Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 354: Member initative: Free memberships for staffers

Entered by scholar on Fri Sep 1 19:33:41 2006:

I am a member in good standing, and this is a member inititative.

I propose that we grant all official staff members free memberships in
Cyberspace, Inc. for as long as they hold their positions.

Again, we'll need six people to endorse this proposal before we can vote on
it.

I, of course, endorse.
42 responses total.

#1 of 42 by scholar on Fri Sep 1 19:35:02 2006:

My reasoning here is that there shouldn't be people who work as hard as staff
does and yet don't have memberships.

There's currently at least one staff member in that position.


#2 of 42 by naftee on Fri Sep 1 19:39:14 2006:

i vote yez


#3 of 42 by mcnally on Fri Sep 1 19:44:15 2006:

 As "at least one staff" person who is not a member --  I suggest that 
 it's unnecessary to confer automatic memberships on staff and in some
 circumstances may actually be helpful to have staff people whose regular
 logins are not members in the staff group, as it makes it possible for
 them to spot file permission problems that might not be obvious to those
 with greater permission group membership.


#4 of 42 by nharmon on Fri Sep 1 19:50:09 2006:

I think staff can create pseudos and decide which are the members and
which aren't. That way they can vote in elections and hold office if
they wish.


#5 of 42 by scholar on Fri Sep 1 19:57:25 2006:

Re. 3:  Perhaps we could make it the decision of the staffer whether they get
a membership, and as nharmon suggests, which account of theirs gets it.

The new wording of the proposal is as follows:  All staff members of Grex may,
at their option, be granted a free membership in Cyberspace, Inc. for as long
as they remain on staff.  Any staff member receiving a free membership may
choose which of their accounts the membership belongs to.


#6 of 42 by tod on Fri Sep 1 21:36:18 2006:

I 2nd scholar's proposal


#7 of 42 by nharmon on Fri Sep 1 21:50:47 2006:

I am not a member, can I endorse scholar's proposal? If I can, I do.


#8 of 42 by scholar on Fri Sep 1 22:59:41 2006:

Only endorsements from members count toward the total needed to vote.


#9 of 42 by kingjon on Sat Sep 2 00:13:20 2006:

I'm not sure how I'd vote on the proposal, but I think it ought to go to a
member vote.



#10 of 42 by spooked on Sat Sep 2 02:32:30 2006:

Being one such staff member, there is not a lot that I can't do now that I 
would like to do from Grex given I was a member.




#11 of 42 by aruba on Sat Sep 2 23:33:42 2006:

If I thought this would get us more, or more active, staff members, I'd be 
for it.  But the point of having members pay dues, is that Grex needs 
money to pay its bills to keep running.  Giving out free memberships 
reduces that income.

But it's true that our scarcest resource at the moment is staff 
committment.  Is there anyone out there who would commit more time to Grex 
staff work if Grex gave them a complimentary membership in return?

One problem that would need to be worked out, to implement this proposal, 
is to delimit the time when people are "on staff".  As it is, people tend 
to be officially "on staff", in the sense of having root access, long 
after they stop actively doing things on Grex.


#12 of 42 by scholar on Sun Sep 3 05:17:30 2006:

I've considered those problems, but I really don't think they'd have much of
an effect on Cyberspace's income; people are on staff because they care about
Grex.  In my estimation, if this proposal passes, it won't be used to 'stiff'
Grex, but will be a decent thing to do in return for the work staff does for
us -- regardless of whether or not it results in increased work or not.


#13 of 42 by spooked on Sun Sep 3 11:18:27 2006:

If Grex moved to a more modern, flexible operating system you may see 
more staff members interested.  There are no guarantees, however!  

The fact that OpenBSD was pushed for its 'security hardness' has strained 
the interest of at least a few current and former staff members.  And, 
given that, we have seen it has hardly proven a fortress either!  Being 
a security expert, I can tell you for a fact that most security issues 
are the result of poor configuration and lack of diligent 
maintenance/monitoring --- something we have been lacking.  OpenBSD (and 
its push by a couple of former/current staff memebers) has lost not only 
the interest of others in terms of participation, but also limited our 
software base and chance of modernisation.




#14 of 42 by remmers on Sun Sep 3 16:40:07 2006:

<remmers dons his voteadm hat>

Since this is an official proposal item, I direct your attention to
Article 5 of the bylaws, posted at
http://cyberspace.org/local/grex/bylaws.html .
(Note: The version of the bylaws in item 2 of this conference is not
up-to-date with respect to voting procedures.)

The rules are: There's a discussion period of at least two weeks.  At
least 10% of the membership must endorse bringing the proposal to a vote
by so indicating in this item.  After two weeks, but not more than 30
days, have elapsed, the proposer may post a final wording of the
proposal.  Members have 48 hours thereafter to add or withdraw
endorsements.  If the proposal has the necessary number of endorsements
48 hours after the author posts a final wording and requests a vote, it
goes to an online vote via secret ballot.

If the author doesn't request a vote or the necessary number of
endorsements isn't obtained within 30 days of the posting of this item,
the proposal lapses and is not eligible to be voted on.

This proposal item was posted on September 1, so discussion extends at
least through September 14 and will either come to a vote or lapse no
later than September 30.

Assuming that the online member list is up to date, there are 53
members; hence 6 member endorsements are required to bring this to a
vote.  I count 3 so far: scholar, tod, kingjon.

<remmers removes voteadm hat>


#15 of 42 by steve on Sun Sep 3 17:11:44 2006:

  Re #13: That is an absurd statement.  Please start a new item in Garage
or coop, detailing your reasons giving your thoughts.  I want to hear them
in detail.


#16 of 42 by cross on Sun Sep 3 20:02:52 2006:

Why is it absurd?  It's been discussed numerous times, Steve.


#17 of 42 by naftee on Mon Sep 4 01:47:09 2006:

re 15 Thank you for that blanket statement, steVE.  Really.


#18 of 42 by steve on Mon Sep 4 04:13:19 2006:

   It's being "discussed" doesn't alter the fact that its absurd Dan.  But
I'd like to have an item where the anti-OpenBSD philosophy side of things
can be explained.  Starting with that it isn't "modern"...  However, that
all I want to say here about it.  I'm hoping Mic creates an item soon.


#19 of 42 by spooked on Mon Sep 4 12:43:35 2006:

You will be hoping for a long time.



#20 of 42 by steve on Mon Sep 4 14:06:56 2006:

   Well thats nice.


#21 of 42 by naftee on Mon Sep 4 15:59:26 2006:

Who's Mic?


#22 of 42 by cross on Mon Sep 4 22:15:49 2006:

Regarding #18; That you say it's absurd doesn't make it so.  And don't
misconstrue the idea that OpenBSD isn't appropriate for grex as an
"anti-OpenBSD philosophy."  You have a tendancy to take technical
disagreements as some sort of personal attack when they aren't, and I really
don't understand why.


#23 of 42 by steve on Tue Sep 5 01:00:00 2006:

 *I* do?  Hmmm.


#24 of 42 by cross on Tue Sep 5 01:32:53 2006:

Well, that's my impression, yes.


#25 of 42 by spooked on Tue Sep 5 21:13:15 2006:

Dan's right (that is my impression also).

OpenBSD is a relatively stable, cutdown OS -- however, I would not use 
it for anything other than for a bastion host firewall.  For building 
conferencing systems and/or systems offering services of any type, there 
are much more appropriate (and most importantly 
flexible/configurable/customisable) alternatives.







#26 of 42 by remmers on Wed Sep 6 13:27:12 2006:

Re #24, #25:  It's not my impression.  I've expressed disagreements with
STeve from time to time, and have seen others do so in various meetings,
but have yet to see him take it personally.

A look at the heading reminds me that this item is about free
memberships for staffers.  I think it's a bad idea.  It might be
reasonable to give staffers who need it outbound internet access
however, even though that's a perk normally restricted to members.


#27 of 42 by aruba on Wed Sep 6 14:55:48 2006:

We have in fact done that in the past for staffers who needed to test
internet services.


#28 of 42 by nharmon on Wed Sep 6 15:46:49 2006:

John, why do you think it is a bad idea?


#29 of 42 by cross on Thu Sep 7 23:44:48 2006:

Regarding #26; I've never meet Steve in real life, so I can't *really* say
(a lot of grexers who think I'm crusty would be - I think - pleasantly
surprised to meet me in real life.  A lot of the impression one gives online
revolves around written communication styles, but a lot of human interaction
is lost in writing).  But I digress....  I see Steve as very quick, and I
would go so far as to say too quick, to step in and speak up for things he's
pushed.  Like OpenBSD.  It's like he feels that he has a personal stake in
it.


#30 of 42 by naftee on Fri Sep 8 03:04:26 2006:

He may be quick, but I doubt that he's very fast. :(


#31 of 42 by scholar on Fri Sep 8 03:34:27 2006:

Fat's the truth.


#32 of 42 by other on Sat Sep 9 16:39:45 2006:

My impression is that STeve has a very protective attitude toward Grex, and
probably a deeper understanding of the threats it is faced with on a daily
basis than any other user of the system, and that his ideas of an appropriate
OS for Grex center around what is most likely to keep Grex functioning and
available for the users for the largest proportion of time in the face of those
threats. Frankly, all the flexibility and softfware base we want won't do any
good if system downtime goes up to the point where no one can use it anyway.
And as for free memberships for staff (rememeber? the actual TOPIC of this
item...), there is no reason I can think of that this would be a valuable
change to make. Staff have easy access to all the benefits of membership, and
the requirements of membership (id verification, evidence of some commitement
to the idea of supporting Grex) are useful indicators of the potential of an
individual to be a responsible contributor to the system rather than a powerful
abuser. (At this point, I suspect some people will bring up Valerie as a
counterpoint, so I'll say that though I do not approve of what she did when she
left, her contributions up to that point were undeniable and significant.)


#33 of 42 by tod on Sun Sep 10 02:05:18 2006:

re #32
I don't dispute the intentions of staff.  I do question the lack of interest
and respect given to fresh volunteers, though.


#34 of 42 by other on Sun Sep 10 06:12:18 2006:

It's a thankless job, and no non-financial compensation can really
change that.  In addition, selecting people to entrust to manage the
system is a really daunting challenge.  The system lies or dies on the
good will of the user base and a bad choice can have really damaging
effects.

We're not a large enough player in the internet world to attract people
for prestige reasons, and our complete non-commerciality limits the
resources we have available to lure good people by other means.

The status quo may not be ideal, but there just aren't many options
available, especially without compromising some fundamental aspect of
Grex's present character.


#35 of 42 by cross on Wed Sep 13 22:30:24 2006:

I think the status quo *is* the problem.  People aren't motivated to join
staff because it's perceived (rightfully so) as elitist and cliche-ish, with
certain members being "chosen" over certain others.  That said, I'd work on
staff again if needed, but I really think grex needs to do a better job of
self-promotion and changing its image to attract new blood.


#36 of 42 by steve on Thu Sep 14 03:33:27 2006:

   No Dan, I really don't think I have a "personal" stake in the usage
of OpenBSD, but Eric is quite right that I feel protective of Grex.  I
see and deal with the vandals that attack the system, and while I have
said before that I think FreeBSD is a very good operating system, I feel
that OpenBSD offers more in terms of security.  Thanks Eric for your
comments.


#37 of 42 by cross on Thu Sep 14 11:39:52 2006:

Could you expand on that, Steve?  Hopefully in some sort of quantifiable
manner?  Is that just your intuition, or do you have data to back that up?

I saw many of the script kiddies who tried to crack grex's security, too. 
Some of them were successful (the tty attack).  I don't think that would have
worked under FreeBSD, but it certainly did on OpenBSD.  Did anyone ever
investigate *where* that attack came from?  Can you conceed that another
system might handle things better, and if not, why not?


#38 of 42 by steve on Thu Sep 14 16:43:58 2006:

   That last question can't be answered completely and you know it. If
some horrid new problem was discovered in OpenBSD and not the other BSDs
then we could have a problem.  As for the specifics of the tty problem,
I'm not sure about Free/NetBSD either--it definitely was a problem here
and I should still look into that more.

   I could reverse the question at the beginning of your post and ask
you why OpenBSD is *less* secure.  Not less good in terms of things
that you've mentioned (smp  support, kernel threads, ...), but in specific
terms of security.  We're getting into philosphy here, and I'm not
certain that anything I say is going to have any effect your thoughts,
at all, and take time that I could be spending on other grex stuff.
But I'm a sucker and will probably try to come up with stuff as I
can (taking a break at work at the moment).


#39 of 42 by cross on Thu Sep 14 17:26:48 2006:

I think that OpenBSD and FreeBSD are roughly comparable in terms of security.
Certainly, OpenBSD is better at self-promotion in this regard, but that's just
promotion, and may or may not reflect reality.

I would posit that OpenBSD's tendancy to be less reliable makes it less
appropriate for grex, versus OpenBSD that is used in this sort of environment
more often (there were a number of BBS's in China running on FreeBSD:
thousands of interactive users using them at a time).  I'd say that being less
reliable really is being less secure in a way.

My data is that grex has crashed multiple times due to bugs in OpenBSD, the
tty problem, the attacks against the system logger, and other things just
not working as advertised.


#40 of 42 by remmers on Fri Sep 15 16:44:03 2006:

<remmers dons voteadm hat>
The minimum two-week discussion period for this proposal has passed, so 
scholar may post final wording anytime and request a vote anytime between 
now and September 30.  To be voted on, at least 10% of the membership (= 6 
members at current levels) must within 48 hours after such posting endorse 
bringing the proposal to a vote.  If I counted correctly, there are 3 
endorsements at this time.
<hat off>


#41 of 42 by scholar on Sat Sep 16 03:52:16 2006:

<scholar dons proposer hat>

Here's the final proposal:

All staff members of Grex may,
 at their option, be granted a free membership in Cyberspace, Inc. for as long
 as they remain on staff.  Any staff member receiving a free membership may
 choose which of their accounts the membership belongs to.


The formatting is a bit crummy, but I'd like to see three more people endorse
bringing this to vote so we can see what the membership thinks of it.

<hat off>


#42 of 42 by naftee on Sat Sep 16 23:44:02 2006:

silly hats only, please


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: