|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 299 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 200 of 299:
| 
Apr 5 15:46 UTC 2005 |
I enjoy the autonomy of the personal twit filter. My only recommendation to
aid new users would be to offer them the names of staff people that currently
use the twit filter and let the new users pick and choose which one they'd
like to copy/edit.
|
slynne
|
|
response 201 of 299:
|
Apr 5 15:54 UTC 2005 |
I very much disagree with the statement in resp:187: "it is hypocritical
to claim to oppose government censorship while supporting private
censorship."
But I suppose that is something best saved for another item. This item
is about what is best for Grex. I am not sure what the answer is. There
is something special about having a forum where all may speak. But, it
turns out that once you have such a place, enough people will abuse it
that it essentially becomes useless.
I have noticed in the blog world, each individual who keeps a blog has
the ability to control the content (including comments) on their blogs
and that has gone a long way to keep twits from trashing things too
much. It still happens but it seems more rare.
Maybe the answer for grex is to get into the whole blog mindset. Twit
filters and ip blocks for bbs and author control (even over another's
responses) in some sort of blog section.
|
tod
|
|
response 202 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:02 UTC 2005 |
I hate blogs. They are extensions of vanity press. If people start removing
responses from their items that they don't like then we're going to have some
serious issues.
|
slynne
|
|
response 203 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:08 UTC 2005 |
Really? I suspect that if that sort of policy were in place, people who
dont like the idea of having their posts deleted will refrain from
responding to those items. The important thing is to make sure any blog
section of grex has clear policies. I know that not everyone likes
blogs which is why I wouldnt suggest that grex *only* have blogs
although I dont see a problem with allowing authors to control items.
As for blogs, I like them. One of the main reasons I like mine is that
it gives me control over posts. I can delete posts (which I have done
although very rarely). I can disallow annonymous posts (which i have
never done) or I can turn off the comments altogether (which I have
done recently).
|
keesan
|
|
response 204 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:20 UTC 2005 |
How is a new user supposed to be able to choose a twit filter? The new users
we sign up prefer not to make choices. Let the filter be on by default. It
is pretty obvious who the major twits are. I could live with a couple of
other annoying posters that are on my filter because they can't spell.
|
tod
|
|
response 205 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:25 UTC 2005 |
re #203
The serious issues I'm referring to are the entire charter of Cyberspace.
|
naftee
|
|
response 206 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:33 UTC 2005 |
re 201 I suppose you agree with the fact that the police should not be armed,
but the citizens should be allowed to carry guns ?
|
naftee
|
|
response 207 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:34 UTC 2005 |
statement, not fact
|
richard
|
|
response 208 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:38 UTC 2005 |
twit filters only work once you have them set up. The problem that
needs to be considered is new user, who run newuser, get an account and
read confs knowing nothing about twit filters or who the twits are that
need to be filtered. They aren't going to stay around long enough to
learn all of that. They will just leave. Then you end up with a grex
that is not growing or evolving, because only the same users-- the ones
who know how to use twit filters and who the twits are-- stay around as
regulars.
I just don't think filters are any kind of long term answer.
|
blaise
|
|
response 209 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:45 UTC 2005 |
What about splitting agora? Have two conferences, one that is
unprotected and one that is protected. Default new users to reading the
protected version but being unable to post to it until whatever criteria
are decided on have been met.
|
slynne
|
|
response 210 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:53 UTC 2005 |
resp:5 The entire character of Cyberspace is changing no matter what.
All we can do is maybe control the direction in which it changes.
|
tod
|
|
response 211 of 299:
|
Apr 5 17:54 UTC 2005 |
Perhaps you need to address the newuser issue rather than the content of
existing users? Recruit some palatable participants if you think it is a
problem. The minute you start talking about a "private system" and picking
and choosing the members then you can just go scrap article 6 of Cyberspace's
incorporation (especially section 5.) I honestly don't see how a blog could
fit into computer "conferencing" if each "blog" has a squelch button held by
each author. That' is not conferencing; that is dictation.
|
mary
|
|
response 212 of 299:
|
Apr 5 18:11 UTC 2005 |
When a newuser first sees the general conference, they get to see
the first and last item only. It's a hello meant to not overwhelm.
It's then their choice whether to read the rest of the items, or
not. This wasn't seen as censorship all these years, but rather a
way not forcing newbies to read it all, in order. A default filter
does about the same thing, as far as I'm concerned. It gives them a
sample of the system then offers them choices.
I think what's really got some people itchy here is that they see
filters going mainstream. More people will be going that direction,
by *their choice* and maybe, just maybe, people with a lot to say
but not much worth reading, won't be making the cut.
|
slynne
|
|
response 213 of 299:
|
Apr 5 18:16 UTC 2005 |
I mean. If everything were up to me we would
1) maintain a completely free and open newuser
2) not allow anyone to delete another's posts under any circumstances
3) have all the really interesting users continue to post.
4) have lots of of new people coming along and staying because they
find the place really interesting
5) have the users love the system so much that they really want to
keep supporting it financially.
The problem might be that sticking to #1 and #2 might pretty much mean
giving up on #3, #4, and #5.
|
slynne
|
|
response 214 of 299:
|
Apr 5 18:18 UTC 2005 |
FWIW, I have tried my darndest to recruit people to grex. My hope was
that if there were even just 4 or 5 new interesting people, it might
make a big difference. I have specifically told around 30 people I know
online to check out grex. Not one of them liked it.
|
scholar
|
|
response 215 of 299:
|
Apr 5 18:25 UTC 2005 |
I've recruited at least one person!
|
tod
|
|
response 216 of 299:
|
Apr 5 19:14 UTC 2005 |
re #214
It's not our fault you're boring! ;)
|
richard
|
|
response 217 of 299:
|
Apr 5 21:22 UTC 2005 |
I also think that eliminating offsite email would help a good deal,
because many of these folks get all these extra logins for no other
reason than to have extra email addresses. If they cant get extra
addresses, they might not bother to run newuser so often. There really
is no reason for Grex to still be in the offsite email business
anymore, there are too many other places offering free email who do it
better.
|
tod
|
|
response 218 of 299:
|
Apr 5 21:39 UTC 2005 |
re #217
I would agree to limiting e-mail to members.
|
keesan
|
|
response 219 of 299:
|
Apr 5 22:16 UTC 2005 |
I send mail to lots of nonmembers who are using grex, including some curious
students just passing through who have questions about grex that I cannot
explain in a telegram. Limiting email to members would be as bad a limiting
bbs to members.
|
richard
|
|
response 220 of 299:
|
Apr 5 22:27 UTC 2005 |
keesan, I was suggesting limiting OFFSITE email to members. Everyone
who has a grex login would still have email, but only those who are
members would be able to send email offsite. Everyone would still be
able to send email to other grexers at their grex emails.
|
tod
|
|
response 221 of 299:
|
Apr 5 23:05 UTC 2005 |
I'm all for priviledged SMTP access.
|
keesan
|
|
response 222 of 299:
|
Apr 6 00:19 UTC 2005 |
We signed up several people with grex who had never used email and wanted to
try it out. Are you suggesting grex no longer serve this purpose, providing
a free way to learn about the internet? Email is what got me here in the
first place.
|
jep
|
|
response 223 of 299:
|
Apr 6 14:22 UTC 2005 |
I think the e-mail discussion is a separate issue. I see this
discussion as being what to do about the conferences, which are the
core of Grex.
|
keesan
|
|
response 224 of 299:
|
Apr 6 15:11 UTC 2005 |
Then most of grex's users never get to the core and just use email.
|