|
Grex > Coop8 > #52: Adding .yeswrite and .nowrite to the write program | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 315 responses total. |
adbarr
|
|
response 25 of 315:
| 
Apr 27 19:41 UTC 1996 |
And a good comment it is. Welcome. Do more. Make cookies.
|
janc
|
|
response 26 of 315:
|
May 19 03:46 UTC 1996 |
I've never been able to decide whether to do this. There are good arguments
on either side. Maybe we should put the decision up for auction. Whoever
wins the auction gets to decide if we have a .yeswrite, a .nowrite, both, or
retain the status quo. Hmmm....
|
nephi
|
|
response 27 of 315:
|
May 19 03:52 UTC 1996 |
Whoa! I *like* that! Will you enter an item in the "Auction" conference?
|
janc
|
|
response 28 of 315:
|
May 19 13:41 UTC 1996 |
I think I'd want to see first if the idea raises any scream of agony. I'd
probably want to enlarge the list of possible software changes to bid amongst.
A "boot" command in party? I dunno.
|
nephi
|
|
response 29 of 315:
|
May 19 15:17 UTC 1996 |
(Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! I think that would be a terrific option for private
channels! You just don't stop with the ideas, do you?! 8^)
|
steve
|
|
response 30 of 315:
|
May 24 01:12 UTC 1996 |
This isn't a scream, but it is a plea:
Don't.
The idea of being able to manage a system whereby people can "shut out"
those they don't like *really* doesn't appeal to the sense of things on
Grex.
I know, I know--there are lots who might say head is up in the
stratosphere (again). But I see the idea of the yes/no .files as
something that will foster more negativity than make solutions.
In fact, I should say it doesn't *solve* anything--it just shuts
people out. Makes doors. Adds locks and bars the windows in this
little piece of cyberspace.
Of the two, I could better live with the "no" .file, becuase that
at least would allow all other people that aren't in the file to
be able to write someone. But the .yes file seems *really* against
the spirit of Grex. And the perfect way to truly stomp on the
sense of "community" here.
My thoughts on the concept.
|
janc
|
|
response 31 of 315:
|
May 24 03:28 UTC 1996 |
These have been pretty much my reason for not implementing this. But I am
now and then confronted by users, often women, who find themselves continually
harrassed by one other user. So because of one creep, they have to shut off
everyone on Grex. That's not the ideal either.
Both sides of this issue have good reasons, and I still find myself torn
between them. Auctioning off the decision seems like one way to get myself
out of that bind. I'm not sure I want to do so though.
|
ajax
|
|
response 32 of 315:
|
May 24 04:30 UTC 1996 |
The right to decide Grex's policies shouldn't be auctioned off. The
board or members should decide. Grex is supposed to be run democratically,
not by the highest bidder. Jan, if you want someone else to make the
decision, how about ask the board to vote on it?
|
scg
|
|
response 33 of 315:
|
May 24 06:19 UTC 1996 |
Jan owns the software, as far as I know, and can make whatever changes to it
he feels like. It is then up to the board and the members to decide whether
to use Jan's software.
|
janc
|
|
response 34 of 315:
|
May 24 17:28 UTC 1996 |
Yes, the decision whether to install such a change to write would ultimately
be a board decision. But the decision whether or not I implement it is mine.
Any of several other people could, in theory, do so too, but past experience
doesn't seem to indicate that many people are so inspired. Probably the whole
thing is too complex to auction off.
|
robh
|
|
response 35 of 315:
|
May 24 18:34 UTC 1996 |
Maybe we could give it to ryan1 to do. >8)
|
ajax
|
|
response 36 of 315:
|
May 24 20:00 UTC 1996 |
Ahso, I got the impression from #26 that Jan wanted to auction off
the decision of what's used on Grex, rather than his programming
services.
|
janc
|
|
response 37 of 315:
|
May 25 04:18 UTC 1996 |
So far, as far as write and party have been concerned, what I have decided
to program has been exactly what Grex has decided to install (though "tel"
wasn't turned on until I made it possible for individuals to turn it off).
If someone paid for me to program such an option, they'd probably be real
disappointed if it didn't get installed. But I don't think anyone is ready
to decide if such a thing would be installed so the whole idea doesn't work.
|
steve
|
|
response 38 of 315:
|
May 25 18:32 UTC 1996 |
Jan, what you said in #31 is the best reason I could see for implementing
it, but in the case of creeps, they'll just take out new accounts. Do
people remember the person who came from a small college in Nebraska
who insisted in presenting facts of his genetalia to anyone he could
write? Hmmm, what a (l)user. He wouldn't have hesitated a minute to
change accounts.
So the very people who need shutting-out the most would be the
very ones who'd be mostly likely to circumvent this system.
|
janc
|
|
response 39 of 315:
|
May 25 18:48 UTC 1996 |
Not if you have .yes files.
|
nephi
|
|
response 40 of 315:
|
May 25 20:19 UTC 1996 |
Actually, with an attention-seeking dweeb like that, getting ignored would
be the last thing he'd want. Remember puff the magic party spammer? Even
though he had a nothing pseudo account, he didn't run newuser to get around
the filter we were using until "norepeat" got fixed in party. If
Iwantattention Dweeb annoys people until he gets put on a lot of .nowrite
lists, then he'll lose interest and go away. Besides, it takes at least a
good 15 minutes to run through newuser. I'd say that is quite a pain in the
butt to have to keep doing, especially since you lose the "attention value"
when you use a pseudo.
|
carson
|
|
response 41 of 315:
|
May 25 21:13 UTC 1996 |
uh-oh. I was planning on visitng that "small college in Nebraska." I'm
planning on visiting females, though, or so they say. ;)
|
adbarr
|
|
response 42 of 315:
|
May 26 00:24 UTC 1996 |
Radical idea No. 3.5.6(a) -- females have legitimate perspectives and
interests here. I really doubt many males really understand their situation.
I would suggest a harsh process of squelching the harassment for, say, 1 year,
with evaluation of the process and results. Then you would have some
real data to use in formulating conclusions and decisions. Ok, not perfect,
not easy, but it does move toward a solution. Women should have equal input
in the design and evaluation.
|
steve
|
|
response 43 of 315:
|
May 26 15:07 UTC 1996 |
That can't work Arnold, given the way Grex works. How would we know
if the person got on? We can't use names/logins, since people can
create them. We can't use IP addresses, since a IP address can map to
a UNIX machine where many login in from. Or that IP address is a PC or
Mac in an area of many such machines, say in a library.
When I have been informed about repeat problems by people, I've
talked to the person in question. Thats worked maybe 20% of the time.
If they persisted I've talked to their ISP/school, and thats worked
at least 50% of the time.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 44 of 315:
|
May 27 14:53 UTC 1996 |
Ok, perfection is not possible. Is there a way to approach something
better than what exists? If "watch" programs can be used for other purposes,
why not this? I don't know enough here so pardon my ignorance, but those
who do could be creative - try something -- evaluate - adjust?
|
lost2
|
|
response 45 of 315:
|
May 27 17:04 UTC 1996 |
I am all in favor of the implementation of a the no-file , I have never had
a problem myself but have known many who have and they had to shut off there
chat completly, witch makes it very difficult for me or any other person the
y may still wish to talk to, to contact them unless they hang out in party
all the time.
if ther was a program installed that made it possible for them to get
rid of those harrasing them and not all the rest of us, it would be a great
boon to grex. then if that person changed login I.D.'s they could just filter
them as well. I think they would get tired of creating new login's soon
enough..
The only reason I found this co-op topic was because robh told me about
it after a friend had been harrassed , bye another user. I asked him if it
was possible to filter someone out of chat and he said unfortunatly not yet.
I still fail to see any way it could cause any harm except to those
who are abusing the system and other users.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 46 of 315:
|
May 27 17:30 UTC 1996 |
OK everybody, I'm here to make my annual BBS response. I felt strongly
about this issue, so I thought I'd reply.
I have wanted a feature similar to this ever since I first got
offensive telegrams and write messages. I support this improvement
one-hundred percent. Oh how heavenly it would be if a user from India
would not be able to send me a telegram reguarding my pty usage, while I
am in the middle of writing a C program! (I think that all the staff
members know what I am referring to) (I am also not cutting down on all
the Grexers from India, but there are a few who say things that are
totally inappropriate and offensive.)
Perhaps this type of feature would form "them/us" groups. So
what? Grex has always been like that. I mean, there are party channels
which can be closed to keep certain people out. Should we consider that
a clique also? I'm sorry but, I do not buy it that it would cause
problems for people. As for the issue about "people should learn to work
things out" -- fine. But you must realize that this is the internet, and
if somebody has their mind set on annoying the heck out of you, they are
going to try to get at you. Even with all the reasoning, and talking
to them, they will not quit.
(Oh, and please do not give me the argument: "Party did not
always have closable channels") ;)
* A .yes or .no list would be no different than running a filter in
* party with the grep command so that you could not see what that twit
* was saying.
---> I do not see how this would, in any way, block communication
between people. In fact, I believe that this would *INCREASE* communication
between users instead of blocking it. For example: Say user "twit" is
write-flooding you, and you are forced to de-perm your messages. Then
the people who you do wish to converse with cannot write you. If A user
had the opportunity to just block out that one particular user, then
there would be no need to totally de-perm your messages.
If this improvement to write and tel is implemented, I know for a
fact that I would use it. I am also extremely sure that many others
would take advantage of this feature. Believe me, from what I see in
party, the demand is there for it.
RE: #35
Rob -> If I had the ability to write such a program, it would already
have been done.
For this debate, you can record a big "AYE" for me.
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a
thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."
--- William Jennings Bryan
___ __
|) \/ /\ |\ | /\ |\ | | |/ / \ \ / | /\ |/
|\ / /--\ | \| /--\ | \| | |\ \__/ \/\/ | /--\ |\
--- rantkowi@northland.lib.mi.us
--- http://fluffy.neb.net/users/ryan1/index.html
|
aliz
|
|
response 47 of 315:
|
May 27 17:32 UTC 1996 |
I agree with @#42 adbarr. I cnat tell you how put out i feel when i get ntal
request, the moment i log on from total strangers. When i aks them to stop-
they dont- or they get very verbally abusive. I am really tired of a certain
group of indivuivuals who just assume that i am female- im ready to have a
sexual go- with them. It has brought me down to a new level. I am not proud of
these technquics. but i will share them with you , in the hopes that we can
resolve the main issue.. First i have told them that my son wrote a prgram to
record the tels and ntalks- and, that i am sending this now to the staff so
they know- the person is to stop bothering me. Next, i have everyone in party
send a tel , telling the person to leave me alone- this wokrs well. as of today
i have matheced and surpassed the amougnt of ntalk requests with my tel back
saying simply fuck off.. some times they get the hint after this, and some
times they dont If this sounds un like the normal liz you all are used to- be
advised its just total frustartion of being asked for "Hot chat" perpetually
on line. I have asked ryan to amke a program controling just my option of using
ntalk. Of course, im his mom- so he doesnt take teh request-- mine! seriously
:) Thanks for letting me spout. By the ways- i dont have any problemsin
dealing with the peoplz i do know- for the most part- its the total strangers
who want their "hot chat" fix of the day. unless any of them are millionaires-
i dont want to hear from them-- that was a big time joke - fior er for those
ywho dont know my humor
|
adbarr
|
|
response 48 of 315:
|
May 28 01:20 UTC 1996 |
Well, there is a challenge.Respect. Love, Caring, What is the true measure
of manhood here?
|
ryan1
|
|
response 49 of 315:
|
May 29 03:10 UTC 1996 |
It is kind of hard to respect and care for somebody who
is calling you all sorts of names--and half I have
never even heard of before I went on grex!.
|