|
Grex > Coop > #278: Grex Town Hall -- How do we move forward? |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 357 responses total. |
keesan
|
|
response 1 of 357:
| 
Jun 15 13:31 UTC 2010 |
What is happening with the two phone lines?
|
denise
|
|
response 2 of 357:
|
Jun 15 13:39 UTC 2010 |
One of them will be discontinued.
|
kentn
|
|
response 3 of 357:
|
Jun 15 14:06 UTC 2010 |
And we'll monitor the remaining one to see how much it gets used.
|
kentn
|
|
response 4 of 357:
|
Jun 15 14:08 UTC 2010 |
BTW, Board meeting minutes, which document this decision on phone
lines are available in the coop conference in item 279.
|
richard
|
|
response 5 of 357:
|
Jun 16 05:38 UTC 2010 |
I want Grex to attract new members, which it is not doing and has not
been doing since the validation patch was put in eliminating a fully
open newuser. Today's internet has far too many things to do for most
people to have the patience to wait around for some staff member to
'validate' them and confer that they are good enough to participate here.
The validation patch should be removed and then Grex needs to discuss
ways it can publicize itself and attract more people here. Grex needs
to use some of its funds to let people know its around and its cool. I
recall some years ago Grex used to sponsor a movie night at one of the
outdoor movie things they had in A2, even gave out keychains or pins or
something there one year. Grex can also better publicize itself through
youtube, facebook, twitter .etc
|
lar
|
|
response 6 of 357:
|
Jun 16 07:19 UTC 2010 |
set up an IRC server
set up a newsgroup server
set up a gopher server
these retro services will attract the only people who really care about
unix places like this anyway. Hippy nerds chowing down on granola and
trail mix.
|
tod
|
|
response 7 of 357:
|
Jun 16 17:22 UTC 2010 |
re #6
I would only be for IRC if people are forced to telnet to port 6669 and
use it manually..none of that remote mIrc or BitchX GUI client stuff.
Newsgroup and IRC is all about p2p file xfer anymore...waste of bandwidth.
|
kentn
|
|
response 8 of 357:
|
Jun 16 19:10 UTC 2010 |
Maybe gopher will make a comeback? Hmmm...
The idea of a retro system has been tossed around a bit. It is one
way to go and one thing we can continue to do (text conferencing, for
example). We could do more retro things, of course. Along this line,
installing more programming languages, debuggers, databases, and other
apps that can be run or used at the command line might attract some new
users (even if they aren't "retro").
GUI apps tend to use too many system resources for a small multi-user
system. Perhaps if we got a better system...
Becoming a member of Grex gets you access to more features, like
outgoing access. BitchX and ircII are available, for example, if you
are a verified (not validated) member. These are command line programs.
I don't know that being only a retro system will attract a large
community of new users willing to become members, though. We're more
likely to attract new users with newer means of communication or at
least a fresher interface to the conferences and email. And of course,
we'd need a more open new user policy than what we have now. The
latter assumes the system can be set up so that juvenile twits don't
cause frequent issues. Being destructive is so much easier than being
constructive...
Not everyone wants to use Facebook or Myspace or Twitter.
|
tsty
|
|
response 9 of 357:
|
Jun 16 19:13 UTC 2010 |
the towonhall idea is a goo done and if we could get non-local partipsipation
it wold be even better.
the meeting wold hae to be a tad more controlled/discipliend than just
a ppl-ftf-gathering thogh.
woth tonsters confernce call facility, and one of my amps, the
assemble multitude could partipsipate from .. oh,,,, paki/afgh/engl/japan
or wherever.
thoughts?
|
richard
|
|
response 10 of 357:
|
Jun 16 19:56 UTC 2010 |
Grex needs to start allowing graphics in its conferencing posts.
Everyone who blogs or conferences these days uses pictures and such.
In addition backtalk needs to be changed to start allowing posts to be
edited. In most other places you post on the internet, you are given
the chance to retroactively edit your entries at least for a short
period after posting if you choose. Here you make a typo or a mistake
in a post you have to delete the whole thing.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 11 of 357:
|
Jun 16 20:08 UTC 2010 |
Allowing graphics in the conferences? Well, I guess 4chan.org is pretty
popular too.
|
bellstar
|
|
response 12 of 357:
|
Jun 16 22:34 UTC 2010 |
Sadly, "/b/ isn't your personal army." /g/, however, can promise users to
break new ground in raid organization and allow libertarian militias to roam
> Here at Grex, Everybody Gets Their Own Personal Army [of One]
|
bellstar
|
|
response 13 of 357:
|
Jun 16 22:35 UTC 2010 |
Ow sh*t I forgot the ;-)
|
kentn
|
|
response 14 of 357:
|
Jun 16 23:55 UTC 2010 |
I like the idea of editing posts. If we had someone who could change
backtalk reliably, we'd be in business for that as long as there were no
policy reason against editing (I'd assume if each user owns their own
responses such that they could delete them, they should also be able to
edit them). I've seen on some systems where a note is added to the post
to indicate when it was edited so that readers know it has been changed.
I'm not sure about the graphics. It would be neat in some respects,
but as soon as someone starts posting images that will get Grex in
trouble with the law, then we'd need to start moderating responses,
which doesn't sound good.
|
keesan
|
|
response 15 of 357:
|
Jun 17 00:06 UTC 2010 |
Can you already link to images at other sites?
|
kentn
|
|
response 16 of 357:
|
Jun 17 00:15 UTC 2010 |
Obviously, you can cut and paste links to other sites in a conference
response but the conferencing software doesn't interpret those links to,
say, display an image.
|
tod
|
|
response 17 of 357:
|
Jun 17 00:21 UTC 2010 |
re #14
I like the idea of editing posts.
That's called CENSORSHIP.
|
slynne
|
|
response 18 of 357:
|
Jun 17 01:01 UTC 2010 |
The only issue I can see with allowing users to edit their previous
posts is that sooner or later some troublemaker is going to go edit it
their posts in such a way as to make it seem like responses to the
original post were in response to the original post.
I might enter an item entitled 'HOw many joints have you smoked this
year?' and most everyone will say zero. Then I could change it to 'How
many times have you had sex this year?' har har. But people could make
others look dumb. The only solution would be to cut and paste the
original post into the response which opens up a whole nuther can of
worms.
|
kentn
|
|
response 19 of 357:
|
Jun 17 01:26 UTC 2010 |
Hmm...editing your own words? I guess deleting your response is
censorship then? Censorship is done by others to your words, not by you
to your own words (unless you want to call it self-censorship, but as
the owner of your own words you can do what you want with them).
What should we do then? Put back all the posts that people deleted
because they were owner?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 20 of 357:
|
Jun 17 02:08 UTC 2010 |
re 17: Maybe some of us like censorship you hippy!
|
kentn
|
|
response 21 of 357:
|
Jun 17 02:45 UTC 2010 |
This response has been erased.
|
kentn
|
|
response 22 of 357:
|
Jun 17 02:51 UTC 2010 |
See? I need to edit #21. I guess I should delete it and enter it
again. What a pain.
|
kentn
|
|
response 23 of 357:
|
Jun 17 03:02 UTC 2010 |
The thing is, if you can delete your own response and enter it again
in edited form, then you've well...edited it. Why not make that one
step instead of two?
|
slynne
|
|
response 24 of 357:
|
Jun 17 03:40 UTC 2010 |
When you do it that way, it is very clear which responses occurred
before the edit and which after.
|
tod
|
|
response 25 of 357:
|
Jun 17 04:16 UTC 2010 |
re #20
Once the censors are allow then all tha twill be left ar Roman tax cllecorsz!
|