|
Grex > Coop12 > #49: Nominations for the Board of Directors | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 332 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 87 of 332:
| 
Nov 3 21:33 UTC 2001 |
The Patriot Bill, if I remember correctly, included some warrantless wiretap
stuff, at least to the point where once there was a court order for a person,
there didn't need to be orders for the individual taps.
"Carnivore" was a pretty minimal packet sniffer. For targeting one person,
coming in through one modem pool, it probably worked well. It didn't (or
doesn't; I'm not sure what its current status) scale well to any sort of
widespread use.
That's not to say there isn't something else that does. I have heard stories,
short on specifics, of taps in a few places. I assume they're pretty close
to the network edges, and not picking up more than a small fraction of
Internet traffic. Whether Grex, or something else at the ISP Grex uses, is
considered interesting enough to be paid attention to, you'll all have to
guess for yourselves.
|
remmers
|
|
response 88 of 332:
|
Nov 4 17:21 UTC 2001 |
Re #86: Thanks, Mark. I was off Grex for a couple of days, or
I would have tried to rein in the drift sooner.
Yes, folks -- please remember that this is the BOARD NOMINATION
ITEM, it's an in important item in Grex governance, and off-topic
discussions, interesting though they may be, really belong
elsewhere.
I'll post a summary of the nominations thus far in a few minutes.
|
remmers
|
|
response 89 of 332:
|
Nov 4 17:36 UTC 2001 |
Okay, this seems to be the current status of nominations:
Nominated and accepted:
mary
jp2
bhelliom
mdw
orinoco
Nominated but declined:
eeyore
janc
davel
scott
arabella
Nominated, but have neither accepted nor declined:
other
cmcgee
krj
Let me know if I missed anything.
Remember that nominations close on November 15. To appear on
the ballot, a nominee must affirmatively accept in this item
and meet eligibility requirements before the start of voting
on December 1.
|
aruba
|
|
response 90 of 332:
|
Nov 4 17:39 UTC 2001 |
I'd like to nominate Jeff Kaplan and Dan Romanchik.
|
remmers
|
|
response 91 of 332:
|
Nov 4 17:45 UTC 2001 |
Speaking personally, I'll add that I've attended many Board meetings,
both as a Board member and "member of the public", and my overall
impression has been that as deliberative bodies go, The Grex Board
is fairly laid-back and uncontentious, and on most issues doesn't
have a lot of trouble reaching concensus. There are disagreements
from time to time, but I don't remember any shouting matches.
If you want "contentious", you should serve on some of the bodies
I've encountered through work at my university. :)
So I'd like to encourage more folks to accept, and to consider
making more nominations.
|
remmers
|
|
response 92 of 332:
|
Nov 4 17:45 UTC 2001 |
(aruba's #90 slipped in)
|
mdw
|
|
response 93 of 332:
|
Nov 5 03:32 UTC 2001 |
Jeff & Dan are both laid-back folks; I'm sure they'd do a fine job and
either or both would be welcome additions. Jeff deserves credit for
easing a lot of our recent disk space crunch; Dan was once the grex
treasure-lord & did a really bang-up fine job.
|
dpc
|
|
response 94 of 332:
|
Nov 7 15:38 UTC 2001 |
I want to emphasize the *lack* of problems M-Net has had with
non-local members. The Board meets at my house, and we make
two calls and put them on speakerphone. We have never been
unable to reach our non-local members, and they participate
just like local members.
|
aruba
|
|
response 95 of 332:
|
Nov 7 16:22 UTC 2001 |
Jamie is now a member of Grex, so you may consider his candidacy official.
|
keesan
|
|
response 96 of 332:
|
Nov 7 16:24 UTC 2001 |
Does anyone want to nominate jep, who has board experience at m-net?
|
kaplan
|
|
response 97 of 332:
|
Nov 7 16:29 UTC 2001 |
I accept my nomination.
|
jp2
|
|
response 98 of 332:
|
Nov 7 16:32 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 99 of 332:
|
Nov 7 17:04 UTC 2001 |
Re #97: Yay!
|
dpc
|
|
response 100 of 332:
|
Nov 7 21:16 UTC 2001 |
What jp2 said is true, but my statement that we never been unable
to reach our non-local members is also true. People sometimes
miss meetings, but non-locals have as good a track record as
locals.
|
krj
|
|
response 101 of 332:
|
Nov 7 22:24 UTC 2001 |
I started item:61 to discuss the idea of out-of-town Board
members. Please move discussion there so we can keep this item
uncluttered for Board nominations and acceptances. Thanks!
|
jep
|
|
response 102 of 332:
|
Nov 8 20:56 UTC 2001 |
re #96: I appreciate the suggestion, but:
1) I'm not a member of Grex because I don't like Grex's level of
support for the ACLU
2) My life is not at the level of stability which I'd want before I'd
consider running
3) My style of management isn't at all what Grex is used to
4) I have some history which would make me an unpalatable choice for
many Grexers, including bad management for Arbornet and shocking many
Grexers by being the visible point of contact for Arbornet pulling out
of a joint grant project
I do like Grex a lot, and wish it all the best. I think there are many
better choices than me for the board.
I think you are one of them, by the way, especially given your passion
for investment options for Grex, and your ability to take on projects
and commit time to them. I'm not just returning a compliment. I
really would be very happy to see you serve on the Board.
|
keesan
|
|
response 103 of 332:
|
Nov 8 20:58 UTC 2001 |
Thanks for returning the compliment with a compliment but I don't think I am
diplomatic enough to serve on the board. Mark asked me to run once and I
refused. Any other volunteers? I would be happy to do any research which
would save the board time. I also don't know enough about computers.
|
aruba
|
|
response 104 of 332:
|
Nov 9 16:18 UTC 2001 |
I nominate Greg Fleming.
|
mary
|
|
response 105 of 332:
|
Nov 9 23:55 UTC 2001 |
Yes. Please say yes.
Greg has a very nice way of getting to the meat of an
issue and distilling it down to a common sense solution.
|
flem
|
|
response 106 of 332:
|
Nov 12 22:26 UTC 2001 |
Yeah, sure, I'll accept.
|
styles
|
|
response 107 of 332:
|
Nov 13 00:03 UTC 2001 |
#102: what's grex's level of support for the ACLU, and why is support for
the ACLU bad?
|
jp2
|
|
response 108 of 332:
|
Nov 13 00:44 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
remmers
|
|
response 109 of 332:
|
Nov 13 03:27 UTC 2001 |
(Both Grex and Arbornet were parties to a suit filed by the ACLU
against Michigan's internet censorship act. The law was struck
down by the courts -- the correct outcome, in my opinion. I
think that our working with the ACLU on this was entirely
appropriate.)
(But this is drift in the board nominations item.)
|
janc
|
|
response 110 of 332:
|
Nov 13 04:15 UTC 2001 |
As far as I can tell, it would be as accurate to say that the ACLU supported
Grex and Arbornet as to say that Grex and Arbornet supported the ACLU. All
three organizations wanted that law struck down. None of them were involved
solely out of love and affection for the others. The ACLU contributed vastly
more time and resources to the job than anyone else. I think they probably
did us a much bigger favor than we did from them. But I suppose that if you
equate the ACLU with satan, taking favors from them isn't very appealing
either.
|
gull
|
|
response 111 of 332:
|
Nov 13 14:52 UTC 2001 |
Yeah, how dare they defeat a law that would have shut us down! Evil
bastards.
|