response 301 of 367:

Mar 13 22:14 UTC 1997

You cant prove who voted when...or how many voters voted yesterday or the day
before.  Just because Valerie changed her vote on the last day doesnt mean that
other people didnt vote on the last day as well.  I dont see the problem, since
all extending the time period did was give more people time to vote.  In any
case this was brought up and there was no objection.  End of story.

response 303 of 367:

Mar 13 22:56 UTC 1997

[Actually, it was my mind that changed.  The proposal wasn't even being voted
on at that point]

response 305 of 367:

Mar 14 02:49 UTC 1997

will this be implemented before the other motion is voted on?
*is trying to decide when to leave*

response 307 of 367:

Mar 14 03:32 UTC 1997

I would certainly hope this policy would be implemented without 
delay.  Then as we go into the next vote we'll have a better
feeling for how it goes.  I'm looking forward to any fine-tuning
of this issue to be based more on fact than fear. 

Janc and srw, when do you plan to make the switch?

response 309 of 367:

Mar 14 05:26 UTC 1997

I also think it is totally inappropriate to hang the vote on one 
person's back. You don't really know how anyone voted, nor when nor if 
they changed their vote. You only know what the claimed. The vote is 
officially a secret ballot.

response 311 of 367:

Mar 14 21:12 UTC 1997

I would appreciate some time. It would be curteous. Prove to me you're no
incapable of even that. I'm beginning to wonder.

response 313 of 367:

Mar 15 03:21 UTC 1997

It shouldn't be especially complicated to implement this policy, as we don't
have to note which conferences have special properties. I was feeling
particularly harried when I read your post Mary. I would like to give
preparation time for those people who want to remove selective items in
advance of this, out of respect for their wishes.

I am torn on the question of waiting for another vote. It would seem proper
to implement the policy which was approved by the members without delay, as
I am sure you will argue, but others may have a legitimate claim that if we
were to pass by membership vote in a very short time a compromise, then it
would be less disruptive to the Grex community not to implement a policy for
a short period which would cause pain to some, only to revise it shortly
thereafter. 

Besides, I am not sure how many different policies I want to implement. I am
leaning toward allowing the consensus building process come to rest first
before going off and implementing anything at all. I am undecided and wish
input and guidance on this.

response 315 of 367:

Mar 15 05:15 UTC 1997

Steve, you say, "I am sure you will argue..." but I'm not going to
argue.  So there. ;-)

Really, whatever folks decide to do here is fine by me.  You 
want to delay implementing this until all the votes are a done
deal, no problem.  

This issue has taken on a life of its own.  It maybe be something of a
novelty for this to happen on Grex but I've seen it many a time on M-net. 
Over the years I've watched in total amazement how folks can get so
completely immersed, dominated, and emotionally devastated by the politics
of a bbs.  Grex is getting big enough now that we have collected a cadre
of folks susceptible to this behavior.  Enough to feed the action and make
it a good show.  Progress, of a kind. 

But maybe it's what I'm exposed to all day long that keeps me from feeling
too much empathy for this crisis.  You want to feel crushed?  Find out
your cancer is inoperative.  You want to feel helpless?  Watch a loved one
clinging to life while your heart-felt wish is they would mercifully die.
Feel left out of the decision making?  Deal with a teenager out of
control.  Feel you've "lost your home?"  Be without a place to sleep at
night. There are issues worthy of the kind of angst we've seen here.
Unregistered reading of a bbs's conferences ain't it.

I'm hoping some leadership steps up to the podium and helps get us through
this (exaggerated) issue.  You won't please everyone but you will be
helping all involved.

response 317 of 367:

Mar 15 08:52 UTC 1997

I have two questions:  Why?  No reason to do it, really.. people for the most
part won't really care, I dont' think it will noticeably increase volume. 
Most people on grex don't even care about confs.  Why not?  anon people can
read grex confs all they want.. jsut telnet itn, get yourself a login, and
read.  It's not private.  it's public.  I don't really care.

response 319 of 367:

Mar 15 21:14 UTC 1997

Re #315:  Well said, Mary, and I too don't think the issue is worth getting
worked up about.  But everything is relative, and if Grex politics is really
important to someone, well then they'll feel strongly about it.  But really,
people, let's keep some perspective.

response 323 of 367:

Mar 23 00:02 UTC 1997

I think there needs to be a plan on where we are going with this issue. 
I'd suggest that the policy which was voted on (this item) be put into
effect as soon as either Jan or Steve can make the necessary changes to
Backtalk. 

Jan, what was the estimate you gave today on how soon you could have this
done?

Meanwhile, I'd suggest the Board do one of two things.  The Board could
decide to make Jan's unreadable-to-the-unregistered utility available as
as soon as the program is written.  Or, if there is a strong feeling this
utility needs to be voted on by the membership, then someone who feels
that way needs to propose such a vote. 

This issue needs to be resolved.