response 1 of 16:

Feb 11 20:39 UTC 2001

If this were to come to a vote now, I would vote no on it.

We don't yet know what form this new law will take, if any, or how it will
apply to Grex.  We don't know if it will pass.  At this point, from what I
understand, it's a sound bite that somebody has gotten into some newspaper
articles, and still hasn't been introduced for consideration.

There are better ways to deal with proposed legislation than to wait for it
to pass and file suit against it.  Figure out what the proposed legislation
is, and if it really would cause problems.  Contact your legislators, to make
them aware of your concerns.  Write letters to newspapers and talk to
reporters, raising public awareness of the problems the legislation would
cause.  Filing a lawsuit should be a last resort.

We got into the Cyberspace v. Engler lawsuit because it was a last resort.
The legislation had passed, was about to go into effect, and contained
provisions that would have required us to shut down.  While the case isn't
over yet, it appears to have worked.  That's a good thing.  However, the
success there appears to have made some people here eager to try again,
apparrently jumping at the chance to file lawsuits without trying other ways
of dealing with the problems, and without first seeking legal advice.  That
not only makes no sense; it's dangerous.

response 3 of 16:

Feb 11 23:24 UTC 2001

Nowhere in the Grex bylaws is a membership vote required for anything other
than electing board members or changing the bylaws.  If the board really feels
that this comes up as too much of an emergency to allow for a membership vote,
the board can certainly take action without one.

Past Grex boards have often been cautions about taking controversial
positions, and have therefore pushed issues out to the membershi, either to
avoid making a decision or for validation of a decision.  However, if you're
arguing that this is a membership vote to allow the board members to do their
jobs as board members, rather than to set any specific course of action, it
seems rather pointless.  If, on the other hand, this is a vote to have the
members bless something in advance, before information is available on whether
it's needed or a good thing, so that the board doesn't have to take
responsibility for what it votes on, it strikes me as dangerous.

response 5 of 16:

Feb 12 19:22 UTC 2001

From the newspaper article, though, it sounded like the main complaint
was free *email* providers.  Grex doesn't require ID to send email.  So
it's not quite correct to say we require ID for Internet access; we
require ID for a subset of Internet protocols that happen to use a lot
of resources.

response 7 of 16:

Feb 12 20:31 UTC 2001

        Ain't seen the text of it yet, myself..

        If the idea is to beat up wingates and other systems that can't dns,
        letting morons out to the world, I don't see the problem.. The above
        would be clarifying something that admin is supposed to consider
        anyway.

response 9 of 16:

Feb 14 17:24 UTC 2001

I think it is critical for Grex to try to shape the wording of the bill BEFORE
it gets written.  It is much easier to get good legislation by having it
reflect our concerns as it is written, than to try to amend bad legislation
after it is put on the table.  

response 11 of 16:

Feb 15 07:25 UTC 2001

Yes, janc's email was a good start.  Even better would be to find a defender
in Lansing.  Chris Kolb might be a good person to start with.  I think he may
be more strongly in favor of free speech issues than John Hansen.  

response 13 of 16:

Feb 16 20:41 UTC 2001

if this proposed law is what it sounds like, if it passes, grex would
have to shut down newuser and start authenticating all new users and
all current users who arent members.  and keeping all authentication
paperwork on file.  And require grex to get rid of all existing 
postings in any conf, current or past, that came from non authenticated
users.  

as grex doesnt have a paid staff, this potential law has as much potential
of eventually forcing grex to shut down as the previous law did. grex
must protect itself.  Vote for the motion and be prepared to sue at once
should this become law.

response 15 of 16:

Feb 16 22:41 UTC 2001

Actually, very few bills are passed in Lansing that are worded exactly as
their sponsors first drafted them.  There is a process that a bill goes
through, both in committee and on the floor of the House and the Senate. 
During this process, in order to insure sufficient votes to pass the bill,
compromises and wording changes are made.  

To come in AFTER this process is complete (the bill has been passed by a
majority of both the HOuse and Senate) makes it almost impossible to make
changes.  The chance to affect the bill's wording and coverage is while it
is being written, not after it is law.