|
Grex > Coop8 > #138: An item on conferencing ethics | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 92 responses total. |
kerouac
|
|
response 50 of 92:
| 
Nov 7 19:03 UTC 1996 |
Truthfully, I dont crave attention or want attention. What I want is
to participate in the discussion like anyone else. Maybe I do
defend my ideas too much here, but that should reflect my
commitment to grex, not arrogance. I think I may be too
sensitive in this conf because only a few ppeople actively participate
and the majority of members simply rubber stamp what they do. I
should get over that particular paraonoia. But I also dont
go out of my way to flame people, and tehere do seem to
be people who only post here when it is "flame kerouac" time
I think this reflects the difficulty of computer
conferencing on sensitive matters when it involves people who do not know or
have a sense of the others involved. I am not an ill-tempered person
in real life. Just the other day I was emailing someone I've
known on a daily basis for more than ten years, and he was jokingly asking
what drugs I use becuase in all that time he's never seen me in a bad mood.
Maybe my style here needs work but I assure you I am not
this way personally.
|
steve
|
|
response 51 of 92:
|
Nov 7 19:46 UTC 1996 |
I believe that, Richard. Some people have ASCII personas that are
substancially like their real-life selves. Others come off very
differently here in cyberspace, such that you'd never know the "real"
person, judging them by what they write.
It could well be that way for you. I don't think anyone here believes
that your comments have been purposely designed to bother others, but
that has been the effect. So, working on the way you project ideas
would be a good thing, I think.
|
brighn
|
|
response 52 of 92:
|
Nov 7 23:26 UTC 1996 |
(1) I think Remmers is doing a fine fine job and shouldn't resign.
(2) Richard, you wish to be like every other Grex user. Other Grex users limit
their responses to one screen except when necessary. Other Grex users try not
to post more than one item before there's a response.
Other Grex users don't know when to quit and give up on losing battles, so
in that' you're just like the rest of us.
|
davel
|
|
response 53 of 92:
|
Nov 7 23:27 UTC 1996 |
Re #49: kerouac said he won't leave until "he no longer agrees with what
Grex is doing"? kerouac actually implies that he agrees with what Grex
is doing?? Wow. He has strange ideas about how to express approval,
is all *I* can say.
|
srw
|
|
response 54 of 92:
|
Nov 8 06:59 UTC 1996 |
This is deliberately written in the third person and not
directly toward Richard. I am trying to be analytical and
not combative. I hope I can succeed at this.
Things I agree with Richard about:
* I think Richard does not crave attention. (He gets it,
though).
* I think he did not wish to disrupt coop (He does it,
though.)
* He is thick-skinned. That's OK in my book.
Things I disagree with him on:
No one, not even staff, is obligated to treat everyone
equally. As soon as anyone utters one word in any
conference, he or she can expect to be judged on it. That is
how it works. One takes responsibility for ones own
postings. Fortunately, opinions are not immutable. Damage
can be undone.
Grex is not dying because of a lack of participation in
anything. It is thriving in fact. That's my opinion, anyway.
This is all a matter of opinion, anyway.
The reason for our rejection of Richard's ideas, is not
because he does not belong to our inner circle, but because
they are (by and large) ill-considered ideas. I think he has
a blind spot about accepting criticism of his ideas. There
has been a lot of criticism of them, and he has ignored most
if it, and the result has been derailment and ultimately the
need for this and other metadiscussions.
We are reasonable people, and we do not want to chase a
person out of coop for disagreeing with us. Heaven knows, we
need good ideas, and would be foolish to turn them away.
When Richard has an idea about Grex, I'd like to hear it. If
I think it is not a good idea, I will say so.
By the way, I happen to think that Richard does a wonderful
job of making intelligent comments about politics in that
conference. I know he is a strong supporter of the
Democrats, and I am an independent, so I don't always agree
with him there, either, but his comments always seem well
considered there. I am quite puzzled why there should be
such a difference between these two topics (politics vs
how-to-run-grex).
|
rcurl
|
|
response 55 of 92:
|
Nov 8 08:19 UTC 1996 |
Yes, that is puzzling, since they are both like the weather, here.
|
tsty
|
|
response 56 of 92:
|
Nov 8 09:17 UTC 1996 |
.......michigan weather, too!.....
|
birdlady
|
|
response 57 of 92:
|
Nov 8 19:32 UTC 1996 |
<grin at TS>
One thing I must say to Richard -- Sometimes I feel that you have the
impression that everyone on grex is picking on you and you alone. You are
not the first person to ever get flamed in a conference or argued
with/against. All we're saying is that you need to change a little to get
people to respect you, which I see you have realized by your previous response
about your old friend, easygoing, etc... When we try to help, however, you
get so defensive that you won't listen, I mean thoroughly **listen** to
peoples' advice. I understand, I think, because my boss at work is exactly
like you (or your personality on Grex, I should say). I know you're a
good-hearted person because we have talked about many other issues in party
years ago. All I can say (from my observations) is that you need to calm down
and *listen*. Take a chill pill, to coin a cheesy phrase. ;-)
You can't expect staff to resign because they hurt your feelings. There are
thousands of other users on this system that the staff and BOD have to take
into account when dealing with opinions and ideas. You aren't the only person
proposing ideas, even though you may feel like it.
Richard, this isn't meant as a flame; Instead, it's simply my observations
and how they can best be dealt with. If you choose to ignore me, fine. It
won't kill me or even hurt a bit. I just had to get this out in the open.
Before you respond, please read this again, because I notice your responses
sometimes give the impression that you haven't truly *read* the previous
responses.
<birdy notices that she's gone over the one-screen limit brighn talked about
and hangs her head in shame>
Sorry, guys...
|
remmers
|
|
response 58 of 92:
|
Nov 9 11:36 UTC 1996 |
(Technical nitpick: Not all screens are alike. Mine is 50 lines,
and your response occupies only about 2/3 of it...)
|
dang
|
|
response 59 of 92:
|
Nov 9 14:12 UTC 1996 |
(Historical nitpick: Historically, the most common screen size by far has
been 24 lines, so most often, a screenful of anything has refered to 80 col
X 24 rows... :)
|
remmers
|
|
response 60 of 92:
|
Nov 9 15:53 UTC 1996 |
(I realize that. Just thought that people should be aware that
in these days of windowing systems and resizeable windows, there
are lots of different screen sizes that people are using.)
|
birdlady
|
|
response 61 of 92:
|
Nov 9 19:54 UTC 1996 |
(Well, it takes up almost two of *my* screens, but I did forget about the
screen size variations. Thanks for the nitpicking; That's usually how I
learn lots of things...) =)
|
scg
|
|
response 62 of 92:
|
Nov 9 20:27 UTC 1996 |
(to nitpick a little more, as a Windows weenie, a lot of the Windows95
communications software I've found isn't resizable, and just assumes 24 lines
as *the* window size)
|
mdw
|
|
response 63 of 92:
|
Nov 9 20:50 UTC 1996 |
I've been using 90x60 screens for about 10 years now.
|
davel
|
|
response 64 of 92:
|
Nov 9 22:28 UTC 1996 |
Someone remind me ... exactly how much is a keats of text?
|
aaron
|
|
response 65 of 92:
|
Nov 10 17:29 UTC 1996 |
re #13: Your advice was to ignore kerouac. As any person can see, the
responses before yours did not ignore kerouac -- they flamed him.
What good did you expect would come of that?
re #32: Ah. So this item is composed exclusively of responses by people
new to this conference, who don't know enough to ignore kerouac.
<cough>
re #64: You could ask keats. Oops. He doesn't use this system. Why is
that, again?
|
mdw
|
|
response 66 of 92:
|
Nov 10 23:54 UTC 1996 |
Because we love you, Aaron.
|
tsty
|
|
response 67 of 92:
|
Nov 11 09:09 UTC 1996 |
a keats of text is 2 screens full, *usually* ~48 lines.
|
aaron
|
|
response 68 of 92:
|
Nov 11 16:41 UTC 1996 |
re #66: Your sincerity is noted, Marcus. But I don't think that was
the question.
|
polygon
|
|
response 69 of 92:
|
Nov 11 22:09 UTC 1996 |
I don't believe in any one-screenful limit.
I haven't read all the earlier discussion, but this item is very
interesting.
Richard/kerouac has been polite in this item, but plainly he has angered
some of the calmest people I know (including krj and the folks krj
mentioned). Calling for Remmers' ouster seems a bit over-the-top,
and not at *all* justified by the text that John reposted here; however,
I can see that those words are slyly provocative toward R/k.
Judging by what has been written in this item, I see that R/k sees Grex
as being run predominantly by a small group of Ann Arbor-area people.
Small meaning in comparison to the total universe of Grex users. That
is plainly true. Whether there is anything wrong with this state of
affairs is a matter of opinion.
I will have to think about janc's comments about "debate".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 70 of 92:
|
Nov 12 06:18 UTC 1996 |
Beyond that, Grex is run essentially by its staff. Most of the discussion
at any board meeting is usually "staff" stuff (really boring... 8^}). The
*interesting* things Grex does are mostly originated in conferences, and
occur on an ad hoc basis. It is a rather unique establishment. Sometimes I
think what holds it together is the serendipitous name "Grex".
|
janc
|
|
response 71 of 92:
|
Nov 12 06:55 UTC 1996 |
I don't believe in one screenful limits either.
Decision-making on Grex is really weird. The board rarely votes on anything
without getting an unanimous vote. This isn't because the board agrees all
the time, but because when they can't agree they tend to defer the topic for
more discussion on-line instead of voting on it. So there is very little
appearance of actual decision-making at Grex board meeting. The staff does
seem to make more decisions, but by an even more informal and mysterious
processs. Staff never votes on anything. They talk things over and then
someone appoints him or herself to go out and do something. I don't know what
holds this place together. I think it must be some kind of collective
hallucination.
|
davel
|
|
response 72 of 92:
|
Nov 12 14:18 UTC 1996 |
(Those are pretty much the options when you run things by consensus (as far
as possible - sometimes a decision *has* to be made, when inaction isn't
feasible, but you don't have a consensus). The second degenerates into chaos
if those volunteering act on their own; my experience (on staff for a while,
& observing it at a distance) is that if staffers think there's any real
chance of varying opinions, they raise things & mostly wait for consensus
before going ahead. You don't *need* votes to see whether consensus exists,
unless people are afraid to speak up.)
|
pfv
|
|
response 73 of 92:
|
Nov 12 19:57 UTC 1996 |
Well, the military always stressed making a *decision* and then
living with the right or wrong of it. <shrug>
Meanwhile, at least Grex has a Staff and the Board don't dump on
them, while the Staff doesn't dump on the users.
In all honesty, I tend to view Grex with mixed Fear & Loathing,
while simultaneously looking on in Awe and Respect.
This joint is chaotic and weird, but MANNNNNnnn..! You guys have
got both staff and borg worth keeping around! ;-)
|
mdw
|
|
response 74 of 92:
|
Nov 12 23:27 UTC 1996 |
Strange you should mention the military. RRO was originally codified by a
military general.
|