|
Grex > Oldcoop > #76: member initiative: do not restore two items | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 357 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 90 of 357:
| 
Jan 12 19:14 UTC 2004 |
item:coop,2 By-laws:
ARTICLE 5: VOTING PROCEDURES
a. Any member of Grex may make a motion by entering it as the
text of a discussion item in a computer conference on Grex
designated for this purpose. The item is then used for
discussion of the motion. All Grex users may participate in
the discussion. No action on the motion is taken for two
weeks. At the end of two weeks, the author may then submit a
final version for a vote by the membership. The vote is
conducted on-line over a period of ten days.
b. A motion will be considered to have passed if more
votes were cast in favor than against, except as provided
for bylaw amendments.
c. For voting purposes, a day will run midnight to midnight. In
the event of continuous system downtime of 24 hours or more,
the voting period will be adjusted to compensate.
|
jep
|
|
response 91 of 357:
|
Jan 12 19:30 UTC 2004 |
Thanks!
I grow very weary of this process and of the attacks, the bizarre
attempts to circumvent what is going on, and of following the same
discussion in 11 different items.
I am looking forward to this being over with. I expect to then take a
vacation from coop, and possibly even from Grex. No, I won't be mass
deleting responses from all of Grex or anything. There is something
wrong, though, when it requires this much effort, and discussion, and
endurance, to make a simple request. I didn't expect it and wasn't
prepared for it, and I resent it.
|
gull
|
|
response 92 of 357:
|
Jan 12 19:35 UTC 2004 |
It works the same for you as for everyone else, jep.
|
jp2
|
|
response 93 of 357:
|
Jan 12 19:36 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
jp2
|
|
response 94 of 357:
|
Jan 12 19:36 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 95 of 357:
|
Jan 12 21:46 UTC 2004 |
re resp:92: I have not been through this type of process before on
Grex. I haven't been through anything here with this level of attacks.
I've been through a similar process, when I was on Arbornet's Board of
Directors, but I was elected to that. I knew what I was getting into.
If you think it should be normal that a Grex member should go through
all of these items, attacks, haranguing, difficulty, etc. as part of
sending a request to the staff, well, I disagree. That's what I did,
and it's been a lot more difficult and distressing than what I had
expected.
jp2: You're not worth responding to any more.
|
willcome
|
|
response 96 of 357:
|
Jan 12 21:49 UTC 2004 |
jp2's and jep's spat is
SAD
|
cyklone
|
|
response 97 of 357:
|
Jan 12 21:55 UTC 2004 |
All actions have consequences. Some are unintended. Some are undesirable.
|
other
|
|
response 98 of 357:
|
Jan 12 21:59 UTC 2004 |
Some are tasty.
|
gull
|
|
response 99 of 357:
|
Jan 12 22:51 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:95: When you deliberately get a staff member to do something
that most other staff members feel is a violation of policy, I think you
can expect it to be controversial.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 100 of 357:
|
Jan 12 23:08 UTC 2004 |
John -- if you had followed Jan's advice and had the items temporarily removed
pending a membership vote, rather than taking his out-of-control wife's help
and getting them summarily deleted, you'd have a lot more friends on this
issue.
|
naftee
|
|
response 101 of 357:
|
Jan 12 23:31 UTC 2004 |
re 95 They didn't start as "attacks". They migrated.
|
jep
|
|
response 102 of 357:
|
Jan 12 23:46 UTC 2004 |
re resp:100: No one suggested to me that the items be temporarily
removed pending a member vote, until the items were already removed.
*No one* spoke to me at *any* point, other than Valerie, until *after*
the items were removed.
The Board and staff were carrying on a discussion about my request, in
which I was not included, and about which I was not even informed for a
day after I sent my request. I heard about that from Valerie as well.
Can you go over again what it was I was supposed to do in order to
retain goodwill among both the staff and membership?
I deny that I went outside of any reasonable expectation anyone could
have of "the system". My initial e-mail went to staff@grex.org. So
did my next message (after I had received not a *peep* by way of
response, from *anyone*). I worked within the system to the very best
of my ability. I'm doing so now.
|
jep
|
|
response 103 of 357:
|
Jan 12 23:57 UTC 2004 |
Whups, one baff member had sent me a personal message, discussing
personal matters related to my request but with no policy discussion of
any kind, before the items were deleted.
|
gull
|
|
response 104 of 357:
|
Jan 12 23:59 UTC 2004 |
You admitted in earlier responses that when you saw what valerie had
done, and that she was leaving, you realized you had a limited window in
which to get your items removed. To me it sounds like you knew you were
taking advantage of a questionable loophole.
|
jep
|
|
response 105 of 357:
|
Jan 13 00:14 UTC 2004 |
View hidden response.
|
jep
|
|
response 106 of 357:
|
Jan 13 00:22 UTC 2004 |
My response resp:76 contains all of the e-mails between myself and
staff members, discussing the deletion of my items, including all
headers. I sent the first one from Grex and then the rest from my
account on M-Net. My Grex e-mail is forwarded to M-Net. Most of the e-
mails were included to either baff or staff
I have omitted the personal message I mentioned as it is of no value in
this discussion.
All of my contact with the staff of Grex on the matter is included, in
both directions. I excluded a couple of lines of comments which would
not affect this discussion.
An explanation of Valerie's suggestion that I just mass-delete my own
responses... she sent it to me at 10:00 p.m. Uncharacteristically for
me, I had logged off for the night and gone to bed early. I never got
to respond to her suggestion before she deleted my items.
|
jep
|
|
response 107 of 357:
|
Jan 13 00:24 UTC 2004 |
Whups, the e-mail thread is in my response resp:105, which was posted
from Backtalk as a "hidden" response. It's a bit lengthy., which is
why I posted it as hidden.
|
willcome
|
|
response 108 of 357:
|
Jan 13 00:25 UTC 2004 |
Expurgated.
|
jep
|
|
response 109 of 357:
|
Jan 13 00:56 UTC 2004 |
To read from Picospan:
1) Get to the "Respond or pass?" prompt
2) Type "set noforget"
3) Type "only 105"
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 110 of 357:
|
Jan 13 01:15 UTC 2004 |
Re #102: If you want goodwill from those of us who think this was wrong,
allow staff to restore your items, minus your responses.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 111 of 357:
|
Jan 13 01:22 UTC 2004 |
What Joe said. That or get a legal opinion.
|
slynne
|
|
response 112 of 357:
|
Jan 13 01:47 UTC 2004 |
jep, I think if the items were restored minus your responses and minus
the responses of anyone else willing to have them removed (which I
suspect would be most of the participants), you would find that the
remaining posts would be so far out of context that they would be
almost meaningless. You could also retire the items at that point which
puts the liklihood that someone will accidently stumble on them at
nearly zero.
|
naftee
|
|
response 113 of 357:
|
Jan 13 01:56 UTC 2004 |
jep, seeing as those items were in old agora conferences (as opposed
to Valerie's, which was in the femme cf) I think they'd be a lot
harder to find from the average user than Valerie's baby diary items.
For instance, a user could easily stumble across the femme cf and
browse the items, but wouldn't necessarily go looking under cobwebs to
find obscure items such as the ones you deleted. Ergo, you seem to
have been a little overly paranoid.
|
jep
|
|
response 114 of 357:
|
Jan 13 02:28 UTC 2004 |
re resp:110: Joe, I don't care to buy Grex's affection, not at that
price. If you have to have me act against myself so you can get your
way, in order for you to feel good about me, then you'll have to feel
bad about me. Second, if the items are restored, there'll be a loss
of goodwill from me toward Grex and toward those whom I believe have
voted to put them back on-line.
re resp:111: There is no reason to involve a lawyer. None. And
neither you nor I can afford the bill in any case.
re resp:112: I don't see a mechanism for doing it. I don't see how it
gets done without the items being public, meaning the responses will
never really be deleted. They'll be re-posted by someone. Look
through this item and the other ones and tell me I'm wrong about that.
If my proposal fails, then if it appears likely the items will be put
back on-line, I will press at that time for people to authorize their
responses be removed first.
The items are deleted now. That's a good thing. It doesn't hurt
anyone. *No one had visited those items in a year*. Maybe no one
ever would have. I don't know that, but I know they'd be visited now,
as the only items ever deleted and then brought back; as objects of
curiosity; in order to make attacks against me by people who can't
stand me because I asked for them to be deleted.
Putting them on-line now is not undoing an action. It's taking a new
action which is very hostile toward me. It would be an attack. The
items are causing no harm at all now. The only way they won't cause
further harm is if they're left alone, just as they are. They're
gone. Leave them alone.
re resp:113: Uh huh. Every Grexer will know how to get them.
|