|
Grex > Oldcoop > #145: Member Resolution: Undead the Kilt | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 109 responses total. |
lowclass
|
|
response 37 of 109:
| 
Mar 27 02:16 UTC 2004 |
So, seeing as Grex has been around for a while the original FOunders own
everything that's been written here?
THat's farcical, and deliberately so. THe iten entry might belong to
the intiiating poster, but nothing past that point that the origionator hasn't
contributed would EVER belong to the, in any case. USage, in the form of
posting an item is one thing, but ownership is a totally diffent concept.
Ownership and use were confused, or worse, and tend result was the erasure
of total line of conversation. At NO time did I or do i EVER, transfer
ownership of whatever I write here to the styaff or board. If THAT is non
profit practice or worse, bylaw, please inform me here.
If that's the case ,i'll be out of here so fast you'll hear the somic
boom.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 38 of 109:
|
Mar 27 02:25 UTC 2004 |
No, it's not the case, lowclass. I thought it was, but I've since learned
I was wrong.
|
parcel
|
|
response 39 of 109:
|
Mar 27 03:30 UTC 2004 |
When you gonna learn you're wrong about /etc/passwd, chump?
|
soup
|
|
response 40 of 109:
|
Mar 27 04:05 UTC 2004 |
re 33 I volunteered gelinas for that job.
|
coopcf
|
|
response 41 of 109:
|
Mar 27 04:08 UTC 2004 |
Hey guys:
Item 7 in the agora40 conference contains a lot of content that eventually
migrated to the divorce item created by jep. Is there evidence that this
conference has had increased activity due to people attempting to find
out more about the situation?
|
aruba
|
|
response 42 of 109:
|
Mar 27 05:53 UTC 2004 |
Re #37: The issue has never been ownership, Carl. Grex stopped publishing
some text, but at no point did anyone asserted that had anything to do
with who owned it.
Brooke: as I said, I'm utterly sick of this whole thing. Everyone has
already stated their opinions many times here. (I hope you realized that
the discussion took place in many, many items in coop? Dunno if you read
them all. If you did read them all in a day, God help you.) So I don't
feel like starting the argument all over again by stating mine again.
Email me if you really want to know.
|
jp2
|
|
response 43 of 109:
|
Mar 27 06:07 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
twenex
|
|
response 44 of 109:
|
Mar 27 13:13 UTC 2004 |
Question is, if *gelinas* is an idiot, WHAT does that make polytwerp?
|
cyklone
|
|
response 45 of 109:
|
Mar 27 13:52 UTC 2004 |
"The issue has never been ownership, Carl. Grex stopped publishing
some text, but at no point did anyone asserted that had anything to do
with who owned it."
BULLSHIT! That is *EXACTLY* what this was all about. The
anti-restorationists voted to strip non-favored users of their rights to
control their posts in order to do personal favors for favored persons.
The problem is that feeble-minded people started making specious arguments
about how the users never lost any rights because they could repost their
words. I very patiently (at first) explained the fallacy of that argument.
Sadly, a bunch of unprincipled fools either didn't have the brain-power or
didn't want to use what they had to understand this very obvious point.
If the anti-restorationists really believe this is NOT about ownership,
then here is my proposal:
RETURN MY DAMN POSTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
parcel
|
|
response 46 of 109:
|
Mar 27 16:42 UTC 2004 |
YEAH< ANTI_RESTORATIONISTS!
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 47 of 109:
|
Mar 28 10:55 UTC 2004 |
resp:29 I do too. (I like the way Brooke put things.)
resp:36 if I understand it right, responses to an item should be
controlled by those who write them... because they have merit and worth
of their *own*. I'm not an expert on copyright law or any sort of that
precedence, but I think the argument that has been put forth is valid.
An item author should *not* delete responses even if he/she decides to
delete the original item-- I think the rights belong to those who wrote
the responses. At least, it would seem to be that way with the
precedence of the scribble command (and how freeze and retire now
stand). Scribble seems to point to a response by response, post by
post, ownership.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 48 of 109:
|
Mar 28 11:38 UTC 2004 |
Arguing against response 36 is unnecessary. The recently approved proposal
on item deletion contradicts that response.
|
parcel
|
|
response 49 of 109:
|
Mar 28 18:14 UTC 2004 |
Contradict isn't the right word.
|
aruba
|
|
response 50 of 109:
|
Mar 29 03:47 UTC 2004 |
Re #45: The ownership of a response has no bearing on whether Grex is
obliged to keep publishing it.
|
parcel
|
|
response 51 of 109:
|
Mar 29 04:18 UTC 2004 |
don't hurt yourself, aruba.
|
glenda
|
|
response 52 of 109:
|
Mar 29 06:13 UTC 2004 |
I see Grex sort of like a library or a bookstore. Books go out of print or
are removed from the shelves to make room for newer books all the time.
Sometimes a book sits there and gathers dust for a while before it gets
noticed as not moving. Once it is noticed that it isn't moving, isn't being
bought or checked out or even taken from the shelf and glanced at; it is
taken off the shelf and either boxed up to be put in storage, given away,
remaindered, or just thrown out.
I haven't heard any massive outcry from authors of those books because they
were permenantly removed from the shelf. Libraries and bookstore don't give
guarantees that books will remain on the shelf forever, neither does Grex.
Nowhere on Grex has it ever been said that items will stay around and never
removed.
|
parcel
|
|
response 53 of 109:
|
Mar 29 07:27 UTC 2004 |
It's absurd to use that as an excuse for unecessary censorship, though.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 54 of 109:
|
Mar 29 13:05 UTC 2004 |
That's for damn sure. Once again long-time grexers struggle to create
pointless analogies to justify personal favors for favored persons and to
justify denying users the right to control what happens to their posts.
I'd love to see where in Grex's policies or terms of use it says Grex is
like a library or bookstore where managements controls the "stock" of
words.
|
jp2
|
|
response 55 of 109:
|
Mar 29 13:14 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
edina
|
|
response 56 of 109:
|
Mar 29 16:16 UTC 2004 |
Hmmmm. About the library analogy . . .well, the LOC keeps a copy of every
book published in the US. Soooo, in the spirit of that theory, there will
always be a place I can get a copy of the book. I have no place to get a copy
of what was written in the items (some of which I contributed to heavily).
Mark, I know you're sick of it. I apologize that I'm such a johnny-come
lately. But I really feel strongly about this. The divorce items being
deleted really hit me where it hurts - and I would hope it hurt you as well,
as I always got a lot out of your postings.
|
slynne
|
|
response 57 of 109:
|
Mar 29 19:35 UTC 2004 |
I think that there is some point to the library analogy. Items are
often removed from Grex due to inactivity. Sometimes they are archived
but it has always been my understanding that they are not. So we should
all understand that what we say here isnt necessarily going to stay
here forever.
However, the major difference is that typically before items are
removed, there is notice given before hand. This notice is given so
that anyone who wants to can make their own archive copies before the
item is deleted. That didnt happen in this case.
What happened is that the members decided to make an exception to the
usual way of doing things. Now, we can argue about if that was a good
decision or a bad decision all day but it doesnt really matter because
it is done now. Those items will not be restored.
But, Brooke, maybe someone made some personal copies of those items.
You might want to ask around. It is is possible that someone did who
would be willing to give you a copy. I heard a rumor that there were
copies floating around. You could also see if there is anyone on staff
willing to get your words from the deleted items for you although since
that would involve a lot of work, I wouldnt necessarily expect someone
to be willing to do it. But you never know.
|
parcel
|
|
response 58 of 109:
|
Mar 29 20:27 UTC 2004 |
The library analogy has no applicability to this at all. You're letting
Glenda pull a Jesuit rhetorical on you: she's defining the terms of the
debate. This is bad, because she's doing it wrong.
|
jp2
|
|
response 59 of 109:
|
Mar 29 20:31 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 60 of 109:
|
Mar 29 20:51 UTC 2004 |
Actually, Brooke, the Library of Congress does not always have a copy of every
book printed in the United States. At least, I have found that their records
have gaps (I have to check the web interface they have at times, and sometimes
they have no record of holding a particular book when I've then gone on to
find evidence that it does indeed exist). Anyway, that's beside the point.
I can see where you would have very strong feelings about your words being
lost and I would definitely take note of Slynne's advice and ask if anyone
has a private copy or if there would be any way of getting a copy of what you
wrote from the archived files. I feel kind of frustrated here (and I think
a lot of people do) because I can see where you and some other people had very
personal and timely posts made, and I can see that you would want to have a
copy of them, but, on the other hand, as someone who has said things she would
REALLY prefer weren't online anymore, I can see Jep and Valerie's feelings
too, and sympathize with their wishes as well. If you had asked me before
the divorce and baby diaries were deleted, I would have probably voted not
to delete them. But since they were deleted, I saw no purpose in putting them
back when some people seem to have made a habit of picking up hurtful things
and poking at others with them just to see if you bleed the thousandth time
as much as you did the first. (And while you can say that everyone ought to
be tough and ready to take the abuse, the truth is that some people can't,
and I'm more on that side than on the side of "right", if it comes to push
vs. shove. Feelings and consideration over abstract principles.) I suspect
that this will be ridiculed as "favors for favored persons" but in reality,
I hurt for you, too.
|
parcel
|
|
response 61 of 109:
|
Mar 29 20:55 UTC 2004 |
Use paragraphs. It makes it easier to skim.
|