|
Grex > Coop9 > #55: Motion: To allow unregistered reading of all conferences | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 367 responses total. |
valerie
|
|
response 282 of 367:
| 
Mar 12 06:11 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
babozita
|
|
response 283 of 367:
|
Mar 12 15:27 UTC 1997 |
The president has asked me to cool it on the mudslinging. I had left co-op
anyhow, but I came back to apologize. I've had strep throat since Friday,
combined with a stomach flu and a 102-degree fever. While that isn't an
excuse, some of the inflammatory posts were made during said fever. Valerie
(my wife, not the president) and Jenna can both attest that I haven't quite
been myself emotionally. I apologize for any discomfort that I may have
caused.
I never said anything I didn't mean, but I chose langauge and styles that were
inappropriate to this forum, at this time.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 284 of 367:
|
Mar 12 16:13 UTC 1997 |
Thank you Paul!
I too changed my vote from no to yes.
If Mary's proposal fails, and we cannot find a workable compromise, then
nothing on Grex will be available to unregistered people.
If Mary's proposal passes, and none of the compromises have majority
support, we will still have this policy in place.
It is not clear to me that any compromise is going to get majority
support, and since I really prefer that we allow unregistered reading, I
want this option available.
|
mary
|
|
response 285 of 367:
|
Mar 12 23:05 UTC 1997 |
I grew up in a family that tended to disagree with enthusiasm.
No problem here. I hope you feel better soon, Paul.
|
jenna
|
|
response 286 of 367:
|
Mar 13 03:26 UTC 1997 |
I still hope Mary's propoal fail. I'm a fan of free choice and it doesn't
allow that.
|
remmers
|
|
response 287 of 367:
|
Mar 13 05:20 UTC 1997 |
Results are as follows: 40 voting members in good standing cast
ballots.
Yes 21
No 19
In addition, 72 non-members voted. The results here (which don't
count towards determining the outcome) are
Yes 40
No 32
|
robh
|
|
response 288 of 367:
|
Mar 13 08:38 UTC 1997 |
Fair enough. I'll have my resignation ready in the afternoon.
|
ladymoon
|
|
response 289 of 367:
|
Mar 13 12:23 UTC 1997 |
I hope you, cmcgee, and you valerie are happy! Hads you two not switched your
votes, this thing would be DEAD.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 290 of 367:
|
Mar 13 15:09 UTC 1997 |
I think it is an unfair double standard that the Staff conference can remain
closed to unregistered reaading, however every single
other conference must be open.
|
babozita
|
|
response 291 of 367:
|
Mar 13 15:52 UTC 1997 |
*smiles at Ryan* I was advised by one staffer that I was being discussed in
the Staff conference about a year ago. That statement was confirmed, in very
roundabout ways, by two other staffers and outrightly denied by yet two other
staffers. So I heartily agree with you, and have said so before. I'm told 90%
of the staff conference is so boring that it would be torture for anyone else
to HAVE to read it, though. =}
|
robh
|
|
response 292 of 367:
|
Mar 13 16:28 UTC 1997 |
Re 289 - To be technical, *one* switched vote would have defeated
this motion, since "majority" means "more than half", not "half or
more". Look it up in your Funk and Wagnalls. >8)
|
richard
|
|
response 293 of 367:
|
Mar 13 16:45 UTC 1997 |
|
richard
|
|
response 294 of 367:
|
Mar 13 16:59 UTC 1997 |
AndValerie saves the day! I felt sure that if she hadnt changedher vote
back, this would have been a tie. I predicted this outcome om the nail:
#106 of 293: by Richard J. Wallner (richard) on Sun, Feb 23, 1997 (18:15):
Mary, Peter, Jeff, John, SCG, and SRW all voted against the previous
proposal
but will vote yes for Mary's. Basede on the previous vote of 16 to 24,
if
noone else changes their mind, the vote would be 21 yes 19 no.
The votes are there.
Grex politics arent that hard to figureout :) I hope Jan and/or SRW can
turn unregistered reading on today. May as well try it out for a while
before voting on thenext proposals. So we'llhaveperspective. Flip the
switch!
|
robh
|
|
response 295 of 367:
|
Mar 13 17:15 UTC 1997 |
"Flip the switch", what an appropriate phrase for it. >8)
|
babozita
|
|
response 296 of 367:
|
Mar 13 18:29 UTC 1997 |
siwtch, bird, they're both nouns
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 297 of 367:
|
Mar 13 18:35 UTC 1997 |
I would hope, that before "flipping the switch", that the designers of
Backtalk wait for the outcome of the currently-in-process compromise. I see
no benefit in offending people unnecessarily by hasty implementation of
something that might last only 15-20 days.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 298 of 367:
|
Mar 13 18:49 UTC 1997 |
Uh....is that a motion? I see no harm in having it on, even if only to
have a couple of weeks of experience with it. It is not hasty to implement
a policy when the policy is adopted. Besides, any chance to gain
experience, rather than just all the theory we have had, is worthwhile.
|
dpc
|
|
response 299 of 367:
|
Mar 13 21:53 UTC 1997 |
I must point out that the vote switches occurred during the improperly-
extended period of voting, confirmed by the switchers. If the vote
had ended when it should have, the motion would have been defeated.
Unbelievable!
|
ryan1
|
|
response 300 of 367:
|
Mar 13 22:09 UTC 1997 |
I declare a mis-vote!
|
richard
|
|
response 301 of 367:
|
Mar 13 22:14 UTC 1997 |
You cant prove who voted when...or how many voters voted yesterday or the day
before. Just because Valerie changed her vote on the last day doesnt mean that
other people didnt vote on the last day as well. I dont see the problem, since
all extending the time period did was give more people time to vote. In any
case this was brought up and there was no objection. End of story.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 302 of 367:
|
Mar 13 22:36 UTC 1997 |
David, if you will read response 30, posted on February 15th, you will see
that my vote changed well withing the proper voting period.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 303 of 367:
|
Mar 13 22:56 UTC 1997 |
[Actually, it was my mind that changed. The proposal wasn't even being voted
on at that point]
|
dpc
|
|
response 304 of 367:
|
Mar 14 01:56 UTC 1997 |
I'm only talking about confirmed late vote-switchers, Colleen.
|
jenna
|
|
response 305 of 367:
|
Mar 14 02:49 UTC 1997 |
will this be implemented before the other motion is voted on?
*is trying to decide when to leave*
|
richard
|
|
response 306 of 367:
|
Mar 14 03:04 UTC 1997 |
#305...yes, there was no period of delay stipulated and staff is obligated
to carry out member or board ordered directives with due diligence3.
|