Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 166: Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting Monday, April 12, 2004

Entered by slynne on Thu Apr 8 18:00:19 2004:

Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting  Monday, April 12, 2004


1.  7:00 pm Opening Gavel Tap 
2.. Treasurer's Report 
3.  Staff Report and Next Grex Update 
4.  Schedule Next Meeting 
5. New Business 
6. Closing Gavel Tap       

 The meeting will be held at aruba's house. I will let him post 
directions. 
44 responses total.

#1 of 44 by gelinas on Thu Apr 8 18:46:16 2004:

(Can we gather a bit early, so that bhoward need call only once?)


#2 of 44 by slynne on Fri Apr 9 02:06:17 2004:

sounds good to me


#3 of 44 by aruba on Sat Apr 10 04:32:09 2004:

I live at 711 Duncan Street in Ann Arbor.  Here are some directions:

Coming from outside Ann Arbor:

Take 94 to the Jackson Road exit (172).  At the corner of Jackson and
Maple (the first light you come to), turn left.  The second light after
that is Miller; turn right.  Duncan is the second right.  Turn right on
Duncan and go 3 or 4 blocks, past Haisley School.  My house is on the
right - there's a "Slow Children" sign out front.

From Ann Arbor:

Take Miller road west from downtown.  (Catherine becomes Miller when you
cross Main St.)  Go a couple miles, and Duncan Street will be on your
left.  Bruce Street is right before it, and if you get to the light at
Maple, turn around and go back.  Turn onto Duncan, and then see above.

Here's a crude map:

            \    | Maple
            __\__|________ M14
           /    \|
           |     |\
  94      /      |  \
---------        |   |\
          \      |  *|  \ Miller
-----------|-----+-  Duncan
Jackson Rd |     |
           |
            \
              \    94
                ------


#4 of 44 by soup on Sat Apr 10 23:25:54 2004:

That's awesome.


#5 of 44 by mary on Sun Apr 11 12:27:14 2004:

I'd like to see a letter sent to ArborWeb thanking them for the free
advertising they gave Grex for the longest time.  It seems the advertising
has stopped and the announcement in the MOTD is gone too. And when I look
at their advertising rates, even those for non-profits, I realize what a
courtesy it was we had ads for so long. 

Maybe we could slip this into agenda?


#6 of 44 by cmcgee on Sun Apr 11 15:01:29 2004:

You do know why they gave it to us for so long, don't you?  Check out their
webmaster.


#7 of 44 by mary on Sun Apr 11 15:36:35 2004:

Yes, very aware of that.  But I think a thank you would still be 
nice.


#8 of 44 by cmcgee on Sun Apr 11 16:59:03 2004:

I agree.  And notch up an explicit dollar value to the costs of recent events.


#9 of 44 by cyklone on Sun Apr 11 21:11:39 2004:

So Valerie took another of her "toys" and ran home? BFD. Grex does a
personal favor for a favored person, and still it isn't enough. I guess
she won't be happy until someone creates a time machine to go back and
undo history. There's a lesson in there somewhere. Maybe ya'll will learn
it . . . . 



#10 of 44 by mary on Sun Apr 11 21:34:28 2004:

I prefer to think this was a business decision, on the part of
ArborWeb/AA Observer, and not more fall-out from Valerie.
Their quoted rate for advertising non-profits is something like
$75 a month.  Maybe they could no longer carry Grex for free.

Would anyone object to our sending a letter thanking them for the
years of free advertising?


#11 of 44 by slynne on Mon Apr 12 00:33:33 2004:

I think sending a letter is a good idea. It certainly is worth a 
discussion at the meeting. I have added it to the Agenda.

Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting  Monday, April 12, 2004


1.  7:00 pm Opening Gavel Tap 
2.. Treasurer's Report 
3.  Staff Report and Next Grex Update 
4.  Schedule Next Meeting 
5. New Business 
   *Thank You letter to ArborWeb
6. Closing Gavel Tap       

 The meeting will be held at aruba's house. I will let him post 
directions. 


#12 of 44 by albaugh on Mon Apr 12 13:56:48 2004:

> It seems the advertising
 has stopped and the announcement in the MOTD is gone too. <

Does anyone know the cause of the advertising being stopped?  Certainly if
ArborWeb provided something free of charge to grex, it should be thanked.
But if advertising suddenly ceased because of a certain person taking unusual
action which negatively affected grex in this regard (and that seems to be
the speculation), then perhaps someone else at ArborWeb ought to be contacted
about the situation...


#13 of 44 by cmcgee on Mon Apr 12 16:00:13 2004:

It doesn't seem unusual to me.  Arborweb was doing a favor for their
webmaster, which she is no longer interested in having them do for her. 
Valerie was gdoing grex a favor, which she is no longer interested in doing
for Grex.  

We are supposed to call up Arborweb and ask that they give us free
advertising because we're "special" to them even without Valerie's
participation in Grex? 



#14 of 44 by albaugh on Mon Apr 12 17:05:03 2004:

That's a good question, and probably the answer is "grex just loses out".
If this is indeed what happened, then I would consider it very, very petty.
But I won't use any names, until someone has actual proof that this certain
someone was indeed responsible for the grex perk going away.


#15 of 44 by scott on Mon Apr 12 17:24:36 2004:

Speaking of people being petty, it's happening right here with people bitching
about Valerie yet again.  Valerie did Grex a favor with that advertising, and
now that it's gone *she* is the one being petty?  More likely it was an
ongoing small effort to keep the Grex ad in the Observer's pages.


#16 of 44 by cmcgee on Mon Apr 12 19:35:33 2004:

I consider the treatment Valerie received here to be far worse than "petty".
With both the current member vote and this item, she -continues- to receive
treatment that makes me cringe.  

Unfortunately, it is those of us who remain active who now bear the brunt of
the  anti-Valerie sentiment and activity.  She is certainly not reading new
items and new responses.


#17 of 44 by jp2 on Mon Apr 12 19:57:05 2004:

This response has been erased.



#18 of 44 by remmers on Mon Apr 12 21:07:31 2004:

Re #15: As far as I know, the Grexwalk notice in the Observer is still
there and will continue to be.  What's gone is the ad on the Arborweb
website.

I was continually amazed, knowing that there's normally a nontrivial
charge for ads on ArborWeb - even for nonprofits - that the ad was
there for so long (years, in fact).  It's something that their policy
certainly didn't entitle us to.

I'd say a thank-you to them is definitely in order at this point.


#19 of 44 by cyklone on Tue Apr 13 00:36:17 2004:

"I consider the treatment Valerie received here to be far worse than "petty"."

What, you mean her being criticized for acting beyond her authority? Are
you by any chance refering to the outrage some of us expressed when
instead of just deleting her own words, which she ostensibly claimed to
the source of her concern, she punished an entire group of users by
deleting *their* words? Part of life is that the truth sometimes makes us
cringe. Deal with it. 



#20 of 44 by other on Tue Apr 13 00:36:28 2004:

This is all Jamie's fault!


#21 of 44 by jp2 on Tue Apr 13 02:03:02 2004:

This response has been erased.



#22 of 44 by tod on Tue Apr 13 03:29:07 2004:

#13 of 21: by C. S. McGee (cmcgee) on Mon, Apr 12, 2004 (12:00):
 It doesn't seem unusual to me.  Arborweb was doing a favor for their
 webmaster, which she is no longer interested in having them do for her.

Why is it that the favor was for Valerie and not for Grex? How do you know
this?  Were they doing their write-off for Valerie, too?
Somebody should call Arborweb and ask why we got pulled from their
advertising. Maybe they didn't even notice it when Valerie CENSORED our ad!


#23 of 44 by remmers on Tue Apr 13 12:20:55 2004:

When's the last time anybody actually saw the ad?  I seldom look at
the Arborweb site, so it could've been pulled a long time ago and I'd
never have known.  Maybe somebody noticed that the ad wasn't being
paid for, decided that it had slipped through the cracks somehow, and
deleted it.  It's a big site, and it's possible that the webmaster
isn't the only person who updates content.


#24 of 44 by tod on Tue Apr 13 22:50:11 2004:

Or its possible the webmaster yanked it in a frothy vehemented fervor
unbeknownst to anyone outside of that padded room aka The Popcorn Machine


#25 of 44 by lowclass on Wed Apr 14 02:37:59 2004:

    It's just as possible she thought the hassle of getting the web ad ON
arborweb, possibly at cost to HER, just wasn't worth the shit she put up with
at work.

                (no, that is NOT an endorsement of her behavior as a staff
memeber.)


#26 of 44 by jp2 on Wed Apr 14 12:20:07 2004:

This response has been erased.



#27 of 44 by lowclass on Thu Apr 15 02:06:18 2004:

        I DIDN'T say she was embezzeling from her employer. On the other hand,
she might have worked a partial non-monetary compensation deal that included
the website FOR GREX, at no charge TO GREX, as a favor She was willing to
provide at that time.

        I ALSO think she was MORE than entitled to erase HER contributions to
the BABY diary/ LA LECHE stuff, but didn't have the right to erase anyone
ELSES responses. For that matter, Jep was within HIS rights to erase HIS
entries in his divorce journal, as long as he didin't mess with whatever
anybody ELSE posted in response.

        Either way, it would have looked fairly wierd, post-cvensor, but it
would have been the right way, within ethics, to do it. THAT'S what i think.

        `Unless you, or anybody else, feels COMPELLED to demand I think
something else.

        (beleive me, that would get interesting. very, VERY interesting.)


#28 of 44 by tod on Thu Apr 15 16:24:56 2004:

echo ECHO ECHO


#29 of 44 by remmers on Thu Apr 15 19:30:41 2004:

Re #27: I agree and would liked to have seen the items restored, minus
any responses that their authors wanted taken out.  However, the
membership voted otherwise (more than once).


#30 of 44 by tod on Thu Apr 15 19:41:59 2004:

The membership vote for censorship then, right?


#31 of 44 by anderyn on Thu Apr 15 19:46:53 2004:

If that's what you're calling it, then, I believe they are.


#32 of 44 by tod on Thu Apr 15 20:25:27 2004:

Why is the blue "free speech" ribbon on the website if the membership is on
the record as condoning censorship?


#33 of 44 by cyklone on Thu Apr 15 21:33:28 2004:

Because some grexers prefer to pretend they have principles rather than vote
to support them.


#34 of 44 by soup on Fri Apr 16 01:13:13 2004:

Right, as long as 'they' don't call it for what it is, it remains legal.


#35 of 44 by albaugh on Fri Apr 16 16:52:44 2004:

The all-or-nothing crowd continues to bay away...


#36 of 44 by cyklone on Fri Apr 16 20:43:40 2004:

Maybe I'm missing your point, but how is supporting the right of an
individual to remove his or her posts while also maintaining that
individual should not be permitted to remove the posts of others "all or
nothing"? In fact, it is the most reasonable middle ground. 



#37 of 44 by tod on Fri Apr 16 22:01:33 2004:

Its a personality issue for these folks that are voting in favor of
censorship.  I can't imagine any other reason why.


#38 of 44 by cmcgee on Sat Apr 17 04:05:47 2004:

Limited imagination, I guess.


#39 of 44 by soup on Sat Apr 17 05:22:49 2004:

Bad guess.


#40 of 44 by tod on Sun Apr 18 15:33:56 2004:

re #38
Why don't you explain why folks are voting in favor of censorship. Enlighten
me.


#41 of 44 by jiffer on Wed Apr 28 16:10:09 2004:

re #40 Because it will shut people up. 


#42 of 44 by jp2 on Wed Apr 28 23:06:31 2004:

This response has been erased.



#43 of 44 by cyklone on Thu Apr 29 01:01:40 2004:

Voting against restoration will shut people up?!?!?! That's wishful thinking
if ever I've heard it.


#44 of 44 by jesuit on Wed May 17 02:15:01 2006:

TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: