|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 138 responses total. |
cyklone
|
|
response 32 of 138:
| 
Jan 16 20:59 UTC 2004 |
Do you think that non-profits and not-for-profits are excused from
documenting things in writing? Guess again. Your questions again display
the "grex as personal playground" approach I find so distasteful. At the
very least, when grex claims to support free and uncensored speech, then
yes, I damn sure expect any policies in opposition to free speech and in
support of censorship to be in writing. I really don't think that's asking
too much.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 33 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:13 UTC 2004 |
With all due respect, aruba - and I *do* respect you and other grex baff - a
policy is not a "policy" unless it *is* documented. Otherwise it's
"folklore", passed down from one baff to another, I guess. And allows for
a valerie to claim "I *thought* it was OK for someone to kill her own post,
so that's all I did."
|
aruba
|
|
response 34 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:18 UTC 2004 |
It's asking way too much to ask that all Grex policies be documented. We
wouldn't have a Grex at all if that were a requirement, because the people
who founded it would never have agreed to that. Grex policy has always
been to have as few rules as possible.
Grex is not anyone's personal playground. But it is not a government
organization or a publicly traded company, either. If you want that level
of organization, you're going to have to look somewhere else. In
particular, you're going to have to go to an institution where you're
paying someone's salary to serve you.
I don't object to clarifying policies, but your indignation at them not
being written in blood already displays a real misunderstanding of the way
things work. In order for Grex to function at all, we need to strike a
balance between staff members knowing what's expected of them, but not
expecting them to meet such high standards that they won't be willing to
do it for free.
|
aruba
|
|
response 35 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:22 UTC 2004 |
Kevin slipped in. With all due respect to him, he's wrong. A policy
doesn't have to be written down to exist. Writing it down clarifies that
everyone is on the same page, provided everyone has read what's written.
Should we write up a handbook of grex policies, and require all prospective
staffers to pass a test on the contents?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 36 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:30 UTC 2004 |
All members and users, too?
|
gull
|
|
response 37 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:55 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:35: It seems, at least in this case, there was a disagreement
about one of these "unwritten policies" you're talking about. So, I
feel I have to ask how staff members find out about these policies, and
how anyone can judge whether one is broken when there's nothing to base
that decision on.
|
gull
|
|
response 38 of 138:
|
Jan 16 21:56 UTC 2004 |
(I'm trying hard to believe that talk about "unwritten policies" is not
just an excuse for being arbitrary and selective about enforcement.)
|
albaugh
|
|
response 39 of 138:
|
Jan 16 22:34 UTC 2004 |
I don't know if you consider it a "policy" or not, but look at all the pages
& pages associated with newuser! I am not looking for a *treatise* on every
single think that it is important for baff to know about, but there should
probably at least be something listed (e.g. an outline) about all the things
that a baff would have to consider. Then for each item, there may or may not
be a written policy for it, but "if you don't know you better ax somebody".
So I guess that the proposal (for member vote) alive in this coop re: killing
items is needed after all...
|
naftee
|
|
response 40 of 138:
|
Jan 16 23:04 UTC 2004 |
biff baff boff
|
tod
|
|
response 41 of 138:
|
Jan 16 23:36 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 42 of 138:
|
Jan 17 02:24 UTC 2004 |
Clearly it's Grex's policy to trust the staff to make decisions where
there are no written policies. And to trust the users, the
fairwitnesses, and the Board. There's a general philosophy which
people pick up through association with other users, and also some of
it is written in some places.
I work at a pretty regimented company, and it in turn is owned by a
very highly regimented (and government regulated) company. Even so,
not all decisions which can come up are written down. There are
enough rules no one can possibly read them all and keep them in mind
in order to apply them at all times. I have a general sense of how
the rules apply, and then I live within that general sense.
Grex doesn't have a professional rule-writing staff as my employer
does. Grex staff members have a general sense of the Grex philosophy,
and they apply it as they think best, and we can all live with that,
pretty much. Usually if they don't know, staff members ask first.
They ask each other, or the Board, or occasionally post an item to
ask, or even have a formal request for a vote, though that's rare.
It works fine. It always had. It would now; the current situation
would be manageable (there's disagreement but Grex can be reasonable
and deal with that) if it weren't for excessive heed being paid to a
few users who want attention and trouble, not a solution. Look for
those who are being inciting and not seeking a solution -- if you have
to -- and stop paying so much attention to them, and then Grex can go
back to being Grex.
I think these last two weeks have been the worst two weeks Grex has
seen. So do most who come here regularly, I bet.
Some think it's the best. That's why there's a problem. They're
having a ball, and too many of us (including me) are falling for it.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 43 of 138:
|
Jan 17 03:58 UTC 2004 |
Jep, there is a solution. It is reasonable. You just don't like it. And it
is disingenuous for anyone to suggest this is merely a matter of staff
having to figure out how to act in some gray area. Grex professed to
support free and uncensored speech. There is no room to argue that what
valerie did, both for herself and on your behalf, wasn't a violation of
that express policy.
|
aruba
|
|
response 44 of 138:
|
Jan 17 04:10 UTC 2004 |
No one's arguing that, cyklone.
|
jep
|
|
response 45 of 138:
|
Jan 17 13:03 UTC 2004 |
Cyklone, you don't have much interest in Grex other than meddling with
it's policy. Your views of what is reasonable for those who regularly
spend time on Grex are just not that important.
|
scott
|
|
response 46 of 138:
|
Jan 17 13:39 UTC 2004 |
(Basically jp2 is asking whether Grex is ISO 9001[?] compliant, which is
something that businesses do voluntarily, rarely by regulation)
|
cyklone
|
|
response 47 of 138:
|
Jan 17 14:34 UTC 2004 |
Re #45: Drop the self-righteous BS. I was obviously involved enough with
grex to make numerous posts to your divorce items. On that basis alone
your logic is unsupportable and my participation in this debate is more
than justified. I DO NOT appreciate a user attempting to deny me access to
my own words or the words of others. Is that clear enough?
It also appears as if you are still desperately trying to find new reasons
for voters to go your way when the facts and policies (at least those that
were commonly expressed and understood, ie free and uncensored speech) do
not support your position. Did it ever occur to you that if you were to
be a little less obstinate, and a little more forthcoming about the facts
and your reasons, people might voluntarily do what you are now demanding
be done without their permission? Your attitude is pissing away a lot of
the good will people felt/feel toward you. You might want to give that
some thought.
|
willcome
|
|
response 48 of 138:
|
Jan 17 14:58 UTC 2004 |
Grex runs Picospan, not YAPP.
|
jep
|
|
response 49 of 138:
|
Jan 17 16:37 UTC 2004 |
There is nothing more I know of that I can say to explain my actions.
I think I've said it all. I doubt if there has ever been an action
taken on Grex which was so thoroughly documented, explained and
justified; right down to the minute by minute timing and the thoughts
behind all of my actions. If I say anything new, it will obviously
seem like rationalization. Anything new I say was probably not
something I considered then; it's something I've thought of since.
That's rationalization. But it's not necessarily wrong.
I don't think were any postings by "cyklone" in the divorce items, so
it wouldn't be obvious at all that you posted there. Oh, I don't
really doubt it was you, since you've said so and I don't have any
reason to disbelieve you. It just is not obvious.
I don't recall if there was ever a posting on Grex by "cyklone" until
you decided to get involved in Grex policy. Your .plan says you've
been here for several years, though. You must have done something
while you were here. I just don't know what it was.
I think people should consider that there are several loginids here
who have done little on Grex but enter items in coop. Why is that?
Is it because of a great and selfless, interest in making sure Grex is
well run, and amazing ability to analyze Grex's needs and well-being?
They sure are adamant... it must be from strong principles. I guess.
Things sure are better, here on Grex, aren't they, since these people
got involved in administration for the past few months? I've noticed
many improvements since they showed up here in coop. Let me think for
a minute and I'll list them.
Hmm, let me think for another minute.
|
jp2
|
|
response 50 of 138:
|
Jan 17 17:09 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 51 of 138:
|
Jan 17 20:25 UTC 2004 |
Let me try another approach. Jep, you say "There is nothing more I know of
that I can say to explain my actions. I think I've said it all. I doubt
if there has ever been an action taken on Grex which was so thoroughly
documented, explained and justified; right down to the minute by minute
timing and the thoughts behind all of my actions.
First of all, if you think I am mistaken about what follows, please feel
free to direct me to your item and post numbers rather than reposting it
yourself. What I do recall, without such a review, is that you wished in
hindsight you had never entered the ites. You also expressed concern your
son might learn of those items. You then went on to discount the
possibility that such a discovery could have a net positive value and
also, I think, mentioned you'd simply prefer not to deal with it.
Here's the problem: even if you get your way, the cat is out of the bag.
The *gist* of much of your text is now present here for all to see. In
other words, if your son uses the same diligence you suppose it will take
for him to find your divorce items, he will stumble across these in the
coop cf. What is next? Will you be proposing to delete all such items in
this cf?
If you fear the polyboys will call his attention to the divorce item in
much the same way they informed hera's son of her "sex with hubby" mnet
items, guess what? They will just point him to these discussions instead
(which I'm fairly certain have already been saved by someone on the
system). Frankly, in terms of gaining perspective, your son would be
better off, IMNSHO, reading the originals, which have far more context, as
opposed to reading coop.
It still seems to me that rather than engaging in some sort of vintage
Soviet Russian rewrite (or "unwrite") of history, you would be better off
figuring out how to deal with that inevitable day when you and your son
come face to face with just how distraught you were over the divorce. You
can discount my opinion as that of a "know-it-all." But I speak as a human
being who knows most secrets cannot be buried and most certainly not
yours. I'm sorry you can't see this or accept it as FACT. I am also sorry
you are causing such problems for grex, and at least some of its users, in
your pursuit of what is ultimately unobtainable.
|
jep
|
|
response 52 of 138:
|
Jan 18 00:28 UTC 2004 |
re resp:51: Cyklone, now you're trying to run Grex from afar *and*
telling me how to raise my son. Do you do this kind of stuff a lot?
|
willcome
|
|
response 53 of 138:
|
Jan 18 00:39 UTC 2004 |
Now I'm going to reread these items. I can't imagine it'll be boring,
even if it's Saturday night.
|
willcome
|
|
response 54 of 138:
|
Jan 18 00:40 UTC 2004 |
(wow, uh oh! You didn't use enough noun
specifiers! You'll confuse the girls.)
|
cyklone
|
|
response 55 of 138:
|
Jan 18 00:46 UTC 2004 |
Neither of those statements are true so I can't very well answer your
question. My saying you can't hide your feelings from your son (unless he
stays off of grex and mnet and avoid grexers and mnetters) is not advice
on raising him. You may wish my words weren't true, but you can't wish
away the reality. At best you can hope he stays off mnet and grex and
doesn't learn any other way. I'm sorry you can't accept that. And if you
can't understand that you are merely confirming my belief you are slipping
back into the same unproductive obstinance and willful refusal to deal
with reality that marked your early posts in the divorce item.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 56 of 138:
|
Jan 18 00:47 UTC 2004 |
<willcome snuck>
|