From wheels at scn.org Thu Jun 1 11:15:25 1995 From: wheels at scn.org (Kevin Higgins) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 11:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: |Party News and Needs Message-ID: Hello SCNers, It's almost time for the SCN First Annual Celebration at the Mountaineers Club on Saturday Night! So far, things are going well. The band is lined up, the food is ready to be picked and the hall is ready. There are two things needed at this time. I need to have people help out with ticket taking and clean-up. I am assuming I will just co-op people into helping with these chores at the party and so have not made a more rigourous list, etc. The one area I have fallen behind in is getting door prizes. If you have something to donate by way of doorprize, please let me know or just bring it to the party. Professional services would be welcome, such as one hour of Windows training or how to Surf the Internet along with the classic doorprizes like gift certificates, software or knickknack items. I look forward to seeing you on Saturday night. It is going to be a great celebration! Excitedly 8-), -Kevin Higgins --- wheels at scn.org From bobk Thu Jun 1 14:04:26 1995 From: bobk (Bob Kennewick) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:04:26 -0700 Subject: alt.sex.* Message-ID: <199506012104.OAA06165@scn.org> I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN newsfeed. They are among the most popular on the Internet and I'm sure a lot of people on SCN would read them and find them more useful than most other newsgroups. It is a topic most people have at least a passing interest in. I would also like to make sure that after all the talk about free speech on the SCN mailing lists (state legislation, CMU, etc), that SCN practices what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed. I would like to see SCN reaffirm its commitment to protecting controversial free speech and make a clear statement that sexual topics are acceptable on SCN. On a related note, I hope everyone gets a chance to read and participate in the discussion on SCN censorship on scn.general. SCN needs to clarify whether harassment is an exception to its free speech commitment and if so, to clearly define what constitutes harassment. (I am cross-posting this message to scn.general.) I sincerely hope that when faced with its own real world decisions on what were previously theoretical commitments to free speech that SCN does not waver. Protecting controversial speech is the first principle in the SCN policy statement. If we water down our free speech commitment, I would be in favor of just deleting it altogether from the policy statement. Bob From anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com Thu Jun 1 15:25:24 1995 From: anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com (Aki Namioka) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 95 15:25:24 PDT Subject: Candidates Message-ID: <9506012225.AA08793@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> Below is a list of candidates for the first SCN elections. I have not gotten acknowledgements from all nominated candidates that they really want to run, therefore, they are listed as unconfirmed. Thanks, Aki --------------------------------------------- STEVE BANERIAN I would like to nominate Steve Banerian. No one has worked harder on more aspects of SCN the last few months. He has done more to help both volunteers and users than anyone. Along with participating in many of the Services open houses and road trips, Steve handles many system administration duties, including working this past weekend to finally get the SCN newsfeed going. He is the most active volunteer in interacting with users on the FreePort system. Although Steve handles himself well in a discussion, he is more of a doer than a talker. By being an active participant and getting his hands dirty on both SCN and the Internet, he has become, in my opinion, the most knowledgeable person on SCN about this organization, the Internet and community networks in general. He understands what it will take for SCN to be successful and more importantly he will get things done. I know that when I want to get anything done on SCN, Steve is the one person I can turn to. It will be real nice to have that kind of person on the board to finally get things moving. Steve Banerian will get things accomplished and deserves to be on the initial board of directors. (nominating statement) TONY BARBAN (not confirmed yet) CARLOS CRUZ (not confirmed yet) RANDY GROVES MICHAEL HANSON I would like to nominate michael hanson for a position on the Board of Directors of SCN. He has assisted new users with SCN, use of the freeport system, and in finding solutions to users' problems. He has started the offline news-and-mail reading area, writing the scripts and freeport-work-arounds necessary to make it work. This has been a very useful utility area for users. (nominating statement) JIM HORTON Jim Horton would be a valuable asset as one of our interim SCN Board members and I would like to take this opportunity to nominate him. Jim has been with SCN a long, long time--somewhere near it's inception--and has always been involved, sometimes behind the scenes, currently as the head of the SCN Roadshow, which takes SCN out to the community. He has been an inspiration to us all with his consistent level-headedness and good humor. (nominating statement) NANCY KUNITSUGU (not confirmed yet) AKI NAMIOKA I have had the pleasure of working on this project since it started in 1992 and it has been an extremely rewarding 3 years! My philosophy in volunteering on the project is to put my money where my mouth is, i.e. where there is work to be done, do it. Over the past three years I have been the Policy Committee focal point, which has produced the policy statement, the code of etiquette, the bylaws, the disclaimer, and the current elections process. We are currently working on incorporating the SCN Association and filing the necessary 501(c)(3) papers. I have also worked as as a Services Mentor bringing more than 8 organizations onto SCN, and I have tried to share this information with other Mentors by developing and giving periodic Mentor Workshops. As a participant on the Outreach Committee, I have given several presentations on SCN, most recently at the Joint Washington and Idaho Library Association meeting in Spokane. In February, I joined the Webmasters group and helped Sustainable Seattle build a Web site on SCN. I look forward to working with the Seattle Community Network Association to build an organization that is active in advocating our policy beliefs and at the same time maintaining and developing a community network that meets the needs of its users. LORRAINE POZZI As one of the "founding mothers" of SCN, and more recently as co-founder of the Women's Center within SCN, I bring a unique perspective to the organization. While I have great respect and appreciation for the technical expertise that has made this stage of development possible, I believe it is imperative that SCN develop strengths in other areas as well -- i.e., community building, fundraising, board development, and public relations. I have had experience serving on other non-profit boards, have written and contributed to several successful grant proposals, and helped draft bylaws for two non-profit groups. I have worked with many community leaders. I am committed to ensuring that SCN become a more diverse, more helpful, and more friendly organization, and be truly representative of the community. JOE RODGERS If elected, I commit to: 1) Spending as much of my time with SCN as I feel healthy with, and no more. 2) Promote healthy limits in others: no volunteer work is worth making yourself and others crazy. 3) Work towards changing the organizational model of SCN from a 'supply side' economy, to a service oriented community. 4) Improving my attitude by placing credit where credit is due in addition to the criticism that I give so freely. 5) Become a qualified mentor, and get 3 new IP's on line within the next year. 6) Work towards improving the design cycle of this service's 'look and feel'. JAMES RUSSELL I would also like to nominate James Russell. I have been told that James can explain SCN usage in a simple and clear manner to new people and is invariably patient. These are valuable resources. (nominating statement) ERIC RUTHFORD I have been a regular user of the Seattle Community Network for the past eight months. I have participated in the many fora of SCN, and I am very familiar with its workings. If elected, I plan to make SCN a larger place with more outside connections with the WWW, telnet, and perhaps FTP. I am thoroughly committed to both privacy and free speech. I will defend these two things while making SCN an environment free of harassment. JEREMY SCHERTZINGER I believe as a member of the SCN board I could present a point of view unlike many others. I can bring the voices of the younger users of SCN and help create a more balanced board. Thank you. (As a side note, I will be away from Seattle all of July with no net access for the most part.) DOUG SCHULER I am very happy to accept Kevin Higgins' nomination to the Seattle Community Network board. Our vision of a free community network system for Seattle and the King County region is becoming a reality and I would be proud to serve in this important role as an interim board member. I am one of the original founders of the system and did much of the earliest work in bringing information about community networks - including the Cleveland Free-Net, the San Monica PEN system, the New York Youth Network, and Big Sky Telegraph in Montana - to our attention here in Seattle. I was instrumental in developing the original principles and I wrote the original editorial that was in the Seattle Times. I, along with Aki Namioka, presented the first vision of SCN at Kay Bullitt's house, along with Lorraine Pozzi and many others. I also presented the SCN "vision" at the Community Introduction at the Seattle Public Library and worked with Randy Groves, Yvonne Chen, and Jim Taylor to develop the "memorandum of understanding" between SCN and the Library that helped lead to SCN's outstanding relationship with the Library. In addition, as the former chair of the outreach committee, I worked on several proposals including one for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which yielded two years of part-time volunteer coordination support for a joint project with public television KCTS/9. I have been working in the area of social implications of computing for over 13 years and I am currently the chair of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. I have attended both "Ties that Bind" community networking conferences and I am active nationally in promoting community networking. To this end I wrote "Community Networks: Building a New Participatory Medium" for the Communications of the ACM and I'm nearing completion of a book entitled "New Community Networks - Weaving Electronic Webs for the 21st Century" to be published this Fall by Addison-Wesley. I feel that I have been instrumental in launching the Seattle Community Network. I am eager to continue in that role as we make SCN an important and enduring resource for the entire region. As an interim director I feel that the most important contribution we could make would be to help assess the challenges and opportunities facing SCN today and to make a set of recommendations for the new board. BARBARA WEISMANN I have served on the Council of a major co-op, as well as worked with a new citizen action group to form and pass its Bylaws. I have worked for the past five years with non-profits and understand the requirements of all aspects of their functioning. I would be happy to fulfill the position of interim Board. ----- End Included Message ----- From lbs at aa.net Thu Jun 1 15:52:11 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 15:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: <9506012225.AA08793@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> Message-ID: I have one question, that perhaps someone can clarify. One of the unconfirmed candidates is nancyk. I do believe that nacyk has contributed a lot to SCN; however, since she is also a *paid* employee of SCN, and accountable to the Board of Directors - would this not be a 'conflict of interest' ? -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From randy at scn.org Thu Jun 1 16:21:44 1995 From: randy at scn.org (Randy Groves) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 16:21:44 -0700 Subject: Candidates Message-ID: Aki, Here's my reponse and a little blurb. I don't know if it's too late to include or not ... I will run for the board position. I have been involved with the project from the beginning. I think that I understand both the vision and many of the nuts and bolts of implementing the vision. There are several places where I would like to see the new organization improve upon what we have done so far: involvement in the communities of the Puget Sound region; health care issues - delivery, support, information; support for economic development in the communities; other uses of the 'network' that we have constructed (both human AND machine) in support of community building of all kinds; and of course fundraising and sponsorship. We have the makings of a great project here - let's let people know about it!! I am interested in moving the organization to the next steps, but being sensible about it. We need to be able to fully walk before we can run. From tomz at u.washington.edu Thu Jun 1 21:49:47 1995 From: tomz at u.washington.edu (T. Zeiler) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 21:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: |Party News and Needs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I could offer an hour of internet surfing lessons as a door prize. Tom Zeiler 524-1958 tomz at u.washington.edu From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Fri Jun 2 14:03:17 1995 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: 2 Jun 95 14:03:17 PDT (Fri) Subject: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare References: <199506012104.OAA06165@scn.org> (Bob Kennewick's post of Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:04:26 -0700), <9506012225.AA08793@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> (Aki Namioka's post of Thu, 1 Jun 95 15:25:24 PDT) Message-ID: <9506021403.AA01267@grogatch.seaslug.org> In a recent posting <199506012104.OAA06165 at scn.org> Bob K. said: > I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN > newsfeed. [...] > [...] SCN practices > what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed. [...] > [...] > I sincerely hope that when faced with its own real world decisions on what > were previously theoretical commitments to free speech that SCN does not > waver. Protecting controversial speech is the first principle in the SCN > policy statement. If we water down our free speech commitment, I would be > in favor of just deleting it altogether from the policy statement. > Well said, Bob! Apropos of this, Aki recently posted in <9506012225.AA08793 at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> a list of nominees for the initial SCN board. I think it important that the candidates be *explicit* or at least truthful about the boundaries of what they consider acceptable discourse in public-access computer systems. I urge voters to take note of waffling, vagueness and dogmatism, as well as wisdom, thoughtfulness and experience. Questions to be asked of prospective candidates might include: o To what extent do your personal views on controversial discourse influence your role as director of a public grouping? What conflicts exist, if any? Why or why not? o What constitutes "harmful speech"? What does not? Is there any difference between bodily injury, hurt feelings and/or offended sensibilities? Are the differences, if any, of degree or kind? o Would you defend advocacy of activities or views you disapprove of? Does legality or illegality make any difference? Why or why not? o What are examples of legitimate intervention? illegitimate intervention? -- kurt From jrodgers at rain.kcls.lib.wa.us Fri Jun 2 17:01:00 1995 From: jrodgers at rain.kcls.lib.wa.us (Joe Rodgers) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 17:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jun 1995, Randy Groves wrote: > Aki, > Here's my reponse and a little blurb. I don't know if it's too late to > include or not ... > Can we talk about this? What these elections mean to me, is a transition from seat-of-the-pants, do-whatever-it-takes-to-get-the-job-done decision making, to something that says, "Okay, here is the way we're going to go about it" and then do it in a manner consistant with what we've just set. I think these are the reasons that Washington state wants us to jump through certain hoops before we're allowed to be a tax-deductable charity. They want predictability, as do the users of this facility. By setting up the rules, and then breaking them in the same breath, you're undermining the whole rationale behind the elections.I have nothing against a wider playing field: each of the 3 late candidates is probably more enthusiastic about this place than I am. But if you're going to allow these guys a late entry, then to be fair, you've got to open it up to everyone else, all over again. (Yeah, like it would make a difference!) I'm going to withdraw my grumble from the election area, since this is probably better handled 'behind closed doors', But if one or all of the three latecomers win, I'm going to feel honor-bound to contest the election. From lbs at aa.net Fri Jun 2 17:25:42 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 17:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Randy Groves has contributed a great deal to SCN; and is a great candidate. I believe that his *nomination* was placed within the correct time period. It was only his *statement* that was a little late (and not by much). Joe's email indicated he would *protest* if any of the 'late' candidates won (?) I think upfront we need to confirm that these candidates are valid. Their *nominations* were placed in time. -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From mascott at scn.org Fri Jun 2 22:16:29 1995 From: mascott at scn.org (A. R. 'Bob' Mascott) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 22:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: To All Please keep in mind, as you read this, that Nancy and Carlos are both good friends of mine and that I work with them on SCN Committees. This situation is 'atypical' of what a lot of the complaints are about here at SCN. Unfairness. We create unfair situations by fudging the rules for those on the inside (so to speak) or just not doing our job that we have agreed to do to the utmost. The later is what worries me now and worries about the candidates that we have who can not spend adequate time in doing the job that they said they would do for SCN. The nomination was clearly date stamped by the originating system as on June 1, 95 12:37:32 PDT. The names of these candidates are being carried in the list of candidates. It was announced at the General Meeting - First that nominations would close, at the close of business, then at midnight 31 May, 95. It was also announced that the full Board of Directors consisted of 13 members and that there was no process for an election in the Bylaws. The Bylaws exhibited in the Policy section calls for 15 Directors and clearly has an election process. What changes to these Bylaws and the Articles of Incorporation are we not being shown? A call had gone out for someone to count the votes. I volunteered and so far there has been no response. I think that rules for voting should have been posted before the voting started. Like one vote for one person or one account (whichever is the lessor). You must vote for all 3 candidates at the same time, not one candidate, one candidate and one candidate. There will be no changing your mind on voting, like casting your vote, then a week later, changing your mind because the voting is still open. It will be very hard to count the votes correctly now, with no rules to go by and if rules are established, they will be put in midstream to the voting, which is also wrong. It is really very hard, to be fair to all people and being fair to the less fortunate is part of what I thought we were all about. Bob Mascott - mascott at scn.org On Fri, 2 Jun 1995, Lucys wrote: > > > Randy Groves has contributed a great deal to SCN; > and is a great candidate. > > I believe that his *nomination* was placed within the correct > time period. It was only his *statement* that was a little > late (and not by much). > > Joe's email indicated he would *protest* if any of the 'late' > candidates won (?) I think upfront we need to confirm that > these candidates are valid. Their *nominations* were placed > in time. > > > -- > Lucy S. lbs at aa.net > Seattle, Washington USA > > From leni at nwlink.com Sat Jun 3 00:56:39 1995 From: leni at nwlink.com (Brian Lenihan) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 00:56:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath Message-ID: I am really disturbed by what I have been reading. I am also disgusted and angry. This whole election situation is getting way out of hand. Let's get a few things straight: 1. SCN as a corporation does not exist yet. This online community we call SCN is not the legal entity which is referred to in the bylaws and the articles of incorporation. The computer system/community is being confused with an organization which will only exist after it is incorporated. 2. By definition, a proposed organization cannot possibly have any members. 3. The bylaws do not have any provisions for electing the initial Board of Directors, nor should they. Without members, who is eligible to vote? I think a major mistake was made when the decision was made to hold an election. SCN doesn't exist, there is no official policy in place and the natural result is all this incredible squabbling. The interim board should be appointed. Why do we have a coordinating council anyway? If people aren't happy with the appointees, they will get a chance soon enough to vote for the full Board. The dates by which the first annual meeting must be held and the full board must be elected were chosen rather arbitrarily by me. They can be moved up if people are worried about the delay. The bylaws are not official until they are ratified by the _full Board_. For those of you who may not be aware of it, the state does not require bylaws to incorporate. The IRS does. Over the past few months I have seen all kinds of sniping aimed at the motives behind some of the provisions in the bylaws. I wrote them and I certainly cannot be considered a SCN "insider" with my own agenda. I wrote them with the intent to make it difficult for radical changes to be made to the organization in a short time period. In particular, having up to six Board members appointed by the standing Board ensures that an organized group of people cannot take over the Board in one election. Three year terms are suggested so only a third of the Board turns over each year. All of these things insure a stable organization. There are plenty of provisions to protect the members from a malevolent Board. Recent events suggest that my concerns were well-founded. I think the bylaws could be even simpler, but I am deeply concerned by the behavior being exhibited by some our users. I am even more convinced that having a voting class of users is totally unworkable. Anarchy has its devotees, but it has no place in a _volunteer_ organization. Who has the time for it? Why shouldn't some the same people who created SCN be appointed to the interim Board? And why should the interim Board be open to anyone? This organizations future is riding on these decisions. I am especially upset by the way people who can't be bothered to work for SCN have gotten so vocal in attacking the people who _created_ SCN. I personally have been disappointed in some of the directions the "founders" have chosen to take SCN and I may not agree with some of their decisions, but I respect what they have done and I admire them for it. Those people have worked hard in their free time and no one should be overlooking that fact. There are some really good people involved in SCN and I am glad I have met them. Especially Aki, who steered me towards the job I now have (Thank you! but working 12+ hour days really doesn't leave me much time for SCN). I don't see a clean way out of this mess, so I propose that we back up and that SCN scraps the election and an interim Board is appointed by the coordinating council. Anything else would be incredibly destructive, as recent events have proved. OK, now I can take a deep breath. --Brian From lbs at aa.net Sat Jun 3 11:23:17 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 11:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 3 Jun 1995, Brian Lenihan wrote: > I don't see a clean way out of this mess, so I propose that we back up and > that SCN scraps the election and an interim Board is appointed by the > coordinating council. Anything else would be incredibly destructive, as > recent events have proved. TO ALL: I agree with Brian's observations, and I 'second' his proposal to scrap the elections. Although I am a proponent of democracy and open discussions, I agree that SCN needs some *stability* as an organization. I think Brian's proposal has a lot of 'common sense'. -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From spban at eskimo.com Sat Jun 3 11:33:37 1995 From: spban at eskimo.com (banerian) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 11:33:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 3 Jun 1995, Lucys wrote: > On Sat, 3 Jun 1995, Brian Lenihan wrote: > > I don't see a clean way out of this mess, so I propose that we back up and > > that SCN scraps the election and an interim Board is appointed by the > > coordinating council. Anything else would be incredibly destructive, as > > recent events have proved. > > TO ALL: > I agree with Brian's observations, and I 'second' his proposal to > scrap the elections. > Although I am a proponent of democracy and open discussions, I > agree that SCN needs some *stability* as an organization. > I think Brian's proposal has a lot of 'common sense'. I wouldn't object to scrapping the elections, but with a couple provisos: 1) at least one of the interim board members not be "one of the original members of SCN" to keep a little bit of diveristy in viewpoint available. 2) an elections committee be set up to recommend election/voting/nomination prodedures. sure, another committee.... :-) but it just might help make things go a little smoother when the "real" elections occur. FYI, if you read alt.online-services.freenet (now available on SCN!) you'll see a thread called "crisis in freenets" SCN is not alone in its growing pains. -- s banerian spban at eskimo.com banerian at scn.org From gsg2660 at scn.org Sat Jun 3 15:54:51 1995 From: gsg2660 at scn.org (George Goodwin) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 15:54:51 -0700 Subject: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare Message-ID: <199506032254.PAA10636@scn.org> >In a recent posting <199506012104.OAA06165 at scn.org> Bob K. said: >> I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN >> newsfeed. [...] >> [...] SCN practices >> what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed. [...] >> [...] >> I sincerely hope that when faced with its own real world decisions on what >> were previously theoretical commitments to free speech that SCN does not >> waver. Protecting controversial speech is the first principle in the SCN >> policy statement. If we water down our free speech commitment, I would be >> in favor of just deleting it altogether from the policy statement. >> > >Well said, Bob! > >Apropos of this, Aki recently posted in ><9506012225.AA08793 at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> a list of nominees for the initial >SCN board. I think it important that the candidates be *explicit* or at least >truthful about the boundaries of what they consider acceptable discourse in >public-access computer systems. I urge voters to take note of waffling, >vagueness and dogmatism, as well as wisdom, thoughtfulness and experience. > >Questions to be asked of prospective candidates might include: >o To what extent do your personal views on controversial discourse > influence your role as director of a public grouping? What conflicts > exist, if any? Why or why not? >o What constitutes "harmful speech"? What does not? > Is there any difference between bodily injury, hurt feelings and/or > offended sensibilities? Are the differences, if any, of degree or kind? >o Would you defend advocacy of activities or views you disapprove of? > Does legality or illegality make any difference? Why or why not? >o What are examples of legitimate intervention? illegitimate > intervention? > >-- kurt I feel that free speech is important, both in practice as well as concept, but if we are to have a group composed of age groups that are diverse and varied, we either put up barriers based on age ( censorship_) or we don't provide everything. If we provide alt.sex, then we must provide all of the other forums, over 10000, and our disks will choke. I would propose that even if we want to add someone's particular desire, that in a diverse group, the group can act on it. If someone wished to have downloadable QuikTime movies of "Deep Throat", we would not consider that as an application of censorship if the organizatiopn declined to carry it because of: Storage space Access to Minors Offence to other members Where should we draw the line. SCN is a new and still struggling organization. It would be nice if we could pay for everything, but consider that our net access is via the Seattle Public Library, not some client or user. We may decide in the future that we have the resources to add all of alt and all of sci and all of art and all ... but we are not there yet. I don't think that this is an issue for the Board-of-Directors at this time for the same reasons as above.! -- ......This Message sent, By George Goodwin gsg2660 at scn.org From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Sat Jun 3 18:59:22 1995 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: 3 Jun 95 18:59:22 PDT (Sat) Subject: Re2: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare In-Reply-To: <199506032254.PAA10636@scn.org> (gsg2660@scn.org (George Goodwin)) Message-ID: <9506031859.AA03774@grogatch.seaslug.org> George said: }>>[...me quoting Bob K...] }>> I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN }>> newsfeed. [...] }>> [...] SCN practices }>> what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed. [...] }>[me] }>Well said, Bob! }> }>Apropos of this, Aki recently posted in }><9506012225.AA08793 at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> a list of nominees for the initial }>SCN board. I think it important that the candidates be *explicit* or at least }>truthful about the boundaries of what they consider acceptable discourse in }>public-access computer systems. [...my stuff deleted...] } }I feel that free speech is important, both in practice as well as concept, }but if we are to have a group composed of age groups that are diverse and }varied, we either put up barriers based on age ( censorship_) or we don't }provide everything. It's my opinion that exposure to graphic or talk sex does no harm to anybody. I think one would be hard-pressed to provide evidence to the contrary, unless the prospective censor wished to provide themselves as an example, in which case we must consider the thesis that exposure to graphic sex does indeed turn one into one of the lowest of the bottom-feeders, a censor, self-serving confessions of serial killers notwithstanding. We have to remember that much of the opposition to young folk seeing sex is from the same folk who advocated firing Jocelyn Elders (successfully, to the Clinton administration's great shame) for advocating that masturbation be taught as a form of relief of sexual tension. In fact, if those folk indeed resisted temptation, it's the best argument for indulging that I have heard yet. If they failed to resist temptation, as did nearly all of the rest of us, what does that prove? Just one thing: we are all human beings, with human urges. Nothing more. A lot of the hoohah surrounding this issue comes from parents who have extremely selective memories of their own privately constructed childhood innocence. Nobody ever remenbers what little hellions they were; they'd prefer that their children conform to their internalized never-lived ideal, instead of being like they were. You know, adults really are not very bright; the disrespect that kids hold for us is richly deserved in many cases. There's no better way to get a kid to do something than to forbid it to them. There's no harder way to get a kid to do something than to order them to do it. Yet kids see all the foofaraw raised around sex by adults and can't help but wondering, "well, if it's got them in an uproar, it must be pretty interesting." Besides, kids like to push adults buttons. If adults would just shut up about sex, kids probably would forget the whole thing. Instead, they keep harping on it, with predictable results. Question of the day: how do you get a 4-year-old to put a bean up their nose? Answer: Forbid them to do it, of course, and freak out when they do!! After all, you haven't heard of any flags being burnt lately, have you? It was the issue du jour for a while, but once the adults (read: establishment, the powers-that-be, authority, etc.) lost interest, the kids did too. Besides, that was only done to get people's goats. } If we provide alt.sex, then we must provide all of }the other forums, over 10000, and our disks will choke. OK, technical arguments must not be conflated with censorship. We don't need to provide access to .gif's (or provide a 1-gig disk and a 1-day expire time -- can't that group have its own partition?); after all much better quality printed images are available for those who get off on images. Besides, you don't have to provide them all. Just the ones people ask for. Not the same thing. However, sex talk satisfies deep human needs -- i. e. talking about sex with other real live human beings, and I don't mean at $2/minute. Sex is a natural human activity, and a community center without areas for that is going to be hard-pressed to say that they are free-speech advocates if there never seems to be enough disk space for those "controversial" newsgroups. Don't forget, people will be watching to see if it's really not enough disk space, or whether bluenoses are getting appeased. Besides, secondary storage is getting cheaper and cheaper. }I would propose that even if we want to add someone's particular desire, }that in a diverse group, the group can act on it. If someone wished to }have downloadable QuikTime movies of "Deep Throat", we would not consider }that as an application of censorship if the organizatiopn declined to }carry it because of: } Storage space I agree; see above. However, it should be made explicit and the action should be done in an open manner so that it could be verified. I'd hate to see a bluenose using lack of storage space as an excuse. Storage space must be really not available for that to work as a reason. As time goes on, it becomes less viable. } Access to Minors The barrier mentioned above only needs to be nominal, doesn't it? Do we actually have to call 911 if we learn that somebody on the other end of the wire is a kid? How would that happen anyway? So, let the user sign a disclaimer saying they are over 18 and that they will not allow young folk access to their terminal. That way, if they lie, the moral/ethical onus lies on them, not us. I am willing to take somebody's word that they are over 18 (or whatever the age is). I am not going to sue them if they turn out to have deceived me. After all, I have this signed disclaimer right there in this shoebox... :) Access to the newsgroups in question perhaps should be accompanied by warning messages (but see above, where I talk about how kids find out what's interesting -- just by observing where the adults get all hot and bothered). Besides, it makes more sense to provide empty or minimal .newsrc's to users. Let them find out what's there by exploration. In other words, let sleeping dogs lie. } Offence to other members Uhhh, like being offended at censorship? Why should being offended at graphic sex take precedence over offence at lack of free speech? Why not the other way around? If somebody is offended by feelthy pix they should not look at them. We should not be responsible for the religion that others *choose* and the boundaries it imposes on them. It is said that in certain Islamic countries women must wear chadors (a head-to-toe flowing garment that conceals the body) so that men aren't incited to lustful thoughts, or otherwise offended. But it seems entirely unfair to hold a woman responsible for events that occur solely within the confines of a man's cranium. Should she be held responsible for things that the man is likely obsessing about anyway solely because that culture forbids it? In any case, there's nothing she can do to control what goes thru the man's head. In this country, a similar analogy holds. Sometimes, the only way somebody won't be offended by one's presence or activities of life is for one to stop living, an unacceptable option for many. We live in an increasingly diverse, multicultural society, for better or for worse. There are infinite opportunities for being offended, yet we only have a finite lifetime. People who get offended by commonplace activities of others perhaps need to get counseling of some kind, and perhaps a sheet of suitable references could be prepared. In any case, why worry about it -- if there's a hereafter, that's where it'll get sorted out anyway. Somehow we need to start getting rational about what bothers us and what doesn't. }Where should we draw the line. SCN is a new and still struggling }organization. Certain persons who have declared candidacy for the board of directors no doubt would like everything nice and sanitized for the benefit of visiting firepersons and prospective grantors, but the fact is we are presumably a community, which includes homeless people, sex fiends, prudes, clean people and people who don't take a bath very often and everything orthogonal to all of the preceding. Sorry, life is not as clean and shiny as those persons think it should be. Presumably, because we are "new and still struggling", we need grants and other money sources; I would hope in our hunger for cash flow, that we only approach grantors who also put a high value on free speech. I would hope that we have the collective courage to turn down money that had censorship strings attached. No doubt there will be competition for the same money from FreeNets who decide to compromise their ideals of free speech in order to obtain funding. Well, this would just make us look better in some circles...if that ever became the case, we could use that fact to promote ourselves! } It would be nice if we could pay for everything, but }consider that our net access is via the Seattle Public Library, not some }client or user. We may decide in the future that we have the resources }to add all of alt and all of sci and all of art and all ... }but we are not there yet. I don't think that this is an issue for the }Board-of-Directors at this time for the same reasons as above.! The issue of whether we have the space to carry all the groups is not the same as whether we should carry certain groups because their content. The latter issue *is* one that the BOD should be concerned about, and user/members should be concerned about the opinions of prospective BOD members on that issue. The first issue concerns chiefly the sysadmins. One wishes that the candidates weren't mum on this; so far all the talk has been from non-candidates. Perhaps for the candidates this is all moot since they are all ardent free speech supporters anyway? -- kurt From janossz at scn.org Sat Jun 3 23:56:19 1995 From: janossz at scn.org (Janos Szablya) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 23:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re2: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare In-Reply-To: <9506031859.AA03774@grogatch.seaslug.org> Message-ID: Kurt, PLEASE RE-READ YOUR ARGUMENTS AND ELIMINATE THE CONTRADICTIONS THEN REPOST IT SO I CAN TELL WHAT IT IS YOU ARE SAYING. EXAMPLE: ADULTS AREN'T VERY BRIGHT.... USERS SIGN WAIVER THAT THEY ARE OVER 18 THEN YOU SLAM ISLAM AS A RELIGION. Please explain your position clearly so I can understand why you just don't find these areas and "play"? I have no problem with sexual material, but.... where does social responsibility begin and end? I have no answers that are clear cut hear only we have issues that are greater than this thread that need to be addressed first and this issue should go on a back burner until it can be thought through. I feel the same way about violence/bombmaking it's just not the time when we are so far from being at the end of the first chapter of SCN. On 3 Jun 1995, Kurt Cockrum wrote: > George said: > }>>[...me quoting Bob K...] > }>> I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN > }>> newsfeed. [...] > }>> [...] SCN practices > }>> what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed. [...] > }>[me] > }>Well said, Bob! > }> > }>Apropos of this, Aki recently posted in > }><9506012225.AA08793 at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> a list of nominees for the initial > }>SCN board. I think it important that the candidates be *explicit* or at least > }>truthful about the boundaries of what they consider acceptable discourse in > }>public-access computer systems. [...my stuff deleted...] > } > }I feel that free speech is important, both in practice as well as concept, > }but if we are to have a group composed of age groups that are diverse and > }varied, we either put up barriers based on age ( censorship_) or we don't > }provide everything. > > It's my opinion that exposure to graphic or talk sex does no harm to anybody. > I think one would be hard-pressed to provide evidence to the contrary, > unless the prospective censor wished to provide themselves as an example, > in which case we must consider the thesis that exposure to graphic sex > does indeed turn one into one of the lowest of the bottom-feeders, a censor, > self-serving confessions of serial killers notwithstanding. > > We have to remember that much of the opposition to young folk seeing sex is > from the same folk who advocated firing Jocelyn Elders (successfully, to > the Clinton administration's great shame) for advocating that > masturbation be taught as a form of relief of sexual tension. > In fact, if those folk indeed resisted temptation, it's the best argument > for indulging that I have heard yet. If they failed to resist temptation, > as did nearly all of the rest of us, what does that prove? Just one thing: > we are all human beings, with human urges. Nothing more. > > A lot of the hoohah surrounding this issue comes from parents who have > extremely selective memories of their own privately constructed childhood > innocence. Nobody ever remenbers what little hellions they were; they'd > prefer that their children conform to their internalized never-lived ideal, > instead of being like they were. > > You know, adults really are not very bright; the disrespect that kids hold > for us is richly deserved in many cases. There's no better way to get a > kid to do something than to forbid it to them. There's no harder way to > get a kid to do something than to order them to do it. > Yet kids see all the foofaraw raised around sex by adults and can't help > but wondering, "well, if it's got them in an uproar, it must be pretty > interesting." Besides, kids like to push adults buttons. If adults would > just shut up about sex, kids probably would forget the whole thing. Instead, > they keep harping on it, with predictable results. > Question of the day: how do you get a 4-year-old to put a bean up their nose? > Answer: Forbid them to do it, of course, and freak out when they do!! > > After all, you haven't heard of any flags being burnt lately, have you? > It was the issue du jour for a while, but once the adults (read: establishment, > the powers-that-be, authority, etc.) lost interest, the kids did too. > Besides, that was only done to get people's goats. > > } If we provide alt.sex, then we must provide all of > }the other forums, over 10000, and our disks will choke. > > OK, technical arguments must not be conflated with censorship. We don't > need to provide access to .gif's (or provide a 1-gig disk and a 1-day expire > time -- can't that group have its own partition?); after all much better > quality printed images are available for those who get off on images. > > Besides, you don't have to provide them all. Just the ones people ask for. > Not the same thing. > > However, sex talk satisfies deep human needs -- i. e. talking about sex > with other real live human beings, and I don't mean at $2/minute. Sex is > a natural human activity, and a community center without areas for that is > going to be hard-pressed to say that they are free-speech advocates if > there never seems to be enough disk space for those "controversial" newsgroups. > Don't forget, people will be watching to see if it's really not enough disk > space, or whether bluenoses are getting appeased. Besides, secondary storage > is getting cheaper and cheaper. > > }I would propose that even if we want to add someone's particular desire, > }that in a diverse group, the group can act on it. If someone wished to > }have downloadable QuikTime movies of "Deep Throat", we would not consider > }that as an application of censorship if the organizatiopn declined to > }carry it because of: > } Storage space > > I agree; see above. However, it should be made explicit and the action > should be done in an open manner so that it could be verified. I'd hate > to see a bluenose using lack of storage space as an excuse. Storage space > must be really not available for that to work as a reason. As time goes > on, it becomes less viable. > > } Access to Minors > > The barrier mentioned above only needs to be nominal, doesn't it? Do we > actually have to call 911 if we learn that somebody on the other end of the > wire is a kid? How would that happen anyway? > So, let the user sign a disclaimer saying they are over 18 and that they > will not allow young folk access to their terminal. That way, if they > lie, the moral/ethical onus lies on them, not us. I am willing to take > somebody's word that they are over 18 (or whatever the age is). I am not > going to sue them if they turn out to have deceived me. After all, I have > this signed disclaimer right there in this shoebox... :) > Access to the newsgroups in question perhaps should be accompanied by warning > messages (but see above, where I talk about how kids find out what's > interesting -- just by observing where the adults get all hot and bothered). > > Besides, it makes more sense to provide empty or minimal .newsrc's to > users. Let them find out what's there by exploration. In other words, > let sleeping dogs lie. > > } Offence to other members > > Uhhh, like being offended at censorship? Why should being offended at graphic > sex take precedence over offence at lack of free speech? Why not the other way > around? If somebody is offended by feelthy pix they should not look at them. > We should not be responsible for the religion that others *choose* and the > boundaries it imposes on them. > > It is said that in certain Islamic countries women must wear chadors (a > head-to-toe flowing garment that conceals the body) so that men aren't incited > to lustful thoughts, or otherwise offended. But it seems entirely unfair to > hold a woman responsible for events that occur solely within the confines of > a man's cranium. Should she be held responsible for things that the man is > likely obsessing about anyway solely because that culture forbids it? In any > case, there's nothing she can do to control what goes thru the man's head. In > this country, a similar analogy holds. > > Sometimes, the only way somebody won't be offended by one's presence or > activities of life is for one to stop living, an unacceptable option for many. > > We live in an increasingly diverse, multicultural society, for better or > for worse. There are infinite opportunities for being offended, yet we > only have a finite lifetime. People who get offended by commonplace activities > of others perhaps need to get counseling of some kind, and perhaps a sheet of > suitable references could be prepared. In any case, why worry about it -- if > there's a hereafter, that's where it'll get sorted out anyway. > > Somehow we need to start getting rational about what bothers us and what > doesn't. > > }Where should we draw the line. SCN is a new and still struggling > }organization. > > Certain persons who have declared candidacy for the board of directors no > doubt would like everything nice and sanitized for the benefit of visiting > firepersons and prospective grantors, but the fact is we are presumably a > community, which includes homeless people, sex fiends, prudes, clean > people and people who don't take a bath very often and everything > orthogonal to all of the preceding. Sorry, life is not as clean and shiny > as those persons think it should be. > > Presumably, because we are "new and still struggling", we need grants and > other money sources; I would hope in our hunger for cash flow, that > we only approach grantors who also put a high value on free speech. > I would hope that we have the collective courage to turn down money that had > censorship strings attached. > > No doubt there will be competition for the same money from FreeNets who decide > to compromise their ideals of free speech in order to obtain funding. > Well, this would just make us look better in some circles...if that > ever became the case, we could use that fact to promote ourselves! > > } It would be nice if we could pay for everything, but > }consider that our net access is via the Seattle Public Library, not some > }client or user. We may decide in the future that we have the resources > }to add all of alt and all of sci and all of art and all ... > }but we are not there yet. I don't think that this is an issue for the > }Board-of-Directors at this time for the same reasons as above.! > > The issue of whether we have the space to carry all the groups is not the > same as whether we should carry certain groups because their content. The > latter issue *is* one that the BOD should be concerned about, and user/members > should be concerned about the opinions of prospective BOD members on that > issue. The first issue concerns chiefly the sysadmins. > > One wishes that the candidates weren't mum on this; so far all the talk > has been from non-candidates. Perhaps for the candidates this is all > moot since they are all ardent free speech supporters anyway? > -- kurt > From lbs at aa.net Sun Jun 4 00:51:05 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 00:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re2: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 3 Jun 1995, Janos Szablya wrote: > > I have no answers that are clear cut hear only we have issues that > are greater than this thread that need to be addressed first and > this issue should go on a back burner until it can be thought > through. I feel the same way about violence/bombmaking it's just > not the time when we are so far from being at the end of the first > chapter of SCN. Well said. SCN is in the process of being a separate entity, and needs to focus on that first. First things first. These other issues, such as making SCN's commitment to all the alt.sex.* forums as some *grand celebrated cause* for 'free speech' are a *red herring*, which divert attention away from establishing SCN itself. (This whole topic was diverting attention away from the elections. It was one of the things that was making the elections into a 3-ring circus!) > > > On 3 Jun 1995, Kurt Cockrum wrote: > > > So, let the user sign a disclaimer saying they are over 18 and that they > > will not allow young folk access to their terminal. That way, if they Any *MINOR* child could sign a statement stating they are an adult. SCN would not be providing 'due diligence' if they did not add some administrative feature to *verify* that the person was in fact an adult. How SCN could do this, I'm not sure. However, it could be an administrative nightmare. > > > > } Offence to other members > > > > People who get offended by commonplace activities *********** The most popular alt.sex.* forum is probably alt.sex.stories. These *commonplace* (???) stories include: incest, pedophilia, rape, bondage, S/M, and snuff stories. The time to debate the merits of the *usefulness* of the alt.sex.* forums is *later on*. I will be one of those people who will debate AGAINST these forums. Until later... -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From randy at scn.org Sun Jun 4 02:30:53 1995 From: randy at scn.org (Randy Groves) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 02:30:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: What's this about me being a LATE candidate? I believe I was nominated toward the very first of the nominaition process, by Kevin Higgins, I believe. I only meant that I wanted to include my statement. If it is too late, then I'm willing to have Kevin's original nomination statement be mine. Actually, I don't think that the rules that we set up said ANYTHING about when nominating statements had to be in, only that the NOMINATIONS had to close. If I am interpreting things too loosely, please correct me! -randy On Fri, 2 Jun 1995, Joe Rodgers wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jun 1995, Randy Groves wrote: > > Aki, > > Here's my reponse and a little blurb. I don't know if it's too late to > > include or not ... > > > Can we talk about this? > > What these elections mean to me, is a transition from seat-of-the-pants, > do-whatever-it-takes-to-get-the-job-done decision making, to something > that says, "Okay, here is the way we're going to go about it" and then do > it in a manner consistant with what we've just set. > > I think these are the reasons that Washington state wants us to jump > through certain hoops before we're allowed to be a tax-deductable charity. > They want predictability, as do the users of this facility. > > By setting up the rules, and then breaking them in the same breath, > you're undermining the whole rationale behind the elections.I have > nothing against a wider playing field: each of the 3 late candidates is > probably more enthusiastic about this place than I am. But if you're > going to allow these guys a late entry, then to be fair, you've got to > open it up to everyone else, all over again. (Yeah, like it would make a > difference!) > > I'm going to withdraw my grumble from the election area, since this is > probably better handled 'behind closed doors', But if one or all of the > three latecomers win, I'm going to feel honor-bound to contest the election. > From wheels at scn.org Sun Jun 4 14:47:27 1995 From: wheels at scn.org (Kevin Higgins) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 14:47:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am in favor of Brian's suggestion and Lucy's second. It appears that the interim obard is generally designed to be an administrative procedure done to further the effort of SCN becoming a registered non-profit organization with the State of Washington, with the ultimate goal of gaining tax-exempt staus with the IRS (a 501(c)(3) organization). We could just have this incorporating board deal with the paperwork and then have people run for positions on the larger permanent board of the SCNA (SCN Association). -Kevin Higgins --- wheels at scn.org From bd056 at scn.org Sun Jun 4 15:52:14 1995 From: bd056 at scn.org (Lawrence Mueller) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 15:52:14 -0700 Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath Message-ID: <199506042252.PAA06215@scn.org> > > > I am in favor of Brian's suggestion and Lucy's second. It >appears that the interim obard is generally designed to be an >administrative procedure done to further the effort of SCN becoming a >registered non-profit organization with the State of Washington, with the >ultimate goal of gaining tax-exempt staus with the IRS (a 501(c)(3) >organization). > We could just have this incorporating board deal with the >paperwork and then have people run for positions on the larger permanent >board of the SCNA (SCN Association). > >-Kevin Higgins --- wheels at scn.org > > Well put. Do we have any information on how the voting procedures, membership process, and make-up of the Board is handled on Cleveland Free-net, or the Vancouver Free-net? Surely we are not the only group facing such problems? Larry Mueller --- bd056 at scn.org From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Sun Jun 4 14:17:47 1995 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: 4 Jun 95 14:17:47 PDT (Sun) Subject: Re2: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9506041417.AA05436@grogatch.seaslug.org> Janosz said: #Kurt, # #PLEASE RE-READ YOUR ARGUMENTS AND ELIMINATE THE CONTRADICTIONS THEN #REPOST IT SO I CAN TELL WHAT IT IS YOU ARE SAYING. OK, I will do my best. #EXAMPLE: ADULTS AREN'T VERY BRIGHT.... What part of this didn't you understand? (-snurk-) # USERS SIGN WAIVER THAT THEY ARE OVER 18 This was a suggestion offered as a simple remedy to a potentially hairy situation. While rationally viable, perhaps it was not legally viable. Perhaps it was my mistake to assume that rationality and the law are/were compatible. This seems to be an area where clear thinking is a handicap or disability; I admit to mine. # THEN YOU SLAM ISLAM AS A RELIGION. I said: >It is said that in certain Islamic countries women must wear chadors (a >head-to-toe flowing garment that conceals the body) so that men aren't incited >to lustful thoughts, or otherwise offended. But it seems entirely unfair to >hold a woman responsible for events that occur solely within the confines of >a man's cranium. Should she be held responsible for things that the man is >likely obsessing about anyway solely because that culture forbids it? In any >case, there's nothing she can do to control what goes thru the man's head. In >this country, a similar analogy holds. Show me where the "SLAM" is, besides in your own cranium. In the latter case, I can't be held responsible any more than the hypothetical woman mentioned above. Women having to wear chadors is a fact that is easily checked out. Go read a book about Iran or any country where "sharia" is the law of the land. I ventured an opinion about the fairness of certain social relations that are also easily checked out (read any book by Islamic feminists). Are you saying having opinions about religiously-derived social relations in other countries or this one is not OK? Would-be shades of Salman Rushdie!! In this country dressing provocatively is no justification for rape (or it shouldn't be); men are expected to be able to contain themselves when seeing more of a woman's body than is ordinarily the case. It is not considered by many people to be socially justifiable for men to be protected against the consequences of acting out their lustful urges by passing the burden of restraint to women. "The devil made me do it" is not a viable excuse. #Please explain your position clearly so I can understand why you #just don't find these areas and "play"? Janosz, I gave it my best shot. Since you still don't understand it I guess I'm just not a very good writer. I guess I'll just have to keep on writing until I get better. Candidly, I'm not particularly interested in reading sexual material, although I occasionally run across something interesting. I'm against censorship, particularly where the state is involved. I don't like people telling other people what they can read and what they can't read, and backing that up with force of any kind. That is the position I'm coming from. #I have no problem with sexual material, but.... where does social #responsibility begin and end? Well, maybe there are no endpoints. Social responsibility is perhaps more a property of the social space we all inhabit, sort of like how (warning! loose analogy ahead! :} ) PI (3.14159265+) is embedded in 3-space. #I have no answers that are clear cut hear only we have issues that #are greater than this thread that need to be addressed first and #this issue should go on a back burner until it can be thought #through. I feel the same way about violence/bombmaking it's just #not the time when we are so far from being at the end of the first #chapter of SCN. Well, is it ever going to be OK to talk about or is it going to be "jam yesterday, jam tomorrow but never jam today"?? What's this "first chapter" business? You mean before the group incorporates? Is it going to be OK to talk about violence/bombmaking afterwards? Inquiring minds want to know. Let's bear in mind that we aren't talking about sex, violence or bomb-making in this forum. We are talking about talking about sex, violence or bomb-making. I urge readers to take most careful note of the distinction. #>[...180 lines of quoted material deleted...bug in the mailer?...] It is almost embarrassing to reply to a posting which, while purporting to be a point-by-point refutation of my posting, is in fact a confirmation of same. -- kurt "The map is not the territory." --Korzybski From banerian at scn.org Sun Jun 4 21:31:55 1995 From: banerian at scn.org (banerian) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 21:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: elections Message-ID: i hereby withdraw from the election for interim board membership i will reiterate my suggestion that an elections committee be set up to give some form to the format for nominations,elections,voting, etc. I'll even volunteer to be on such a committee. free speech is another issue, to be dealt with in another space-time coordinate. good night, and get some sleep! -- banerian "The kids of today should defend banerian at scn.org themselves against the 70's" gs772 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu From banerian at scn.org Sun Jun 4 21:39:06 1995 From: banerian at scn.org (banerian) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 21:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: the "free speech " issue Message-ID: As newsadmin (!?!?) of SCN, what I'd like people to know about free speech: 1) it aint free. 2) the resource issue appears not to be disk space but processor speed. Our neews machine literally cannot keep up with the news feed. Too slow. Our load average, on Sunday evening , is up to > 30!!! I will be requesting that our main feed back off on the feed. For now, partial feeds of comp, news, soc, sci, alt, (none of talk, misc), and full of seattle, pnw, wash, and if I can get it, tacoma (well, some of our users do hail from the south!) So, this will be the issue, disk space a reasonably strong second. like it or not. $$$ :-/ -- banerian "The kids of today should defend banerian at scn.org themselves against the 70's" gs772 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu From janossz at scn.org Sun Jun 4 22:48:46 1995 From: janossz at scn.org (Janos Szablya) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 22:48:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I believe that Randy is right I seem to recall his name very early in the nomination process. Janos From mascott at scn.org Mon Jun 5 05:49:15 1995 From: mascott at scn.org (A. R. 'Bob' Mascott) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 05:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: elections In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steve I agree with you completely, that any time an election is declared - An election committee of impartial participants should set the rules and oversee the election. When we have one person in charge of policy. That same person in charge of the election. That same person in charge of the voting and that same person 'a candidate'. Doesn't somebody else see a conflict of interest? Bob Mascott - mascott at scn.org On Sun, 4 Jun 1995, banerian wrote: > > i hereby withdraw from the election for interim board membership > > i will reiterate my suggestion that an elections committee be set up to > give some form to the format for nominations,elections,voting, etc. > I'll even volunteer to be on such a committee. > > free speech is another issue, to be dealt with in another space-time > coordinate. > > good night, and get some sleep! > > -- > banerian "The kids of today should defend > banerian at scn.org themselves against the 70's" > gs772 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu > > From lbs at aa.net Mon Jun 5 09:57:48 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 09:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: elections In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Jun 1995, A. R. 'Bob' Mascott wrote: > I agree with you completely, that any time an election is declared - An > election committee of impartial participants should set the rules and > oversee the election. > > When we have one person in charge of policy. That same person in charge > of the election. That same person in charge of the voting and that same > person 'a candidate'. Doesn't somebody else see a conflict of interest? > I agree with the need for an impartial election committee. Regarding the 'conflict of interest', yes I guess I can see that. HOWEVER, I think it was *unintentional* at the time. In terms of people, we do have limited available people to staff all positions. It probably does need more people to 'spread out' different responsibilities. IN SPIRIT, I do think the initial intention has been to be **responsive** to a democratic process. I respect and admire that. ************************* Due to shortness of time: 1. How about accepting Brian's proposal to let the coordinating committee select the interim directors? 2. Form an election committee for the election of Board of Directors, which will be at a later date. -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com Mon Jun 5 10:57:55 1995 From: anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com (Aki Namioka) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 95 10:57:55 PDT Subject: elections Message-ID: <9506051757.AA18645@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> Hi All, I guess we all live and learn. Rule #1 - you can't make everybody happy any of the time. This is a lesson I am still learning :-) First, Brian Lenihan is right. I could have put one name on the Articles of Incorporation, submitted it, and none would be the wiser. It also would have been faster. There is nothing that says a project that is NOT YET a corporation has to hold an election. Error #1 - trying to bring more people into the selection of the interim board. Second, two names were submitted late - by twelve hours as Bob Mascott indicated. Randy's nomination was one of the first to be submitted, however, his statement of candidacy came a little later, so he is not one of the late ones. The late nominations were submitted by one of the most vocal critics of the current SCN "regime". So, I included the candidates. Error #2 - being intiminated by somebody who is vocal with criticism. Third, I have never tried to organize anything like this before plus we were pressed for time. So, we didn't have time to organize a committee to organize the elections. I had some ideas about how it should get done, but not everything was worked out. Error #3 - trying out a new process on a large group of computer users with less than two months to implement. Now to address some points directly (it is Monday morning - my frustration is showing now): About Bob Mascott's criticism that there is a conflict of interest. What INTEREST????? My interest is in seeing SCN become a non-profit organization and all my actions wrt to the policy committee has been working up to that point. I am not getting any money for this - nor glory, as indicated by recent mail. Instead I am getting slammed left and right. I AM NOT IN CHARGE OF VOTING. In fact I was looking for a neutral third party to do the counting and Kevin Higgins suggested an accountant. If we continue the elections, I feel strongly that the voting SHOULD NOT BE DONE BY A MEMBER OF THE COORDINATING COUNCIL!!! A member of the Coordinating Council is NOT a neutral third party. About Steve Banerian's comment about having a non-founding member of SCN as one of the three board positions. This suggestion assumes, (1) that there is a definition of a founding member of the project - I don't know of one and (2) that there is a "fair" way to select this non-founding member (if we figure out the answer to 1.). I am not sure if we can accomplish (1) and (2). About the idea of calling off the elections - I think the CC should consider this and make a decision either over e-mail or at the June 14th meeting. I will not make a decision about this on my own. About the idea of setting up an elections board - it is fine with me and if anybody wants to volunteer for the job of coordination they are free to step forward. Now, I am going to retreat and see if I can beat my head against another wall for awhile. - Aki From greg at corsys.com Mon Jun 5 15:30:52 1995 From: greg at corsys.com (Greg Prosl) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 15:30:52 -0700 Subject: Let's All Take a Deep Breath In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I concur with Brian. An interim board appointed by the cood. comm. is the best thing at this point. The elections should be delayed pending a more clearly defined election process and time to sort it all out. Clearly, as indicated in Brian's email this is well within the original framework. I feel that with so much work still to do it dosnt serve SCN at this time. Greg From anansi at scn.org Mon Jun 5 11:48:19 1995 From: anansi at scn.org (Joe Rodgers) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 11:48:19 -0700 Subject: what's on the plate Message-ID: <199506051848.LAA11243@scn.org> The heap of mail since thursday suggests a complex knot of weirdness, but it doesn't seem really that complicated-someone point out to me if I'm missing something here, OK? 1) alt.sex.*, censorship, resource issues Bob Kennewick brought this one up, I think. The question seems to be, if we fail to offer the sex channels to seattle, are we guilty of censorship? Or, depending on who you ask, the question is, how many newsgroups can we afford to provide access to, and which ones should be selected? 2) irregularities in the election This one is mine. The question is, are the rules being followed as they were posted? And if not, what to do about it? The prospect of dealing with a conflict like this makes some people want to abolish the whole procedure in favor of an appointed temporary board. Monarchy is less complicated than democracy, it doesn't make it better. 3) membership in SCN This one doesn't have to be fully fleshed out until September, I may have made a mistake to bring it up this early (in the Policy area). In any case, I haven't heard anyone question the authority of the coordinating council to do what it has done so far, so I'm not sure why it's of issue here. Am I missing something here? A face full of pie would be better than sullen griping. -- i It's easy to find someone who wants to go to bed.But its real hard to -=[scn]=- find someone who'll let you say,"Look, I've got a cardboard box & a )|(carpeted floor. Here's my plan:You get in the box and hold this flashligh /_|_\ ,and I'll push you around like you're in a car." Chris Isaak From tsparks at halcyon.com Mon Jun 5 13:09:22 1995 From: tsparks at halcyon.com (Tom Sparks) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 13:09:22 -0700 Subject: Elections Message-ID: I am perplexed by all this wishy washy behavior. There was a general meeting, 30 or more people discussed the election process for over a half an hour. There was a call for candidates, people were nominated, they were given an opportunity to accept or decline the nomination. A menu was created on SCN with a forum to discuss the election and to offer a Q & A for the membership to question the candidates. One person voices a serious doubt about the timing and procedure of the election and suddenly the whole thing looks like it may be scraped. This is not how organizations flourish, when you start a process like this with the apparent approval of the SCN organization, it should be seen through to the end. Maybe there were some mistakes made in planning and implementing this election, we can live with our mistakes. Luckly this is a virtual board that will be replaced or augmented in the near future. There needs to be some consistency here, when we say we are going to do something, we should do it. All this second guessing, "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" is only going to make matters worse. Lets use this election as a primer on how to and how not to do our next more important election. ..Tom Sparks From carlos at scn.org Mon Jun 5 14:06:15 1995 From: carlos at scn.org (Carlos Cruz) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 14:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: elections Message-ID: Hi All, I respectfully withdrawl my name, Carlos Cruz, from the election for interim board membership at this time. Also, I agree that a deep lung full of fresh air is good and an impartail election committee even better. Let's keep this train on track and try and avoid the bandits. - DOGBERT RULES! - Carlos From gsg2660 at scn.org Mon Jun 5 22:02:03 1995 From: gsg2660 at scn.org (George Goodwin) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 22:02:03 -0700 Subject: Elections Message-ID: <199506060502.WAA13386@scn.org> I agree, we are wasting time. The interim board is only for incorporation not permanent. >I am perplexed by all this wishy washy behavior. There was a general meeting, 30 or more people discussed the election process for over a half an hour. There was a call for candidates, people were nominated, they were given an opportunity to accept or decline the nomination. A menu was created on SCN with a forum to discuss the election and to offer a Q & A for the membership to question the candidates. One person voices a serious doubt about the timing and procedure of the election and suddenly the whole thing looks like it may be scraped. >This is not how organizations flourish, when you start a process like this with the apparent approval of the SCN organization, it should be seen through to the end. Maybe there were some mistakes made in planning and implementing this election, we can live with our mistakes. Luckly this is a virtual board that will be replaced or augmented in the near future. >There needs to be some consistency here, when we say we are going to do something, we should do it. All this second guessing, "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" is only going to make matters worse. >Lets use this election as a primer on how to and how not to do our next more important election. >..Tom Spark -- ......This Message sent, By George Goodwin gsg2660 at scn.org From jamesr at scn.org Tue Jun 6 13:50:07 1995 From: jamesr at scn.org (James Russell) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1995 13:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re2: SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Lucy; Well said, and thank you. James! James/of/Renton jamesr at scn.org scn.org=Seattle community network On Sun, 4 Jun 1995, Lucys wrote: > On Sat, 3 Jun 1995, Janos Szablya wrote: > > > > I have no answers that are clear cut hear only we have issues that > > are greater than this thread that need to be addressed first and > > this issue should go on a back burner until it can be thought > > through. I feel the same way about violence/bombmaking it's just > > not the time when we are so far from being at the end of the first > > chapter of SCN. > > Well said. SCN is in the process of being a separate entity, and > needs to focus on that first. First things first. > > These other issues, such as making SCN's commitment to all the > alt.sex.* forums as some *grand celebrated cause* for 'free speech' > are a *red herring*, which divert attention away > from establishing SCN itself. > > (This whole topic was diverting attention away from the elections. > It was one of the things that was making the elections into a > 3-ring circus!) > > > > > > > > On 3 Jun 1995, Kurt Cockrum wrote: > > > > > So, let the user sign a disclaimer saying they are over 18 and that they > > > will not allow young folk access to their terminal. That way, if they > > Any *MINOR* child could sign a statement stating they are an adult. > SCN would not be providing 'due diligence' if they did not add some > administrative feature to *verify* that the person was in fact an > adult. How SCN could do this, I'm not sure. > However, it could be an administrative nightmare. > > > > > > } Offence to other members > > > > > > People who get offended by commonplace activities > *********** > > The most popular alt.sex.* forum is probably alt.sex.stories. > These *commonplace* (???) stories include: > > incest, pedophilia, rape, bondage, S/M, and snuff stories. > > The time to debate the merits of the *usefulness* of the > alt.sex.* forums is *later on*. > I will be one of those people who will debate AGAINST these forums. > Until later... > > -- > Lucy S. lbs at aa.net > Seattle, Washington USA > > > From jamesr at scn.org Tue Jun 6 14:32:06 1995 From: jamesr at scn.org (James Russell) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1995 14:32:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: elections In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hello There; What we need is for everyone to meet on a Saturday or Sunday and one big general SCN meeting and talk face to face about the Election and Free speech problems. Of course it will never happen! Let talk face to face anf get it over with, we will all pay the price. Again one day on the weekend so that no one will not have a problem with work schedule. These email messages are killing me. Now prove me wrong! James/of/Renton jamesr at scn.org scn.org=Seattle community network On Mon, 5 Jun 1995, Lucys wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jun 1995, A. R. 'Bob' Mascott wrote: > > > I agree with you completely, that any time an election is declared - An > > election committee of impartial participants should set the rules and > > oversee the election. > > > > When we have one person in charge of policy. That same person in charge > > of the election. That same person in charge of the voting and that same > > person 'a candidate'. Doesn't somebody else see a conflict of interest? > > > > I agree with the need for an impartial election committee. > > Regarding the 'conflict of interest', yes I guess I can see that. > > HOWEVER, I think it was *unintentional* at the time. > In terms of people, we do have limited available people to staff > all positions. It probably does need more people to 'spread out' > different responsibilities. > > IN SPIRIT, I do think the initial intention has been to be > **responsive** to a democratic process. I respect and admire that. > ************************* > > Due to shortness of time: > 1. How about accepting Brian's proposal to let the coordinating > committee select the interim directors? > 2. Form an election committee for the election of Board of > Directors, which will be at a later date. > > -- > Lucy S. lbs at aa.net > Seattle, Washington USA > > From sjm at scn.org Tue Jun 6 23:27:15 1995 From: sjm at scn.org (Steven Mudd) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1995 23:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Elections/Deep Breath/Moving Forward/alt.whatever In-Reply-To: Message-ID: So, a couple of cents in the meter, stand up on this podium, and... Agree with eveyone. Well, not really- though it has seemed that just about all of the recent postings have made valid points. My initial reaction was similar to Tom's; sure, this election is fraught with problems, but let's push on, use it as test run for the real thing. On the other hand, the time spent may be better invested in the "real thing". Particularly in issues such as how to validate/tabulate votes. Given that, I'm more inclined to agree with Brian, let's appoint some people, get legal, and get on with gritty details of democracy. Regarding Steve Banerian's suggestion of an "outsider" rounding out the temporary triumvirate, how about an SPL person? (if they're willing). -Steven -I've got a feeling the SPL may have an opinion on our carrying alt.sex, and they deserve a voice in the debate. On Mon, 5 Jun 1995, Tom Sparks wrote: > > > I am perplexed by all this wishy washy behavior. > There was a general meeting, 30 or more people > discussed the election process for over a half > an hour. There was a call for candidates, people > were nominated, they were given an opportunity to > accept or decline the nomination. A menu was > created on SCN with a forum to discuss the election > and to offer a Q & A for the membership to question > the candidates. > > One person voices a serious doubt about the timing > and procedure of the election and suddenly the whole > thing looks like it may be scraped. > > This is not how organizations flourish, when you start > a process like this with the apparent approval of the > SCN organization, it should be seen through to the end. > Maybe there were some mistakes made in planning and > implementing this election, we can live with our mistakes. > Luckly this is a virtual board that will be replaced or > augmented in the near future. > > There needs to be some consistency here, when we say we are > going to do something, we should do it. All this second > guessing, "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" is only going to > make matters worse. > > Lets use this election as a primer on how to and how not to > do our next more important election. > > ..Tom Sparks > > > > From jeremys at scn.org Thu Jun 8 06:40:06 1995 From: jeremys at scn.org (Jeremy Schertzinger) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 06:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: withdraw nomination Message-ID: I hereby withdraw myself from the elections. I am in favor of the coordinating council appointing one person to form an SCN board. -- Jeremy Schertzinger jeremys at scn.org **** Seattle Community Network (SCN) Teens area maintainer. **** To get to the Teens Area on SCN type "go teens" from anywhere My opinions are not those of CPSR/Seattle or SCN From melissas at scn.org Fri Jun 9 17:21:08 1995 From: melissas at scn.org (Melissa Schofield) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 17:21:08 -0700 Subject: Elections (my 1st try at diving in) Message-ID: <199506100021.RAA10403@scn.org> I just spent the last hour sifting through all the election email thats been posted to scn at scn.org, and perusing the "go elect" area. I would like to ask a couple of questions and then suggest a solution to this debate. Is there anything saying that these interim board members have ANY defined responsibilities whatsoever? The coordinating council will still be around, right? My suggestion: The bulk of the voting is suppose to take place at the General Meeting on June 28th or by emailing vote at scn.org by then if you can't make the meeting. Let the election go forward as planned rather than getting flamed for being undemocratic -- this will all be over on the 29th. It really isn't that important who is elected -- the important election will be the one for the real board once SCN is officially incorporated. This is just to have names for a form the government requires to incorporate. If the interim board members really have no responsibilities (and truthfully, even if they did) I would plan to vote for the three candidates who have been with SCN since the beginning: Doug Schuler, Aki Namioka, and Randy Groves. I hope that makes sense, and that others will choose to do the same. - Melissa Schofield newbie volunteer From joperry at scn.org Fri Jun 9 18:07:24 1995 From: joperry at scn.org (SCN User) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 18:07:24 -0700 Subject: Elections (my 1st try at diving in) Message-ID: <199506100107.SAA21259@scn.org> > >I just spent the last hour sifting through all the election email thats >been posted to scn at scn.org, and perusing the "go elect" area. I would >like to ask a couple of questions and then suggest a solution to this >debate. > >Is there anything saying that these interim board members etc...to the effect that, let this minor/temporary election go on as planned and let the meaningful election of Board of Directors occur soon. This is the most succinct and persuasive posting -- in accord with tsparks and a couple of others... Yes, wasn't that a lot of noise in your mail box over such a minor matter?!! I am beginning to believe that this medium of e-mail encourages the fundamental/traditional "paranoid style of American politics." But it is possible to cut through it... Bravo, newbie Melissas.> > > -- John Oliver Perry and/or Sue Perry JOP: Prof. Engl., ret.; writer, Indophile, neighborhood council, stainedglass fabricator SUE: Painter, Francophile, 3dW bookclub 1606 East Columbia St., Seattle, WA 98122-4635 PH:206-329-3327 From jrodgers at rain.kcls.lib.wa.us Sat Jun 10 08:59:19 1995 From: jrodgers at rain.kcls.lib.wa.us (Joe Rodgers) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 1995 08:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Worst case scenarios In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The topic is starting to fade, but I've been working on this post for five days now. If you don't want to resurresct this 'issue', you may want to privately e-mail me any flames. I can take it. It's been suggested that what SCN needs to worry about is a takeover by a well organized group who love power for its own sake. That is a story that helps (as far as it goes) with planning for the future. Here's another story that may help with planning for the future. A person seduces away a minor, only this time it's not on AOL, it's on SCN. or, Someone meets someone else through e-mail, and accusations of rape are made. Then the police serve a warrant to look at both people's e-mail accounts. or, The government manages to pass a law that makes it a crime for anyone to facilitate communications that are considered illegal. And then SCN is singled out as a test case for the law. or, SCN gets sued by someone. (the most likely scenario of the bunch, IMO.) It could be a frivolous lawsuit, it could have substance. Lawsuits seem to have no bearing on whether or not there was wrongdoing, but simply how visible the target is. For many high-profile companies, there are contantly lawsuits pending, it's considered a cost of doing business. SCN may not have much in the way of resources, but we are certainly high profile. --==[ *SO* ]==-- When the cops or the lawyers come knocking, we can say, "Oh, we're just a volunteer group, we never had time to fulfill our contracts." And they'll have us over a barrel, and SCN as an autonomous entity, will cease to be. Or, if we've been running a tight ship, we can stand our ground and tell them what we've done, and know that we've done what we say we've done. my point is, that legal self defense begins with honoring a contract. The contract I cried foul on is a very small one, hardly very important at all. But it was made publicly, along with several much larger contracts. The By-laws and the Policy statement are a contract with the users of SCN. We can debate and chew and hem and haw;but I've never heard anyone question the authority of the coordinating council. What the CC decides is the 'law of the land'. BUT ONLY IF IT'S WRITTEN DOWN. I've heard it suggested that we should let this one go,it's such a small thing, what would be the harm... At what point does a written contract become important enough to honor? Not that anyone asked, but I think the answer is, when we present it publicly in written form to our users. SCN users include lawyers, judges, crooks, cops, and folks who couldn't care less. Even if the last is the biggest, it's the first 4 you gotta worry about. For the record, I do not get my rocks off by being difficult. Everyone's telling me that I'm not being very nice, that I should try to build SCN up instead of always pointing out its flaws all the time. I have spent the last 4 years working for a public service agency's data processing division. When I'm being paid, no one has ever told me to ignore a problem that I see: On the contrary, I've been repremanded for ignoring problems that were then discovered by our customers. Now I'm volunteering, and being accused of having way too much fun as I point out what I see as a serious problem in SCN's attitude: Contracts are only worthwhile when they don't have to be enforced. I see occasional violations of the contract that we all sign to get on. But from all the response to this 'rulebreaking' I can only conclude that that contract is a bluff. With the legislation that's been proposed in the State and Federal level, it looks like SCN and the other public data services are going to come under serious scrutiny, if not actual persecution. Even if the free speech clause, and our right to assemble manage to survive unscathed, SCN is still, eventually,going to get sued. I can't shake the feeling that there is some denial happening here, that if we all just wish hard enough, SCN will somehow be immune to all the crap that flies around in that mean old outside world. So far, people's 'need to be liked' seems to exceed their need for a rational pattern. SCN is not going to blow apart and flutter away if anyone looks too hard at it. Neither is it going to grow in strength UNLESS it receives some scrutiny. From wheels at scn.org Mon Jun 12 11:37:13 1995 From: wheels at scn.org (Kevin Higgins) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Outreach Committee meeting this Saturday Message-ID: The SCN Outreach Committee will be having a meeting this Saturday, June 17th at the University Branch Library from 10 to 11:30 AM. The meeting is planned to help the new Outreach Committee Chair, Melissa Schofield, organize the Outreach Committee tasks and focus on priorities. If you can only make it to one Outreach Committee meeting, this is the one to attend. Issues to be discussed include developing a business plan, Outreach goals and fundraising. Many of you have atively participated in the Outreach process such as Roadshows and are welcome to discuss how SCN can better support your efforts in this process. To subscibe to the outreach mailing list, send e-mail to: outreach at scn.org (use the message below with the appropriate address) subscribe I will send out one more reminder on Thursday, I hope to see your there. -Kevin Higgins --- wheels at scn.org From bb140 at scn.org Tue Jun 13 19:07:29 1995 From: bb140 at scn.org (Barbara Weismann) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 19:07:29 -0700 Subject: Little red hen Message-ID: <199506140207.TAA27962@scn.org> >From here on out, I suggest that those people who felt so strongly about elections, free speech, etc., open up and sit on a committee that meets monthly to formulate the Standard Operating Procedures of SCN. Otherwise, meet with Policy. Or, start writing SOPs yourselves instead of complaining. Personally I feel that most people in the organization have ignored this very necessary part of the work, including the Bylaws, but now want everything ttheir way. Make it your way by doing the work. Also, this kind of horrid exchange is typical of grass roots organizations attmepitng to do Bylaws and SOPs. The important part is to not let one group think for all the rest. However there is responsibility in keeping up, knowing the issues, and actaully finding solutions via research. Has anyone else read a set of Bylaws? Want to start there? Barb From wheels at scn.org Thu Jun 15 22:00:42 1995 From: wheels at scn.org (Kevin Higgins) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 22:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Outreach Committee Meeting Sat. 10-11:30 Univ. Library Message-ID: Hi all, Just a reminder for those who are interested that there will be a Outreach Committee Meeting at the University Branch Library (50th & Roosevelt) on Saturday from 10 to 11:30 AM. If you can only attend one Outreach meeting, this is the one to go to. We will introduce the new Chair, Melissa Schofield, and develop a plan of action for Outreach. Important issues include: meet the chairperson, Melissa defining the role of the outreach committee developing Outreach, while avoiding duplication of effort with other committees & individuals; elements of a business plan, including marketing of SCN. how to include more volunteers in SCN outreach - or how to delegate responsibility and empower volunteers. computer recycling efforts And anything else we might possibly shoehorn into 1.5 hour meeting. We will also set future meeting times, you can e-mail in your suggestions if Saturdays do not work for you. I would like to have Outreach meet once a month, but will go with whatever works for people. I hope to see you on Saturday. If you want to follow the Outreach group, subscribe to Outreach at scn.org. -Kevin Higgins --- wheels at scn.org From bobk at cyberspace.com Sat Jun 17 16:42:44 1995 From: bobk at cyberspace.com (Bob Kwick) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 95 16:42:44 PDT Subject: connection to other freenets Message-ID: <9506172342.AA15194@armitage.cyberspace.com> | We are currently testing the waters by setting up a few connections to | other freenets (hoorah!). SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. I haven't used them much, but from what I've seen, they are very responsible and constructive chat areas. There are a lot of good ones, inculding one called Diversity MOO, available. We should consider setting up a MOO for the Seattle area on SCN. If we don't have the resources there are other MOO's that will let us use their sites to build a Seattle area. It can be a real-time virtual version of the Seattle community. It could be pretty neat. If you want one, Sanford Morton, who is an expert on MOO's, might be willing to do a presentation on MOO's for SCN members. You will need to find a meeting place with a telephone line available and room for an overhead display. Bob From anansi at scn.org Sun Jun 18 08:24:24 1995 From: anansi at scn.org (Joe Rodgers) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 1995 08:24:24 -0700 Subject: connection to other freenets Message-ID: <199506181524.IAA18512@scn.org> > > SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. MOOs are great. They really add a new dimension to on-line relating, and make for a richer transaction. BUT: I don't want to see us lose focus on the format of SCN, and what people are really logging on for. It's awfully tempting to try and offer users every possible service, just because it's internet-related. If SCN is to have any sort of MOO presence, I'd strongly suggest we pick one, set up a pointer to it, and leave it at that. If SCN becomes a center for 'games heaven', it's gonna jeapordize our standing with the branch libraries, who rightly see SCN as just another service, competing with their catalog. > I haven't used them much, but from what I've seen, they are very > responsible and constructive chat areas. There are a lot of good > ones, inculding one called Diversity MOO, available. We should > consider setting up a MOO for the Seattle area on SCN. If we don't > have the resources there are other MOO's that will let us use their > sites to build a Seattle area. It can be a real-time virtual version > of the Seattle community. It could be pretty neat. > -- i -=[scn]=- .^, | anansi )|( .^/ ~"\, * /_|_\ ~/ \ From aclu at scn.org Mon Jun 19 09:05:36 1995 From: aclu at scn.org (ACLU Washington (Martin Munguia)) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 09:05:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: No subject Message-ID: ACLU of Washington (Christine Llobregat) From kgillgren at igc.apc.org Mon Jun 19 10:41:21 1995 From: kgillgren at igc.apc.org (Kenneth Gillgren) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 10:41:21 -0700 Subject: connection to other freenets Message-ID: <199506191741.KAA15926@igc2.igc.apc.org> I agree. This could be a very exciting area to explore. I've been visiting Diversity University in the context of an online conference they are hosting on Distance Education. A few considerations and caveats are in order, howver. 1. As a MOO, it would be resource intensive, at least as much as CHAT or IRC. 2. The MOO may need to be sponsored and managed by a third party, that is, not the SCN administration or SCN itself. The reason is somewhat related to the freedom of expression issues that have arisen recently. Specifically, Diversity University explicitly requests users and visitors *Not* to engage in conversations or comments of an explicitly sexual nature, subject to removal from the system. This is clearly in line with Diversity Universities expressed mission. I don't know how others handle this, but I'll be checking into MUSE later today or tomorrow. DU also has a system for users to respond or report to harrassment (it involves a "witness" function to "record" the harrassing action for review and action by DU administrators). Anyway, it's worth some consideration. Ken ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From scn-owner at scn.org Sat Jun 17 16:44:45 1995 > Date: Sat, 17 Jun 95 16:42:44 PDT > From: bobk at cyberspace.com (Bob Kwick) > To: scn at scn.org, services at scn.org > Subject: Re: connection to other freenets > Cc: sanford at halcyon.com > Sender: owner-scn at scn.org > > | We are currently testing the waters by setting up a few connections to > | other freenets (hoorah!). > > SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. > I haven't used them much, but from what I've seen, they are very > responsible and constructive chat areas. There are a lot of good > ones, inculding one called Diversity MOO, available. We should > consider setting up a MOO for the Seattle area on SCN. If we don't > have the resources there are other MOO's that will let us use their > sites to build a Seattle area. It can be a real-time virtual version > of the Seattle community. It could be pretty neat. > > If you want one, Sanford Morton, who is an expert on MOO's, might be > willing to do a presentation on MOO's for SCN members. You will need > to find a meeting place with a telephone line available and room for > an overhead display. > > Bob > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From kgillgren at igc.apc.org Mon Jun 19 10:48:53 1995 From: kgillgren at igc.apc.org (Kenneth Gillgren) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 10:48:53 -0700 Subject: connection to other freenets Message-ID: <199506191748.KAA17688@igc2.igc.apc.org> The MOO I've observed (Diversity University) is really not intended to be a live chat area. It is an open, virtual environment in which participants can construct cooperative, shared learning environments. Maybe it would lend itself to a community commons or public square type setting, but there would need to be a deeper level of support than SCN may want to provide on its own. I guess that's why I was thinking a third party (i.e., an IP) with the requisite technical background, would need to kind of oversee the development of such a service. Maybe pointers to existing MOOs would be best as an interim step (but the issue of bandwidth remains--you don't slip into a MOO for a five-minute break--You go there to spend some time). Ken ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From scn-owner at scn.org Sun Jun 18 08:25:20 1995 > Date: Sun, 18 Jun 1995 08:24:24 -0700 > From: anansi at scn.org (Joe Rodgers) > To: bobk at cyberspace.com > Subject: Re: connection to other freenets > Cc: scn at scn.org, services at scn.org > Reply-To: anansi at scn.org > Sender: owner-scn at scn.org > > > > > SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. > > MOOs are great. They really add a new dimension to on-line relating, and > make for a richer transaction. > > BUT: I don't want to see us lose focus on the format of SCN, and what > people are really logging on for. It's awfully tempting to try and offer > users every possible service, just because it's internet-related. If SCN > is to have any sort of MOO presence, I'd strongly suggest we pick one, > set up a pointer to it, and leave it at that. If SCN becomes a center for > 'games heaven', it's gonna jeapordize our standing with the branch > libraries, who rightly see SCN as just another service, competing with > their catalog. > > > I haven't used them much, but from what I've seen, they are very > > responsible and constructive chat areas. There are a lot of good > > ones, inculding one called Diversity MOO, available. We should > > consider setting up a MOO for the Seattle area on SCN. If we don't > > have the resources there are other MOO's that will let us use their > > sites to build a Seattle area. It can be a real-time virtual version > > of the Seattle community. It could be pretty neat. > > > > -- > i > -=[scn]=- .^, | anansi > )|( .^/ ~"\, * > /_|_\ ~/ \ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From michaelh at scn.org Mon Jun 19 19:09:43 1995 From: michaelh at scn.org (Michael Hanson) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 19:09:43 -0700 Subject: MOO's (was Re: connection to other freenets) In-Reply-To: <9506172342.AA15194@armitage.cyberspace.com> Message-ID: > bobk said: > SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. > ... > Why should we do this? Specifically: Are MOO's available through other low-cost methods? Is there a great demand for MOO's among SCN's users or potential users? (Does the demand warrant taking resources from our other efforts?) 1. Are Moo's available through any other channel? Can they be reached via gopher/WWW from the library menus. There is no point in our duplicating things that are already available, when our time and resources might better be used to create services that don't already exist. 2. SCN seems to be rather dead (or at least in hibernation) right now - it has been over a month since any new information areas/IP's were announced. I think our priority should be to get more local information channels going. Before we add access to other fun technical tools - we should see what users - potential and actual really want or need. We can not yet adequately support our venture into the web. We should try to be user driven - focusing on helping local people to get connected, rather than being technology driven - spending our effort and computing resources on technology just because it is available. -- Michael Hanson (michael at scn.org) Seattle, WA, USA Advocating increased mobility - whether physical or electronic as a cure for the fragmentation of society is like prescribing champaign as a hangover cure. From jamesr at scn.org Tue Jun 20 20:16:54 1995 From: jamesr at scn.org (James Russell) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 1995 20:16:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: MOO's (was Re: connection to other freenets) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Michael: You are so Right! Now, how about the youth at Rope. We could use a lot more help there since I'll be on vacation for the month of July. Thank you. Write mgrant at scn.org. James/of/Renton jamesr at scn.org scn.org=Seattle community network On Mon, 19 Jun 1995, Michael Hanson wrote: > > bobk said: > > SCN should also consider setting up some connections to some MOO's. > > ... > > > > Why should we do this? Specifically: > Are MOO's available through other low-cost methods? > Is there a great demand for MOO's among SCN's users or potential users? > (Does the demand warrant taking resources from our other efforts?) > > 1. Are Moo's available through any other channel? Can they be reached > via gopher/WWW from the library menus. There is no point in our > duplicating things that are already available, when our time and > resources might better be used to create services that don't > already exist. > > 2. SCN seems to be rather dead (or at least in hibernation) right now > - it has been over a month since any new information areas/IP's were > announced. I think our priority should be to get more local > information channels going. Before we add access to other fun > technical tools - we should see what users - potential and actual > really want or need. We can not yet adequately support our venture > into the web. We should try to be user driven - focusing on helping > local people to get connected, rather than being technology driven - > spending our effort and computing resources on technology just > because it is available. > > -- > Michael Hanson (michael at scn.org) Seattle, WA, USA > Advocating increased mobility - whether physical or electronic as a > cure for the fragmentation of society is like prescribing champaign > as a hangover cure. > From randy at scn.org Thu Jun 22 08:50:31 1995 From: randy at scn.org (Randy Groves) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 08:50:31 -0700 Subject: 15 minutes of fame ... starting NOW! Message-ID: I was reading the latest Newsweek (the one with Jim Carrey on the cover) before going to bed this morning, and was most pleasantly surprised to see an article on FreeNets, with Tom Grundner's picture on the first page. Imagine my surprise and delight when I turned the page and saw Seattle Community Network listed prominently in a sidebar titled 'Logging On'!!!! And they even got all the contact info right! Check it out! -randy From lbs at aa.net Fri Jun 23 14:30:00 1995 From: lbs at aa.net (Lucys) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 1995 14:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 15 minutes of fame ... starting NOW! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jun 1995, Randy Groves wrote: > I was reading the latest Newsweek (the one with Jim Carrey on the cover) > before going to bed this morning, and was most pleasantly surprised to see > an article on FreeNets, with Tom Grundner's picture on the first page. > Imagine my surprise and delight when I turned the page and saw Seattle > Community Network listed prominently in a sidebar titled 'Logging On'!!!! > > And they even got all the contact info right! > > Check it out! > > -randy > Hello all, I read the article today at the library, and it is a good write up. One thing it mentioned was that freenets (due to funding needs), have found themselves asking Freenet members for contributions. I just want to say that as a SCN member, I'd be willing to make a yearly financial contribution. Right now, I'm waiting for: 1. SCN to have it's own non-profit status (i.e., own bank account) 2. some idea of what our funding needs are for the next year (and what is an appropriate amount for an individual to contribute.) I don't know how others feel, but I hope SCN isn't too shy about letting us know how much money it takes to keep us going. There are probably alot of SCN members who want to contribute, but have no idea how much is needed. Just my $.02 .... -- Lucy S. lbs at aa.net Seattle, Washington USA From melissas at scn.org Sun Jun 25 02:04:33 1995 From: melissas at scn.org (Melissa Schofield) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 1995 02:04:33 -0700 Subject: User Surveying Message-ID: <199506250904.CAA21268@scn.org> >I am now working on putting together user surveys, for registered >users who have never logged in, for those who use the system regularly, >and for those who haven't used the system in several months. > >I am looking for all sorts of suggestions on what questions I should >include in the survey. No promises to include all questions, but I >want to get your input before I proceed. > >Please post thoughts in the Outreach Committee Forum (go outreach), >or send email to me. > >Thanks for your help! > - Melissa From anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com Tue Jun 27 16:19:57 1995 From: anamioka at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com (Aki Namioka) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 16:19:57 PDT Subject: Meeting tomorrow Message-ID: <9506272319.AA28500@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> Reminder: SCN meeting tomorrow. We are holding the elections as planned. - Aki