|
Grex > Coop8 > #73: Cyberspace Communications, Inc., Finances through 5/31/96 |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 106 responses total. |
robh
|
|
response 50 of 106:
| 
Jun 14 13:03 UTC 1996 |
Re 48 - They don't even need to "surrender" their anonymity to
the Grex staff, just to the Treasurer, unless we've changed that.
Re 49 - I think most of us are concerned. Gods know I am.
|
davel
|
|
response 51 of 106:
|
Jun 14 13:22 UTC 1996 |
I thought Mary was objecting to an
I-don't-hear-many-folks-objecting-to-verification comment by suggesting that
those who object are often no longer around to comment.
She may correct me if that's not a good interpretation.
|
meg
|
|
response 52 of 106:
|
Jun 14 16:02 UTC 1996 |
No, that's not what she meant. The people she listed in her response are
all people who would not stand a verification check, if push came to shove.
|
chelsea
|
|
response 53 of 106:
|
Jun 14 20:59 UTC 1996 |
I'll trade you 200 mundane creativity-impaired authentic logins for
one fascinating and cleverly constructed pseudo account. Not knowing
or knowing there is a real name attached to an account means diddley
to me - it's simply not important. But some folks get very uncomfortable
without knowing the person is real. Whatever that means.
Discouraging pseudos won't stop someone who wants to be malicious from
being malicious. You can't force anyone to be accountable for what
is entered here. Rules you can't enforce are worse than no rules
at all.
I'm just real glad I got to experience M-net in 1986 and 1987 and
I wish I'd been around in 1985 based on chunks I've read.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 54 of 106:
|
Jun 14 21:16 UTC 1996 |
You wont see the real names of sun and selena for instnace on here. They dont
use them online and didnt offer them when they ran newuwser. But they arent
nameless or faceless and are valued grexers, so what does it matter if they
want their privacy?
|
aruba
|
|
response 55 of 106:
|
Jun 14 22:06 UTC 1996 |
No one is proposing that Grex discourage pseudos, or anonymity if a user
desires it. We're just trying to cover our butts in case someone does
something malicious with telnet.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 56 of 106:
|
Jun 14 22:07 UTC 1996 |
It doesn't matter at all, unless they want outgoing telnet. I am sure there
are spheres in their existence elsewhere where they are much better known
publically than they would be on Grex if they submitted ID. It is very hard
to hide from *all* of society.
|
dpc
|
|
response 57 of 106:
|
Jun 14 23:56 UTC 1996 |
Yes, aruba, I'm *very* concerned about Grex' finances. Don't think
you're a lonely voice in the wilderness.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 58 of 106:
|
Jun 15 00:52 UTC 1996 |
# 55 -- a four letter word, actually two four-letter words - "Cash"
and "jail". Pay for the privilege!
|
chelsea
|
|
response 59 of 106:
|
Jun 15 02:58 UTC 1996 |
Re: #55 My response was to simply point out that pseudos
are not a sign of shady behavior, as has been suggested.
If it helps, think of them as pen names. Or don't think
about them at all and let people enjoy the system in their
own fashion.
I would love it if Grex could allow full access to everyone
without asking for any ID. But I understand why it can't
be that free-wheeling.
|
srw
|
|
response 60 of 106:
|
Jun 15 04:22 UTC 1996 |
Okay, thanks for clarifying that. I don't think it was my posts that implied
pseudos were a sign of shady behavior, as I certainly don't think that
(never have). But clearly this would become the case if anonymous users
could access the net. There would still be benign anonymous users, as before,
but I think we would attract a large number of nefarious types. I am sure
that this is what some were getting at, not attacking our anonymous
conferencers.
|
tsty
|
|
response 61 of 106:
|
Jun 15 09:08 UTC 1996 |
any other comments on #32, which has yet to be opposed?
|
scott
|
|
response 62 of 106:
|
Jun 15 12:35 UTC 1996 |
OK, re 32: I don't think Grex should be offering unverified telnet, etc. for
a fee. This would make us look like the shadiest system on the net, and would
attract appropriate attention from both good and bad. We offer a community,
not access to the Internet.
|
jenna
|
|
response 63 of 106:
|
Jun 15 21:21 UTC 1996 |
(btw, kerouqc, I don;t think sun is a member and I know selena isn;t
which means their activities and potential for messing with systems
is limited to this one, and limited to grex and I think grex is very
generous to allow the amount of anonyminity it does ON grex
because wht if some psuedo did something to grex and they couldn;t
figure out who did it? It;s perfectly understandable why nobody
wants anonymous logins from grex making trouble on the net (I;m
sure that would cause problems for grex!!) and even if most people
wouldn;t cause problems, the potential risk is too great. IT;s
like courtesy to any system a grexer might log onto from here.
(that;s how I think of it)
|
aruba
|
|
response 64 of 106:
|
Jun 16 00:04 UTC 1996 |
That's how I think of it too. Nicely put, Jenna.
|
tsty
|
|
response 65 of 106:
|
Jun 16 01:56 UTC 1996 |
re #62, i'd prefer it for free sted a fee, however grex is supported by
donations and LOTS of free sysadmin intelligence as well.
if grex had a T-3 to the backbone, that would make matters considrably
different. our tinypipe connection is the saving grace in our current
configuration for teh compromise idea.
yes, we provide a community and most of it is inside here. but not all of
it is. ftp, telnet and lynx are extra-burden processes. anonymity is
another extra-burden process iff grex wants to hold itself accountable
in that particular fashion. if, however, grex wants to hold itself
accountable for pushing back the barriers to access it's a better
accountability, imo.
and remember, anonymous or not, severe misbehaviour gets an account
poofed anyway. the compromise raises the stakes IF there is intentional
misbehaviour while reinforcing private access if there is not such an
activity.
|
janc
|
|
response 66 of 106:
|
Jun 16 03:15 UTC 1996 |
I'm with Jenna on this. Grex welcomes anonymous users *on Grex*. We don't
feel it is our duty to inflict them on the rest of the net (though we do that
to an extent).
On the other hand, when users cause problems, our track record on tracing and
identifying them is actually pretty good. Grex's respect for the anonymity
of users doesn't extend to those who attempt to hack the system, seriously
abuse resources (and won't modify their behavior when asked), or persistantly
harass other users.
|
ajax
|
|
response 67 of 106:
|
Jun 16 05:28 UTC 1996 |
By providing e-mail to everyone, we do allow people to anonymously cause
problems on other system.
To recap TS's proposal in #31, it would allow anonymous telnetting for $60/
year, presumably without member voting rights. Without going into the merits
of the idea, I doubt many, possibly any, Grexers would be interested in this
offer. Has anyone heard of a Grexer who wants to pay for anonymous telnet
access here?
|
tpryan
|
|
response 68 of 106:
|
Jun 16 15:11 UTC 1996 |
Does GREX do cash accounting or accural accounting? That is,
when someone buys a year's membership on GREX, do you enter the income
as $60 for the current month, or $5 for each of the 12 months?
|
danr
|
|
response 69 of 106:
|
Jun 16 15:26 UTC 1996 |
It counts as $60 for the current month.
|
srw
|
|
response 70 of 106:
|
Jun 16 15:30 UTC 1996 |
Selena is the only one who has indicated she would like to support Grex but
will not do it while we require her to provide ID. We have told her that we
accept anonymous donations, but not memberships.
The treasurer can confirm, but we do cash accounting I believe.
|
jenna
|
|
response 71 of 106:
|
Jun 16 15:35 UTC 1996 |
There are a limited number of probelms that can be caused
by e-mail. (that's my understanding of it). There are certain
sites though, that if someone telnets to them and causes trouble,
they'll kick the whole site off... (and trouble is boradly defined)
and that's not a good rep for a board.
|
drew
|
|
response 72 of 106:
|
Jun 16 16:31 UTC 1996 |
Re #69:
Huh? WHY!? That money is supposed to last 12 months. It is not a good idea
to touch it any more than $5 a month, or run your accounting on the assumption
that you can.
E-mail can be used to send anonymous threats. On the other hand, so can
the USPS.
|
ajax
|
|
response 73 of 106:
|
Jun 16 17:52 UTC 1996 |
#72 - Grex's accounting method is simple. Being a volunteer-run org,
simplicity is a useful feature. No accounting experience is necessary.
M-Net, a similar Ann Arbor system, uses an accrual system. It has some
advantages, but their old treasurer didn't post a monthly balance sheet
in many months, and their new treasurer hasn't been able to get enough
information to do any reports.
#71 - E-mail can also be used to flood a person's mailbox, or flood an
entire system. Such attacks are called "mail-bombings." Some systems
can be shut down by this, depending on how they're configured.
#70 - I thought Selena wanted an anonymous membership. TS's proposal
seems to not provide membership, but merely an anonymous telnet "fee for
service."
|
aruba
|
|
response 74 of 106:
|
Jun 16 18:59 UTC 1996 |
Yes, Grex does "cash accounting".
|