|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 154 responses total. |
mdw
|
|
response 25 of 154:
| 
Mar 21 05:34 UTC 1996 |
I sure don't recall any rules against redundant conferences. I suspect,
the users of grex being what they are, such conferences would swiftly
cease to be "redundant".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 26 of 154:
|
Mar 21 05:54 UTC 1996 |
I am sorry to hear that a fw on Grex has acted in the alleged high-handed
manner toward users. If true, it is rude, narrow-minded, capricious,
and decidedly not in the Grex manner.
|
robh
|
|
response 27 of 154:
|
Mar 21 08:25 UTC 1996 |
Re 20 - If you were the f-w of After Dark, and saw an item in
that conference that you felt was more appropriate for the Human
Sexuality conference, you'd ask the f-w of Human Sexuality to
link it over.
Um, isn't that what brighn did?
|
brighn
|
|
response 28 of 154:
|
Mar 21 08:35 UTC 1996 |
Just one FW, Rane? What do you think of an FW of one conference who
wanders around telling other FWs that they're doing it wrong because
they don't do it the way he does it? That's high-handed, too, IMHO,
and KErouac has a history of starting just this sort of fight... this is
at least the third *I've been involved in. It's also the last, for me,
becuase I decided it's just not worth it. He can disagree with
my way of thinking all he wants.
The four users that Colleen refers to -- Val, Phenix, Sekari, and Jazz,
to be precise -- did not leave because of continued linking and other
FW abuses. They left (and in fact, Jazz *didn't* leave) because of
a personality conflict between two users, one of whom happened to be
a Fair Witness. I dislike Jazz strongly. I got into several major fights
with him, some (but not all) of which revolved around the FW-ship.
Enough of the fight was public for any critical mind to realize that
the fight wasn't about FW powers, and I did not abuse said powers --
the only item that was frozen was the one in which the worst fight
occurred, and it was frozen at the request of the poster (Phenix).
That series of fights and the current disagreement with Kerouac are
unrelated. Kerouac is being difficult. I reached an agreement with
him, but I also said I was taking a break from being FW of After Dark.
Now Colleen, who is alleging attempts at civility, is calling for
my removal as FW of After Dark.
Why do these people stamp their feet, call me immature, then go to the
rooms, slamming their door with the same immaturity and lack of forethought
that I use? MAybe because we're all humans... *shrug*
Ah well. Such is life. All of this isn't worth arguing over anymore.
*shrug*
Kerouac, start a second flirt conference. If you're as popular as
you think, and we're doing so a botched job, everyone will leave ours
for yours and we'll shut down. Same to you, Colleen. That's the point
behind Grex... Accordions, for instance, died because it was a clique
conference and most of the people in the clique left. If you're not
happy, start a redundant conference. Quite right, Grexers won't want
redundant conferences, and so more than likely one will die. *shrug*
|
scg
|
|
response 29 of 154:
|
Mar 21 08:51 UTC 1996 |
It sounds to me as if there are some larger issues going on in that
conference, and that particular item may not be the issue at all. That said,
knowing the stated purpose of splitting the two conferences, it seems obvious
to me that the item in question (and it was an interesting item, BTW) was the
sort of thing that was intended to go in the Human Sexuality conference, and
not the AfterDark conference. Whether moving it was handled the right way
is another question, and I think it's really something for the FWs to figure
out. If the users of the conference don't like it, they're welcome to start
their own conference. They could even start several conferences, for several
different ideas of just how the conference should operate, if they really
couldn't agree on anything.
Maybe I'm missing something, as I usually do with kerouac's complaints, but
I really don't see what the big deal is. Or is this just another excuse to
draw us out into a long debate just for the sake of debating. A lot of what
I've seen in this item, coming from its poster, has sounded a lot more like
political rhetoric than substance.
|
davel
|
|
response 30 of 154:
|
Mar 21 12:05 UTC 1996 |
I don't know that you're missing anything, Steve - this time, or usually.
|
carson
|
|
response 31 of 154:
|
Mar 21 12:53 UTC 1996 |
Ditto. Now you can sleep easier.
|
katie
|
|
response 32 of 154:
|
Mar 21 17:12 UTC 1996 |
(Enough with the <shrug>ing, already!)
|
brighn
|
|
response 33 of 154:
|
Mar 21 19:15 UTC 1996 |
Sorry Katie, didn't know it bothered you. *shrug*
*giggle*
You're not missing anything, Kerouac is just being himself.
IT hit me because of the previous scenario, between myself and Jazz,
because of the similitude. In both cases, because the FW had the nerve
to suggest that a conversation was inappropriate to a conference, I
was accused of censorship and oppression. Kerouac would get along
well with Larry Flint and half a dozen rappers for his ability to
completely misconstrue the intent of the First Amendment. *giggle*
Any ordinary week, I'd've reacted to KErouac as I am now, as the
little gnat nuisance that he is. (The preceding sentence is simply a
personal opinion and in no way is intended to represent
a scientifically evidenced fact.)
|
kerouac
|
|
response 34 of 154:
|
Mar 21 20:00 UTC 1996 |
SRW, this is not rhetoric...I have raised some serous issues about
conferencing, problems that are well worth looking at, and you seem to
dismiss them all because it is me doing the posting. I'm not tring to
make this personal, and its a narrow attitude on your part. The
conferencing setup here has problems. There arent enough users who
use the conferences for there to be redundant confs or cliques....its
hard enough to get people to read the mainstream conferences. It would
be far far better for grex to have a small group of strong, vibrant
conferences than 50,000 redundant ones and ones for every little
clique. What we need are strong conferences that belong to everyone
and are not anyone's private domain.
As for this AD mess, I was not the one making this personal. I
protested loudly but also specifically said it wasnt personal and
that it was no reflectio n on anyone. For that Brighn came on party
the night before last and ruined a pleasant conversation I was having
by launching into a tirade of obscenities against me, basically calling
me every ugly namein the book. All because I wanted to participate in
HIS conference in a way that I thohght was appropriate and that the users
of AD would enjoy.
I'm discouraged by this item. I raise seirous issues and all I see are
flippant one-line responses or personal attacks. Doesnt anyone care
about these issues enough to discuss them?
|
kerouac
|
|
response 35 of 154:
|
Mar 21 20:34 UTC 1996 |
I have a question. If conferences belong to the people who
created them, why then arent all confs except maybe coop and agora
closed? If users are nothing but the guests of the fw's, why should
they be allowed open admittance? The policy of grex, and it is a
good one, is that confs are open and anyone can participate. But
based on what seems to be the attitude of most of you towards confs,
it is the fw who should decide who can join. Clearly Brighn must feel
that way. Giry says he basically invited her to leave AD because
she suggested hross take over as sole fw. He founded that conf, I guess
most of you feel he has the right to do that.
All I have ever been suggesting is that since the potential has always
exsisted for open hostilities between fair witnesses and users, roles
and functions ought to be spelled out. This is not rhetoric, and I'm
not even suggesting people be denied fw'ship if they refuse to comply,
but if staff is going to give some users special commands and abilities,
it is irresponsible of staff to not want to address the consequences.
|
katie
|
|
response 36 of 154:
|
Mar 21 20:54 UTC 1996 |
Hey, this is BBSing. It's just for fun. This is not a serious enough
'problem' to merit all sorts of rules. Let it blow over.
|
giry
|
|
response 37 of 154:
|
Mar 21 21:26 UTC 1996 |
I have left both AD and Sexuality... not because of the linking roblems, just
because I was tired of the crap that has been bringing me down, it was no
longer a fun thing for me. I don't know if that is my fault or if it is
anyones... but I have decided to leave.
|
brighn
|
|
response 38 of 154:
|
Mar 21 22:54 UTC 1996 |
I'm with Katie. I happen to have a bad temper. We're all human, we all ahve
foibles. Once we're done being humans with petty little foibles, we should
all be able to gather at the cyberbar and have a good laugh over it.
*resists the urge to shrug for katie's sake*
Hell, if Katie and I can agree, anyone can. =}
*g*
(Note for the humor-impaired: That wasn't meant as a flame. I like Katie.)
|
kerouac
|
|
response 39 of 154:
|
Mar 22 04:57 UTC 1996 |
Okay, rationale people can work things out. Selena and I have agreed
to a truce and a solution that does not involve yet another sex conf. Stay
Tuned.
A big reason I've been so vocal is that I know people who could very
easily have grex logins who would be considerably more petty than just
being loud like I have been. There are a lot of sensitive people out there
and you dont want to piss the wrong ones of them off. I know more than
one person who would not hesitate to crack root or send some virus out
to turn that new Sun04 computer into junk, for no other reason than that
they are pissed at some fw in some little conf. I've seen it happen.
I've seen sysops who've had $10,000 computer systems turned into scrap
metal. You cant act like the dangers arent out there. You cant like
every person who logs into grex is going to be a perfect gentleman.
You cant act like cyberspace is all one big happy family. There are
scumbags out there. A simple little code of honor that fw's could
voluntarily agree to follow is not a bad thing.
|
srw
|
|
response 40 of 154:
|
Mar 22 06:43 UTC 1996 |
I am curious why my initals are placed at the beginning of #34, kerouac.
I am more inclined to favor your argument over brighn's, although
I believe that conferncing on Grex is a bit too undermoderated.
In general I would like to see more moderation of comments, so that topics
were adhered to a little better. I know that the two sex confs were split
specifically for that reason. Brighn's motivation was in that vein. Still,
in this case I think he handled it badly. That is hindsight. Even he admitted
it.
I'm not inclined to see rules to govern what is acceptable. I'd rather
see more good judgment applied than we currently see.
Shrugging is a sign of indifference.
Brighn's excessive shrugging doesn't read well to me.
While it does not bother me, I think it sends the wrong message.
I read "I don't care" whenever I see a *shrug*.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 41 of 154:
|
Mar 22 07:53 UTC 1996 |
I read, "but what can I do about it".
|
brighn
|
|
response 42 of 154:
|
Mar 22 13:44 UTC 1996 |
I mean, "We're all taking this much too seriously.", which is close to
Steve's reading.
I'm included in the "we".
|
sekari
|
|
response 43 of 154:
|
Mar 22 21:23 UTC 1996 |
wether it's taken seriously or not
it is a problem
shrugging may not necessarily make it worse
but it isn't getting any better
|
kerouac
|
|
response 44 of 154:
|
Mar 22 22:09 UTC 1996 |
srw, I was referring to brighn in that previous post...no offense meant. I
dont have any problem with shrugging. Maybe it just means brighn is keeping
things in perspective. And he's right, we do take things much too seriously...
I know I'm guilty of that...but part of that is that some people on here
regard conferencing differently than others. Some think of conferencing in
the same way you'd think of the "games" menu....a recreational diversion but
not of paramount importance in terms of why they use this or any board.
Others, like me, who use other sites for email and 'net access, are only here
for the confs. So there's a difference in prioritization.
To be honest, the confing disputes we've had here are tame compared to ones
I've seen on m-net. As long as we have good people as fw's, who are willing to
talk and work things out, I guess maybe it isnt necessary to overly define and
regulate everything. But see, I'm a liberal democrat, who believes in using
government and protocol to protect people. When I see things happen that are
bad, it is reflexive to say "hey, we dont have enough laws...or the laws arent
good enough" What I think I need to do is learn to shrug!
|
brighn
|
|
response 45 of 154:
|
Mar 23 00:41 UTC 1996 |
Sekari, the mere fact that we're having a serious and protracted discussion
on whether I shouldput *shrug* throughout my entries when that's exactly
what I'm doing IRL when I'm typing indicates that some people *are* taking
things way too seriously and finding things to snit about. *nods
definitively* And I'm one of the reigning kings of pointless snits,
I'm also an arrogant shit at times who trivializes the views of people I
find to be trivial *ironic laugh*. What's the difference between me and
somebody who doesn't pepper their responses but has exactly the same
viewpoints? *inquisitive look* The difference, it's easier to tell when
I'm being sarcastic. *sardonci grin* Also keep in mind that I'm used
to doing a lot of prose writing... anyone who's had cybersex with me
knows me propensity for detail and making things as real as possible.
*giggle* So your "if yo're not part of the solution you're part of the
problem" attitude is hardly going to get me to change my shrugging ways.
*shrug* As far After Dark / Human Sexuality / Sexuality II? Things
settled down mighty quick in there when I started taking a lackadaisical
attitude. Kerouac and I stopped fighting when I stopped taking him
and the situation so seriously. So, as far as things not getting better,
when I either shrug things off or rip into people for stupid reasons,
I thinks things *have* gotten better since I started shrugging again.
Now, if I *sigh and rolls eyes*, then maybe people have a point in saying
I'm being rude. *lifts hands to heaven in a sign of helplessness and
frustration* (not really, that would be ultimately rude *giggle*).
|
tsty
|
|
response 46 of 154:
|
Mar 23 02:04 UTC 1996 |
sometimes fw's get attacked and sometimes they fight back. Sometimes they
just respond but not in perpetuity. Perpetuating a fight merely perpetuates
a fight.
|
selena
|
|
response 47 of 154:
|
Mar 23 04:30 UTC 1996 |
Well, the solution to the problem worked fine. I leave you all to discuss
the silliness you may or may not feel is important.
|
brighn
|
|
response 48 of 154:
|
Mar 23 08:41 UTC 1996 |
I agree, Testy. =}
|
jazz
|
|
response 49 of 154:
|
Mar 23 15:37 UTC 1996 |
It seems to me that the reasons that people have left AD, if I've read
them carefully enough, have varied from person to person, and incident to
incident. The only one of the four, which I presume doesn't include me, since
I haven't left the conference, which I really know enough to speak about would
be Val - and she clearly stated that she left, both to me, to brighn, and to
the conference, because she felt out-of-place in that conference because she
felt intellectual flirting or at least non-physical flirting was discouraged.
I've cfadminned for three years on M-Net, going though a few changes
of the guard of confcoms and boards ("Kings come and go - but I am forever!"
- C. Richileu, Disney), so I've seen my share of the conference problems and
been called in to help resolve a few of them. I don't think that M-Net's
problem sare inasmuch worse as they are different - primarily too much spam
from too many people and inactivity, instead of too much activity, by
fairwitnesses. With regards to that last one, I'm not sure that there is a
happy middle ground for everyone with conference management. Natch that, I'm
sure there isn't. It doesn't hurt to have some tolerance here and there for
different views, though, and to accept that any successful conference, however
inspired by fairwitnesses, must also be fueled by it's participants and that
any successful conference must grow and expand beyond it's original concepts
and bounds.
It's also nice not to receive tel's like "don't mess with the powers
that be!" when you disagree with a FW, or hate mail. But that's just bile
on my part.
|
