|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 335 responses total. |
keesan
|
|
response 300 of 335:
| 
Nov 1 14:13 UTC 2001 |
Do you enjoy it when they make fun of you? Do you think other readers enjoy
it? (I am asking seriously, not trying to criticize you). Maybe it would
be better to use email for this sort of corrective activity?
|
mooncat
|
|
response 301 of 335:
|
Nov 1 15:49 UTC 2001 |
re #300- as Meg mentioned in #299- she makes fun of the people she
knows. I think that were I to point out something she mistyped, or
mispelled, she would find some amusement in it (especially if the typo
resulted in a real word) and vice versa.
Now if the two people involved didn't know each other, and didn't have
a friendship where they kidded and teased each other, it wouldn't be as
enjoyable.
Make sense?
|
eeyore
|
|
response 302 of 335:
|
Nov 2 04:19 UTC 2001 |
I thought I was pretty clear.....
If Anne made a mistake, I'd laugh long and hard at her, and expect her to do
the same to me. I wouldn't do it you you, since I don't know you. Anne, I
used to live with her....Like I said...only people that I know, and that know
me.
|
keesan
|
|
response 303 of 335:
|
Nov 2 13:52 UTC 2001 |
My question was, do you think other readers find this sort of teasing
interesting to read in agora, or would email be better for it? Actually,
other readers ought to answer this question.
|
eeyore
|
|
response 304 of 335:
|
Nov 2 16:33 UTC 2001 |
Um, out of reality, not everything that is posted is posted for "being
interesting". If that were the case, a good 2/3 of Agora would be gone, as
well as large chunks of a lot of other things.
|
senna
|
|
response 305 of 335:
|
Nov 2 18:23 UTC 2001 |
A large number of grexers have known each other for years, and when you
communicate with someone for that long amusing bits of humor are bound to come
up every now and then. Some do it more (Anne and Meg), some do it less
(rcurl), but we all still do it. Banter is fun and generally a good way to
keep things lighthearted.
|
carson
|
|
response 306 of 335:
|
Nov 3 03:09 UTC 2001 |
I find myself in agreement with Stephen.
|
senna
|
|
response 307 of 335:
|
Nov 3 08:18 UTC 2001 |
Shut up, poodlesquirt. There isn't enough room on this bbs for the both of
us. :)
|
carson
|
|
response 308 of 335:
|
Nov 3 23:35 UTC 2001 |
I still find myself in agreement with Stephen. ;)
|
brighn
|
|
response 309 of 335:
|
Nov 4 16:54 UTC 2001 |
would both of you just shut the Hell up and let me talk?
|
richard
|
|
response 310 of 335:
|
Nov 5 05:05 UTC 2001 |
Regarding the fact that jp2 lives out of town. I agree the bylaws should
be amended to allow for out of towners to serve on the board and
attend meetings by teleconference. But also to be sure, it is better if
the board members know each other in person. No matter how often you deal
with someone online, you dont get the complete sense of him/her unless
you meet them in person.
I suggest the bylaws be amended to allow for those living out of town to
serve on the board and attend by video or phone conferencing, BUT also
require that every board member must attend at least one board meeting per
year in person. Failure to show up in person at a meeting at least once
during a calendar year should require the board to vote on whether to
remove that member. I think even jp2 could make it to a2 once a year if
it was important enough to him.
|
jp2
|
|
response 311 of 335:
|
Nov 5 05:08 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 312 of 335:
|
Nov 5 05:11 UTC 2001 |
plus there's the question of whether an out of town member conferencing
by phone constitutes "face to face" meeting. it may be that an out of
town member couldnt vote according to the bylaws unless it was via
video conferencing, which would I guess be one legal definition of "face to
face"
|
brighn
|
|
response 313 of 335:
|
Nov 5 17:20 UTC 2001 |
(if a cluase is put in to allow/require out-of-towners to teelconference in,
might I suggest that explicit language be put in that stipulates it's at that
BOD's expense, not Grex's? This is Richard's idea and Jamie's candidacy we're
talking about... >=} )
|
richard
|
|
response 314 of 335:
|
Nov 5 17:55 UTC 2001 |
thats a good point too. also, the board would have to meet at a place
that could facilitate telephone or video conferencing.
|
brighn
|
|
response 315 of 335:
|
Nov 5 21:15 UTC 2001 |
... and I would classify that as an unfair restriction on the Board. This
isn't a major corporation.
|
lowclass
|
|
response 316 of 335:
|
Nov 5 23:02 UTC 2001 |
Does the checking account we have accrue interest? "THAT'S covered the
FDIC...
|
aruba
|
|
response 317 of 335:
|
Nov 5 23:45 UTC 2001 |
I think #316 was meant for item 58 - I'll answer over there.
|
danr
|
|
response 318 of 335:
|
Nov 6 00:47 UTC 2001 |
re #311: Both you and Richard have never been to Ann Arbor. I guess
it's like "birds of a feather..." or something like that.
|
scg
|
|
response 319 of 335:
|
Nov 6 07:20 UTC 2001 |
Come on, if you want to criticize Jamie or Richard for something, surely you
can find something more significant than never having been to Ann Arbor.
I wonder what percentage of Grex users have been to Ann Arbor. It's probably
pretty small.
|
davel
|
|
response 320 of 335:
|
Nov 6 13:58 UTC 2001 |
Ah, but he said (in #311) "well known" users. That narrows it down a bit.
8-{)]
|
janc
|
|
response 321 of 335:
|
Nov 6 16:26 UTC 2001 |
Especially if he means "well known to Ann Arbor users" as opposed to "well
known to Bangalore users".
|
orinoco
|
|
response 322 of 335:
|
Nov 6 17:48 UTC 2001 |
(Nice.)
|
jp2
|
|
response 323 of 335:
|
Dec 15 19:53 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
other
|
|
response 324 of 335:
|
Dec 15 21:33 UTC 2001 |
It's only slander if it's a lie, and by the way, the courts have held
that postings on a BBS are only the poster's opinions.
|
