response 100 of 280:

Feb 26 07:41 UTC 1996

Neither fw touched the bulletin - ask someone else. The logout screen
was created by "someone else, not a fw" and installed by application
simply, of "raw power." Ask someone else. 
  
Even as there was this "intrusion," the graphic seemed somewhat worthy
of visibility so i put it as the logout. That would seem to placate
whomever was the "intruder," and also not insult the creator - as has
been done in the past by other (maybe the same) intruder.
  
The legitimate (fw created) login screen incorporates changes that
were suggested and text that was provided as "suggested alternatives."
  
nephi and i (and the non-hostile contributors) had this plan when we 
first started out. It has been completed. The compromises, good ones
i might add, have been accomplished within nephi's and my vision of
direction. 
  
Nothing is multiplying, there is an intruder mucking about - root(s) can
discuss the intruder in the "security" section of the staff conference.
  
That's where intruders and security are discussed, properly.
 
It's rather a shame that "instant gratification" wasn't the immediate
result of the proto-login screen. But it was a proto-login screen and
that was certainly not any sort of secret or cabal in operation.
  
Neither nephi nor i had any grandious ego tied up in the proto-screen
so the flung insults were ignored and we just got to work on the
end product. nephi reacted rather naturally to the vitriol; he certainly
thought grex was more civilized than that. 
  
I was kinda surprised, frankly, because *i* thought grex was a friendlier
place than that. The same venom could (quite UN-productively) be returned
based on much more critical matters facing grex. But it won't be. Tha's
not a game *i* play - i leave it in the snake pit where it belongs.
  
The intruder/interloper/usurper can kill the bulletin since that was
the source, not the fw's. 

response 102 of 280:

Feb 27 00:56 UTC 1996

 hmm...other than the fw's , I take it that the only others who could
have changed the logout screen (without authorization) would be
someone with root, which limits the possible culprits.

response 104 of 280:

Feb 27 05:01 UTC 1996

   Unless someone has a back-door way to become root.  Getting the
root password is difficult.  Not impossible, but difficult.  Thats
why 'back-door' ways of getting a "root shell" are so scary on any
UNIX system.

   TS, I need some clarification here: at one point the login file
had the long intro banner removed, and later it was added again.
Did you re-add the login intro to the login file?

response 106 of 280:

Feb 27 10:46 UTC 1996

<Erinn wonders why this is so important-- am I just not getting something
here?>

response 108 of 280:

Feb 28 01:12 UTC 1996

  I just think it was unconsciounable for tsty and nephi to completely
ignore stated sentiments of the users of this conf, and insist they 
wont do anything without a Board vote.  If they think that in their
capacity as fw's they have to be responsive ONLY to the board, I dont
think they have a proper view of fair witnessing.  If thats the case,
they should step aside and let others be the fw's.  Fair witnesses
dont own confs and the users of the confs arent their guests.  

   Unfortunately, this isnt the first instance I've seen of fw's being
too possessive of their confs.  Maybe what this says is that cfadmin 
should come up with an !fw file that clearly states the role, purpose
and responsibilities of fair witnesses in the picospan environment.  Or
maybe cfadmin believes each conf should set their own guidelines for
what they want their fw's to be doing.  I'm not sure which would be the
best policy, but its obvious which would be the least confusing.

response 110 of 280:

Feb 28 02:19 UTC 1996

I don't believe that either FWs "insists" that the board order them to do
anything. yes, nephi stated that if the board asked him to change it, he
would. My guess is that his statement was made in the heat of the moment,
in the face of excessively hostile and/or negative reaction to what he
and TS probably thought was a good idea. I think it would take a hell
of a lot of ego to hold either nephi or TS to that statement. I also
personally feel that doing so would be a unnecessarily tragic mistake.

I really don't think that TS or nephi are exercising all that much
control over the coop conference. Neither of them have even approached
my own "Stupid FW Tricks." Neither are scribbling responses. Neither
are killing off items indiscriminately.

What they seem to be doing, at least as the view is from here, is invite
input, and work from there. Yes, there's been rhetoric that doesn't 
suggest that, but look at the actions instead of the ASCII.

I really hope they haven't started to turn a deaf ear because of the
gratutious malice that seems to have been tied into what should have
been a simple complaint. Life is too short to hold a grudge over something
as simple and silly as this.

response 112 of 280:

Feb 28 02:55 UTC 1996

Still hasn't been changed? yoo-hoo... Richard, I know you have a brain,
and you can pribly discern even subtle changes. Take another look.

Also, there's nothing in the bulletin right now, although the rumor was
that the original text had been moved there. What's the big deal now?

response 114 of 280:

Feb 28 04:27 UTC 1996

  It isn't a 'big deal' but it is an aggravating one, that of
having the text blasted at you every time you get here.  But
worse is the lack of response from the FW's in general.  Coop
is not a place for an active FW--there might not be many others
on Grex where the FW should step into the background, but this
is one of them.  The participants can carry on, and indeed have
for four years now.

  As I have said before I am not happy about the situation.  It
really smacks of "I-know-what-I'm-doing-and-will-shove-it-down-
your-mouth" which is really ironic coming from TS.

  The changes that you refer to Carson, aren't really changes
in a real sense of the word: they're fine tuning.  I don't
care exactly *what* they say, but how often they say it.  There
is no reason to keep a philosophical statement in the login
screen--and I don't care *what* it says.  It belongs in the
bulletin so people don't have to see it so often.

   TS and Nephi: would you please publically say why, in the
face of large(?) amounts of negative responses, and some smaller
amount of neutral responses you haven't explained your actions?

   A while ago I said  "TS and Naphi, are you out of "sponge"
mode yet?".  That is still a valid question.

   I'm still not sure of the details you are saying, TS about
someone with root powers changing any of the coop config
files.  I'll state right now that I didn't.

response 116 of 280:

Feb 28 05:43 UTC 1996

   Well, considering that the login screen changes were rather
extremely different from what we've had before, I think we're
seeing the fine tuning of of something that was a major change.

response 118 of 280:

Mar 1 09:35 UTC 1996

the bulletin file is now zeroed. I guess "thankxx" to whomever zeroed
it, but it was NOT a fw. It still would be "interesting" to discover
who (not a fw) created the bulletin inthe first place, and then who
(not a fw) decided to zero it. If the fw's decide to put someting
in the bulletin file, we will. Anyone else who wants to put someting
nt he bulletin file ... can certainly request it - neither one of
us is un-approachable and baff *certainly* knows how to find (at least)
me in a few seconds. 
 
AS for the rest of the intrusion, i would highly, highly doubt that
someone "broke" root. Other possibilities might be consdiered.
 

response 120 of 280:

Mar 1 20:50 UTC 1996

right STeve, roots messing with login screens and other people's
artwork has been done before. And Grex lost a few memberships as a
DIRECT RESULT of "root abuse." Hell, tehre wasn't even an apology
offerred in public OR in private. Frankly, i wouldn't have expected
anything so slimey to be acknowledged in public, but several of "us"
know the parties involved. 
  
This event did not *have* to be done by a root though, who else is
eligible?
  
Oh, with the permission of the creator of the ascii-art logout screen,
i have edited out the nice work. The creator simply created the work.
Who found out about it, and how is part of a question. Who (non-fw)
then took that art, without the creator's permission, and who then
stomped his/her hob-nailed boot on the login screen is the other part
of the question. I know when - youwant email?
 

response 122 of 280:

Mar 2 06:05 UTC 1996

I think Mary's advice is worth considering. I suspect it is too late to do
any good here. There is ill feeling building over the fact that the FWs are
not responding to the needs of the coop community. Avoiding ill feeling seems
to be something that we already missed our opportunity for.

Please remove the login screen. It annoys practically everybody.
No one is reading it for what it says any more, we are only seeing it for what
it stands for. FW obstinance.

response 124 of 280:

Mar 2 23:14 UTC 1996

  I think coop and agora don't require the fw's to drive the conference,
as others often do, so rotating isnt a bad idea.  Again I just think that
tsty and nephi were out of line in going over the heads of cfadmin and 
the users of this conference and asking the board to get involved.  This
just seemed to be a case of not wanting to make a change, and trying to
invoke as much bureacracy as possible to avoid making the change.