10/16   How exactly did "make motd anon, semi-anon, or non-anon" turn into some
        hostile "students/politburo vs. alum" hate fest?  I keep reading stuff
        that strongly implies that "total anon motd" is the "what alums want"
        and a "logged motd (of some sort)" is what "students/politburo wants".
        This is clearly not the case.  Some alums want a totally anon motd,
        some want a semi-anon motd and others have wanted it completely
        non-anon going back many years.  Given that the vote on this vaguely
        defined motion was not unanimous in pburo and that they have "already
        spent over 50 hours" discussing and dealing with it, it seems like
        "the students/pburo" aren't of a single mind either.  This whole
        students vs alums thing is a red herring that seems intended to
        misdirect the entire non/anon motd discussion.  Unfortunately, it
        seems to have succeeded. :-(   Wake up, the strings are being pulled.
        \_ I was with you up till that last line.  Who's pulling the
           strings?  The Illuminati?
           strings?  The Illuminaiti?
           \_ It's not a conspiracy.  There's someone who wants us to not talk
              about the real issue but to babble about this us vs them,
              students vs alum nonsense.  If not we wouldn't have been
              diverted off the original topic on to this hatred garbage.
              I'm asking everyone to ignore that noise and go back to the
              real issue: the motd and how to make it not suck.
              \_ Are you saying we got Karl Roved?  --PeterM
        \_ The issue is that the politburo has decided that it wants to make
           a change (whether it was unaninmous or not is not really germane).
           There is an uproar about the change, and I am confident that 100%
           of the people who are complaining about the idea are not current
           students.  I think it is quite difficult to argue that the MOTD
           in its current state serves the CSUA's active members, and
           similarly hard to argue that the proposed change will have any
           deleterious effect on MOTD discussion.  -tom
           \_ So what does qualify for being on the motd? HW and test answers?
              Sunshine, pretty flowers, fuzzy wuzzy bunny rabbits and baby
              \_ Don't fuck wih Fuzzy Bunnies.  -John
              chicks, and meeting announcements? Does the motd get to be a
              disasterous insane and inane public forum or the same chirpy,
              go-CSUA-happy-happy-joy-joy message every day? What is the
              politburo's "vision" of the motd?
              \_ Complete non sequitur and red herring.  -tom
                 \_ Not really. If I don't want to be sorried for posting to
                    the motd, what are the rules? If there are no rules, well,
                    just say so and note that people will be sorried by fiat.
                    If you know what will best serve the active members of
                    the CSUA in the motd, I'd be happy to read it.
                    \_ How about, the exact same as the rules about being
                       sorried for walling.  It's not that complicated to
                       figure out what you should and shouldn't do.  And
                       that's completely separate from the question of
                       whether usage should be logged (as it is in every
                       other form of electronic communication).  -tom
                       \_ And the official wall rules are? And as shown over
                          the weekend, logging can lead to arbitary sorrying.
                          Changed this time, but still sets an interesting
                          precedent. What is the politburo's vision of what
                          the CSUA should be? (not really directed at tom
                          per se, but an open question)
                          \_ Actually, it was lack of logging that led to
                             arbitrary sorrying; if the MOTD were logged,
                             you would never sorry "the wrong man."  -tom
                             \_ I think it's more unchecked ego than lack
                                of logging that led to arbitrary sorrying
                                in this case.