response 63 of 92:

Mar 23 16:12 UTC 1999

(For an "HTML blocker", would it be feasible to put in a
user-configurable option of always being shown the plain-text version of
responses? Since a plaintext version will always exist, and since
Backtalk will show that to the user anyway in the cases where there *is*
no HTML version of a response, it doesn't seem like it would be hard to
show that to the user in all cases.)

Re resp:58 - I remember quite well the debate on anonymous web reading,
which got a heck of a lot more heated than this discussion has. I
favored anonymous web reading and thought the whole controversy was a
tempest in a teapot. And indeed, it's had just about zero visible impact
on Grex.

Unlike anonymous reading, which is invisible to users (almost by
definition), HTML would have a visible impact on every user of Backtalk.
There's an aspect of it that makes me nervous: The <IMG> tag makes it
very easy to embed images that are stored on any web server on the
internet. And unlike fancy formatting, which takes some work, putting
images into responses can be done casually, by typing a few characters.
And there are a lot of images out whose posting could have legal
implications. I'm concerned that support for <IMG> might (note that I
say "might", not "would") result in a substantial number of problematic
images (sexually explicit, copyrighted, illegal, etc.) popping up in the
conferences.

Only two people responded to my earlier question about what we should do
if this happens: Joe Parish, who said he would simply censor such images
(which as it happens, fairwitnesses can't do in Grex's version of
Picospan), and Steve Weiss, who said he didn't know how it should be
handled. Any other takers?

Generally speaking, I favor Jan's "TRY IT, and if there are problems,
FIX IT" approach to things. Thing is, I can see three possible fixes to
the "problematic images" problem, should it arise:

(1) Ignore it. Grex doesn't censor, so just leave the images there.

(2) Have cfadm censor them, following some established appropriateness
criteria, and report the poster to their ISP. This would mean we would
have the staff "policing" the conferences, similar to the way we now
police for vandals and mail spammers).

(3) Disallow images by having Backtalk filter out <IMG> tags, on the
grounds that preserving Grex's open, unpoliced, and uncensored style of
conferencing is more important than the ability to jazz up responses
with pictures.

Which of these three fixes do folks favor? Can anyone think of others? I
know I strongly favor (3). I think (1) is ruled out as a general policy
for legal reasons, and I would REALLY REALLY REALLY hate to see policing
spread to the conferences. That leaves (3). Do other people feel the
same way? I have no more evidence that a problem will arise than Jan
does that it won't, but I'd feel more comfortable going into the HTML
posting era if we have a concensus beforehand on how we would react to
this particular problem, should it arise.

response 65 of 92:

Mar 23 21:53 UTC 1999

I like option (3) also.  

response 67 of 92:

Mar 23 22:27 UTC 1999

Looks like we want to allow fairwitnesses to turn off HTML images in
conferences, without necessarily turning off all HTML.  (Currently
fairwitnesses can either turn HTML off completely or on completely.)

Is that what most people are looking for?

Note that if I implement this the easy way, then if you have HTML images
turned on, and then turn it off, the old posted images will not go away.
They will still be there, but you won't be able to post new images.  The
rules are enforced at the time of posting, not at the time of reading. 
This means that fairwitnesses will always be able to post images, simply
by turning it on long enough to make the post (just as fairwitnesses
currently can always post to frozen items, by thawing them long enough
to make a posting).

response 69 of 92:

Mar 24 00:30 UTC 1999

I like 3 as well.  

response 71 of 92:

Mar 24 04:18 UTC 1999

Does option (2) mean that cfadm has to follow ALL the conferences, or just
respond to fw's censor requests?  This particular cfadm doesn't have any
(graphical) web access at home....  

response 73 of 92:

Mar 24 18:14 UTC 1999

Hopefully (2) won't happen and we won't have to decide any on any 
criteria. I would rather not see HTML posting capability result in the 
establishment of a heavy-duty conference management bureaucracy.

Having expressed my fears, I'll say again that I have no evidence that 
they'll come to pass. Grex has done extremely well by trusting the 
users and keeping things very open.

I think that the ability to filter <IMG> without throwing out all of 
HTML is a reasonable thing to implement. 

I plan to turn both <IMG> and HTML on in conferences I fw and see how 
it goes.

On another note: Currently you can do in-line sound files via the 
<EMBED> tag. See (or rather hear) the MIDI file I "posted" in item 8 of 
the backtalk conference, for example. <EMBED> should probably go, or at 
least be selectively disable-able like <IMG>. (A technical problem: 
Suppose two sound files get posted in the same item...)

response 75 of 92:

Apr 7 14:36 UTC 1999

The new backtalk has been installed.

By default, HTML is turned off in all conferences.

Fairwitnesses can turn it on, with or without images.

response 77 of 92:

Apr 16 01:32 UTC 1999

is there any place we can easily look to see which conferences have html 
permitted?

response 79 of 92:

Apr 16 10:56 UTC 1999

I've permitted full html in the DIY conference, on the theory that it would
be a good place to be able to display diagrams.

response 81 of 92:

Apr 16 22:18 UTC 1999

Very subtle plug there, hhsrat.  :-)

response 83 of 92:

Apr 18 18:41 UTC 1999

When I installed the new backtalk, I sent E-mail to all fairwitnesses
telling about their ability to turn that on, as well as the ability to
set which items will be new to newusers.

HTML is on in

   backtalk
   cinema
   diy
   enigma
   garage
   hangout

The new items settings have been altered in

   garage
   poetry

Not very popular features.

response 85 of 92:

Apr 18 21:10 UTC 1999

would it be reasonably possible to change the settings so that each response
header has the name of the item in it (in backtalk)?