I move that Grex place a blue ribbon and a statement endorsing
the Blue Ribbon Campaign for Online Freedom of Expression on its web
page until the fate of the recently-enacted Federal statute which
prohibits the display of material 'harmful to minors' in certain
circumstances is decided by the Federal courts.
        This motion is made under Article V of the Grex bylaws.

48 responses total.

I second the motion.

I'd suggest wording like:

        I move that Grex place and endorsement of the Blue Ribbon
Campaign for Online Freedom of Expression on its web page.  This
endorsement should stay in place at least until the fate of the
recently-enacted Federal statute which prohibits the display of
material 'harmful to minors' in certain circumstances is decided
by the Federal courts, but may be left up longer at the discretion
of Grex's webmasters.

Basically, it's vaguer about the exact form that the endorsement should
take, and it only sets a minimum on how long the thing can stay up, not
a maximum.

While we're at it, what other political issues does Grex as an organization
want to take a stand on?  Whatever happened to having a system where we could
have open discussions with lots of different points of view?

This is a nice concept, but rather misguided.

This is an open discussion and there are lots of different points of view.
Your's, for example. 

I accept janc's re-wording of my motion.  Thanx!

(Note: Since this is a formal proposal by a member, the bylaws specify 
procedures and time constraints, which I'll review: Minimum of two weeks 
for discussion (can be longer, at the proposer's option). When the 
proposer submits a final wording, it is put up for a vote and passes if 
a majority of those voting vote in favor. Voting period is ten days, 
during which discussion can of course continue. Since the vote program 
allows people to change their votes, continued discussion could indeed 
affect the outcome.

The minimum two week discussion period ends December 3. This means a 
vote on this *might* take place at the same time as the Board election. 
This would not be a technical problem.)

I like the gist of Jan's changes.

Re #3:  Grex taking a stand on this issue does not in any way stifle open
discussion of it online.

I'd like to remind everyone that to vote on an issue such as this one, you
need to be a Grex member and have paid for at least three consecutive months
of membership including the one in which the vote takes place.  If you feel
strongly about this issue and are not a member, by all means consider becoming
one.

To become a member of Grex, send $6/month or $60/year to

Cyberspace Communications, Inc.
P.O. Box 4432
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-4432

If you pay by some method other than personal check, be sure to include a
photocopy of some form of ID.

The last time I became a member, I found I had to participate in the 
election to do so.  The very day after I'd made it emphatically clear I 
didn't want e-mail about Grex's elections, I got e-mail about Grex's 
elections.  I donated my membership to Meg Geddes, and didn't send any 
money to Grex for about 5 years.

Just last week, I became a member of Grex once again.  I gave a 
check to aruba for a year's membership.  This time I did plan to 
participate in the elections, as an interested voter.  But, now it looks 
very likely I'll have to support a political campaign to be a member, 
when what I really wanted was to support Grex as a free discussion 
board.  The concepts to me of a political agenda and a free discussion 
board are incompatible.

So, if this thing passes, that will be 2 bad experiences from 2 
memberships for me.  I'm not going to blast anyone, or ask for my money 
back, but this *is* a disincentive for me to send more money to Grex (if 
it passes).

BTW, and FWIW, I support the general goals of the blue ribbon campaign.  
I'll bet at least 95% of Grexers do, too.  I hope they do.  I just think 
it's really inappropriate for Grex itself to "have an opinion".

I'm puzzled. Why do you say "I had to participate in the election to do
so", or "I'll have to support a political campaign to be a member"? You
have to do neither to be a member. You can completely ignore both the
election and the referendum. And, whatever happens in either, does not
mean you support either - you are perfectly free remain in opposition to
anything, and no one will think otherwise. So, what's your beef, again? 

I don't think we usually spam members with a lot of E-mail about
elections, but sending mail to members reminding them that they can vote
seems perfectly reasonable.  I'd think most members would appreciate
that.  Hard to please all the people though.

On the second issue, I think he means that if he supports Grex by
donating money, and Grex supports a cause he does agree with, then he
feels his support is being attached to something he doesn't want to
support against his will.  To a degree, I think that is one of the
hazards of supporting any group.  It's agenda will never be exactly what
you would like or expect.  At least as a member you have some input -
you can vote against this motion.

I'm still undecided on this.  Grex's web page says right at the top:

         Welcome to Grex
    a public service promoting
           free speech
               and
           free access
          on the internet

with "free speech" and "free access" in big red letters.  I put this
there myself, and I think it expresses the general opinion here.  So our
web page already says very prominently that we support free speech.

The step being proposed here is that we go from supporting internet free
speech in general, through words on our web site and through our own
actions and policies, to specifically endorsing the Blue Ribbon Campaign
for Online Freedom of Expression.  I'm still uncomfortable with the idea
of Grex taking that step.  It just doesn't seem like part of our
purpose.  The mere existance of Grex is an extremely powerful statement
that the people here absolutely support free speech.  Compared to that,
Blue Ribbons are completely insignificant.  I really believe that Grex,
as an organization, should rarely speak.  I'm probably going to vote
against this.

Since we've already had a good bit of discussion on this, I think
the "minimum period", ending December 3, will be fine.  I expect that
the final wording will be that in #4.  Gee, I hope janc supports his
own wording!   8-)

(I remember the last time jep became a member.  It was while I was running
for the board for the first time.  At that point, some percentage of the
members had to vote in an election, or we wouldn't have quorum and the
election wasn't valid.  Nobody was forced to vote, but people not voting
managed to, inadvertantly I'm sure, cause major procedural headaches.  We
ended up doing a bylaw ammendment to eliminate the quorum requirement (that
vote required a quorum too, but we somehow got it), and we then did the board
election over again.  None of this is particularly relevant to the issue at
hand, but I thought I'd put jep's comments into context)

Needless to say, I support this motion.

I am surprised and shocked that anyone here who has studied CDA II
thinks it's not an issue that directly affects grex.  The ACLU brief
makes a specific point of noting that "credit card registration" (named
by CDA II as a specific means of age verification) isn't available to
organizations that provide "free" registration, which strikes at the
very *heart* of the way grex is structured -- newuser.  They also note
the overly expensive penalties ($150,000 / DAY!), the inadequate
safeguards against disclosing age verification data (explicitly,
*none*!), and the vague and overly broad definitions used in the law,
many of which raise the very same consitutional issues that CDA
floundered on.  Lastly, they note that Janet Reno (the very person
responsible for enforcing CDA II!) had warned congress before CDA II was
even passed that it would likely be found unconstitutional.

I am also surprised and shocked that there are any but a few crazed
yahoos that think grex shouldn't have the blue ribbon link on its home
page.  Apparently, the blue ribbon page is one of the *4* most linked
pages in the universe.  We are not talking crazy left-wing liberal
weirdness, folks.  This is ordinary mainstream mom-and-apple-pie "what
it means to be a free american" patriotic good wholesome stuff!  I have
to really wonder how much real commitment some people here have to "free
speech", and its attendant responsibilities.  Some people here seem to
be under some sort of delusion that it's ok if they individually
"support" free speech, but that they don't want any other organization
to speak in favour of free speech for them.  Guess what?  The folks who
are *against* free speech are quite organized, and quite willing to let
one of the most powerful groups in the world speak on their behalf
against free speech - the US gov't!  That's right, CDA II is being
promoted with *your* tax dollars, by a bunch of people who really don't
care what you think.  If you believe in free speech -- why is it ok for
gov't to expouse principals you don't believe in, but not ok for grex to
expouse principles you *do* believe in?

In any group of any size, there are bound to be *some* things the group
does that some people don't like.  But in this case, this group
*depends* on free speech being, well, free in this country.  I don't see
how the blue ribbon campaign is in any way not consistent and indeed
*necessary* for grex's continued existance.

re #12: Thanks for your comment.  That was the problem, but I'd 
forgotten it.  I just remembered having a problem.  (How embarrassing.)

re #10: I agree with the Blue Ribbon Campaign.  I think it's a fine 
thing.  I wish it the best.  If I had a home page, I might well sign up 
myself.  It's that I think Grex should be above participating in 
political campaigns.  Grex should remain an independent forum.

re #13: You (mdw) mentioned:

>That's right, CDA II is being
>promoted with *your* tax dollars, by a bunch of people who really don't
>care what you think.

This proposal is the flip side of that.  Tax dollars will be used to 
oppose something enacted by an elected Congress (because Grex is a 
501(c)(3) organization now).  Also, membership dollars will be used the 
same way.  If it's objectionable for the government to promote CDA II, 
then it's objectionable for Grex to oppose it.

Then there's the "slippery slope" argument, which Jan has already 
poo-pooed, either here or in the other item in agora.  He's dismissed it 
quite incorrectly.  Once Grex starts having a political agenda, it's a 
sure bet that people are going to try to have Grex support other 
political movements, too.  I'd rather see it stop right now, than to see 
Grex endorsing candidates and assuming political stances on the behalf 
of me and other people here.

Grex supports free speech.  It does that by existing; by allowing 
unrestricted public expression.  Endorsing a political agenda isn't 
going to increase or improve that function.

But not endorsing that political agenda is going to decrease or degrade that
function.

It is easy to break one stick. A bundle of sticks is much more difficult
to break. We must stand with all those that oppose restriction of free
speech, or we will be broken one by one. 

How many membership dollars will it take, by the way, to put up the blue
ribbon and statement (personally, I think the "dollars" argument is
irrelevant - one devotes resources to one's goals to the extent necessary
and feasible. It depends on the strength of your convictions. Anyone here
have strong convictions about free speech?)?

This response has been erased.

Whups... I slipped there for a minute.

This item now linked to the cyberpunk conference.  Your one stop conf
for all items CDA related.

John, I'm sorry if you feel your Grex membership money is not being put to
good use, but I'm afraid I don't understand your arguments.

It will take a total of 0 dollars and 0 cents, per month, to put the blue
ribbon on Grex's web site.

I am reminded of a story I heard about Bill Cosby back when he was doing his
show on NBC in the 80s.  He put a sign up on the living room set that said
"End Apartheid" or something to that effect.  The jar-heads at the network
told him to take it down, because the network didn't want to get involved in
a political issue.  Cosby said that the network might not have an opinion on
apartheid, but there was absolutely only one opinion the fictional Huxtable
family could have, and he walked off the set rather than let them take down 
the sign.  Eventually the network capitulated, and the sign stayed up.

While it may be a contoversial issue in some quarters, there is absolutely
only one position Grex can have on the issue of free speech on the Internet,
by virtue of our mission.  We're not expanding our opinions at all to support
the blue ribbon campaign, so I think the slippery slope argument is without
merit.  When people start proposing we support wildlife refuges, or recycling
programs, or family values, THEN you can complain that we've gotten off track.

hear hear - If pressed, I would find it just about impossible to explain 
how grex could be what it claims and yet not support the blue ribbon.
I will certainly be voting for this proposal. 

I think it's time to start the member vote on this motion, isn't it?

Yes, it could start now. Please enter the final wording, or point
me to a response that contains the wording you want. Then I'll set
up the program to vote on this. (I'll have to give a different
name that "vote", since that name is currently in use for the
Board election.) Give me a day or two. As specified in the bylaws,
voting will run for 10 days from the time the polls open.

The "proposal" program doesn't have a web interface, and I doubt
I'll have time to put one together in time for this vote, so voting
will most likely be by dialin and telnet only. I intend to remedy
this situation for future proposal votes.

The final text of the motion is in response #2 up there.

Okay. I'll set up the vote today.

Thanx, John!

This response has been erased.

I regret the lack of a web interface. I doubt that it will 
disenfranchise any members (not positive, though)  but it certainly 
would be inaccessible to many of our non-members, if there were any 
reason for them to vote.

You wanna write one in the next five minutes, Steve?  :)

Seriously, I agree that there should be a web interface.
It won't be a huge job, mainly a matter of adapting the
existing web interface to the board vote. But it'd still
take more time than I have right now. If you have time in
the next couple of days, please be my guest. Perhaps you're
even familiar with the code, since I gave you permission
to use the program for votes on HVCN.

As far as I know, no members will be disenfranchised. But
perhaps we should try to find out. Should I send mail to
all the members asking about this, and allow them to vote
in some other way if they can't use telnet or direct dial?

(With your permission, Dave, I'll replace the phrase "I move" by
"It is moved".)

Ok, the vote is now set up. I replaced "I move" by "MOTION:", purely
for stylistic reasons. I also corrected an obvious typo in resp:2 .
Other than that, the motion should be verbatim as it reads there.
If anybody notices a discrepancy, please let me know.

There's a message in the motd announcing the vote. (I had a link
item:coop,43 to this item in it, but noticed that Backtalk didn't
clickify it, so I took it out.) I'll also announce the vote in
Agora.

It's somewhat harder for me to log in to vote on this, but I think it's 
probably worth the effort.  (I normally use Grex via backtalk 
exclusively.)

Sorry for the inconvenience. I guess it's a LD call for you to
dial direct, but you could probably vote and be off in 2 minutes.
Or if telnet is an option, you can use that.

Yes, telnet is an option, and I did use it.  The LD call wouldn't have 
prevented me from voting, either, if I'd needed to use it.  It wasn't 
worth the trouble for the staff to do something, for me.  

I wonder how many other members there are who use the WWW?  I doubt if 
anyone was prevented from voting this time, but this will get to be a 
bigger issue as time goes on.

I too would have preferred a Web interface.

<remmers promises to have it ready by the next time we vote
 on a proposal>

<jep appreciates remmers for his commitment to excellence on behalf of 
Grex>

There are powerful, organized, well-funded forces that are hostile to
free speech.  Most people are unaware and too involved in their daily
lives to oppose these forces of evil.  It is the duty of people who
are aware to take a stand against antidemocratic forces when possible,
which is why I'm voting to support the Blue Ribbon campaign.
 
All that is required for evil to triumph is for good people to do
nothing.

REMINDER: Last day to vote on this proposal is today, Wednesday December 
16. The polls will close at midnight Eastern Standard Time.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss