|
Grex > Coop13 > #75: Member Initative: Restore the Murdered Items | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 424 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 6 of 424:
| 
Jan 9 20:45 UTC 2004 |
How can users feel comfortable posting on Grex, if staff will not protect the
integrity of their posts in the future. And by that I mean not just
protecting what users had said, but protecting the context of what they said.
Grex is allowing its own history to be revised if it will not firmly protect
its old items from this sort of butchery. Why even keep the old conferences
and items around if users can do what Valerie did and go back and cut holes
in them?
|
other
|
|
response 7 of 424:
|
Jan 9 20:48 UTC 2004 |
5: We should not attempt to cross that bridge unless we actually
come to it.
|
jp2
|
|
response 8 of 424:
|
Jan 9 20:51 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 9 of 424:
|
Jan 9 20:58 UTC 2004 |
p
|
other
|
|
response 10 of 424:
|
Jan 9 20:58 UTC 2004 |
You can accept changes without resetting the clock.
|
jp2
|
|
response 11 of 424:
|
Jan 9 21:01 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
other
|
|
response 12 of 424:
|
Jan 9 21:06 UTC 2004 |
Right then. In that case, you're wasting your time because it will
never pass, as written. There are too many people here who would
rather wait for a more reasonable proposal than force the re-posting
of text which users explicitly and rightfully removed for their own
perfectly legitimate reasons, even if their methods were messy and
collateral damage was (at least temporarily) sustained.
|
jp2
|
|
response 13 of 424:
|
Jan 9 21:10 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 14 of 424:
|
Jan 9 21:48 UTC 2004 |
I urge a "no" vote for this proposal. Additionally, item:76 has a more
limited proposal which would conflict with this one. I think anyone
who reads this needs to make sure they read that item, too.
|
richard
|
|
response 15 of 424:
|
Jan 9 21:58 UTC 2004 |
Grex doesn't allow editing of items. Why? I was always under the impression
that was some old debate back when Grex started, and it was decided that if
users were allowed to edit their items, they'd risk taking other people's
responses out of context by doing so. But scribbling an item can do the same
damage, and if you scribble an old item where the old users are no longer
there to scribble, or clarify their old posts, how is that fair?
|
other
|
|
response 16 of 424:
|
Jan 9 22:19 UTC 2004 |
It's not fair that I only had one set of grandparents while I was
growing up. If you can fix that, I'll fix the scribble problem.
|
gull
|
|
response 17 of 424:
|
Jan 9 22:26 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:4: An odd position from someone who's advocated deleting entire
old conferences.
|
willcome
|
|
response 18 of 424:
|
Jan 9 22:55 UTC 2004 |
YEAH< RICHARD! WHAT KIND (OR SHOULD I SAY MEAN?!?!? ) OF JEW SCHEME ARE YOU
TRYING TO PULL ON US?
|
keesan
|
|
response 19 of 424:
|
Jan 9 23:52 UTC 2004 |
I keep seeing the most recent response in an item cut off, for instance gull's
response ends at the end of a line in 'deleting entire'
|
tod
|
|
response 20 of 424:
|
Jan 9 23:52 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
naftee
|
|
response 21 of 424:
|
Jan 9 23:54 UTC 2004 |
I vote yes.
The count is at 6.
|
aruba
|
|
response 22 of 424:
|
Jan 10 00:53 UTC 2004 |
Richard, of course it's not fair. Life is not fair. Some really bad things
happened this week, and they were unfair. That doesn't mean we can undo
them without doing a lot more harm.
I wish all of this hadn't happened. But I don't have the heart to force
John's or Valerie's items to be put back up, at least not now. So I'll be
voting no on this proposal. We need to all calm down and get a little
perspective before we try to fix anything.
|
gull
|
|
response 23 of 424:
|
Jan 10 01:09 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:19: There's probably a mismatch between the actual number of
lines of your terminal, and what Grex things your screen size is.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 24 of 424:
|
Jan 10 02:19 UTC 2004 |
I'm voting no.
|
cross
|
|
response 25 of 424:
|
Jan 10 02:33 UTC 2004 |
I'm voting yes, but with the following caveat: Keep JEP's items offline
for the time being. Track down all participants and ask them if they
would mind scribbling their responses. If none do, don't bother restoring
the items. If there's some subset of users who disagree with scribbling
their responses, then we can move from there. Otherwise, the effect
would be that of every user scribbling their responses, which would be
basically the same as just deleting the items in question. Similarly with
the baby diary items (though that's a much bigger job, I imagine).
I didn't, and still don't, understand the point of deleting the baby
diaries. The mnet parody only took *new* material, and there wasn't
any new material being added to the items here on grex, so what was the
point of deleting them?
|
richard
|
|
response 26 of 424:
|
Jan 10 02:41 UTC 2004 |
#17...gull, I advocated closing old confs and archiving them out of the main
bbs. If I said "get rid of them", thats what I meant. I have no problem with
those conferences that are no longer active and haven't been active in some
time, being kept in some other "museum" area of grex for historical reasons.
And Aruba, I would argue that you are being more sympathetic towards valerie
and jep because you see them here in front of you, and you don't see any of
the many many old users who passed through this place. Users who participated
honestly on this board, and who don't deserve to have their old words
misconstrued and taken out of context just to satisfy the vanity of a couple
of users. If you want Grex to grow, you MUST create an environment where
people feel safe posting here, and you can't have that environment if you let
old items get butchered like this.
|
richard
|
|
response 27 of 424:
|
Jan 10 02:50 UTC 2004 |
And I know that people won't feel safe posting here if they can't edit or
scribble new posts. they should be able to. But NEW posts, where the other
users interacting with them are known to be still around. There has to be
a point where staff protects old items and old conferences from further
modification. And I don't think its unreasonable at all.
./
|
richard
|
|
response 28 of 424:
|
Jan 10 03:02 UTC 2004 |
And if you go back and look at the old Agoras, Agora1 or Agora12 or such,you
can see that they are in fact read only. Those items are not open and you
can't post to them. But you CAN still alter them if you posted in those items.
What is wrong with saying that if an item is closed and archived, and you
can't modify it regularly anymore, that you ought not to be able to modify
it anymore including scribbling? If Valerie scribbles a post in Agora15,
nobody can go back and post again there if they felt the need to clarify
themselves. Not that anyone is ever going to read those items again likely,
but it is just the point.
|
jep
|
|
response 29 of 424:
|
Jan 10 03:11 UTC 2004 |
Richard, if you want to propose a different policy change, please
enter a separate item. I for one am not going to respond to you in
all of the current active items in policy, all of which are on
different subjects.
Thank you.
|
valerie
|
|
response 30 of 424:
|
Jan 10 05:51 UTC 2004 |
[I posted this first in the item discussing John Perry's proposal, but then
I realized that I should post it here too. So this is a duplicate response.]
Wow... it occurred to me that I should come back for long enough to
make a proposal for a membership vote on keeping my baby diary deleted,
so I logged in to do that, and found that there are at least two such
proposals on the table already.
A couple of thoughts:
At the beginning of Grex, fair witnesses were given very broad powers to
do whatever they pleased in their conferences. It was expected that they
could delete items and set up their own set of rules for each conference.
If you didn't like the way a fw ran a conference, you were supposed
to start your own similar conference with a different fair witness,
run it your own way, and if it was better than the original conference,
then people would hang out there instead of in the original. If that
meant that there were 12 cooking conferences, that was cool.
I can remember plenty of instances of fair witnesses legitimately
deleting items. In the classified ads conference, the fws deleted
old ads. In the kitchen conference, the fws (I was one of them) deleted
everything and started over, because the conference had gotten big and
we wanted it to stay manageably small. In the Enigma conference, John
Remmers would change the decor from time to time by deleting old items
and adding a "new western look" or whatever style he wanted to try out.
Nobody objected.
In conversation this evening, Jan said to me that he thinks that the
recent discussions about people being allowed to scribble their own
responses changed people's ideas of what the role of a fair witness is.
I don't know about that -- I sat out from those discussions -- but it
could well be true.
However, if the definition of what a fair witness can do has changed, I
think it is wrong to apply the new rules to old items. My baby diary ran
for over six years -- that is, it started long, long, before those recent
discussions. Misti says that for sure she would have deleted the baby
diaries from the femme conference if I had asked her to. Grace sounds
less certain than Misti, but she says that she thinks she would have too.
What I'm asking is that if people want a rule that says that fair
witnesses can't delete items, don't retroactively apply it to items that
the fair witnesses would have legitimately been allowed to delete --
such as my baby diary items or John Perry's deleted items.
----------
Also, I have to say, I thought that the title "Valerie's Baby Diary"
made it clear that I owned those items, just like I own the files in
my directory and my books in my home. Other people could post to those
items, but I viewed them as my own. The title made that clear. I had
no idea that people thought that any item in PicoSpan was the collective
property of the Grex user community. I'm not sure if this is something
that was unwritten and reasonable people made different assumptions,
or if it is something that got decided on during the big discussion
(that I didn't read) about scribbling items. But to me the idea that if
"Valerie's Baby Diary" is in PicoSpan, then it belongs to the community
and not to Valerie -- that idea was a surprise to me.
The first volume of the baby diary originally had another title, which
was changed later, so maybe some case could be made that this does not
apply to that volume. But the other five volumes were named "Valerie's
(pregnancy/parenting/childbirth/whatever) Diary" from the time when they
were entered. If the Grex community decides to make a policy that says
that Grex, and not the item author, owns all items, I hope the policy
won't be retroactive back to items that were entered before the policy
was defined, back when the ownership of items was ambiguous and people
came to different interpretations.
----------
Hm... I should post this response in the other proposal item too, since
it's much more relevant to that one than to this one.
|