|
Grex > Coop13 > #360: Member initative: Allow members to host images | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 182 responses total. |
scholar
|
|
response 75 of 182:
| 
Sep 16 08:52 UTC 2006 |
It's perfectly valid to compare M-Net to Grex, though.
They both provide basically the same services, and quite frankly, M-Net does
a better job of it.
|
cross
|
|
response 76 of 182:
|
Sep 16 14:13 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #74; So there's nothing to gain by looking at mnet as an example,
considering that they've already done what is being proposed for grex? As
scholar says, it is perfectly valid to compare the two. Indeed, I think it
could be particularly constructive.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 77 of 182:
|
Sep 19 05:32 UTC 2006 |
Why is it important to host the images on Grex, as opposed to Flickr, or some
other image hosting site?
|
spooked
|
|
response 78 of 182:
|
Sep 19 07:39 UTC 2006 |
Not sure...
I find it exceptionally puzzling that we still offer email, and don't
agree that it is worth the pain.
|
cross
|
|
response 79 of 182:
|
Sep 19 12:17 UTC 2006 |
I'm not sure that anything that grex does is "important." But it's been
requested over and over through the years, and the traditional arguments are
starting to fall flat (because if nothing else, things like Flickr and
photobucket do exist). But, I also think grex is mired in resistance to
change; a lot of our justifications are, "we've never done it that way." Or,
"what's wrong with the way we do it now?" Then strawman arguments are put
up to justify current policy and, eventually, the debate just dies down
because no one is interested in arguing it over and over. But hey, mabye
that's why grex's membership levels have halved in the past few years.
|
mary
|
|
response 80 of 182:
|
Sep 19 13:00 UTC 2006 |
I don't hear people objecting to this on the basis of "we've never done it
that way". Rather, they are presenting some pretty compelling reasons for
keeping our current policy. And I think it's unfair to say aruba, steve,
glenda, mcnally and others who have spoken up are simply resistant to
change. They have brought up some valid points here.
Aruba doesn't really want to see Grex hosting porn. sTeve wonders how we
will go about the censorship issues that will arise. mcnally points out
how allowing some images but not others might jeopardize our common
carrier status. And glenda brings up how other sites are already doing a
great job at hosting images and do we really want the added legal and
administrative burden involved. I'm highlighting just a few of those who
have brought thoughful questions to the discussion.
I haven't found any of the answers to these concerns compelling enough
to truck ahead, changing our policy. But the discussion has been
interesting.
|
cross
|
|
response 81 of 182:
|
Sep 19 18:34 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #80; No one said those aren't valid points. But you know what?
There's this BIG counterpoint to each one: M-Net, an organization that does
largely the same thing as grex and is under many of the same constraints,
allows images and it hasn't been a problem for them. I think it's perfectly
valid, for each of the points raised, to ask why that hasn't been a problem
for M-Net. As for resistance to change, that you "haven't found any of the
answers to these concerns compelling enough to truck ahead, changing our
policy" is being pretty resistant to change.
Of course, each of the compelling concerns you raise could equally be applied
to, say, offering email. Why not remove email access, as well? How is that
substantially different? Substitute UCE for porn (well, really, they're
largely the same thing now days - that and pharmacuticals are what most of
the spam I get concerns).
That we don't allow images for the reasons cited, but do allow email is
inconsistent.
|
tod
|
|
response 82 of 182:
|
Sep 19 20:29 UTC 2006 |
I don't think there would be a big overhead of censorship unless that is what
Grex is all about for certain staff people.
|
other
|
|
response 83 of 182:
|
Sep 19 21:00 UTC 2006 |
Re# 81: There is one reason, and it is monumentally significant. M-Net
is run autocratically. If you come up against a sysadmin on an issue,
you might as well just leave, because unless you can convince the person
to even spend the time listening to/reading why you think they're wrong,
you have no chance of winning the argument.
The difference between that and the way Grex is run makes M-Net in no
way whatever a reasonable measure of what might happen on Grex. There
cannot possibly be a reasonable use of M-Net's example for any
predictive value on Grex.
|
tod
|
|
response 84 of 182:
|
Sep 19 21:21 UTC 2006 |
re #83
So what you're saying is that Grex staff is a bunch of beauracratic bologna?
Wow, I agree for once.
|
steve
|
|
response 85 of 182:
|
Sep 20 00:58 UTC 2006 |
Grex staff is anything but beaurcratic.
|
steve
|
|
response 86 of 182:
|
Sep 20 01:08 UTC 2006 |
Dan, Mary is not resistent to change per se. She said that she has been
listening to the issues and doesn't see it as a reason to change. I think
thats perfectly valid. She is listening, but doesn't agree. Thats a lot
different from being resistend.
Again I will say that what M-Net does is what M-Net does. What they
choose to do is just about irrevelant to what we do. The cultures are
different, and thats that.
Your argument about removing email access if you substitute that for
porn doesn't make sene to me; the two are completely different.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 87 of 182:
|
Sep 20 01:14 UTC 2006 |
Maybe we can handle this the same way we handled the idle daemon issue.
Allow images for a month or so and see what happens.
|
cross
|
|
response 88 of 182:
|
Sep 20 02:02 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #83; What does the autocratic nature of M-Net system
administration have to do with the fact that both M-Net and Grex are 501(c)3
not-for-profit corporations, both have an open-access model for newusers,
and both face many of the same potential legal problems with respect to
images? In regards to the issues that have been raised in this discussion,
I don't see how you can so easily discount M-Net's experience in this
matter.
Regarding #85; Heh.
Regarding #86; I disagree. I think, at the core of it, that this was
proposed by polytarp and therefore immediately got on the bad side of nearly
everyone. I wonder how the discussion would have evolved had it been
proposed by someone else?
Yes, M-Net and grex are different. But with respect to the issues raised
regarding this proposal, there is much that grex can learn from M-Net. In
particular, M-Net did not become a haven for porn sites once it started to
allow images, it did not lose its nonprofit status, and it does not appear
that it has been the victim of legal action relating the images its users
put in their personal web space. Moreover, it is a convenience for its
users. Why wouldn't grex look at that? How does the response, "M-Net isn't
grex" invalidate their prior example with respect to things that are exactly
analogous between the systems? These aren't cultural issues, they're
organizational issues, and at that level, the two systems share much in
common.
And my argument wasn't that porn is analogous to email, but rather that
email and hosting images are (nearly) isomorphic, where porn maps to UCE.
That is, email access and image access have many of the same risks, and in
particular, nearly all that have been raised in this thread. (Of course,
grex did turn off outbound email for newusers as a result of this, but
there are hordes of users grandfathered in.) Saying, "I've read the
discussion, and conclude that the risks sufficiently outweigh the benefits
that I am not swayed in favor of the proposal" gives one pause for thought
when the same line of reasoning can be applied to email, as well.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 89 of 182:
|
Sep 20 02:30 UTC 2006 |
Basing a technical argument on the "different cultures" of m-net and grex
is intellectually weak, at best, and dishonest at worst. If the arguments
were over cultural issues, the point would be relevant. When it's used to
rebut a perfectly technical argument that m-net can handle images and
grex's capacity is not that dissimilar, it has zero persuasive power.
Unless of course someone is suggesting more grexers would post porn here
than m-netters would there. Hmmmm. Twinkie's "Dirt Pig" stories are pretty
vile, but maybe there's an underlying fear that some grexer somewhere
could do worst . . . .
|
steve
|
|
response 90 of 182:
|
Sep 20 02:58 UTC 2006 |
Hmmm. I thought this was a discussion about image files in general,
not just technical. Am I wrong here? Whats weak about it? I don't see
why, because M-net does something that we should or should not do whatever.
|
steve
|
|
response 91 of 182:
|
Sep 20 03:03 UTC 2006 |
Had someone else have proposed this Dan, my thoughts would be the
same. And, actually this was a reasonable thing to put up for
discussion.
|
aruba
|
|
response 92 of 182:
|
Sep 20 03:29 UTC 2006 |
Dan - it doesn't appear that more than a handful of Grex members support
this proposal; otherwise there would be enough to force a vote on the issue.
So your beef is not with the board and staff, but with the (vast majority of
the) membership. I say, if you really feel this is a good proposal, you
should make it your goal to convince a couple more members to endorse
bringing it to a vote.
|
cross
|
|
response 93 of 182:
|
Sep 20 03:40 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #90; It is a discussion, but the points are mostly technical in
nature, for sufficient definitions of what technical mean. In this case, this
involves legality among other things, not just the gearhead computer aspects
of it (which I would expect to be uninteresting to most except you, myself,
and perhaps a few others).
I don't think anyone is saying, "M-Net does this, therefore grex should."
I think what they *are* saying is that, "because M-Net does this, it does not
follow that grex cannot, or that the potential problems are insurmountable."
I know that that's what I'm saying, at the very least.
Regarding #91; I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one, Steve,
because that's what you say, even though your dislike for the proposer is well
known (and was aluded to in one of these threads - of course, his antagonism
toward you is well-known as well). Is that true for everyone who's chimed
in here?
Regarding #92; With all due respect, Mark, I'm willing to bet that the vast
majority of the membership is completely unaware that this discussion is
taking place at all. Part of that has to do with who started it. Part of
it has also to do with where it's being discussed (how many members venture
outside of agora on a regular basis?). For the record, I do think it's a good
proposal that would benefit grex, but unfortunately, these posts in and of
themselves take enough of my already taxed time that I cannot do more
cheerleading for it. I would suggest that scholar post a notice in agora that
this discussion is going on, or request the agora FW to link this item there
to give it more exposure. I would also like to point out that the grex
membership is a very, very small percentage of the total number of users.
I'm not sure that really matters all that much, but in general, the membership
is not at all representative of the overall userbase.
|
steve
|
|
response 94 of 182:
|
Sep 20 03:49 UTC 2006 |
I'm not sure about that Dan. Grex members do all sorts of things on
the system, just like the entire population. Except of course, they
care enough to send in money.
I will point out that I haven't heard a large number of Grex's
members asking for this. That I can remember, this is the first
such proposal in a while. I don't think its that big an issue here.
I mean, if it were, I would think that we'd be seeing more
comments here. As it is, there aren't enough people to support
this to go up for a vote, are there?
|
cross
|
|
response 95 of 182:
|
Sep 20 04:26 UTC 2006 |
I'm not sure; I haven't been keeping track of that. But then, if it's not
a big issue, is there a reason *not* to do it? I think Nate had a good idea:
try it for a month and see what happens. Leave in a provision that it can
be turned off at any time if the flood gates open and it looks like the dam
is about to burst. Would a test-run be bad?
And again, I'm not sure most of the membership even knows this is being
discussed....
|
naftee
|
|
response 96 of 182:
|
Sep 20 04:33 UTC 2006 |
i think most of the membership is asleep right now, cross.
|
cross
|
|
response 97 of 182:
|
Sep 20 05:10 UTC 2006 |
Quite possibly.
|
mary
|
|
response 98 of 182:
|
Sep 20 10:51 UTC 2006 |
Quick question - if we hosted erotic images that were visible to anyone,
would be be obligated to somehow put them behind a click-though where
viewers stipulated they were 18 or over? Would we need to comply with laws
stating all models were 18 or older? Can we get around any liablity of
facilitating a minors access to these photos simply by stating we don't
censor anything our users want to upload?
And as to our modeling ourselves after other systems, well. it's
always useful to see how it goes when others do it differently, but
we need to think it through, for ourselves, and first and foremost
do what works for Grex.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 99 of 182:
|
Sep 20 12:14 UTC 2006 |
IANAL, but I think the common-carrier status that Mcnally talked about
would say that Grex does not need to put click-throughs for the images
because basically the content would be owned by and the responsibility
of the user.
So, the two only choices is either allow all legal graphics with zero
censorship, or none at all.
|