|
|
| Author |
Message |
pthomas
|
|
Question.
| 
Mar 10 21:45 UTC 2002 |
Does Grex have a policy of giving free memberships to those receiving
government assistance?
|
| 41 responses total. |
mary
|
|
response 1 of 41:
|
Mar 10 22:05 UTC 2002 |
No. We're pretty inexpensive and mostly what you get for
your membership is a warm fuzzy feeling for helping out
a worthwhile organization. Someone without the money to
give could get that same feeling by helping out in other
ways.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 2 of 41:
|
Mar 11 00:33 UTC 2002 |
So Grex isn't interested in being a good corporate citizen and providing
valuable Internet services to those who are obviously hurting and in need?
That doesn't seem very socially responsible to me.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 3 of 41:
|
Mar 11 00:43 UTC 2002 |
*grin* as far as I know, we don't have any valuable Internet services to
provide.
|
aruba
|
|
response 4 of 41:
|
Mar 11 00:46 UTC 2002 |
Grex does provide internet services, namely email and text-only web
access, to all comers. That is part of our charitable mission.
|
scott
|
|
response 5 of 41:
|
Mar 11 00:48 UTC 2002 |
We *are* a good corporate system. We don't lie about our taxes, and we don't
dump toxic waste into local rivers.
But also ditto on Mark's #4.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 6 of 41:
|
Mar 11 00:57 UTC 2002 |
But why should someone be denied the right of voting in Grex elections and
serving on the Board of Directors, simply because they have fallen into
the bad graces of capitalism? It smacks of an unjust "poll tax" intended
to keep low-income people from participating in Grex. Even though other
methods of helping Grex, this injustice being perpetrated on the very
people Grex is intended to serve no doubt keeps many low-income people
away.
|
jp2
|
|
response 7 of 41:
|
Mar 11 01:44 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
davel
|
|
response 8 of 41:
|
Mar 11 02:41 UTC 2002 |
Re last sentence of #6: Well, I for one doubt it pretty strongly. I'd be
really interested in some actual examples of low-income people who have
considered Grex & decided not to become involved for this reason. Mere
assertions that there are many aren't worth the electrons that they're
displayed with.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 9 of 41:
|
Mar 11 02:44 UTC 2002 |
#8: Injustice is injustice, regardless if your claim is true or false.
Your bourgeois prejudices are telling.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 10 of 41:
|
Mar 11 03:23 UTC 2002 |
re 4: Mark, I was questionning how "valuable" our services are. I
suspect that in a competitive market environment, our additional
"services" for members might not actually be worth $6 per month.
But heck, I hadn't calculated in the value of being able to vote here!
|
other
|
|
response 11 of 41:
|
Mar 11 05:59 UTC 2002 |
Ignore pthomas, he's trying to one-up jamie in shit-stirring, and all
he's doing is getting his mouth full of it.
|
davel
|
|
response 12 of 41:
|
Mar 11 14:20 UTC 2002 |
I know. I was just shovelling a bit more in. 8-{)]
|
aruba
|
|
response 13 of 41:
|
Mar 11 15:56 UTC 2002 |
Re #10: Right, I agree.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 14 of 41:
|
Mar 11 16:00 UTC 2002 |
I think it's amusing how Grex, when a way in which it might be socially
responsible and assist low-income persons is identified, responds with not
only inaction, but mockery. If it has a "charitable mission" at all, it's
difficult to see from this vantage point. More like a mission of securing
the control of the international bourgeoisie over the system by
systematically denying to those less fortunate the right to be active
participants in its decision-making process.
|
aruba
|
|
response 15 of 41:
|
Mar 11 16:08 UTC 2002 |
Have you got someone in mind, Phil?
|
pthomas
|
|
response 16 of 41:
|
Mar 11 20:23 UTC 2002 |
No. I am simply trying to point out how Grex currently is being used as a
tool for the perpetration of injustice.
|
krj
|
|
response 17 of 41:
|
Mar 11 20:37 UTC 2002 |
This item gets a bit more context from reading M-net policy conference
item 119.
When (over on M-net) Phil is proposing to change M-net policy to be
more like Grex's, and then here on Grex he's attacking the Grex
policy, one does start to wonder who is doing the mocking.
Phil probably doesn't realize that the M-net policy on free
"Membership"-class access dates from the days when M-net was positioning
itself as a discount ISP and getting good money for it. In particular,
as a M-net Patron or Member, you did not have to attack-dial the
modems and thus you could have reliable access to your e-mail.
Free Memberships for the impoverished was about services, not about
voting.
Also, my vague recollection is that in the Arbornet founding documents,
there is much more of an undertaking to provide computer access to
low-income people than Grex has ever undertaken. But that's a vague
memory from old Policy conference arguments.
|
jp2
|
|
response 18 of 41:
|
Mar 11 21:01 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 19 of 41:
|
Mar 11 21:53 UTC 2002 |
Actually, it's refreshing to see his glorius revolutionary call for the
bourgeoise to give the masses what they aren't clammering [? looks funny] for.
He reminds me of the HRP in its heyday.
|
other
|
|
response 20 of 41:
|
Mar 11 22:39 UTC 2002 |
clamoring
|
aruba
|
|
response 21 of 41:
|
Mar 11 22:52 UTC 2002 |
I think if someone made a good case that extending more services to
nonmembers would fill an important need, then the idea would get serious
attention here in coop.
I think Grex is and has always been interested in providing net access to
those who otherwise couldn't afford it. It's a fallacy, though, to say that
just because we don't the idea to its logical extreme, it isn't important.
|
jp2
|
|
response 22 of 41:
|
Mar 12 01:07 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 23 of 41:
|
Mar 12 03:38 UTC 2002 |
An interesting idea. Who would decide who gets the gift memberships?
|
pthomas
|
|
response 24 of 41:
|
Mar 12 04:04 UTC 2002 |
Presumably a photocopy of a welfare/unemployment/whatever check would
suffice.
|