|
Grex > Coop7 > #128: Web-Page Building on Grex |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 382 responses total. |
srw
|
|
response 300 of 382:
| 
Feb 4 01:22 UTC 1996 |
I can't agree with that. You are posting them on the wall for everyone to
see. Everything posted is immediately available everywhere. It's quite the
same as standing there holding the pictures, right on the playround. Anyone
who knows you are doing it is free to walk over to you and take one of your
pictures. How long will it take for the word to get around on the playground?
|
ajax
|
|
response 301 of 382:
|
Feb 4 06:57 UTC 1996 |
In a school hallway, you're ostensibly circumventing adult
supervision. On the web, supervision for kids is both possible
and recommended. When you take kids to a library, you
guide them to the children's section. Why is the web different?
You don't want kids talking unsupervised to strangers at the door
or on the phone - why expect safety talking to strangers on the
computer?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 302 of 382:
|
Feb 4 08:02 UTC 1996 |
I think there is a difference between having access to burning candles
in a church, and passing them out to people pumping gas at a gas
station.
Steve, where have you been? The word has *already* gotten around on the
playground.
|
srw
|
|
response 303 of 382:
|
Feb 4 20:25 UTC 1996 |
You mean that Grex is the place to go to for sex stories?
I don't think so. But the word would be out if it were true.
And then everyone on the playground would come to see.
Rob, I wonder what you mean. Schools don't permit strangers on their
playgrounds during school hours, so you seem to be saying that we aren't a
playground. Kids need supervision here. How do you plan to provide that?
Perhaps you think parents are supposed to be responsible for ensuring that
their children don't get connected to the wrong sort of place. How?
It's not like in real life, where it's much easier to do.
This is cyberspace, where with one click of the mouse the kid can jump outof
the playground into terra incognita.
TThis is why the mainstream (*NOT* just the religious right) are solidly
behind the idea of putting controls on sites that expose children to material
like this. The Grex community is not paying attention to this fact, and is
in for a rude awakening, real soon now, I suspect.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 304 of 382:
|
Feb 4 23:04 UTC 1996 |
Oh, so soon! Right here in River City. Pack toothbrushes. Read
Tom Wolfe for background, ye white-collar defendants..
|
rcurl
|
|
response 305 of 382:
|
Feb 5 07:23 UTC 1996 |
I guess I just don't have the romantic view of children's psyches. No, I
didn't mean that Grex is a favorite site for sexuality - there are many
much better, faster, juicier, etc sites - but that these children that you
want to protect from the real world already know what you want to protect
them from. Its available from all their friends in the playground.
I doubt that the "mainstream" are "solidly behind" censorship of
cyberspace, but I would agree that there are a lot of narrow minded people
that are willing to get very loud about their paranoia, which does lead to
censorship, unless one mounts a counter defense. A problem for freedom of
speech here, however, is that while most don't support censorship, they
also don't have a high regard for obsessions with pornography and
violence. I go along with the view that I do not support those that are
obsessed, but will defend their rights of free speech. One result of this
is that rational people do draw a line at what they will vociferously
defend, not because it is "bad" but because one must select one's battles.
I think this is what happened with movie ratings. I don't know which way
it will go with respect to cyberspace.
|
ajax
|
|
response 306 of 382:
|
Feb 5 07:40 UTC 1996 |
Re 303's "Kids need supervision here. How do you plan to provide that?"
You think that, some other people think that, but it is not universal.
Especially when "kids" includes anyone up to 17 years, 364 days old.
I believe it depends to a large extent on the "kid" in question, and
that's a call for parents to make.
For young kids, parents are supposed to provide some supervision -
they can't be left home alone, for example. At that stage, parents
should supervise computer activity to the extent they deem appropriate.
I doubt many really young kids are on Grex unsupervised - the text of
newuser alone requires fairly mature reading skills.
If parents want to minimize their work in supervising their kids, they
can hook them up to a well-controlled on-line service. AOL and Prodigy
provide "child" settings to limit access to areas, restrict incoming
mail to approved senders, and provide adult supervision in all their
child-accessible chat areas. You pay for it, but that's usually the
case when you want someone else to watch your kids for you.
With or without controlled access to web pages on Grex, parents
concerned about what their children are exposed to should still
supervise them here, because we'll still have mail and real-time
chats where anyone (including children) might say anything.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 307 of 382:
|
Feb 7 02:56 UTC 1996 |
And the Grex policy is . . . ?
|
popcorn
|
|
response 308 of 382:
|
Feb 7 03:08 UTC 1996 |
...to debate it to death without coming to any particular conclusion.
|
raven
|
|
response 309 of 382:
|
Feb 7 05:19 UTC 1996 |
re #308 ...and we *don't* have much time, this will be signed into
law this week. I still think there should be a vote among the membership
to see if they want Grex to take *any* steps toward obeying the telecom
law.
|
nephi
|
|
response 310 of 382:
|
Feb 7 05:46 UTC 1996 |
Are you a member, Matthew? It is up to members to make official proposals
for the membership to vote on. If you are, go make an official proposal.
Remember, you don't need to have a quorum anymore, so it'll be much easier
to get your proposal passed.
If you're not a member, well, I guess you should leave it to someone who
cares . . . .
Also, keep in mind that if the membership were to vote for something that
could put the board in prison, several very good board members may be forced
to resign, possibly leaving no quorum and no decision-making ability. But
then, that may be what you want, anyway.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 311 of 382:
|
Feb 7 05:51 UTC 1996 |
You might want to read the bylaws before entering your proposal, Matthew.
There are just a few steps to follow.
|
nephi
|
|
response 312 of 382:
|
Feb 7 06:06 UTC 1996 |
By the way, I linked this item from Co-op 7, Item 128 to Co-op 8, Item 10 a
while back, but Grex promptly crashed on me, so that I couldn't enter this
notice.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 313 of 382:
|
Feb 7 11:48 UTC 1996 |
I would very much like to know what Grex policy will be with respect to
complying with the decency provisions of the new Telcom law. I don't like the
law but it is there. Some things are happening with HVCN that might relate
to Grex but frankly, I hesitate to raise these questions until Grex takes
a stand on this issue. HVCN will take steps (whatever they may be) to comply
in good faith. I would hate to see Grex depart on this issue. There is a fight
to be fought within the system. We, whether individually, or as a group, will
join that fight.
|
remmers
|
|
response 314 of 382:
|
Feb 7 12:38 UTC 1996 |
Arnold makes a point that I have also raised before: Organizations
affected by and opposed to this law need to be talking to each
other and working together to fight it. So far I have seen little
evidence that this is happening on a local (Ann Arbor area) level.
Grex users have been discussing it online for a while now, M-Net is
barely beginning to talk about it, and I am in the dark about what
other local organizations are doing. The Commnets conference on
Grex has been silent about. Some mailing lists that I seem to
recall being set up a while ago to communicate on matters of
common interest and concern (like WIN, maybe?), and of which as
far as I know I am still a member, appear to be silent.
On the other hand, #313 appears to impose a precondition on Grex
for HVCN to be willing to talk to us: We'll talk, but only if you
agree to such-and-such a stance in advance. I am disappointed in
that. This is a crisis, we're all in the same boat, and we need
to be as open with each other as we possibly can. It is not a
time to be setting up barriers between us. Okay?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 315 of 382:
|
Feb 7 15:32 UTC 1996 |
1. What new Telcom law? B^}
2. I've stated my opinion that Grex should comply when the regulations
are issued that define "decency", etc.
3. Let's ask the ACLU what course of action they recommend for internet
hosts.
|
raven
|
|
response 316 of 382:
|
Feb 7 19:15 UTC 1996 |
No I am not currently a member of Grex, however I was a member in
good standing from April 93 through the middle of 95. I do log in every
day and participate in the confs and fw the cyberpunk conf. So I would
say that I am a member of the Grex community, if my proposal is dismissed
out of hand certainly I will take that as a slight on my almost 3 years
participation in the Grex community. It may be academic anyway if Grex
decides to comply with the telecom I will certainly leave Grex forever.
I suspect others may make the same decsion. Afterall the one thing Grex
can offer that a major service provider cannot offer is intelligent
dissent.
|
ajax
|
|
response 317 of 382:
|
Feb 7 19:43 UTC 1996 |
Hmm. I wonder if whoever hosted the Lansing freenet-ish gettogether
a while back (was it MichNet?) would consider organizing another one
where groups could discuss different approaches to the issue.
Matthew, your membership status doesn't matter at all for making
proposals here. It does matter for calling for an official specific
membership vote. I agree with you that a member vote may be a good
idea, but I think it should wait until a concrete proposal emerges.
Voting for *in*action, especially at this point, sounds unnecessary,
since we have inaction by default!
|
mta
|
|
response 318 of 382:
|
Feb 7 20:43 UTC 1996 |
Does anyon have the exact wording of the requirements that have passed into
law? It would be especially helpful in making informed decisions...
|
robh
|
|
response 319 of 382:
|
Feb 7 21:22 UTC 1996 |
That's exactly what I've been thinking. I'll go to the VTW Web
site and see if I can get the current wording.
|
raven
|
|
response 320 of 382:
|
Feb 7 21:34 UTC 1996 |
re #317 Good point, however we should be ready because the CDA will be
signed into law, probably, by the end of the week. Does anyone have
an idea of how long it will take the (FCC?) to promolgate rules, and
start enforcing the CDA?
|
robh
|
|
response 321 of 382:
|
Feb 7 21:52 UTC 1996 |
I've downloaded a copy of the current wording. It's in:
/home/robh/cda
According to the wording, the law will go into effect 30 days
after it's been signed.
|
mta
|
|
response 322 of 382:
|
Feb 7 22:20 UTC 1996 |
Thanks, Rob.
|
scg
|
|
response 323 of 382:
|
Feb 8 03:00 UTC 1996 |
The actual wording is important, as is an opinion from an attorney on what
the wording means. If we have 30 days, hopefully that will be enough time
for the court challenges and/or the "corrections" bill to go through.
Especially with that abortion section thrown in, I can't see how this would
hold up in court, or how Grex could continue to exist if we were to obey a
law like this. I don't like to have Grex breaking the law, but there is a
point at which the law just becomes too much.
Maybe it's time for a law imposing severe penalties on those lawmakers who
vote for laws that are later found to be unconstitutional.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 324 of 382:
|
Feb 8 03:15 UTC 1996 |
That would violate the separation of powers, as it is only the judiciary
that can declare a law unconstitutional - Congress cannot make that
decision. However, their adopting unconstitutional laws reflects upon
their intelligence, which is a good basis for the electorate to choose
how to vote.
|