Article View: news.admin.misc
Article #448Re: cs.utexas.edu discrimination charged
From: Sten Drescher
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 00:00
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 00:00
46 lines
3036 bytes
3036 bytes
In article <bmartin-1610951400050001@bmartin.utmem.edu>, bmartin@utmem1.utmem.edu (B. Martin) writes: BM> In article <qumivlt3j11.fsf@cyclone.Stanford.EDU>, Russ Allbery BM> <rra@cs.stanford.edu> wrote: BM> [Much Deleted] >> It's this "I'm a taxpayer, so I *OWN* EVERYTHING you've EVER >> TOUCHED!" crusade that gets on my nerves. BM> Do you realize that most state univeristy systems are subject to BM> that state's open meetings laws? In the states I am familiar with, BM> the average taxpayer can attend any lecture s/he chose on a random BM> basis. Most just do not choose to use this right (and it is a right BM> under most open meeting laws). Multiple attendance is regulated BM> because of the question of tuition. BM> Likewise, most technical equipment on the campuses of state BM> universities is likely required to be accessible to qualified users BM> by similar legislation and with appropriate arrangements to prevent BM> chaos. Thus, a gateway operated by a state institution likely must BM> be made accessible to all state citizens with equipment/knowledge of BM> using that gateway. The commercial provider is not relevant becuase BM> the provider is not being punished by the actions. The actionds of BM> the administrator is more analogous to denying campus to citizens of BM> city 1 because of other citizens of city 1 were unruly. It simply BM> can't be done this way at a state university. This is like saying that the computers of the Texas Employment Commission, or Department of Family Services, must be made available. This is plainly ludicrous. These computers, like those of the University of Texas, are for the use of a limited class of users, not all residents of the state of Texas. BM> Now, much of this is likely applicable to citizens of Texas in this BM> case, but the general principles remain. Denying access to a BM> specific user based on previous acts by other people is essentially BM> prior restraint and out of place for a government representative. -- #include <disclaimer.h> /* Sten M Drescher */ ============================================================ = When Privacy Is Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Have Privacy = = I Support the Phil Zimmermann Legal Defense Fund! = = email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf = ============================================================
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<554tx3g8up.fsf@galil.austinsc.tandem.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<45eg9h$pa2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1139f4,a66a81315182fe4f X-Google-Attributes: gid1139f4,public X-Google-Thread: 113866,396979f44c3da610 X-Google-Attributes: gid113866,public From: dreschs@galil.austinsc.tandem.com (Sten Drescher) Subject: Re: cs.utexas.edu discrimination charged Date: 1995/10/20 Message-ID: <554tx3g8up.fsf@galil.austinsc.tandem.com> X-Deja-AN: 117832896 sender: dreschs@galil.austinsc.tandem.com references: <45eg9h$pa2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> to: bmartin@utmem1.utmem.edu (B. Martin) organization: Tandem Computers newsgroups: news.admin.misc,austin.internet