You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 220-244   245-269   270-294   295-319   320-335      
 
Author Message
25 new of 335 responses total.
jp2
response 245 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 29 04:26 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

scott
response 246 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 29 13:08 UTC 2001

Re 243:

You *never* bowl, Jamie?  But what if Grex decides that the best way to raise
money would be a Grex Board Bowl-a-thon?  Your refusal to bowl could cause
Grex to run out of money and close up shop.  

Therefore, I must recommend that all voting members vote *against* jp2, if
in fact he isn't disqualified for other reasons first.
davel
response 247 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 29 13:57 UTC 2001

I also never bowl, & would have to demand that any proposed Bowl-a-thon be
put up to a member vote, so that I could vote against it.
jp2
response 248 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 29 16:13 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

janc
response 249 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 02:48 UTC 2001

I don't know.  I think we could raise a lot of money selling "heckling passes"
to a Bowl-a-thon featuring non-bowling bowlers.
jp2
response 250 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 02:52 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

eeyore
response 251 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 04:42 UTC 2001

You know, I wonder if we should start taking this idea to Syl....:)
krj
response 252 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:22 UTC 2001

I was ruminating this morning about the possibility of a member proposal
to bar Jamie from membership in Grex, on the grounds that his DMCA
threats demonstrate that he does not support the peacable exchange
of information and ideas, as declared in the Preamble and the Membership
sections of the bylaws.  Any interest?
So far it's just a thought.   
pthomas
response 253 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:24 UTC 2001

Yeah, banning people from membership because of their political views
_really_ supports the "peaceable exchange of ideas." Sounds more Stalinist
than anything to me.
jp2
response 254 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:26 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

md
response 255 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:26 UTC 2001

No, he said "threats," not "political views."  Maybe you were standing 
too far away.
pthomas
response 256 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:28 UTC 2001

So it's to become the official policy of Grex that people who assert their
rights under Federal law are not welcome?

I assume you'll be making sure women and minorities are also barred from
membership.
jp2
response 257 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:29 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

tfbjr
response 258 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:34 UTC 2001

I don't believe his views are the matter, but his approach which includes
legal threats including what I perceived to be implied legal threats against
members.
jp2
response 259 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:36 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

pthomas
response 260 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:37 UTC 2001

Yes, because Grex has violated his rights under Federal law.
jp2
response 261 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:39 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

md
response 262 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:42 UTC 2001

Show of hands: who cares if Jamie is being oppressed?  Didn't think 
so.  (Democracy in action!)
jp2
response 263 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:43 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

md
response 264 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:47 UTC 2001

Are you eternally grateful on each such day?  I mean, that's a *lot* of 
grateful.  Oh, wait!  This is the Mandelbrot thingie you were talking 
about, isn't it?
jp2
response 265 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:50 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

brighn
response 266 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 18:58 UTC 2001

I think we should leave it for a courtroom to decide if rights have been
violated. It would make me wonder why anyone would wish to join a BBS they
are making veiled threats to, but if Jamie wants to join and he doesn't
actually sue or otherwise damage Grex, I don't personally have a problem with
it.
krj
response 267 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 19:46 UTC 2001

You realize, brighn, that your resp:266 is totally incoherent, 
because the first and second sentence contradict each other?
krj
response 268 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 20:11 UTC 2001

pthomas in resp:256 ::  Free speech is a political goal.  
(Just ask any number of people in less fortunate countries.)
So Grex is a political organization, even if it is a wimpy and 
non-partisan one, in much the same way that the EFF and the NRA are.
 
A large number of people in the computer community, including me, 
believe strongly that the DMCA is the most anti-free-speech law 
to come down in decades.

I would not require the NRA to take me as a member, since I advocate
strict gun control;  I would not require the Young Americans 
for Freedom to accept an avowed Stalinist.

I do not believe Grex is obligated to accept 
a member who, by his own actions over the last few months, demonstrates
his belief that copyright claims should be adjudicated summarily over
any free speech concerns.
jp2
response 269 of 335: Mark Unseen   Oct 30 20:18 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 220-244   245-269   270-294   295-319   320-335      
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss