anarchy-Rulez" mentality is rather amusing.
|
babozita
|
|
response 183 of 367:
|
Mar 3 14:36 UTC 1997 |
Arnold, repression includes trying to coerce somebody into breaking a
religious commitment because you personally don't agree with his decision.
You're disgusting me. Let it drop already.
I'd say thatsame, or similar, thing to Kerouac, but I'd be wasting my
keystrokes.
Incidentally, I voted yes, because this motion will, in my view, do exactly
the opposite of what its framers intended. I find that highly amusing, and
I've become so cynical that at this point I want nothing more than to watch
this thing explode and watch egg splatter all over Mary Remmers face.
|
robh
|
|
response 184 of 367:
|
Mar 3 14:59 UTC 1997 |
Good thing I didn't give you that $18 for membership, then. >8)
I had worked out about two screens' worth of responses for Richard,
but then I realized that I would be encouraging him. Folks, this has
to be the biggest non-issue of this entire vote. If anyone wants
to talk to me about it via e-mail, that's fine. This item should
be used to discuss the proposal, not me.
|
babozita
|
|
response 185 of 367:
|
Mar 3 15:21 UTC 1997 |
If you -- or anyone -- had given me membership dues, I'd've abstained from
this vote anyhow. I will not become a member just to vote on one particular
issue. Purposes and views of Grex aside, I *personally* see such behavior as
unethical (last sentence direct at Mme. President)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 186 of 367:
|
Mar 3 20:06 UTC 1997 |
When I started conferencing on grex it was a rather radical departure for
me. I knew I was speaking publically, and not always speaking "popular
thoughts". I haven't stopped, though I admit that tiny fragments of
paranoia pop up now and then, when I realize that people will form an
opinion of me over what I write, and sometimes such opinions have
consequences. The very creation of grex was a step by a group of people
that had overcome, or set aside, this worry. At the time grex was founded,
it was rather radical to have such open access, but particularly *access
to post*. A founder would have to confirm (or deny) this, but I believe
that the "newuser" process was installed for a number of reasons, not the
least of which were to convey nettiquette to users, and to form a
recognizable community of those that would be participating in the
conferences.
My support for unregistered web reading of the conferences comes from
these considerations. Unregistered reading is actually less radical than
the original conception of open participation, and just reading makes no
contribution to the community except to invite participation. I am
inclined to think that if the web had existed at the time grex was
created, that open web reading without registration would have been an
original component, since it is entirely consistent with the founding
mission.
This proposal returns us more fully to that mission.
|
richard
|
|
response 187 of 367:
|
Mar 3 20:20 UTC 1997 |
If the web interface was fast and efficient enough, newuser wouldntbe
necessary because there wouldntbe theneed to bookmark confs. If one could
pull up a hundred responses in an item in a few seconds and scroll down,
theydont need bookmarks. In order to keep bookmarks,you have to read
through entire confs. With a fast web interfac, youl could simply be
prompted for aname or handle every time you click post.
Newuser could be, and maybe someday, obsolete. I know of many web
conferencing setups that dont use newuser. Some sites, you can go and
post every day using a different name ifyoui want.
I think at some point, Grex is goingto have to move awway from Picospan,
because it doesnthave the source, and and in order tokeep pace with the
rest of cyberspace, itneeds an interface it can change and update.
Having participation files is something of anuisance anyway, becauseany user
can call up yourhom e directory and find out all the confs you read. Some
people might not want anyone knowing that sort of info.
|
remmers
|
|
response 188 of 367:
|
Mar 3 21:16 UTC 1997 |
Re #186: Very well said. I agree.
|
babozita
|
|
response 189 of 367:
|
Mar 3 22:17 UTC 1997 |
Open web reading is entirely consistent with the founding mission.
It will be useful to Grex.
It will not have the effect that has been cited, not at all.
An advertisement on the Web will be a lot more useful for the intended effect.
I offered one. I was ignored. Too bad, I was serious. One problem with having
so many cooks and no clearly identified Head Cook (apologies, Valerie, but
President is more nomenclatural than function -- but then, you knew that) is
that when someone offers something and there's no interest, no-one feels
inclined to say, "No, thank you." How rude.
But enough about me. =}
this "consistent with the founding mission" attitude is annoying, and that's
what tweaked my shorts in the first place. It's less annoying coming from
Rane, since he isn't actually a founder, but all the same, I can't help but
mist up and hear the Stars and Stripes... (1) Places change. Attitudes change.
(2) It was perfectly possible to code a guest account on telnet; the only
difference between such an account and a user registered one would be that
the password couldn't be changed. An oversight, certainly, by the founders,
but no-one's come forward to offer one. Hrm, rewind, you'd also have to code
the guest account so posting was impossible, but that really doesn't sound
THAT hard to me (not that *I* could do it, of course, but still...). (3) Grex
staff thinks too much of Grex' importance in the universe, and overestimate's
Grex' ability to hold people's attention.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 190 of 367:
|
Mar 3 23:17 UTC 1997 |
None of those statements are reasons for not allowing unregistered web
reading.
|
babozita
|
|
response 191 of 367:
|
Mar 3 23:34 UTC 1997 |
Did I say anywhere that they were?
|
mta
|
|
response 192 of 367:
|
Mar 4 00:48 UTC 1997 |
staff thinks too much of Grex' importance in the universe, and overestimate's
Grex' ability to hold people's attention.
Perhaps. But we aren't operating completely without evidence here. In the
six years since its inception GREX has grown incredibly, and we still have
lots of familiar faces from over the years.
Besides the importance of GREX in the "universe" matters only with GREXes own
universe. The ability of GREX to hold people's attention matters only insofar
as it holds the attention of a core group of like minded people.
If GREX is so unimportant and so unable to hold your attention...
nevermind.
|
babozita
|
|
response 193 of 367:
|
Mar 4 01:39 UTC 1997 |
Say it, Misti. Tell me to leave. I dare you.
But you're mighty defensive if that's the only thing in my recent posts you've
chosen to respond to. A nerve stuck, perhaps?
(struck, too)
|
mta
|
|
response 194 of 367:
|
Mar 4 01:43 UTC 1997 |
No, actually I wasn't about to ask you to leave. I was about to ask you about
your reasoning in still being here if GREX is so unimportant and
uninteresting? That statement simply made no sense to me. A lot of the rest
has made a great deal of sense. Some I even agreed with wholheartedly.
(Maybe I'm not alone in my "overly defensiveness" if you only saw an
invitation to leave where I saw a pointer to puzzling logic.) <g>
|
jenna
|
|
response 195 of 367:
|
Mar 4 02:17 UTC 1997 |
unimportant in the universe and unimportant to brighn are not the same thing,
last
I checked.
|
babozita
|
|
response 196 of 367:
|
Mar 4 03:26 UTC 1997 |
Sorry, Misti. I was in a pissy mood a few hours ago. The MOTD for tomorrow
will review WHY I'm in a somewhat pissy mood today. *smirk*
Grex is important to me. I just don't think that most people who wander by
on the Web will give two shits less about it. I think that many people who
wind up staying on Grex iitially do so because they went through the effort
of creating an account, they might as well stay a week or so to see if it's
cool. No account creation, no motivation to stay. I think that there are more
people who stay because they've done the work of creating an account, then
decide they like it, then there are people who will skim past Grex anonymously
then come back with piqued curiosity. That's why I think an advertisement
would be more effective than anonymous reading: many more people will
anonymously read once, then forget Grex even exists.
Did that make sense? If not, I'll rephrase it.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 197 of 367:
|
Mar 4 06:18 UTC 1997 |
Your argument is lost in the 14,000 users that ran newuser and still
do not appear to care about the Grex community. Maintaining those 14,000
accounts tasks resources. Perhaps it is better that a lot more unsupportive
visitors won't create accounts and primarily the supportive will.
|
robh
|
|
response 198 of 367:
|
Mar 4 07:45 UTC 1997 |
If we didn't delete accounts that were inactive for three months,
I might agree with that sentiment. But since we do, I don't.
|
babozita
|
|
response 199 of 367:
|
Mar 4 14:07 UTC 1997 |
#197. Rane, maybe you should go to the doctor for tha wax in your ears.
Have I not said that I voted yes on theproposal?
Have I not said that the proposal will HELP grex?
You have just told me exactly WHY i reasoned that the proposal is a good
thing, then told me that my argument is bad, when it has caused me to come
to the same conclusion you have come to.
Geez, Rane, normally you strike me as a reasonably intelligent fellow.
|
pfv
|
|
response 200 of 367:
|
Mar 4 14:24 UTC 1997 |
Hehehe.. Too funny..
You think it's slow now..? Just wait.
A lot of those accounts can't possibly be using the confs, and
I'd wager they are here primarily for mail..
I guess the "ponder" is of how many of those accounts pony up
any sort of "support", and I do not mean telling all of their
friends, teachers or whatever about the free email.
*Shrug* You have a Tiger By The Tail - have fun with it.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 201 of 367:
|
Mar 4 16:40 UTC 1997 |
Paul, in #183 you said you voted for this proposal in order to spite Grex -
and so that "this thing explode and watch egg splatter all over Mary Remmers
face" - hardly intelligent objectives.
I'm not sure I understand #198 - I thought that we had 14,000 current, active,
users, who will not be affected by the 3-month rule, but who do not support
Grex conferencing (or the organization). I may have misunderstood when that
number was put forward. How many users are there that do not support
conferencing or the system?
|
babozita
|
|
response 202 of 367:
|
Mar 4 19:35 UTC 1997 |
No, in order to spite Mary Remmers, Rane. And I was playing. Sheesh.=}
Ahem. To clarify for the humor-impaired:
I believe the result of this proposal will be to decrease the number of people
running newuser, and ultimately to decrease the number of new users accrued.
I believe that the new users who are accrued will be of a higher qulaity
overall (by higher quality I mean, more participatory in conferences, and/or
less malicious in Party and other communication fora). I find it ironic that
the stated purpose of this motion is to increase new user accrual overall,
since it will have a negative effect. If my predictions are correct, I will
not refrain from showing joy at Mary Remmers' expense, because I don't like
her. It will be difficult, though, to demonstrate an actual effect (unless
it's very very significant), and so my joy will most likely take place solely
in hypothetical realms. I shall seek to find other ways to be joyful in life.
It's too bad, Rane, that after all your years you have yet to obtain what so
many of us obtain early on, a sense of humor and sarcasm. I can envision you
as the pater in Name of the Rose, poisoning the pages of the Comedia so
theother monks die if they read it.
For the humor-impaired: the previous paragraph was meant as a friendly barb,
not an overt insult. I have spent the better part of a year as a belligerrent
twit. I am using the occasion of my 29th birthday to return to my Devil's
Advocate, Devil-May-Care, impish self.
Enough disclaimers, kids? =}
|
tsty
|
|
response 203 of 367:
|
Mar 4 19:55 UTC 1997 |
voting 'no' on dumping the whole of grex 'out there' *and* then
following that with a vote of 'yes' to put the crafted intro.cf 'out there'
would achieve the pro arguments, diminish the con arguments and
maintain whtever system-wide peace we still have.
|
babozita
|
|
response 204 of 367:
|
Mar 4 20:20 UTC 1997 |
100% agreed, Tsty.
Make a motion before voting closes on this motion and repeat that suggestion
in your motion item.
|
richard
|
|
response 205 of 367:
|
Mar 4 22:10 UTC 1997 |
brighn, yourloine of thinking is not logical...if more people use grex, in
any way, more users will eventually run newuser.
I hope Mary's proposal is the last word on this issue..even *I* am sick of
this debate (and with me that takes some doing) Lets just do it, see how it
works, and if someone doesnt lke it after a few months, then make a proposal
to revise the policy.
|
nsiddall
|
|
response 206 of 367:
|
Mar 4 23:16 UTC 1997 |
Laughing out loud, Richard! You all sound extremely reasonable for the
moment. I agree, that doing this with just one conference, on an experimental
basis, seems like a mild and sensible approach. Let's discuss it a bit, and
make sure no one objects to that--but see if we can avoid votes, and bitter
arguments, and subcommittees and the supreme court, hey? How about a
discussion item for this?
|