Conference turris::womannotes-v1

See 440.0

Martin.

    Since this obviously belongs here....
    
    
    =================================================================
    < Note 440.0 by MAY20::MINOW "Je suis Marxist, tendance Groucho" >
                                 -< Ignore it >-

I'm voting "no" for several reasons:

1. Every Digital employee is "a member in good standing" of this,
   or any non-work-related notesfile.

2. "All the voices are needed in the chorus."

3. It's trivial to skip over junk notes (and you learn to recognize
   them very quickly).

4. If someone is abusing their welcome here (and doesn't respond to
   polite peer-group pressure), I think there really are only two
   alternatives: either totally ignore the individual, or go to
   personnel and file a harassment complaint.  I suggest the former.

Martin.

    NO.  Ignore the notes.  It works in training dogs, it works in
    training children.  The trashnotes are all very childish and 
    ought to be ignored.
    
    Jo-Ann

  The greeks had a word for it -- ostracism.

  JP

    
    re.0
    
    
>    I propose that the moderators be empowered to exclude "trashnotes"
>    from the file by summarily purging them whenever found.  For the
>    purpose of this policy, "trashnotes" are defined as notes that
>    appear to be pointlessly provocative, or otherwise devoid of worthy
>    content.
    
    Who decides?  It seems that your only answer would be akin to the
    judges answer on how to define pornography ("I'll know it when I
    see it")  
    
    Devoid of worthy content?  What arrogance!  Whose metric shall we
    use?  Yours?  Mine?  Sorry, they could be light worlds apart.
    
    Moderaters already have the power to delete notes.  By renaming
    something as a "trashnote" in order to justify your actions in no
    way changes the nature of the act.  Censorship!  A is A whether
    you like it or not.
    
    
 >    Notes that are merely light-heartedly trivial, entered by
 >   people of good repute, are specifically *not* considered trashnotes
 >   for the purpose of this policy. 
    
    And again I am forced to ask  "who decides?" and even more important
    "By what right?"  
    
    Please define "people of good repute"  Please apply your definition
    to me, whom you've never met!  Is that a problem?  
    
    
>     Since any action would be a
>     judgement call on the part of the moderator(s) involved, please vote
>    "yes" only if you trust that the power will not be abused. 
    
 
    Let's call this note what it is.  You are asking for your blatant
    censorship practices to be legitimized by the bleating of the majority.
     The Constitution of the United States was specifically designed
    to protect the minority from just such a tyranny of the majority.
    Frankly your tactics are reprehensible and offensive to the right
    thinking people of this conference.
    
    If you've not worked it out yet, I'm voting against oppression!
    
    
    
    richard    
    
    

    no

    
    
    Ignore them...

    
    I had to think about this question for a while before answering.
     I worry about censorship and about where future lines might be
    drawn.  But in all the time that I've been reading this file, I
    have seen only a very few notes set hidden or nowrite, and I think
    the fact that the moderators are asking our permission to act on
    a privilege they already have suggests that they will continue to
    demonstrate respect for all the members of this conference.
    
    Justine
    

    No, let people make an a** out of themselves if that is what
    they so desire.  Why should you screen that for them?
                              
    

    1) "Trashnoting" sucks up a lot of our energy for little or no gain.
       (that was my opinion -- put the flamethrower down)
    2) I trust the moderators of this file to "do the right thing" in
       this situation.
    3) People who have traditionally written "trashnotes" would still be 
       welcome to contribute; however we would all be restricted from
       writing "trashnotes".
    4) Would you stand by while someone spraypainted "Asshole inside"
       on your car to allow that person "freedom of expression"? For
       me, there are limits, and "trashnoting" steps over them.
    
    liz

    	Trashnotes blatently offensive -- Yes
    	All trashnotes as a matter of policy -- No

     1. I object to the "mandatory registration" notion.  This isn't
        South Africa, is it?
     
     2. Broad-brush concepts that are enacted to control a specific
        problem often grow out of control.  Remember the Gulf of Tonkin
        resolution?
     
     3. I further object to the idea that a group of people can
        "democratically" abrogate free speech. 

    With the proviso that if at any time another poll is taken on this
    issue, and the yes votes to not equal or exceed 2/3, the moderators
    will be disempowered.
    
    Not that I worry too much about our moderators' judgement...
    
    Lee

    I've had notes deleted and was not pleased (not in this file though).
    My only gripe is that if a moderator does this, there should be
    an explanation.  Send the person a mail message explaining why,
    if they don't like it they can argue with the moderator.  There
    is nothing more frustrating than wondering why you were deleted.

    

    oops, too many returns there...
    

    Trash the suckers.
    
    
    JEF

    Boy am I embarrased, I just discovered I wasn't in 7.*...
    
    Now that that's fixed, I want to say that I used to want to see
    all the notes that moderators set hidden or deleted. Now that I've
    seen a bunch, here and in files I moderate, I don't want to see
    them anymore. I wish they never got entered, but given that they
    do I trust the moderators of this file to "do the right thing."
    
    	-- Charles

    
    This is difficult but I really do not like trashnotes....
    
    vote is yes		2.54		one year ago today...
    
    

    
    Let the readers be the judges of a notes content. I don't need
    anyone to screen for me. 
    
    As long as I have a vote, it will be for freedom of self
    expression. 

        For what it's worth this isn't censorship. This is cleaning
        up corporate documents. Notes aren't published.
        
        JimB.

    
    NO!
    
    I suspect someone hit a nerve with a moderator. Perhaps that should
    be discussed.
    
    Whats next, all mens entries that run against the grain get deleted?
    
    

Sorry, but I can't remember the correct Latin form.

	"AND WHO SHALL WATCH THE CUSTODIANS?"  (Cicero, I believe)

Also,

	"POWER CORRUPTS, ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY" (?)
    

	These complaints about "censorship" are out of line - this is
	a Digital resource which the moderators are responsible for
	and should moderate as they see fit. I do believe the current
	moderators would be rational and fair in implementing this
	policy as stated. Give them some credit.
	
	I vote "no" because I think it would be counter-productive.
	The best way to deal with trash notes is simply to NEXT
	UNSEEN. Do not reply to or acknowledge them in any way. Trash
	noters crave attention - making them martyrs on the cross of
	"free speech" only plays into their hands. 
	
	Mike

    ...c'mon, everyone...
    
    Who decides what's trash and what isn't?  There are some notes I
    am not crazy about---however, there is a simple, cheap, and efficient
    way to get by them--HIT RETURN.
    
    I may not like some of the notes I read, but I'll be damned if I'll
    support a decision to arbitrarily remove them.
    
    Jane

    
    	RE:  .43
    
    	Good grief, what is your problem?  Is there some reason why
    	you can't just express an opinion like the rest of us (including
    	some of us who are ALSO read-only noters) without screaming
    	your head off and going totally off the deep end?  And for
    	what?  The vast majority of the "yes" replies have included
    	nothing more than a title line ...  < yes (2.*) >
    
    	That's pretty emotional, all right.
    
    	Be embarrassed all you like -- knock yourself out.  Whatever
    	makes you happy.  But I refuse to be insulted by your remarks.
    	
    	Your note is the first "moronic level of reactions, [with]
    	emotionalism" in this note.  I hope it is also the last.

    Interesting statistic, with plus-or-minus-error of a couple:
    
    Thus far, the women responding are 3-to-1 in favor, and the men
    are evenly divided between yes and no.
    
    I find trashnotes much easier to ignore than the endless discussions
    about what to do about them. But I haven't seen anything to concern
    me about possible mis-use of such a policy. So I'll continue
    the trend and abstain.

    I am both for and against for some of the reasons stated already.
    Sorry to be so wishy-washy on this issue, but I can't help it.
    
    re .43:  I don't see your problem with having to be registered before
    you can vote.  Just register.  Is that *sooooooooooo* hard?  I hope
    you catch my sarcasm.  You'd think you were being asked for a ten-page
    essay or something.
    
    re .45:  Glad to have you back, Suzanne!
    
    	-Ellen

    I hate the trashnotes, but my conscience says ...

    I don't think the problem is big enough to need this kind of solution
    (yet).

    (Since my method of tabulating the votes will not require the exclusion
    of mere commentary...)
    
    I'd like to respond to Lee's proviso but I can't remember which
    was her response...but as I think she's the only Lee we have...
    
    I hadn't actually got around to thinking about the question of
    referenda particularly, Lee, but I am firmly in favor of people voting
    this (or any other) policy provision out of existance if it isn't
    meeting our needs.   I suppose if the (new) proposal were phrased as a
    question of whether to retain an existing (e.g. this) policy, that
    would constitute a de facto referendum.   And I certainly think the
    66.666% of votes cast is at least a good first approximation of the
    margin that would reduce triviality.  But maybe not, and we will find
    that we need, oh, 70 or 75% to obtain some stability; we can deal with
    that if we need to. 
    
    <--(.43)
    
    Bonnie, I'm really sorry that you consider the idea of a democratic
    process to be ridiculous.  It has a long tradition in human society and
    appears to be the best of an imperfect set of choices.  I'm a utopian
    socialist, personally, but recognise that that is unlikely to work out
    well in life.  My next favorite is probably dictatorship, but only if
    I'm the dictator:  the corollary is anarchy and that's like utopian
    socialism, it only works if everyone is willing to assume complete
    responsibility for making everything work well and we know very well
    that some people aren't.  Democracy always carries the seeds, as you
    very correctly point out, of a "tyranny of the majority"; I consider
    that sort of tyranny just as bad as any other and will do what I can to
    make sure those seeds don't sprout.  I'm also not sure why you object
    to the idea of voter registration. Is it a philosophic issue?  Are you
    not registered to vote in the "real world"?  I'm curious.  As to what
    "trashnotes"  or "people of good repute" are, you're right, there may
    sometimes be some difficulty determining how to answer those questions
    in particular cases.  I suspect you probably don't care, but I
    personally plan never to purge anything I don't have a clear feeling
    about.  But if that means the only notes deleted are those written by
    some one individual, too bad.  And while I'm at it, being "the
    moderator who started this trashnote", I did NOT say "if you vote
    no, start another basenote with an alternate proposal".  You have
    it backwards:  I said If you have an alternate proposal, vote "no"
    on this one and start another basenote.  Very different.  Does what
    I did with Martin's response make more sense now?  Hope so.
    
    						=maggie

For the record, I misread Maggie's .0 and thought she was requesting
a procedure I've seen in some technical conferences, where a "vote"
note contained *only* votes, with pointers to notes that discussed
objections.  I have no objection to having my note moved.

Martin.

    The same has been said in some of the previous, but ...
    
    These notes are written to wind everyone up and they almost always 
    succeed.  Ignoring them isn't a perfect solution (there will always 
    be a new noter who doesn't know he/she is about to reply to a waste 
    of space), but deleting could create martyrs.
    
    How about the moderator who finds such a note first replying with 
    a notice to other noters ("Answer at your own risk.  Arguing with 
    this noter is like wrestling with a tar baby.")?  Maybe that will
    at least limit the length of the topic and save everyone's time.
            
    I was going to abstain, but regret that I have to vote "no".

    I changed my mind and deleted my previous vote .19
    
    (Although, it suddenly occurred to me that I could have simply done
    a MOD NOTE/TITLE="no (7.22)", which brings up the thought that
    maybe putting the vote in the title is not a good idea. It is
    convenient when the votes are to be tabulated, but maybe a bit too
    vulnerable to tampering (only as a general rule, and not to cast any 
    aspersions on the moderators of this conference whom I do trust 
    implicitely not to abuse their power).)
    
    re .10:
    
    richard,
    
    	editorial actions are not censorship. This file is not a newspaper,
    the moderators are not some dictatorial government agency prescribing
    what the public can and cannot read. This file is a corporate document,
    the moderators are the editors of it and are answerable to the
    corporation for its contents. They have every right to decide what
    can and cannot be contributed to it.
    
    re .0:
    
    	However, that is the legal interpretation. In fact, this _is_
    as general discussion forum and while I believe the moderators _have_
    the right to delete whatever is inappropriate, I think I would prefer
    them not to _exercise_ that right. 
    
    Trashnotes are an annoyance, but ultimately just disgrace the author.
    
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    
                                                                         

    Re: .53
    
      >Ignoring them isn't a perfect solution
    
    But it is.  It's just that not everyone ignores them all the time.
    

    Boy, am I ambivalent about this one. I thoroughly dislike people
    being obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious, but it's their right
    to do it. 
    
    I haven't read most of the earlier replies to this note (gotta save
    time somewhere), but have there been any questions about company policy
    in this situation? In the real world, every fool has the 1st ammendment
    right to be a fool; I imagine that we don't give up that right just
    because we carry a DEC badge.

    When I typed "reply" to this note, I fully intended to vote "Yes", but
    I've convinced myself otherwise.  I'd prefer to see people ignore fools
    than humor them or cut them off. 

    Yes...but only for this particular instance.  And only if the
    moderators agree to read each note and decide whether it constitutes
    trashnoting or is a valid contribution.  (In other words, to make
    sure that deletions are not a "knee-jerk" response to any particular
    noter's name!)
    
    In general I would vote against a policy like this in order to assure
    that I can make my own decision about what I want to read, but this
    particular instance seems to merit such a policy.
    
    If the moderators were to change, I would consider this policy
    rescinded.   I trust the current moderators to carry this policy
    out thoughtfully and conservatively.
    
    If a particular noter is having his/her notes deleted, and disagrees
    strongly with the moderators about their value, I think it should
    be possible for that individual to ask others in the file to evaluate
    the notes as well, and negotiate with the moderators.
                                     
    
    Holly

            -<Count this vote positive>-
    
    I vote for allowing "trashnotes" to be deleted - although I am
    mostly (but not exclusively) a note READER.  I'm still learning
    to use NOTES - but things are improving.  Have enjoyed most of it.
    
    Val Verge  Registered - 2.90

	*Every* reaction to these trashnotes, whether it be a retort in kind,
a reasoned rebuttal, or a discussion of defensive policy, serves only to
*further empower* their authors to disrupt this forum and set its agenda.

	Please accord them only the silent pity they deserve. NEXT UNSEEN
is the best medicine.

	Moderator deletion/hiding opens the endless rathole of value
judgements, referenda on individual cases, etc.

	In cases where the material is so offensive that corporate harassment
policies apply, (and they should then *be* applied) and its continued
readability/extractablity pose a clear risk of 'higher intervention' on the 
entire conference, the moderators should have free rein...

    
    Yesssssss. Let's get rid of the trash and conserve disk space.
    
    Kerry, you only have one vote if you are a listed member, not rools.
    If you aren't listed as a member you have no vote.
    
    I certainly hope you get your psyhchological problems straightened
    out soon. (This is alotta' fun. B^)
    
    BTW, I'm in 7.44.

    
    After reading .62 - .96, I have changed my mind back to a "yes"
    vote.
    
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    

    YES!!!!!!!!! ... (number 2.105 [thanks Jim :-)]

    After reading Kerry Faulkners crap I would now like to change my
    vote from No to a big big big YES.
    
    Thank You
                                 
    And by the way Kerry, Suzanne is a very respected and liked person
    in this community!  I'm sure you would be the one that doesn't fit
    in!

	Mr. Faulkner, you deserve praise for your ironic and clever,
	albeit uncomfortable, position. 

	With calculating care, you have rallied this entire file around 
        a issue dear to your heart. Like others, I mistook your foolish 
        actions until it became obvious they were part of a ploy. None 
        is really so silly as to provoke so many with petty diatribes, 
        typical of an adolescent, without ulterior motives. 

	After I was taken by your clever manipulation, I saw its true meaning. 
        Your actions clearly demonstrate the necessity for deleting notes, 
        a difficult decision made easy by the brilliant example you have 
	provided. 

	Just as I am impressed by your use of satire, so to am I amazed
	by the generous amount of time you have to spare on such an issue.
	Sadly, I have not been allotted such, so I must be content, knowing 
        your methods are constantly on the watch while others produce. 


	No se gana pero se goza,

	John

	

    In order to keep the conference more readable I have set hidden
    the copied notes.
    
    Bonnie J

   mmmm-hmmmmmm
    

    
    	Gee, I've always thought that a great note-write qualifier would
    be "life = X"; you specify 1 hr, 1 day, 1 week, "forever", etc after
    which the note (or reply) would automatically dissappear without a trace.
    ...would make housekeeping a breeze!                          
                                                                             
    
    	Joe Jas
    

    This was tough...however, I think personal attacks of the type seen
    here are reprehensible.

    note .115 was set hidden because it contained a personal
    reference to another noter

    
    restatement of .115
    

    Oooh, the temptation to change my vote.
    
    Has anyone ever heard of B.F. Skinner?  I'm not up on Skinnerian
    theory (if that's what it's called), but the flurry of notes and
    responses awhile back (somewhere 'round the .90's) sure did make
    me think of what he did with pigeons.
    
    He put a pigeon in a box and everytime the pigeon exhibited a 
    selected behavior (rang a bell, or pirouetted on its tiny pigeon
    feet) it was automatically dispensed some yummy pigeon food.  
    
    Then, I think he wondered what might happen if a pigeon which
    had learned to do the selected behavior got no yummy treats for 
    doing it.  If the pigeon wasn't rewarded, it stopped doing the 
    behavior.
    
    _Then_, I think he wondered what might happen if another pigeon
    which had learned to do the selected behavior was intermittently 
    and randomly rewarded for the selected behavior.  D'ya know what
    happened?  The pigeon went into a veritable frenzy of twirling or 
    bell ringing when the treat was not consistently withheld or 
    consistently offered.
    
    I think it's just amazing how much we humans have in common with 
    pigeons.
    
    "Pigeons on the grass, alas!" (Gertrude Stein, I believe.)
    
    CQ

    I registered.
    
    			YES 7.106

    By all means - a definite YES! Voter #154
    

    7.69 I vote a definite maybe??? OK I vote yes also!
    
                      REK

    The polling booth is now closed.  Official results will be announced
    as soon as possible.
    
    						=maggie

    
   The proposed policy change has passed by a vote of 47 to 18, which
   represents 72.3% in favor.
   
   The breakdown:
   
   The numbers below do not account for the few members who have
   re-entered their introductions, or for those who have left us, but
   should still be interesting and may even be suggestive.
   
   Members registered at start of voting     at close    increase 
   --------------------------------------------------------------
   Women:                            143          154        7.7%
   Men:                               93          107       15.1%
   Total:                            236          261       10.6%
   
   Voting:                         women              men
   --------------------------------------------------------------
   Total members voting:              35               30
   Percentage of elegible voters:     22.7%            28.7% 

   Total votes in favor:              29               18
   Total votes opposed:                6               12
   Percentages:                       82.9% in favor   60.0% in favor
   
   "New" members in favor:             7                7
   "New" members opposed:              0                4
   Percentages:                      100% in favor     63.6% in favor      

    I had a query from Paul Beck, who wished to know whether I had meant
    not to count his abstention.  Rather than reply by mail (since others
    might also be interested...and also because I'd have to purge and
    remake a logical that's getting VAXmail confused :-)) I'll explain
    here: 
    
    Yes, I intentionally discarded Paul's abstention, just as I didn't
    count those votes from members who, for whatever personal reason,
    decided not to register.
                                              
    Where passage is dependent on some percentage of the total voting
    population being in favor of the proposition (as this was), an
    abstention counted into the total is an implicit "no" vote.  It seemed
    to me to be better to require that any vote be made by declaration
    rather than implication.  
    
    						=maggie
    
    
    (I have also, at the request of one of the participants, purged a
    number of the responses in the middle of the string.  The responses
    purged, while instrumental in changing several votes and probably
    insuring passage of the measure, were not otherwise useful or
    improving.  The entire string was first archived, however.) 

    I had originally left this topic open with the thought that there
    might be useful commentary/argument on the process or suggestions
    for the future.  Since that doesn't seem to be the case, I'll lock
    it again. 
    
    My thanks to everyone for their guidance on this thorny issue; we
    are all stronger for it. 
    
    			         		=maggie