Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 101: Cyberspace Communications finances for January 2004

Entered by aruba on Sun Feb 1 19:13:54 2004:

Here is the treasurer's report on Cyberspace Communications, Inc. finances 
through January 31st, 2004.

Beginning Balance     $4,390.70

Credits                 $330.00         Member contributions
                          $5.00         Repayment of bounced check fee
                          $1.00         Miscellaneous donations
                          $2.00         Sale of a Grex handbook
                          $1.52         Interest on our savings account
                   ------------
                        $339.52

Debits                   $80.41         Pumpkin Rent for February
                         $45.97         Electricity for January
                         $13.71         Phone Bill (see below)
                        $135.00         DSL January 15 through February 15
                          $6.48         Paypal fees (income = $182)
                         $38.00         Renewal of P.O. Box
                   ------------
                        $319.57

Ending Balance        $4,410.65

Our current balance breaks down as follows:

$4,164.11               General Fund
  $163.99               Silly Hat Fund
   $60.00               Spare Parts Fund
   $22.55               Infrastructure Fund

The money is distributed like this:

$1,038.88   Checking account
$3,371.77   Savings account earning 0.65% interest annually

We had one new member (scheidr) in January.  We are currently at 84 
members, 78 of whom are paid through at least February 15th.  (The 
others expired recently and are in a grace period.)

Notes:

- It was a good month for Grex!

- This month's phone charges totalled $90.88.  We had a credit 
leftover from the change from centrex to POTS lines, which we have now 
used up.  So next month's bill will be back to normal.

- I filled out Grex's personal property tax return and turned it in at 
City Hall on Friday the 30th.  For a summary see 

http://www.cyberspace.org/~invent/reportsummary.cgi?repyear=2003&showest=1

I estimate the taxes we'll pay this year at $143, up from $81 last 
year.  (We bought NextGrex in 2003.)  My estimate could be off, 
though, depending on what the Assessor does.

- A $12 check that I deposited in November came back unpaid.  There is
a $5 penalty when that happens.  The person who bounced the check has
replaced it (with cash) and paid the fee.

- Our electricity bill is going to go up a lot, as of January 1st, 
because both OldGrex and NextGrex are up and running.  Scott and I 
measured the current in the Pumpkin at 13.25 Amps, up from 5.5 amps in 
2001 (the last time we measured it).  I haven't changed the amount 
we're paying yet, because Kip is going to check a power meter out of 
the library as soon as one comes back, and hopefully get a more 
accurate measurement of just how much juice we're using.  When he 
gives me that number, I'll write a letter to our landlord explaining 
the situation, and include payment for the difference in January.

Thanks to everyone who contributed in January:

bruin, mbroggy, mbusse, mudlark, robh, scheidr, and one person who 
asked to remain anonymous.

If you or your institution would like to become a member of Grex, it 
only costs $6/month or $60/year.  Send money to:

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

If you pay by cash or money order, please include a photocopy of some 
form of ID.  I can't add you to the rolls without ID.  (If you pay 
with a personal check that has your name pre-printed on it, we 
consider that a good enough ID.)  Type !support or see 
http://www.cyberspace.org/member.html for more info.
155 responses total.

#1 of 155 by naftee on Sun Feb 1 19:15:26 2004:

Who donated the $1?


#2 of 155 by robh on Mon Feb 2 20:53:40 2004:

Re 1: That would be me, I think.

Why?  For the Hek of it.  (And because I didn't have change.)


#3 of 155 by witzbolt on Mon Feb 2 20:55:46 2004:

i'm ejaculating on your tits.


#4 of 155 by aruba on Wed Feb 11 15:23:16 2004:

Yesterday two longtime Grex members told me they won't be renewing their
memberships as a result of the recent debate.  Not because of the outcome,
but because of the process.


#5 of 155 by micklpkl on Wed Feb 11 16:10:10 2004:

I'm almost certain I won't be renewing, either. This isn't a threat, or a
promise --- just a heads-up. It's a pity, and something that I've been
wrestling with since I first heard about valerie's excision of entire
discussion items. I've received a lot of help from a good chunk of grex's
members in the past, and I've tried to do what I could to return the favour
in support of the system. I simply don't see the point, anymore.


#6 of 155 by naftee on Wed Feb 11 16:18:06 2004:

It should be the outcome.


#7 of 155 by slynne on Wed Feb 11 17:33:27 2004:

Wow. I guess I feel a little sad that people are ready to give up on 
grex over this. I cant say that I was happy about all of this business 
but I wasnt really expecting people to actually bail over it. 



#8 of 155 by gull on Wed Feb 11 17:47:06 2004:

I guess we can score two more points for the M-Netters in their attempt
to destroy Grex.


#9 of 155 by anderyn on Wed Feb 11 18:08:21 2004:

I don't think it's the actual issue so much as the vitriol and keats of text
that were written with a lot of mean-spiritedness (mostly on one side, in my
opinion) -- I certainly am much less interested in participating if all my
efforts are going to garner are insults and diatribes about "favoring favorite
people". I suspect that others feel the same way, even if all they're doing
is reading such things. 


#10 of 155 by cmcgee on Wed Feb 11 18:32:44 2004:

I really hope that people will reconsider leaving Grex.  I value this
community enough that  I'm willing to consider new ways of operating, if it
helps maintain the community.


#11 of 155 by jp2 on Wed Feb 11 18:50:36 2004:

This response has been erased.



#12 of 155 by tod on Wed Feb 11 18:54:51 2004:

This response has been erased.



#13 of 155 by slynne on Wed Feb 11 19:01:23 2004:

I kind of remember when similar things starting going on over on Mnet 
but with different "troublemakers". People got upset and left...mostly 
to come here. What happened after that is that over time, there were 
fewer and fewer interesting people. There have always been folks who 
flame each other online and who try to cause problems. But when all the 
interesting people have left, then what is left? I cant blame anyone 
for not wanting to put up with it but once the more interesting people 
start leaving, things get pretty boring pretty fast. 

FWIW, I am still an "mnetter" although I certainly have no desire to do 
anything to hurt grex. 


#14 of 155 by ryan on Wed Feb 11 19:09:21 2004:

This response has been erased.



#15 of 155 by tod on Wed Feb 11 19:26:06 2004:

This response has been erased.



#16 of 155 by ryan on Wed Feb 11 19:44:31 2004:

This response has been erased.



#17 of 155 by naftee on Wed Feb 11 20:31:39 2004:

I'm sure it was your behaviour that caused it.


#18 of 155 by robh on Wed Feb 11 20:37:44 2004:

Re 11 - If Fascism had won on Grex, you wouldn't still be here.

Gods, how I wish fascism had won on Grex...


#19 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 11 20:45:30 2004:

Re. 14: Is that why you started running party bots you were specifically told
not to run, and then when you were stopped, you cursed and vitrioled in the
system problems item?


#20 of 155 by albaugh on Wed Feb 11 21:16:10 2004:

Re: #4:  What aspects of "the process" are what these people say will be
having them leave?  The proposals (which is the grex defined way to enact
grass roots system changes)?  The discussions?  The name-calling?
I would like to know what was so bad about "the process", whatever that means.


#21 of 155 by naftee on Wed Feb 11 21:17:31 2004:

re 19 We could post excerpts!


#22 of 155 by gull on Wed Feb 11 21:20:19 2004:

Re resp:12: Sure, anyone is welcome on M-Net.  Making trouble is what M-Net
is all about.  But on Grex people occasionally want to do stuff other than
gaming the system and talking about shitdicks.


#23 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 11 21:48:41 2004:

                                Welcome to the
                         February General Conference


                          fairwitnesses:  jerryr
                                          slynne


First item 1, last 66

Ok: find shitdick
No matches found.


                                Welcome to the
                         January General Conference


                          fairwitnesses:  jerryr
                                          slynne


First item 1, last 127

Ok: find shitdick
#3.259 dc;fu (ric)
      1: TWILA that I allowed shitdicks.com to expire.
#3.265 www.bush2004.com (tonster)
      3: ratbert:/var/www/turnover # whois shitdicks.com
     30:    Domain Name: SHITDICKS.COM
     63: ratbert:/var/www/turnover # host -t ns shitdicks.com
     64: shitdicks.com name server ns1.nameresolve.com.
     65: shitdicks.com name server ns2.nameresolve.com.
     66: shitdicks.com name server ns3.nameresolve.com.
     67: shitdicks.com name server ns4.nameresolve.com.

                                Welcome to the
                         December General Conference


                          fairwitnesses:  jerryr
                                          slynne


First item 1, last 100

Ok: find shitdick
#36.28 Twinkie (twinkie)
      4: Dustin, it's really high time that you ate a bag of shitdicks.


#24 of 155 by naftee on Wed Feb 11 22:26:26 2004:

Yeah the focus has changed .


#25 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 11 22:33:01 2004:

Yeah.  twinkie's the only one who still talks about shitdicks; even ric's
given it up.


#26 of 155 by tod on Wed Feb 11 22:36:22 2004:

This response has been erased.



#27 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 11 22:59:51 2004:

O, sorry:  I meant in the context of M-Net.  Grex -- gull included -- talks
more about shitdicks than M-Net does.


#28 of 155 by naftee on Wed Feb 11 23:23:08 2004:

Indeed, it's almost as if shitdicks is the only concept they've imparted from
m-net culture.


#29 of 155 by robh on Wed Feb 11 23:27:11 2004:

Funny, I was just thinking how our bbs looks far too much
like M-Net's these days...


#30 of 155 by iggy on Wed Feb 11 23:40:17 2004:

re#8 gull... who are these mysterious mnetters that you think are trying
to ruin grex?


#31 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 11 23:51:33 2004:

I'll fess up:  The only reason I spend so much time trying to aid, literate,
and help Grex is because I want to ruin it.


#32 of 155 by marcvh on Thu Feb 12 00:23:08 2004:

Given that a lot of people maintain accounts on both systems, I'm not sure 
how one determines which among them are "M-Netters who also use Grex" and
which are vice-versa.  Or even why it matters.


#33 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 00:43:12 2004:

This response has been erased.



#34 of 155 by naftee on Thu Feb 12 01:41:26 2004:

Ergo, due to all this opinionated speech floating around; GreX's bbs has
become more like m-net's!


#35 of 155 by aruba on Thu Feb 12 04:17:13 2004:

Re #20: Well, I can't truly speak for the users in question.  But my
understanding from what they told me is that the large quantity of
bitterness, the harassing emails, the name-calling, and the lack of a
sense that Grex is a community were the biggest problems.  One person was
finding the situation stressful enough that his/her physical health was
suffering.


#36 of 155 by happyboy on Thu Feb 12 08:01:04 2004:

really?!  her health was *suffering* because of people's
behavior on a bbs?

*rolls eyes*

the person in question obviously has some sort
of emotional disturbance REGARDLESS of what goes
on around here.


#37 of 155 by iggy on Thu Feb 12 13:23:17 2004:

I would tend to agree.


#38 of 155 by jp2 on Thu Feb 12 13:44:09 2004:

This response has been erased.



#39 of 155 by rational on Thu Feb 12 13:45:34 2004:

I forgot one of my hats in my locker at school at STP, and I don't like the
one I have at home.  What does Cyberspace Communications suggest I do?


#40 of 155 by scott on Thu Feb 12 13:57:59 2004:

Yet another demonstration that some people take online communications
seriously.  There *are* people in the world (I'm one) who don't see a bbs as
a place solely useful for trading insults.


#41 of 155 by gull on Thu Feb 12 14:23:30 2004:

This response has been erased.



#42 of 155 by gull on Thu Feb 12 14:24:13 2004:

Yup.  Resp:36 is pretty revealing of the M-Net attitude.  "They're just
pseudos, not real people.  They don't have feelings."


#43 of 155 by anderyn on Thu Feb 12 14:44:11 2004:

Why would n't I take it seriously? I am talking to you and you are talking
to me. Just because it's not in person doesn't mean that I'm not involved in
what I'm saying and what you're saying. It's as real as the conversation I
just had with a workmate. If he said "shut up you old hag", I would be
stressed and upset, so why shouldn't I be in this forum? 


#44 of 155 by aruba on Thu Feb 12 14:47:23 2004:

That's pretty much how I feel, too.  You don't have to be emotionally
disturbed to feel stress when someone yells at you, or at someone in the
same room with you.  That's what it has felt like for me over the past
month.


#45 of 155 by jp2 on Thu Feb 12 14:49:00 2004:

This response has been erased.



#46 of 155 by naftee on Thu Feb 12 15:08:09 2004:

Yeah, like the m-netters arew 'immune' to feelings.  Right.


#47 of 155 by aruba on Thu Feb 12 15:13:44 2004:

The point you should take from #4, Jamie, is that to a lot of us this is not
just a game, of logic or anything else.  I don't really expect that to mean
anything to you, but I have to say it anyway.


#48 of 155 by iggy on Thu Feb 12 15:14:26 2004:

so gull again throws out the mysterious "m-net" like it is supposed to 
be an insult.  Yet he is unable to provide names or reasons as to
who this "insult" encompasses.
He hasn't even bothered to define what a grexer is, other than he identifies
himself as one.  Gull, what makes a grexer?
I've been on grex since it first opened to the public in ..what year
was that.. 1991?  I've been here just as long as many of you.


#49 of 155 by scott on Thu Feb 12 15:28:31 2004:

Iggy, if you're that bothered by inaccurate refences to "M-Netters" then
perhaps you could do something about the inaccurate references "Grexers" from
you, jp2, and others.  As in "Grexers don't believe in free speech", etc.


#50 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 15:48:30 2004:

Personally, I find it hard to understand how a person can make 
something like a bbs so important to themselves that when things like 
this happen, it makes them actually physically ill. And I say this as 
someone for whom online conferencing is very important. Sure there are 
people on Mnet and Grex who can upset me that much but they are all 
people I have real life relationships with. 

I worry about some of the people who are getting very upset about all 
of this. I wish there was something I could do to make everyone happy. 
You know, some kind of win-win solution. I *really* wish jep and 
valerie would have considered having the items restored with all of 
their posts removed as well as all the posts of people who would 
obviously have been very willing to give their permission. 

I think it is fair to acknowledge that some people are upset because 
their words have been deleted without their permission. It is fair to 
acknowledge that the sore loser game playing behavior of some of those 
people is upsetting other folks around here. 

But maybe the first thing we can do is stop all these "mnetters" 
and "grexers" remarks. It seems like when someone calls someone on Grex 
an "mnetter" it is meant as some kind of insult but also meant to 
illustrate that those people are outsiders and not very welcome here. 
Ditto for when people on Mnet start using "grexers" a lot. 


#51 of 155 by jp2 on Thu Feb 12 16:40:34 2004:

This response has been erased.



#52 of 155 by scott on Thu Feb 12 17:54:57 2004:

Re 50:  Lynne, it's not the bbs.  Repeat:  It's NOT the bbs.  It's the other
people on the bbs that get some folks worked up and even ill.  Imagine that
about half the people you talked to on the phone were that rude.  Would you
just say "oh, it's just the phone, it's not reality"?  How about face-to-face?

What seems to be the big difference is that some of us view online
communication to be just as real as the telephone, which is just as real as
face-to-face.  That you don't see it as real, to me, indicates that you are
the one with some social shortcomings.


#53 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 18:30:45 2004:

Haha. Scott, I work in tech support, half the people I talk to *are* 
that rude and I find myself thinking, "well, it's just the phone, not 
reality...they cant hit me, stab me, burn me with cigarettes, feed my 
dog klonopin or throw poop at me" *all* the time. Maybe working at ASH 
has just given me a different perspective. 


#54 of 155 by gull on Thu Feb 12 18:37:32 2004:

I think slynne is missing the fact that to some people here, there are
real friends of theirs that are involved, maybe even people they see in
person on a regular basis.  Not everyone here thinks of other BBS'ers as
just text on the screen with no real person behind it.  Saying "it's
just a BBS, it shouldn't be that important to them" shortchanges the
real friendships and real people that are involved.

I really do think that this is a cultural difference between Grex and
M-Net, and what we're seeing now may be a wrenching change where Grex's
culture is going to be forced to become more impersonal, like M-Net's.


#55 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 18:38:20 2004:

This response has been erased.



#56 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 18:39:09 2004:

This response has been erased.



#57 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 18:46:41 2004:

I get it that real people are involved here. Honestly, if someone I 
knew in real life who I cared about were treating me like shit either 
here or anyplace else, it would upset me. But I dont get upset about 
people I dont know especially when it is online because I know that a 
person cant leap through their computer and harm me physically. And no 
one can harm me emotionally unless I let them. 


#58 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 18:51:15 2004:

This response has been erased.



#59 of 155 by iggy on Thu Feb 12 19:25:43 2004:

*makes boogie-boogie taunting face at slynne*

Have I ruined your day yet?


#60 of 155 by scott on Thu Feb 12 20:10:47 2004:

Lynne, when you get rude tech support calls are you allowed to be as rude in
return?


#61 of 155 by albaugh on Thu Feb 12 20:29:50 2004:

I guess I don't think there is anything that could - or should - be done 
to / with grex that would retain the people who say they are leaving due to
the item killing kaper and its aftermath.


#62 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 20:39:05 2004:

resp:60 - nope. And as it turns out, since they dont bother me, I find 
it very easy to be pleasant. I am also very very good at directing 
conversations in the way I want them to go. In my case at work, I can 
have people laughing by the end of the call. 

But, I have to admit that the main reason I am not rude back to those 
people is because my employer wouldnt like it and my employer *pays* 
me. 

resp:61 - I have to disagree. While I dont know who is leaving, I'll 
bet it is some of our more interesting people. 

Just so you all know, I dont think there is anything wrong with wanting 
an online community filled mostly with people who kind of know you and 
who are willing to be there to support you. I also understand that 
people want an open community where folks can wander in and be made to 
feel welcome. The problem though, is that if you have an open system, 
folks you might not want to feel welcome will come in too. 

If that part of it really bothers people, they very well may want to 
leave. I like the open system feel of this place, personally. I also 
like the sense of community. In fact, it means so much to me that I am 
not willing to leave here right now because doing so would just harm 
the community. 

I hope that anyone else who values that sense of community tries to 
stick it out with me. Ignore the folks who bother you. Use a twit 
filter if you must. But please please keep contributing here because 
*being here* is more important than even sending in money. (although 
naturally, I hope people will continue to be willing to do that too) 


#63 of 155 by albaugh on Thu Feb 12 20:44:26 2004:

Disagree, then.  Just what *is* it you think could / should be done to / with
grex to retain / bring back those people?  Kick out all the "trouble makers".
Issue rose colored glasses?


#64 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 20:50:32 2004:

I dont know. I would kind of like people to learn how to 
ignore "trouble makers". I would like people to realize that *they* are 
valuable to grex. Not because of any potential money they might send it 
either. Because each person here contributes something to someone. I 
would like to convince people to ignore the people whom they dont think 
contribute and focus on everyone else. I admit too that this is all a 
totally selfish desire of mine. I want people to stay because it makes 
my grex experience better. 


#65 of 155 by scott on Thu Feb 12 20:53:52 2004:

Re 62:  I'd suggest that you've gotten used to an unnatural and unhealthy type
of social interaction. :(


#66 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 21:27:52 2004:

This response has been erased.



#67 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 21:28:41 2004:

resp:65 Yes! That is just it. I have learned how to deal with unhealthy 
types of social interaction. It's a skill. And one I happen to like 
because it allows me to take more social risks than I might otherwise. 

I have my safe places where all the social interaction is safe and 
healthy and wonderful and all of that. I see grex as being more public 
than that. I share a lot here but I dont share everything because this 
is a place where jerks can come in. HOwever, I have met some of my 
closest friends online. People with whom I can have safe private 
conversations with. People I can share my deepest secrets and pain 
with. People I wouldnt have in my life if m-net/grex were closed 
systems. Those people are so important to me that I think it is worth 
ignoring a few jerks sometimes in order to keep the system open so some 
other really great person can come strolling into my life. 

You cant have the safe and secure utopia community *and* have an open 
system. You can have a pretty darn good community though. This is 
especially so if people are committed to it. This is what grex has 
right now and hopefully will continue to have. 


#68 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 21:40:12 2004:

This response has been erased.



#69 of 155 by slynne on Thu Feb 12 21:59:21 2004:

I dont like the idea of other people's words having been deleted 
without their permission. However, I dont see it happening again in the 
near future and frankly, I dont think anyone's words that were deleted 
are anything I will miss. 


#70 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 12 22:11:04 2004:

This response has been erased.



#71 of 155 by iggy on Thu Feb 12 22:37:52 2004:

the notion of "kicking out the trouble makers" is pretty risky because
just whose definition do you use? Who would speak for all of grex and
be the one to point fingers?  Before you know it, someone will
be pointing at YOU.


#72 of 155 by naftee on Thu Feb 12 23:08:02 2004:

Hey, the GreX public did a pretty god job of kicking out two troublemakers:
jep and valerie.


#73 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 00:33:57 2004:

This response has been erased.



#74 of 155 by naftee on Fri Feb 13 01:08:41 2004:

Gawd; better call in some more m-netters to fill in the empty seats!


#75 of 155 by jmsaul on Fri Feb 13 01:17:39 2004:

This response has been erased.



#76 of 155 by jp2 on Fri Feb 13 02:09:23 2004:

This response has been erased.



#77 of 155 by rational on Fri Feb 13 02:12:26 2004:

 :)


#78 of 155 by jmsaul on Fri Feb 13 02:28:17 2004:

(Fixed dumb typo)

 In all of the verbiage and nastiness on both sides, Lynne's said one of the
 most valuable things I've ever read about BBSing:
 
    I have learned how to deal with unhealthy 
    types of social interaction. It's a skill. And one I happen to like 
    because it allows me to take more social risks than I might otherwise.
 
 You have four choices:
 
 1.  Leave
 2.  Close the BBS to "undesirables"
 3.  React to undesirable behavior with stress and hostility
 4.  Learn to deal with unhealthy types of social interaction in a healthy
        manner
 
 When I've said in the past that it's best to ignore system twits, I'm not
 saying that you should learn to like them.  They're going to be a part of
 Grex unless you shut the doors.  It's unavoidable -- you may manage to
 teach or bully or scold some into changing their behavior, but there will
 always be more.  It's up to you whether you continue to allow their
 presence to stress you out, or learn to handle them in a healthier way.


#79 of 155 by slynne on Fri Feb 13 03:56:55 2004:

Wow. Thanks Joe. I agree with everything you have said in resp:78


#80 of 155 by happyboy on Fri Feb 13 07:33:53 2004:

this discussion has gone on longer than is comfortable for me.


i hope i don't get a tummyache because of it.


                :(


#81 of 155 by cmcgee on Fri Feb 13 12:50:45 2004:

Go Joe!  Go Lynne!  Thanks for articulating why I'm staying.  I too wish I
could "kick out" the people I perceive as "ruining" Grex.  But I value Grex
more than I dislike them.  And I want other people to realize that there are
quite a few of us who want to be in a community where healthy interactions
are the -norm-.


#82 of 155 by iggy on Fri Feb 13 14:29:12 2004:

huh.. i didn't get the same thing out of slynne and jmsaul that
cmcgee appeared to.  i thought they were saying it is much healthier
to learn to deal with people rather than to kick everyone out so you can
have a private sanctuary.


#83 of 155 by jp2 on Fri Feb 13 14:41:53 2004:

This response has been erased.



#84 of 155 by remmers on Fri Feb 13 16:51:53 2004:

I didn't read cmcgee's "I too" as referring to slynne and jmsaul.

And *I too* applaud what they said.  :)


#85 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 17:51:01 2004:

This response has been erased.



#86 of 155 by keesan on Fri Feb 13 18:04:29 2004:

I have not kicked people out.  I use tools to avoid having to deal with the
messes they make, such as the ignore command, or fixseen when someone posts
all over agora or scribbles all over agora.  If everyone did this the vandals
might get bored and go away.  


#87 of 155 by jp2 on Fri Feb 13 18:09:06 2004:

This response has been erased.



#88 of 155 by albaugh on Fri Feb 13 18:28:07 2004:

All that is fine, but it isn't about changing *grex* in any way - it's about
people essentially developing thicker skins or the ilk.  And that isn't
something "grex" can do, other than perhaps posting a "warning" during
newuser or other places.  So, while people leaving grex because they were
stressed out over the item killing kaper may be unfortunate, unless grex is
to become a private members-only club where no mean / nasty people would ever
show up, those as bailed, well "sorry to see you go, but..."


#89 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 19:25:23 2004:

This response has been erased.



#90 of 155 by anderyn on Fri Feb 13 19:39:53 2004:

I think that a warning about this being the internet, etc. might be
appropriate. Seriously.


#91 of 155 by scott on Fri Feb 13 19:40:34 2004:

*I* can develop a thicker skin.  What about the jerks who are also driving
away new users, by entering abusive responses in party or Agora item 1?


#92 of 155 by iggy on Fri Feb 13 19:53:27 2004:

i highly doubt new users are helpless, defenseless little bunnies that need
someone charging in on a white horse and chainmail to protect them.


#93 of 155 by happyboy on Fri Feb 13 19:57:27 2004:

re91: i'll assume that you consider me to be one of *the jerks*

      who are the newusers who i have driven away?  i want names
     scott.  in fact i want names of any folks who have been
driven away by *the jerks*


#94 of 155 by keesan on Fri Feb 13 20:46:29 2004:

That is not the point.  If I were a potential user of grex, and the first and
probably only thing I saw here was name-calling, I would go away.


#95 of 155 by scott on Fri Feb 13 21:11:29 2004:

Re 93:  Easy enough.  I'm not calling you one of the
jerks-who-are-trying-to-drive-people-away.  I'm referring more to polytarp.

Although I'll certainly give you an honorary "jerk" for your pointless demand
for essentially uncollectable data.  ;)


#96 of 155 by albaugh on Fri Feb 13 21:34:08 2004:

I don't see any way that grex can remain "grex" and at the same time preclude
jerky users.


#97 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 21:57:37 2004:

This response has been erased.



#98 of 155 by krj on Fri Feb 13 22:00:40 2004:

"Grex: Where The Weak Are Killed and Eaten."


#99 of 155 by cyklone on Fri Feb 13 22:13:58 2004:

"Grex: Doing Personal Favors For Favored Persons"


#100 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 22:19:17 2004:

This response has been erased.



#101 of 155 by anderyn on Fri Feb 13 22:21:36 2004:

So we do personal favors for favored persons. How do I get on the a-list?
Enquiring minds want to know.


#102 of 155 by scott on Fri Feb 13 23:06:48 2004:

Founding a Grex and writing a great deal of its software, spending at least
5 years on the board and over 10 years on staff... yeah, good thing we got
rid of that worthless valerie person.


#103 of 155 by jmsaul on Fri Feb 13 23:14:25 2004:

Re #91:  You have the same four choices about them, Scott.  With the
         additional note that you *could* restrict certain items or
         conferences to "approved" users or "approved" posts while still
         leaving the rest of the system open -- but those restricted areas
         wouldn't really be very Grex-like.  I suspect a lot of people
         you value wouldn't be comfortable in moderated or restricted
         places.


#104 of 155 by gelinas on Fri Feb 13 23:31:16 2004:

(I think you missed his point, Joe; or maybe he didn't express it very weil:
how to keep new users who who are turned off by the 'jerks'?)


#105 of 155 by tod on Fri Feb 13 23:34:29 2004:

This response has been erased.



#106 of 155 by gelinas on Sat Feb 14 00:01:19 2004:

What?  


#107 of 155 by cyklone on Sat Feb 14 00:33:29 2004:

Re #101: It apparently involves claims of grievous injury resulting 
in Victim Identification.



#108 of 155 by jmsaul on Sat Feb 14 00:42:09 2004:

Re #102:  Nobody got rid of her.  She got rid of herself.  Everyone else
          who was parodied is still here and actively participating. 




#109 of 155 by tod on Sat Feb 14 00:55:01 2004:

This response has been erased.



#110 of 155 by robh on Sat Feb 14 02:27:24 2004:

So who else *is* being parodied there, anyway?


#111 of 155 by jmsaul on Sat Feb 14 02:45:10 2004:

As far as I can remember, Sindi, Rane, Bruce, Twila, Jaklumen, Mynxcat, and
a few other people occasionally, including me and most of the parodists.  Also
Jan, now.


#112 of 155 by albaugh on Sat Feb 14 03:51:56 2004:

(what jmsaul said in #108)


#113 of 155 by rational on Sat Feb 14 03:55:54 2004:

Re. 111:  there're many more.


#114 of 155 by scott on Sat Feb 14 04:07:11 2004:

Re 103:  Nope, there are more than four choices.  Choice #5 would be to
convert them... we've done it before.


#115 of 155 by naftee on Sat Feb 14 04:19:52 2004:

     i wanna jerk


#116 of 155 by jmsaul on Sat Feb 14 15:04:47 2004:

Re #114:  Re-read my original post.  Yes, you can convert them -- but you
          can't convert them instantly, and there will always be more.


#117 of 155 by ryan on Sat Feb 14 16:26:43 2004:

This response has been erased.



#118 of 155 by naftee on Sat Feb 14 17:24:17 2004:

When you write something intelligent.  That's not going to happen anytime
soon.


#119 of 155 by jp2 on Sun Feb 15 00:18:47 2004:

This response has been erased.



#120 of 155 by naftee on Sun Feb 15 01:19:43 2004:

riddance


#121 of 155 by tod on Mon Feb 16 19:25:17 2004:

This response has been erased.



#122 of 155 by janc on Tue Feb 17 02:15:11 2004:

Re 109:  I resent the implication that I couldn't fix the disk.  I did fix
the disk.  I was up copying the data off a perfectly good disk so that it
could be cannibalized for parts to fix the disk that had died.  Kip did the
actual cannibalization, so it was a group effort.

It's been a week since the vote was over, and some minds are still spinning
in a tight little circle:  "Valerie is Satan.  No free speech on Grex.
Valerie is Satan.  No free speech on Grex.  Valerie is Satan.  No free
speech on Grex...."  OK.  OK.  Take a valium.  Get some sleep.  Maybe some
breathing exercises.  You'll do yourself an injury if you keep this up much
longer.


#123 of 155 by cyklone on Tue Feb 17 02:28:47 2004:

Nothing a little breastmilk won't cure!


#124 of 155 by naftee on Tue Feb 17 04:04:43 2004:

Just a little more sex...


#125 of 155 by rational on Tue Feb 17 04:14:52 2004:

AND A LOT MORE FREEDOM RIBBON!


#126 of 155 by happyboy on Tue Feb 17 19:13:14 2004:

re122: whatever, milquetoast.


#127 of 155 by tod on Tue Feb 17 22:09:31 2004:

This response has been erased.



#128 of 155 by twinkie on Wed Feb 18 00:30:26 2004:

re : 122

It's rather convenient to be condescending after the fact, when you've
basically got what you wanted, ne?



#129 of 155 by tod on Wed Feb 18 01:18:20 2004:

This response has been erased.



#130 of 155 by jp2 on Wed Feb 18 01:50:57 2004:

This response has been erased.



#131 of 155 by gelinas on Wed Feb 18 02:38:51 2004:

Your second sentence in #129 proves that your complaints are farce:  if
your words were really being censored, you'd not be able to claim that you
had been censored.

Until YOU stop scribbling your posts, you're little more than a hypocrit to
accuse Valerie of vandalism for removing her posts.

As has been said many times, you can re-enter your comments from any removed
items at any time.


#132 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 18 02:39:56 2004:

Joe, you really don't think people can be selectively censored?  Why's it
impossible for some things they say to be censored and others not? 


#133 of 155 by gelinas on Wed Feb 18 02:51:03 2004:

Because censorship is general, aimed at either particular people, or
particular subjects.  The removals here on grex were not targeted at people
nor at subjects.  The people whose responses were removed can still post on
grex (and have, endlessly. :)  The subjects of the responses can still be
discussed on grex.  Just not in the original items.


#134 of 155 by cyklone on Wed Feb 18 03:16:17 2004:

Keep up the lame justifications, gelinas. The fact of the matter is I can
*NEVER* repost the deleted items because (a) I don't have copies and (b) I
don't have a photographic memory. Sure, I could post something similar,
but MY ORIGINAL WORDS are now gone forever because some assholes voted
that valerie and jep's feelings were more important than mine. Those were
personal favors for favored persons, pure and simple. As the disfavored
person, I feel a loss over my words similar to a mourning and all you can
do is pretend nothing was lost. Fuck you.

If you can't see my point and acknowledge it then you are as insensitive
an asshole as certain grexers accuse mnetters of being. 



#135 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 18 03:20:55 2004:

Was it hard to write that while wiping away tears, cyklone?


#136 of 155 by cyklone on Wed Feb 18 03:28:06 2004:

No, I save my tears for more important things. This feels more like I was
robbed by a bunch of self-righteous senior citizens driving real slow
getaway cars. The sad part is not that I was robbed but that they took
something of inherent value to me. 



#137 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 18 03:29:35 2004:

Oh, okay.


#138 of 155 by gelinas on Wed Feb 18 04:17:39 2004:

Yes, I do see your point, and I acknowledge your loss, cyklone.  That it hurts
doesn't make it censorship, though.  That it was a personal favour for special
persons doesn't make it censorship.

I've been convinced that the deletions were wrong.  I've NOT been convinced
that it was censorhip.


#139 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 18 04:50:43 2004:

Why'd you ban my address, putz?


#140 of 155 by anderyn on Wed Feb 18 12:07:18 2004:

Cyklone, I am sorry that you felt so attached to your words that you feel pain
that they were removed. I suppose that I don't quite get this, since I work
as a copy editor and I write for publication -- if I were that attached to
what I wrote, even the stuff I really adore, I'd feel pain a LOT. Just because
you said it one way at one time doesn't mean that you can't get it really
close another time, as long as you have a forum that allows you to try again.
And I lost some information that was important to me (things like when Griffin
smiled first, etc. -- which I didn't keep in any diary, or save in a folder,
or anything else and which I can't replace by memory or any other means
(unless someone saved the text and are willing to share), but I am not half
as upset as you are. 


#141 of 155 by iggy on Wed Feb 18 13:35:54 2004:

so you are saying that you are sorry he is upset/hurt...BUT that
you don't really understand why?

That is the exact same argument the people doing the parody used and
were attacked for not understanding the full scope of the hurt feelings
that were caused because of it.  (gack, run-on sentence)


#142 of 155 by jp2 on Wed Feb 18 14:04:04 2004:

This response has been erased.



#143 of 155 by anderyn on Wed Feb 18 16:28:51 2004:

Um. I'm saying that I don't quite get the amount of pain he's claiming. I know
a lot of authors (maybe not a huge amount, but I deal with them every day,
and I talk to others on a regular basis) and only a very few of them are
so attached to one particular expression of their ideas (as in, "oh, you
deleted my file? you've censored my immortal ideas!" rather than "oh, you
deleted my file? I'll have to rewrite this, what a drag. Hope I can get it
close to the cool thing I wrote before.") that they feel it's worth a lot of
complaining and screaming and all of the rest of it. Yes, I know it hurts to
have something you've written disappear, although it hurts worse to have it
mangled by an uninterested editor, ime.  

I don't think that making something disappear en masse without looking to see
who or what was in the stuff disappeared (I don't think Valerie knew or cared
exactly who or what was written in those files at the time she did it, so it
was  not aimed at anyone in particular or at any speech in particular) is the
same at all as making fun of someone else in what seems in the medium of
computers to be a mean spirit (I admit that I could be misreading your words
in the agora conference but it did not seem like "ha-ha, let's laugh together
at how silly everyone one is", but more of a "look what an idiot and a jackass
this person is, let's laugh at what a dolt they are, and how much better we
are..." type of speech). I would hope that I would not perform either action,
since I don't like causing pain, but I'd rather do Valerie's action (which
was not meant to hurt, imo) rather than the parody (which seems meant to hurt,
or at least seriously sting, the persons parodied). YMMV.


#144 of 155 by cyklone on Wed Feb 18 17:40:12 2004:

How could the parodists be intending to sting people that weren't even
reading our posts (at least until the self-righteous janc made such a big
announcement)? Second, you again fall for the "it's easy to repost the
same ideas" myth. NO IT ISN'T! My posts were very specific responses to
words and situations present during a particular time and in a particular
place. There is no possible way I could recreate those words, especially
when the other words that inspired them have been removed as well. What is
so hard to see about that? I'm not complaining you censored my "immortal
ideas." I am complaining that you censored the expression of my ideas; an
expression I can never recreate thanks to the grex thugs doing personal
favors for favored persons. Thugs like you, twila. Fuck you. 

As far as whether or not you "get" the pain I am claiming, maybe you
should reread my item in agora (#56, I believe). You are again falling for
the mistake of using yourself as a yardstick for measuring and judging
appropriate behavior. That is a *HORRIBLY DEFECTIVE* method and much of
what has been posted is a perfect example of why.


#145 of 155 by anderyn on Wed Feb 18 18:05:07 2004:

Why isn't it easy to repost it? You had the ideas, you can have them again.
If they were so inspiring and needed to be saved, then you should be able to
remember the thrust of them well enough to recreate them, or the parts thereof
that you believe are important. The expression is fleeting compared to the
idea. I do not subscribe to the belief that all speech is important and needs
to be archived for all time. Some things need to be. Some things should be
forgotten as soon as they are typed. Are you sure you want to re-read yourself
saying "fuck you" and calling untrue names (I am not "a brutal ruffian or
assassin" as per Merriam-Webster) in twenty years, for example? You may wish
to, but unless you take steps to preserve that expression of yourself for
yourself, you can't expect it to be there. George isn't going to do it for
you. Harry isn't. I'm not. Grex isn't. 

Aren't you using yourself for your yardstick? Everyone does. It's part of
being human, since the only experience you have is your own. Yes, I know many
people and I listen to them telling me their experiences (whether via voice
or electrons), but in the end, I have to filter that through my own mind and
heart and truth, to come to a decision. I didn't make a decision to vote to
"favor favored persons" -- I voted the way I did because (1) what's done is
done, and it would have been wrong to repost things so that those who gawk
and cause trouble could have more fodder,  and (2) as a parent, I could see
why valerie and jep wanted those items gone. I would have wanted them gone
too. I would hope that I'd have done it in a differnt way than Valerie did,
but I can't say that I would have with emotions running high. 


#146 of 155 by albaugh on Wed Feb 18 19:43:42 2004:

Some of these guys should be spanked with a yardstick...  ;-)


#147 of 155 by other on Wed Feb 18 20:06:32 2004:

... or a cattle prod...      



oh, yeah. -->  ;-)


#148 of 155 by rational on Wed Feb 18 20:52:47 2004:

AND ALL OF THEM NEED TO WEAR A GREX FREEDOM RIBBON!


#149 of 155 by cyklone on Wed Feb 18 22:06:41 2004:

Twila, when I have more time I will explain how far off base you are with
your "yardstick" analysis. However, one recurrent theme can be blown out
of the water right now. The whole "now it's such a big deal we can never
restore it because it would no longer be the status quo" carries a huge
negative implication within that assumption. What you are saying is (a) if
a berserk staffer or a whiner like jep manages to delete text and (b) the
deletion naturally creates controversy, then (c) it cannot be restored
*because* of the controversy (ie "it would have been wrong to repost
things so that those who gawk and cause trouble could have more fodder"). 
This leads to an absurd result: If someone does something outrageous on
grex, like seizing control of the words of another, then that person's
wrongful acts of deletion will not be undone because of the controversy
the *wrongdoer* created. Talk about rewarding inappropriate behavior. That
is just one of the incredibly damaging lessons of the vote not to restore. 


#150 of 155 by naftee on Thu Feb 19 00:10:55 2004:

re 138

>I've been convinced that the deletions were wrong.  I've NOT 
>been convinced that it was censorhip.

OH GREAT!  Then you can follow these three easy steps to do what is RIGHT for
GreX:

1) Break into the Pumpkin
2) Restore the deleted items as written in jp2's proposal from backup tape
3) Resign from staff

If you follow the three steps I'll send you an autographed postcard.  If you
manage to skip step 3) I'll send you two postcards.  Deal?


#151 of 155 by rational on Thu Feb 19 00:16:24 2004:

AND I"LL SEND YOU A RIBBON EVEN IF YOU SKIP ALL STEPS!!!!


#152 of 155 by tod on Thu Feb 19 01:34:57 2004:

This response has been erased.



#153 of 155 by cyklone on Thu Feb 19 01:57:01 2004:

EXACTLY! If anyone has a copy of the dbunker posts, I would very much
appreciate my words back.


#154 of 155 by rational on Thu Feb 19 02:09:15 2004:

I HAVE A COPY OF THIS RIBBON< YOU SHOULD WEAR IT


#155 of 155 by jesuit on Wed May 17 02:14:48 2006:

TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: