|
Grex > Coop9 > #27: Motion: To allow anonymous reading via Backtalk | |
|
| Author |
Message |
popcorn
|
|
Motion: To allow anonymous reading via Backtalk
| 
Dec 18 07:05 UTC 1996 |
Grex's bylaws say that any member of Grex can change how the system works by
entering an item in co-op. This item is to propose such a change. Here is
the text of the section of the bylaws that explains the procedure we are
following in this item:
ARTICLE 5: VOTING PROCEDURES
a. Any member of Grex may make a motion by entering it as the
text of a discussion item in a computer conference on Grex
designated for this purpose. The item is then used for
discussion of the motion. All Grex users may participate in
the discussion. No action on the motion is taken for two
weeks. At the end of two weeks, the author may then submit a
final version for a vote by the membership. The vote is
conducted on-line over a period of ten days.
Here is the text of the motion. Please offer suggestions, wording
clarifications, etc.
Motion: To allow anonymous reading of all public conferences on Grex via
Backtalk.
|
| 624 responses total. |
popcorn
|
|
response 1 of 624:
|
Dec 18 07:08 UTC 1996 |
(I once was really strongly in favor of allowing anonymous reading via
Backtalk. I'm not feeling very fervent about either side of the issue
anymore. But I did say I'd propose a membership vote here so that
all the Grex members can decide the issue. So, this item is that membership
vote.)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 2 of 624:
|
Dec 18 07:13 UTC 1996 |
I suggest wording it as "Anonymous reading of all public conferences on Grex
via Backtalk is permitted."
|
popcorn
|
|
response 3 of 624:
|
Dec 18 07:45 UTC 1996 |
Sounds fine to me.
|
davel
|
|
response 4 of 624:
|
Dec 18 11:29 UTC 1996 |
Why limit it to Backtalk? I know, that's the only means at present, but just
wait ...
|
remmers
|
|
response 5 of 624:
|
Dec 18 12:26 UTC 1996 |
More generic wording: "Anonymous reading of all public conferences on Grex via
the World Wide Web is permitted." That would cover Backtalk and any web-reader
software that would come along in the future.
I favor this proposal. It's an extension to the web of the anonymous reading
(since we don't verify users) that we already allow via telnet and dialup.
|
davel
|
|
response 6 of 624:
|
Dec 18 14:21 UTC 1996 |
I favor it, too. Anyone who can dial in or telnet in can read any conference,
anonymously even beyond the question of verification: they can join a
conference but choose "observe" instead of "join" at the
join-or-pass(-or-whatever) prompt, and there is no participation file or
anything else to give anyone a clue that they've ever read the conference -
not even for an instant. Given that *and* completely open, unverified
accounts, I don't see that limiting reading through the web buys anyone
anything at all - unless the goal is just to reduce access to Grex through
the web. It would be pretty hard to have more anonymity than we already have.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 7 of 624:
|
Dec 18 15:18 UTC 1996 |
Good point John. Let's consider the wording in #5 to be the latest version.
|
remmers
|
|
response 8 of 624:
|
Dec 18 15:54 UTC 1996 |
(Sorry about the formatting of #5. I was responding via
Backtalk, and my browser apparently didn't send along
end-of-line records corresponding to places where it did word
wrap.)
|
kerouac
|
|
response 9 of 624:
|
Dec 18 17:19 UTC 1996 |
When this was discussed at the board meeting, wasnt it coupled with
Selena's proposal that fw's be determined to have the right to decide
whether their confs are offered through backtalk or any new interface
other than the one it was created in.? I believe the argument was that
if an fw doesnt like or use or have the ability to use backtalk or
any new interface, that it should be his/her prerogative of whether their
conf is offered by that method.
|
scott
|
|
response 10 of 624:
|
Dec 18 17:26 UTC 1996 |
It was thrown back to be argued about on-line more. The Board didn't make
any action on this subject.
|