response 20 of 138:

Jan 15 15:59 UTC 2004

Umm, to which address did you send that?  I only have the Jan 6th request in
my staff email account.

response 22 of 138:

Jan 15 17:04 UTC 2004

>> So, it's been like a week since I requested that coop:39 be killed 
>> because I don't like it.  I have received no response at all from the
>> staff and the item is still there.  Could I again request that it be
>> killed?

> As you know, it is not possible to delete the item in accordance to 
> Grex policy, so staff cannot act on this request.  If compelling reasons 
> were shown why it needs to be deleted, then it is theoretically possible 
> that either the board or membership might vote you a special exception
> which would enable staff to act.
>
> My guess as a non-board member is that unless the circumstances were far,
> far more compelling than any case now under consideration, it would be the
> preference of the board to defer that decision to the membership.  This
> seems to be possible in this instance, because having publically announced
> that you wish this item deleted, you clearly are not concerned that people
> might save copies before the item can be deleted if your desire to have it
> deleted was publicized.
>
> As such, the most effective way for you to waste as many people's times
> as possible while further burdening Grex's already cumbersome and 
> overloaded administrative processes with an idiotic attempt to make an
> imaginary point might be to enter a member proposal.
>
> I wish you all the luck in your endeaver that you deserve.
>
>                               - Jan Wolter

response 24 of 138:

Jan 15 18:19 UTC 2004

> As you know, it is not possible to delete the item in accordance to
> Grex policy, so staff cannot act on this request.

And just what *is* that policy, pray tell?!  If there were such a policy,
surely it was documented, and could be dragged out and posted for all to read.
And there would therefore be no need for the proposal on the subject now
alive in coop.

Either there is (was!) a policy or there isn't.  If there is, let's see it,
please.

response 26 of 138:

Jan 15 19:14 UTC 2004

(resp:24  there isn't a policy, and the item can't be deleted in 
accordance with a policy that doesn't exist.  that's my take on what 
Jan meant, although he's certainly more qualified to clarify his 
comments than I am.)

(I also think Jan's response was amusing, although it doesn't please me 
that he had to write it.)  :P

response 30 of 138:

Jan 16 02:50 UTC 2004

Just like the board election.

response 32 of 138:

Jan 16 20:59 UTC 2004

Do you think that non-profits and not-for-profits are excused from
documenting things in writing? Guess again. Your questions again display
the "grex as personal playground" approach I find so distasteful. At the
very least, when grex claims to support free and uncensored speech, then
yes, I damn sure expect any policies in opposition to free speech and in
support of censorship to be in writing. I really don't think that's asking
too much. 

response 34 of 138:

Jan 16 21:18 UTC 2004

It's asking way too much to ask that all Grex policies be documented.  We
wouldn't have a Grex at all if that were a requirement, because the people
who founded it would never have agreed to that.  Grex policy has always
been to have as few rules as possible.

Grex is not anyone's personal playground.  But it is not a government
organization or a publicly traded company, either.  If you want that level
of organization, you're going to have to look somewhere else.  In
particular, you're going to have to go to an institution where you're
paying someone's salary to serve you.

I don't object to clarifying policies, but your indignation at them not
being written in blood already displays a real misunderstanding of the way
things work.  In order for Grex to function at all, we need to strike a
balance between staff members knowing what's expected of them, but not
expecting them to meet such high standards that they won't be willing to
do it for free.

response 36 of 138:

Jan 16 21:30 UTC 2004

All members and users, too?

response 38 of 138:

Jan 16 21:56 UTC 2004

(I'm trying hard to believe that talk about "unwritten policies" is not
just an excuse for being arbitrary and selective about enforcement.)

response 40 of 138:

Jan 16 23:04 UTC 2004

biff baff boff

response 42 of 138:

Jan 17 02:24 UTC 2004

Clearly it's Grex's policy to trust the staff to make decisions where 
there are no written policies.  And to trust the users, the 
fairwitnesses, and the Board.  There's a general philosophy which 
people pick up through association with other users, and also some of 
it is written in some places.

I work at a pretty regimented company, and it in turn is owned by a 
very highly regimented (and government regulated) company.  Even so, 
not all decisions which can come up are written down.  There are 
enough rules no one can possibly read them all and keep them in mind 
in order to apply them at all times.  I have a general sense of how 
the rules apply, and then I live within that general sense.

Grex doesn't have a professional rule-writing staff as my employer 
does.  Grex staff members have a general sense of the Grex philosophy, 
and they apply it as they think best, and we can all live with that, 
pretty much.  Usually if they don't know, staff members ask first.  
They ask each other, or the Board, or occasionally post an item to 
ask, or even have a formal request for a vote, though that's rare.

It works fine.  It always had.  It would now; the current situation 
would be manageable (there's disagreement but Grex can be reasonable 
and deal with that) if it weren't for excessive heed being paid to a 
few users who want attention and trouble, not a solution.  Look for 
those who are being inciting and not seeking a solution -- if you have 
to -- and stop paying so much attention to them, and then Grex can go 
back to being Grex.

I think these last two weeks have been the worst two weeks Grex has 
seen.  So do most who come here regularly, I bet.

Some think it's the best.  That's why there's a problem.  They're 
having a ball, and too many of us (including me) are falling for it.

response 44 of 138:

Jan 17 04:10 UTC 2004

No one's arguing that, cyklone.