Proposal for Conference Access Policy

Mar 7 20:16 UTC 1997

I move that Grex adopt a conference access policy as follows:

All conferences are open to all users who have a Grex login id. 

Existing conferences may decide whether to allow people who do not
have Grex login ids to read the conference. People who do not have Grex
login ids are considered unregistered readers.  Unregistered readers may
not post or otherwise participate in any conference.  

All conferences created after the adoption of this policy must be open to
unregistered readers.  

response 2 of 67:

Mar 7 20:40 UTC 1997

        Still makes more sense to either mod the program, or write a 
        new program using the current dataformat in which the authors
        themselves make the judgement call <shrug>

        The proposal still seems to suggest that the author is at the
        mercy of whatever PTB.. Pretty stupid precedent for a system like
        Grex that continually brays about freedom and rights..

response 4 of 67:

Mar 7 21:29 UTC 1997

I also think there should be a rule saying no vote proposals shall be made
during a period when another vote on the same issue is being diswcussed or
takng place.  Proposals should be fully vetted on their merits, and we dont
need members trying to torpedo other members proposals with proposals of their
own, before the former has even been voted on.  This isnt just because of this
item, but Mary torpedoed Valeries proposal by making her own proposal
deliberately after Valeries vote had started.  Mary could have made her
proposal at any time but waitedspecifically for the first vote to start.  
I agreed with Mary's proposal, and in a way was glad it helped defeat
Valerie's, but that still doesnt excuse the timing.

response 6 of 67:

Mar 7 23:34 UTC 1997

Well, *I'd* vote yes on this one.  >8)

response 8 of 67:

Mar 8 00:48 UTC 1997

I'll vote for it in a heartbeat!
And I'll encourage everyone else to, also.
Now, Mary, here's a Proposal that clearly defines, in its own terms, what it
wants to do. Take notes, hon.

response 12 of 67:

Mar 8 02:46 UTC 1997

The flaws in Valerie's proposal still hold for this one:

1. What to do about linking?
2. Who decides a conf is open or closed?  fw's? do we have elections  in
each conf?
3. what about confs with no fw's or in-abstebntia fw's?


IN addition, I think fututure fw's of future confs might resent that
current confs were given special treatment and get these permanent special
priviledges to remain closed while they have to be open.  It sets up an
environment whre some confs are seen or could be seen as more special than
others.  I think this is a REALLY BAD   proposal.  Worse realy than
Valeries because at least she was prooposing that all confs be treated the
same.

response 14 of 67:

Mar 8 04:11 UTC 1997

<sigh> 
I am amending my propsal to specificly forbid linking items between
conferences that allow unregistered reading, and those that do not allow
it.  No one should have to keep track of which items in a conference that
nominally does not allow unregistered reading, might have been linked to
one that does. 

I move that Grex adopt a conference access policy as follows: 

All conferences are open to all users who have a Grex login id.

Existing conferences may decide whether to allow people who do not
have Grex login ids to read the conference. People who do not have Grex
login ids are considered unregistered readers.  Unregistered readers may
not post or otherwise participate in any conference.

No items may be linked between conferences that allow unregistered reading
and conferences that do not allow unregistered reading. Items and
responses in conferences that allow unregistered reading may be copied to
conferences that do not allow unregistered reading. Items and responses
MAY NOT BE COPIED from conferences that do not allow unregistered reading. 

All conferences created after the adoption of this policy must be open to 
unregistered readers.

response 18 of 67:

Mar 8 16:59 UTC 1997

cmcmcgee, your new wording doesnt say *how* restrictons against linking willl
be enforced?


To my way of thinking, if Valerie wants this proposal topass, she should have
maintained her yes vote on mary's.  Why?  Because if mary's passes, then
either way we have unregistered reading and those who are unalterably opposed
to having it in anyform will not have incentive to vote on follow up votes.
if mary'svote fails, theyw ill still see the opportunity to stop unregistered
reading altogether and will subsequentlyvote against this proposal as they
voted agaisnt valerie';s.  Bychanging her yes to a no on mary's, she is
defeating her own purpose.

prediction:  if Mary's vote passes I think this will pass, if Mary's vote
fails, I think this will also fail and we wont have unregistered reading at
all.

response 20 of 67:

Mar 8 18:08 UTC 1997

plus once a conf decides, it that decisin permanenent?  Or do confs who
ddecide to be closed have the optionof changing their accesspolicycontinuously
until the end of time?

response 22 of 67:

Mar 9 02:26 UTC 1997

Marys proposal was simple...all confs are open, no contingincies, no this conf
open and this closed, and this group decides or that group decides, or this
fw or that fw...mary's proposal was basic.  I dont see your argument.

response 24 of 67:

Mar 10 00:34 UTC 1997

Question: How does one log in anonymously to GREX? The web, sure... But didn't
we vote on that already?