|
Grex > Coop8 > #52: Adding .yeswrite and .nowrite to the write program | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 315 responses total. |
robh
|
|
response 75 of 315:
| 
Jun 17 19:19 UTC 1996 |
Dammit, that little shit told me he wasn't going to do that
any more....
|
popcorn
|
|
response 76 of 315:
|
Jun 18 03:39 UTC 1996 |
"mesg n" -- I never get harrassing tels/writes/talks.
|
brighn
|
|
response 77 of 315:
|
Jun 18 04:01 UTC 1996 |
The whole point, valerie is that mesg n is a binary thing...
we ether get to talk to everyone or no-one... that's childish, IMHO.
If *you* don't want to talk to anyone except through mail, valerie,
that's your choice, and it's fine and dandy with me, but it's not a
viable option for all of us.
|
nephi
|
|
response 78 of 315:
|
Jun 18 06:49 UTC 1996 |
I absolutely agree with brighn here. Jenna is just one person, and in the
course of just a few days, she's been sexually harrassed by at least a half
a dozen "men"! And jenna is *not* the exception here! This . . . shit
happens every day here. It is widely known that staff is not going to stop
it, and is in fact powerless to do so. (Otherwise, udaywig would have been
gone *LONG* ago.)
So instead of eliminating the problem, we tell all our women users that they
either get continually harrassed by a random string of "men", or they lose
their ability to recieve messages in real time from their friends. Does
anyone see anything *wrong* with that message?
Sad. Really, really, sad . . .
(By the way, jenna, I hope that you do keep posting here every time you get
harrassed by anohter user [or the same user again] so that the folks here can
get an appreciation of how truly wrong we are letting things operate here.)
|
remmers
|
|
response 79 of 315:
|
Jun 18 12:47 UTC 1996 |
Well, staff could get rid of the 'udaywig' id, but what's to
prevent the person behind the id from coming back under a new id
and continuing the same behavior?
I don't like harassment, but I also like the idea of minimizing the
need for staff to play policeman. That's why I find the concept of
a .yeswrite feature attractive -- it gives an individual the
ability to decide who can talk to them and puts power in the hands
of the user to control their own environment, which is where the
power belongs.
|
tsty
|
|
response 80 of 315:
|
Jun 18 20:33 UTC 1996 |
does the shadowpasswd file take :*: ?
i'm not suggesting that particular action, just asking the question.
|
srw
|
|
response 81 of 315:
|
Jun 19 00:14 UTC 1996 |
What do you mean by your question? Can we disable the account? Yes.
|
brighn
|
|
response 82 of 315:
|
Jun 19 01:21 UTC 1996 |
re: John's comment on staff playing policepersons...
Mail to staff: "Help! User farvergnugen is harassing me!"
Response from staff: "Leave them off your .yeswrite file" or "Put them in
your .nowrite file."
Simple. PLeasant. Straightforward.
|
carson
|
|
response 83 of 315:
|
Jun 19 01:29 UTC 1996 |
I dunno. I think that if I were looking for "cybersex," and I managed
to make it to, say, the sex conference, and I'd managed to figure out
how to read, oh, the first and last item, I know who'd be on my
short list judging from the, uh, passion of their responses.
not to blame the "victim" or anything.
|
ajax
|
|
response 84 of 315:
|
Jun 19 04:48 UTC 1996 |
Carson, I'm unclear whether you're sarcastically trying to say you
*do* blame the victims (i.e. only the passionate sex cf-ers are
harrassed), or whether you're merely suggesting a more effective
search strategy for cybersex seekers. Your response seems
innuendo-laden, though it's easy to misread the intent of responses.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 85 of 315:
|
Jun 19 05:38 UTC 1996 |
Re 78: To clarify, I agree too with brighn's #77. My point is that you can
get rid of harrasser types *now* with "mesg n". Having .yeswrite and .nowrite
files is definitely a better solution, in my mind.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 86 of 315:
|
Jun 19 05:38 UTC 1996 |
The thing is, of course, that someone has to write it.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 87 of 315:
|
Jun 19 06:39 UTC 1996 |
You need mesg N to dump the write *now*.
|
carson
|
|
response 88 of 315:
|
Jun 19 12:02 UTC 1996 |
Re #84: between those two extremes, i.e., I'd guess certain sex cf'rs are
more likely to be found and pursued. whether I feel it's right or
not doesn't even come into play; my hypothesis is that's the way
things are.
|
davel
|
|
response 89 of 315:
|
Jun 19 14:07 UTC 1996 |
Certainly this capability was a good candidate for a
let's-not-until-we-need-to approach. But given that there's ongoing
harrassment of anyone, with the perpetrators not responding to normal
social sanctions, it seems like now's the time to go ahead. What Valerie said
in #86 ...
|
brighn
|
|
response 90 of 315:
|
Jun 19 15:34 UTC 1996 |
Well, we're discussing jenna here, specifically, and in the sex conf
almost all of her few posts were under the shade account. I'm not
sure what your relevance is. Someone is saying she was walking through
the business district in a business suit in broad daylight and got
raped, and you're saying "Well, if women wouldn't jog through Central
Park at night wearing halter tops..." You've confused me yet again.
=}
(Oh, the above was directed to Carson, forgot to put that at the
beginning.)
|
carson
|
|
response 91 of 315:
|
Jun 19 17:31 UTC 1996 |
yep, brighn. right over your head, obviously.
|
brighn
|
|
response 92 of 315:
|
Jun 19 20:06 UTC 1996 |
*looks quizzically at carson*
if you're doing something other than trying to pick a fight,
lad, elucidate those of us lesser beings
|
nephi
|
|
response 93 of 315:
|
Jun 19 22:13 UTC 1996 |
I agree with Brighn's analogy in #90. It seems to me to parallel what Carson
was saying in his response way up there ^ . Perhaps Carson meant something
different?
Regarding #86, I agree with you with you. It seemed to me that before people
were saying that even if it had been written, that we shouldn't install it.
Again, the only person who has ever expressed interest in programming
modifications to "write" thinks that perhaps it wouldn't be a good idea
anyway. I can't (nor can anyone else, I guess) tell him what to program.
All I can do is try to convince him that it is a good idea -- and I'm sure
that he'll never think that it is a good idea if everyone says it won't be
installed even if he goes to the trouble of writing it.
And, of course, if anyone else wants to make changes to the "write" program,
they are all welcome. I'll have to learn how to program, first, so I'm still
at the "beggar" stage, where I have to convince others to program the things
I want. Maybe I'll talk with Ryan . . . 8^)
|
jenna
|
|
response 94 of 315:
|
Jun 21 07:02 UTC 1996 |
ghatio & vgopal (oops that's ghati) ntalked me while i was confing.
i sent them both tels telling them "GO AWAY! stop ntalking me NOW!"
which i think is prety explicit and simple langauge. they kept doing it.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 95 of 315:
|
Jun 21 08:13 UTC 1996 |
I'm not convinced that rape and ntalk are comparable. Rapists don't generally
think that they're starting a friendly conversation. They know they are doing
something wrong. In contrast, the umpteenth person to ntalk a female often
has no idea that he's doing something unwelcome -- he thinks he is being
friendly. He has no clue that far too many other guys think the same thing.
If a woman seems friendly and gets raped, it's wrong to say she was asking
for it. The idea that by being friendly she is asking for violence is
flat-out wrong. In contrast, if someone seems friendly and gets ntalked,
well, she *is* asking for it. The idea that by being friendly, she is
asking for other people to want to be friendly and talk to her, that is
just common sense. It's not comparable to rape.
But I'm wandering down a tangent. I continue to think .yeswrite and
.nowrite files are a really good idea.
|
brighn
|
|
response 96 of 315:
|
Jun 21 14:22 UTC 1996 |
I agree, Valerie. Did I suggest otherwise, or are you responding to
someone else? I didn't mean to make the strong analogy between the
two, I meant merely to point out the fallacy in Carson's point with
a strong example. Clearly rando, ntalks and rape are not even the
slightest bit similar in scale.
|
jenna
|
|
response 97 of 315:
|
Jun 21 16:51 UTC 1996 |
The only similiarity is that whhen I send: "STOP SENDING ME TALK REQUESTS"
they don't stop.
they infact send me --> oh wait it said "STOP SENDING ME
TALK REQUESTS AND GO AWAY" they send me bunches of tels
saying "CONTACT ME IMMEDIATELY" get a brain people.
crown & gos both talked me @ apporximately
the same time. I sent them tels saying stop, gave them a minute
turned my incoming messages off, and turrned them back on.
in the middle of typing this i got identical message from them at
almost the same time saying "ContACT ME IMMEDIATLY"
personally, i wouldn't say to someone who'd just say
GO AWAY. Maybe if I knew them, but to my knowledge
I do not, and if I did I would expect them to tell me who they
are.
I'm just ding this in hopes that whoever can do the programming
but thinks it's a bad idea mmight be convinced.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 98 of 315:
|
Jun 21 17:02 UTC 1996 |
well jenna maybe you should go back to being shade...lwwith that name
nobody could tell you are female unless you gave it waway in your plan.
Or get a similar sex-neutral id
|
jenna
|
|
response 99 of 315:
|
Jun 21 19:39 UTC 1996 |
Uh... I had a lot of problems when I was using the shade account.
Besides, kerouac, I have a right to use my real name without getting
harassed for it. I think what you don't understand is that I'm here trying
to show
why we NEED either .esywrite or .nowrite. I know about mesg N
and mesg n, and I'm perfectly capable of telling pople to
go blow themselves (sometimes in nicer ways sometimes in meaner ays)
I just think this is a good way of showinfg that we need those things
so that I can keep having my convo's with robh and brighn and
other friends while confing, and not have to deal with screens of ntalks
|