| Grex > Coop13 > #43: Account of Board Candidate Terminated |
| response 93 of 130: | 
Dec 7 02:57 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 94 of 130: |
Dec 7 02:57 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 95 of 130: |
Dec 7 03:02 UTC 2003 |
Oh, I'm not saying that the fact that this information wasn't available at the time that jp registered should acquit him of wht he did. Just curious as to how people should get to know that certain things like mass-emailing is not acceptable if they weren't told when they made their account and were never told or there was no chance to read about it elsewhere
| response 96 of 130: |
Dec 7 05:02 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 97 of 130: |
Dec 7 05:08 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 98 of 130: |
Dec 8 15:54 UTC 2003 |
Grex also suffers "collateral damage" from mass mailers -- they tend to result in us getting blacklisted by SpamCop. SpamCop only seems to need one complaint to trigger this.
| response 99 of 130: |
Dec 8 16:10 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 100 of 130: |
Dec 8 17:20 UTC 2003 |
And your point is?
| response 101 of 130: |
Dec 8 18:19 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 102 of 130: |
Dec 8 19:23 UTC 2003 |
Not quite when, is it.
| response 103 of 130: |
Dec 16 17:33 UTC 2003 |
First of all, I really do not care what M-Net does. Secondly, Jamie, you shot yourself in the foot by your own actions, no one else's. Impulsive behavior screwed you over temporarily. Did it not occur to you to wait until after the election and try to work with the board--either as a board member or as a member of grex--to get something like this started and see if staff could be alerted? It's not staff's fault that your election got temporarily derailed. Can you, for once, stop playing the martyr? It doesn't wear very well one you.
| response 104 of 130: |
Dec 16 17:44 UTC 2003 |
Heh, there's a part of me that thinks he was afraid we might actually elect him this time, and sabotaged himself deliberately. But most of me thinks he just likes making trouble.
| response 105 of 130: |
Dec 16 17:50 UTC 2003 |
I think he really did care this once. And made very poor judgement on how to go about it. His account was locked, and after reading all responses concerning this, I'm satisfied with the fact that the right thing was done. The voting program was pointed to hist statement, and his account later restored. All of these I'm satisfied with. The election is over, and I'll go by the outcome, whether he gets elected or not. I don't think having his account locked for that one day affected the outcome with regards to his count of votes. Now can we drop this issue?
| response 106 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:25 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 107 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:25 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 108 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:27 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 109 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:29 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 110 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:30 UTC 2003 |
/e joins the conspiracy. Uhm, who is this conspiracy against?
| response 111 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:32 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 112 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:52 UTC 2003 |
Sapna: I agree, I think he did care. He just didn't think ahead.
| response 113 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:55 UTC 2003 |
Well, at least something constructive came of this. Policies regarding usage limits are now easy to get to online outside of the newuser program, with a pointer to them in the motd.
| response 114 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:57 UTC 2003 |
As a proud member of the Conspiracy to Prevent Jp2 from Being Elected, I would like to thank our president, jp2, for all his hard work during this election. We couldn't have done it without you. ;)
| response 115 of 130: |
Dec 16 18:58 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 116 of 130: |
Dec 16 19:06 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
| response 117 of 130: |
Dec 16 19:06 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.