Grex Coop Conference

Item 232: Taking root access from non participatants

Entered by lar on Sat Jun 28 04:50:49 2008:

If you are a non participatant we move to take away your root access.

non participatant as  defined as not logging in at least once a week.

We need to take the keys of the kingdom away from the old guard and 
let some new blood emerge. We need members with a new vision for Grex.
Unix on a Sun was a novel idea in the late 80s and early 90s but now 
anybody can get a Linux or FreeBSD distro and set up a *nix box.
We need to take roo access away from glenda and steve because steve 
has acted like a cowboy by turning off new user. Such independant 
action by a root should be instantly dealt with by the BOD and if they 
refuse to act I say we call for thier resignation. I for one call for 
the resignation of Chuck Martin aka: unicorn for incompetance and the 
shirking of his responsabilities.
126 responses total.

#1 of 126 by gelinas on Sat Jun 28 13:10:35 2008:

Had newuser not been turned off, it is quite likely that grex itself would
have been:  the attacks on grex were getting out of hand.  Turning off
newuser was (and, right now, is) the only way to keep the vandals from
coming back.


#2 of 126 by keesan on Sat Jun 28 14:21:50 2008:

If we fire all the staff what next?
Is there some way to allow new users at least web interface access?


#3 of 126 by gelinas on Sat Jun 28 14:32:38 2008:

Anyone can read the conferences anonymously, Sindi.  Posting requires logging
in, which requires an account.


#4 of 126 by keesan on Sat Jun 28 14:38:12 2008:

I am suggesting finding a way to let new users have accounts but restrict them
to web interface only, so that they cannot vandalize grex (at least not as
easily - it would presumably take longer to litter all the items in agora).
Also perhaps there could be some restriction on the length of a posting by
future users until they have proved themselves sane.


#5 of 126 by gelinas on Sat Jun 28 15:05:23 2008:

This kind of policy has already been discussed and approved, and is merely
(!) awaiting implementation.


#6 of 126 by keesan on Sat Jun 28 22:24:56 2008:

Is anyone actually working on the details?


#7 of 126 by lar on Sun Jun 29 11:28:59 2008:

I don't think preventing shell access is the answer but rather a 
strict validation protocol. And lets remember that all this abuse came 
from one user.


#8 of 126 by mary on Sun Jun 29 12:47:39 2008:

Any solution that requires someone else to do the work is not going to 
go anywhere.  We don't have worker bees anymore.  What we have are users 
in denial.  

We need to migrate Grex somewhere where software and hardware issues are 
offered, for a reasonable fee.  This community does a reasonable job of 
raising money so I think paying for this service won't be a problem, at 
least not in the short run.  A few (non-techie) folks could 
administrate.  But I don't see this as happening because we're a 
democracy and folks would rather see Grex go down than see their pet 
feature eliminated.

We've had a nice run.  I don't consider Grex a failure but maybe we've 
taken this model as far as it can go.




#9 of 126 by gelinas on Sun Jun 29 17:10:12 2008:

(Thus my comment on disposing of everything at once.)

I *think* Dan did some work on the validation code.  I've not had time to
follow the development, so I don't really know where it stands.


#10 of 126 by slynne on Sun Jun 29 17:31:04 2008:

I agree with resp:8 


#11 of 126 by nharmon on Sun Jun 29 23:42:10 2008:

I disagree with #8. Those who have given up on Grex should try and keep out of
the way if/when there is a revolution in staff.


#12 of 126 by slynne on Mon Jun 30 00:21:31 2008:

I'll do that


#13 of 126 by lar on Mon Jun 30 03:47:38 2008:

gid rid of steve as a root and maybe we can persuade mcnally and cross 
to accept a staff position. Maybe spooked would come back as well. In 
fact if we get rid of chuck martin we could cut a deal with cdalten. 
He doesn't hate grex so much as he hates unicorn. He wouldn't be a big 
loss since he's not ever here anyway.


#14 of 126 by jep on Mon Jun 30 14:17:47 2008:

I'd ask for my account to be removed if cdalten becomes a member of
Grex's staff.


#15 of 126 by tod on Mon Jun 30 19:16:15 2008:

Stranger things have happened.


#16 of 126 by lar on Tue Jul 1 11:05:11 2008:

re#14

Why is that? You're a BOD member of a group of reformed trolls aka:
m-net.


#17 of 126 by jep on Tue Jul 1 15:08:02 2008:

Cdalten has shown his level of respect for the users of Grex, and his
level of maturity.  I wouldn't care to be part of a system with someone
like that in charge.


#18 of 126 by tod on Tue Jul 1 20:37:17 2008:

Is there a rule someone has to respect Grex to be part of Arbornet?


#19 of 126 by lar on Wed Jul 2 10:55:26 2008:

Who said anything about putting him in charge? Where did you get that
from?


#20 of 126 by jep on Wed Jul 2 13:15:28 2008:

re resp:18: As usual, I have no idea what, if anything, you meant to
say.  Did you enter your response in the right item?

re resp:19: It looked to me like resp:13 was regarding staff members,
and cdalten was mentioned in that response.


#21 of 126 by lar on Wed Jul 2 14:10:40 2008:

I was just suggesting that we cut a deal with cdalten since most of his
bitterness is directed at something chuck martin did to him. I was
suggesting we eliminate unicorn from staff( considering how he doesn't
log in anyway) not make chad a staff member.


#22 of 126 by marcvh on Wed Jul 2 15:43:03 2008:

Are you in favor of appeasement in general, or just in this case?


#23 of 126 by slynne on Wed Jul 2 16:00:25 2008:

I dont think it would hurt to engage cdalten in a discussion but I dont
particularly think it is a good idea to make staffing decisions based on
the most troublesome users


#24 of 126 by jep on Wed Jul 2 16:53:03 2008:

I have discussed cdalten's behavior toward Grex with cdalten on M-Net. 
I've mainly let him know my perspective, that unicorn has been a
contributor to Grex whereas cdalten has not contributed anything
positive to anyone.  I'd be willing to see cdalten arrested for his
actions, and have told him so.  I'd personally be willing to do whatever
I could to see that happen.


#25 of 126 by unicorn on Wed Jul 2 22:16:01 2008:

Re 21:  Where do you get the idea that I don't log in?  Just because I'm
not currently particularly active on the bbs doesn't mean I don't log in.
I don't have the time at the moment to read and respond to much because
I have other priorities when I'm online for the time being, but I log in
just about every day.  If there were serious and persistent problems, I
would most likely find out about them unless someone else fixed them
rather quickly between my logins.  And if you think Chad would ever help
grex in any way, you are sadly mistaken.

By the way, Chad only uses me as a scpaegoat when he wants to cause
trouble.  When he gets tired of it, he claims that I decided to "give
it a rest", but when he discovers a new way of attacking, he claims
that I am once again doing something that he refuses to elaborate on
and not giving it a rest, even though I haven't changed what I'm doing
at all, just so he can have an excuse to try out his new attack.  I am
in no way the problem.  Chad is.


#26 of 126 by mcnally on Wed Jul 2 23:51:23 2008:

 One of the things that some organizations can only learn the hard way
 is that temperament and soundness of judgment are much more important
 qualities in a system administrator than energy or technical brilliance.

 Of the four qualities I've mentioned, however, the only one I'm willing
 to concede to cdalten is energy.  I agree with what I take to be the
 general consensus -- that it would be a very poor idea to involve him in
 the management of Grex.


#27 of 126 by sholmes on Thu Jul 3 03:09:50 2008:

And if in future we have another troll having issues with another staff
, do we keep on removing staff like that?


#28 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 3 05:54:55 2008:

re#26

maybe one day you will consider coming back on staff.

re#27

Only if they act without any hint of accountability whatsoever


#29 of 126 by jep on Thu Jul 3 13:00:41 2008:

re resp:25: Thanks for posting, Chuck.  It's unfortunate that you're the
cited target of a criminal, which is what cdalten is.  Rest assured that
there are few who give him any credibility.  You're doing nothing wrong.
 Please hang in there.


#30 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 4 01:38:36 2008:

"I am in no way the problem.  Chad is."
True in a certain sense. However,for whatever reason chad has singled 
you out and you seem to lack the skill needed to stop him. This has 
resulted in newuser being turned off. I see that as a big problem for 
grex.


#31 of 126 by gelinas on Fri Jul 4 03:17:38 2008:

Note that unicorn is not the only one lacking the skill:  STeve disabled
newuser because _he_ had no other way of stopping the attacks, either.


#32 of 126 by scholar on Fri Jul 4 03:31:30 2008:

and certainly not because that was just the easier way to stop it.


#33 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 4 03:39:46 2008:

Should have went with freebsd like cross suggested. m-net is 
impervious to his attacks even with our old version


#34 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 4 04:41:44 2008:

ie: cat < /***/***| grep "*" > /***/*** &  
(modified because some bozo is likely to try it again, if you're in 
the know you know what goes in place of the "*")

It's sad that any user who runs this 15 times can bring grex down for 
a week. That's what happened a few months back when we were kept out 
of the loop. mickeyd ran it 15 times and grex went down like naftee's 
mom.


#35 of 126 by keesan on Fri Jul 4 15:17:02 2008:

Perhaps one of our vandals has the expertise to explain the fix?


#36 of 126 by lar on Sat Jul 5 01:14:02 2008:

The fix is to turn off newuser and keep the vandal from the handle.

Anyone who did this could still bring grex down at this point,although I
don't want to run it to prove the point.


#37 of 126 by veek on Sat Jul 5 04:26:59 2008:

Re #25 #27 #31 are bang on! Chuck you need to ignore Lar's rubbish.
Before you signed up, Chad was gnawing on my foot and n8's, and making
an ass of himself with tel floods and what not! Why are we wasting time
even replying to this rubbish?? Let's not mention Chad ever again in
serious discussion! He's like a black hole sucking up peoples time!!

I'm not happy that new-user is turned off but there are no other
practical alternatives besides hosting, and that won't solve abuse
issues! I'd suggest "helpers" with more power to kick idiots off the box
(what's wrong with n8 policing the box??), and I'd like to help (website
updates), but I'd also like to stay anonymous, at least from all but
treasurer (that would exlude cross, steve, remmers, etc)! *hehe* it
would also be fun to watch n8 kicking Chad out when he acts like an ass
*grin* the vast quantities of pleasure i would derive watching chad
froth and fume :)


#38 of 126 by glenda on Sat Jul 5 04:43:32 2008:

Larry,

I would like to know why you think that I should have my root access
removed.  I would hate to think that you are shallow enough to think
that just because I am married to STeve...


#39 of 126 by lar on Sat Jul 5 06:44:38 2008:

re#37

"it
would also be fun to watch n8 kicking Chad out when he acts like an ass
*grin* the vast quantities of pleasure i would derive watching chad
froth and fume :)"

I bet you would,considering how he's made an idiot out of you in m-net
general. You lack the skills needed to be given the keys to the kingdom
although it would be fun to watch chad pwn you here on grex when you
tried to boot him.




re#38
It's not that at all. What do you need root access for? If you need it
and participate I don't have a problem with you keeping it. The problem
I have is someone marching in and making a decision that effects
everyone without any sort of accountability.


#40 of 126 by glenda on Sun Jul 6 04:25:32 2008:

Then why do you name me by name as needing to have my root access
pulled?  You have no idea what I do or don't do as staff.  I report to
the board and to the other staff members, not to you.

I find it insulting that you name me and STeve as needing our root
pulled, and Chuck's should be pulled because he doesn't log in.  How do
YOU know who logs in and who doesn't.  When you log in via the web
interface, it doesn't show up under a last command.  Who died and made
you in charge of who should and shouldn't have root access?


#41 of 126 by lar on Sun Jul 6 06:35:22 2008:

I find it insulting that steve logs in and turns newuser off without any
accountability whatsoever. It's appalling that you would flame someone
who makes an issue about this. It seems like you're only offended at
someone suggesting that your root powers be removed. THAT"s when you get
your panties all in a bunch and decide to participate in the discussion.
While it is true that "last" doesn't record a login via the web
interface there are other logs that do. 

"Who died and made
you in charge of who should and shouldn't have root access?"

What do YOU need root access for? What do you actually do with it? When
is the last time you found a system hole and plugged it? When is the
last time you stopped a vandal in his tracks? Even STeve wasn't able to
stop cdalten except by turning newuser off. And ALL you moan about is
someone DARING to suggest that the great and mighty monarchs of grex(
you and steve) give up root access. Steve sound lose root powers because
of his prima dona cowboy attitude concerning newuser. When everyone
asked why it was off he was too unconcerned to even defend the action.


#42 of 126 by lar on Sun Jul 6 12:38:12 2008:

As for naming you. I 'm sure you would resent steve/ being denied root
enough to give him the password so the move is a pre-emptive one for
security's sake. You don't need it anyway. Maybe you two want this box
on your front porch for the cats to sleep in as well?


#43 of 126 by mary on Sun Jul 6 13:22:55 2008:

I'm for giving lar root. TS too. Anyone else?



#44 of 126 by nharmon on Sun Jul 6 14:01:51 2008:

Why does everyone need root? Seems to me there should be one or two 
"senior staffers" who have the root password (and write it down 
somewhere secure), and then delegate authority on the system via 
something like sudo.


#45 of 126 by slynne on Sun Jul 6 14:17:20 2008:

resp:43 Why not? I suspect that lar would quickly find out what it feels
like to get heaps of abuse thrown at him for volunteering his time and I
can only think of one or two people who could use such a lesson more
than he can. I don't know if his technical skills are up to the task but
assuming they are, he does log on here regularly enough to be an asset.
I don't have any reason to suspect that he would abuse such a staff
position. 



#46 of 126 by mary on Sun Jul 6 14:59:09 2008:

I agree.  


#47 of 126 by tod on Sun Jul 6 16:37:22 2008:

re #40
 You have no idea what I do or don't do as staff.

We've kind of been having this discussion about staff accountability and
knowing what it is that staff does.  Maybe you could outline for lar and some
others to give them an idea?


#48 of 126 by glenda on Mon Jul 7 00:51:06 2008:

The biggest and main reason I have root is because I am one of the
locals on the list with access to the machine for reboots.  Sometimes it
requires more than just pushing the reset button.

And no, if steve wasn't to have the root password and I did, I would not
give it to him.  We do not, and never have shared passwords.  I have my
own account and password on his machine, he has the same on mine.  We
may be married, but we are and always will be separate people.  The only
time I have had his password was when I helped him to update all his
machines at work.  He does a major test to make sure all the patches,
etc. have been applied to those machines a couple of times a year.  He
then changes the admin password on them afterwards.  If I had root and
he didn't and I needed his expertise to fix something, he would walk Me
through it.  That is how we work together.  If he has more knowledge in
an area, he walks me through it so that I learn how to do it on my own.
 If I know more, I walk him through it so he learns how.

You also can't truly say that STeve turned off newuser without any
accountability whatsoever.  You are not privy to the discussions in the
staff conference as you are not staff.  It is true that he doesn't
actively participate in the different conferences, and that he doesn't
log on everyday.  He has a lot of other obligations that have to come
first.  He has been trying to come up with a solution to the problem
ever since he turned newuser off.  He didn't just turn it off, say it
was a lost cause, and forget about it.


#49 of 126 by mcnally on Mon Jul 7 01:28:59 2008:

 I'm trying to stay out of this fight, but I want to point out that
 whatever discussion may have occurred in the staff conference is
 irrelevant to the question of whether staff acted accountably.
 I also don't think it's a fair argument tactic to rebut someone
 else's claims by referring to information which practically nobody
 is entitled to read.  Glenda is probably right that nobody has any
 idea what she and other staff members are doing to help the system.
 But when the only record of what gets done in a non-public conference,
 whose fault is that?



#50 of 126 by tod on Mon Jul 7 02:27:22 2008:

re #49
  But when the only record of what gets done in a non-public conference,
  whose fault is that?

I agree the accountability should be more transparent.  I'm avoiding
blaming since I'm way out of the loop.  I can't imagine that there are too
many national security secrets discussed, though.  Therefore, a summary or
couple blips of what each staffer does/when would be nice.  It'd make life
easier for troubleshooting major outages I'd assume.


#51 of 126 by hungus on Tue Jul 8 16:54:27 2008:

I think steve and glenda should have their root privileges pulled because they
thing they're entitled to it, and there's nothing quite as offensive as
entitlement.



#52 of 126 by tod on Tue Jul 8 17:18:06 2008:

I've heard that a lack of budget can be worse than entitlement.


#53 of 126 by hungus on Tue Jul 8 21:48:51 2008:

(Rimshot).


#54 of 126 by glenda on Wed Jul 9 00:07:19 2008:

I don't feel, and never have felt, that ANYONE was entitled to have root
privileges.  Only those that need them to do jobs requiring them should
have them.


#55 of 126 by cross on Thu Jul 10 00:15:00 2008:

I don't see much utility in pointing fingers and playing the blame game
on newuser being off, but let's be honest: there wasn't any discussion
in the staff conference.  Here's the only mention of the issue:

----
response 555 of 559:      Feb 14 19:26 EST 2008

   Brought Grex back up after mickeyd crashed the system.

   Newuser is off till we get it moderated or the latest version
of OpenBSD installed which fixes this problem.
----

(That's from Steve.  Of course, no one [including me] mentioned it
later.)

Further, it's worth noting that the following guidelines were posted by
Jan in April of 2007 on staff decision making:

----
Policies on staff decision making          Apr 2 12:55 EDT 2007

Last night we had some discussion of staff decision making procedures. 
I've posted a summary of them to coop, but I thought a copy should go
here too.

-------------------

I guess I should have kept notes during the joint staff/board meeting.
I didn't.  This is from memory.  It was not run as a formal meeting, but
as a discussion to establish some ground procedures for how staff should
work.

Traditionally the Grex board has operated by consensus.  We would
regularly meet, discuss things that needed to be done, and reach a
consensus on how an whether they should be done.  This worked very well
for many years, but in the last few years has largely broken down. 
Staff has actually met very infrequently, and it is hard to come to
consensus if you only discuss things on-line or in email.  Furthermore,
many of the staff people who used to be very active (myself and Marcus,
notably) are now much less active, and do not always keep up with the
current issues on Grex.  They've become kind of intermittant staff.  How
do you form consensus with people who aren't even listening to the
discussion?  We also increasingly have staff in remote locations, which
makes meetings to reach consensus more difficult.

Suggestions arising out of this include:

  - Staff should resume meeting regularly, probably bi-monthly at least.
    The conference phone should be available, so people can call in.

    (Staff has not, however, scheduled it's next staff meeting.  I
     wonder if we should make a habit of meeting after board meetings?)

  - The staff conference is to be considered the main place for
    discussion of things to do.  If a staff member raised a topic in
    the staff conference, and got no negative feedback, they are
    welcome to feel free to go ahead.  They don't necessarily need to
    seek input from people who aren't currently actively reading the
    staff conference and keeping up on things, though they may, in
    some cases, WANT to do so.  We understand that staff members are
    sometimes busy and have to drop out of the loop for a while, but
    things need to be able to go on without them if they are out of
    the loop.

  - Some things don't actually require a lot of staff consensus.

    In an emergency, the staff on hand need to act independently on
    their own best judgement.  They should obviously make an effort
    to inform other staff of what they are doing or what the did.

    Some changes to Grex are fairly limited and local.  If you are
    installing a newer version of 'tcl' that has very limited impact
    on the system.  The only thing you're doing that a regular user
    couldn't do is putting it in a system directory where everyone
    can easily access it.  Modifying things more central the operating
    system that might impact other parts of the system or overall
    system security would require more discussion.

  - Of course, other changes may require broader discussion in the
    coop conference and/or at a board meeting.  These are changes that
    impact the user interface routinely experienced by many users,
    or changes that have policy implications.
----

Note the part on emergencies: it seems that Steve certainly acted within
the guidelines set forth by the board.  The problem is that none of us
bothered to follow up (again, myself included).

Grex does have a problem: what to do with too lots of inactive staff who
plain don't have time and a community that has needs.  How do we get
back to where we need to be?

Personally, I'd like to see some constructive input on this.  Lar's and
Mary's button-pushing isn't getting us anywhere, and neither is the
complaining coming from tsty and Rane.  Nor is my inaction.  What's the
best course of action?


#56 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 10 04:35:29 2008:

"Newuser is off till we get it moderated or the latest version
of OpenBSD installed which fixes this problem."


That's actually a somewhat reasonable answer to the big question. Too
bad steve was to lazy to inform the people who actually USE the system.
Maybe he didn't want to answer the inevitable question that would arrive
next and that is WHEN can we expect one of those two things to happen?
In any case I agree with cross that my button pushing accomplishes
little. However, it did get some dialog started. It's too bad that some
people will just sit back in total lethargy unless you troll them
intense enough. And STeve still has yet to weigh in on this. 


#57 of 126 by mcnally on Thu Jul 10 06:16:47 2008:

 > What's the best course of action?

 Instead of insisting on a fix for everything at once, which seems to
 be what these discussions always degenerate into, how about if we
 focus on identifying one or two modest but achievable goals and make
 them the first priority with the hopes that forward progress might
 encourage more engagement?


#58 of 126 by nharmon on Thu Jul 10 11:39:37 2008:

> The staff conference is to be considered the main place for discussion 
> of things to do.

Is this necessary? What percentage of staff work needs to be hidden from
non-staff users? I would think not very much of it. 


#59 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 10 12:09:30 2008:

I think cross has pretty much blown glenda's claim( by pious fraud) that
that newuser's status was discussed at length in staff. I wouldn't be
too surprised if steve and glenda stormed in here and dumped the whole
baby on cross and resigned 


#60 of 126 by slynne on Thu Jul 10 14:00:43 2008:

I wouldnt be surprised either considering the abuse that is being
directed at them. 


#61 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 10 14:29:09 2008:

want some violin music with that whine? 


I mean they are SOOOOO abused.


#62 of 126 by slynne on Thu Jul 10 14:52:54 2008:

While I am sure they cant possibly give a rats ass about your opinion,
you have been somewhat nasty in your remarks. And it is clear as far as
you are concerned that they cant win no matter what they do. They can't
stay on because then they are hogging the root and keeping other staff
members from doing anything and if they do resign, they're dumping the
work onto others because of some emotional instability. You are
attacking them personally. FWIW, it shows a lot more about your
character than theirs. 


#63 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 00:02:02 2008:

This response has been erased.



#64 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 00:05:04 2008:

"You are
attacking them personally. FWIW, it shows a lot more about your
character than theirs. "

Listen to this BS! If someone DARES to criticize them for acting in a
arbitrary manner then it's classified as a "personal attack" and they
call into question my character. It's funny to me that someone who
supports the murder of babies in the womb can question anyones
character. 


#65 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 00:11:40 2008:

"While I am sure they cant possibly give a rats ass about your opinion,
you have been somewhat nasty in your remarks."

That's the problem, he doesn't care about ANYONE's opinion and that's
why he acts in such a prima dona manner. 



#66 of 126 by slynne on Fri Jul 11 00:29:51 2008:

Bringing my views about people's sovereignty over their own bodies into
this discussion is just another example of the low blows you're making
in this item. Again, something that says more about your character than
any one else's. And fwiw, suggesting that someone is acting like a prima
donna is more of a personal attack then merely stating that you believe
someone is acting in an arbitrary manner. Do you really not understand
how insulting you are being? Do you actually expect to be taken
seriously by anyone?


#67 of 126 by glenda on Fri Jul 11 02:08:48 2008:

I wish that you would quit lumping me in with your tirades against
STeve. I am his wife, not his clone.  I have never acted in an arbitrary
manner in any staff capacity on Grex, unless you count my going over and
rebooting it without checking in with anyone when I notice it is down
and I am free to get there.  I am uncomfortable with doing anything else
on the system alone, I am not experienced enough.  I am, however, very
good at doing things under the direction of others when I am the only
one physically available when something needs to be done NOW.  I can be
talked through almost any technical problem and am using this as a
further learning tool as the hands on I don't get from the computer
science program at Eastern.

For you information, you can't take root away from me.  I don't even
know the current root password.  I have to call another staff member to
get it when I need to use it, I just don't use it often enough to keep
it in my active memory.  What have I ever done to you or Grex for you to
be so up in my face against me?


#68 of 126 by tsty on Fri Jul 11 03:26:17 2008:

a whiel back ... and would be consistent with today ... both STeve *and*
glenda (and i) battled vandals on the typical as-needed basis.
  
suggesting that EITHER ought to have root access pulled (whether or
not it applies) is chin-droppingly stupifying in its scope - or lack
of scope.
  
i might need some defending (not really, but tha;s another story) but
STeve, mcnally, jep, glenda, remmers, mdw, janc, (even popcorn, mostly) or
other founders+ need none. i've probably missed a couple other ppl in
whom i have implicit trust regardless of temptation. yeh, i missed cross,
sorry. oh, scott is included (wehre is scott when you need him?) as well.
  
 .. umm, srw, i, gelinas and bhoward (while i;'m remembering the GoodGuys (tm).
  
and , umm, whow was it that wnet to carnagie - root/board at 16? 
  
 re 43 ... if i had maintained my skill level i would be glad to assist
again. but i havne't so i can;t - thank you, regardless.
  


#69 of 126 by mcnally on Fri Jul 11 04:42:52 2008:

 #68 could be read to imply that I was a grex founder.  I was active on
 the system fairly early in its history, but I was not one of the founding
 group.


#70 of 126 by cross on Fri Jul 11 05:20:33 2008:

You know, I've had my fair share of *technical* disagreements with
Steve, and I've questioned and, I think, been questioned on *technical*
grounds with him, but honestly, I've never had anything personal against
the guy (or against Glenda) or, for that matter, anyone else on staff
(yes yes, I realize some would disagree with that; all I can say is that
you probably misinterpreted my comments about something or another).

Anyway, the point is, some of this is veering away from legitimate
questioning of the status of the system and moving toward just bashing
on the guy, which isn't productive.  From my perspective, Steve seems
like a really nice guy who I'd enjoy sitting down and having a technical
conversation with.  He seems like a devoted family man, and I have a lot
of respect for that (same goes for Glenda, though I guess she's a family
woman, not a family man).

Lest this smack of hagiography, none of this is relevant to the running
of Grex, and as everyone knows, Steve and I differ about the best
approach to these.  I suppose my point is, let's not get things
confused.  Someone's views on abortion, religion, etc, are totally
irrelevant.  What *is* relevant is our direction as a system, where we
want to go, what we want to do, etc.

To that end, I agree with McNally's idea about finding some small,
attainable projects, and seeing them through to completion.  What can we
do, though?  Any ideas?


#71 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 06:03:47 2008:

"Bringing my views about people's sovereignty over their own bodies into
this discussion is just another example of the low blows you're making
in this item."

You're the one that gets making desparing remarks about another's
character. To criticize someone for making a decision you don't agree
with Isn't a low blow. However, to try to spin the battle into a
question of character  is a way to weasel away from the salient issue. 
 I have just as much to call into question your disgusting position of
murdering babies as you do to question my tactics. I actually don't care
what you think of my opinion. However, I don't think I have swung any
low blows here. Not like YOU are trying to do. Now If I said something
like "slynne, if your opinion carried as much weight as that fat ass of
yours, then you could rule the world", then THAT would be a low blow.
However,I'm not saying that.


#72 of 126 by mcnally on Fri Jul 11 06:03:57 2008:

 I think at this point the thing most likely to improve the
 recoverability of the system in the event of an outage is finding
 a remote console solution.  I don't have any experience with them,
 but it seems like there are many IP-based KVM solutions.  Could
 we set something like that up so that the next time there's a
 crisis the recovery of the system doesn't depend on the Andres or
 the few other local-to-Ann-Arbor volunteers with access?



#73 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 06:13:24 2008:

"What have I ever done to you or Grex for you to
be so up in my face against me?" 
Who is "against" you? If you don't have root access then you are
excluded from the topic. I don't have an issue with you being told the
root password and being walked through some issues nor do I have 
aproblem with you rebooting the system without permission. That;s
laughable and it (coupled with slynne's remarks about "low blows") is a
misrepresentation of my position. I will restate it for clarification: I
have an issue with someone who acts arbitrarily and without
accountability to the community.  

Now,you made a statement that led me to believe that this issue had been
discussed at length in staff.cf. cross  then posted what was actually 
said. It showed that the statement you made was misleading hence the
label "pious fraud". The  label was directed at your statement.


#74 of 126 by glenda on Fri Jul 11 07:15:26 2008:

I never said "discussed at length", I said that it was discussed.

How am I not to believe that you are against me when you mention me by
name every time you go into a tirade against STeve, especially since you
are accusing me of doing the same things you say he is doing without
knowing what my exact position on staff was.  You just assumed that
because I am related to him that I am just as bad as him in your eyes. 
I find that to be insulting.  If you knew us, you would find that we
have a lot of differences of opinion on a lot of things, Grex among
them.  In fact, STeve is one of the reasons that I have stayed around. 
If left to my own devices, I would have said the hell with it due to the
actions of people like Chad, hera, jmpv (or whatever his login is), and
you.  I don't need this type of aggravation with everything else going
on in my life right now.  I stay because STeve says it is worth it in
the long run and because of the friends that I have found here.  I
usually ignore jerks like you, and will now go back to doing so.


#75 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 11 08:39:23 2008:

"I never said "discussed at length", I said that it was discussed."

You attempted to make me believe the whole issue was discussed in staff
and that it was a decision that you had agreed to. That's the innuendo
expressed in that pious fraud of a statement. You can out whining like a
spanked puppy with a persecution complex when cross posted what was
actually posted there. You statement was a thinly veiled attempt at
deception.  Don't try to play the sympathy card when you are called out
on it.  


#76 of 126 by cross on Fri Jul 11 13:23:43 2008:

resp:72 I agree that that's a pretty obvious thing.  Personally, I think
we need to upgrade to a new machine with such functionality just built
in.  It would probably be pretty easy, but we need to spec something out
and just buy it.

The board discussed doing that, and make some steps toward actually
doing it, but then got sidetracked (that was actually my fault: the task
was mine, and I got so busy that it never happened).

I will look again.

An issue: when Grex got onto its present hardware, we sort of did it by
buying the cheapest stuff we could.  In retrospect, that was a bad idea,
and a continued symptom of our past "cheapness."  That is, our limited
budget had forced us to be bottom feeders when it came to hardware.  It
further forced us to be clever when it came to stringing things together
into a usable system.  That was all well and good in and around the
90's, not so much later, but we got used to it and by the time we had
actual money, we still thought about things in the old way.  Some of the
predictions about the unreliability of PC hardware that we'd fought off
came true, but largely they were self-fulfilling prophecies that we
subjected ourselves to, not functions of the hardware.

Well, that was then.  This incarnation of Grex has been running since
late 2003 or thereabouts, and it's really time to upgrade to new
hardware.  In doing that, let's *not* nickle and dime ourselves into
unreliability; we have the money, let's get some decent hardware and go
from there.


#77 of 126 by slynne on Fri Jul 11 14:47:41 2008:

resp:72 I like the idea of IP based KVM for grex but most of the devices
I found after a quick google search seemed pretty expensive. 

I like the idea of new hardware but I think that qualifies as a big
project. 


#78 of 126 by scholar on Fri Jul 11 15:22:40 2008:

Re. 74: Glenda, someone making a terse comment is not a discussion by any
definition.

It's not clear to me exactly how touching it is that you're trying to convince
us you have no special quarter for your own husband.

However, it is quite clear that you used what you believed to be your
privileged access to the staff conference to mislead Grex's membership into
thinking Steve's drastic action may have been well considered, robustly
discussed, or possibly even something that had gained consensus among staff. 
It's also clear that, now that your deception has been plainly exposed, you're
attempting to avoid responsibility by refusing to talk about it. 

Volunteer or no, using a position of authority to lie to the members of a
corporation and indeed the members of what's purpoted to be an open community
is simply unacceptable.


#79 of 126 by tsty on Sat Jul 12 09:11:36 2008:

re 78 .. schooler ... umm, what yuor myopia misses is that a ;terse
comment; is the usual ourcome of a long adn difficult discussion. 
   
your slurs exhibit al the pathos of an immature thinker - try again.


#80 of 126 by lar on Sat Jul 12 09:31:50 2008:

"it is quite clear that you used what you believed to be your
privileged access to the staff conference to mislead Grex's membership 
into
thinking Steve's drastic action may have been well considered, robustly
discussed, or possibly even something that had gained consensus among 
staff."

Thanks tarp, I'm glad that I'm not the only one who got that 
impression from her statement. It was a PIOUS FRAUD

"now that your deception has been plainly exposed, you're
attempting to avoid responsibility by refusing to talk about it."

Hey, her not speaking is doing the rest of us a favor. I'm hoping this 
gets steve so pissed off he he comes busting in here like like a swat 
team.  


#81 of 126 by mary on Sat Jul 12 12:52:47 2008:

Too many lars.  Not enough delizias.

Why online communities die.


#82 of 126 by cross on Sat Jul 12 15:10:18 2008:

resp:79 Yeah, except that that really didn't happen.  That said, given
the context, Steve's actions were NOT unreasonable.  The real problem
wasn't that newuser got turned off as a stopgap; the problem was that we
never figured out how to turn it back on.

resp:80 [last paragraph] I'm not sure what purpose that would serve. 
Are you trying to antagonize Steve into doing something so drastic that
the resulting community uproar would toss him out of grex?  I don't
think that's likely to happen.

resp:81 That just sounds bitter.  And, frankly, a little lame:
communities change over time, just like neighborhoods.  It's not dying,
it's changing.  That it's changing to something you don't particularly
care for is totally irrelevant, and speaks more about you than it does
about everybody else.  Now, that said, if you have something productive
to add, we're all ears....


#83 of 126 by lar on Mon Jul 14 02:06:18 2008:

"Too many lars.  Not enough delizias.

Why online communities die."

I thought it was because of morbidly obese ugly women.



#84 of 126 by lowclass on Mon Jul 14 02:29:53 2008:

Do you like what you see in YOUR mirror?  Do you even bother to ever notice.
While we're at it, do you look ANY deeper, at ANY time, than surface?

        Gawd, you're a lonely and bitter man...


#85 of 126 by lar on Mon Jul 14 03:21:16 2008:

heh, you must be one the fat ugly women cuz when you throw a stick in 
a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one that got it.


#86 of 126 by tod on Mon Jul 14 18:11:48 2008:

re #85
You totally missed the mark.  


#87 of 126 by hungus on Mon Jul 14 18:33:49 2008:

And Lar is off the rails again.



#88 of 126 by tod on Mon Jul 14 18:40:29 2008:

And that's how it goes
millions of grexers
losing contro-o-ol


#89 of 126 by lar on Tue Jul 15 04:55:59 2008:

If I can get out of this straitjacket I'm going to punch you...


#90 of 126 by veek on Tue Jul 15 07:42:30 2008:

Re #79: "your slurs exhibit al the pathos of an immature thinker - try
again." 

I beg to differ: "an axe to grind" seems to be more appropriate. <bops
the scholar on ze head - you seem to forget sweetie that there are
elections held, so it *IS* an open community>

Re #83: She isn't even close to being morbidly obese. You shouldn't
abandon honesty when you attack someone, it looses all its *sting*

*Mmm* my lunch is not half bad :) Cold chicken with rice+carrots but
there is tangy bread with butter and just the right amount of tang to it
:) I need that tangy-jammy recipe :)

Actually, maybe, would it be possible to backup the Grex server and give
complete root access to scholar, cdalten and lar just for like a month
or so AFTER warning everyone?? Or maybe setup an alternate domain using
VMware?? evvvilhax0r.cyberspace.org. 

Hmm come to think off it, scholar is a canuck, canucks have cheap
bandwidth - can't he run a temporary thing on his home box and if things
work out.. just a suggestion - I wouldn't dream of allowing scholar,
chad and maybe lar near the actual grex server but maybe we could all
login (and use different passwords for his box) and see how things are
run there...

Just a suggestion, no nasty flames please. It would resolve to some
extent this problem.. It would be fun, it might really take off, we have
another box to play with, and it would feel like Grex :)


#91 of 126 by scholar on Wed Jul 16 04:26:38 2008:

Being lied to by an organisation I have donated hundreds of dollars to does
sort of give me an ax to grind, yeah.


#92 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 17 01:40:30 2008:

yeah, swindled and lied to


#93 of 126 by nharmon on Thu Jul 17 01:52:54 2008:

I didn't know scholar donated hundreds of dollars to Grex.


#94 of 126 by scholar on Thu Jul 17 04:20:19 2008:

I don't have records of the exact amount, but I definitely donated quite a
bit, especially compared to my income.


#95 of 126 by veek on Thu Jul 17 05:14:26 2008:

hmm.. I didn't know that Davvy, apologies.


#96 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 17 07:17:19 2008:

Pt Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute


#97 of 126 by veek on Thu Jul 17 09:29:42 2008:

This response has been erased.



#98 of 126 by lar on Thu Jul 17 09:43:02 2008:

polytarp is the one who got suckered into sending grex $$. Did you 
send them any? That's why I said sucker.


#99 of 126 by veek on Thu Jul 17 10:51:56 2008:

This response has been erased.



#100 of 126 by veek on Thu Jul 17 10:55:06 2008:

This response has been erased.



#101 of 126 by veek on Thu Jul 17 11:12:45 2008:

ah okay, you should use "Re:" - Nope, not yet.


#102 of 126 by keesan on Fri Jul 18 04:31:08 2008:

Over ten years, I have donated $600.  Normal membership dues.


#103 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 18 06:34:00 2008:

and getting $600 of out jim and sindi's budget is no small task.


#104 of 126 by veek on Fri Jul 18 09:23:32 2008:

Sheesh! Grr! I only just started working this month, and though I am a
plutocrat right now, my main paycheck hasn't arrived as yet! Plus if you
think I'm going to postpone my new computer by a additional few seconds
from the moment the money hits my account, think again <glares at Lar
and Sindi> I mean Sheesh! Grrr! Plus you guys are rolling in dough and
it's not like you got Scrooge on your doorstep! And if you think I'm
simply stalling think again! A new comp costs like 30-35K minimum with
UPS. I mean sheesh I'm using a 400Mhz right now! And I need a new pair
of shoes! Given that I have a surplus of 10K from one contract job and
approximately 25K from the regular job (and god knows what the
deductions will be on that) I might still wind up a little short!


#105 of 126 by lar on Fri Jul 18 09:56:30 2008:

How much is $600 dollars in Indian money ,veek?


#106 of 126 by veek on Fri Jul 18 10:38:17 2008:

600 U.S. dollars = 25525.3978 Indian rupees

You can do a Google: 600 USD to INR and it will convert for you. Works
for any currency i think. You can't compare currencies like that
though.. price of articles is more accurate.


#107 of 126 by lar on Sat Jul 19 02:54:37 2008:

You can get a decent laptop for under 600 us,veek

If you want a desktop you can get $299 although I don't know about the
shipping:
Laptop
http://www.dell.com/content/default.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&ref=hdd3&s=dhs

Desktop
http://www.dell.com/content/products/category.aspx/desktops?c=us&cs=19&l=
en&s=dhs


#108 of 126 by keesan on Sat Jul 19 04:07:02 2008:

Can't you buy used computers or shoes in India?  Used shoes here are $2, and
used computers are free.  Someone just gave us 30 rack-mount models that just
need scsi drives added, 750MHz or faster.  Their business upgraded.  
Can you upgrade your 400MHz cpu to 500MHZ and if so, can I mail you a cpu?
I have Slot 1, Super Socket 7, or Socket PGA370 of that speed (or faster).


#109 of 126 by lar on Sat Jul 19 06:28:51 2008:

I think he's looking to move into the 21st century


#110 of 126 by veek on Sun Jul 20 09:16:31 2008:

wo! wo! heh, ah heck Sindi! and Lar

Anyway:
1. Essentially I hate shopping because of the traffic so my mom and sis
buy stuff for me. My old pair was a hand me down from my junior sib and
it used to rub my little toe.. bad for running but okay for college and
mild walking. Anyway, they bought the shoes, new ones, Adidas, for
Rs:800 approximately. I thought it would be 1 or 2K! It's on their
account since my mom shouldn't have thrown away my oldest pair which fit
perfectly but was a bit battered.

2. computerwarehousepricelist.com is down for some reason. They host a
Excel sheet with pricing and stuff in Rupees. I'm looking for a studly
Core 2 Duo! With 1-2GB RAM, DVD writer, 200GB disk, TVSE UPS (800VA),
maybe a dot matrix printer, built in audio/video/LAN, 17" monitor (CRT
is fine) and good mobo (boxed), and possibly a wireless 3 port thingy
(but I could postpone this since i use CAT5 anyways), I already have
lots of dvd's.

No Dell crap, too expensive, unbranded is best! *sigh* Oh the joys of
living in a consumer oriented society :P Bet you could create a cluster
out of that.

That secondhand suggestion is not a bad idea! I recently came across a
firm called connoi/www.connoiseur.com and the sysadmins here said they
bought  HP Dual Cores for like 10K and though the case is a bit
battered.. I thought it was a bargain! If i get a bargain I'll pick it
up from them :) and through the sys-admins who I've become pally with :)

Lets see, I need to first collect my loot.


#111 of 126 by keesan on Sun Jul 20 14:40:24 2008:

Someone just passed along to us (thanking us profusely) 30 rack-mount
computers of 750MHz or moare, 512MB, mostly DELL, that they would have had
to pay to recycle otherwise.  Some IBMs and others.  Do you know anyone
working for a rich business that replaces its computers often?


#112 of 126 by glenda on Sun Jul 20 20:27:59 2008:

In Ann Arbor, you don't have to pay to recycle computers anymore. 
Monitors yes, but not the CPU.  Ann Arbor Recycling now takes them and
other electronics for free.


#113 of 126 by mcnally on Mon Jul 21 01:37:57 2008:

 re #110:  Do you really mean a dot matrix printer?


#114 of 126 by veek on Mon Jul 21 07:30:41 2008:

yup, cartridges are less expensive. ditto paper, and I can use the other
side to do rough work.


#115 of 126 by keesan on Mon Jul 21 12:58:47 2008:

You can get a $7 kit (plus shipping) to reink your ribbon.  lasts a lifetime.


#116 of 126 by scholar on Tue Jul 22 00:14:34 2008:

a man after keesan's heart


#117 of 126 by lar on Tue Jul 22 03:10:25 2008:

heh, but not really. if he was truly a man after keesan's heart he 
would still be using  a 286 running dos 6.22


#118 of 126 by nharmon on Thu Jul 24 19:01:34 2008:

DOS shell???? What extravagence!!!


#119 of 126 by aruba on Sat Aug 16 16:07:32 2008:

I am coming to this discussion late, but I feel obliged to respond to cross
in #76.  Dan says that Grex bought its current hardware by "buying the
cheapest stuff we could", but that's not my memory of it at all.  STeve
chose the list of hardware in the spring of 2003, and I set about buying it.
The expenses are listed in the treasurers reports of April through June of
2003, which you can see in coop or at ~aruba/reports/0304.txt ... 0306.txt
I wouldn't say we "spared no expense", and I know Dan had some differences
of opinion with STeve on what to buy (which I didn't hear about until after
we'd already bought the stuff), but it's not fair to say we chose the
cheapest things we could find.

All that said, that was 5 years ago, and even though our memb ership has 
dwindled we have more money now than then (thanks to our move to 
colocation).  I don't thoroughly understand the technical issues, but it's 
my understanding that it's expensive to add the remote-access capability 
we need to the current machine, because most people who need that buy new 
machines that have it built in.  So I support spending some of our money 
on a new machine.


#120 of 126 by cross on Sat Aug 16 16:13:54 2008:

(My recollection was that we did NOT buy hardware RAID or ECC memory in order
to save money.  Actually, the ECC thing might have been for performance, which
I don't quite understand, but then, there's a lot that I don't quite
understand.  The RAID thing, as well as a rack-mount case, were certainly cost
related.)


#121 of 126 by keesan on Sat Aug 16 17:45:23 2008:

We have several no-longer-new rackmount DELLs (1550, 1650) with RAID
and SMP capabilities - would grex want any of those?  Also ECC RAM
PC133 512MB.


#122 of 126 by cross on Sat Aug 16 18:53:25 2008:

No, I don't think that those would be particularly useful.  But thanks anyway!


#123 of 126 by keesan on Sat Aug 16 21:35:27 2008:

Would anyone else reading this like one or more?  We already recycled or gave
away at least half of the original total.


#124 of 126 by nhardon on Tue Aug 19 14:51:30 2008:

Ask cross about the penis extension that he got for lar.


#125 of 126 by lar on Wed Aug 20 02:27:32 2008:

I haven't received it yet,is it coming soon?


#126 of 126 by tod on Mon Aug 25 19:33:35 2008:

Yes, stand still


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: