|
Grex > Oldcoop > #376: The problems with Grex, e-mail and spam | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 480 responses total. |
nharmon
|
|
response 376 of 480:
| 
Dec 21 18:00 UTC 2006 |
Good point, Mike.
|
cross
|
|
response 377 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:11 UTC 2006 |
(That's where staff can bitch about all the users!)
(For the humor impaired, that was a joke. Okay, only partly.)
|
tod
|
|
response 378 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:39 UTC 2006 |
Before too many people get off on a tangent about MISSIONS, lets just look
at the Articles of Incorporation for both ARBORNET and CYBERSPACE
COMMUNICATIONS.
ARBORNET
To organize and operate a community-based computer conferecing system in Ann
Arbor, Michigan, involving as many local citizens as possible in computer
conferencing activities of an educational, informational, and data collection
and dissemination nature.
This organization is organized and operated exclusively for purposed described
in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
CYBERSPACE COMMUNICATIONS
The corporation is organized for such charitable and educational purposes as
may qualify it for exemption from the federal income tax under Section 501(c)3
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (or the corresponding
provisions of any future United States internal revenue law.)
More specifically, such purposes include, but are not limited to, the
advancement of public education and scientific endeavor through interaction
with computers, and humans via computers, using computer conferencing.
Further purposes include the exchange of scientific and technical information
about the various aspects of computer science, such as operating systems,
computer networks, and computer programming.
re #369
Grexers - and M-Netters - are only really interested in one goal. Keeping
Grex (or M-Net) up and running.
The charitable mission is a joke.
re #374
M-Net was tied to the Arbornet charter, which had provisions for
community forums and an educational mission. No one at all was ever
interested in those sorts of things, not since M-Net came along, anyway.
Neither of you remember when we had toolkits made and taught hardware class?
Or maybe you missed the M-Net/UNIX manual that was published?
To date, it seems both organizations have stuck to their purposes to provide
"computer conferencing" or "interaction with computers" and the educational
or scientific or data collection bits are sort of ancillary but they DO
exist.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 379 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:41 UTC 2006 |
The particular closed conferences for local charitable non-profits would
have been a service to the community. There is no reason why Grex cannot
provide different services for different community functions, within its
mission statement. They decided, however to continue to just do one thing
one way.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 380 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:47 UTC 2006 |
on Gres, "they" is "we". Grex is run cooperatively, grex is run
democratically, and there are procedures for anyone to bring an issue to a
vote. Any minority viewpoint can be posted for discussion. Any viewpoint
that is turned into a votable motion can be voted on by the whole membership
IF a sufficient percentage of the membership agrees to place it on the agenda
for a vote.
It is disengenuous for rane to say "They decided, however,,,,,,". Rane is
a member, and Rane's viewpoint did not prevail. No anonymous "they" made a
decision.
|
tod
|
|
response 381 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:53 UTC 2006 |
To be fair, Rane probably didn't know that historically Grex wasn't a
501(c)(3) from its inception nor for many years so that mental picture of
reaching out beyond the embittered Marcus crowd hadn't happened yet.
|
remmers
|
|
response 382 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:59 UTC 2006 |
Todd, that's ridiculous.
Grex is perfectly willing to support non-profits in ways within its means
and consistent with its policies, and has done so.
Re #375: "Except for staff, right?" Right. The policy disallowing closed
conferences, with an exception for Staff, was passed by member vote in
1997, by the way. See http://www.grex.org/grexdoc/archives/votes/vote05b
. The resolution was even stronger that, allowing unregistered users to
read conferences.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 383 of 480:
|
Dec 21 18:59 UTC 2006 |
I did know that as I was participating when Grex applied for 501etc. But
that was no reason why Grex could not have acted out of "community spirit".
I've noticed this tendency in other charitable non-profits. They tend to close
around the specific interests of the controlling group, and avoid the more
difficult realm of community outreach: unless, of course, that is specifically
written in their mission.
Re #380: don't read more into my use of "they" than is there. They, we, those
that discussed it, the board....were opposed.
|
cross
|
|
response 384 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:19 UTC 2006 |
It seems clear that the staff needs a place to communicate privately. I'm
not sure the staff conference is it; when I was on staff, I saw a lot of
bashing in the (admitedly older) items that I found distressing. The staff,
if anything on grex, is too closed, as has been stated. I would think that
a mailing list would be better suited for that sort of thing (and probably
more immediate, anyway: sometimes things get posted in the staff conference
that aren't acted on by certain people because those people haven't logged
into grex and thus don't see the conference).
Perhaps it's time to reconsider opening up the staff conference (or
restarting it with a new public conference).
I also think that, instead of calling Todd ridiculous, one should take it
as a clear voice of frustration with the current state of grex. This is
something that should be addressed, not dismissed out of hand.
|
remmers
|
|
response 385 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:47 UTC 2006 |
I took Todd's statement as a summary of Grex history and will stand by my
characterization of it.
I also believe that although Grex certainly has problems that need to be
addressed, the current state isn't nearly as bad as you like to make it
out to be.
|
tod
|
|
response 386 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:50 UTC 2006 |
re #382
Todd, that's ridiculous.
Grex is perfectly willing...
John, I was referring to Rane's perceptions at the time of the request. If
today, there is a movement to provide closed conferencing for other
501(c)(3)'s then I'd love to hear/see it.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 387 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:52 UTC 2006 |
*sigh* It does not bode well for board members to start the new year with
such ruffled fur. please, all of you, try to make a private list of the VALID
criticisms that are being made, no matter who makes them. Grex's current
state is distressful to quite a few of us. Board members sniping at each
other, in public, adds to the problems.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 388 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:52 UTC 2006 |
Tod slipped.
|
cross
|
|
response 389 of 480:
|
Dec 21 19:55 UTC 2006 |
Honestly, I'm not trying to snipe at anybody. But I'd prefer that we don't
just blow people's criticisms off. Personally, I think Todd's got some valid
things to say.
|
remmers
|
|
response 390 of 480:
|
Dec 21 20:08 UTC 2006 |
Re #385: You were speculating, then, and you were wrong. Rane was a
board member at the time. Grex was committed from its inception to
qualifying for and seeking 501(c)3 status, although we didn't have it yet.
Rane and others were fully aware of this.
Re #387: Colleen, I'm not trying to snipe either, but if I read something
that I believe is unfair or incorrect, I'm going to speak my mind.
|
tod
|
|
response 391 of 480:
|
Dec 21 20:29 UTC 2006 |
I'm going to speak my mind.
Me, too.
Grex wouldn't have happened if Marcus hadn't lost his M-Net account. Closed
conferencing was an idea that staff wanted to keep to itself and the idea of
giving that benefit to outsiders was beyond approach. I don't think my
assessment of the period in which Rane referenced is "ridiculous" at all.
If somehow the concept of providing closed conferences to 501(c)(3)'s has
somewhere along the line become acceptable, I'd love to hear it.
So far as I can tell, staff has been the one calling the shots on this since
the idea was first suggested. It's all too telling that the folks who jumped
for the seats on Board ARE/WERE staff, don't you think?
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 392 of 480:
|
Dec 21 20:40 UTC 2006 |
The folks who were ELECTED to the Board are/were staff. There were lots of
other choices for members to make
|
cross
|
|
response 393 of 480:
|
Dec 21 20:53 UTC 2006 |
I think that Todd is referring to the group of folks who logged into grex at
nearly the last moment to nominate/be nominated/accept nominations.... At
least one of those is a staff member who does not otherwise login on a regular
basis.
Regarding #390; Aw you're a swell guy, Remmers. I'll buy you a beer one of
these days....
|
tod
|
|
response 394 of 480:
|
Dec 21 21:00 UTC 2006 |
re #393
referring to the group of folks who logged into grex at
nearly the last moment to nominate/be nominated/accept nominations.... At
least one of those is a staff member who does not otherwise login on a
regular
basis.
Yea, I thought I was the only one who noticed that. It pretty much convinced
me to withdraw my nomination from the Board being that the major "problem"
voiced by users has most often been actions of the staff.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 395 of 480:
|
Dec 21 21:34 UTC 2006 |
I thought it was fishy. It also occurred to me it's possible, depending on
how many "non-insiders" like tod and cross run, to essentially fix the
election in advance by choosing not run once enough other "suitable" members
stay in the race.
|
slynne
|
|
response 396 of 480:
|
Dec 21 22:44 UTC 2006 |
Yeah well, I can think of easier ways to win elections where only 20
people vote.
|
cross
|
|
response 397 of 480:
|
Dec 21 23:11 UTC 2006 |
I didn't think it was fishy so much as transparent.
|
jep
|
|
response 398 of 480:
|
Dec 22 01:04 UTC 2006 |
re resp:378: Todd, I was involved in organizing the hardware classes
that TS Taylor taught. I tried to follow up and do it again a few years
later, along with linda, but there was no interest at all at that time.
None, other than the two of us.
I was involved in K12Net -> Teachernet. I can probably list every
person who contributed time to that project.
I was involved in lots of those things, probably all of them, but very
few others were.
Arbornet tried expanding into roles outside of those which were it's
core. All of those attempts were failures except the hardware classes.
|
tod
|
|
response 399 of 480:
|
Dec 22 01:26 UTC 2006 |
re #398
I was around for all of those things also. I can actually remember a jubilant
TS coming back to the house on Forest Ct after one of the classes. K12 was
a flop because it tried to accomplish too much without enough human resource
to support it. Several 386's sat dormant or were used to play games in
classrooms. There were many attempts on the charity and education end but
at no time has the "computer conferencing" or "interaction with computers"
part of the 501(c)(3) education qualifier been missing.
You say there was never an interest in community forums or education but I
say M-Net has had that from the getgo.
|
ric
|
|
response 400 of 480:
|
Dec 22 13:42 UTC 2006 |
For the record, I remember all of those things. Particularly one version of
the manual which i helped produce and we sold hundreds of copies at the Art
Fair offering "FREE INTERNET ACCESS". It was a very profitable venture for
Arbornet, and filled the coffers because 1996 was a time when people were
really starting to discover the internet. I remember the hardware kits and
the hardware classes as well.
That was 10 years ago.
My only point was that the "charitable mission" - for both Cyberspace
Communications and Arbornet - is a joke at this point. 10 years ago is pretty
irrelevant.
|