Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 95: Why?

Entered by polytarp on Sun Jan 25 23:37:26 2004:

Why was the classic account killed?
16 responses total.
#1 of 16 by gelinas on Sun Jan 25 23:43:02 2004:

Why didn't you re-use your "classics" item to ask the question?  For that
matter, why are you bothering to ask?  You know quite well why it was
killed:  To (try to) prevent your continued vandalism.

#2 of 16 by polytarp on Sun Jan 25 23:47:18 2004:

This response has been erased.


#3 of 16 by polytarp on Sun Jan 25 23:50:17 2004:

Re. 1.  I didn't reuse my classics item simple because I can't reuse my
classics account.  It's a principles thing.

Now, I bother to ask because I don't understand what's wrong with it.  As I
understand it, Grex allows users to enter items.  That's all I was doing; and
I wasn't entering duplicates or anything nasty like that.  Additionally, I
wasn't entering items at any tremendous pace; surely, Grex can handle an item
being entered every five minutes without being overburdened.

This is clearly yet another case of censorship, and I'm the only one who's
incurred any vandalism under it.

#4 of 16 by cyklone on Mon Jan 26 00:41:45 2004:

When it's a system problem, it's not probably not a censorship issue. If
grex allowed similarly large items posted by other users but not those
posted by you, then it would be a censorship issue.

#5 of 16 by polytarp on Mon Jan 26 00:44:44 2004:

That doesn't make any sense; it's like saying it wouldn't be a censorship
issue if Grex was deleting posts with certain opinions, as long as it was
doing it to all people who posted them.

#6 of 16 by cyklone on Mon Jan 26 00:50:50 2004:

Opinions are not a system problem. Large files are.

#7 of 16 by polytarp on Mon Jan 26 00:54:11 2004:

Non-sense.

#8 of 16 by naftee on Mon Jan 26 01:04:18 2004:

Rubbish.

#9 of 16 by polytarp on Mon Jan 26 01:06:54 2004:

Malarky.

#10 of 16 by scott on Mon Jan 26 02:52:46 2004:

Please don't feed the troll, cyklone.

#11 of 16 by kip on Mon Jan 26 03:03:04 2004:

So most Grexers wouldn't be offended if I simply took care of what I perceive
to be vandalism or childish behavior and then simply ignored the complaints
that followed from said cleanup?

Hmmm, I might have to try that.

#12 of 16 by gelinas on Mon Jan 26 03:18:49 2004:

I'm not sure what you mean by "simply ignored the complaints", kip.
Would you mind expanding upon your comment?

#13 of 16 by kip on Mon Jan 26 06:13:21 2004:

I'm sorry, on my own second reading, I see that I wasn't very clear there.

I was suggesting that after vandalism was dealt with, should I simply ignore
the complaints of the vandals that I'm depriving them of whatever it is they
feel I took by cleaning up after them.

Certainly if they were other complaints from others about my action, I would
not ignore them.

#14 of 16 by gelinas on Mon Jan 26 11:47:59 2004:

If the 'vandal' asks a question, as in 0 above, it should be answered, as
in 1 above.  General railing and wailing should be handled as you see fit.

#15 of 16 by kip on Mon Jan 26 12:28:07 2004:

Fair enough, that seems reasonable.  I'll try that out and see what happens.

#16 of 16 by jesuit on Wed May 17 02:14:47 2006:

TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE

There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: