|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 184 responses total. |
cyklone
|
|
response 45 of 184:
| 
Jan 31 21:30 UTC 2004 |
Re #43: What you call "controlling my life" seems to include controlling
others as well. As for my interest in Grex, go read my item in agora and
maybe you will know the facts a little better. BTW, the principles you
claim I am trying to "force" on you are not just mine but the principles
grex professed to be upholding when it agreed to cooperate with the ACLU.
I personally don't care if grex wants to do personal favors for favored
persons at the expense of free and uncensored speech. Ya'll can have your
little sandbox to play in, and I'll join the reindeer games elsewhere.
Grex's credibility is at stake, and if ya'll want to be hypocrites, be my
guest.
|
jp2
|
|
response 46 of 184:
|
Feb 1 00:02 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 47 of 184:
|
Feb 1 00:29 UTC 2004 |
Did you steal a page from aaron's "How To Argue With Leeron" book?
|
naftee
|
|
response 48 of 184:
|
Feb 1 00:43 UTC 2004 |
No he just asked you..."HOW TO BE AS GAY AS POSSIBLE".
|
jp2
|
|
response 49 of 184:
|
Feb 1 00:55 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
naftee
|
|
response 50 of 184:
|
Feb 1 01:59 UTC 2004 |
Exactly; just like leeron.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 51 of 184:
|
Feb 1 02:18 UTC 2004 |
re 48
Naftee, nobody is questioning whether you've stolen my act or not.
|
naftee
|
|
response 52 of 184:
|
Feb 1 02:30 UTC 2004 |
Stealing one of your acts would be about the stupidest thing someone could
do. But then again, that's why you thought of it. If we can even call those
actions "thinking" in the traditional sense.
|
gull
|
|
response 53 of 184:
|
Feb 1 03:02 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:45: Grex's claim to the ACLU was that we'd be forced to shut
down. It didn't really have much to do with the system's commitment to
free speech. Maybe you shouldn't pretend to know better than the rest
of us about stuff that happened before you came here.
I'm getting really tired of people who come to Grex from other systems
just to have fun gaming the system, trolling, and tormenting staff. I
wish they'd go back to shitting in their own back yard and stop shitting
in ours.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 54 of 184:
|
Feb 1 03:11 UTC 2004 |
While I was in fact on grex regularly at the time of the ACLU discussion,
I admit to not knowing the details. However, I doubt it would have been
interested in grex if it was aware of the present policy of personal
favors for favored persons at the expense of free and uncensored speech. I
could of course be wrong, but that does not make the hypocrisy disappear.
|
jep
|
|
response 55 of 184:
|
Feb 1 03:33 UTC 2004 |
I have some history with M-Net myself, some involvement with it's
past, and some concern about it. I certainly don't consider it to be
an insult to be an M-Netter. However, I have been an active Grexer,
too. I've been involved here, and when I express a concern for Grex,
it is on behalf of Grex, in the interest of improving Grex, so that it
will be better for myself as well as others.
I have pointed out that probably most of the discussion against my
proposal is from people who have little other involvement with Grex
than trying to control it. Jp2 is one such; a highly unusual case in
that he actually ran for the Board without much other involvement
here. Naftee and polytarp are two more, and cyklone, you're another.
It's wonderful for you to have principles, I am sure. It's puzzling
when they extend so far as to areas (Grex, I mean) about which you
haven't got much other concern. It's foolish for you to call
me "controlling" under the circumstances of this discussion.
As far as what you've said in Agora, it is not of interest to me. Is
that the Agora on M-Net, or Grex, by the way?
As far as personal favoritism... it is true that people here may
regard what I say in a different light than what someone says whom
they don't know, or have known only recently. I've been here since
Grex first came on-line. Most Grexers have had ample opportunity to
know me at my best and my worst, and the many stages in between. I
have said things that disgust, disappoint, frustrate, horrify and
anger many people here. I have also said things that entertain them,
contribute to their arguments, or perhaps even enlighten them a
little, from time to time. I care about some Grexers, and some of
them care about me. I don't think it would be an improvement if they
treated me the same way as someone who just ran 'newuser' for the
first time today. I think it would be silly. Not that it matters
what I think; they are not going to do it. No one in all of human
experience treats people they don't know the same as those they do
know. I am not asking for a policy change. I am asking for a favor,
and asking for recognition of unusual circumstances. I have said
exactly that since I asked for the users to authorize my items to
remain deleted.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 56 of 184:
|
Feb 1 04:18 UTC 2004 |
I think it's unfortunate that you'd dismiss valid points out of hand, simply
because you're able to produce "street cred".
Admittedly, my knowledge of Grex history is mostly anecdotal, but I'm still
reasonably sure that a tenet of Grex has been to allow everyone an equal
opportunity to direct the system's future. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but
I thought that was the larger reason Grex came to fruition.
At what point does a person earn the right to say that something's wrong, or
that change is needed? And at what point does a person gain the right to trump
the suggestions of others?
Personally, I have little (if any) stake in Grex. I've been a user on and off
for probably a decade now, give or take a few months. Does that longevity earn
me a place at the table of elders? (Don't worry, that's a rhetorical question)
Either way, as something of an outsider looking in, there seems to be varying
degrees of hypocrisy on both sides. One side is all but chanting "Do as I say,
not as I do." while some of the others who are championing free speech as an
absolute are themselves guilty of raising a stink to have their works deleted.
I don't think either side is inherently right here. If the items are restored,
there's almost certainly going to be some emotional duress to a few users.
If they're wiped from the digital ether forever, the concept of speech without
censorship is damaged.
It really boils down to what you care more about. You're voting for a friend,
or you're voting for your principles.
|
jp2
|
|
response 57 of 184:
|
Feb 1 04:20 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
witzbolt
|
|
response 58 of 184:
|
Feb 1 04:45 UTC 2004 |
Re. 55: I have no interest in controlling Grex, and I think you should
appologise for pretending you think I do.
|
witzbolt
|
|
response 59 of 184:
|
Feb 1 04:48 UTC 2004 |
Re. 57: AHAH< YEAH< IF YOU THINK JPTHOMAS IS HALF OF M_NET<> AHAHA.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 60 of 184:
|
Feb 1 04:50 UTC 2004 |
b&
|
naftee
|
|
response 61 of 184:
|
Feb 1 05:18 UTC 2004 |
re 55 What, you're calling me the control freak? You're the one who's making
_specific_ requests of GreX users to do _specific_ actions. I have merely
demanded action on supposed GreXer principles.
re 57 Yeah I have reasonably steady posters on my wall too. Does that count?
|
jp2
|
|
response 62 of 184:
|
Feb 1 05:34 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
tod
|
|
response 63 of 184:
|
Feb 1 15:58 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 64 of 184:
|
Feb 1 17:10 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:63: There's a certain group of people who have come here with no
interest in contributing anything to the system; they're only here to
make trouble, by arguing about obscure points of policy, repeatedly
posting large amounts of irrelevent text in conferences, and abusing
staff members. I see no reason we have to welcome people like that,
anymore than a coffeehouse would have to welcome people who came there
to shout obscenities at patrons.
|
scott
|
|
response 65 of 184:
|
Feb 1 17:10 UTC 2004 |
What bugs me about this whole "Grex MUST xxx, because that's what it claims
to support" argument is that it pretty much would prevent Grex from being a
community. One thing a healthy community can do is occasionally cut people
a little slack. Places that demand 100% compliance with some set of
principles, no matter how well-intentioned, will eventually schism over
differences in interpretation or in realization by some that the principles
cannot be considered perfect.
I don't think a community can be based on "you must assume that EVERYTHING
you say will be hoarded in case it becomes useful as evidence against you".
Nobody can really live up to that standard.
And I would rather not have Grex become like M-Net, where you have a community
of people for whom online interaction means creating a persona that isn't
real but is instead meant for a game of humorous insults.
|
naftee
|
|
response 66 of 184:
|
Feb 1 19:14 UTC 2004 |
re 64 No, we only abuse former staff members.
re 65 Your idea of what m-net is like is rather humourous, but completely
false.
|
aruba
|
|
response 67 of 184:
|
Feb 1 19:16 UTC 2004 |
I agree strongly with scott in #65.
|
twinkie
|
|
response 68 of 184:
|
Feb 1 19:45 UTC 2004 |
re: 65
Kristallnacht was also cohesive community thinking.
Okay, okay, that's more than a little extreme.
Honestly though, what's the point of claiming to support something, when
you're not prepared to support it?
I think a lot of people are surprised to see responses deleted en masse after
the somewhat recent debate over whether a person can permanently scribble one
of their own responses.
It's unconscionable that so many people would object to someone wanting to
do something as simple as remove their posts, yet many of the same objectors
are willing to write a free pass to friends who want to destry their posts,
as well as the contributions of others.
Perhaps I'm misreading here, but it seems to me that the objection isn't as
much to popcorn and jep wanting to scribble their posts. The objection is to
the hundreds (thousands?) of others who were *not* willing to have their
writings arbitrarily censored, yet had their contributions forcibly removed.
Although you don't want Grex to become another M-Net, allowing this could
quite possibly be the most M-Netish thing Grex has ever done. And I'm not
talking about M-Net today, but M-Net before 1995.
You're sowing the seeds of favoritism, separate classes of users, and blatant
staff abuse. If those hallmarks haven't made M-Net what it is today, I don't
know what has.
Rather than view the handful of M-Netters here as dictating "You must be like
M-Net!", try looking at them as people trying to warn you "Don't be like
M-Net." If you're a sci-fi fan, pretend they've come from 2014 to tell you
what Grex looks like in the future.
While I don't necessarily agree with your broad generalization of M-Net's
community atmosphere, there is a certain degree of truth there. To some
(perhaps many), there is solace in simply knowing that Grex is an alternative.
I can't speak for others, but I can say that that's why I've bothered to post
about this. You have a community. Don't screw it up.
|
scott
|
|
response 69 of 184:
|
Feb 1 20:43 UTC 2004 |
Re 68:
Ignoring your Nazi comparison...
"Honestly though, what's the point of claiming to support something, when
you're not prepared to support it?"
There's a difference between supporting something and rigidly insisting that
everything done by everybody must match that something 100%... and on top of
that demanding that everything must be documented as official policy.
|