response 352 of 624:

Jan 15 18:33 UTC 1997

there appears never to have been an objection to a *selection* of
grex conferences being available to unregistered web users (non-grexian).
<thankxx for the language clarification remmers).
  
there is *substantial* and serious objection to the wholesale,
open-floodgates availabillity, ABSENT a local, grex loginid.
  
what i see as the primary motivation for unregistered reading (and
posting prohibited) is to create "bait" for the planet to take, become
a grexer, contribute to the conferences, and ....perhaps contribute
in other ways to the system.
  
if this synthesis and analysis is sufficiently accurate, there might
be -in place already- not only the mechanism (backtalk) but also
previously approved bait (intro.cf).
  
remember/recognize that bait is not "i don't beliefve i ate the
whole thing," but rather a quality sampling for further (login as newuser)
involvement.
  
as i understand the function, purpose and intent of the intro.cf, it 
is *specifically* intended to be such bait. the other ~92 conferences
are for further involvement (login as newuser to delve deeper) (do we
really have ~92 conferences or did i dream that ##?)
  
this concept may necessitate a restart of intro.cf, fashioning it for
a more focused but identical function for which it was created.
  
linking would become less of a problem if there were *prior* approvals
among the various participants and fws.
  
submitted for conmmet and consideration after having said very little
because i was trying to find the real common ground, system benefit
and respect for teh wide variety of poistions which make grex great.
  
i also join with mta in #345.

robust discussion among reasonable ppl strengthens the system.

response 356 of 624:

Jan 16 03:51 UTC 1997

Howabout 1. Conferencers will discuss whether they want their confernces
readable by unregistered users.  The final decision for each conference
is made by its fair witness.

Otherwise it sounds great to me. :-)

response 358 of 624:

Jan 16 14:43 UTC 1997

I totally agree with Rane and go even further saying I feel
this whole "compromise" goes against what we are trying to
do with Grex.  This plan is little more than a bridge
to get people out of corners they have painted themselves into.
(Try parsing that sentence before your first cup of coffee!)

Will we still be working with a guest login?  Who is going
to moderate all the bickering and power-plays this FW decides
thing is going to allow?  What happens the next time a couple
of users announce they are crying all night and will leave
if they don't get their way.

I know this sounds harsh but we don't need mothers here we
need good leadership.  Good leadership would look at our 
goals and go from there.  

response 360 of 624:

Jan 16 16:13 UTC 1997

I remember a discussion where one was planned and there
seemed to be a lot of support for how useful it would be.
Maybe it just never got coded.

Would it be possible for a membership vote to be held
where there were three options - one to allow unregistered
reading of all conferences, one to keep things as they are
now, and other for a hybrid resolution?  That way you'd
get to see how the membership would like this to go.

response 362 of 624:

Jan 16 16:32 UTC 1997

Right, there was a big discussion about a "guest account" a
couple of years ago. It never got coded. Ironically, even though
the guest account would have allowed unregistered reading of
all conferences, I don't recall that there was much if any
controversy about that aspect of it.

If the proposal is worded as Valerie proposes, I would probably
vote against it even though I favor unregistered reading,
because I'm opposed to making it an option for new conferences
(and only reluctantly willing to make it an option for existing
ones).

Which raises the question of just what it would mean if the
proposal is defeated, since people could be voting against it
for different reasons.

response 364 of 624:

Jan 16 16:35 UTC 1997

Multi-way votes are really difficult to do fairly.  EG, if you have options
A1, A2, and B, with A1 and A2 being similar, and the majority of people
prefering either A1 or A2, then B may win because the majority were split over
A1 and A2.  There are ways to handle these things, but they are full of
paradoxes and problems.  If it can be narrowed down to two options that would
be nicer.

response 366 of 624:

Jan 16 17:43 UTC 1997

Valerie's proposal, makes Grex look hypocritical, because 
on the one hand Grex would be saying that under no circumstances can
conferences close themselves to *registered* users (any of
them at any time) and on the other hand saying that with *unregistered*
users do as you please.  An unregistered user would be a user of grex and
should not be treated differently, for the same reason that *members*
arent given preferential treatment over regular users in terms of conference
access.  Users of Grex are users of grex.  Period.  It is

It is obvious that those who are against ubnnregisterd reading only 
begrudginly accept current grex open-access policy, and would prefer if they
could close their
confs to ALL users and selectively admit people.  Open access
means not being able to control who reads your posts, not KNOWING who is
readingyour posts.

And it would also be setting a really bad precedent if concensus is
torpedoed by three or four people threatening to leave.  That gives THEM more
power than anyone else here, they are dictatingp olicy.  There are plenty
of us who feel just as strongly as they do that unregistered users SHOULD
be allowed access to all the conferences.  Yet because we are not threatening
to leave, our views do not matter as much.  Tjhey can dicatate the wording
of the proposal BECAUSE they are threatening to leave.  And that stinks.

If Valerie is being really fair, she will propose not only her latest
pro[posal but the one in item #0, the original proposal, and let the members
decide.

response 368 of 624:

Jan 16 19:00 UTC 1997

I would favor a proposal that allows current conferences to discuss the issue,
with the fw(s) deciding based on those discussions whether or not the
conference is open to unregistered reading.  
HOwever, I want this to be a limited compromise, only for current conferences.
All new conferences would be open to unregistered reading.  

response 370 of 624:

Jan 16 21:22 UTC 1997

re #367 Kerouac does repeat himself a lot doesn't he. :-)

re #369  I think it makes sense to let the confernces decide myself.  It's
more democratic than ruling by fiat for the unknown future.  Is the only
objection to letting future confs decide the linking issue?  If that is
the case lets try the proposal as Valerie has stated for 90 days and see
if linking *really* is a problem.

response 372 of 624:

Jan 17 01:32 UTC 1997

I support new conferences being open, without a decision by the users.  The
"let current users decide" sounds like the compromise between the "all open,
right now" faction, and the "every conference decides for itself, forever"
faction.  While prefereing the "all open" option, I can understand some
current conferences not wanting that.  I don't think any more conferences
should be started under the innocent assumption that there is "privacy" on
Grex.  

response 374 of 624:

Jan 17 15:53 UTC 1997

Anyone else sucking parts of their (or someone else's) bodies over
this issue?  Which ones?