response 151 of 229:

Aug 4 22:00 UTC 1996

I agree with you completely Steve (#147).  We do need to push memberships
harder than we have been.  And we do need more innovative fundraising efforts.

My point, really, is that we haven't even scratched the potential for people
who would support us with our current philosophy, and until we do, I think
it's silly to change our philosophy to appeal to a different market every
week.  At some point, we would cease to be GREX and would be just another
tiny, barely making it ISP on the by-ways of cyberspace.

If it turns out that some of our very vocal users are right, that we would
do better serving our purpose with a "philosophy change", then in the long
run, I'm sure we'll try that.  But not before we've given a real shot at our
founding philosophy.

Yeah, we need more members...but I don't think it's true that we're desperate
for members.  Numbers were down for a while ... but they have always cycled
and there's no reason to think that won't continue.  We really do need to
promote membership!  But why not start with the people who already support
what we stand for rather than seeking out the market that says that it'll
support us if we change to meet their wishes?  Obviously we're just right for
someone -- this place is packed!

response 153 of 229:

Aug 5 02:26 UTC 1996

The philosophy of GREX includes being a good net neighbor.  That requires that
we be able, if necessary, to track down the people we let out onto the net.
Because not everyone's intentions are as pure as yours and mine, Selena.  Some
people would jump as the chance to visit havoc on the net completely
anonymously.  It's a shame it's true.  I wish it weren't, but as long as
people remain people, that remains true and we have to live with it.  Which
means that GREX can and does invite people to come here completely anonymously
but we can't in good conscience let completely anonymous people out onto the
net where not every system is prepared as we are to deal with the vagueries
of human nature.

response 155 of 229:

Aug 5 10:31 UTC 1996

Simply that my membership would have been instituted for a year and a
half, now, if it wasn't for retentiveness on grex's part. We were talking
about gaining members, yes? 

response 157 of 229:

Aug 5 17:07 UTC 1996

Dave, who's giving who money here?
If I'm sitting on a corner and somebody walks up and offers me $100,
I'm not going to say I'll only take it if I can have his name.

Selena can afford to be retentive.  She's $90 richer as a result of it.

Grex can't afford to be retentive.  It's $90 poorer as a result of it.

Actually, it's $150 poorer.  $90 because of verifitcation (in Selena's case),
$60 because baffers were consistently rude to me when I had the money to give
(they're not being rude anymore, thank goodness, at least not to the extent).

And Ajax, what is Selena's minority view?  That Grex would get more money if
it weren't so rude and retentive?  That Grex needs money?  Honestly, Rob, get
a grip.  The nickels and dimes that Grex loses by not doing what it needs to
do to get those memberships start to add up.  Ask Aruba.

response 159 of 229:

Aug 5 18:53 UTC 1996

hmm... This is the second time in 24 hours I find myself agreeing with
'ajax'.. This is getting scarey.

One point though, why are folks limited to a single vote/membership? I've
always sort of visualized voting members as shareholders, and their shares
would dictate how loudly they may vote.. Is this a misconception?

Frankly, if verifying yerself is such a major hassle, perhaps you should
start a new board with total anonymity provided to all the users: I'm sure
you'll get plenty of activity, and I'm sure running it will become the
insane hassle I've been guessing and and seen previously mentioned in
multiple posts. As the technology becomes ever more affordable, radical
dissidence becomes less legitimate and viable. Additionally, I'm sure you
could find several systems in the area that could provide all the software
you need and their might even be some technically competent folks willing
to assist you in setting up (and maintaining) this theorectical system,
selena..

Of course, you'd all be liable for whatever your users do with their
anonymity internationally, and then that same anonymity would probably
weaken your local, internal defensive measures as well.. Good Luck.

response 161 of 229:

Aug 5 22:30 UTC 1996

Good point, Draven.  Now I understand.
Wasn't that easy, Ajax?  No sarcasm needed.  Brian uses lower case,
a calm tone of voice, and everything is clear to me.
Selena's rhetorical style is a moot point.  It doesn't justify your own
horse''s ass behavior.  For the same reasons I've stated already:  presumably,
you're trying to encourage people to donate; Selena isn't.  I happen to agree
with Selena; legalities notwithstanding, membership shouldn't require the
level of verification expected (which, granted, isn't much).  

Maybe what should be encouraged is non-membership donations.  Put people's
names in the MOTD for donating, say, $50 or more.  I'm not saying Selena's
motivation has to do with recognition, but many people are more inclined to
do such things if they get credit for it.  Don't make people who are willing
to give the system money feel like shit just because they're unwilling to
undergo verification.  (I'm saying all this because this is about the second
or third time in over two years that I've heard any mention of non-membership
donations... considering what paltry little one gets from membership.  Voting?
woohoo!  I don't frankly care about voting.  Certain internet access?  Well,
for non-dialins, there isn't much access that Grex provides that isn't
provided in order to telnet in in the first place.  SO what would I get out
of membership?  A warm fuzzy feeling in the pit of my heart.  Create a
non-voting membership class, or a donator class, and when members are listed,
list the people who contribute without getting membership.  Just a suggestion.

As for ill-feeling, Ajax, would that include repeatedly attacking me for
happening to agree with Selena, when I don't use the same debate style?
I reiterate, Ajax:  Get a grip.  Now I go one step further... *brighn hands
Ajax three nails and a hammer and suggests he take a nap*

response 163 of 229:

Aug 6 04:17 UTC 1996

Well, I don't think we have any rules on Grex against campaign contributions,
but I'm not sure how much good they'd do.

response 165 of 229:

Aug 7 00:45 UTC 1996

Well, when a friend of mine recently made a fairly large _no strings, no
membership donation_ she was thanked publicly.  Not in the MOTD -- but I doubt
she wanted that.

response 167 of 229:

Aug 7 03:38 UTC 1996

seems a simple enough matter to ask people if/how they want
recognition...

response 169 of 229:

Aug 7 04:04 UTC 1996

I was thinking of something along the lines of the back pages of 
the opera program, where at the top they thank GM and Ford for 
donating $100,000, and on down through different levels of 
support to the average Joe with a $50 donation.
 
You can have a lot of fun naming the different levels of support.

response 171 of 229:

Aug 7 04:19 UTC 1996

Actually, as I have admittedly said repeatedly, if grex can't allow me
a vote legally, that's fine- I don't need that. I merely want to be
accepted as a member for my mebership- if the voting privilege is tied up
with litigatory problems, I don't care.
        So, with that as a given, why not?

response 173 of 229:

Aug 7 07:37 UTC 1996

So, any word on the meeting that this item is supposedly about?