response 26 of 85:

Dec 6 07:18 UTC 1995

Ham radio operators have solved the problem in group discussion by quickly
establishing a circular order. This could be implemented for the board
discussion by establishing the order of speaking by "lot" in advance.
Newcomers (including, for board meetings, guests) to the group would
"break in" in a short gap each participant leaves. If that happens, the
"chair" (net controller) could recognize either the next person in the
circle, or the "breaker" (who then fits into the circle at that point).
There is also a procedure for leaving the group when one's turn comes.

response 28 of 85:

Dec 6 14:35 UTC 1995

The "circular group" in #26 is not part of the FCC Rules Part 97, and
hardly is the basis for an examination, unless it is knowing whether
to proceed clockwise or counterclockwise. It just seems to me to be
something hams do based on common courtesy in a group that cannot see
each other. Seems to me the same conditions would apply in an on-line
meeting. Since there has been assorted support for trying it, I suggested
a way to make it more likely to work. Do you have a better suggestion?

response 30 of 85:

Dec 6 17:55 UTC 1995

I'd be interested to see how an on-line board meeting would work.  Like Rob,
I'm not ready to make it an annual thing just yet ... but it would certainly
let an out-of-town folks who would like to participate get their chance.

It may take a few false starts to get things running smoothly, but the board
and the people who have generally attended board meetings are all intelligent,
co-operative, well mannered people.  I think the logistics of keeping the
conversation followable would work out without too much trouble.

As to giving root access to the chair of the board...ouch!  No, bad idea!
The chair doesn't need root unless he or she is, coincidently, on staff.
It could only cause trouble and wouldn't be of any benefit to GREX as far
as I can see.

response 32 of 85:

Dec 6 22:09 UTC 1995

Rane, you miss my point. I'm not saying that your "circular group" was
part of some FCC rule. What I was trying to say was that the average
ham radio operator has already proved, by the fact that he went through
the work of studying for, applying, taking the test, and then getting his
ham radio license, he/she has already proved that they are the type of
personality who will work cooperatively in, and follow the rules ofm
the "circular group" you describe. Unfortuneately, I believe an online
conference on Grex will simply not work, because it will be buried by
the everyone trying to talk at once. It will look like party.

response 34 of 85:

Dec 7 04:19 UTC 1995

I agree that it would probably be painful and not a lot might get done.  I
don't think I'd treat being at one as as high a priority as being at an in
person board meeting.

response 36 of 85:

Dec 7 23:25 UTC 1995

  As to giving the board chairman root, the argument made on mnet I
believe was that if there ever is a real schism between staff and the board,
the staff can simply ignore the board because they have the "keys to the
car" so to speak.
  It seems safer to say that either the board chairman or some other board
member that he/she designates be given root access in the event there are
no roots on the board already.  Its more than likely that there will
always be at least one person trained in Unix on the board, so I think the
danger is minimal.  I mean anyone can learn to use something safely if
they are trained right.
  This is about checks and balances, and the board of directors shouldd
always be able to check the actions of staff and vice versa.

response 38 of 85:

Dec 8 01:57 UTC 1995

In practice, there has always been enough overlap between board & staff
that it has allways been true that at least one board member has root.
I think that's no accident; I believe the majority of the active members
on this system already realize the value of having at least some
technical skill that is relevant to grex, and having a good solid
representation of all these skills on the board.  I think most people
here also recognize the importance of good relations between the board,
staff, & the members & users of this system.  I think that's the real
secret of our success so far with the system, and I don't know of any
other way to do things that would work nearly as effectively.

response 42 of 85:

Dec 8 06:36 UTC 1995

(speaking as a board member who is not on staff and does not have root:)
        I'd be very nervous about giving out root based just on somebody being
the board chairperson.  I assume that we can trust anybody who is on the board
not to try to harm the system -- if we can't, then the users have made a big
mistake in electing such a person to the board.  However, there is more to
giving somebody root access than just trust.  This may be a hard concept for
some to grasp, ;) but it is possible for somebody to be the most trustworthy
person in the world, and still not have a clue about Unix system
administration.  Being the system administrator at the place where I work,
I get to hear all the suggestions from well intentioned but not particularly
technical people about possible solutions for problems, and some of them, as
much as they would seem to make sense, would have bad consequences that such
people would have no way of knowing about.  For the board to decide to give
one of its members root access without consulting the rest of the staff, and
then expecting the rest of our volunteer staff to go in and clean up after
that person would be a mistake.
        I'll admit that there are times when I wish I had root and a Dungeon
key on Grex.  Usually it's when Grex is down and I'm sitting in my office a
five minute walk away from the Dungeon and, if I had access to it, could
easily walk over there and do a reboot.  However, unless the rest of the staff
decides that they would consider that useful and would trust me with it, it's
not something it would make sense for me to push for at all.  If I were to
accidentally get in over my head and screw something up, chances are it would
be somebody else who would have to clean up after that.

response 44 of 85:

Dec 8 07:56 UTC 1995

I agree with all that. In the farfetched example of a Staff rebellion against
the board, root pw will buy the staff nothing. The board controls the keys.
The board can fire all of staff. Staff would be legally required to turn in
their keys. The board would "hire" new staff to change the root pw, and run
the system. A new staffer at the console doesn't need to know the old root
pw to change it.

The only power the staff has over the board is the power to withhold its 
services. This happens on and off all the time, as most staff members have
lives to run, besides Grex.

response 46 of 85:

Dec 8 13:51 UTC 1995

        Avast ye hearties, it's the Jolly Roger and her staff.  Arr.

        That's going to be a tough bill to enforce at any level, John ...
though the implications are frightening if it does become law for all
public-access systems.

response 48 of 85:

Dec 8 18:01 UTC 1995

We need to get the text of the bill. It is dangerous to opine without reading
the thing. There is an article in WSJ - I'll see if I can summarize that later
this evening.