🚀 go-pugleaf

I really would prefer to ignore messages like Frank Topping's recent long 
diatribe against K12net.  However, Frank has cited a message one of my 
students posted on the K12net BBS I sysop, so I feel must reply.  However, 
my reply will be considerably shorter and more direct than the original 
message.
 
First, the message served a very useful purpose to my students, all of 
whom must learn how to use computer networks (hands-on with active 
accounts) this year.  The message Frank cited plus several others serve as 
excellent examples of "how to" and "how not to" write messages when one 
wishes to receive good responses and establish on-line conversations.  My 
classes have discussed these examples and have created their own set of 
"rules" for on-line etiquette.  As usual, their self-established rules are 
even more conservative than the etiquette list posted widely and published 
in ISTE's "T.I.E. News" by Yvonne Andres (FrEdMail) and my own.  Teachers 
will recognize the value inherent in having students discover and generate 
their own rules of behavior.  But that is pedagogy and Ed Philosophy which 
will probably not hit any marks in this thread.  Suffice it to say, my 
students are as unhappy with "bad" messages as anyone else here and they 
figured it all out themselves!
 
Second, one would hope that if a reader of a message is concerned with the 
content of that message, the reader would make some minimal effort to 
contact the author of the message or the operator of the system of origin.
 
Frank has my home and work and K12net phone numbers and usmail addresses, 
but he did not contact me.  He knows me from a couple of years ago when he 
helped me begin with K12net!  I have requested of him in email a copy of 
the message he posted here as a courtesy but he has not sent a copy to me.
 
Third, Frank does not know anything about the education program at my 
school or the use of computer telecommunications in my classes.  He does 
not know the BBS software we use.  He has never, under his own name at 
least, signed onto that system.  He does not know anything about the 
students involved or anything about any of the other people in the 
messages he re-posted.  To my knowledge, he has never been a certificated 
K12 teacher nor has he been in any classroom environment, in my district 
at least.  Yet, he has strong opinions, his right, which he expresses in 
an intimidating fashion.  I hope he will come to understand that the re-
posting of student messages with personal information such as addresses (a 
bad practice) from K12net (a relatively controlled environment) to 
newsgroups such as core.advisors and misc.education (a relatively 
uncontrolled environment) does in a big way exactly what he was 
complaining about to begin with.
 
Finally, despite his recent message, I invite Frank to become a productive 
(non-flaming) part of a discussion about educational uses of networks.  
There is a lot of potential here and a lot of work to be done.  
Unfortunately, the only solid consequences of his message are the probable 
cutting of the K12net chat areas from newsgroups and a possible re-
thinking of gatewaying FrEdMail student messages as well.
 
This will be my only reply here to Frank's message.  Those of us who are 
professionally trying to incorporate modern technologies into curricula in 
schools just don't have the time to engage ourselves in lengthy on-line 
fire fights.  If Frank wants to be constructive, he knows multiple ways to 
contact me.
 
-Bob Shayler-
for reference:    sysop of several FrEdMail BBSes for five years
                  sysop of one K12net BBS for two years
                  moderator of K12net's Sr_Chat echo
                  member of FrEdMail Board of Directors
                  member of Iris Board of Directors
                  SLUSD Mentor teacher (ed tech)
and not least --- active teacher for the past 27 years
                    in southern and northern California and New York
                    and father of two children who use this technology