|
Grex > Coop13 > #43: Account of Board Candidate Terminated | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 130 responses total. |
willcome
|
|
response 7 of 130:
| 
Dec 3 05:41 UTC 2003 |
It should be noted that I've fucked over Grex multiple times much more
destructive and ill-intentioned than this, and NONE of the times ended with
my account being frozen.
|
carson
|
|
response 8 of 130:
|
Dec 3 12:34 UTC 2003 |
(what e-mail?)
|
jp2test
|
|
response 9 of 130:
|
Dec 3 13:12 UTC 2003 |
Valerie has claimed that she was attempting to resolve an emergency situation.
This is despite the fact that the action she took was several hours after the
supposed "emergency" was over. This is also despite the fact at least one
staff member was aware of it at the time and chose to do nothing.
Sorry, but this is not the staff acting to prevent abuse. Grex has no
terms of service or acceptable use policy that you can even fall back on.
This is punishment for daring to think against the Grex way.
My membership rights have been suspended. My campaign has been intentionally
sabotaged by the Grex staff by preventing my candidate statement from being
seen inside the vote program. And an unknown number of users have emailed
me asking how to become members, and they are waiting for responses.
Wait, it just hit me. You guys don't actually want new members, do you?
|
gull
|
|
response 10 of 130:
|
Dec 3 14:37 UTC 2003 |
I don't think staff sabotaged your campaign. I think you sabotaged your
own campaign a long time ago.
That said, I find this troubling and I'd like to see a good explanation
from the staff members involved.
|
gull
|
|
response 11 of 130:
|
Dec 3 14:37 UTC 2003 |
(Incidentally, when you said you'd sent out 900 email messages my first
thought *was*, "geez, that sounds like spamming.")
|
gelinas
|
|
response 12 of 130:
|
Dec 3 14:47 UTC 2003 |
Sending out mass mail is an abuse of grex. Abuse of grex results in the
account being locked. jp2 sent out mass mail. jp2 was locked.
|
scott
|
|
response 13 of 130:
|
Dec 3 14:57 UTC 2003 |
The text shown during the newuser process specifically mentions email abuse.
Since Jamie apparently ran newuser to create the "jp2test" account, he can
hardly claim that this is some "secret" rule.
|
jp2test
|
|
response 14 of 130:
|
Dec 3 14:58 UTC 2003 |
Of all the responses I received, nobody complained about the fact they were
being asked what Grex could do to make them happier users. Lots, and I mean
lots asked how to become members. There are at least 10 sitting in my inbox
that I had not had the chance to respond to. And over the past 12 hours (or
so) an unknown number of new messages have come in.
Someone needs to respond to these and I predict at least four new members as
a result of this.
|
gull
|
|
response 15 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:14 UTC 2003 |
I think what jp2 did showed poor judgement, but I think it probably
deserved a warning, not the loss of his account. If he did it again
after being warned, then I could see locking out his account.
It looks to me like staff has lately been taking more severe action
against people whose conference items they happen not to like than they
would against other users, and I find that really troubling.
|
scott
|
|
response 16 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:16 UTC 2003 |
Basically you're arguing that "the ends justify the means", which I consider
to be a cop-out at best.
You behaved in a way which you know is not acceptable, and now you're claiming
that it is for the good of Grex instead of admitting that you abused the
system.
|
scott
|
|
response 17 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:16 UTC 2003 |
(gull slipped in - I was responding to Jamie's #14)
|
jep
|
|
response 18 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:19 UTC 2003 |
1. I don't think it's appropriate to lock out the account of a Board
candidate while an election is in progress. If that's to be done, it
seems to me it should be by vote of the Board, not by a staff member
acting on his own.
There's no precedent for this set of circumstances. There are no rules
protecting a candidate; or giving either a candidate, or a Board
member, any special privileges. There's no doubt that having his
account locked out will affect jp2's chances in the election. I think
that fact has to be considered.
2. I think jp2 did something stupid. I think it was irresponsible; he
should have known better than that. Even so, I don't see any reason to
believe it was intended as an assault on Grex.
I'm reluctant to criticize the staff when they're acting to prevent
abuse of system resources. However, just this one time, I'd like to
ask the staff to immediately restore jp2's account.
|
jp2test
|
|
response 19 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:20 UTC 2003 |
The same thing has been happening on M-Net for years.
It concerns me, too. Many here hate me, and I am willing to accept that.
Some of it is justified. Some of it is completely unreasonable. To each
their own. But there has been a clear pattern emerging with regard to the
way staff treats offenders.
|
jp2test
|
|
response 20 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:22 UTC 2003 |
Slippage, I was responding to 15.
|
jp2test
|
|
response 21 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:23 UTC 2003 |
16: Have you even seen the message that was sent?
|
scott
|
|
response 22 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:43 UTC 2003 |
Re 21: The message text doesn't matter. What matters is your deliberate
abuse of Grex's email system, and how the issue is resolved.
Re 15 (gull): Accusing staff of playing favorites... do you have any specific
incidents in mind? The only one I can think of is the whole polytarp issue,
where there's an individual who goes out of his/her way to be a twit in
conferences, but whose account(s) were locked for legititmate reasons.
|
scott
|
|
response 23 of 130:
|
Dec 3 15:48 UTC 2003 |
Re 18 (jep):
So you're proposing a sort of immunity for Board candidates? That sounds like
a magnet for abuse...
This all reminds of my childhood, when one of my siblings would combat boredom
by starting arguments, preferably between people who were otherwise good
friends.
|
jep
|
|
response 24 of 130:
|
Dec 3 16:12 UTC 2003 |
Scott, I'm stating outright it's inappropriate for the staff to scuttle
a Board candidate's election campaign. That seems to be the pressing
issue, from my perspective. I'm very uncomfortable with the way this
has handled and the effects it will have.
I am not trying to stir up trouble for the sake of sparking
discussion. I have some policy views which are not widely accepted and
have vigorously pursued them in the past, however, for the most part, I
am a longtime mainstream user of Grex. And this issue has nothing to
do with those other issues.
I am a member solely in order to support Grex, and contribute money and
auction items when appropriate or when requested. I think I deserve
some respect for my record and background I think I deserve some
attention when I write of my discomfort for what is happening here. I
think it is very inappropriate to dismiss my comments with references
to kids combatting boredom. I'm not bored, I'm not a kid and I'm not a
troublemaker.
|
remmers
|
|
response 25 of 130:
|
Dec 3 16:21 UTC 2003 |
(I read Scott's esponse as referring to Jamie as "the kid",
not you.)
|
naftee
|
|
response 26 of 130:
|
Dec 3 16:25 UTC 2003 |
re 21 THIS IS EXHIBIT A <> CAPABLE OF A CONVICTION OF JP2!!!@()*
Subject: Greetings from Grex Candidate jp2
Hello, my name is James Howard and I am currently running for election to
the Board of Directors here at Grex.
I picked a few of you who have logged in recently to ask a question. I
see that you are currently not a member of Grex. I am wondering if you
would be interested in becoming a member, or if not, what could Grex do
you make you interested in becoming a member?
Thank you, James
|
flem
|
|
response 27 of 130:
|
Dec 3 16:40 UTC 2003 |
For what it's worth, it was valerie that locked jp2's account, and I
don't think she reads coop very often, so it's unlikely that she'll come
here to defend her actions. It's also unlikely that she has read any of
jp2's recent coop items.
I think that staff messing with a board member's campaign is a bad
thing, but it would be an even worse thing if staff were not allowed to
protect the system from someone just because they happened to be running
for board. Otherwise next year willcome or some other cookie-cutter
twit will send in $18, announce he's running for board, and start
running forkbombs and harassing people and compiling eggdrop and.....
Without revealing the contents of board/staff communications with Jamie,
suffice it to say that 1) this story isn't over, and 2) I'm reasonably
happy with the way it's going.
|
other
|
|
response 28 of 130:
|
Dec 3 16:49 UTC 2003 |
1. Whether or not people minded receiving the spam is beside the
point. Grex's limited ability to handle it is the primary concern.
2. Hundreds of abusers per month are locked with no warning for
similar abuse of resources. I wrote what I wrote because I believed
jp2 had not been locked when he should have, but the action locking
his account merely came later.
3. Candidacy for the board, or for that matter any difference of
opinion with the majority, has absolutely no weight in consideration
of appropriate response to abuse of the system. The numbers of
abusers are simply too great and the time required to deal with them
too extensive to be making exceptions.
|
scott
|
|
response 29 of 130:
|
Dec 3 17:08 UTC 2003 |
(Sorry about the ambiguity, jep - I was not referring to you as one who starts
arguments for fun)
And I really can't see why staff should not be able to deal with vandals,
regardless of whether they're board candidates or not. Flem pretty much
covered "why" in #27.
|
tod
|
|
response 30 of 130:
|
Dec 3 17:23 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
other
|
|
response 31 of 130:
|
Dec 3 17:33 UTC 2003 |
From: STeve Andre'
Subject: Re: Account of Board Candidate Terminated
Date: 3 December 2003 12:03:17 PM EST
To: Eric R. Bassey
Sure! Feel free to post this message, and my original message
to him, if you think that will help things. I'm dealing with a time
critical crisis at work so I have to get back to it now. I'll see
the discussion in coop tonight, or earlier if I can. Thanks for
asking, and thinking of doing that. Post this message if you'd
like. STeve
On Wednesday 03 December 2003 12:03 pm, Eric R. Bassey wrote:
If you don't do it, can I post some portion of this in the item in
Coop, by way of public explanation for the timing? Not that I want
to place blame, but I think it helps to remind folks that staff are
human and volunteer and have lives that do not revolve around Grex.
On 3 Dec 2003, at 11:46 AM, STeve Andre' wrote:
Valerie, I owe you an apology for not locking the account
myself. I have the same feelings you do about this, which
is what we've done in the past with mass mailings.
I didn't, mostly because I was in the middle of crud at work
and had gotten a message from Glenda about Grex being
dredfully slow, and then saw two messages (to help and
trouble) which clued me into what the problem might be.
So yes, I should have locked the account right then and there.
I'm sorry that I didn't.
That this belongs to a candidate running for the board makes it
a little weird, but that shouldn't matter. Mass mailings have
never been tolerated, regardless of who they are.
--STeve Andre'
|