🚀 go-pugleaf

morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:

[...]
>Well, there are aspects of the disciplinary process that cannot be
>adequately codified.  The determination of "adequate" restriction is possibly
>the most subjective part of the entire process.  In this particular
>scenario, I'd slap a page limit on the user (say, 30 pages/day).  As
>an alternative, his use of dot-matrix and/or line printers could be
>unrestricted, while the laser printers are made unavailable.
[...]

I'm not saying that such a restriction is wrong, only that you should
recognize them for what it are, punishments. Computer Center imposed
punishments should be minor (major punishments should require more
formality), imposed only after giving the user his or her say, subject
to appeal, etc.

I think your draft policy could be improved by separating the two
kinds of restrictions (restictions as minor punishment vs.
restrictions to prevent likely harm to the system or to people).

Without this separation, it is possible to punish users without due
process (in my opinion, this is exactly what happened at Ohio State
U.)

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.3619@layout.berkeley.edu=