response 109 of 236:

Dec 21 20:35 UTC 2006

Please try to keep board business on the records, too, folks. 

response 111 of 236:

Dec 21 23:45 UTC 2006

Re #109:  Of course.

response 113 of 236:

Dec 26 19:06 UTC 2006

I didn't see it, but probably deleted it by mistake.  My brain goes a bit
numb after the 500th or so deletion.

response 115 of 236:

Dec 26 21:03 UTC 2006

Oh, I don't know.  I think there are some pretty nice people who hang here 
and I tend to be able to get on most of the time.  We're not perfect but 
to listen to you it sounds like we should just set the hardware on fire 
and slit our wrists.

Sorry, but I think our biggest problem is a few problem users.  And they 
aren't that big of a deal.

response 117 of 236:

Dec 26 21:36 UTC 2006

It's not apathy.  

response 119 of 236:

Dec 27 00:14 UTC 2006

There's a few people who need a match lit up; the hardware is a lot more 
diligent, responsive, and visionary than those individuals.

If you mate with them, the shit tastes like caviar.

response 121 of 236:

Dec 27 02:33 UTC 2006

There's often a fine line between merely being comfortable with the
status quo- and demanding change merely for the sake of change.
Sometimes change is good, sometimes it's not necessary. 

For the layman it's sometimes hard to tell what side of the line some of
you "WE MUST CHANGE" types are on.

response 123 of 236:

Dec 27 06:21 UTC 2006

You don't "have to" change, but if Grex wants to move forward (and I'm 
seriously doubting that) then big changes have to take place, because the 
current processes have totally screwed the production line and it cannot 
keep good people enthusiastically particpating in staffing it (note, this 
does NOT include symbolicly staffing it, either).

If you think geez Grex must be great because of its balance sheet -- you're 
a moron.  Most of Grex's shallow bank account stays propped up because of 
large one-off occasional generous donors.  The question you should be 
asking is if Grex was financially sound (and it is not) is what services 
or give backs has/is it providing to the user/community base.  You only 
need to log onto freeshell.org and know half a degree or two about 
Unix/bbs/conferencing to see Grex is well over a decade behind and 
falling further and further behind every second.

It's sad enough that Grex is in the position it is in.  What's even more 
tragic is that supposedly responsible/intelligent/caring Grex-folk think 
it is all lovely and snuggly.

response 125 of 236:

Dec 27 15:04 UTC 2006

resp:123 I don't think Grex is great because of the balance sheet, I
think Grex is great because of the community of people here. I've always
thought that one of Grex's main purposes in being was the formation of
community.

Also- I DO think changes need to be made- however, your insulting and
negative mode of arguing doesn't convince me that the MAJOR CHANGES
you're suggesting are really the best course of action. 

I would like to see e-mail restored for all users, I would like to see
newuser reopened so we can GET newusers. The RAID array conversation is
an interesting one and I'd like to see that pursued. 

Merely slamming current staff and the members of Grex doesn't really
propel anything but ire forward, now does it?

response 127 of 236:

Dec 27 15:24 UTC 2006

What I get most out of grex is the community thing. It would be 
fabulous if we could get some new people here. Right now, of course, we 
do have some technical problems in that area what with newuser being 
turned off and such. But as Anne points out there are also some other 
problems that arent technical in nature and those are just as 
important. 

response 129 of 236:

Dec 27 20:28 UTC 2006

resp:128 Todd, are you suggesting that ALL change is good? That change
purely to change is what we should be striving for? As I stated- there
are times when change is needed, stagnation can be deadly, however, not
ALL change is good, or to the benefit of the system. If changes aren't
thought about we'll just end up trying to jump in 8 different directions
and blow through what little money Grex DOES have in the bank. 

response 131 of 236:

Dec 27 21:42 UTC 2006

I agree with slynne.  I don't get where people make the conceptual jump
from, ``there are problems'' to ``change for the sake of change.''  Clearly,
there are some things that need to be changed.  Among them:

1) Stagnation and apathy within the community.  I think this is hard to
guage for people *in* the community, but consider that the membership level
has nearly halved in the past few years.  It needs to be asked, ``why is
that?'' Do people perceive that as a problem?  If so, is it worth fixing?
If not, why not?  If peole are content with the community as it is, why
bother turning on newuser?  Is grex supposed to be about an *actively
growing* community, or the same group of people who have always been here?

2) The spam problem and email in general.  Grex email, when it works, has
some serious problems.  Come on, grex can do better than that.

3) The newuser thing and abuse.  Once again, grex can do better than that.

4) The various staff issues.  Points (2) and (3) can only be addressed with
the assistance of staff, but there aren't staff resources available to
address them in any real way.  I've outlined several ways in which I think
that at least the spam problem can be (partially) addressed (including:
making email opt-in, doing automated verification via paypal and
`sponsorship' of users by members to allow off-site email, putting in spam
and virus filtering), but there's no one on staff with the necessary
combination of time *and* experience to make any of those things happen.  Is
this something grex should try and correct?  If so, how?

Clearly some long-time users and contributers are disillusioned and
unsatisfied with the direction the system is taking.  Instead of just saying
that they're insulting and writing them off, perhaps a better course of
action is to ask *why* they're so frustrated and dissatisfied, and work from
there.