|
Grex > Coop11 > #140: Grex in the new millenium-- should it be web based? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 91 responses total. |
tpryan
|
|
response 25 of 91:
| 
Dec 1 23:39 UTC 1999 |
And then Grex can sponsor itself by putting advertisements on those
web pages.
|
spooked
|
|
response 26 of 91:
|
Dec 2 00:07 UTC 1999 |
I think most of the above discussion is valid, and certainly at least healthy.
I don't think Grex should drop the dialins. I never use them personally as
I'm an overseas user, but allowing Net access - free at that - was one of
Grex's principal aims, still is, and should remain so. The technical and
social basis of Grex is *very* rare in Internet terms, and it should be
maintained. I do believe that over time, it would also be beneficial for Grex
to become more web accessible, but this will require significant software
development effort and staff work. It's all well and good to say grex would
be cooler having a greater web presence, but you must understand that the
staff are already overworked, and it's not economically feasible (and spawning
from that hence) technically feasible for us to expand more on the WWW
presently. This discussion is healthy, don't get me wrong, for Grex's
long-term strategies, BUT what we should be concentrating on is how to bring
more memberships in. We really need at least as double as many as we do now
before it would be viable to expand to the web more if we are to keep the
dialins, and anyone who has a conscience knows we have something special there
we should maintain.
|
other
|
|
response 27 of 91:
|
Dec 2 02:43 UTC 1999 |
the activity in the conferences is fairly representative of the interests of
the people who use grex. is suspect that the growth of the internet as a
whole is more responsible for the decline in the variety of the conference
activity than anything about grex itself. people have found other, larger
and more diverse communities of choice in which to pursue those interests.
what should (or can) we do about that? i don't think there is anything to
be done about it. we're not the only game in town the way we perhaps were
once. ('we' meaning confer, grex and m-net.)
under such conditions, a shakeout would be natural, and the remaining users
of grex will be drawn to what it offers that they don't feel they can get more
easily or better elsewhere. many of us who continue to ue the conferences
on grex do so because of a sense of comfort with the people with whom we're
interacting, and perhaps the stability and even predictability of the
participation. i think we feel that if we start a discussion here, we can
do so with some confidence that there is a group of people who will respond
straightforwardly and without swamping us with junkmail for our efforts.
we're not hiding, although the expectations we have and the comments they
engender may give us the look and feel of a closed system to those who poke
their heads in and don't stay to really look around.
there is a good solid reason why grex was once called "galactically boring"
and why many of us appreciate (though with some humour) that label.
<blather, blather...>
|
gelinas
|
|
response 28 of 91:
|
Dec 2 03:21 UTC 1999 |
I'm not convinced that "The technical and social basis of Grex is *very*
rare in Internet terms" (spooked, #26). I *do* agree that those places
are very hard to find, but the Internet I know and love has exactly the
same technical and social basis as Grex. But the Web is not the Internet,
and the Internet is not the Web.
There used to be (may still be, but I don't have the time to search them
out) MUDs all over the place. There used to be (legal) software archives
all over the place. Now all anyone knows are the web servers.
|
spooked
|
|
response 29 of 91:
|
Dec 2 03:43 UTC 1999 |
MUDs are not conferencing systems.
The close-knit social environment on grex is very special. You'd be hard
pressed to find another system like it.
|
spooked
|
|
response 30 of 91:
|
Dec 2 03:46 UTC 1999 |
Moreover, the experience, qualifications, and expertise of many of the staff
on here is nothing short of outstanding. People tend to overlook this,
especially if they're not technically literate.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 31 of 91:
|
Dec 2 03:52 UTC 1999 |
No, MUDs are not conferencing systems. The ones I used, though, were
close-knit social environments. Those that weren't, I stopped using.
Technical expertise is not that rare, either. I'm not overlooking it,
and I'm not denigrating the folks who provide it here. I think some of
them are my friends.
|
spooked
|
|
response 32 of 91:
|
Dec 2 04:30 UTC 1999 |
Well, intellectual exchange was and is one Grex's aims, not specifically role
playing.
And, technical expertise is not rare, I agree. But, on a system where staff
is made entirely of volunteers, you will be very hard pressed to find such
an exceptional team of co-staffers.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 33 of 91:
|
Dec 2 21:42 UTC 1999 |
I thnk richard has brought up something important to discuss. I disagree with
some of what he said, but I appreciate his bringing it up.
No we shouldn't eliminate all the dial-ins, but we should, as we have been,
drop unnecessary ones.
Some expansion of Web services is good, as long as we remember that the
two-fold goal is community and free speech.
|
janc
|
|
response 34 of 91:
|
Dec 2 22:33 UTC 1999 |
Several comments:
I agree that expanding our web interfaces is a good idea. Things I'd
be interested in include:
- Improved interface to conferences - Backtalk still has clunky
aspects.
- Web version of tel/talk/write, including "write help". I think it
would be neat if, while reading the conferences you could have
a little window at the bottom of your browser screen where messages
from other Grex users could pop up. You could also type and send
messages here. This would give a great sense of being "on Grex"
while reading through the web, and would let people ask for help
in a spontaneous way, and get instant replies.
- Web interface party. Sure, why not?
I'm not very interested in web interfaces to mail. If you are coming
in over the web, you can get email elsewhere. If you are coming in
over the dial-ins, such an interface would be of no use. And it
wouldn't particularly help draw web users into the Grex community.
Grex's goals are quite clearly written up in several places. One
of them is our 501(c)3 application. See
http://www.cyberspace.org/local/grex/501c3.html
Charity is definitely one of our purposes in life. Making net services
available to people who could not otherwise afford them is a big part
of our mission. The other is education, in a rather broad sense that
has more to do with encouraging people to talk to each other than with
lecturing to them. Of course, we do an awful lot of just plain
socializing, which we aren't at all ashamed of. Just chatting with
with people can be educational in itself (eg, teens often find Grex
one of the first places they can interact with adults on an equal
footing). And even when it isn't terribly educational, it is fun and
helps build the sense of community that inspires people to donate time
and money to us, thus enabling us to do good things.
Yes we should drop dial-ins as they fall out of use. But I don't
think we should be thinking of completely eliminating them anytime
soon. We will continue to have dial-in users for a long time. Grex's
"free second-rate ISP" role isn't going to be obsoleted very fast.
There are lots of things that are similar to Grex out on the web.
There isn't much that is the same. I'm not sure either fact is a big
deal. What we are doing works for a lot of people, so we are on to
something good. Does being unique make it better, or are we so good
that more people should be trying to emulate us? I don't know. I
think if you try to strive to be unique, you are likely to end up just
being silly. We need to strive to be good.
Growth is also a tough issue. In many ways it is nice to be small.
But I feel like I want Grex to be as good as it can be. Growth is
a likely consequence of that, even if it isn't necessarily my goal.
The ideal outcome from my point of view would be if Grex were so good
that lots of people all over the world started similar systems. That
way Grex wouldn't be getting huge. Having local focus a strong part
of our goal makes that make more sense.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 35 of 91:
|
Dec 2 23:37 UTC 1999 |
What in particular would you suggest in terms of having local focus as part
of our goal?
|
other
|
|
response 36 of 91:
|
Dec 3 00:55 UTC 1999 |
the local focus is a result of the interests of the users. the users are
primarily local (of the conferences anyway, and it's hard to imagine that any
other part of the system can be characterized as even having a focus in that
way.)
|
davel
|
|
response 37 of 91:
|
Dec 4 14:26 UTC 1999 |
I don't think conference users are primarily local, by any means. There are
a *lot* of non-local ones. But there is a distinct core of local users, which
has a great impact.
(I'm agreeing with what I *think* Eric has in mind, while quibbling about what
he actually said.)
|
lilmo
|
|
response 38 of 91:
|
Dec 4 18:58 UTC 1999 |
I'd say that coop more than other cf's has a local focus, since grex board
and staff have to be local, and tend to make a strong contribution to coop.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 39 of 91:
|
Dec 4 19:03 UTC 1999 |
(actually, don't we have a few non-local staffers now?)
|
tpryan
|
|
response 40 of 91:
|
Dec 4 19:46 UTC 1999 |
How do we get out the word that conferences are like newgroups
except that the subjects are better organized and hang around for years,
not weeks?
|
spooked
|
|
response 41 of 91:
|
Dec 5 02:22 UTC 1999 |
Yup, we do, nephi (IL?) and me (Australia) are non-local staffers.
|
devnull
|
|
response 42 of 91:
|
Dec 6 00:02 UTC 1999 |
Re #40: If grex became as well-known as usenet, it would probably start sucking
as much as usenet.
Overall, I have to say `if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. Grex does a number
of things well. I like the fact that I'm using a telnet connection for this
conferencing. There are probably enough web-only-conferencing systems out
there besides grex anyway.
The fact that grex has essentially the same amount of bandwidth to the internet
as my home does, and grex manages to serve as many people as it does, is
quite impressive.
|
other
|
|
response 43 of 91:
|
Dec 6 23:00 UTC 1999 |
i think it has been mentioned before, buit i think pop mail access would be
nice for dial-in users...
|
gull
|
|
response 44 of 91:
|
Dec 6 23:15 UTC 1999 |
Re #43: I thought POP was a TCP/IP service; how would it work over a
straight dial-in?
|
scott
|
|
response 45 of 91:
|
Dec 6 23:50 UTC 1999 |
We've been sort of intending to do local PPP on dialups (ie only Grex access).
|
pfv
|
|
response 46 of 91:
|
Dec 7 11:13 UTC 1999 |
"local PPP on dialups" meaning..? Acting as a small "isp"?
|
scott
|
|
response 47 of 91:
|
Dec 7 13:16 UTC 1999 |
(ie only Grex access) means not allowing access to the outside world. But
people dialing in could run Backtalk, multiple telnet, etc.
|
pfv
|
|
response 48 of 91:
|
Dec 7 19:10 UTC 1999 |
uhhhhmm.. Is there a point to that sort of setup?
|
scott
|
|
response 49 of 91:
|
Dec 7 21:49 UTC 1999 |
uuuummm... Is there a point to *not* having that sort of setup?
|