|
Grex > Coop13 > #77: Member Initiative: Do Nothing For Four Weeks. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 56 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 2 of 56:
| 
Jan 10 03:20 UTC 2004 |
thats a fine idea, but util this issue is addressed, staff should move to
disable use of the program valerie wrote to mass delete old responses. It
is fair to ask that the users have time to consider this, as you suggest
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 3 of 56:
|
Jan 10 03:22 UTC 2004 |
I would agree that that program is part of the frenzy and use should be
suspended as part of the cooling off process.
|
aruba
|
|
response 4 of 56:
|
Jan 10 03:29 UTC 2004 |
Sounds good to me, Colleen.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 5 of 56:
|
Jan 10 03:45 UTC 2004 |
Thanks, cmcgee. I, at least, want a chance to think things thhrough before
making any decisions. Right now, I can barely keep up with the flow of
text, much less digest it all.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 6 of 56:
|
Jan 10 04:24 UTC 2004 |
Sorry, I consider this more histrionics! Cool off, scmool off. So far, all
that has happened is a bunch of talk. Isn't that what grex is for, talk?
In fact in a "twisted" way this episode has driven more talk out of the
woodwork than anything I can remember happening on grex, even the scribble
log escapades. The strength of a system, policy, bylaw is that it *won't*
be set aside in "troubling times". So I say *let* jp2's & jep's proposals
work their way forward until a possible time to hold a vote, and if a vote
comes, let it have its 2 weeks or whatever it is to be decided. That's plenty
of time to have more TALK and convince people one way or the other, if needed.
A proposal to suspend good, in-place mechanisms is the most harmful thing to
come up yet out of this mess.
|
richard
|
|
response 7 of 56:
|
Jan 10 05:27 UTC 2004 |
just becuase YOU think it is a good in-place mechanism albaugh doesn't mean
everyone else does (speaking here about valerie's program which has only been
"in place" a couple of days. I really think Valerie should have let the users
discuss it and decide if they want such a program. I think it is highly
dangerous to have a program that enables users to scribble multiples of posts
at one time with no further effort. This is how people who happen to be in
a bad mood can do create destruction, because it is easy to do. At the least,
you should only ever be able to scribble one post at a time.
|
kip
|
|
response 8 of 56:
|
Jan 10 05:32 UTC 2004 |
What exactly do people want? An emergency meeting of the board to settle
this? The next regular board meeting is January 19th, I have no doubt this
will be discussed if it isn't already on the agenda.
Or is the intent of the other items here to whip the membership into enough
of a frenzy to make a rash and potentially unmaintainable referendum?
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 9 of 56:
|
Jan 10 05:33 UTC 2004 |
I don't see much of a frenzy here, do you?
|
willcome
|
|
response 10 of 56:
|
Jan 10 08:55 UTC 2004 |
HEY< GUYS<
WHAT HAPPENS IF ALL THREE OF THE RECENT PROPOSALS PASS?!? THEY"RE MUTUALLY
CONDRADICTORY AND HOW DO WE DECIDE WHICH TAKE PRECEDENCE?!
|
richard
|
|
response 11 of 56:
|
Jan 10 09:06 UTC 2004 |
then I guess the board votes on which of the passed proposals to actually
enact
|
willcome
|
|
response 12 of 56:
|
Jan 10 09:20 UTC 2004 |
What if someone enters an initiative saying the Board can't do that?
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 13 of 56:
|
Jan 10 13:41 UTC 2004 |
resp:0 It has seemed that matters of diplomacy and negiotation have
suffered a bit. I have read carefully through the mass of these
debates, trying to make the best sense of it all. I have offered some
of my experience rather than to openly enter the debate. Perhaps I am
idealistic, but I think this proposal allows us some time to consider
such discussion rather than make decisions that might appear quick or
hasty later.
resp:3 As long as everyone agrees the script should be suspended as
part of this proposal, I have no problem with it.
|
willcome
|
|
response 14 of 56:
|
Jan 10 14:32 UTC 2004 |
Of course, there's no-way to "suspend" the script.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 15 of 56:
|
Jan 10 14:47 UTC 2004 |
To "suspend" the script, I would ask Valerie or another staff member to
make sure no one could run it on Grex. I would also ask that anyone with
the skills to create another script that achieves the same effect (robotic
removal of all posts created by a single login and uid) refrain from doing
so for the same time period.
It may be that this becomes a type of robotic action that is forbidden under
our no-bots policy.
|
mary
|
|
response 16 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:16 UTC 2004 |
People here are very angry, just like Valerie was angry.
I think they need to be allowed to vent even if that means
removing all of everything they've ever posted. Even if
it means they walk away or take a break from Grex.
This will settle down. Grex will survive. I find it reassuring,
actually, that people care enough to get upset.
I'd *not* try to meddle with any additional rules at this time
or try to calm things down until they're ready to calm down.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 17 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:29 UTC 2004 |
Re #15: Minor point: Valerie is not a staff member.
|
willcome
|
|
response 18 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:44 UTC 2004 |
Re. 15: There's still no-way to disable or hinder anyone who wants to run
the script.
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 56:
|
Jan 10 15:54 UTC 2004 |
Donning by voteadm hat...
The fact that there are now three conflicting member proposals on the
table entered at about the same time raises some interesting procedural
questions that the bylaws don't address. I'd appreciate some guidance
from the board about how to procede.
|
jp2
|
|
response 20 of 56:
|
Jan 10 16:10 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 56:
|
Jan 10 16:40 UTC 2004 |
Re #17: That's true, and not a minor point.
Re #20: Jep gets to "worry about" it too, since he made one of
the proposals.
|
naftee
|
|
response 22 of 56:
|
Jan 10 17:19 UTC 2004 |
The GreX staff should prepare a list of blacklisted scripts, and post it
somewhere, so we can all balk at how long it would be.
|
gull
|
|
response 23 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:29 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:2 and resp:3: I think that would be silly. Valerie's script
only automates something that everyone can already do. It's ridiculous
to tell people, "Okay, you can go scribble all your responses by hand,
but don't you dare automate it!" It's also unenforcible.
|
scott
|
|
response 24 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:30 UTC 2004 |
We apply that rule to other operations, like sending mail.
|
other
|
|
response 25 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:33 UTC 2004 |
1) This proposal is well intentioned, but I think that the delays
already built in to our voting process are sufficient to serve the
purpose for which it was proposed.
2) Because the posting-removal script only automates a process that
any user can freely engage in anyway, and it won't run without the user
being logged in to run it (correct?) depermitting the script or
otherwise prohibiting other similar scripts sets an unclear precedent
and may be worse than leaving it alone.
3) The people posting most vehemently in the aftermath of these events
are those with the least at stake. If you take those noises out of the
picture and reevaluate, you'd find that there is much concern being
expressed, but that the process is not proceeding any differently from
any other controversial matter we've dealt with in the past.
As far as I can tell, this was coming sooner or later anyway, and it
was bound to be a test of the ability of Grex to survive growing pains.
This is a process all small organizations go through as they grow, in
some form or other, and either they survive it and go on, or they don't
and something else comes along to fill the niche. You can't short
circuit this process and be doing Grex any favors. And changing the
rules of the game as this proposal does is just that.
|
other
|
|
response 26 of 56:
|
Jan 10 18:37 UTC 2004 |
24: Thea reasons for that particular prohibition are distinctly
different.
|