🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May21.232534.17880@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> eric@geology.tn.cornell.edu writes:
>
>   I am a part-time sysadmin, and got some complaints a while ago from
>someone who received rude mail messages from one of the users of our
>system. My attitude was that I didn't think that it was any of my

  Don't bother to try creating a principle to cover the general case.  Just
do the following:

	(a)  Send a message to the person complained about, indicating that
	     a complaint has been received.  Remind him/her of general
	     responsibilities of users.  Do so in a friendly but firm tone.

	(b)  Send the complainer a message indicating that you have sent
	     such a note.  But remind the complainer that you do not read
	     private email messages, so there is no action you can take unless
	     the abuser's behavior is such as to cause problems which are
	     publically visible.  Suggest that the two users settle their
	     own problems.  Use a friendly but firm tone.

	(c)  Consider whether your wording was sufficiently non-accusatory
	     that you can send each carbon copies of the messages sent to
	     the other.


-- 
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
  Northern Illinois Univ.
  DeKalb, IL 60115                                   +1-815-753-6940

My own feeling is that I make no attempt to censor or preview mail,
but if I get complaints about harrassing, offensive, or libelous mail,
I take them very seriously.

The idea is that we grant people access to our computers for specific
purposes. And that doesn't generally include bashing or defaming other
people.

Now if you want to set up your own computer and your own network, you can
say anything you want. But if we're providing you the computer access
for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
us.              
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs
The University of Georgia  |  Athens, GA 30602   U.S.A.
-------------------------------------------------------

mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:

[...]
>But if we're providing you the computer access
>for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
>us.              
[...]

How does this compare with your university's general policies? Does
your university prohibit "embarassing" student organizations from
using "free" university resources such as building space for meetings
or talks?

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

In article <1991May22.004900.21797@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>
>Now if you want to set up your own computer and your own network, you can
>say anything you want. But if we're providing you the computer access
>for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
>us.              

Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
does the 'free' part originate from?

    --- jason

---------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Phillips  ----> jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Northwestern University

In article <1991May22.042638.18885@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jason Phillips) writes:
>In article <1991May22.004900.21797@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>>
>>Now if you want to set up your own computer and your own network, you can
>>say anything you want. But if we're providing you the computer access
>>for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
>>us.              
>
>Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
>does the 'free' part originate from?
>
>    --- jason
>
  (smile)  You obviously have no idea how a university is financed.
  If each student had to pay his share of running the university,
  tuition would be $100,000 to $200,000 per year, or more.

  Some very small private universities do manage to collect nearly
  all their operating expenses from tuition. They are noted for high
  tuition and not having very much to offer.  (Small, mediocre schools
  for the rich.)

  The rest of us have many funding sources:
    -- Tuition (this is a small to negligibly small part of it);
    -- Grants and research contracts (this pays for a whopping large
	 part of the computer facilities at most institutions);
    -- The endowment (in the case of most good private universities,
	 this consists of a large collection of investments that produce
	 large income every year);
    -- Subsidy by state legislature (in the case of most state universities,
	 this covers a LARGE part of the operating expenses, IN ADDITION
	 to income from the endowment [=land grant]).

  My personal opinion is that in-state tuition should be zero. As it is,
  tuition is a very small part of the University's income, and it gives 
  students the unfortunate illusion that they are paying for the
  University's services. In reality, everyone that we admit is thereby
  receiving a large scholarship -- we educate people without making them
  pay anything like the real cost of the education.

  By "for free" I also meant another thing. Computers are generally set
  up by specific units within the University (departments, the computer
  center, etc.) for specific purposes, and users (or users' departments)
  very often do not have to pay the department that owns the computer
  in order to be allowed to use it.
    
  Finally, by "embarrass" I was referring specifically to email intended
  to libel or harrass -- NOT to the ideas expressed in the mail, but rather
  to the intent of carrying out a destructive personal attack.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs
The University of Georgia  |  Athens, GA 30602   U.S.A.
-------------------------------------------------------

In article <1991May22.040819.29865@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>>But if we're providing you the computer access
>>for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
>>us.              
>
>How does this compare with your university's general policies? Does
>your university prohibit "embarassing" student organizations from
>using "free" university resources such as building space for meetings
>or talks?
>
  We do not allow organizations to engage in personal harrassment or
  libel either. And that's the kind of "embarrassing" mail I was talking
  about. I'm not proposing to censor the _ideas_ expressed in the mail.

  There's another difference. Buildings are provided by the university
  as a whole. Computers are provided by specific departments or units
  for specific academic purposes. Net access is heavily subsidized by
  NSF and similar organizations FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURTHERING ACADEMIC
  RESEARCH. It is not a communications common carrier like the telephone
  company or the post office. It has specific purposes which vary
  somewhat depending on exactly where, and how, you are attached to it
  and who's paying.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs
The University of Georgia  |  Athens, GA 30602   U.S.A.
-------------------------------------------------------

eric@geology.tn.cornell.edu (Eric Fielding) writes:

>   I am a part-time sysadmin, and got some complaints a while ago from
>someone who received rude mail messages from one of the users of our
>system. My attitude was that I didn't think that it was any of my
>business to tell people what they could write in their mail messages.
>This particular situation seemed to be two people arguing with one
>another, one using ruder language than the other. 
> 
>   The post office doesn't check what kind of mail they get in the mail
>boxes. They only investigate in cases of mail fraud as far as I know.
>What is supposed to be the situation on computer networks? Do we shut
>down "alt.flame"?

You should regard yourself as a 'common carrier' in this case.  Your
job is to deliver the mail, not censor it.  You provide connectivity
service to users, not behavioural control.  If somone doesn't like
the contact of another person, they should take it to the people who
have authority over that person, not the sysadmin.  If you got a rude
letter from your banker, who would you complain to -- the post office
or the president of the bank?

As for dealing with the offended party, inform him that you have no
authority over your users and suggest that he contact someone at your
site who has such authority.
-- 
"SPAM is a registered trademark of a pork product
 packed only by Geo. A Hormel & Co. Corp."
     -- Sun Technical Bulletin, March 1991, pg ii

mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
[...]
>  Net access is heavily subsidized by
>  NSF and similar organizations FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURTHERING ACADEMIC
>  RESEARCH.

Just a small clarification: NSFNET supports both research and
education.


- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Another clarification: If you send me e-mail falsely saying that I was
a Nazi deathcamp guard, you have not (legally) libeled me. The purpose
of libel law is to protect my reputation against false statements.
One condition of libel is it be "published" in the sense that you have
shown the false statement to someone other than me.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
<jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jason Phillips) writes:
<<mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:

<<<..... But if we're providing you the computer access
<<<for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to....

<<Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
<<does the 'free' part originate from?

<  (smile)  You obviously have no idea how a university is financed.
<  If each student had to pay his share of running the university,
<  tuition would be $100,000 to $200,000 per year, or more.

<  Some very small private universities do manage to collect nearly
<  all their operating expenses from tuition. They are noted for high
<  tuition and not having very much to offer.  (Small, mediocre schools
<  for the rich.)

<  The rest of us have many funding sources:
<    -- Tuition (this is a small to negligibly small part of it);

At Kansas State University, students' tuition pays somewhere between
20--25% of the total cost of running the university.  (The Regents
periodically adjust fees to keep them near 25%.)  In-state undergraduate
fees are currently about $730/semester; non-resident $2,130/semester.

And if you'd like to hear how many Rhodes, Marshall, Truman, ...
scholarships KSU students have received in the last 10 years, I
could probably come up with those outstanding figures, too!
--Myron.
--
# Myron A. Calhoun, Ph.D. E.E.; Associate Professor   (913) 539-4448 home
#  INTERNET:  mac@cis.ksu.edu (129.130.10.2)                532-6350 work
#      UUCP:  ...rutgers!ksuvax1!harry!mac                  532-7353 fax
# AT&T Mail:  attmail!ksuvax1!mac                   W0PBV @ K0VAY.KS.USA.NA

In article <1991May22.042638.18885@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jason Phillips) writes:
:
>Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
>does the 'free' part originate from?
:

These yearns can be continued ad absurdum.  The like-minded
follow-up question would naturally be should paying a tuition mean a
right to send harassing mail.  (Of course it doesn't, but if one
asks the one question, why wouldn't this logically follow :-). 

...................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi
Moderating at garbo.uwasa.fi anonymous ftp archives 128.214.12.37
School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland
Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: gado::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun

In <1991May22.124033.3668@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:

>In article <1991May22.040819.29865@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>>mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>>>But if we're providing you the computer access
>>>for free, and the network access for free, you have no right to embarrass
>>>us.              
>>
>>How does this compare with your university's general policies? Does
>>your university prohibit "embarassing" student organizations from
>>using "free" university resources such as building space for meetings
>>or talks?
>>

I don't know about their policies, but in Mikes defense I would have to
guess YES.  If the student organization is gathering for something
purely defamatory like a "The dean is a fink" rally, I do think they
would deny use of campus resources.  Mike certainly wasn't talking about
topics or content that would be controversial but, as he said in another
post, harassing.

-- 
--
Charles "Chip" Yamasaki
chip@oshcomm.osha.gov

In <scs.674919197@wotan.iti.org> scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:

>eric@geology.tn.cornell.edu (Eric Fielding) writes:

>>   I am a part-time sysadmin, and got some complaints a while ago from
>>someone who received rude mail messages from one of the users of our
>>system. My attitude was that I didn't think that it was any of my
>>business to tell people what they could write in their mail messages.
>>This particular situation seemed to be two people arguing with one
>>another, one using ruder language than the other. 
>> 
>>   The post office doesn't check what kind of mail they get in the mail
>>boxes. They only investigate in cases of mail fraud as far as I know.
>>What is supposed to be the situation on computer networks? Do we shut
>>down "alt.flame"?

>You should regard yourself as a 'common carrier' in this case.  Your
>job is to deliver the mail, not censor it.  You provide connectivity
>service to users, not behavioural control.  If somone doesn't like
>the contact of another person, they should take it to the people who
>have authority over that person, not the sysadmin.  If you got a rude
>letter from your banker, who would you complain to -- the post office
>or the president of the bank?

I generally agree, but not in all cases.  In the case of a corporate or
government E-Mail system the function of the gateway and its
administrator might be more than just a common carrier.  Rather, in many
cases it should be regarded as a "liason" to the organization and
"representative" to the external E-Mail community.

I don't mean that E-Mail should be monitored or censored on a regular
basis but,in many cases theadministrator should support the user in
his/her organization in alleviating problems in any way possible,
including blocking mail from offensive parties if requested.

I think interconnectivity is a wonderful thing and it would be a shame
if a corporation or agency had to shut down their gateway because the
administrator told the CEO he was not responsible for the content of
mail and could not effectively help him solve the problem.

The sysadmin should be there to assist their users in ANY way possible.

>As for dealing with the offended party, inform him that you have no
>authority over your users and suggest that he contact someone at your
>site who has such authority.

Further, I think this kind of approach gives a poor image of your
organization.  I know this wouldn't work in our case.  When (I hope
soon) more of our users get on-line I would think management would
consider any harassing mail to be a poor reflection on the
Administration and would want the problem solved posthaste.

I would think that in a case where you are in the same organization or
closely linked you could pass the complaint along to the proper party
yourself (if the grievance sounds legit).  If you are a member of the
same organization and were acting as a representative you could even
have some resolution procedures on paper.  Such procedures might entail:

A Confront the accused in a non-accusational tone.  Do they
| confirm that a message was sent?
|
+-yes-B Get some background info.  Was the content questionable?
|     |
|     C-yes--- Pass the information along to the persons manager.
|     |
|     D-no---- Drop the subject.
|     |
F-no--E-maybe- Ask the complaintant for a copy and attempt to
               authenticate and review it.  Return to B.

In any case I think you should inform the other party that the matter is
being investigated and that you will try to help.  Maybe even attempt to
inform them of the resolution if appropriate.

Of course, this approach might not apply to those administrators of
systems like UUNET or providers of general news and mail feeds, but in
cases where a person who appears to be a representative of an
organization to which image is important, I think the sysop has to
respond positively and quickly or risk losing the resource (gateway) to
"bad press".
-- 
--
Charles "Chip" Yamasaki
chip@oshcomm.osha.gov

In article <1991May22.042638.18885@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>,
jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jason Phillips) says:
>Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
>does the 'free' part originate from?

Not all services provided by a university are open to the student body merely
because they pay tuition.  A freshman can't go in and use a $2 million
electron scanning microscope and a sophmore can't walk into the $100 million
particle accelerator and 'try it out'.  The problem with network is that
the true value is hidden from the user.  All one sees is a simple $1000
terminal so one says 'Heck, what damage am I doing here?'

But the cost of the fiber-optic backbones that run throughout the campus,
the Ethernet segments in the buildings, the bridges, repeaters, routers,
the phone lines are all unseen.  It is all underground in some hidden
place.  Each university has at least $2 million in network infrastructure
and many have well past that amount.

So the question then is 'Does paying tuition entitle a student to do whatever
he wants with university equipment since he has paid for it?'  If the answer
is yes, then we might as well pack up and let them play with the colliders.
If the answer is no, then the use of equipment is a privilege and not a
right.  If it is a privilege, then the university is entitled to make its
own set of rules by which the student body has to abide.  Not every
university creates the same set of rules (some don't allow students to use
the network at all) and I guess future students will have to factor in
network policy when selecting their university.  Previously, students have
selected universities by their academic standards, by the campus aura, by
how the dorms look, by how close it is to home or the bar.  Perhaps it is
time that high school students also examine university network policy
before deciding on which university to attend.  If you don't like the policy
of one university, then don't go there.

But please don't say that net-access is a right.  It is a privilege that
should not be abused.


>
>    --- jason
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>Jason Phillips  ----> jasonrey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
>Northwestern University

Hank Nussbacher
Israel

chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes:

> [[ a long, thoughtful response to my suggestions to: ]]

>>eric@geology.tn.cornell.edu (Eric Fielding) writes:

>>>   I am a part-time sysadmin, and got some complaints a while ago from
>>>someone who received rude mail messages from one of the users of our
>>>system . . .

>I generally agree, but not in all cases.  In the case of a corporate or
>government E-Mail system the function of the gateway and its
>administrator might be more than just a common carrier.  Rather, in many
>cases it should be regarded as a "liason" to the organization and
>"representative" to the external E-Mail community.

But this is clearly not the case.  Eric is the guy who trundles the
mail cart down the hall.  He is overstepping his own authority if he
attempts to manage user behaviour in any way, shape or form.  Until
then, the proper course for him to take is to put complaintants into
touch with those who have authority.

>I don't mean that E-Mail should be monitored or censored on a regular
>basis but,in many cases theadministrator should support the user in
>his/her organization in alleviating problems in any way possible,
>including blocking mail from offensive parties if requested.

You're actually advocating Eric censor (I hate that word) outgoing mail
from a user over whom he has no authority.  Brrrrr!  If I found our site
postmaster doing this, I'd fire the postmaster.

>I think interconnectivity is a wonderful thing and it would be a shame
>if a corporation or agency had to shut down their gateway because the
>administrator told the CEO he was not responsible for the content of
>mail and could not effectively help him solve the problem.

That's not what was suggested.  There are lots of things Eric could
do to help.  But he should not take those actions unilaterally, and
the CEO (or person in authority) has to be made aware of both the cost
of the actions taken (yeah, rewrite all the sendmail.cf files so as
to exclude mail from person a to person b) and has to take responsibility
for dealing with the end user.
-- 
"SPAM is a registered trademark of a pork product
 packed only by Geo. A Hormel & Co. Corp."
     -- Sun Technical Bulletin, March 1991, pg ii

>>In article <1991May22.040819.29865@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
>>                                kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
[...]
>>>How does this compare with your university's general policies? Does
>>>your university prohibit "embarassing" student organizations from
>>>using "free" university resources such as building space for meetings
>>>or talks?

chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes:

>I don't know about their policies, but in Mikes defense I would have to
>guess YES.  If the student organization is gathering for something
>purely defamatory like a "The dean is a fink" rally, I do think they
>would deny use of campus resources.  Mike certainly wasn't talking about
>topics or content that would be controversial but, as he said in another
>post, harassing.
[...]

I don't think a "the dean is a fink" rally (or e-mail) should count as
harrassment. The Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students,
the main expression of student academic freedom in the US, says:

--(begin quote) ---
B. Freedom of Inquiry and Expression

  1. Students and student organizations should be free to examine and
discuss all questions of interest to them, and to express opinions
publicly and privately. They should always be free to support causes
by orderly means which do not disrupt the regular and essential
operation of the institution. At the same time, it should be made
clear to the academic and the larger community that in their public
expressions or demonstrations students or student organizations speak
only for themselves.

  2. Students should be allowed to invite and to hear any person of
their own choosing. Those routine procedures required by an
institution before a guest speaker is invited to appear on campus
should be designed only to insure that there is orderly scheduling of
facilities and adequate preparation for the event, and that the
occasion is conducted in a manner appropriate to an academic
community. The institutional control of campus facilities should not
be used as a device of censorship. It should be made clear to the
academic and larger community that sponsorship of guest speakers does
not necessarily imply approval or endorsement of the views expressed,
either by the sponsoring group or the institution.
--(end   quote) ---
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes:
[...]
>Of course, this approach might not apply to those administrators of
>systems like UUNET or providers of general news and mail feeds, but in
>cases where a person who appears to be a representative of an
>organization to which image is important, I think the sysop has to
>respond positively and quickly or risk losing the resource (gateway) to
>"bad press".
>-- 
>--
>Charles "Chip" Yamasaki
>chip@oshcomm.osha.gov

Is *this* this official view of OSHA?

Seriously, I think difficulty can often be avoided by appending a
disclaimer to the effect: The views expressed here are the author's
own and do not neccessarily represent the views of OSHA." This is
especially important for newsgroup postings.

- Carl

-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

[ ... ]

>Seriously, I think difficulty can often be avoided by appending a
>disclaimer to the effect: The views expressed here are the author's
>own and do not neccessarily represent the views of OSHA." This is
>especially important for newsgroup postings.

One would hope that this was understood by all participants, unless
otherwise stated.  I really don't believe that you set policy for UIUC,
and if you think I set policy for KSU then I've got a great investment
for you.  :-)

(Has this strayed far enough from the subject yet?)

--
Tim Ramsey/system administrator/tar@math.ksu.edu/(913) 532-6750/2-7004 (FAX)
Department of Mathematics, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS  66506-2602
 "Jello is another dish best served cold."
         -- me, again

In <1991May23.132025.20299@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>>--
>>Charles "Chip" Yamasaki
>>chip@oshcomm.osha.gov

>Is *this* this official view of OSHA?

>Seriously, I think difficulty can often be avoided by appending a
>disclaimer to the effect: The views expressed here are the author's
>own and do not neccessarily represent the views of OSHA." This is
>especially important for newsgroup postings.

ABSOLUTELY!  You got me there, and I have taken care of it immediately. 
Good point.

Please note that the new disclaimer on my message should also apply to
all of my previous postings.  Sorry for not including it sooner.
-- 
-----------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Charles "Chip" Yamasaki| The opinions expressed here are my own and are not
chip@oshcomm.osha.gov  | supported or even generally accepted by OSHA. :-)
-----------------------+---------------------------------------------------

For several years, before I gave up on PCs as being a bad job, I
followed the twists and turns of FidoNet.  Early on while I was using
that network, they had a very simple policy, which I think is probably
very good advice even for many more advanced networks.  It was this:

	1.  Do not be excessively annoying.
	2.  Do not be excessively annoyed.

-GAWollman

Garrett A. Wollman - wollman@emily.uvm.edu

Disclaimer:  I'm not even sure this represents *my* opinion, never
mind UVM's, EMBA's, EMBA-CF's, or indeed anyone else's.

mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>>
>>Only one question: do students pay to attend your university?  If so, where
>>does the 'free' part originate from?
>>
>>    --- jason
>>
>  (smile)  You obviously have no idea how a university is financed.
>  If each student had to pay his share of running the university,
>  tuition would be $100,000 to $200,000 per year, or more.

Sure?

>  Some very small private universities do manage to collect nearly
>  all their operating expenses from tuition. They are noted for high
>  tuition and not having very much to offer.  (Small, mediocre schools
>  for the rich.)

Why on earth should rich people send their children to mediocre schools?!?
Doesn't make any sense to me. People able to pay those sums you mention
should be able to see if they get anything for their money.
--
|Jesper Lauridsen        |                                          |
| Datalogisk Afdeling    |  "I have things to do and news to read"  |
|  Matematisk Institut   |                                          |
|   Aarhus Universitet   | - rorschak@daimi.aau.dk                  |

   If a person yells in open air a harrasing statement, is the medium, the air, to blame?  Or is the person who is harassing?  The net is in this case merely the medium of communication.  If there are problems, let the offended party use the E-Mailed message as evidence in normal vocal or phone harassment disciplinary avenues.  You are assuming a judicious stance on a personal matter, one better suited for 'personal' policy rather than 'system' policy.                                                       







          

                                    John  Wagner
 

   

In <1991May29.025740.499@midway.uchicago.edu> wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner) writes:

>If a person yells in open air a harrasing statement, is the medium, the
>air, to blame? Or is the person who is harassing? The net is in this
>case merely the medium of communication.  If there are problems, let the
>offended party use the E-Mailed message as evidence in normal vocal or
>phone harassment disciplinary avenues.  You are assuming a judicious
>stance on a personal matter, one better suited for 'personal' policy
>rather than 'system' policy. 

Where do people get these strange analogies?  You can't compare open air
to E-Mail.  I don't think I should have to explain this one, but anyone
who would make such a ridiculuous statement obviously need it explained.

Open air is a free and absolutely necessary element that is
ever-present.  It is assumed, in fact has been proven to be required
for human survival.  Humans (most anyway) are capable of vibrating
it through the use of their own personal vocal chords, thus causing this
"yelling" phenomenon you discussed, without the use of corporate
resources.  This makes it imparctical, at best to regulate and the
privilige is nearly impossible to revoke.  Therefore, it must be covered
by other policies (which I'm sure it is in many places).

E-Mail on the other hand, is a resource that is not an absolutely
necessary resource to 99% of all corporations or organizations.  It is
normally paid for by the transport supplier, as well as the equipment
used to generate, store, and access it.  Since the PRIVILEGE to use it
may be revoked at any time if its use results in problems that detract
from the organizational goal, the use of it should be treated as a
PRIVILEGE and not a RIGHT. 

In virtually any organization I would think that if the wrong person is
annoyed by the E-Mail system (or users thereof) and the problem is not
resolved to the users satisfaction, the system could be disabled and all
of the other users would suffer.

I have seen some outrageous comparisons drawn in this thread, but this
takes the cake.  Speaking of which, E-Mail is like fruit-cake.  If
someone beats you with a fruit-cake we can't just outlaw fruit-cake, so
why pursue those nasty fruit-cake muggers?
-- 
-----------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Charles "Chip" Yamasaki| The opinions expressed here are my own and are not
chip@oshcomm.osha.gov  | supported or even generally accepted by OSHA. :-)
-----------------------+---------------------------------------------------