From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: ghudson@cie.uoregon.edu (Greg Hudson)
Subject: Re: Gaming, and various commentary
Message-ID: <1991Dec7.051800.12381@nntp.uoregon.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 91 05:18:00 GMT
I don't read this group (comp.admin.policy) normally, so I
apologize if I'm breaking any conventions. I thought I'd throw in
my two cents.
My first cent: most of the time spent on MUDs is unquestionably
spent on recreation, whether it's playing an adventure game on LP
or Diku-style MUDs or chatting with people on MUDs derived from the
TinyMUD paradigm. Certainly, a lot of building and programming
goes on, and a lot of people have learned a great deal about
programming using MUDs in an enjoyable environment, but MUDding is
definitely a game, and I don't see anything wrong with treating it
as a game, and ergo a slightly questionable use of academic computer
resources.
My second cent: one aspect of MUD programming that hasn't gotten
too much attention lately, perhaps because it doesn't go on so much
any more, is client hacking. In the old days of MUDs, everyone and
their grandmother was trying to add their favorite feature to a MUD
client, since the client programs of the day were generally minimal
telnet replacements. Modern clients are much more extensive (and
often more difficult to modify), so it's not as popular a pastime
any more.
Nevertheless, I think some people have learned a great deal from
client programming, and it's something that many users can benefit
from. I started the summer of 1990 with a very incomplete
knowledge of C coding and virtually no knowledge of Unix. Over the
course of a year and a half I've written several client programs,
one used by at least several hundred people internationally, and
another with a full-fledged C-like extension language compiler and
interpreter, both ambitious projects at my age. (The former is not
entirely my own work, since it was based on a previous MUD client
and has been somewhat modified by another programmer since I last
released it. The latter is just about to emerge from beta
testing and is also publically available, but not widely used.) I
don't think my case is particularly common among MUDders, but I
know several others who have learned about C programming, network
applications, and software maintenance through client programming.
For my own part, I've also learned about user support and
documentation.
I'd like to see more client programming going on. It's something
that applies to all MUD players, and doesn't just apply to MUDs.
As an example, I'm planning to write extneion language code for my
latest client to allow it to act as a rudimentary horizontal
windowing system with roughly the same multiprocessing approach as
screen (i.e. filtering output from ttys).
My third cent (inflation): MUD extension languages are very
diverse. Proficiency in all of them would amount to a fairly
comprehensive course in programming language design. A brief,
hopefully accurate synopsis (some of this has been covered by other
posts):
MOO: A C-like object-oriented language based on the concept of
verbs attached to objects. The language is highly integrated into
the structure of the server, which is essentially just an
interpreter, and is perhaps the most advanced and elegant designs
among modern MUDs.
MUF (for TinyMuck): A stack-based Forth language with no backwards
jumps; all looping is done with recursion. It's interesting to
develop theory about how to do large loops, since there is an
imposing 512-object data stack and call stack ceiling. (Writing
programs to handle lots of iterations isn't difficult, but it
requires a bit of thought.) I learned a lot about stack handling
using this language. MUF is unstructured and difficult to read,
and is grafted onto the server rather than integrated into it (it
plays the role of a complicated command language), but it's an
interesting study. It's probably the most commonly-used MUD
language today for Tiny-derived MUDs, and is
U (for UberMUD, not in use): More of an operating system than a
MUD. It was a C-like language, very flexible, with Unix-style
permissions.
UnterMUD macros: These macros do not constitute an extension
language, and are not robust enough for complicated tasks, but they
do have conditionals and are at the very least an interesting study
in typographical parsing.
TinyMush scripting: My knowledge falls flat here. It is a
typographical language, I believe-- that is, commands are not
translated into internal tokens, to my knowledge, and it may not be
robust enough to handle some string operations, but I'm by no means
certain. It is apparently powerful enough to warrant the term,
"language," and can be used to program a wide variety of things.
LPC (for LP-MUDs): Quite possibly the most commonly used extension
language in modern Internet gaming, an object-oriented C-like
language centered around an adventure game. It's apparently so
versatile that no other extension language has emerged in its
niche (adventure-style MUDs).
There are probably others out there that I'm missing, and I haven't
described any of the wide variety of client extension languages out
there (including clients written in elisp, clients with TM-complete
typographical macro/trigger systems, a client with a procedure-
oriented C-like extension language, and a client using tcltt as an
extension language). A great deal of effort has gone into
designing MUD extension languages, and a few of them are
beautifully constructed. I don't have an opinion on whether they
really justify MUDs, but they're certainly of some value.
Well, that was an awfully weighty three cents. I hope it's
informative.
Greg Hudson
ghudson@cie.uoregon.edu
Your friendly neighborhood minor in MUDding
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec7.224120.29985@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1991 22:41:20 GMT
dcw11111@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Blackmore) writes:
[...]
>One thing that we both didn't mention earlier, and the basis for all of our
>(mine and John's arguments) is the University's policy that you cannot
>interfere with another person's ability to learn. If I need to do classwork,
>and you are doing something else, you are keeping me from accomplishing my
>learning.
[...]
While this seems to be a general philosophy; it is not as far as I
know, a formal U. of Illinois policy. If I am incorrect, please tell
me where I can look up the policy.
As a counterexample, a tennis class cannot kick a recreational player
off the courts at IMPE, the intermural physical education building.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sarwate@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Sanjiv Sarwate)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec7.231545.15137@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1991 23:15:45 GMT
sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
>sds30742@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (John Stewart) writes:
>|BZZZT! Thank you for playing.
>I, for one, do not think it's a game.
Someone used this line as a protest against being kicked off for MUDding.
The operations staff remained unmoved and kicked him off. And never felt
guilty about it. And I support that.
>This flippant remark at the beginning kind of ruined the rest of the
>article, which was basically contradiction. I'm supposed to be
>convinced? An essay would have been better.
And break a fine NetTradition? Never!
>My personal feeling is I just couldn't possibly work somewhere where
>monitors came along randomly and forced me to let them look at my
>screen so they could make a decision whether I was really working on
>academia. Imagine if the government treated everyone that way.
You are leaving a huge gap here. What if you were gaming? I mean, blatant
games like SimCity or something? Since I can't look at your screen, does
that mean I can't kick you off? WRONG!
"Look at the screen" is being misinterpreted to mean "read through the whole
session." In point of fact, we here at the U of I have decided to sidestep
the whole problem and kick off ALL MUDders and IRCers when the labs get busy.
Bar none. Everyone goes. This avoids all invasion of privacy issues and
is equally fair to everyone.
>And you know, it wouldn't be effective in my case. Just about every
>time you came by, I'd be editing some perl or C++ code, which of
>course looks quite academic. But what you wouldn't know is that
>sometimes it's work related, sometimes school related, and sometimes
>it's a project I'm working on, which could be anything from a
>directory tool to a networked game. But you'd never know.
OK. How about this: If you are using a MUD or IRC or gaming, then you get
kicked off. EOD.
>How much user input was used in developing this policy? How do the
>users feel about the way things are now?
Haven't heard one complaint yet. And the problem user cited above sorted out
his own difficulties.
>Sean
--
==============================================================================
Sanjiv Sarwate |"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little
sarwate@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu | minds."
SANJIV@UIUCVMD.BITNET | -Ralph Waldo Emerson
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec7.234814.14230@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
References: <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> <1991Dec7.061635.29837@acsu.buffalo.edu> <1991Dec7.191303.16491@eff.org>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 91 23:48:14 GMT
In article <1991Dec7.191303.16491@eff.org> kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>For example, the availability of kill files in newsreaders has,
>in my opinion, greatly lessened the pressure to suppress speech.
... just like the /ignore command did for IRC. And we just added new
features to the irc server to make ignoring someone based on their
relatively-unforgable hostname inexpensive.
I think that the people who helped implement these features (WiZ, msa,
Avalon) deserve all our thanks. Bravo. I think the rest of Carl's
points boil down to: "You should remove kill to prevent its abuse; no,
it's technically impossible." Leads to rather boring discussion.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: hayes@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Patrick Hayes)
Subject: Re: The dread F word
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.014855.14608@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: news@cis.ohio-state.edu (NETnews )
References: <1991Nov22.183858.26504@ms.uky.edu> <9271@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1991 01:48:55 GMT
In article rsr@bigbang.Berkeley.EDU (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>(BTW, I guesss this means that OSU doesn't carry
>rec.arts.erotica, eh? :-)
Oddly enough, we do. And alt.sex, but not more offensive stuff like
alt.sex.bestiality or alt.evil. Go figure.
---PCH
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: falk@peregrine.Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Subject: Re: [soc.women] NPR report on Goya's nude(was re: feminist prudes and Goya's nudes)
Message-ID:
Date: 8 Dec 91 02:54:23 GMT
References: <9112012233.AA25472@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine
In article <9112012233.AA25472@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
> From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
> >Seems to me that the school over-reacted by removing the Goya and
> >the other paintings too. They should have simply moved it to another
> >place.
>
> According to a story on NPR, the school _did_ "simply move it to another
> place". They moved the Goya print to a reading room in a library building.
> Perhaps I misunderstand and you meant they should have moved it to a differ-
> ent location in the same room?
Oh, my mistake. I thought the paintings were removed completely.
--
-ed falk, sun microsystems
sun!falk, falk@sun.com
card-carrying ACLU member.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: falk@peregrine.Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Subject: Re: Schools that outlaw on-line searches of library catalogs
Message-ID:
Date: 8 Dec 91 02:57:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: exodus.kk32gmINNrup
References: <1991Nov22.155626.11919@eff.org> <1991Nov22.183858.26504@ms.uky.edu> <1991Dec6.172031.26982@midway.uchicago.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine
In article <1991Dec6.172031.26982@midway.uchicago.edu>, mack23@sam.spc.uchicago.edu (Chris Walsh) writes:
> In article <1991Nov25.120702.10871@cc.curtin.edu.au> chooper@cc.curtin.edu.au (Todd Hooper) writes:
> >
> >On a side note, this whole OSU thing has rather soured my view of that
> >institution. Conciously or not, OSU will always be associated in my mind with
> >the shootings in the sixties (?) and the Brack case.
>
> Hello???? The shootings were at Kent State!
*And* they were in 1970.
FYI, there was in fact, a *bigger* riot on the OSU campus on the same
weekend as the one at Kent State; however the National Guard wasn't
called for that one. Why? Because the riot at OSU was over a football
game and the one at Kent State was political.
--
-ed falk, sun microsystems
sun!falk, falk@sun.com
card-carrying ACLU member.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: garvey@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (Heather Garvey)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.044336.18614@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 8 Dec 1991 04:43:36 GMT
kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
>As a counterexample, a tennis class cannot kick a recreational player
>off the courts at IMPE, the intermural physical education building.
Wow. Here you can. There is a priority list on the fence stating
the order of precedence. Starting with Varsity (during practice times),
classes (during class times), on down to people-not-even-connected-with-
the-Univ.
The general rule at labs here seems to be: You can do anything you
want, even to the point of just sitting there and watching the screen saver
make pretty designs *as*long*as*no*one*is*waiting*for*a*machine. You have
obviously never had to get a paper typed up for a class in an hour only
to find the lab packed, a huge line, and your paper will be late
because some person is playing a game. Would you allow someone to just sit
there and stare at the screen saver with a huge line waitng? Under your
'we must have freedom absolutely' attitude, you would have to let them
sit there, taking up a machine. They have a valid purpose in starting at it,
just as I would have a valid purpose in playing a MUD. The question is
whether or not printing/writing a paper for a class is more important
when it comes to "I'd-sell-my-grandmother-for-a-machine" capacity in
a Univ. computing lab.
Now, you might be saying, "But that's a silly example - staring at
an empty screen." Well, tell one of the kids trying to get their Pascal
project finished, fifteenth in line for a machine, that MUDing is just as
important and *surely* they can see the sociopolitical ramifications of
maintaining absolute academic freedom. They will most likely brain you
with their textbook and take your machine....:-) To them, being
denied a machine because of MUD is as silly as being denied a machine
because someone loves a screen saver....
--
"We are women. We are Bolt Masters!" | Heather "Moose" Garvey
-- Kim and I, while helping to | garvey@scl.cwru.edu
build the Glaser 120 Loft. | Biochemist-In-Training
| Back to School. Whee.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: michael@iastate.edu (Michael M Huang)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1991 05:11:00 GMT
Heh. All these talks about who should be kicked off the terminal depending
on what is on the screen (mudding or IRCing). What if you have a multiple
window environment? I can always have at least one "academic" window open
at all time while "mudding" so that I can be labeled as a "legit" user.
What then? Soon, the admin would get pissed off and ban the games altogether.
It is best for all mud players/coders to respect other "legit" users. Use
common sense, you know who they are (those fanatically confused people with
programs due next day and walking around blabbering about no free terminals :)
Class assignments cannot be delayed (period). Mudding can. Come mudding some
other day cuz muds will still be around (some of 'em :).
Classworks cant wait. Simple to the point.
-michael
Vincent's Hollow
--
Michael M. Huang MAC Slave at High Tc Update
(michael@IAState.Edu) Superconductivity Info. Center
Opinions are my own & noone else's. Ames Labs, ISU, Ames, Iowa, USA
"If train stations are where trains stop, how 'bout 'em workstations?"
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: elg@usl.edu (Eric Lee Green)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.054126.9940@usl.edu>
Date: 8 Dec 91 05:41:26 GMT
References: <9112061626.AA04540@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: anon@usl.edu (Anonymous NNTP Posting)
In article <9112061626.AA04540@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> Revelation of basic information does not necessarily violate privacy.
>> Concealing *all* information pushes us into paranoid secrecy.
>>
>You know... I really should take your name (which you so proudly
>display) and the relevant address info from your email address
>and do some 'interesting' things to you which will show you that
>maybe giving out names isn't such a 'safe' activity. I won't, because
>I don't do things like that. But its something to think about.
In a previous incarnation, I ran a controversial BBS system. I made no
attempt to conceal my identity from those users who were members of
the club that the BBS was associated with -- in fact, my name and phone
number were on each and every club newsletter, and I'm still running
into people, years later, who recognize me from that era.
The point: discussion on a civilized note doesn't result in the sort
of prank EMAIL/prank calls that you'd expect from spreading your name
and (EMAIL) address around the world. Note that my .signature has my
(land) mail address and phone number in it, hardly a "secretive" thing
to do. I suspect people of paranoia when they want to get on USENET with
a pseudonym because "there's crazies out there." This is a level of
paranoia to rival that of mothers who won't let their kids play in
the front yard because "kidnappers might get them" (there were a little
over 200 kidnappings by strangers last year... if you don't have an
ex running around who wants custody of the kids, you don't have a whole
lot to worry about).
--
--
Eric Lee Green P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70506 (318) 989-8950
Internet: elg@elgamy.raidernet.com UUCP: uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg
"It's never too late for a happy childhood" -- The Doctor
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112081802.AA13104@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:02:17 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112081803.AA01076@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:03:02 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112081803.AA26294@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:03:05 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112081803.AA31181@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:03:30 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112081803.AA00532@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:03:47 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: adam@owlnet.rice.edu (Adam Justin Thornton)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.063022.28678@rice.edu>
Date: 8 Dec 91 06:30:22 GMT
Here at Rice, the policy is that legitimate work comes first, and if you are
playing a game, whether or not you have a legit window open on screen, and
someone asks you to leave, you must. Now if you can talk your way out of it:
"Aw, c'mon, man, I'm just waiting for cc to finish," that's another matter.
And some users have a problem going up to people and saying, "Off this beast
NOW!", but all in all the policy seems to work ok.
Adam
--
Adam Thornton | Opinions are mine alone, though Rice is welcome to them.
"Once in a while, you can get shown the light in the strangest of places
if you look at it right." | "To all the beautiful people out there: there
are a lot more of us than there are of you."| adam@owlnet.rice.edu | 64,928
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: pjg@acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.072506.25215@acsu.buffalo.edu>
Date: 8 Dec 91 07:25:06 GMT
kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
|Because I'm allegedly a 1) free-speech fanatic
|4) haven't used IRC extensively, my comments are invalid.
since i (perhaps others as well) might have been interpreted this way i'll
note that i meant you don't appear to understand the problem since you've
cast it in an irrelevant context. of course i understand that you don't
think it's irrelevant. since it appears to me that you are arguing from
a faulty premise i hold that your comments are not relevant. not that
they are invalid.
|Cancel requests are seldom applied to a note from another site. I've
|never experienced "cancel wars". Also, I assume that cancel requests
|can be ignored if they seem to be coming from a site with a history
|of bad cancel requests.
assumptions are dangerous. while it's true that we have no evidence
for cancel "wars" neither do we have no evidence that illicit cancels
have never ocurred. while it's possible to ignore cancel requests if
the future of usenet depended on most sites doing so usenet would be
in trouble. it should be noted that usenet does have some other forms
of harassment that quite difficult to deal with.
[i said (more or less)]
|> "technical fixes to social problems rarely work."
[carl disagrees and notes the sucess of kill files (irc ignore)]
i disagree in turn. taking your kill file example: it depends on the
cooperation of the person you're trying to "suppress". if that person
declines to cooperate your attempt to "suppress" "harassment" will fail
or suceed at a cost you won't wish to pay.
|Ideally, if all else fails, you should be able to cut your system off
|from that user.
the ideal is hard to achieve. i don't believe you've made the case
that it needs to be.
|This may the heart of the matter. Can someone expand on these
|technical issues?
irc depends on the database being consistent at all sites. if it's not
things don't work right. this could be fixed but not with the existing
model. if one grants a new real-time conferencing system then one can
of course design it so all of irc's warts are removed. Q lining is
stupid because it depends upon more coordination than is available in
irc.
carl i refuse to speak in the context of both the present irc and some
future perfect conjugation. we have what we have and must deal with it
the best we can. i believe that there are adequate protections in current
or fairly near term versions of irc for most things - operators are a weak
point however. the easiest way to fix that would be a single server. other
ways are in the distant future and hence belong under the topic "things
i'd like to see someday".
i don't think this has anything to do with acad-freedom so i'm not
sending it there.
--
pjg@acsu.buffalo.edu / rutgers!ub!pjg / pjg@ubvms (Bitnet)
opinions found above are mine unless marked otherwise.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.irc] Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <9112081957.AA11350@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 07:57:04 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: t891368@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Mark)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID:
Date: 8 Dec 91 13:39:36 GMT
References: <1991Dec3.173457.4181@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Dec3.213721.6223@eff.org> <1991Dec6.021420.5399@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Njuiz noveles nova newes)
gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article hrose@eff.org (Helen Trillian Rose) writes:
>> Carl> And (maybe) stop text
>> Carl> from a user on another server from going through the op's system
>> Carl> for some period of time.
>>
>>Very hard to implement.
>Actually, it's easy to implement and so fascist that we never have.
>I'm surprised that Carl would recommend even thinking about this.
>Fortunately, our sense of freedom of speech is sufficiently strong...
Ahem... excuse me :)
*wink*
Mark
mark@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au
mark@gus.bf.rmit.oz.au
I've hugged Loopy(tm)
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112090249.AA23307@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 14:49:03 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi>
Date: 8 Dec 91 15:30:45 GMT
References: <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> <1991Dec7.061635.29837@acsu.buffalo.edu> <1991Dec7.191303.16491@eff.org> <1991Dec7.234814.14230@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@nntp.hut.fi (Usenet pseudouser id)
In-Reply-To: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sauna.cs.hut.fi
>points boil down to: "You should remove kill to prevent its abuse; no,
>it's technically impossible." Leads to rather boring discussion.
Allow kill for everybody with no artificial limits on who is
'privileged'. Seems to work on Usenet.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: steiner@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu (Jason Steiner)
Message-ID: <1991Dec8.155639.5510@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Subject: Re: Gaming
Date: 8 Dec 91 15:56:39 EST
it's really not that difficult to handle mudding/irc/gaming in university
computer labs. i'm an avid mudder & a computer consultant here at u of
toledo & we have very few problems with it.
first - the administration generally takes a kindly (or at least tolerant
view of gamers. one of the profs has even taken the time to install some
games (nethack, hunt, etc) on his own hd space.
second - we've got priorities: games are generally allowed unless there are
more important uses for the machines, i.e. papers.
third - things are even better in my case 'cause i have my own computer &
phone line which i use for data exclusively.
basically it comes down to mutual respect: if the admins actually support
gaming the gamers will understand that when they are asked to get f it's
not just because some ogre wants to spoil their fun & comply. likewise, if
gamers respect academic uses of computer systems the admin is much more
likely to leave them be when resources -are- available.
and you can avoid this almost completely (except for the issue of nettraffic)
by staying out of the labs altogether.
intolerance in general is just -no fun- & causes a lot more problems than
just leaving things be. being a dictator or a rebel takes too much work.
it certainly isn't constructive.
just my $2.00, van
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: a-scheinine@uiuc.edu (Alan Scheinine)
Message-ID: <9112090547.AA02147@uy.ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Sender: u10534@uy.ncsa.uiuc.edu
Date: 8 Dec 91 17:47:44 GMT
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Gaming
Do people who play games look around at the the environment?
Do they stop when there are other users waiting or when the
system becomes slow? Such politeness may sound like more than
can be expected of students, but consider an analogy.
Suppose most drivers paid no attention to people crossing
the street; suppose most merchants paid no attention to the
quality of what they sold; suppose that when you put your cloths
into a washing machine in your building's laundry room,
they would be stolen unless you stayed to watch; suppose each
Monday the parking lot had many shards of glass from revelers
tossing-out empty bottles. Whether or not such events are
common varies from community to community. The point is:
the LAW does not prevent these 'small injustices' in most cases.
The rules provide guidelines for those who want to be fair,
but enforcers of the law cannot cope with quadrillions of
situations in which the law applies each day in any community.
Back to the computer room. If enforcement of gaming rules
comes only from the system administration and from users who
want to use the computer for homework, then the 'community' of
users is like the nightmare-city I described. To be more
precise, it is not necessary to say the games are less important.
Rather, I say that there needs to be a way of establishing a
consensus among users as to what is important. (Like a community,
you won't get 100 percent agreement, of course. The issue is,
what is typical behaviour.) The idea that typically people playing
games would decide for themselves to log-out when the computer
room gets crowded, does that sound absurd, a fantasy? My point
is that if they don't, if enforcement is needed to rein-in
people; then there will forever be a game of cat and mouse,
with endless discussions concerning techniques of enforcement.
I am not knowledgeable about system administration vis a vis
gaming. I think that the quality of life in a community is
is not controlled by the efforts of law enforcement, whereas
the debate about gaming on computers seems to often focus on
rules and policy. Perhaps that is only because of the focus of
the newsgroup comp.admin.policy.
Alan Scheinine
a-scheinine@uiuc.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mgm8426@sigma.tamu.edu (R.Michael Litchfield)
Subject: Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <8DEC199118310097@sigma.tamu.edu>
Date: 8 Dec 1991 23:31:00 GMT
In article <23463@hoptoad.uucp>, tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes...
> THIS
>INCLUDES A CONTRACT OF CONFIDENTIALITY. In other words, the sender of
>an unsolicited message has no right to enforce any contract of secrecy
>with regard to that message.
What consititutes solicitation of a message? Couldn't including an e-mail
address at the bottom of a posted mesage be consider a soliticitation for
responses? Clearly it would be if the posted message also included a line like
"Comments?" or "What do you think?"
>Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com
-Michael
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.003623.2686@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 9 Dec 91 00:36:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: murdoch.1991Dec9.003623.2686
References: <1991Dec7.191303.16491@eff.org> <1991Dec7.234814.14230@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
In article <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>Allow kill for everybody with no artificial limits on who is
>'privileged'. Seems to work on Usenet.
This was tried, and failed, on the "anarchy net".
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: chooper@cc.curtin.edu.au (Todd Hooper)
Subject: Re: Schools that outlaw on-line searches of library catalogs
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.122907.10985@cc.curtin.edu.au>
Date: 9 Dec 91 03:29:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: cc.1991Dec9.122907.10985
References: <1991Nov22.155626.11919@eff.org> <1991Nov22.183858.26504@ms.uky.edu> <1991Dec6.172031.26982@midway.uchicago.edu>
In article , falk@peregrine.Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes:
> In article <1991Dec6.172031.26982@midway.uchicago.edu>, mack23@sam.spc.uchicago.edu (Chris Walsh) writes:
>> In article <1991Nov25.120702.10871@cc.curtin.edu.au> chooper@cc.curtin.edu.au (Todd Hooper) writes:
>> >
>> >On a side note, this whole OSU thing has rather soured my view of that
>> >institution. Conciously or not, OSU will always be associated in my mind with
>> >the shootings in the sixties (?) and the Brack case.
>>
>> Hello???? The shootings were at Kent State!
>
> *And* they were in 1970.
...and I was wrong!
Actually, I wasn't referring to the Kent State shootings by the National Guard,
but the 'lone man in the tower' shootings (which were somewhere else anyway!).
Todd
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112091532.AA21415@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 9 Dec 91 03:32:39 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Network utilization by MUD players (was Re: Gaming)
Message-ID: <9112091533.AA19780@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 9 Dec 91 03:33:10 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Gaming, and various commentary
Message-ID: <9112091534.AA23952@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 9 Dec 91 03:34:02 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112091640.AA26610@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 9 Dec 91 04:40:27 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: dcw11111@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Blackmore)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.062011.8804@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1991 06:20:11 GMT
michael@iastate.edu (Michael M Huang) writes:
>Heh. All these talks about who should be kicked off the terminal depending
>on what is on the screen (mudding or IRCing). What if you have a multiple
>window environment? I can always have at least one "academic" window open
>at all time while "mudding" so that I can be labeled as a "legit" user.
>What then? Soon, the admin would get pissed off and ban the games altogether.
This is true, and I do it quite a bit. However, many of the people who are on
muds and IRC have no academic work to do on UNIX, or they don't know enough
about NCSA to add another session.
>It is best for all mud players/coders to respect other "legit" users. Use
>common sense, you know who they are (those fanatically confused people with
>programs due next day and walking around blabbering about no free terminals :)
>Class assignments cannot be delayed (period). Mudding can. Come mudding some
>other day cuz muds will still be around (some of 'em :).
I agree wholeheartedly. However, this is too idealistic. Not all people
agree, and it is those people who cause me so much strife.
IN ANOTHER ARTICLE:
someone said something about 'the person in question resolved his own problems'
and though I don't remember if they were referring to a comment I made or not,
I will clarify: The person I was referring to in an earlier article was not
the person who caused all of the problems in the labs last year.
Dean Wagner "Several years ago I said goodbye
Bmore@uiuc.edu to my own sanity"
dcw11111@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu - 'I Don't Mind at All'
Blackmore@MUDs.MUCKs.MUSHs Bourgeois Tagg
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: bav@hobbes.ksu.ksu.edu (Brick Verser)
Subject: Network utilization by MUD players (was Re: Gaming)
Date: 9 Dec 91 09:41:57 GMT
Message-ID:
In article <1991Dec06.180003.10985@groucho> djanson@doc.ee.uidaho.edu (David Janson) writes:
>If anyone has any hard figures on this subject, I'd appreciate looking at them.
I ran NNSTAT here on Thursday, Nov 21, 6am to 6pm. We have a policy which
supposedly prohibits MUD playing between 8am and midnight on school days, so
there shouldn't have been too much MUD activity. But MUD turned out to be
the number 4 application behind BITNET, NETNEWS, and FTP. It outpaced
ordinary TELNET and SMTP that day (dunno how representative that Thursday
was). MUD ports represented about 6% of the total traffic, or about
32 megabytes in those 12 hours (740 bytes/sec).
I did the same test running from Friday night about 10pm to Monday about 3am
(3171 minutes) and MUD was the single biggest application. MUD was about
30% of our total while FTP, NETNEWS, and BITNET were each about 15%. The
total MUD traffic was about 460 megabytes (in 190K seconds is 2400 bytes
per second). 30 minutes peaks were much higher than average, but still
only a tiny bump for a T1 connection. We have no servers here, so all
of the MUD traffic represents our folks playing the game on distant machines.
So, while MUD playing here isn't a problem for our T1 connection, it could
be troublesome to a site with a 56KB connection. Indeed, before we upgraded
our Internet link about a year ago, the MUD players were requesting we
enhance the 56KB connection we had at the time; seems interactive response
time wasn't really good enough for real-time MUD battles.
--Brick
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Reply-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Precedence: bulk
To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Errors-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk-request
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1991 10:29:31 -0500
X-Digest-Sender: "William W. Arnold"
Message-Id: <199112091529.AA11519@eff.org>
Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Mon Dec 9 10:28:37 EST 1991
[For information on how to get a much smaller edited version of the
list, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send acad-freedom caf
- Billy ]
In this issue:
gl8f@fermi.clas.Vi : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
hayes@python.cis.o : Re: The dread F word
falk@peregrine.Eng : Re: Schools that outlaw on-line searches of library catal
falk@peregrine.Eng : Re: (soc.women) NPR report on Goya's nude(was re: feminis
elg@usl.edu (Eric : Re: (comp.org.eff.talk) Re: Finger & Liberty
jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyr : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
t891368@otto.bf.rm : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (alt.irc) Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
gl8f@fermi.clas.Vi : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
chooper@cc.curtin. : Re: Schools that outlaw on-line searches of library catal
u10534@uy.ncsa.uiu : (none)
kadie@eff.org (Car : Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
The addresses for the list are now:
comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list
or caf-talk@eff.org
listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions
(send email with the line "help" for details.)
caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Gaming, and various commentary
Message-ID: <9112092256.AA26361@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 9 Dec 91 10:56:05 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.141030.27579@ulowell.ulowell.edu>
Date: 9 Dec 91 14:10:30 GMT
In article <1991Dec6.160325.23414@ms.uky.edu>, sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
|> This sounds to me like poor planning on the part of the
|> administration. Why aren't there enough resources to go around? What
|> is the administration doing to create enough computing resources and
|> insure the availability.
|>
Well, since we are a State school in Massachusetts, there is nothing _we_ can
do to make more resources available. Can you say "Money"? It has nothing to do
with poor planning on our part. There is no reason why we should devote budget
for resources for non-academic reasons, when were barely have enough for
academics. Our policy reflects our only recourse.
|> One has to ask: Why is there crime? Are the students a bunch of
|> criminals?
|>
Huh? I never said they were criminals...
|> When they dropped the ridiculous resource limits here, and started
|> handing out accounts a student could keep for the duration of their
|> stay at the university, some interesting things happened: (1) Account
|> stealing dropped off dramatically. About the only people that steal
|> accounts now are those who aren't actually going to school here. (2)
|> Resource consumption did not rise dramatically. (3) Students were a
|> lot happier.
|>
Not here...it seems they feel it is OK to pass around passwords to people on
the outside. Several students hve gotten into trouble over this already.
--
=======================================================================
Brian O'Neill - Systems Manager, Computer Science (508) 934-3645
University of Massachusetts at Lowell
Internet: oneill@ulowell.edu UUCP: harvard!ulowell!oneill
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: Gaming, and various commentary
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.143722.15293@ms.uky.edu>
Date: 9 Dec 91 14:37:22 GMT
jasonp@cunix3.Prime.COM (Jason R. Pascucci) writes:
>
>Wes, a few question: What do you mean by 'examining' muds?
As MUDders have become more common here at UK, I've logged
into a few MUDs, just to look around. On those MUDs that
I "visited", I asked the players about their use of the
game. The vast majority of the people I asked indicated
that they were merely players. I've also spoken with several
MUD maintainers; they indicated that the vast majority of
their users were players.
I realize that my "sample" was small and unrepresentative;
that's why I asked for more comprehensive numbers in my
earlier posting.
>Okay, breaking keyboards is a little extreme, but you can
>usualy find out who did it, and make them pay for it.
Ha! That's rich. We have roughly 800-100 people cruising
through our labs every day. When equipment is damaged, the
responsible party usually just scoots out the door before
anyone notices.
--
morgan@ms.uky.edu |Wes Morgan, not speaking for| ....!ukma!ukecc!morgan
morgan@engr.uky.edu |the University of Kentucky's| morgan%engr.uky.edu@UKCC
morgan@ie.pa.uky.edu |Engineering Computing Center| morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: dl2p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Douglas Allen Luce)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID:
Date: 9 Dec 91 14:56:54 GMT
References: <1991Dec7.191303.16491@eff.org> <1991Dec7.234814.14230@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi>
<1991Dec9.003623.2686@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <1991Dec9.003623.2686@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Excerpts from netnews.alt.irc: 9-Dec-91 Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email ..
Greg Lindahl@fermi.clas. (240)
> In article <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki
> Kuoppala) writes:
> >Allow kill for everybody with no artificial limits on who is
> >'privileged'. Seems to work on Usenet.
> This was tried, and failed, on the "anarchy net".
The "Usenet kill" and "IRC kill" are not homologous concepts, and one
cannot really compare them in such a way. However the "anarchy net" was
hardly a fair trial of the concept of an open IRC kill. The current
network, rife with indiscriminate operators, is probably a more fair
indication of what happens with an open IRC kill.
Douglas Luce
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.151719.10743@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1991 15:17:19 GMT
In an effort to share the fun (and to give myself more time for
thesis work) ...
Wanted: Folks to edit one issue of CAF-News each
Short Job Description:
Given a file containing, on average, about 75 CAF-talk articles,
choose the approximately 12 best and write a short paraphrase of each
articles.
Job Requirements: Email access to me (kadie@eff.org)
Things that make the jobs easier:
Current versions of "nn" and "perl".
Compensation: You will be listed as editor for the issue you edit.
You will have the satisfaction of doing something useful and maybe
even important.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From helen Fri Dec 20 12:24:13 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA10163
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Fri, 20 Dec 1991 17:24:32 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID:
Sender: news@newshost.anu.edu.au
References: <1991Dec3.173457.4181@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Dec6.100928.8950@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org>
Date: 9 Dec 91 15:53:26 GMT
kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>[...]
>>A second hint is that when someone is KILLed on IRC, all operators see
>>it and this provides a form of checks and balances on operator
>>behavior.
>With /WALL removed, with flood control, with channel operators, what
>are the advantages of allowing the irc operator on one server to /KILL
>users on all the other systems? Is this power still necessary? (Can
>you give examples of why?)
we're working on reducing operator powers, believe me :)
>>Some IRC operators ignore such complaints; sometimes a
>>complaint to a systems administrator provides satisfaction, sometimes
>>the irc operator is a systems administrator and the only recourse is
>>to try to kick a server off of IRC. Distributed software is fun.
>[...]
>Just as an email administrator's jurisdiction is limited to his or her
>site, just as a Netnews administrators jurisdiction is limited to his
>or her site, so an IRC operators's jurisdiction should be limited to
>his or her site. IRC will not be fully distributed until the
>jurisdiction of IRC operators is so distributed.
There are sevral differences here though:
1. news works mainly via 'relaying' and through batch operations which
allows a news administrator to act locally with effect. This batching
also allows you to cancel an article before it reaches theoutside world.
On IRC you have no such luxury since its 'real-time'. Just the same as
there are a few nntp servers which anyone can port at, there are client-
open servers.
2. I dont know that postmaster's have any 'extraordinary' powers except that
they are usually root and look after the local 'sendmail.cf' which again
will work via a batching system or create a queue for problems with
outbound mail (a la uucp).
3. Because some IRC server administrators show a certain carelessness when
setting up their server, bad ircd.conf files get written which can cause
headaches unless Operators have wide reaching powers.
If each NSS on the T1 network in the USA had a 'caretaker' who booted it,
setup its routing table, etc. then you have a similar job to the IRC
admin/operator. Now if those NSS's werent very intelligent and you had
College Park to Ann Arbor via Palo Alto and Seattle, then you'd want it
fixed pretty quickly so that it went via Jersey. Do you wait for the local
NSS caretaker at each node on the bad route to get to work, notice the
problem and wait for others so that the change is fixed when all the culprit
NSSs are fixed or give the caretaker at each NSS the power to fix the
situation without the need for others ? Whilst there are IRC servers
connected to each other in a net (esp. if we ever allow circles), we are
always going to need IRC operators to keep the net in working order and to
do that they need to be able to act with 'global power'.
Making the server any more intelligent requires that it lookup metrics
for hosts from internal routing tables or similar. To do that means the
server should run as a root. Big stumbling block. With servers as they
are now, there is little or no problems unless the net itself goes
crazy (cant be avoided by us plebs) or we get a juvenile operator on.
-avalon
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID:
Sender: news@newshost.anu.edu.au
References: <1991Dec6.100928.8950@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> <1991Dec6.160029.22601@ms.uky.edu> <1991Dec6.180634.14594@eff.org>
Date: 9 Dec 91 16:15:50 GMT
kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:
>[...]
>>Email administrators can refuse to handle mail from a given user or site.
>>If a user subscribes to a ton of mailing lists, then goes for 3 months
>>without reading his mail, I'm going to stop accepting mail for him from
>>those mailing lists (or ask the lists to unsubscribe him until he and I
>>have a chance to talk).
>[...]
>>Netnews administrators can refuse to handle news articles from a given
>>user or site. An example of this is michigan.com (CAT-TALK), which refuses
>>to deliver mail/Usenet to/from certain sites (those sites whose users have
>>annoyed the admin at CAT-TALK).
>[...]
>>IRC administrators can refuse to handle messages from a given user or site.
>An IRC operator can only refuse to handle a message from a given user
>by /KILLing that user from the *whole* network. Similary, an IRC
>operator can only refuse to handle messages from a given site by
>having that site expelled from the *whole* network.
>For example, say the admin at CAT-TALK dislikes me.
>email -- He can stop my email from going to/through his computer, but
>he can't stop my email from going to/through other computers.
>Netnews -- He can stop my Netnews articles from going to/through his
>computer, but he can't stop my articles from going to/through other
>comptuers.
>IRC -- (If, however, he is an IRCnet operator) He cannot stop my IRC
>messages from going to/through his computer, except by stopping my
>messages from going to/through all other computers.
ok, if it were possible to stop messages from a user or host or
domain going to users on *my* server but allowed them to pass through
to other servers, would it be a good thing to do ?
its quite do-able :)
would anyone use it ? remember, in such a type of action, you are deciding
for *all* users of your server where they can and cant see messages from
and whether or not they want to. thats a nasty form of censorship.
-avalon
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <9112100227.AA06772@rose.cit.cornell.edu>
Sender: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu
References:
Date: 9 Dec 91 16:27:52 GMT
Matthias Urlichs thoughtfully provides a translation, then says:
> It's generally agreed that the article is as bad as it sounds. Someone
> talked with the author on the phone, and she didn't seem to be interested
> in learning the facts. :-(
In my impression, the article was basically factually correct, although it
clearly took a anti-Usenet, as well as "yellow journalistic", slant.
The Usenet DOES carry millions upon millions of bytes of pornography of
all types, including non-consensual, bestial, pedophiliac, etc. etc. etc.
I agree with the author in her opinion that many taxpayers, and certainly
many lawmakers, would be rather dismayed to find that any (and it is a
miniscule amount) of their money was being used to fund alt.sex.
I'm rather surprised, actually, that more noise hasn't been made about alt.
sex.* by this point. I suspect it will be coming soon...
None of this is intended to mean that I personally disapprove of alt.sex -- I
read it regularly myself. Most of us probably do. I think many of us also
probably feel somewhat guilty that we are able to put our computers to such
unusual use. I know I do at times.
-----
Eric Scheirer -- Cornell University / The MITRE Corporation
HORJ@vax5.cit.cornell.edu / (607) 253-2431
There are three kinds of people in the world:
1. Those who know how many kind of people there are in the world,
2. Those who don't.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec9.175822.20496@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
References: <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi> <1991Dec9.003623.2686@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 91 17:58:22 GMT
In article dl2p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Douglas Allen Luce) writes:
> However the "anarchy net" was
>hardly a fair trial of the concept of an open IRC kill.
I suspect that you don't know of what I'm refering to. While the
gateway was up between ANet and EFNet, slopoke allowed anyone to oper.
The result was consistant abuse by a couple of individuals. You may or
may not consider it to be a fair trial, but it proves that some people
are capable of abusing kill to a much larger degree than any current
operator.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: nbc2134@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil (Robert F Solon)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
Message-ID: <9112091943.AA00320@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil>
Sender: nbc2134@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil
References: <1991Dec9.151719.10743@eff.org>
Date: 9 Dec 91 18:43:47 GMT
>
> In an effort to share the fun (and to give myself more time for
> thesis work) ...
>
> Wanted: Folks to edit one issue of CAF-News each
>
> Short Job Description:
>
> Given a file containing, on average, about 75 CAF-talk articles,
> choose the approximately 12 best and write a short paraphrase of each
> articles.
>
> Job Requirements: Email access to me (kadie@eff.org)
>
> Things that make the jobs easier:
> Current versions of "nn" and "perl".
>
> Compensation: You will be listed as editor for the issue you edit.
> You will have the satisfaction of doing something useful and maybe
> even important.
>
> - Carl
> --
> Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
> I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
>
--
Bob Solon, rsolon@dsac.dla.mil
Administrative Information Branch -- "We Code, You Explode!!"
Directorate of Resource Management Systems (APCAPS)
DLA Systems Automation Center, DSAC-BCC (614) 238-8256 AV: 850-8256
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: hrose@eff.org (Helen Trillian Rose)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
In-Reply-To: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU's message of Mon, 9 Dec 91 17:58:22 GMT
Message-ID:
Sender: hrose@eff.org (Helen Trillian Rose)
References: <1991Dec8.153045.4177@nntp.hut.fi>
<1991Dec9.003623.2686@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
<1991Dec9.175822.20496@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1991 19:27:09 GMT
Greg> == Greg Lindahl
Greg> In article dl2p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Douglas Allen Luce) writes:
> However the "anarchy net" was
>hardly a fair trial of the concept of an open IRC kill.
Greg> I suspect that you don't know of what I'm refering to. While the
Greg> gateway was up between ANet and EFNet, slopoke allowed anyone to
Greg> oper. The result was consistant abuse by a couple of
Greg> individuals. You may or may not consider it to be a fair trial,
Greg> but it proves that some people are capable of abusing kill to a
Greg> much larger degree than any current operator.
Not counting Vanity-Server-Net.
--Helen
--
Helen Trillian Rose irc operators mailing list
Electronic Frontier Foundation operlist-request@cs.bu.edu
Systems and Networks Administration Flames to:
women-not-to-be-messed-with@eff.org
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Subject: Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <23509@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: 9 Dec 91 20:00:15 GMT
References: <1991Dec6.181834.29459@midway.uchicago.edu> <23463@hoptoad.uucp> <1991Dec9.185534.840@midway.uchicago.edu>
>In article <23463@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes:
>[my reposting of the news.announce.newusers dogma on posting e-mail]
>>That is incorrect. The situation with regard to paper media is
>>precisely the opposite. The recipient of an unsolicited message has
>>_no_ obligations with respect to that message or any implied or
>>explicit contract the sender of that message may seek to attach.
In article <1991Dec9.185534.840@midway.uchicago.edu> elle@midway.uchicago.edu
writes:
>I do hate to say this, Tim, but that's utter bullshit. US courts
>have upheld, on multiple occasions, authors' copyright on letters.
>Biographers have been forced to paraphrase extensively when a
>subject's estate refuses permission to reprint letters.
Yes, they have; for instance, the Church of Scientology recently used
this argument to suppress an unflattering biography of L. Ron Hubbard
that quoted extensively from his unpublished letters. The biographers
were not the recipients of the letters, though, so that has nothing to
do with this issue. The rights of a recipient are different from the
rights of someone who simply manages to obtain copies.
The policy I discussed is longstanding with respect to journalists,
columnists, and essayists; it is well known by professional editors
(ask one and see); and when challenged to produce a single court case
in which a person was successfully sued for publicizing unsolicited
letters sent to them, the anti-publication side falls silent.
--
Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com
"My indifference to that comment can only be described as sexual in intensity."
-- Martin Terman, rec.arts.comics
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Date: 9 Dec 1991 21:02:27 +0100
Message-ID:
References: <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.smurf.sub.org
In alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk, article <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de>,
kris@tpki.toppoint.de (Kristian Koehntopp) writes:
< Please note the followup-to. Not another USENET censorship
< diskussion in alt.sex, please!
<
< The german version of EMMA has published in its current issue
< an article about the USENET, an academic network used mainly
< for transmission of pornographic material.
<
Rough translation follows. The article implies that all porn consumers are
male; this isn't translatable very well because the english language doesn't
have a separate female form of "student" or "professor".
EMMA reveals: German professors and students participate in porn network.
Profs and students, sitting in front of their university computers, don't
always work. The 40.000 research computers, installed world-wide, spit out
not only scientific, but also pornographic data. Text and pictures, hand-
drawn and photographed, from the obscene to the violent. World-wide,
researchers delight in feeding pornos into their computers and requesting
pornos. In their paid work time of course. Right now, the first porn networks
are uncovered in the US. Now EMMA reveals: Our professors and students
participate in this macabre game. On 1297 german university computers,
hard-core pornos are viewed daily.
[ Story about Prof Miller, who's much more interested in torturing a woman
with electric shocks than on work on Finals ]
We don't know who "Professor Miller" is; it's a code name of somebody who
enhance their dull uniersity existence with computer sex and hard-core
pornography. On the federal budget, of course. This is because USENET is a
program used mainly by universities [ list deleted ] and private research
institutes [ small list ].
[ Short paragraph guessing at 2 million readers world-wide and saying that
electronic mail is fast and makes sense, e.g. distributing earthquake data ]
But who's interested in earthquake measurements? Statistic from October show
that Mr. Scientist isn't really interested in geologic or physical sciences;
"alt.sex" is at the top of the list: 220.000 readers in October alone.
Compare this with "sci.physics.fusion", where data from nuclear physics are
transmitted; it was accessed only 32.000 times.
People like the sub-group "alt.sex.pictures": moving porno pictures, for
example, a gang rape of a tied-up woman. Transporting a "moving picture"
around the globe is particularly difficult and hence expensive: tay payers
pay $58.000 for the four top sex groups. Not including work time of
highly-paid academics converting their office to a peep show. This should be
interesting for the [ people controlling how state funds are spent ], if not
the state's prosecuting attorneys.
The offers in "alt.sex" can hold their own compared to every well-stocked
porn dealer. Pictures of women forced to have sex with dogs or horses,
barbecued, tortured with a lighted candle or with iron rods. Everything in
technically superb quality, color or b/w. With a few keystrokes, any student
with access to the university computer network can make copies for their
home computer in their dormitory.
Most of these pictures come from the US, where they're made with painstaking
detail work. [ People posting to a.b.p.e will be delighted in this
asessment; unfortunately, the author of this article has admitted that she
didn't look at these newsgroups herself... ] For now, Germans seem to be
consumers, not producers of the jack-off pictures.
The same olds for pornographic texts, all written in English, the language of
the scientific community. They either contain requests ("How can I tie up my
girdfriend", "My girlfriend is allergic to rubber -- what shall i do?, I hate
the taste of menstruation blood -- any ideas?) or verbal [ derogatory term
for statement -- I can't find my dictionary right now ] of many kinds.
The victims of these phantasies of violence, besides women, are gays and
children. For example, "The Real Elvis" threatens another user with:
"Homosexuals are second-class people. When I find out who you really are, you
gay pig, I'll ram my shoe up your ass."
And in "alt.sex.bestiality" someone reports the (real or imaginary) rape of
his adughter. "I sensed my cock pushing through the resistance of her hymen,
she cried. For the first time, I filled her with sperm. She said, Thank you
Father. That was the best birthday present I ever had..."
In America, the graduate porn consumers have been disturbed: A "Seattle
Times" reporter revealed the sex programs on USENET on October 15th. "We
didn't know we had anything pornographic on our computers", Ivan Danserau,
the responsible person in the "State Auditores Office", says.
Consumers of porn programs are anxious: One day later, 16 October, 10:06 pm,
some hints are posted: Don't talk to reporters! "If a reporter asks you,
show him the good, clean programs, not the dirty, tasteless ones. If USA
Today hears about this, Congress will pass a law against it !"
But how about Germany? The Old Boys still play with DataSex. Even EMMA hadn't
heard about this if two physicists hadn't given us access to "alt.sex".
On their travels through the data jungle they accidentally saw the porn file,
and they were shocked. "Nothing against erotica", they think, but this is
demeaning to humans, women, and gays, and shouldn't be available on the work
place. They don't want to reveal their names because "we're sure that the
many people who love the porn area will take revenge. And we have a
scientific career ahead of us." Re career: It wouldn't look too well if it
becomes known which professor spends his highly-paid work time as a porn
consumer.
Computer Science students, hackers, [ female form of "hacker ]: Find out who
among your fellow students and your professors has fun with porno programs.
Look over their shoulder when they wait for their four-color printout because
porn graphics need some minutes to print. Catch them in the act, or sting
them like the Dutch these days. They offered porn programs via computer, and
logged who was interested:
2000 requests within only three days! "An invasion of horny men", the offerer
complains -- and published, via computer, the 2000 requests. The printout,
which EMMA has access to, doesn't show names, but the codes for universities.
For example, we know that on August 6, on 9:26 pm, the institute of
theoretical physics at the university of Cologne was interested in the
pornos. Wouldn't the dean of the university be interested in _that_ ?
Complain at [ the people responsible for the university and for the spending
of money by it ] ! Tell us what you find out ! Let's kick out those graduate
porn consumers !
<
< URSULA OTT
====
Reactions so far: One TV network showed interest. One university has turned
off alt.sex.* as well as some other "offensive" newsgroups, like sci.military.
Several others have unsubscribed to alt.*.pictures or .sounds because of the
bandwidth / storage requirements.
It's generally agreed tht this article is as bad as it sounds. Someone talked
with the author on the phone, and she didn't seem to be interested in
learning the facts. :-(
--
Matthias Urlichs -- urlichs@smurf.sub.org -- urlichs@smurf.ira.uka.de /(o\
Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany -- +49-721-9612521 \o)/
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: djohnson@beowulf.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <26316@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: 9 Dec 91 23:41:05 GMT
>I'm really starting to get a bad taste for the ages old custom of
>administrators deciding for the users what is legitimate and what is
>not, especially when the object in question is a tool, such as
>a teleconferencing system.
Stay in school then, it often gets worse in the real world (ie, they
may tell you which machines can be used when working on which
contract). It is not that administrators do this to spite you
(although that may be how you feel), they often may be forced to do
this by law.
For example, at many universities, computers that are purchased using
education fees or tuition must be used only for educational work (and
this usually means class work, not some vague learning value you get
from muds or irc, or the hand-eye coordination you get from playing
tetris). If the education fees or tuition is supported by the state,
then there is nothing to keep that requirement from being law.
Now if it was your machine and you paid for it, it's a different matter.
(and a tiny recreation fee or computer center fee doesn't cut it)
--
Darin Johnson
djohnson@ucsd.edu
- I'm not a well adjusted person, but I play one on the net.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <9112100123.AA01190@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
Sender: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu
References: <1991Dec9.224515.12705@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 01:23:28 GMT
>>>>> On 9 Dec 91 22:45:15 GMT, baillod@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Brad Baillod) said:
> To Ursula Ott: (I'm assuming that this is the author; correct me if
> I'm wrong) (and if anyone in Germany can get in touch with her in
> any way, tell her this for me, and say it's from the person whose
> story she "adapted:") Congratulations. You have, I'm sure, several
> hundred deutsch marks extra for "writing" a story full of lies and
> innuendo. At the same time, you have managed to damage, if only a
> little, what is becoming the greatest communication tool of the 20th
> century. But I'm not worried, Ursula--you see, the Net will go on,
> in all its various forms. You, on the other hand, are a wispy piece
> of fluff who will dry up and blow away once you find out your
> plagiarized "article" does not stir up the uproar you anticipated.
> Long after you're unemployed, searching in vain for someone else's
> work to copy and call your own, people will be discussing sex of all
> varieties on Usenet, and "brainy scientists" will be viewing
> pornography on their computers. You, on the other hand, will be
> discussing your overdue rent with your landlord, and viewing the
> want ads in the newspaper.
> Love, Brad
> --
> Brad Baillod baillod@eecs.umich.edu
Brad,
This is entirely unnecessary and uncalled for. It only serves to
reinforce stereotypes about readers of Usenet, and hence it adds to
the problem rather than helping resolve it.
I seriously suggest that you apologize to Ursula Ott (especially since
you have not verified for yourself that she authored the EMMA article)
and attempt to post a more constructive, thought-out response.
At the very least you should retract your posting.
If the author of the EMMA article deserves condemnation for her
article, you deserve no less condemnation for the deliberate
offensiveness of your response.
I hope you can see that you are reducing yourself to a level that you
are yourself criticizing.
Manavendra K. Thakur Internet: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu
Systems Programmer, High Energy Division BITNET: thakur@cfa.BITNET
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for DECNET: CFA::thakur
Astrophysics UUCP: ...!uunet!mit-eddie!thakur
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.012943.29560@eff.org>
References: <1991Dec9.151719.10743@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 01:29:43 GMT
This is a clarification.
The ability to program in "perl" is not needed.
But the ability to run programs written in "perl v4.*"
is helpful.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: cgross@surya.UWaterloo.CA (Christian Gross)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID:
Sender: news@watserv1.waterloo.edu
References: <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 01:30:33 GMT
In urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
>In alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk, article <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de>,
> kris@tpki.toppoint.de (Kristian Koehntopp) writes:
><
>< The german version of EMMA has published in its current issue
>< an article about the USENET, an academic network used mainly
>< for transmission of pornographic material.
><
>Rough translation follows. The article implies that all porn consumers are
>male; this isn't translatable very well because the english language doesn't
>have a separate female form of "student" or "professor".
>EMMA reveals: German professors and students participate in porn network.
>Profs and students, sitting in front of their university computers, don't
>always work. The 40.000 research computers, installed world-wide, spit out
>not only scientific, but also pornographic data. Text and pictures, hand-
>drawn and photographed, from the obscene to the violent. World-wide,
>researchers delight in feeding pornos into their computers and requesting
>pornos. In their paid work time of course. Right now, the first porn networks
>are uncovered in the US. Now EMMA reveals: Our professors and students
>participate in this macabre game. On 1297 german university computers,
>hard-core pornos are viewed daily.
Well, thats interesting,
Here are my two cents,
First, about the article, Typisch Deutsch.( Typical German)
Second, with the censorship. The usenet is an open network and
is sponsered by the users. There should not be a person regulating who
sees what. Can you imagine a network as big as this one subjected to
the rules of different nations. It would be crazy. Now however if
the keeper of a site decides that they will not sponser specific groups
well then thats their affair. But if a person decides that he will
store only pornographic pictures well he bought the machine and its
his life and nobody else's. The censorship would be more headache
than its worth. Do I look at the pictures, Yes, but if it was decided
tommorrow that I don't get access because our site decided against it
then ok, thats life. About the Germans making such a big deal about this
topic, clean your own closests.....
Or have you forgotten about Tutti Frutti and those public tv sex shows
How do I know about these shows? I am from Germany!
Christian
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From warnold Wed Dec 11 13:17:57 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA07568
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Wed, 11 Dec 1991 18:18:03 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty)
Subject: Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <18356@goofy.Apple.COM>
Date: 10 Dec 91 01:52:18 GMT
References: <25NOV199121581989@zeus.tamu.edu> <1991Dec5.221557.6856@news.stolaf.edu>
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
In article <1991Dec5.221557.6856@news.stolaf.edu>, adams@agnes.acc.stolaf.edu (Samuel C. Adams) writes:
>
> Let's all take a little time to perform a public service.
> Drop a line to:
>
> root@zeus.tamu.edu
>
> and include this article. It is not net.policy to provide resources
> for this kind of communication, if it can be called that.
No, please _don't_. Mr. Litchfield would, admittedly, have to double his
intelligence to qualify as a half-wit, but blanket censorship is a ridiculous
response.
If you don't like what he has to say, and there's certainly much to dislike,
learn to use a killfile instead.
> P.S. Concerned about free speech? Me, too. The Supreme Court has held
> since 1942 that "fighting words" are _NOT_ protected.
Unless you feel that Mr. Litchfield's email was an incitement to violence,
this doesn't apply. I'd be very interested in seeing you make a case along
these lines...
> And for that matter, who said the net was free? Somebody is paying
> for all this, and not so that we can throw obscenities around, either.
Well, I'm certainly glad to have someone out there watching out for my
well-being. Sorry, Sam, I didn't elect you to be net.cop, and I _have_, in
fact, heard all those words before. Give it a rest; you might end up
looking as foolish as Mr. Litchfield.
--
Lefty (lefty@apple.com)
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112101700.AA22468@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 10 Dec 91 05:00:12 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.sex.bondage, et al.] Re: The USENET pornographic network
Message-ID: <9112101736.AA26361@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 10 Dec 91 05:36:11 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: hayes@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Patrick Hayes)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.071341.26672@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: news@cis.ohio-state.edu (NETnews )
References: <9112100227.AA06772@rose.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 07:13:41 GMT
In article <9112100227.AA06772@rose.cit.cornell.edu> escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) writes:
>None of this is intended to mean that I personally disapprove of alt.sex -- I
>read it regularly myself. Most of us probably do. I think many of us also
>probably feel somewhat guilty that we are able to put our computers to such
>unusual use. I know I do at times.
>
>Eric Scheirer -- Cornell University / The MITRE Corporation
>HORJ@vax5.cit.cornell.edu / (607) 253-2431
No I don't ever feel even remotely guilty about anything I see on USENET.
And if I were to feel guilty about something I might post, I wouldn't post
it.
Does anyone have the address for this EMMA magazine/newspaper/whatever?
---PCH
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Reply-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Precedence: bulk
To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Errors-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk-request
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 07:51:12 -0500
X-Digest-Sender: "William W. Arnold"
Message-Id: <199112101251.AA18509@eff.org>
Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Tue Dec 10 07:50:05 EST 1991
[For information on how to get a much smaller edited version of the
list, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send acad-freedom caf
- Billy ]
In this issue:
dl2p+@andrew.cmu.e : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy) Network utilization by MUD players (wa
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy) Re: Gaming, and various commentary
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
avalon@coombs.anu. : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
avalon@coombs.anu. : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
gl8f@fermi.clas.Vi : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
hrose@eff.org (Hel : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
urlichs@smurf.sub. : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy) Re: Gaming, and various commentary
nbc2134@dsacg2.dsa : Re: Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
thakur@zerkalo.har : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
kadie@eff.org (Car : Re: Wanted: Guest CAF-news editors
cgross@surya.UWate : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
The addresses for the list are now:
comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list
or caf-talk@eff.org
listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions
(send email with the line "help" for details.)
caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: baillod@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Brad Baillod)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.081641.3276@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 08:16:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: zip.1991Dec10.081641.3276
References: <1991Dec9.224515.12705@zip.eecs.umich.edu> <9112100123.AA01190@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Mr. News)
In article <9112100123.AA01190@zerkalo.harvard.edu> thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur) writes:
>Brad,
>
>This is entirely unnecessary and uncalled for. It only serves to
>reinforce stereotypes about readers of Usenet, and hence it adds to
>the problem rather than helping resolve it.
>
>I seriously suggest that you apologize to Ursula Ott (especially since
>you have not verified for yourself that she authored the EMMA article)
>and attempt to post a more constructive, thought-out response.
>
>At the very least you should retract your posting.
>
>If the author of the EMMA article deserves condemnation for her
>article, you deserve no less condemnation for the deliberate
>offensiveness of your response.
>
>I hope you can see that you are reducing yourself to a level that you
>are yourself criticizing.
Your point is taken. I've cancelled the article. My railing at
Ursula Ott (whom I did verify as the author before I posted) was
more a product of what I believe to be her borrowing of my parody.
Yes, my response to Ms. Ott was unconstructive. Therefore, I've
pulled the article. I myself hate it when people make Usenet look
bad.
To Ms. Ott (if she can read this): I apologize for what I wrote
in my response. I realize it was very offensive. I will try to
resort less to ad hominem (ad feminem?) attacks in the future.
--
Brad Baillod baillod@eecs.umich.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: adams@agnes.acc.stolaf.edu (Samuel C. Adams)
Subject: Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.090604.10942@news.stolaf.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 09:06:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1991Dec10.090604.10942
References: <25NOV199121581989@zeus.tamu.edu> <1991Dec5.221557.6856@news.stolaf.edu> <23461@hoptoad.uucp>
Sender: news@news.stolaf.edu
In article <23461@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes:
>In article <1991Dec5.221557.6856@news.stolaf.edu> adams@agnes.acc.stolaf.edu
>() writes:
>>P.S. Concerned about free speech? Me, too. The Supreme Court has held
>> since 1942 that "fighting words" are _NOT_ protected.
>
>I don't believe you _are_ concerned with free speech; it appears more
>that you are looking for an excuse to censor the inane Mr. Litchfield
>while continuing to tell yourself that you are in favor of free speech.
First, I cannot "censor" Mr. Litchfield. I may send email to his sysadmin,
pointing out apparent violations of Usenet guidelines and including samples
of his oeuvre ("eat shit and die worthless scum"). I may also send letters
to the Minneapolis Star/Tribune, complaining that the "Garfield" cartoon
strip is offensive to single white male heterosexual cat-owners who wear
loud ties. Neither of them has to listen if they don't want to; I may
only propose, not dispose. I must thank you, though, for your rather
generous assessment of my powers with regard to this matter.
(To expand on something Steve Dyer wrote, I suppose I could break
security at Litchfield's site and delete his account, or use magical
means to give him a paranoid fear of computers, or else simply break
all his fingers so that he couldn't type his postings. That would indeed
be censorship. Mea culpa.)
Second, my concern for free speech would be meaningless if it did not
grant the people who own and maintain this marvelous medium their rights
as property owners. If the Litch is correct and his system management -
composed, no doubt, of freedom-minded individuals such as yourself -
really doesn't give a damn what this person does with their computer
resources, fine. They may attach whatever conditions they like to the
privilege of Usenet access, and that includes no conditions. But free
speech means that I may complain to them, and they may choose to
withdraw this privilege based on my complaint if it pleases them. As
they said in the USSR once, we have free speech, too; you may say
anything you like - once. Litchfield may post anything he likes;
he must also accept the consequences, as his host defines them.
If he continues to post, no problem. As usual, I'll scan his work
for substance and dispose of it; I think KILL files are for the
lazy and the cynical. Part of my religion is that we never know
who may become profound.
>"Fighting words" only applies when there is an actual possibility of
>imminent violence. This is almost never the case for a network message.
True. The car wouldn't start that day, and there were patches of ice on
I-35, and it is a terribly long drive to Texas, anyway. Also, I don't
own any firearms.
>Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com
>
>"There's a real world out there, with real people. Go out and play there for
> a while and give the Usenet sandbox a rest. It will lower your stress
> levels and make the world a happier place for us all." -- Gene Spafford
Thank you. I needed that.
-- Sam (y derwydd)
--
"SO BE IT ARDANE, that no one shall tell anyone anything, least of all
thy fellows in the Craft, for fear one of you will learn something..."
- from "The Law of the Wiccca!", author unknown
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <9112100947.AA02452@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
Sender: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu
References: <1991Dec10.081641.3276@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 09:47:28 GMT
> In article <9112100123.AA01190@zerkalo.harvard.edu> thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur) writes:
>>I hope you can see that you are reducing yourself to a level that you
>>are yourself criticizing.
> Your point is taken. I've cancelled the article. My railing at
> Ursula Ott (whom I did verify as the author before I posted) was
> more a product of what I believe to be her borrowing of my parody.
> Yes, my response to Ms. Ott was unconstructive. Therefore, I've
> pulled the article. I myself hate it when people make Usenet look
> bad. To Ms. Ott (if she can read this): I apologize for what I
> wrote in my response. I realize it was very offensive. I will try
> to resort less to ad hominem (ad feminem?) attacks in the future.
Thank you. You've redeemed yourself. Now let's put our efforts
toward responding more appropriately to the points raised in the EMMA
article.
Manavendra K. Thakur Internet: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu
Systems Programmer, High Energy Division BITNET: thakur@cfa.BITNET
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for DECNET: CFA::thakur
Astrophysics UUCP: ...!uunet!mit-eddie!thakur
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network
Message-ID:
Date: 10 Dec 91 15:45:55 GMT
>>>>> "Eric" == J Eric Townsend (jet@karazm.math.uh.edu)
>> The german version of EMMA has published in its current issue
>> an article about the USENET, an academic network used mainly
>> for transmission of pornographic material.
Eric> Go look at the stats in the news.* groups. alt.sex.* is up at the top.
Eric> Yes Virginia, a big chunk of USENET's users read the alt.sex.* hierarchy.
Eric> That's a simple fact, not a moral judgement.
group readers % of all newsreaders
------------------------------------------------------------------------
alt.sex 210000 12.7%
rec.arts.erotica 140000 8.7%
alt.sex.bondage 99000 6.1%
alt.sex.pictures 93000 5.7%
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica 72000 4.4%
alt.sex.movies 61000 3.8%
alt.sex.pictures.d 53000 3.2%
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d 51000 3.1%
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.female 42000 2.6%
alt.sex.pictures.female 33000 2.0%
alt.sex.motss 31000 1.9%
alt.sex.masturbation 11000 0.7%
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.male 11000 0.7%
alt.sex.wanted 8200 0.5%
Yes, Eric, that's a lot of people, but it hardly justifies saying that
USENET is "used mainly for transmission of pornographic material".
Well, we might look at volume instead. Totalling the traffic for the
above groups (ignoring crossposting for now), we get 51031.4 kbyte/month.
Doing the same for all groups, we get 747191 kbyte/month, i.e. the
sex groups constitutes 6.83% of the traffic.
So, we ignored crossposting above. According to the UUNET traffic
totals, there is currently (Nov) 22330.362 kbytes/day or 669910.86
kbytes/month, i.e. we overestimated the traffic by 11% by ignoring
crossposting. For the sex groups, crossposting varies, with
alt.sex.bondage at 1%, alt.binaries.pictures.erotica at 12%, alt.sex
at 23% and alt.sex.pictures at a whopping 54%. This means that we lack
precision, but not fatally so.
Lots of boring numbers, right? The point is, I guess, that, yes, there
*is* pornographic material on the USENET, and, yes, some USENET
readers follow these groups, but, no, it is *not* the majority that
follow these groups, and, no, it is not the major part of the traffic.
Now back to out usual flaming. I hope a few facts didn't ruin your
day.
/Lars
--
Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk | It takes an uncommon mind to think of
CS Dept., Univ. of Aalborg, DENMARK. | these things. -- Calvin
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.161446.15693@ms.uky.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 16:14:46 GMT
References: <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de>
urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
>Reactions so far: One TV network showed interest. One university has turned
>off alt.sex.* as well as some other "offensive" newsgroups, like sci.military.
I can understand some offense being taken at alt.sex.*, but sci.military?
That's incredible! I guess it just shows, once more for emphasis, that
a given item is guaranteed to offend *someone*.
--
morgan@ms.uky.edu |Wes Morgan, not speaking for| ....!ukma!ukecc!morgan
morgan@engr.uky.edu |the University of Kentucky's| morgan%engr.uky.edu@UKCC
morgan@ie.pa.uky.edu |Engineering Computing Center| morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
Subject: Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.122804.27245@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 17:28:04 GMT
References: <1991Dec6.100928.8950@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> <1991Dec6.160029.22601@ms.uky.edu>
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
> In article <1991Dec6.160029.22601@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes...
>> In article <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> Just as an email administrator's jurisdiction is limited to his or her
>> site,
> Email administrators can refuse to handle mail from a given user or site.
> If a user subscribes to a ton of mailing lists, then goes for 3 months
> without reading his mail, I'm going to stop accepting mail for him from
> those mailing lists (or ask the lists to unsubscribe him until he and I
> have a chance to talk).
Why not just have you e-mail software bounce messages when the mailbox is
full (with the appropriate message)?...jgo
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.125232.28052@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 17:52:32 GMT
References: <9112061626.AA31346@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Followup-To: alt.privacy
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
> In article <9112061626.AA31346@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes...
> From: tk0jut1@mp.cs.niu.edu (jim thomas)
> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1991 04:11:10 GMT
>> In article <199112040654.AA19419@eff.org> IZZYCY1@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (The Jester) writes:
>> The bottom line is that privacy is a right, not a privledge.>
>> The Jester
> Yes, there should be limits what information is involuntarily released.
Right! None.
> But why should such basic information as address and name and office
> number of a university-owned account be concealed? Would you also
> say that one's office phone and room number be removed from a first-floor
> building directory?
Because of disagreement about what is "basic [therefore exempt from
decorum] information".
Yes. One should be asked for one's preference.
> Revelation of basic information does not necessarily violate privacy.
> Concealing *all* information pushes us into paranoid secrecy.
> Jim Thomas
Revelation of any information without the originator/owner's permission
is a violation of his privacy. Revealing information without such
permission pushes us into tyranny (not to mention psychotic exhibitionism
Yes! Right here! Welcome to Ad Hominem's Psycho-Babble Wars! B-).
Talk to ten people about this and you'll not get ten answers the same
regarding what is the default, what one should be able to expect. One
person may think it's fine to have a complete bio with his last 5
publications on that directory, pictures of the family, home address,
phone number, beeper number, etc. Another will prefer not to have random
passersby know so much as his name. Both are reasonable people, displaying
the variety of values people have because we are all the same...
in that we are all different.
Those who make assumptions about what others should prefer are the ones
in error...jgo John G. Otto otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
Subject: Re: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.144304.2037@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 91 19:43:04 GMT
References: <9112081803.AA26294@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
> In article <9112081803.AA26294@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes...
> From: garvey@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (Heather Garvey)
> Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,rec.games.mud
> Subject: Re: Gaming
> Message-ID: <1991Dec8.044336.18614@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
> Date: 8 Dec 1991 04:43:36 GMT
>> kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> As a counterexample, a tennis class cannot kick a recreational player
>> off the courts at IMPE, the intermural physical education building.
> Wow. Here you can. There is a priority list on the fence stating
> the order of precedence. Starting with Varsity (during practice times),
> classes (during class times), on down to people-not-even-connected-with-
> the-Univ.
> The general rule at labs here seems to be: You can do anything you
> want, even to the point of just sitting there and watching the screen
> saver make pretty designs *as*long*as*no*one*is*waiting*for*a*machine.
> You have obviously never had to get a paper typed up for a class in an
> hour only to find the lab packed, a huge line, and your paper will be late
> because some person is playing a game. Would you allow someone to just sit
> there and stare at the screen saver with a huge line waitng? Under your
> "we must have freedom absolutely" attitude, you would have to let them
> sit there, taking up a machine. They have a valid purpose in starting at
> it, just as I would have a valid purpose in playing a MUD. The question is
> whether or not printing/writing a paper for a class is more important when
> it comes to "I'd-sell-my-grandmother-for-a-machine" capacity in a Univ.
> computing lab.
Hey! I've got this great idea! There's a scheme that's worked out well
for millennia. When you've got a scarce resource, develop a system for
assigning property rights and allow free trade. In other words, put a
slot for quarters (or FeRNs or credit cards) next to the micro or terminal
and start charging people directly for access time. If someone wants to
spend megabucks to play a MUD then, it's no problem. Take the money he
pays and use it to expand the facilities, providing more terminals and
micros for academics and gamers alike.
So, tell me. What condition is this "grandmother" in? Hmmm? B-)}...jgo
John G. Otto otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: ssmith@eoin.infoserv.com (Shannon Smith)
Subject: Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <7iBRcB1w164w@eoin.infoserv.com>
Date: 10 Dec 91 20:45:53 GMT
References: <23509@hoptoad.uucp>
tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
(-background material deleted-)
> In article <1991Dec9.185534.840@midway.uchicago.edu> elle@midway.uchicago.edu
> writes:
> >I do hate to say this, Tim, but that's utter bullshit. US courts
> >have upheld, on multiple occasions, authors' copyright on letters.
> >Biographers have been forced to paraphrase extensively when a
> >subject's estate refuses permission to reprint letters.
>
> Yes, they have; for instance, the Church of Scientology recently used
> this argument to suppress an unflattering biography of L. Ron Hubbard
> that quoted extensively from his unpublished letters. The biographers
> were not the recipients of the letters, though, so that has nothing to
> do with this issue. The rights of a recipient are different from the
> rights of someone who simply manages to obtain copies.
Correct.
However, having the right to do a thing doesn't _make_ it right to do
it. I reacted out of frustration when I published Litchfield's note.
No, I did not solicit that note. I was well within my rights to
make it public. However, in so doing I engaged in character bashing
(no matter how well-deserved I may have felt it to be....) and not in
a discussion of issues. I also managed to initiate a thread of
copyright law discussion, which is not what people reading alt.pagan
expect to find here.
So I apologize to the readers of this newsgroup for the wasted
bandwidth, and to M. Litchfield for my character bashing.
....................................................................
All humble opinions expressed are my own. Any resemblance to actual
opinions, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <1991Dec10.223358.4533@nntp.hut.fi>
Date: 10 Dec 91 22:33:58 GMT
References: <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de> <1991Dec10.161446.15693@ms.uky.edu>
Sender: usenet@nntp.hut.fi (Usenet pseudouser id)
In-Reply-To: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sauna.cs.hut.fi
In article <1991Dec10.161446.15693@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms (Wes Morgan) writes:
>I can understand some offense being taken at alt.sex.*, but sci.military?
>That's incredible! I guess it just shows, once more for emphasis, that
>a given item is guaranteed to offend *someone*.
I find your comment very strange. I certainly can understand how
someone can feel offended by discussions on equipment created to
destroy human lives and cause suffering (I don't read sci.military,
but I understand the topic is something like that); on the other hand
it seems insane how discussing a basic and pleasant act of human
beings necessary for the human race to survive can offend someone.
Talking about universities, alt.sex* might not be a good idea because
of the relatively high traffic which takes resources off from
information closer to the goal of the universities, but I understand
the talk was about offensive material, not money. Anyway, it's often
quite easy to change the expiration times for high-volume groups.
//Jyrki
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: CCC_KEIL@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Christa Keil)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
In-Reply-To: hayes@python.cis.ohio-state.edu's message of Tue, 10 Dec 1991 07:13:41 GMT
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.005940.6858@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>
Sender: news@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de (News Net)
References: <9112100227.AA06772@rose.cit.cornell.edu> <1991Dec10.071341.26672@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1991 00:59:40 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.12
In <1991Dec10.071341.26672@cis.ohio-state.edu> hayes@python.cis.ohio-state.edu writes:
> Does anyone have the address for this EMMA magazine/newspaper/whatever?
Emma Verlags GmbH
Kolpingstrasse 1a
D-W-5000 Koeln 1
Federal Republic of Germany
Koeln = Cologne
--
Christa Keil--Umv001@Dbnmeb1.bitnet--zotty@dobag.in-berlin.de--zotty@guug.de
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: CCC_KEIL@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Christa Keil)
Subject: Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.011316.7019@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>
Date: 11 Dec 91 01:13:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: wega.1991Dec11.011316.7019
References: <1991Dec06.082334.28184@tpki.toppoint.de> <1991Dec10.161446.15693@ms.uky.edu>
Sender: news@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de (News Net)
In-Reply-To: morgan@ms.uky.edu's message of 10 Dec 91 16:14:46 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.12
In <1991Dec10.161446.15693@ms.uky.edu> morgan@ms.uky.edu writes:
> urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
> >Reactions so far: One TV network showed interest. One university has turned
> >off alt.sex.* as well as some other "offensive" newsgroups, like sci.military.
>
> I can understand some offense being taken at alt.sex.*, but sci.military?
Hmm, I would understand it, if someone would take offense against
alt.sex.pictures.* or alt.binaries.pictures.*, but it is absolut
nonsence to try to forbidde people to talk about sex and sexuality.
And I am pretty sure, that the newsadmin at the University of Stuttgart
did not read a single word in sci.military, otherwise, she had not
turned off this group. That happend just because she 'tried' to think,
but obvisualy she was VERY wrong.
--
Christa Keil--Umv001@Dbnmeb1.bitnet--zotty@dobag.in-berlin.de--zotty@guug.de
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.pagan] Re: Manners; a new perspective
Message-ID: <9112111603.AA10977@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 11 Dec 91 04:03:56 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: lmh44500@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Wildfire)
Subject: Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.042145.7341@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1991 04:21:45 GMT
kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>dcw11111@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Blackmore) writes:
>[...]
>>One thing that we both didn't mention earlier, and the basis for all of our
>>(mine and John's arguments) is the University's policy that you cannot
>>interfere with another person's ability to learn. If I need to do classwork,
>>and you are doing something else, you are keeping me from accomplishing my
>>learning.
>[...]
>While this seems to be a general philosophy; it is not as far as I
>know, a formal U. of Illinois policy. If I am incorrect, please tell
>me where I can look up the policy.
>As a counterexample, a tennis class cannot kick a recreational player
>off the courts at IMPE, the intermural physical education building.
>- Carl
>Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
It may not be University of Illinois policy that you cannot interfere
with someone else's ability to learn, but that was not the origional
complaint. The origional post (hi Declan :) was about gamers. It is
stated CCSO (Communication and Computer Service Offices) policy that gamers
(and this includes IRC and all forms of MUD) will defer their computers
to academic use, ie. papers. The place where you can look this up is at the
Illini Union computer site, and probably ALL of the other CCSO sites.
(The CCSO "rules" for the Union site are posted on the outer doors right
below the big yellow sign that say NO FOOD OR DRINK IN LAB) I know
the residence halls also enforce this rule, but whether or not it is a
set policy, I honestly don't know.
-Wildfire-
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Wildfire | Disclaimer: Who ME?!?! (Wide-eyed innocent look)|
|lmh44500@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu | Sex is not the answer. Sex is the question, |
| hoff@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu | "Oh Baby, YES!!" is the answer. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From warnold Wed Jan 15 09:01:07 1992
Received: by eff.org id AA20439
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Wed, 15 Jan 1992 14:01:15 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Mark Law is an unmitigated asshole
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1991 06:53:32 GMT
gtoal@gem.stack.urc.tue.nl (Graham Toal) writes:
>In article <01GDTM9670LK9YCK1T@DESYVAX.BITNET> HALLAM@DESYVAX.BITNET ("PHILLIP M. HALLAM-BAKER") writes:
>:My opinion of the University of Wisconsin is not enhanced by retractions of
>:posts brought about under duress. If a person takes offense at a post made
>:in a public forum to which he has the ability to contribute to their first
>:course of action should be to post a complaint to that forum.
>*My* opinion of UofW *was* enhanced by this 'apology' -- I thought he
>hit exactly the right note of insincerity making it clear that neither
>he nor his supervisor was in the slightest apologetic - even chosing to
>publish it on rec.humor signalled that they thought it was a joke...
He and his advisor were very cool about it. It's the administrators
above them that have problems.
--
Those who express random thoughts to legislative committees are often
surprised and appalled to find themselves the instigators of law.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <9112111927.AA13569@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 11 Dec 91 07:27:54 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.censorship] Re: Mark Law is an unmitigated asshole
Message-ID: <9112111929.AA21475@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 11 Dec 91 07:29:50 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mgm8426@zeus.tamu.edu (R.Michael Litchfield)
Subject: censorship (was Re: Manners; a new perspective)
Message-ID: <11DEC199103375515@zeus.tamu.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 91 08:37:00 GMT
References: <25NOV199121581989@zeus.tamu.edu> <1991Dec5.221557.6856@news.stolaf.edu> <23461@hoptoad.uucp> <1991Dec10.090604.10942@news.stolaf.edu>
Sender: usenet@tamsun.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41
In article <1991Dec10.090604.10942@news.stolaf.edu>, adams@agnes.acc.stolaf.edu () writes...
>>I don't believe you _are_ concerned with free speech; it appears more
>>that you are looking for an excuse to censor the inane Mr. Litchfield
>>while continuing to tell yourself that you are in favor of free speech.
>
>First, I cannot "censor" Mr. Litchfield. I may send email to his sysadmin,
>pointing out apparent violations of Usenet guidelines and including samples
>of his oeuvre ("eat shit and die worthless scum").
You attempt to censor by proxy. You enviegh upon an external agency to carry
out your will. You have no interest in free speech whatsoever, you are only
interested in speech which does not threaten your world view.
>Second, my concern for free speech would be meaningless if it did not
>grant the people who own and maintain this marvelous medium their rights
>as property owners. If the Litch is correct and his system management -
>composed, no doubt, of freedom-minded individuals such as yourself -
>really doesn't give a damn what this person does with their computer
>resources, fine. They may attach whatever conditions they like to the
>privilege of Usenet access, and that includes no conditions. But free
>speech means that I may complain to them, and they may choose to
>withdraw this privilege based on my complaint if it pleases them. As
>they said in the USSR once, we have free speech, too; you may say
>anything you like - once.
Whoa, I have never seen anyone advocate the totalitarian measures of the former
soviet regime. I personally find such a model distasteful. Let me guess, you
are a big fan of dachou too?
> Litchfield may post anything he likes;
>he must also accept the consequences, as his host defines them.
What you were actually trying to do was intimidate me. "I don't like what you
are saying and if you don't stop I will make it impossible for you to say it"
Worked fairly well with Hitler and the rest of your heros. Of course cause I am
smarter than you give me credit for I realize your threat is impotent, but that
still does not make the threatening any less heinous.
What too about those wonderful slimes who choose to send my system account
edited portions of my messages which pervert my desired expression?
>If he continues to post, no problem. As usual, I'll scan his work
>for substance and dispose of it; I think KILL files are for the
>lazy and the cynical. Part of my religion is that we never know
>who may become profound.
How strange, i agree with you that killfiles are wrong, I neeed to re-examine
my opinion on that. You don't want to put me in your kill file yet you have no
qualms about trying to have me silenced. You are a coward, you don't want to
sully your hands with with even such a watered down filth as putting me in your
kill file as that would be too real for you, so you just get someone else to do
it for you.
>-- Sam (y derwydd)
-Michael
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Mailing list problems, was Re:IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.161705.22239@ms.uky.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 91 16:17:05 GMT
References: <1991Dec6.150235.10506@eff.org> <1991Dec6.160029.22601@ms.uky.edu> <1991Dec10.122804.27245@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu writes:
> morgan@ms.uky.edu (that's me) writes...
>> Email administrators can refuse to handle mail from a given user or site.
>> If a user subscribes to a ton of mailing lists, then goes for 3 months
>> without reading his mail, I'm going to stop accepting mail for him from
>> those mailing lists (or ask the lists to unsubscribe him until he and I
>> have a chance to talk).
>
>Why not just have you e-mail software bounce messages when the mailbox is
>full (with the appropriate message)?...jgo
Our mailer does that automatically; the maintainers of the mailing list
seemed to ignore them for about 3 months. You would think that one week's
worth of bounce messages would trigger a response from the list maintainer,
but it did not. The maintainers of the mailing list also ignored the first
set of email messages I sent them. I even took the unusual step of hand-
feeding a message to the host machine, so I could be sure that my message
was actually delivered. Finally, after 3 email messages from me over 3.5
weeks, the subscriber from my site was removed. As far as I'm concerned,
that's poor management.
Many mailing lists generate a high volume of messages. I recently took
a sample of our incoming mail; we received over 25 Mb of mailing list
traffic in 5 working days! Why should a mailing list continue to pound
my mail hub with undeliverable mail? You'd think that the maintainer
would take notice of repeated bounce messages. If that doesn't happen,
that's poor management.
In the past, I have received email from mailing list maintainers who
regularly check/update/prune their distribution lists. I have also
received email from maintainers who are reacting to bounce messages.
*That's* proper management of a mailing list.
Many mailing lists are maintained on an 'ad hoc' basis. Many, such as
those on LISTSERVs (BITNET), can run for years without any action by a
"real person". Sometimes, a mailing list will be started, then "left
running". The person originally responsible for list management may
leave that site; the list, however, continues to run. That can cause
problems such as ours.
If you're interested in this particular topic, you might want to get
a copy of RFC 1211, "Problems with the maintenance of large mailing
lists", by Westine and Postel. It's available via anonymous FTP from
nic.ddn.mil (192.112.36.5), if your local sites don't have it.
Wes
ps> I am not complaining about mailing lists in general; the vast ma-
jority of the lists with which I have been involved have been
maintained in a very professional manner. However, there are
occasions in any arena of computing in which administrative
action is required.
--
morgan@ms.uky.edu |Wes Morgan, not speaking for| ....!ukma!ukecc!morgan
morgan@engr.uky.edu |the University of Kentucky's| morgan%engr.uky.edu@UKCC
morgan@ie.pa.uky.edu |Engineering Computing Center| morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Reply-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Precedence: bulk
To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Errors-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk-request
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1991 18:17:57 -0500
X-Digest-Sender: "William W. Arnold"
Message-Id: <199112112317.AA07563@eff.org>
Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Wed Dec 11 18:16:55 EST 1991
[For information on how to get a much smaller edited version of the
list, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send acad-freedom caf
- Billy ]
In this issue:
escheire@sunlab.ci : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
hayes@python.cis.o : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
baillod@sparky.eec : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
thakur@zerkalo.har : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
morgan@ms.uky.edu : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (alt.sex.bondage, et al.) Re: The USENET pornographic netw
jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyr : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.e : Re: IRC vs. Usenet & email (authoritarianism)
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.e : Re: (comp.org.eff.talk) Re: Finger & Liberty
CCC KEIL@rzmain.rz : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
CCC KEIL@rzmain.rz : Re: The USENET pornographic network (rough translation)
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.e : Re: (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (alt.pagan) Re: Manners; a new perspective
morgan@ms.uky.edu : Mailing list problems, was Re:IRC vs. Usenet & email (auth
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
The addresses for the list are now:
comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list
or caf-talk@eff.org
listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions
(send email with the line "help" for details.)
caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: as_m455@titan.kingston.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.193101.1@titan.kingston.ac.uk>
Date: 11 Dec 91 19:31:01 GMT
References: <9112060429.AA04943@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@kingston.ac.uk (Network News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: tethys
In article <9112060429.AA04943@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
> Yes, you can learn a lot from MUF, such as basic coding, a stack based
> language, and if you're hot recursion, and other neat stuff. But it
> sounds like what you are saying is that muf programmers are real hot
> shots. Most aren't. And the examples you give aren't that advanced.
I agree, most MUF programmers aren't that hot ... but how many professional
programmers have ever been happy with FORTH ? All you ever get from computer
scientists is funny looks and questions about how it compares to C on speed. To
be honest, I don't think very many programmers at all are hot, and I include
myself. The point is, anyone can say 'sure, that's easy' when they've been
doing it for a while, but most of the people who write MUF code are unlikely to
have come in contact with FORTH before, and it can be a right pain trying to
write large programs in a stack-based language for the first time - heck, at
any time !
As the message was addressed to non-MUDers, think of what most of them were
thinking at the mention of approaching a multi-user task ... then image that
person wasn't into programming at all. If you can honestly say it wouldn't
daunt you if you were in their shoes, then you must have been born to hack ...
no doubt about it !
> If you can write something like OliverJones program to loop over a whole
> database without a stack overflow, or his self-replicating muf code,
> then I'll be impressed.
As for your examples, it comes down to a question of what you want to do.
Anyone can write a program to do either of those tasks if they want ... it's a
question of how long they take to do it. Sounds like you want to drag things
down into a 'how good a programmer are you' contest; pointless really - I only
write code that grabs my fancy, so to some I could seem a good programmer and
to others a bad programmer. All that really matters is that I CAN program ...
and that's what we should be aiming to encourage everyone to be able to do !
They might not ever put it to use, but in a computer-bound society everyone
should be computer literate. My point was that MUDs give lots of people the
desire to learn about computers and, often by accident, they find themselves
becoming SKILLED programmers; notice I said SKILLED, not HOT ... they might not
come up with exotic programs, but they do learn how to put together a program
and solve a very practical problem ...
- Hermes, the Megaflow Junkie.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
Subject: Re: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Summary: cost covering fees
Message-ID: <1991Dec11.150423.6070@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 91 20:04:23 GMT
References: <9112101700.AA22468@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (jgo)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
> In article <9112101700.AA22468@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes...
> From: djohnson@beowulf.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson)
> Date: 9 Dec 91 23:41:05 GMT
>
>> I'm really starting to get a bad taste for the ages old custom of
>> administrators deciding for the users what is legitimate and what is
>> not, especially when the object in question is a tool, such as
>> a teleconferencing system.
> contract). It is not that administrators do this to spite you
> (although that may be how you feel), they often may be forced to do
> this by law.
> For example, at many universities, computers that are purchased using
> education fees or tuition must be used only for educational work (and
..
> tetris). If the education fees or tuition is supported by the state,
> then there is nothing to keep that requirement from being law.
Right. Florida State University's annual report from last year (which
I've been looking at because of all the state budget fuss) has separate
columns in its tables for "restricted" and "unrestricted" funds. There
are many kinds of restrictions which can exist, depending on the wishes
of the source(s) of the funds, including the state legislature as they
dole out their booty from the tax victims.
> Now if it was your machine and you paid for it, it's a different matter.
> (and a tiny recreation fee or computer center fee doesn't cut it)
> --
> Darin Johnson
> djohnson@ucsd.edu
Many people have recommended that fees be on a full cost recovery basis.
This serves several purposes. (1) It provides the necessary funds for
maintenance and upgrades. (2) It reminds the customer/user of the value
of the service received. (3) It reminds the provider of the value of the
service provided and (4) provides a check on wasteful expenditures, either
through public out-cry under lack of competitive alternatives, or through
loss of revenue where competition and/or substitutes (e.g. privately owned
micros & work-stations, and bulletin board systems) exist.
A study by the James Madison Institute of user fees on state and local
government "services" in Florida indicates, however, that this rarely
happens. In some cases the fees far exceed the cost of the service,
in others the fee is a mere token...jgo John G. Otto otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain D. Sinclair)
Message-ID:
Date: 12 Dec 91 04:00:02 GMT
Subject: Re: IRC's /kill
References: <1991Dec3.173457.4181@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Dec6.100928.8950@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>Gee, I'm glad to see that you now support my stand on KILL. What a
>turn-around for you. I'm proud. Now please continue by not harrassing
>other users, not evading /ignore, and not killing and we'll be totally
>proud of you.
There's a lot of excess emotion in these words.
Isn't it ironic? We can't even have this conversation on IRC, because
you'd pull out the /kill whenever I try to get a point across. Thank
Christ some moron didn't code the equivalent of "/kill" into Usenet.
--
Iain Sinclair (axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au) +61 2 330 1816
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: IRC's /kill
Message-ID: <1991Dec12.062733.10145@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
References: <1991Dec6.100928.8950@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 06:27:33 GMT
In article axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au writes:
>Isn't it ironic? We can't even have this conversation on IRC, because
>you'd pull out the /kill whenever I try to get a point across. Thank
>Christ some moron didn't code the equivalent of "/kill" into Usenet.
Your idea of getting a point across is using a sledgehammer -- when
someone ignores you, you should respect that and not try to continue
to send them messages, changing your nick to avoid their ignore.
Fortunately, Usenet's kill file is something that works better than
IRC's ignore, if only that it doesn't let the abusive person (you)
know that you're being ignored.
BTW, Usenet does have something rougly as bad as kill, it's called
"cancel".
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: fsars@acad3.alaska.edu (Allen R Sparks)
Subject: Re: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: Gaming
Message-ID: <1991Dec12.082156.1@acad3.alaska.edu>
Date: 12 Dec 91 12:21:56 GMT
References: <9112101700.AA22468@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Dec11.150423.6070@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Sender: news@raven.alaska.edu (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: acad3.alaska.edu
In article <1991Dec11.150423.6070@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>, otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto) writes:
> Many people have recommended that fees be on a full cost recovery basis.
> This serves several purposes. (1) It provides the necessary funds for
> maintenance and upgrades. (2) It reminds the customer/user of the value
> of the service received. (3) It reminds the provider of the value of the
> service provided and (4) provides a check on wasteful expenditures, either
> through public out-cry under lack of competitive alternatives, or through
> loss of revenue where competition and/or substitutes (e.g. privately owned
> micros & work-stations, and bulletin board systems) exist.
>
> A study by the James Madison Institute of user fees on state and local
> government "services" in Florida indicates, however, that this rarely
> happens. In some cases the fees far exceed the cost of the service,
> in others the fee is a mere token...jgo John G. Otto otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
That's the case here at UAF. The fees far exceed the cost of the
service, but those fees are only applied to outside agencies.
Students Faculty and Staff get the services at no extra charge. To
get an account with access to internet, all you have to do is take a 1
credit class.
=== Al Sparks
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From helen Sun Dec 15 05:57:50 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA16214
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Sun, 15 Dec 1991 10:57:59 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Abstract of CAF-News 01.40
Message-ID: <1991Dec12.215036.10299@eff.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 21:50:36 GMT
This is an abstract for the most recent "Computers and Academic
Freedom News" (CAF-News). Information about CAF-News followings the
abstract. The full CAF-News is available via email. Send email
to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send caf-news cafv01n40
--- begin abstract ---
[Week ending Dec 1, 1991
[The guest editor this week is Benjamin Gross. For information
on being a guest editor, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line: send acad-freedom call-for-guest-editors
- Carl Kadie]
========================== KEY ==================================
The words after the numbers are a short PARAPHRASE/SUMMARY of the
article, NOT AN OBJECTIVE SUMMARY and not necessarily my opinion.
=================================================================
Note 1 Discusses system administratiors that ban or restrict IRC.
1. (a sysadmin) "Certainly, denying IRC access unilaterally hurts the
concientious, fair minded IRC users who don't unfairly monopolise these
resources, but how on earth do you cheaply implement a fairer policy?
(Suggestions greatfully appreciated!)' and "IRC has a >0 cost and a >0 benefit,
and presently the benefits outweigh the cost so I provide IRC services. If the
balance changes adversely, I'll limit the service or remove it completely."
Notes 2-5 are discussing the benefits and problems of system accounting.
2. (Carl M. Kadie) "Use of 'ps -aux' should not be severely restricted because
it allows users and sys admin to see the amount of computer resources being
used as they are being used. This allows high-CPU runaway jobs to be identified
and stopped before they waste more resources (e.g. fixman). This allows users
to make intelligent decisions about when and where to run new jobs. This allows
peer pressure to be applied to users who use an unfair amount of resources for
the given situation."
<1991Nov25.162134.6865@eff.org>
3. (Carl M. Kadie) Defends his position that users should have access to ps
against (Steven Brack) who says it is not one users place to decide what
process other users can execute. Carl says "if I see that you have what looks
like a run away process, I can send you and/or the sys admin email. Why should
I be the one doing this? Because, I'm the one who wants the cycles. The sys
admin isn't logged into the computer, or isn't paying close attention. You may
have logged off or started work on another task, not realizing that your job is
still running."
<1991Nov25.213447.14114@eff.org>
4. (Wes Morgan) States that he does not believe ps and other accounting
measures are an invasion of privacy, because the computer is a publicly
avaliable resource. Since the computer account is provided by the university
and "your use of a given computer system affects all other users of that
system," "then the need for this information becomes apparent." He states that
the users real information, at least a minimun of the real name, must be
avaliable so that they can be contacted, otherwise the user loses the benefits
of effective electronic communication."
<1991Nov26.232012.2924@ms.uky.edu>
5. (Jim Thompson) "I rejected, and continued to reject, the notion that ps is
"privacy-invasive"; if anything, I tried to put the burden where it belongs: on
those who wish to protect every bit and byte of information regarding
themselves." Although, "users have a right to know, up front, what information
about them might be disclosed, and how -- even if they have no choice about
some of it, for example their real name being associated with their uid via
finger."
<9111271314.AA02555@se33.wg2.waii.com>
Note 6 is a staff member from ACS at OSU.
6. (ACS employee) States that he will not condone or condem the ACS policy,
but, "that Ugly rumours about censorship at ACS are ridiculous." "Opinion -
can't prove it - but my experience is ACS is filled with people who strongly
believe in electronic freedom, open computing, call it what you will." and "We
brought usenet & e-mail to the masses here. We fought for it, we are fighting
for it." Also, "some people regarded as villains here are trying hard to make
computing more open and useful on campus. The major limitation is money - or
put another way people at the very top of osu & state gov't have to see
computing as basic part of education. We do."
<1991Nov25.165500.11219@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Note 7 is on the Alt.sex flap at U of Iowa.
7. (Doug Jones) reports "Today's Daily Iowan, Monday Nov. 25, 1991,
has joined the fray. On the top of page 3A, on the left, is the headline 'UI
Computer Files Contain Pornography', followed by the same kind of incisive
reporting of the alt.sex newsgroups that we have become used to from the print
media. The article does mention that the "pornography" is carried by USENET,
but no mention is made of other material on USENET. The article indicates that
the U of I computers contain "over 70,000 pages" of pornography, which is
nonsense -- this is roughly the total number of postings that have been
delivered to Iowa's machines over USENET, but nobody at the DI seems to have
noticed that things get deleted on a regular basis."
<9300@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Notes 8-9 are about restricting personal use of the universities computers.
8. (A student) Says that he believe that there should be a distinction
of the diffrent kinds of recreational computer use, "those that have have an
arguable nexus to the communication of ideas and those that do not (by which I
refer principally to computer games)." This especialy applies to general use
computers and sites.
<199111252159.AA14818@eff.org>
9. (Carl M. Kadie) says "The policy could be improved by applying the "game
policy" to all noncommercial personal use." "In other words, instead of banning
nongame, noncommercial personal use, SEASnet should at least allow nongame,
noncommercial personal use on the same basis that it allows game playing." and
"I was not suggesting *adding* a restriction; I was suggesting *removing* a
restriction."
<1991Nov25.223548.15641@eff.org>
Note 10 is a site manager has problems with gamers and would like suggestions.
10.(Site manager) "I manage 8 student computing sites with about 500 machines
(PC, MAC, NeXT) and I'm having more and more trouble with gamers, especially
IRCers and MUDers." and "Our policy states that the sites are primarily for
academic work. If all the machines are full when a person comes in to do a
paper, all the gamers are booted for a period of time. This is getting to be a
major headache for my staff. How do you all handle it?"
<1991Nov27.215410.18938@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
11. (Carl M. Kadie) Enclosed is a first draft of a bibilography on Computers
and Academic Freedom.
!---------------------> Guest editor: Benjamin Gross <------------------------!
! Mail to: b-gross@uiuc.edu /!\ NeXT mail: bgross@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu !
! No matter where you go, there you are. --Buckaroo Bonzai-- !
!-------------> Reality is only for those who lack imagination. <-------------!
!--> Disclaimer: I speak only on my own behalf, all opinions are my own. <--!
]
--- end abstract ---
CAF-News is a weekly digest of notes from CAF-talk.
CAF-News is available as newsgroup alt.comp.acad-freedom.news or via
email. If you read newsgroups but your site doesn't get
alt.comp.acad-freedom.news, (politely) ask your sys admin to
subscribe. For info on email delivery, send email to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the line
send acad-freedom caf
Back issues of CAF-News are available via anonymous ftp or via email.
Ftp to ftp.eff.org. The directory is pub/academic/news. For
information about email access to the archive, send an email note to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the lines
send acad-freedom README
help
index
Disclaimer: This CAF-News abstract was compiled by a guest editor or
by me, Carl M. Kadie. It is not an EFF publication. The views I
express and editorial decisions I make are my own.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: BMCCONNE@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (Brian McConnell)
Subject: (HELP) International newspaper column for student papers
Message-ID: <9112122313.AA09564@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 12 Dec 91 23:07:06 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Hello:
My name is Brian McConnell. I moderate an international discussion
group for student governments. I am trying to start a weekly column
for student newspapers. One of the subjects I plan to address is the
whole issue of First Amendment rights and emerging media such as
e-mail and discussion groups.
So, my purpose is two fold. One, to research the topic so I can release
a well prepared commentary in January. Two, to collect addresses of
campus papers. So, if you could, please take five minutes to send me
the name, address, city, province, postal code and country of yourc
campus newspaper.
Also, if you have any particular suggestions for researching the
topic please drop a line. I plan to start with the Electronic Frontiers
Foundation
Thanks for your help!
Brian McConnell
Moderator
SGANet
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
Message-ID: <1991Dec12.192816.15279@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Date: 13 Dec 91 00:28:15 GMT
>In article <1991Dec11.164136.28775@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes...
>> otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu writes:
>>> But why should such basic information as address and name and office
>>> number of a university-owned account be concealed? Would you also
>>> say that one's office phone and room number be removed from a first-floor
>>> building directory?
>> Because of disagreement about what is "basic [therefore exempt from
>> decorum] information".
>> Yes. One should be asked for one's preference.
The rest of Wes' followup is an illustration of the above.
>> Revelation of any information without the originator/owner's permission
>> is a violation of his privacy. Revealing information without such
>> permission pushes us into tyranny (not to mention psychotic exhibitionism
> So, the departmental phone list I just received, listing every faculty
> and staff member's name, office, and phone number, is a violation of
> their privacy? After all, they didn't ask me if they could put my
> information on the list!
Yes it is a violation of their privacy. Even here one has the opportunity
to prevent such private information from being disclosed.
> Since they issued that phone number to me FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF MY
> OFFICIAL DUTIES AS AN EMPLOYEE, wouldn't they have the right to dis-
> tribute that information? Isn't it essential for others to have the
> ability to find my phone number, for purposes of my work?
No, it is not. For example, I am the lead hot-line consultant. My name
is not in the directory. There is, however, an entry for the research &
instruction computing center, which gets them a receptionist. The
receptionist routes the call to the appropriate people.
> Since users are given access to academic systems FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF
> THEIR DUTIES, wouldn't the same logic apply to listing users' names or
> *work* office/phone numbers?
Duty Schmooty. I agree to help people use computers. They agree to pay
me. When people talk about "duty" I reach for a firearm and my wallet.
> In regard to finger files, how about this approach?
> Suppose that user information is taken straight from the University
> phone book. If the individual cares enough about his privacy to
> be "unlisted" in the University phone book, then his information
> would not be included in his finger data.
No good. It is too much of a package deal. Maybe I want people to be
able to reach me via e-mail but not by voice. (E.g. Maybe I don't like
interruptions.) Maybe I like people to drop by my home, but don't have
e-mail or a phone.
> The sole exception to this, in my opinion, is the actual name of
> the user. I feel very strongly that the fact that a particular
> person is using a given public system is NOT a private matter.
> I believe that a login should be tied to a real name. I believe
> that electronic communication should be tied to a real name,
> especially email. (I'd also point out that I've seen several
> University phone books that list the name, even if there is no
> phone number/address listed.
> Many people loudly proclaim that *everyone* should use electronic
> means of communication; I'm one of these people. 8) How are peo-
> ple supposed to use these wonderful means of communication without
> some form of directory/"anchor to reality"? If a user on my
> system wants to send electronic mail to a user, should they be re-
> quired to find out that the user is only known as "The Cuisinart"
> (or whatever)?
Another illustration of the above difference and of a KIA personality.
We used to have a personna called Moon Moth. Moon Moth was schizo and
rightly so. Moon Moth was about 5 members of our systems development
group. Another reason is Hotline, helpdesk and problems, three of the
names by which our customers can reach my team of consultants.
One of our points of difference is that I'd rather there were no
"public systems" paid for with stolen or counterfeitted resources.
But, as long as I've been being robbed, I might as well recover
some of the value.
Fine. Have your directory, but let people decide for themselves
how they are listed, whether they are listed, and to whom their
entry is to be visible. (E.g. Universe, World, University, Department,
project group, list of individuals. The lack of the latter wrt file
access is one of the really bad short-comings of "eunuchs".)
I wouldn't "require them to find out" anything.
>Wes
>ps> The only information in the finger data on our system is the
> name, major, and student status (undergraduate or graduate
> student). We do not offer chfn. All three of these items
> are public information.
Once, again, I disagree. It's nobody's business but mine and my
academic advisors' (yes, plural) what my majors, if any, are.
Ditto (mutatis mutandis) for grad/under, faculty, staff, contractor.
If they want it released or advertised, that's fine, but be courteous
by giving them a chance to say otherwise...jgo John G. Otto
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: gross@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ben Gross)
Subject: Restricting game and personal use at public sites
Message-ID: <199112130311.AA17603@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: gross@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Date: 13 Dec 91 03:11:16 GMT
I do not believe any recreational use should be banned or restricted from the
networks or sites. Rather there should be an acceptable use policy with fair
guidlines. The goal should not be to hurt the fair users, but to get rid of
the "jerks". The problem users, "jerks", should be banned from computer access
or have their accounts extreemly limited to education use only. After one
incident users should have their account suspended until they can explain why
they messed up and meanifully say they will not do it again. After a second
time the account should be deleted. If the offenses was just at the site and
not with a specific account, administrative penalties could be imposed such as
fines, since I do not believe that banning users from a large number of sites
is feasible. In all cases the offence should be clearly stated to the users
and the users should be given a chance to appeal. The first step is creating
an acceptible use policy. This can be accomplished by:
1. Having a definte acceptiple use policy that defines what is recreational use
and what uses have priority. ex: (More or less classifications may be
effective)
a) class work
b) reading news
c) e-mail
d) other non game personal use of the system
e) IRC, games, ex: MUDs and Rouge
2. Offering incredibly easy access to the policy. This should give the users
no excuse that they didn't know.
a) posted at the sites
b) given initially with the account
c) avaliable online
3. Give reasons for each policy; it is much easier to accept a policy if you
know the reasons behind it.
4. Make it very easy for the users to give input in the form of suggestions,
complaints, and praise.
a) suggestion box at sites
b) online interactive place for users to post about system policy.
The opinions expressed here are in no way those of UIUC or CCSO or any of their
employess other than myself. Although, mabye someone impotant will read this
and then that could change :)
--
! Mail to: b-gross@uiuc.edu /!\ NeXT mail: bgross@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu !
! No matter where you go, there you are. --Buckaroo Bonzai-- !
!-------------> Reality is only for those who lack imagination. <-------------!
!--> Disclaimer: I speak only on my own behalf, all opinions are my own. <--!
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: bh@anarres.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Harvey)
Subject: let the users make the rules
Message-ID: <9112131512.AA14479@anarres.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: bh@anarres.Berkeley.EDU
Date: 13 Dec 91 15:12:02 GMT
I believe it was Paul Goodman who wrote, in a book about the legal rights
of children relative to their parents, that we should begin by recognizing
that as soon as you talk about protecting children against their parents
you're talking about patching up a situation that's already very badly
broken; the first right of children should be to a home in which the issue
of legal rights doesn't even come up because everyone respects and loves
everyone. Some articles end up making it sound as if a child suing his or
her parents ought to be the usual thing.
I feel much the same about this whole business of computer privacy.
When we're talking about the government, or telemarketers, or the like,
then I want to defend my privacy rights. But when we're talking about
my school computer facility, I feel sad if the issue comes up at all.
Perhaps I'm influenced too much by the fact that in my freshman year of
college I started hanging out at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab.
There I became a user of a timesharing system with no passwords and no
file protection. It was wonderful! The first time I ran into a problem
with the system and asked an official system person about it, instead of
hearing "file a bug report and we'll look into it," I was told "well why
don't you fix it?" Thus was I thrown into the world of system programming
at age 16. Anybody could install new versions of anything. It was pretty
chaotic, but a fertile ground for software development -- this is the
machine on which Richard Stallman invented EMACS, for example. The rule
on this system was that there were no secrets; you could even read other
people's mail files if you wanted. If, on the other hand, you wanted to
keep secret information online, you were encouraged to go down the hall
and get an account on the hyper-secure Multics machine. On the AI machine
I didn't feel like an embattled defender of privacy; I felt like a member
of a community.
Now, that arrangement wouldn't do for everyone. Maybe, in this era of
invasion over the net by international spy rings and so on, it's not
possible for anyone. But my real point is that there's no one right
answer about this privacy business.
So why can't the users decide?
That's my solution to everything -- for example, the problem about people
playing games while other people want to do homework. This becomes a
problem because everyone expects the grownups to come along and police
the place. System administrators tend to talk as though there were
bad guys who want to play games (or whatever) and good guys who want to
do their homework, but my guess is that these are the same people at
different moments. Certainly they are at least the same *kind* of people,
namely students enrolled in some class or other. Why can't they resolve
their differences through direct communication, rather than by appeal to
authority? We (I'm not a system administrator but I am a course instructor)
could use our authority, instead, to set up the communication channels.
We could think of this as part of the curriculum. It's a kind of ethics
instruction that's much more helpful, I believe, than lectures about
not pirating software.
This worked great for me when I was running a high school computer center
with perhaps 400 users, of whom 50 were hard-core. It's less easy, I've
found, at Berkeley, where I have 300 students in one class. They don't
feel like a community to themselves, let alone to the system administrators.
Still, I think all this hair-splitting about what exactly should the game
policy be, or the non-commercial-private-use policy, or whatever, is a
symptom of the fact that the wrong people are deciding. Let the students
decide, and then let the students enforce their policy. Same for privacy.
Okay, so I'm a dreamer, perhaps some day you'll join me and the world
will live as one, etc.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Abstract of CAF-News 01.41
Message-ID: <1991Dec13.181440.11182@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 18:14:40 GMT
This is an abstract for the most recent "Computers and Academic
Freedom News" (CAF-News). Information about CAF-News followings the
abstract. The full CAF-News is available via email. Send email
to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send caf-news cafv01n41
--- begin abstract ---
[Week ending December 8, 1991
[The guest editor this week is Bob Solon. For information
on being a guest editor, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line: send acad-freedom call-for-guest-editors
- Carl Kadie]
========================== KEY ================================
The words after the numbers are a summary of the article and not
necessarily my opinion.
===============================================================
Articles 1-4 concern computer policies at various universities.
1. A staff librarian at the U. of Newcastle Libraries reports and comments
on policy currently under discussion regarding acceptable-use and access
policies for their computers. In particular, the policy "You may not use
the University's computing facilities to send obscene, offensive, bogus,
harassing, or illegal messages" generated much concern, as did the proposal
to limit student access to AARNet (Australian equivalent of Usenet) only
to research or study purposes. There was little concensus about
the validity of the new policies in the Newcastle user community.
<43858C4B08C002AE@cc.newcastle.edu.au>
2. Carl Kadie defends his (from an earlier article) criticisms of
aspects of the University of Iowa computing policies, specifically:
"Sending rude, obscene, or harassing material via any electronic mail
or bulletin board facility is strictly forbidden." Several court cases
are cited in support of the position that "It is not the job of the
government to enforce concepts of courtesy, cooperation, and common
sense with respect to expression."
<1991Dec3.045840.18238@eff.org>
3. According to a Duke University faculty member, who received his
information from a College Press Service paraphrase, the University
of Washington stopped carrying "...a computer channel containing
pornograhic materials...." presumably alt.sex.pictures. Apparently
the University stopped this group in response to a negative article
about to be printed in the Seattle _Post-Intelligencer_.
<393@news.duke.edu>
4. A member of the Oxford University (UK) astrophysics department
reports on the the unavailability of the alt.sex.* hierarchy and some
other parts of the alt.* hierarchy at his university. He also believes
that the situation at Oxford is similar throughout the UK.
<1991Nov27.110018.3066@vax.oxford.ac.uk>
Articles 5-8 discuss issues of user privacy vis-a-vis computers.
5. A sysadmin explains some positive uses for the ps command, and defends
generally the idea that "...if you don't have anything to hide, you have
no reason for privacy" in the context of computer systems. He also
advocates educational "cross-pollination" and productivity from
relatively open systems, especially in an educational environment.
<1991Nov27.031621.4433@usl.edu>
6. A sysadmin summarizes a previous post about privacy on computer
systems that says that the free flow of ideas is not the same as the free
flow of "more mundane personal data." He then contrasts this position
with his own, i.e., the difference between protected information as that
"for which a legitimate use has not been found" and protected information
as "all information which is not inherently sensitive" but excluding
email, which has an "expectation of privacy."
<1991Dec3.004350.10326@usl.edu>
7. A user continues the privacy discussion by critiquing the idea tha
t says that just because something is not technically unconstitutional,
that it is acceptable. He posits that free speech and privacy are not
necessarily incompatible, indicts the "if you have nothing to hide, you
have no reason for privacy" idea as a slippery-slope to erosion of
individual rights in general, and argues that "there will always be
tension between privacy and he free flow when it comes to certain kinds
of information. "
<199112042116.AA08975@eff.org>
8. Another user indicates his own views on privacy in computer systems.
He believes that "...the contents of an academic computer, other than
directory information and any publicly posted material, are private
unless their owners or creators choose to make them public." He also
suggests that such a policy should also pertain to students and staff,
as well as faculty.
<199112050610.AA19751@eff.org>
Articles 9-12 contain list various resources useful in discussions
of computers and academic freedom.
9. Listed is a bibliography on e-mail privacy, reposted with
permission from the researcher.
<1991Dec2.161917.2116@darwin.ntu.edu.au>
10. The various files that are available from the CAF archive are
listed, along with instructions on how to retrieve them and short
summaries of each subject heading.
<1991Dec2.213719.6458@eff.org>
11. A list of free speech resources that are available from the
CAF law archive are summarized and explained.
<1991Dec2.025652.9833@eff.org>
12. A student lists legal resources available online from the
Sydney University Law School archives.
<1991Dec1.121032.2094@darwin.ntu.edu.au>
Bob Solon, bsolon@dsac.dla.mil
Guest Editor
]
--- end abstract ---
CAF-News is a weekly digest of notes from CAF-talk.
CAF-News is available as newsgroup alt.comp.acad-freedom.news or via
email. If you read newsgroups but your site doesn't get
alt.comp.acad-freedom.news, (politely) ask your sys admin to
subscribe. For info on email delivery, send email to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the line
send acad-freedom caf
Back issues of CAF-News are available via anonymous ftp or via email.
Ftp to ftp.eff.org. The directory is pub/academic/news. For
information about email access to the archive, send an email note to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the lines
send acad-freedom README
help
index
Disclaimer: This CAF-News abstract was compiled by a guest editor or
by me, Carl M. Kadie. It is not an EFF publication. The views I
express and editorial decisions I make are my own.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: Abstract of CAF-News 01.41
Message-ID: <1991Dec13.204534.5395@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.181440.11182@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 20:45:34 GMT
kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
}This is an abstract for the most recent "Computers and Academic
}Freedom News" (CAF-News).
}2. Carl Kadie defends his (from an earlier article) criticisms of
}aspects of the University of Iowa computing policies, specifically:
}"Sending rude, obscene, or harassing material via any electronic mail
}or bulletin board facility is strictly forbidden." Several court cases...
Sorry, that's "Iowa State University", the "University of Iowa" has
enough problems without giving them some of ours. ;-)
I have also learned that that paragraph is being rewritten. I don't
think it is appropriate to post it until it is approved, but I will
note that "rude" has been replaced by "threatening" (in the draft I have).
John
--
John Hascall An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center john@iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011 515/294-9551 [fax -1717]
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: skunz@iastate.edu (Steven L Kunz)
Subject: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: skunz@cyride.cc.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: isu
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 22:04:24 GMT
*** ISU Usenet Access Policy ***
The following policy regarding news service from "news.iastate.edu" will be
placed into effect on January 6, 1992. If you wish to opt for a different level
of service than Standard (as described in the policy statement), the forms are
available now in the Computation Center administrative office, 291 Durham
Center.
A document describing Usenet News and the development of this policy is
available via anonymous ftp from "ftp.iastate.edu". Simply establish an ftp
session using the user name "anonymous" and any password and get the document
"/netinfo/news/usenet-news-policy". Also in that directory, you will find the
list of newsgroups excluded from the Standard offering in the file
"/netinfo/news/usenet-news-std-list". (As noted below, this list will also be
posted to "isu.newsgroups" each month.
Usenet News Policy
The Computation Center maintains a news server offering Usenet News lists for
the Iowa State University community. This offering of service must comply with
federal, state, and local laws; policies of the Iowa Board of Regents and Iowa
State University; and be within the guidelines of any agreements between the
university and local, regional, national, or international computer networks.
The Usenet News Administrator is responsible for the day-to-day management of the
service on the Iowa State University campus. Any material, particularly
locally-posted material, which could be harmful to a specific individual(s) may
be removed by the Usenet News Administrator. News lists which have large
resource requirements which adversely affect general use of Usenet News may be
restricted in some form by the Usenet News Administrator.
Any news list may contain material which is unfamiliar, unorthodox or unpopular
to some. Occasionally, even ordinary news lists may contain material which a
reader finds objectionable. Members of the university community have the right
to request a review of particular material by contacting the Usenet News
Administrator in writing. An alternative consistent with the Intellectual
Freedom Statement (as adopted by the American Library Association Council on
June 25, 1971) would be to recognize that each item available within Usenet
News is a view or mode of expression of the person posting the material. The
presentation of such material in Usenet News does not imply any endorsement by
those providing the news service or by those subscribing to it. This suggested
alternative does not apply to the public display of offensive materials, only
to the presence of material within Usenet. A separate policy governs the public
display of material.
Three variations of Usenet News lists are offered. These are called the Focused
News List, the Standard News List, and the Full News List.
The purpose of the Focused News List is to provide an alternative to those who
want their computer to only access news lists which appear to be focused on
academic information directly rather than hobby, recreational, or undefined
areas. The Focused News List contains all news lists except the alternative and
recreational hierarchies (i.e., "alt" and "rec"). Other hierarchies may also be
excluded in the future if their primary focus appears to be away from academic
information.
The purpose of the Standard News List is to provide access to the lists which
are unlikely to evoke questions regarding access, use or distribution of the
material. Hence, the Standard News List offering will explicitly exclude some
news groups. The Standard offering will be the default for campus use. The
excluded lists are those which by their name and accompanying description appear
to offer potential conflicts with law, (particularly with child protection and
pornography law) or with policies such as the sexual harassment policy. A list
of the excluded news lists will be posted monthly to the newsgroup
"isu.newsgroups" with the subject heading "Monthly Posting -- ISU Usenet Access
Policy - Standard List". If other news lists are created which appear to offer
these same potential conflicts, they will be added to the excluded list.
The purpose of the Full News List is to offer full access to all news lists to
anyone in the Iowa State community who requests it and acknowledges their
responsibility in accessing, using, and distributing material from it. Some
material in the full news feed may not be appropriate for general distribution.
It is the responsibility of those receiving the material to comply with
appropriate law and policy.
All computers served by the Computation Center news server will receive the
Standard News List as the default. Those persons in charge of computers
(time-sharing systems, workstations, or microcomputers) may request either the
Focused List or the Full list by filling out the appropriate form obtained from
the Computation Center administrative office, 291 Durham Center. The form for
the Focused News List acknowledges that certain material may not be available to
the specified computer. The form for the Full News List acknowledges
responsibility for access, use, and distribution of all Usenet material via that
specific computer via either console or remote use. Once either Full or Focused
access has been requested, the requester may revert to the Standard offering by
filling out a form.
All publicly-accessible computers in the Computation Center, with the exception
of the HDS WYLBUR time-sharing system, will offer the Standard News List only.
University users of WYLBUR may request access to the Full or Focused News Lists
by filling out the appropriate form obtained from 291 Durham Center. The form
acknowledges individual responsibility of the user-id owner for access, use, and
distribution of Usenet material. Some material in the full news feed may not be
appropriate for general distribution. It is the responsibility of those
receiving the material to comply with appropriate law and policy.
--
Steven L. Kunz
Networking & Communications | Usenet News Admin.
Iowa State University Computation Center, Iowa State University, Ames IA
INET: skunz@iastate.edu BITNET: gr.slk@isumvs.bitnet
Article 622 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: skunz@iastate.edu (Steven L Kunz)
Subject: New Usenet Policy on 1/6/92 - Standard List Definition
Message-ID: <1991Dec13.223123.9705@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: skunz@cyride.cc.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: isu
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 22:31:23 GMT
Note: This document relates the new Usenet News Policy that will be
activated at ISU on January 6, 1992. Please refer to a previous posting
to this group outlining that policy.
*** ISU "Standard List" Newsgroups ***
The "Standard News List" is the full Usenet newsgroup list MINUS
certain groups excluded because their name and accompanying description
appear to offer potential conflicts with law, (particularly with child
protection and pornography law) or with policies such as the sexual
harassment policy.
Reasons for the exclusion of certain groups from the "Standard List" are
outlined in the monthly posting to "isu.newsgroups" with the subject
"Monthly Posting -- ISU Usenet Access Policy - Policy Stmt". A full copy
of the ISU Usenet News Policy is available via anonymous FTP from
"ftp.iastate.edu" in the file:
net-info/news/usenet-news-policy
The following is a list of newsgroups that are unavailable unless a
person responsible for a system (or WYLBUR user-ID) has filled out a
"FULL NEWSGROUP ACCESS REQUEST" form (available from the Computation
Center main office, 291 Durham Center).
Groups currently not provided with "Standard" newsgroup access are:
alt.personals.bondage
alt.drugs
alt.psychoactives
alt.sex
alt.sex.bestiality
alt.sex.bondage
alt.sex.motss
alt.sex.pictures
alt.sex.pictures.d
If other news lists are created which appear to offer these same potential
conflicts, they will be added to the excluded lists.
--
Steven L. Kunz
Networking & Communications | Usenet News Admin.
Iowa State University Computation Center, Iowa State University, Ames IA
INET: skunz@iastate.edu BITNET: gr.slk@isumvs.bitnet
--
Steven L. Kunz
Networking & Communications | Usenet News Admin.
Iowa State University Computation Center, Iowa State University, Ames IA
INET: skunz@iastate.edu BITNET: gr.slk@isumvs.bitnet
Article 104 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sourada@iastate.edu (Steven D Ourada)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 00:03:13 GMT
In <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu> skunz@iastate.edu (Steven L Kunz) writes:
>*** ISU Usenet Access Policy ***
>The following policy regarding news service from "news.iastate.edu" will be
>placed into effect on January 6, 1992. If you wish to opt for a different level
>of service than Standard (as described in the policy statement), the forms are
>available now in the Computation Center administrative office, 291 Durham
>Center.
Ok, where's the form for those of us who only have access to the public
machines?
[I will spare everyone the standard anti-censorship speech here because I
assume that as a member of a university community you would already oppose
such restriction. Maybe not...]
I fail to see the point of this policy at all. Seldom have I heard anyone in
a computer room proclaim "Ooops, I accidentally subscribed to
alt.psychoactives, and now I can't unsubscribe! Oh my God, it's selecting
articles and forcing me to read them! Gee, if only someone had made those
newsgroups unavailable to me, I wouldn't have been damaged by these terrible
postings about Prosac!! Hmm, now I think I will sue I. S. U. and the
board of regents for making this material _AVAILABLE_ to me! It's almost as
if they were trying to make all points of view accessible to me so I can
become educated. I wonder if that evil library has things I don't agree with,
too?!?"
I can't imagine that anyone who has the ability to press the right combination
of buttons on a computer keyboard to be able to read news also lacks the
ability to discriminate between rec. groups and comp. groups. I also can't
imagine that person thinking they have the legal right to use I. S. U., etc.,
as scapegoats for thier own curiosity and/or stupidity.
I don't want the people who developed this policy here to think I am putting
the blame on them. I am putting the blame on them AND their higher-ups who are
probably the instigators of this plan to save us from our ability to read.
A concerned person,
Someone who is able to think for himself,
A fighter for intellectual freedom,
Steven Ourada
Article 623 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 01:12:44 GMT
I'd like to point out that there are a growing number of students in the
residence halls (including myself) who until now enjoyed the ability to read
the news from their rooms. I should think there would be a lot of complaints
if vincent1 did not have full news access. I, of course, can't imagine who
would incite these complaints...
I do realize that having access to vincent and Internet are great priveledges,
but I think the goal of the Iowa State University Computation Center should be
to provide faculty AND STUDENTS with as broad an experience as possible and to
provide as open an access as possible to the world that we all live in. I
don't care if some machines are restricted, but I do hope that the Comp Center
will attempt to continue to provide me free and extremely open access to
internet. If it appears that vincent users would not mind restriction of news
access on vincent1, I could arrange to prove this false...
Maybe you should put stickers on all the terminals...
"Parental guidance provided courtesy of Iowa State University" ?
-John Vencill vencill@iastate.edu
Article 626 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: michael@iastate.edu (Michael M Huang)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 01:42:04 GMT
It was a snowy Monday, and John Doe was frozen to the soul as he trudged into
the computer room. There, he plopped himself down in front of the last open
workstation. With the fingers now so used to typing in the account name and
password, he swiftly logged himself into the system. After a week of absence,
he is ready to do some serious reading, replying, and best of all, flaming!
And when he did get into USENET, he found that a new group has been added:
alt.sex.acts.that.you.would.never.try.while.you.are.alive. Wondering what in
the world that it CAN be, he subscribed to it and read through the first ten
thousands or so articles. He pondered over a particular article and wondered
how it might work....
Later that night, John Doe approached his girl friend....
The next day, the two young people were found [Details censored by the writer
himself]. The parents were in total grief, and at the same time, in total
outrage. How dare the University offer an information source such as this
to young adults who are capable of reading and understanding the information
presented within? The parents sued the school....
Disclaimer: These are my own ideas. So don't bug anyone else about it.
-michael
--
Michael M. Huang MAC Slave at High Tc Update
(michael@IAState.Edu) Superconductivity Info. Center
Opinions are my own & noone else's. Ames Labs, ISU, Ames, Iowa, USA
"If train stations are where trains stop, how 'bout 'em workstations?"
Article 629 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: goldberg@iastate.edu (Adam Goldberg)
Subject: Re: New Usenet Policy on 1/6/92 - Standard List Definition
Message-ID:
Originator: goldberg@vincent1.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.223123.9705@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 04:17:41 GMT
In <1991Dec13.223123.9705@news.iastate.edu> skunz@iastate.edu (Steven L Kunz) writes:
> [...Only Wylbur users who specifically ask for these groups may receive them]
>The following is a list of newsgroups that are unavailable unless a
>person responsible for a system (or WYLBUR user-ID) has filled out a
>"FULL NEWSGROUP ACCESS REQUEST" form (available from the Computation
>Center main office, 291 Durham Center).
>Groups currently not provided with "Standard" newsgroup access are:
> alt.personals.bondage
> alt.drugs
> alt.psychoactives
> alt.sex
> alt.sex.bestiality
> alt.sex.bondage
> alt.sex.motss
> alt.sex.pictures
> alt.sex.pictures.d
>If other news lists are created which appear to offer these same potential
>conflicts, they will be added to the excluded lists.
This sucks in a big bad hairy way. While I could POSSIBLY see the reasons
for excluding two groups (namely, alt.sex.pictures & alt.binaries.pictures.
erotica) I fail to see any reason for excluding the rest.
They are all text-based discussions on topics people like to talk about
(or argue about). alt.drugs, for example, is a seething mess of useful
information about the War On Drugs (read: War On You) and other nifty
things.
If the university library subscribes to Playboy, why the HELL can't alt.sex,
alt.drugs etc be read on one's favorite news-reading system????
--
Article 105 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.privacy] Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
Message-ID: <9112141757.AA23889@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 14 Dec 91 05:57:51 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker)
Subject: Re: New Usenet Policy on 1/6/92 - Standard List Definition
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.060314.21529@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.223123.9705@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 06:03:14 GMT
This new policy on the newsgroups is blatant censorship. Any nonsense
about ``protecting ourselves legally'' should be tossed on the dung
heap where it belongs. Do people really believe that groups that are
internationally transmitted aren't within legal guidelines?
Just for the sake of argument, I decided to look in the library for
some interesting books on the subjects of the banned groups. Maybe
someone will want to get a big fire burning for them -- not.
[Note: For all practical purposes the groups have been banned from the
average student. Or maybe the Comp Center wants this to be the motive
force in getting students using WYLBUR. ]
In the alt.sex.bondage group,
_Sex slavery: a documentary report on the international scene
today._ By Barlay, Stephen.
In the alt.psychoactives group,
_Psychoactive drugs and sex_, by Abel, Ernest L.
In the alt.sex.pictures group,
_Degas, the nudes_, by Thomson, Richard.
or on a lighter note,
_The sex atlas : a new illustrated guide_ by Erwin J. Haeberle
;photography by Laird Sutton.
In the alt.sex.bestiality group,
_Deviant life-styles_, edited by James M. Henslin. (should
find stuff about it in some book like this.)
For alt.drugs fans,
If you want to know which ones....
_Drugs of abuse._
Publisher: Washington, D.C. : U.S. Dept. of Justice, Drug Enforcement
Administration : For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S.
G.P.O., 1985.
Or let's say you wanted specific information,
_Marijuana_, by Mark S. Gold.
For an anxious alt.sex reader,
_The female orgasm; psychology, physiology, fantasy._
By, Fisher, Seymour.
As they say, ``You can find it all at your library.'' Why should the
Computation Center follow any different rules?
It is the posters(authors) themselves that are legally held
responsible for what they write or distribute. The U.S. Postal
Service is not sued for letting people send obscene materials across
state lines. The violators of the Comstock laws are the ones that get
prosecuted.
This policy is not acceptable.
Mark D. Smucker --- mds@iastate.edu
Article 106 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker)
Subject: Some more groups to ban.
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.075201.23947@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: mds@pv7422.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 07:52:01 GMT
I went and read through the .newsrc file(it's really long!) and found
some groups that I wondered why they had escaped the censors.
Any answers?
alt.evil Horrid talks about sawing up of cats and such...
rec.humor Lots of racist and blonde jokes.
rec.nude Having trouble taking off your clothes?
rec.pyrotechnics How to make things go BOOM! (Like a Comp Center)
alt.skinheads Sounds nasty, but these are anti-racist skinheads...
alt.forgery Faking news postings. Could be used illegally.
alt.hackers Good-not bad hackers. Oh well.
alt.suicide.holiday Serious discussions about, and how to do it.
alt.tasteless Ick. Puke. Yuck.
alt.beer Drugs. Drugs. Drugs.
I read the entire policy, and for example, it talks about rec.humor.
One question remains, will all those alt.* groups that are not being
taken on at the moment, appear on the sixth of Jan.?
Mark D. Smucker ----- mds@iastate.edu
Article 108 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: skunz@iastate.edu (Steven L Kunz)
Subject: Re: Some more groups to ban.
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.075201.23947@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 13:57:30 GMT
In <1991Dec14.075201.23947@news.iastate.edu> mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker) writes:
>One question remains, will all those alt.* groups that are not being
>taken on at the moment, appear on the sixth of Jan.?
Yes - the creation of new groups in the "alt" hierarchy will resume after
the new Usenet News Policy has been activated. I will announce a new
alt group creation policy sometime (shortly) after 1/6/92 that will allow
the creation of "alt" groups based on traffic (and not on Gene Spafford's
list that comes out every three months). Any new "alt" groups that get
created (there will be many - probably 30-40 right away) will be added
under the guidelines of the new policy (and may be eligible for the
exclusions from the "standard list").
--
Steven L. Kunz
Networking & Communications | Usenet News Admin.
Iowa State University Computation Center, Iowa State University, Ames IA
INET: skunz@iastate.edu BITNET: gr.slk@isumvs.bitnet
Article 114 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: UseNet News
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.172433.22210@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 14 Dec 91 17:24:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: m.1991Dec14.172433.22210
References: <23506@skye.dcs.ed.ac.uk>
ajs@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Alastair Scobie) writes:
[...]
>Recently we've been under increased pressure to provide both access to reading
>and posting Usenet news to the students, now from the lecturers. Giving access
>to reading is a straight resource issue that we can probably solve. The
>posting of news is what worries us. As usual, it's a case of a few trouble
>makers spoiling it for the vast majority of well behaved students.
[...]
--- FAQ netnews.writing----
q: Should my university allow students to post to Netnews?
a: Yes. Free inquiry and free expression are an important part of a
university's mission. Most universities encourage and support student
expression and publication. Most universities also seem to give full
network access to all users, even students. (This conclusion is based
on an informal survey posted to comp.admin.policy in October, 1991.
[cafv01n33])
There is probably no need to create special rules for student computer
media; your university likely already has rules for student media.
(Look in your Student Code.) In the U.S., most student publications
are free of university screening, censorship, and most retaliation.
(For state universities, this is a legal requirement.) At the same
time, most universities disclaim responsibility for student
publications, even when the university "owns the presses."
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================
caf-statement
=================
This is an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to
academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion
about computers and academic freedom.
Comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to
CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line.
=================
student.freedoms
=================
Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main
statement on student academic freedom.
=================
news/cafv01n33
=================
[No annotation available.]
=================
faq/netnews.reading
=================
q: Should my university remove Netnews newsgroups because some
people find them offensive? If it doesn't have the resources
to carry all newsgroups, how should newsgroups be selected?
=================
faq/media.control
=================
q: Since freedom of the press belongs to those who own presses, a
public university can do anything it wants with the media that it
owns, right?
=================
law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
=================
Excerpts from San Diego Committee v. Governing Bd., 790 F.2d 1471
(1986). A decision by an appellate court that applied the Supreme
Court's Public Forum Doctrine (to a school newspaper).
=================
law/stanley-v-magrath
=================
Comments from _Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd
Ed. by Martha M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe, published in
1987 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. It says, in part, "[a]lthough school
boards are not obligated to support student papers, if a given
publication was originally created as a free speech forum, removal of
financial or other school board support can be construed as an
unlawful effort to stifle free expression." Also, "school
authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication simply
because of displeasure with the content" and "the content of a
school-sponsored paper that is established as a medium for student
expression cannot be regulated more closely than a nonsponsored
paper". Also, it tells what to do about libel in student
publications.
=================
law/student-publications.misc
=================
The book _Law of the Student Press_ by the Student Press Law Center
(1985,1988), says that four-letter words are protected speech, that
public universities are not likely to be liable for publications that
they for which they do not control the contents, and that the
_Hazelwood_ decision does not apply to universities.
=================
law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin
=================
The full text of UWM POST v. U. of Wisconsin. This recent district
court ruling goes into detail about the difference between protected
offensive expression and illegal harassment. It even mentions email.
It concludes: "The founding fathers of this nation produced a
remarkable document in the Constitution but it was ratified only with
the promise of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment is central to
our concept of freedom. The God-given "unalienable rights" that the
infant nation rallied to in the Declaration of Independence can be
preserved only if their application is rigorously analyzed.
The problems of bigotry and discrimination sought to be addressed here
are real and truly corrosive of the educational environment. But
freedom of speech is almost absolute in our land and the only
restriction the fighting words doctrine can abide is that based on the
fear of violent reaction. Content-based prohibitions such as that in
the UW Rule, however well intended, simply cannot survive the
screening which our Constitution demands."
=================
law/rust-v-sullivan
=================
The decision and decent for the so-called abortion information gag
rule case. The decision explicitly mentions universities as a place
where free expression is so important that gag rules would not be
allowed.
=================
law/perry-v-perry
=================
Comments from the ACLU Handbook _The Rights of _Teachers_. It says
that campus mail systems (and other school facilities) can be limited
public forums. (Perry v. Perry was about an interschool mail system.
It was one of the cases that defined the Public Forum Doctrine.)
Also, a paraphrase from an ACLU handbook _The Rights of Teachers_. It
says that generally, speech, if otherwise shielded from punishment by
the First Amendment, does not lose that protection because its tone is
sharp.
Also, from p. 92, it says that there are legal limits to what a
(public) school can ask its teachers to sign. [Some of these same
limits might apply to what a school can ask a user to sign as a
condition of getting (or keeping) a computer account.]
=================
=================
To get these documents by email, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line(s):
send acad-freeedom caf-statement
send acad-freeedom student.freedoms
send caf-news cafv01n33
send caf-faq netnews.reading
send caf-faq media.control
send caf-law san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
send caf-law stanley-v-magrath
send caf-law student-publications.misc
send caf-law uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin
send caf-law rust-v-sullivan
send caf-law perry-v-perry
The files are also available via anonymous ftp from ftp.eff.org
(191.88.144.3) as file(s):
pub/academic/caf-statement
pub/academic/student.freedoms
pub/academic/news/cafv01n33
pub/academic/faq/netnews.reading
pub/academic/faq/media.control
pub/academic/law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
pub/academic/law/stanley-v-magrath
pub/academic/law/student-publications.misc
pub/academic/law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin
pub/academic/law/rust-v-sullivan
pub/academic/law/perry-v-perry
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger)
Subject: Re: [alt.privacy] Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
Message-ID: <3587@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil>
Date: 14 Dec 91 22:50:30 GMT
References: <9112141757.AA23889@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
In article <9112141757.AA23889@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
|
|From: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John G. Otto)
|Newsgroups: alt.privacy
|Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Finger & Liberty
|Message-ID: <1991Dec12.192816.15279@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
|Date: 13 Dec 91 00:28:15 GMT
|
|>In article <1991Dec11.164136.28775@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes...
|>> otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu writes:
|>>> But why should such basic information as address and name and office
|>>> number of a university-owned account be concealed? Would you also
|>>> say that one's office phone and room number be removed from a first-floor
|>>> building directory?
|
|>> Because of disagreement about what is "basic [therefore exempt from
|>> decorum] information".
|>> Yes. One should be asked for one's preference.
|
|The rest of Wes' followup is an illustration of the above.
|
|>> Revelation of any information without the originator/owner's permission
|>> is a violation of his privacy. Revealing information without such
|>> permission pushes us into tyranny (not to mention psychotic exhibitionism
|
|> So, the departmental phone list I just received, listing every faculty
|> and staff member's name, office, and phone number, is a violation of
|> their privacy? After all, they didn't ask me if they could put my
|> information on the list!
|
|Yes it is a violation of their privacy. Even here one has the opportunity
|to prevent such private information from being disclosed.
It is unclear to me that such information at a publicly supported school is
private data. It may very well be considered as part of the public record,
by law, covered by the federal Freedom of Information Act or a corresponding
state statute.
|> Since they issued that phone number to me FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF MY
|> OFFICIAL DUTIES AS AN EMPLOYEE, wouldn't they have the right to dis-
|> tribute that information? Isn't it essential for others to have the
|> ability to find my phone number, for purposes of my work?
|
|No, it is not. For example, I am the lead hot-line consultant. My name
|is not in the directory. There is, however, an entry for the research &
|instruction computing center, which gets them a receptionist. The
|receptionist routes the call to the appropriate people.
Public employees, in addition to assuming a responsibility to the public trust,
also appear to give up at least a small measure of the privacy they might
enjoy if they were instead employed in the private sector.
|> Since users are given access to academic systems FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF
|> THEIR DUTIES, wouldn't the same logic apply to listing users' names or
|> *work* office/phone numbers?
|
|Duty Schmooty. I agree to help people use computers. They agree to pay
|me. When people talk about "duty" I reach for a firearm and my wallet.
If you are a public employee, you have assumed certain duties and
responsibilities, and under some circumstances a decrease in your privacy.
If you don't like it, leave the public sector of employment (or get the
laws changed).
[deleted]
|>Wes
|
|>ps> The only information in the finger data on our system is the
|> name, major, and student status (undergraduate or graduate
|> student). We do not offer chfn. All three of these items
|> are public information.
|
|Once, again, I disagree. It's nobody's business but mine and my
|academic advisors' (yes, plural) what my majors, if any, are.
|Ditto (mutatis mutandis) for grad/under, faculty, staff, contractor.
|If they want it released or advertised, that's fine, but be courteous
|by giving them a chance to say otherwise...jgo John G. Otto
|otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
It my very well be public information (a matter of public record) as defined
by law in a particular state. That an individual feels that the information
should be private may not matter if its release is required by law.
It appears that this discussion has hit upon one of the conflicts of this
information age - freedom of information vs. protection of individual privacy.
What one individual feels should be public knowledge and publicly accessible
is considered privileged and private by another. I don't know that this
issue will ever be resolved.
Jeff Schweiger
--
*******************************************************************************
Jeff Schweiger Standard Disclaimer CompuServe: 74236,1645
Internet (Milnet): schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil
*******************************************************************************
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From helen Sun Jan 12 08:30:42 1992
Received: by eff.org id AA21489
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Sun, 12 Jan 1992 13:30:46 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Originator: tjlee@pv7428.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 23:04:33 GMT
Steven D. Ourada writes:
>I fail to see the point of this policy at all. Seldom have I heard anyone in
>a computer room proclaim "Ooops, I accidentally subscribed to
>alt.psychoactives, and now I can't unsubscribe! Oh my God, it's selecting
>articles and forcing me to read them! Gee, if only someone had made those
>newsgroups unavailable to me, I wouldn't have been damaged by these terrible
>postings about Prosac!! Hmm, now I think I will sue I. S. U. and the
>board of regents for making this material _AVAILABLE_ to me! It's almost as
>if they were trying to make all points of view accessible to me so I can
>become educated. I wonder if that evil library has things I don't agree with,
>too?!?"
Look, I don't usually cause trouble, but I feel that I must add
my voice to those who oppose the new policy. Under the policy, those
who aren't system administrators (which includes all students, and some
faculty and staff) will find that not only have they been denied access
to certain newsgroups -- they've even been denied all say about whether
or not they will have access.
It's true that people sue at the drop of a hat nowadays (Omigod!
Your hat just broke my pet ant Maurice's leg! We're suing!), but nobody
can force anybody to read Usenet postings. You have to go out of your
way to even learn how, since the knowledge isn't required for any class
that I know of. I wish I had Steven's skill with sarcasm, but I
heartily agree with him.
There's no law that says that the computer center must provide
us with access to anything at all, but it can't be denied that this new
policy smacks either of plain and simple censorship or of acquiescence
to imaginary, groundless future lawsuits.
-- Tom Lee, physics graduate student, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa --
Internet: tjlee@iastate.edu | "You can't measure time in hours the way you can
or: tab47@ccvax.iastate.edu | money in dollars because every day is different."
Bitnet: tab47@isuvax.BITNET | -- Jorge Luis Borges
Article 631 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1991 23:19:33 GMT
OK, if someone sued ISU for making available information like alt.sex.acts.
that.you.would.never.try.while.you.are.alive, what are their chances of getting
money?
While we're at it, maybe we should make students sign disclaimers before they
take ChemE classes? Wouldn't want them making lethal chemicals. And NucE
classes. Nuclear reactions are generally not healthy. High voltages can be
fun; maybe we should restrict half the EE classes, too. As I see it, the
whole purpose of a university is to make information available.
-John Vencill vencill@iastate.edu
Article 630 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: viking@iastate.edu (Daniel R Sorenson)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 01:22:50 GMT
In <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu> vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill) writes:
>OK, if someone sued ISU for making available information like alt.sex.acts.
>that.you.would.never.try.while.you.are.alive, what are their chances of
>getting money?
Pretty darn good if the University has to defend itself. They may
not be awarded any money, but lawyers on retainer still cost a lot, and
their salary has to come from somewhere.
>While we're at it, maybe we should make students sign disclaimers before they
>take ChemE classes? Wouldn't want them making lethal chemicals. And NucE
>classes. Nuclear reactions are generally not healthy. High voltages can be
>fun; maybe we should restrict half the EE classes, too. As I see it, the
>whole purpose of a university is to make information available.
I never had to sign any disclaimers while in my NucE classes, and
Chem or Physics labs all assumed we were inteligent enough not to do too
many stupid things. However, this claim cannot be extended to Usenet.
I have two propositions: first, one can claim that since the
alt.sex.* heiarchy contain much by way of support for homosexuals, it
could probably be hyped up to such an extent that GSB and various
other organizations would cry "Homophobia! Censorship!" and start
their own lawsuit against this, or as a student you are free to use
the student legal services to start your own. That is idea #1.
Idea #2 consists of merely asking if there is a less restrictive
way to do this. For example, the proposition looks to be one that
is machine-specific. Is there any easy way to make it account-specific?
How about an easy may of making it location-specific? If I telnet in
from my office I have no business reading alt.sex, but at home I see no
reason why I shouldn't. My other option is to download and compile the
newsreading software and politely ask for a newsfeed to my machine for
those groups I am unable to read presently. This, I claim, is a waste
of resources, but it is another option. Hopefully we can work with the
administrators is something besides a confrontational manner.
As a site administrator, I go out of my way to see that my users
have the best access I can give them. As a site administrator, I also
know that the abusive people tend to wait longer for their support and
may get so tiresome that I'll simply claim "It's not possible." rather
than spend the extra time to make it work.
Dan Sorenson
<=======================================================================>
<"Responsibility" means having to take the blame for your own mistakes. >
<"Power" means you can make other people take the blame for your >
< mistakes. -- Cerebus the Aardvark >
<=======================================================================>
Article 632 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjn@iastate.edu (Tony J Neyens)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.014207.13982@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 01:42:07 GMT
In article tjlee@iastate.edu
(Tom Lee) writes:
> Look, I don't usually cause trouble, but I feel that I must add
>my voice to those who oppose the new policy. Under the policy, those
>who aren't system administrators (which includes all students, and some
>faculty and staff) will find that not only have they been denied access
>to certain newsgroups -- they've even been denied all say about whether
>or not they will have access.
If you're reading from VAX or Project Vincent, that's true. But note that
users of Wylbur (and you are registered on Wylbur if you did register for
VAX using the REGISTER facility) can get the full feed.
>From the policy article:
> University users of WYLBUR may request access to the Full or Focused News
> Lists by filling out the appropriate form obtained from 291 Durham Center.
(But watch your activity, you only have $250.00 of usage charges available,
unless you start paying the university with your own money!)
I just want to correct one point about the proposal (just give the facts!),
I'm officially staying out of this touchy and very controversal issue.
--Tony
--
Tony Neyens, a student at Iowa State University
E-Mail: tjn@iastate.edu (Alternate address: TABN9@isuvax.iastate.edu)
Article 633 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.025729.15997@news.iastate.edu>
Followup-To: isu.talk.misc
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 02:57:29 GMT
In article 631 viking@iastate.edu (Daniel R Sorenson) writes:
>In <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu> vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill) writes:
>>OK, if someone sued ISU for making available information like alt.sex.acts.
>>that.you.would.never.try.while.you.are.alive, what are their chances of
>>getting money?
>
> Pretty darn good if the University has to defend itself. They may
>not be awarded any money, but lawyers on retainer still cost a lot, and
>their salary has to come from somewhere.
Oh please. Take for example the case in which the parents sued the
band ``Judas Priest'' for causing the suicide of their son. The
parents claimed the music had such a large influence on such a young
mind that ``Judas Priest'' was responsible for causing their son's
suicide. The parents lost.
Currently, some people are suing the author of _Final Exit_ for
giving information on how to commit suicide, which they purport led to
their spouse or child's death. The bookstores are not getting sued
for selling the book.
Did the CC consult legal representatives in the formulation of their
policy? If people are scared legally about offering news service,
then why haven't they made a statement that ``Use of this news server
constitutes an agreement to remove the CC from any legal obligations
that may result in your use of it.''
>>While we're at it, maybe we should make students sign disclaimers before they
>>take ChemE classes? Wouldn't want them making lethal chemicals. And NucE
>>classes. Nuclear reactions are generally not healthy. High voltages can be
>>fun; maybe we should restrict half the EE classes, too. As I see it, the
>>whole purpose of a university is to make information available.
>
> I never had to sign any disclaimers while in my NucE classes, and
>Chem or Physics labs all assumed we were intelligent enough not to do too
>many stupid things. However, this claim cannot be extended to Usenet.
You entirely missed his point. If I take enough chemistry classes, I
will eventually be capable of making a high quality version of ``Angel
Dust.'' If I make this drug and sell it, I have committed a federal
crime, but the University is not responsible for my actions.
Follow-up to isu.talk.misc
Mark D. Smucker ----- mds@iastate.edu
Article 634 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 03:55:34 GMT
In tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee) writes:
> There's no law that says that the computer center must provide
>us with access to anything at all, but it can't be denied that this new
>policy smacks either of plain and simple censorship or of acquiescence
>to imaginary, groundless future lawsuits.
Try explaining this to Joe Legislator in Des Moines who holds the
purse strings.
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 635 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 03:58:11 GMT
In viking@iastate.edu (Daniel R Sorenson) writes:
> Idea #2 consists of merely asking if there is a less restrictive
>way to do this. For example, the proposition looks to be one that
>is machine-specific. Is there any easy way to make it account-specific?
Unfortunately the Comp. Center does not have the technology to do
this at present. If you would volunteer to produce software to make this
possible, I am sure they would be more than glad to accomodate you.
The only reason (logical?) this is being done is to transfer the
responsibility ( of all kinds) from the provider to the reader. Maybe
this was not made clear in the postings, but it was clearly mentioned
to me by the Director of the Comp. Center. This does not necessarily
mean I agree with it, but it does make sense. Since this is possible
on Wylbur, (you can get a account) I don't see how rights are
infringed. You just have to go through some extra trouble.
Shiva Shenoy (GSS representative to the Comp. Adv. Committee)
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 636 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.043758.19840@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 04:37:58 GMT
OK, lemme offer a suggestion and see how badly I get flamed. If I want to see
alt.sex.acts.that.will.get.isu.sued now, I type nnsub and type in the name of
the group. When this new policy is in effect, however, I'll have to sign a
sheet of paper saying I'm responsible, etc., THEN type whatever the wylbur
subscribe command is. Since the only difference seems to be the contents of
that sheet of paper, would it be possible and/or acceptable to just put an
annoying message in the nnsub command sort of like the send command's "this
message will be spread to millions of machines and cost billions of dollars
and probably send the world spiralling into utter destruction" message?
Just a thought.
-John Vencill vencill@iastate.edu
Article 637 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: spam@IASTATE.EDU (Michael L Begley)
Subject: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 05:05:19 GMT
this is long, but please read it all, carefully.
The new ISU Usenet news policy is completely unacceptable, because it assumes
the irresponsibility of the reader before they prove to be unable to handle
the content of the groups. Furthermore, it imposes censorship on all persons
not fortunate enough to have their own 'privately owned' machine on the ISU
network. Finally, it requires that anyone who does want to read these groups
must sign a form that will be filed away by the university, which is an
obscene invasion of privacy.
The policy claims to not be censorous, yet it excludes virtually the entire
student body. This is the worst sort of censorship, the sort that claims to
provide free access and yet excludes access to nearly everyone in question.
The publicly accessable machines, if any, must receive a full feed because
they are public. Otherwise the restrictions become modern-day Jim Crow laws,
restricting freedoms to the few who have the resources or status.
As has been stated ad-infinitum, no one is forced to read news. No one
who reads news is forced to read alt.sex. However, I'm quite certain
these groups contain valuable information to the general student body.
With few exceptions, students 'experiment' with sex and drugs in college.
Hell, I did. By providing a forum for students to discuss their beliefs,
fears, and questions, oftentimes anonymously, alt.sex & alt.drugs may be
the best way to learn the 'truth' about these topics. Instead, ISU plans to
sweep these ideas under the carpet, and hope no one raises a ruckass. How
many students are going to discover on their own that cocaine use is a bad
idea, because they didn't know where to ask for information?
This is how censorship occurs. It's not some sweeping government decree.
It's not thought police watching your every move. It's when the vocal
minorities, in voicing their discontent with others, influence publishers
into not publishing questionable works. It's when people tell you that
some ideas are 'bad' and not to think about them. It's when the people in
charge cave in to outside pressures instead of fighting for their
beliefs. And it's when the general public sits back and accepts the
censorship, or even praises it. To quote Ray Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451:
"Now let's take up the minorities in our civilization,
shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities
Don't step on the toes of the dog-lovers, the cat-lovers,
doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists
Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians,
Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from
Oregon or Mexico. The people in this book, this play,
TV serial are not meant to represent any actual painters
cartographers, mechanics anywhere. The bigger your
market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, rem-
ember that! All the minor minor minorities with their ears
to be kept clean. Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock
your typewriters. They did. Magazines became a nice
blend of vanilla tapioca. Books, so the snobbish critics
said, were dishwater. Now wonder books stopped selling, the
critics said.
[...]
There you have it, Montag. It didn't come from the Gov-
ernment down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no
cansorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploi-
laton, and minority pressure carried the trick. Today,
thanks to them, you can stay happy all the time, you
are allowed to read comics, the good old confessions, or
journals."
[...]
...We must all be alike. Not everyone born
free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone
made equal. Each man the image of every other; then all
happy, for there are no mountains to make them
cower, to judge themselves against. So! A book is a loaded
gun in the house next door. Burn it. Take the shot from
the weapon. Breach man's mind. Who knows who might be
the target of the well-read man? Me? I won't stomach
them for a minute. And so when houses were finally fire-
proofed completely, all over the world (you were correct
your assumption the other night) there was no longer
of firemen for the old purposes. They were given the
job, as custodians of our peace of mind, the focus of
our understandable dread of being inferior;
official censors, judges, and executors.
[...]
"Colored people don't like Little Black Sambo. Burn it.
White people do't feel good about Uncle Tom's Cabin.
Burn it. Someone's written a book on tobacco and cancer
of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the
book. Serenity, Montog. Peace, Montag.
Censorship creeps up on you. Some 'obviously objectionable' material here,
something questionable stuff there, and eventually netnews becomes a nice
blend of vanilla tapioca, worthless to the general public. This decade,
sex and drugs are the 'taboo' topics. So they get squashed. Next decade
it'll be Communism and Cyberpunk. So those get squashed. Eventually everyone
gets used to the idea of challenging information getting squashed. Or perhaps
we've already reached that state.
Technically, I don't see the rationalle behind restricting news on a machine
basis. I don't know the internals of news service software, but it *must*
know, somehow, what user on what machine is receiving the articles. At the
very least, the computer could finger the 'offending' computer to check the
user. If the user is on a list of "people who want a restricted feed" then
they should be refused access. This sort of system would work on nearly
every machine, because, with the exception of vincent1 and other publicly
telnettable machines, there is almost always only the one user one a
workstation. The news software merely has to finger this machine to see who's
on. For the publicly telnettable machines, it should be a full feed until
the Center can overcome the technical difficulties of letting people
censor themselves.
The policy claims to follow the Parks Library policy on dispensing material.
I don't agree. First, as has been already pointed out, the Parks library
has *many* books in general distribution covering all of the topics currently
being banned (yes! banned!) from the net. Second, if it refers to the
periodicals section (the only place I can think of that has stuff 'behind
the counter' at the library) than the new Usenet policy doesn't follow what I
view as the 'spirit' of the library's policy. The periodicals section holds
certain material behind the desk not because it's objectionable, but actually
to promote free access. If Playboy, for example, were out among the general
periodicals, it would quickly be cut up and turned into wallhangings or
whatnot, if it even remained in the library at all! By keeping Playboy behind
the counter, along with other often stolen or vandalized magazines, including
Computer Shopper, Time and Sports Illustrated, they're raising the likelihood
that they will remain available & unmutilated for all. But you don't need to
carry that attitude to Usenet News. Someone can't cut a picture out of
alt.sex.pictures and destroy an article in rec.boating on the next page.
Someone can't steal a months postings to alt.drugs and thereby deny everyone
from reading alt.personals. Netnews isn't printed material and needn't be
treated as such, although it must be protected just as vehemently. And it
must be distributed with as much privacy to the reader as is possible.
The idea of 'filling out a form to gain full access' frightens me. Does
this mean the university is maintaining a file of 'drug abusing perverts'?
How McCarthyist! No, I don't believe the university can absolutely guarantee
complete privacy of such files. Whenever information is collected, there is
the danger of it being misused.To predict the most absurd case, imagine if,
someday, a graduate of ISU is up for a high-level government position. For
example, as a Supreme Court Justice...
..."Sir, We have evidence that you, while a sophmore in college, read
alt.sex.anal.unlubricated. Do you deny this?"
..." uhhhhhhhh..........."
That could be a lot more damaging than a pubic hair on a can of coke, and
probably just as irrelevant. But seriously, this sort of information can be
subpoened, illicitly given to potential employers, or otherwise distributed.
The policy needs to be reassessed. The Computation Center, as a university
organization, must follow a policy of universal access. Instead of
subjecting everyone to censorship because of a few people's discontent,
everyone should get full access unless they decide otherwise. The policy
should be similar to the following:
o All users may read a full feed from the server.
o Those who feel they don't want the offensive groups should fill
out a form that will set them up for the 'standard feed'.
o employers reserve the right to set up the focused feed for their
employees on their machines. (after all, the employers are paying
their employees to work, not read news...)
The students and faculty affected need to fight against this censorship.
Perhaps someone could set up an alternate newsfeed, on the campus network
but outside of the jurisdiction of the computation center. Anyone willing
with a snappy enough unix box, and 300 meg hard drive, and an on campus
address (ie ethernet) could do this easily enough. I have these resources
myself, and I may take on this responsibility if I have the time and backing.
Perhaps someone should start an organization called the Association Letting
The Students Experience X (X=Anything) [or ALTSEX for short], that would
work to promote free and private electronic discourse for all students.
Otherwise, someone could take it upon him/herself to consistantly repost
all the articles on the 'forbidden groups' to another group, like
isu.talk.computer-fee, or alt.censorship with an ISU-only distributution.
Or to encourage all posters to the 'forbidden groups' to crosspost to
isu.test Some people might say that this is against the ISU Code of Computer
Ethics (a rather unenforcably vague document). But, as Martin Luther King jr.
wrote:
... there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first
to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral
responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral
responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine
that "an unjust law is no law at all."
Otherwise, if the students and faculty just sit back and allow peer groups
to pressure the university into surpressing information, than the slide
into censorship will continue. What's after alt.sex & alt.drugs?
alt.rock-n-roll? alt.beer? alt.atheism? comp.org.eff.talk? At what
point will netnews become useless fluff, an electronic People Magazine?
We've all grown up and it's time to challenge the beliefs of our mother,
father and Big Brother. Does ISU trust itself and its students so little
that it can't bring itself to promote free and private expression? A
netnews-like system promises to become the information sourse ot the next
generation. We teeter on the brink of the information age. ISU, don't stain
it with the filth of censorship. Don't become the guradians of my morality,
for the bandits of free-thought have already taken up residence and there's
nothing left to guard.
Article 638 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Originator: tjlee@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 05:21:13 GMT
Shiva Shenoy writes:
>The only reason (logical?) this is being done is to transfer the
>responsibility ( of all kinds) from the provider to the reader. Maybe
>this was not made clear in the postings, but it was clearly mentioned
>to me by the Director of the Comp. Center.
Unless you have a WYLBUR account, which I do not, this doesn't
transfer responsibility to the reader -- it removes access to
information from the reader.
I don't have a WYLBUR account, and I am not aware of how
accessible one is to me. (If it costs me money to get one, this is
restricting access to information on the basis of ability to pay.)
Somehow, I doubt the Comp. Center would approve of my getting a WYLBUR
account solely to read news.
-- Tom Lee, physics graduate student, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa --
Internet: tjlee@iastate.edu | "You can't measure time in hours the way you can
or: tab47@ccvax.iastate.edu | money in dollars because every day is different."
Bitnet: tab47@isuvax.BITNET | -- Jorge Luis Borges
--------------------
--
| William W. Arnold | warnold@eff.org | has8wwa@cabell.vcu.edu |
| Co-moderator: Computers and Academic Freedom Mailing list |
| I speak for myself, not {him, her, it, eff}. |
From helen Mon Dec 16 13:43:13 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA01848
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Mon, 16 Dec 1991 18:43:15 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Originator: tjlee@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.043758.19840@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 05:27:37 GMT
John Vencill writes:
>... would it be possible and/or acceptable to just put an annoying
>message in the nnsub command sort of like the send command's "this
>message will be spread to millions of machines and cost billions of
>dollars and probably send the world spiralling into utter destruction"
>message?
It would be perfectly acceptable to me. Would it be sufficient
protection from liability if the Comp. Center put a message something
like this into all the newsreaders, to be displayed before users read
anything?: "Messages found on USENET's newsgroups are written and posted
by individuals acting on their own, not by University employees who are
getting paid for it. You read anything solely at your own risk, and you
are perfectly free to skip messages or unsubscribe from newsgroups that
you don't like."
Maybe it's sufficient protection, and maybe it isn't, but then
no matter what you do, there's probably somebody out there who'll think
you're liable for something (or think they can get money out of you by
pretending to) and sue you. If so, there's no such thing as "complete
protection." You can only balance your amount of protection against the
trouble it causes in other areas. I think this new policy restricts
free information exchange more than its added protection from litigation
warrants.
-- Tom Lee, 206 Physics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, (515)294-5266 --
Internet: tjlee@iastate.edu | "You can't measure time in hours the way you can
or: tab47@ccvax.iastate.edu | money in dollars because every day is different."
Bitnet: tab47@isuvax.BITNET | -- Jorge Luis Borges
Article 640 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sjeckels@iastate.edu (Steve J Eckels)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: sjeckels
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 06:08:38 GMT
In article <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> spam@IASTATE.EDU (Michael L Begley) writes:
>
>
>this is long, but please read it all, carefully.
>
>The new ISU Usenet news policy is completely unacceptable, because it assumes
>the irresponsibility of the reader before they prove to be unable to handle
>the content of the groups.
I think were missing the point here. The problem is not here becuase of
what we read on the computer, but because of what we look at. Groups such
as alt.sex.pictures were pictures are posted that are not just in bad taste
but could also be against state porn laws. Can't you see the joe blow
pulling up a full screen graphic sex picture in the computer lab. This
could cause problems and you know it. I fully agree with the new rule. The
machines in the computer lab should not have these accounts on them. I
think they are doing the only fair thing for all people envolved. You can
still look or read as you please (after getting your slip) but not in public.
Article 642 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Originator: tjlee@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 06:23:26 GMT
Steve J. Eckels writes:
>You can still look or read as you please (after getting your slip) but
>not in public.
You're missing the point. On Project Vincent you can't get a
"slip" unless you're a workstation administrator. Only certain faculty
members are workstation administrators. You can bet the restricted
groups won't be available on any public-access workstations. Nobody on
CCVAX will be able to read the restricted groups. Only on WYLBUR will
it be account-specific. For the other ones, it's either everybody or
nobody.
-- Tom Lee, 206 Physics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, (515)294-5266 --
Internet: tjlee@iastate.edu | "You can't measure time in hours the way you can
or: tab47@ccvax.iastate.edu | money in dollars because every day is different."
Bitnet: tab47@isuvax.BITNET | -- Jorge Luis Borges
Article 644 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker)
Subject: Re: censorship policy to go into effect 6/1/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.062735.24431@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: mds@pv740d.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 06:27:35 GMT
The Computation Center's new Usenet policy appears to violate their own
ethical standards. They propose to violate the right to privacy, and they
also propose to violate the stated ``Respect for intellectual labor and
creativity.''
The first three paragraphs of the code of ethics follows.
Iowa State University endorses the following statement of Software
and Intellectual Rights that was developed through EDUCOM, a non-profit
consortium of colleges and universities committed to the use and
management of information technology in higher education.
"Respect for intellectual labor and creativity is vital to
academic discourse and enterprise. This principle applies to
works of all authors and publishers in all media. It encom-
passes respect for the right to acknowledgment, right to
privacy, and right to determine the form, manner, and terms of
publication and distribution.
"Because electronic information is volatile and easily
reproduced, respect for the work and personal expression of
others is especially critical in computer environments.
Violations of authorial integrity, including plagiarism,
invasion of privacy, unauthorized access, and trade secret and
copyright violations, may be grounds for sanctions against
members of the academic community."
Mark D. Smucker --- mds@iastate.edu
Article 643 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: spam@iastate.edu (Michael L Begley)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 06:46:37 GMT
In article <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> sjeckels@iastate.edu (Steve J Eckels) writes:
>In article <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> spam@IASTATE.EDU (Michael L Begley) writes:
> I think were missing the point here. The problem is not here becuase of
>what we read on the computer, but because of what we look at. Groups such
>as alt.sex.pictures were pictures are posted that are not just in bad taste
>but could also be against state porn laws. Can't you see the joe blow
>pulling up a full screen graphic sex picture in the computer lab. This
>could cause problems and you know it. I fully agree with the new rule. The
>machines in the computer lab should not have these accounts on them. I
>think they are doing the only fair thing for all people envolved. You can
>still look or read as you please (after getting your slip) but not in public.
>
Bzzzzzzzt!!! Wrong on all counts!
1) The rule does not pertain to merely alt.sex.pictures. If that were the only
target of the policy, than I wouldn't be too upset. Alt.sex.pictures, IMHO,
is a complete waste of bandwidth, and yes, I find it offensive when people
have their screens littered with graphic explicit pictures. I'm an operator
for the computation center, and I spend 24 hours a week in durham 139 where
this behavior is most prevelent and public. If anyone asks me to ask someone to
remove a graphic from a screen because they're offended, and I feel that their
offensetivity is justified, I have and will have that person remove the
picture(s).
BUT!!! this policy is not only refering to alt.sex.pictures. It also
restricts textual groups. If I'm reading alt.sex.beastiality, and someone
peers over my shoulder, reads it, and gets offended, well, piss off!
That'll teach them not to be nosey.
But don't tell me I can't read it.
2) Against state porn laws? I doubt the overwhelming majority of the pictures
violate any such laws. Perhaps you ought to look up the law before bringing it
up. However, I do agree that they generally do violate copyright laws.
But again...we're not just discussing alt.sex.pictures. We're talking about
alt.psychoactives, were you can get information about legal drugs disbursed by
student health.
3) No, you can't 'look or read as you please but not in public'. The groups
aren't available! Unless you subject yourself to using wylbur (which is a
terrible terrible terrible system, IMHO, which most people don't read news on)
than you don't get the groups...unless of course you are privliged enough to
be you own system administrator.
Perhaps you ought to reread my original article. The policy is not about dirty
pictures. really. It's about ISU filtering my exposure. Piss on that.
ISU is not my mother, father, or my Big Brother.
Article 645 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: RE: Abstract of "CAF-News cafv01n41"
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.074035.10929@eff.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 07:40:35 GMT
[Posted with the author's permission. - Carl]
Message-Id: <9112150609.AA29422@syzygy.uts.edu.au>
Subject: comp.soc article
Status: RO
In comp.society you write:
>In particular, the policy "You may not use
>the University's computing facilities to send obscene, offensive, bogus,
>harassing, or illegal messages" generated much concern, as did the proposal
>to limit student access to AARNet (Australian equivalent of Usenet) only
>to research or study purposes. There was little concensus about
>the validity of the new policies in the Newcastle user community.
AARNet is the Australian organisation which provides Internet connectivity.
It is not an "equivalent of Usenet" in any way.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu, or (anonymous) ap.4352@hri.com
I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: edsall@iastate.edu (David M Edsall)
Subject: FACIST USENET NEWS POLICY
Message-ID:
Summary: Don't try to be my mother
Keywords: censorship, responsibility
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 09:11:52 GMT
WARNING. THE FOLLOWING POST CONTAINS FOUL LANGUAGE AND ADULT
TOPICS. COMPUTATION CENTER GUIDANCE IS SUGGESTED
Well, you have made me look like a fool and I really don't
appreciate it. I have bragged about how enlightened I felt our
newsadmin was and I am obviously WRONG! Where do you get off telling
me what to read? I am obviously emotional right now and I will say
what I please. If you don't like it, don't read it. Or better yet,
remove the post since it may offend some people, just like some of the
groups supposedly do. This is out-and-out censorship and a violation
of my First Amendment rights. Yes, I sound like a bleeding heart
liberal but I don't give a f*** ( I typed that word and it
disappeared! ) Your policy is s***. The users were never consulted or
informed. I told you the only decision I was willing to respect was
that concerning strained hardware resources. You people have no balls
whatsoever! I am going to address your policy ( read DICTATE ):
>Introduction
>The Iowa State University Computation Center has established the following
>policy on the distribution of Usenet News lists. This policy addresses
>challenges and conflicts that have arisen due to the rapid evolution of services
>provided by the Computation Center in network-based news lists. While most of
>these news lists provide a wealth of technical, research-based, and collateral
>material, a few lists may contain material which may be illegal or viewed by
>some as socially or morally objectionable.
So what? There are some ideas which are now widely accepted which
ate one time were objectionable to one person or a group of persons.
Is that a reason to place limits on the dissemination of those ideas?
> Most news lists are unmoderated, meaning
>that anyone can say anything they want without any review. In general, the only
>form of content control is by "peer pressure" from other list participants.
And this has worked VERY well without any intervention whatsoever
by our parents, federal authorities or "enlightened" newsadmins or
overprotective computer resource committees.
>A key observation is that there may be no point where any systematic review of
>material can occur before it is included in the "news feed". Postings can
>arrive from any point in the world which has computer access to Usenet. While
>moderated news lists are said to be "reviewed by the moderator", how (or
>whether) that person reviews material is not subject to any further review.
>Most lists are unmoderated.
A key point which needs to be made here is that the moderators were
elected by the readers and can be removed as well. This is sort of a
reader-imposed censorship. If the reader does not wish to belong to a
group which has a moderator, they can always ask for a referendum or
start a group of their own. The control is in the hands of the
readers, something which this policy is not and has not been.
>It is important to note that at this point a significant share of the support
>structure for distributing Usenet News is derived from public funding. Most
>(although not all) of the long-haul news article transport occurs over the
>National Science Foundation's data communications network and the regional
>networks supported in part by NSF and other public funding. Many of the news
>systems that receive and re-distribute news articles are owned by or operated
>for the U.S. government (in the case of military or research systems) or by
>state and local governments (in the case of university systems). Usenet News
>could not function at the current level without the existing public-funded
>infrastructure.
And here we are getting at the heart of the matter. You are afraid
of public reaction as well as Federal reaction. This sort of argument
has been used by people on the net for years as to why group A or
group B will be cut-off. Oh no, the NSF is going to step in. As far as
I know, the NSF has never stepped in and forced the revocation of a
group and as far as I know, everytime Joe Public hears from the media
that his daughter Jenny is reading something that could be considered
risque, the public really didn't give a shit.
>Challenges which Accompany this Technology
>The use of Usenet to discuss a wide variety of issues has grown over the years.
>Before long, the "pure technical" nature of the news lists gave way to general
>talk on almost anything, including such topics as aspects of sexual lifestyles,
>illegal drugs, and racist humor. The collective group of Usenet
>"administrators" early on decided to address this potential problem by creating
>an "alt" group division for "alternate" selections. This group of lists could
>presumably be omitted if some topics were considered questionable at an
>individual's site.
Who is to decide what is questionable? That is the basis of the
First Amendment. It's up to me, not the authorities as to what I read
or say. Who gave you people the permission to be MY conscience?
> Currently, the "alt" groups contain such topics as:
>
> alt.sex Postings of a prurient nature
> alt.sex.bondage Postings about dominance/submission
> alt.sex.pictures Graphics images of a prurient nature
> alt.drugs Recreational pharmaceuticals
>
>and also these topics:
>
> alt.fishing Fishing as a hobby and sport
> alt.recovery 12-step recovery groups
> (such as Alcoholics Anonymous)
> alt.sources Alternative source code
> alt.native Issues for and about native Americans
So which of these is objectionable? How do you decide? If it has the
word sex in it, ooooh boy, it must be bad! If it has the word drugs in
it, oh no, we can't have that. Just say no, as Nancy said while she
toked on that joint.
>Some university sites in other locations have already come under internal and
>external criticism for the alleged use of state and federal funds to store and
>distribute items which are alleged either to be illegal or objectionable.
And the difference between whether or not a university is truly to
be regarded as a bastion of intellectual freedom is decided by whether
they back down, as ISU so morally has, or whether they stand behind
the FREE UNCENSORED exchange of ideas.
>Institutions on campus such as the Parks Library already have guidelines
>regarding free access to information. They also have policies in place to
>handle complaints from those who object to various forms of research material.
>The guidelines do not impose censorship. They allow access to all materials,
>although some material may be available only upon request. Procedures exist to
>review the purchase of materials which might be considered illegal under state
>or federal statute. Costs, themselves, prevent the collection of all possible
>material.
Better take Mein Kampf off the shelves to please the Jewish people.
Better get rid of Mark Twain to please the black students. Better get
rid of Young Lady Chatterly, Playboy and Balzac to please the
sexually-repressed who wish to repress sex.
>Usenet News lists, however, present a new form of "openness", both in access and
>in collection. University computer access may extend further into the public in
>the immediate future with ever-expanding network access. Assumptions that
>access is limited to adults (student, staff, or faculty) may no longer be valid.
>This new medium provides any user the ability to voluntarily read and say
>anything they want in a relatively uncensored and anonymous atmosphere. What is
>posted anywhere on the world-wide network will result in Iowa State "acquiring"
>that posting.
Wouldn't that be terrible? Iowa State acquiring an opinion? People
may be able to make rational decisions then. Just explain to me what
is so NEW about this openess? I can speak and exchange things with
people on the net in exactly the same way that I do in person. The
major difference is that they can CHOOSE ( you seem to have forgotten
this word ) what to read which you really can't do with a person who
is speaking to you.
>Development of the Usenet News Policy
>Some of the material provided through Usenet has been objectionable to some
>members of the university community. These objections have ranged from an
>objection to having news lists considered "frivolous" available on a
>researcher's workstation to objections to the display of material in violation
>of the university's sexual harassment policy. The volume of material that
>arrives at campus every day precludes individual review of articles or even of
>selected news groups. The campus commitment to open access and intellectual
>freedom makes the review of material unlikely even if it were technically
>feasible.
Commitment to open access? Not anymore, Jack! You have just
RESTRICTED access to members of this community who do not have their
own workstations. FREEDOM?! I just lost a freedom. I feel less free
now than I did before.
> With the academic freedom of the campus environment goes individual
>intellectual responsibility. Hallmarks of that responsibility are to obtain and
>use material in manners respecting others in the campus community, the goals of
>intellectual inquiry, and state and federal law. Certain aspects of public law
>may apply to the dissemination of material to persons under the age of 18.
I believe that most of us were being resposible before and I
really resent you people trying to be responsible for us.
>Since individual article review is precluded by the volume of material received,
>news lists can only be assessed by their name and the accompanying description
>of their contents. Due to the extremely distributed nature of the posting
>process, any news list may contain an occasional posting (particularly with
>respect to offensive language) which could be considered to be objectionable by
>some.
I find things that are said and done by the YAF and by Dr. Jishke
objectionable but I really don't see the neo-nazis stepping in to stop
them. Why do you feel you must do so in this case?
>Certain technical issues also pertain. The news server software can distinguish
>recipients of news lists based only on the Internet address of the receiving
>computer (timesharing system, workstation, or microcomputer). Of the
>timesharing systems offering general access operated by the Computation Center,
>only the software on the HDS system (WYLBUR) is readily modifiable to allow
>individual choice of access.
Excuse me? I can decide whether or not to subscribe to a group on my
own can I not? I guess not. Dad and Mom, please do this for me.
>Usenet News Policy
( ISU USENET POLICY MORE PRECISELY )
>The Usenet News Administrator is responsible for the day-to-day management of
>the service on the Iowa State University campus. Any material, particularly
>locally-posted material, which could be harmful to a specific individual(s) may
>be removed by the Usenet News Administrator. News lists which have large
>resource requirements which adversely affect general use of Usenet News may be
>restricted in some form by the Usenet News Administrator.
Once again, the only thing which I wish the newsadmin to do is
restrict access due to resource requirements.
( INFORMATION ABOUT THE POPE'S LIST OF ALLOWED READING FOR
IOWA STATE FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS DELETED )
>The purpose of the Full News List is to offer full access to all news lists to
>anyone in the Iowa State community who requests it and acknowledges their
>responsibility in accessing, using, and distributing material from it. Some
>material in the full news feed may not be appropriate for general distribution.
>It is the responsibility of those receiving the material to comply with
>appropriate law and policy.
And I thought we were all doing very well at this up until now. Are
we grounded pop? Mom?
>All publicly-accessible computers in the Computation Center, with the exception
>of the HDS WYLBUR time-sharing system, will offer the Standard News List only.
This is really sad. It is these machines which a majority of the
undergrads PAY PAY PAY money each semester to use. So, if you restrict
access, you had better cut down on the amount that you require these
students to pay.
*** ISU "Standard List" Newsgroups ***
(This information is current as of 12/13/91)
>The "Standard News List" is the full Usenet newsgroup list MINUS
>certain groups excluded because their name and accompanying description
>appear to offer potential conflicts with law, (particularly with child
>protection and pornography law) or with policies such as the sexual
>harassment policy.
Well, you had better add isu.cc.general and isu.newsgroups to the
list because I find this post of yours to be very objectionable and
offensive. Hey, you are looking out for me now, aren't you?
I am going to include here a letter I received from Gene Spafford at
Purdue, the man who is responsible for generating the list of lists
that Mr. Kunz uses to determine what is acceptable or what it
contains:
Subject: Criteria for including alt.sex.pictures.* in your list
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 11:53:54 CDT
>From: - dave
I have been informed by my newsadmin that our site will not be
receiving the new alt.sex.pictures.* groups until they appear in your
alt list that is posted to news.announce.newusers. I would like to
know, for the record ( as I would like to post your reply to
alt.sex.pictures.d ) what criteria you will use to determine whether
or not these groups will appear in your list. If you have been
following the discussion in a.s.p.d you will notice that I have been
very vocal on the subject of discrimination. If there are other sites
which use your list as ours does, then you have the power to impose a
net-wide descriminattion. This is not meant to imply that you are
descriminatory. I am, as are others, curious as to what you will
consider in determining whether or not to include these groups.
Thanks for your time,
David M. Edsall
Subject: Re: Criteria for including alt.sex.pictures.* in your list
In-Reply-To: Message from - dave of
"Wed, 11 Sep 91 11:53:54 -0500"
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 13:24:50 EST
>From: Gene Spafford
We do not get any alt groups here. I never know about new groups or
splits or any other nonsense with the alt groups until someone tells
me. Usually, Len Tower or Dave Lawrence send me updates to my
postings after they appear, and that is how the list is done.
Alt groups are, by definition, not defined by any particular list.
Mine is way out of sync with the reality, so your sysadmin should
certainly not depend on it to decide what groups to carry. Feel free
to forward this on the her or him if you wish.
--spaf
>The following is a list of newsgroups that are unavailable unless a
>person responsible for a system (or WYLBUR user-ID) has filled out a
>"FULL NEWSGROUP ACCESS REQUEST" form (available from the Computation
>Center main office, 291 Durham Center).
>
>Groups currently not provided with "Standard" newsgroup access are:
>
> alt.personals.bondage
> alt.drugs
> alt.psychoactives
> alt.sex
> alt.sex.bestiality
> alt.sex.bondage
> alt.sex.motss
> alt.sex.pictures
> alt.sex.pictures.d
>
>If other news lists are created which appear to offer these same potential
>conflicts, they will be added to the excluded lists.
If you are going to drop these, be fair and drop ALL of the alt
groups. I really think that your selective list is bullshit and VERY
VERY subjective and it is NOT your right to decide what I may say or
expose myself to. It is MY right and I will fight for it.
Yours in bondage,
David M. Edsall
*** ---- +--------------------------+---------------------------+
'0 *` e+ |David M. Edsall | INTERNET: |
< _*/ *` \ |Research Assistant | edsall@iastate.edu |
`* *` |CERN DELPHI Collaboration | BITNET: edsall@alisuvax |
`* *` / |Ames Group \|/ HEPNET: isuhep::edsall |
| `*-*-****| | +--------------------------+---------------------------+
\ |Physics Department /|\ "Gravity is not |
|Iowa State University | responsible for people |
\ / |Ames, IA 50010 | falling in love" |
e- |(515) 294-4110 | - "Big Al" Einstein - |
--- +--------------------------+---------------------------+
Article 647 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [ia.newsgroups, et al.] What to do about the new Newsgroup Censorship Policy at ISU
Message-ID: <9112152215.AA21830@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu
Date: 15 Dec 91 10:15:04 GMT
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: viking@iastate.edu (Daniel R Sorenson)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 10:31:42 GMT
It is interesting to note that Wylbur can be accessed from any workstation
or terminal on this campus that is connected to ISN, so it is simply a
matter of any undergrad downloading that alt.sex.with.aliens GIF to the
local workstation and displaying it. As such, the entire policy falls
flat as any sort of method to reduce the viewing of "naughty" pictures.
Another interesting thing: since internet traffic typically crosses state
boundaries, could this not be construed as a federal violation of
pornography laws, in addition to hampering interstate commerce? If such
is the case, then it is a federal problem and not a state problem, and
hence the Attorney General of the United States should be the one to
decide if these groups can be restricted on a basis of "public decency"
or "purient interest" or even "community standards."
If it's a matter of not viewing nude GIFs on workstations,
then isn't it better served by merely restricting who gets access to
the viewing software rather than the posted data? A group field was
set up in Unix for a purpose not far removed from this, if I remember
correctly, and hence is entirely suitable for stopping this "problem."
It seems there are numorous other methods available besides
censorship of the data contained in these groups. Let's at least take
a look at these alternatives before choosing the one that does the
most damage to the free exchange of information.
<=======================================================================>
< "Television is the first truly democratic culture -- the first culture>
< available to everybody and entirely governed by what the people want. >
< The most terrifying this is what the people want." -- Clive Barnes >
<=======================================================================>
Article 646 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Reply-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Precedence: bulk
To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Errors-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk-request
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 10:52:17 -0500
X-Digest-Sender: "Helen C. O'Boyle"
Message-Id: <199112151552.AA15979@eff.org>
Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Sun Dec 15 10:51:58 EST 1991
[For information on how to get a much smaller edited version of the
list, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send acad-freedom caf
- Billy ]
In this issue:
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (alt.censorship) Re: Mark Law is an unmitigated asshole
axolotl@socs.uts.e : Re: IRC's /kill
gl8f@fermi.clas.Vi : Re: IRC's /kill
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.e : Re: (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
-- cost covering fees
as m455@titan.king : Re: (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
fsars@acad3.alaska : Re: (comp.admin.policy, et al.) Re: Gaming
The addresses for the list are now:
comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list
or caf-talk@eff.org
listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions
(send email with the line "help" for details.)
caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Reply-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Precedence: bulk
To: comp-academic-freedom-talk
Errors-To: comp-academic-freedom-talk-request
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 10:57:50 -0500
X-Digest-Sender: "Helen C. O'Boyle"
Message-Id: <199112151557.AA16209@eff.org>
Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Computers and Academic Freedom mailing list (batch edition)
Sun Dec 15 10:57:26 EST 1991
[For information on how to get a much smaller edited version of the
list, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send acad-freedom caf
- Billy ]
In this issue:
kadie@eff.org (Car : Abstract of CAF-News 01.40
BMCCONNE@VTVM1.CC. : (HELP) International newspaper column for student papers
gross@ux1.cso.uiuc : Restricting game and personal use at public sites
bh@anarres.Berkele : let the users make the rules
kadie@eff.org (Car : Abstract of CAF-News 01.41
john@iastate.edu ( : Re: Abstract of CAF-News 01.41
kadie@m.cs.uiuc.ed : Re: UseNet News
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu : (alt.privacy) Re: (comp.org.eff.talk) Re: Finger & Liberty
schweige@taurus.cs : Re: (alt.privacy) Re: (comp.org.eff.talk) Re: Finger & Li
The addresses for the list are now:
comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list
or caf-talk@eff.org
listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions
(send email with the line "help" for details.)
caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: edsall@iastate.edu (David M Edsall)
Subject: TRIVIA FACTS ABOUT THE FACIST NEWS POLICY
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 14:26:43 GMT
Did you notice that the announcement occured on Friday the 13th?
Did you notice that the new facist policy will take effect over the
break when no one is here?
Just a thought
dave
*** ---- +--------------------------+---------------------------+
'0 *` e+ |David M. Edsall | INTERNET: |
< _*/ *` \ |Research Assistant | edsall@iastate.edu |
`* *` |CERN DELPHI Collaboration | BITNET: edsall@alisuvax |
`* *` / |Ames Group \|/ HEPNET: isuhep::edsall |
| `*-*-****| | +--------------------------+---------------------------+
\ |Physics Department /|\ "Gravity is not |
|Iowa State University | responsible for people |
\ / |Ames, IA 50010 | falling in love" |
e- |(515) 294-4110 | - "Big Al" Einstein - |
--- +--------------------------+---------------------------+
Article 649 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: s2cws@isuvax.iastate.edu (Chris Schweda)
Subject: Newsgroups
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 14:47:30 GMT
Okay, I'll say: the new news policy is bullshit. Bunch of greyhaired
comp center bastards think they can tell me what I should and shouldn't
read.
I'm really getting sick of this. I'm getting sick of dipshits across the
country trying to look out for my best interests. This is a messed up
country populated by messed up people. At this moment -- this particular
point in time -- I'm very, very tired of hearing about censorship.
Who the hell cares? Bastards.
Chris
---
Chris Schweda, Graduate Assistant, English Department
Iowa State University, 206 Ross Hall, Ames, Iowa 50010
---------------------------------------------------------
++ I used to have a .sig file until someone filched it ++
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 115 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 15:36:11 GMT
In <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu> s2cws@isuvax.iastate.edu (Chris Schweda) writes:
>Okay, I'll say: the new news policy is bullshit. Bunch of greyhaired
>comp center bastards think they can tell me what I should and shouldn't
>read.
Okay, I'll say for the nth time: Policies are not made at random by
so called 'greyhaired comp center bastards'. The computation advisory
committee consists of students also (50%) who have an equal say in
the matter.
The irony of it is people like you find it so easy to sit
in your comfortable little offices and talk of censorship, what the
comp.center is not doing, and so on. Where were you when there was a
call to get student representatives to serve on the committee? We
literally had to force students to join the decision making process.
To get back to the talk of censorship: No one is preventing you from
reading or subscribing to any newsgroup. All they are doing is asking
you to take the responsibility. The only way to do this is sign a
piece of paper which explicitly transfers responsibility. Just get a
wylbur account and read/subscribe to your heart's content. This is
currently not available on Vincent due to purely technological
reasons.
At the end of the next semester, you really should consider becoming
a member of the Comp. Advisory Committee.
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 117 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.011244.14246@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec14.231933.10786@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 15:51:30 GMT
In tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee) writes:
> Unless you have a WYLBUR account, which I do not, this doesn't
>transfer responsibility to the reader -- it removes access to
>information from the reader.
> I don't have a WYLBUR account, and I am not aware of how
>accessible one is to me. (If it costs me money to get one, this is
>restricting access to information on the basis of ability to pay.)
>Somehow, I doubt the Comp. Center would approve of my getting a WYLBUR
>account solely to read news.
You do not have to pay anything to get a Wylbur account. You computer
fee takes care of accounts on all machines. Just go to durham and
sign up. You can probable also do this on line.
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 650 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 15:56:00 GMT
Are you sure Playboy is kept at the counter for prevention of theft
only? Have you considered the possibility that it also prevents
minors from getting a hand on R-rated stuff? The people of Ames
(including children) have access to the library.
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 651 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 16:01:50 GMT
>Perhaps you ought to reread my original article. The policy is not about dirty
>pictures. really. It's about ISU filtering my exposure. Piss on that.
>ISU is not my mother, father, or my Big Brother.
....but it sure is the entity that purchased and owns the machines.
Student money did not pay for it. :-)
--
Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Article 652 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: What to do about the new Newsgroup Censorship Policy at ISU
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.163311.4917@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: john@vincent1.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 16:33:11 GMT
DISCLAIMER: This posting is from John Hascall, private citizen, and
any opinions contained within are solely those of the author
and are not the official position of his employer or
any committee on which he serves.
If you have a opinion on the new policy, speak up! Encourage others to
speak up! The policy definitely will not change if you sit there like sheep.
Here are some facts not mentioned in the posting about the policy.
1) The policy was not developed by the Comp Ctr committee which
developed the original "open learning environment" policy.
2) The policy was brought to the Comp Ctr Newsgroup committee
who did not approve it.
3) The policy was brought to the University Computation Advisory
Committee (Computation Center Advisory Sub-Committee) who
did not approve it.
In addition to posting news, here are some people to write
to express your opinion on this matter.
Richard Seagrave
Acting Director, Comp Ctr
291 Durham Ctr
George Covert
Associate Director, Comp Ctr
291 Durham Ctr
David Hopper
Chair, University Computation Advisory Cmte
Vet Diag Lab, 1541 Vet Med
Bob Boston
Chair, UCAC (Comp Ctr Advisory Sub-Cmte)
English, 353 Ross
Patrica Swan
Interim Provost
107 Beardshear
John Hascall
--------------------
--
Helen C. O'Boyle | Co-moderator, Computers and Academic Freedom list
helen@eff.org | << insert usual disclaimer here... my opinions
isy5hob@cabell.vcu.edu | are mine alone, not EFF's or VCU's, etc. >>
From helen Mon Dec 16 13:42:42 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA01814
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Mon, 16 Dec 1991 18:42:51 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: twbv4@isuvax.iastate.edu (Ian Schmidt)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.182458.7461@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>,
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 18:24:58 GMT
In article , shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
>>Perhaps you ought to reread my original article. The policy is not about dirty
>>pictures. really. It's about ISU filtering my exposure. Piss on that.
>>ISU is not my mother, father, or my Big Brother.
>
>.....but it sure is the entity that purchased and owns the machines.
>Student money did not pay for it. :-)
Err, excuse me, but where does most of ISU's money come from? Yupper,
students. Who paid for all those nice new DECstations? Students. What
does the sticker on the VT220 I'm using right now say? "Paid for by
Engineering Computer Fee". Again, students. :-)
> Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Schmidt twbv4@isuvax.iastate.edu irsman@iastate.edu
-> USUAL SIG IS ON VACATION TO PROTEST ISU CENSORSHIP OF USENET <-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 654 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.185817.8517@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 18:58:17 GMT
In article shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
>In <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu> s2cws@isuvax.iastate.edu (Chris Schweda) writes:
>
>>Okay, I'll say: the new news policy is bullshit. Bunch of greyhaired
>>comp center bastards think they can tell me what I should and shouldn't
>>read.
>
>Okay, I'll say for the nth time: Policies are not made at random by
>so called 'greyhaired comp center bastards'. The computation advisory
>committee consists of students also (50%) who have an equal say in
>the matter.
I take it you are on this committee? As a REPRESENATIVE, how did you
garner the opinion of those you serve? Did you vote FOR this? If so
I hope they burn your books someday and halt the presses on your paper.
> The irony of it is people like you find it so easy to sit
>in your comfortable little offices and talk of censorship, what the
>comp.center is not doing, and so on. Where were you when there was a
>call to get student representatives to serve on the committee? We
>literally had to force students to join the decision making process.
>
>To get back to the talk of censorship: No one is preventing you from
>reading or subscribing to any newsgroup. All they are doing is asking
>you to take the responsibility. The only way to do this is sign a
>piece of paper which explicitly transfers responsibility. Just get a
>wylbur account and read/subscribe to your heart's content. This is
>currently not available on Vincent due to purely technological
>reasons.
>
Read Begley's (spam's) article.
Read the others.
Study them. See that the piece of paper is an invasion of privacy.
Be enlightened.
And then be scared.
Mark D. Smucker ------ mds@iastate.edu
Article 118 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: orman@iastate.edu (David L Orman)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>, <1991Dec15.182458.7461@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:09:21 GMT
First off why cant the overall Project Vincent Administrator just fill
out the form and then Full-Feed would be availible on Vincent.
Second, what about all the alt groups that arent offensive? All of the
Discussion here is about alt.sex...... there is ALOT more in Alt land
other than those, I personally subscribe to:
rec.arts.sf.fandom
rec.arts.sf.reviews
rec.arts.startrek
rec.games.corewar
rec.games.frp
rec.games.pbm
rec.humor
alt.bbs.internet
alt.binaries.pictures
alt.emusic
alt.graphics.pixutils
And a few others, and I cant see how any of them have offended anyone.
_______ ___ _________ +-------------------------------------+
/\______\ /\__\ /\________\ | David L Orman |
/ / ___ \/ / / / / ___ / | orman@iastate.edu |
/ / / \ \/ / / / / / / | Aerospace Engineer for Hire |
/ / / / / /___ / / / / / |-------------------------------------|
/ / /___/ / /____\ / /__/ / | 'He's Dead Jim!' -- "Bones" McCoy |
\/__________/_________/________/ |_____________________________________|
Article 655 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: twax6@isuvax.iastate.edu (Shawne Kleckner)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.191043.9009@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>,
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:10:43 GMT
In article , shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
>In <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu> s2cws@isuvax.iastate.edu (Chris Schweda) writes:
>
>>Okay, I'll say: the new news policy is bullshit. Bunch of greyhaired
>>comp center bastards think they can tell me what I should and shouldn't
>>read.
> The irony of it is people like you find it so easy to sit
>in your comfortable little offices and talk of censorship, what the
>comp.center is not doing, and so on. Where were you when there was a
>call to get student representatives to serve on the committee? We
>literally had to force students to join the decision making process.
As a student, I tried to join the said commitee, but was not allowed to do so
because of my connection to the company I work for. I still feel that this
was discriminatory, as I was not interested in selling machines to the school
(we don't sell DEC anyway!) but wanted to be involved in the things that are
going on at the school in regards to the computers that my fee pays for!
>To get back to the talk of censorship: No one is preventing you from
>reading or subscribing to any newsgroup. All they are doing is asking
>you to take the responsibility. The only way to do this is sign a
>piece of paper which explicitly transfers responsibility. Just get a
>wylbur account and read/subscribe to your heart's content.
I don't feel that it should be necessary for me to have to sign anything!
I personally don't subscribe to any alt.* group other than
alt.startrek.creative, but I don't think that restricting my access to these
newgroups is really good policy. I also don't think that the university having
a file of all of those people who want the freedom to see those groups is
necessary. If I went in and signed the form, who is to say that this "list"
isn't someday to be used in a discriminatory fashion? I'm a grown boy now,
mommy doesn't have to tell me what's good and bad, and neither does the
Computation Center at ISU.
If other people don't like the material represented in these newsgroups, then
perhaps they shouldn't subscribe to them. No one is forcing them to do so!
Shawne
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawne P. Kleckner "The more complex the mind, the greater the
>> TWAX6@isuvax.iastate.edu need for the simplicity of play."
Inacomp/Century Systems - James T. Kirk, "Shore Leave."
Ames, Iowa
Novell Platinum Dealer COMPAQ... It simply works better.
* If A=B and B=C, then A=C except where void or expressly prohibited by law. *
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
--
Helen C. O'Boyle | Co-moderator, Computers and Academic Freedom list
helen@eff.org | << insert usual disclaimer here... my opinions
isy5hob@cabell.vcu.edu | are mine alone, not EFF's or VCU's, etc. >>
From helen Mon Dec 16 13:46:28 1991
Received: by eff.org id AA02090
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for cafb-list@eff.org); Mon, 16 Dec 1991 18:46:37 -0500
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: emoeller@iastate.edu (Erich R Moeller)
Subject: This really burns my ***!!!!
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:42:58 GMT
This new policy that Moo U. has pulled out of the sewer is totally
inappropriate for a so called place of learning and ideas!
I always did think that this university had its head up its rear. Now
they've gone and proved it!
Granted, the student's money doesn't pay for all of the computer equipment
and operating costs. _However_, state taxes DO pay for the rest and I do
pay state taxes. And I'm quite sure that most people here do also.
Therefore, we all have the right to get what we've paid for.
If ISU just wants to sweep this under the rug--why don't we pull back the
rug? There is always the one thing that tends to shed light on things like
this, and that is the media. Talk to the Daily and WOI TV and radio. Tell
one of the Des Moines TV stations about what is happening. Hell, you might
even want to write to a state legislator. Sen. Grassley may also be a good
contact to make. Even just talking to a lawyer about whether they can
legally do this may help!
I really don't know what exactly to do. These are some suggestions. Let
me know what you think of them.
If we let ISU get awat with this, then we might as well be called country
bumpkins who don't know nothin' 'bout nothin'.
--
Erich Moeller-=-
["If you rub a balloon on the carpet, it will stick to the wall. However,]
[ it does not necessarily follow that you can rub the wall on the carpet ]
[ and make it stick to the balloon!" -- Me (December 1991) ]
Article 657 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.194642.10763@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:46:42 GMT
shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
}Are you sure Playboy is kept at the counter for prevention of theft
}only? Have you considered the possibility that it also prevents
}minors from getting a hand on R-rated stuff? The people of Ames
}(including children) have access to the library.
There is plenty of "R-rated" material on open shelves.
It is not the job of the library to act "in loco parentis".
John
Article 656 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.195833.11222@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.182458.7461@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:58:33 GMT
twbv4@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
}Err, excuse me, but where does most of ISU's money come from? Yupper,
}students. Who paid for all those nice new DECstations? Students. What
}does the sticker on the VT220 I'm using right now say? "Paid for by
}Engineering Computer Fee". Again, students. :-)
A large part of ISU's money comes from students, but tuition, fees, etc. do NOT
make up more than 50% of the budget (of course, lots of students are tax payers
as well). As for specific equipment:
a) most of Project Vincent was bought with a federal grant
-- this includes the News server machine ---
b) some PV machinew were bought by various depts/colleges
c) some PV machines (i.e., 139 Durham) were bought with
student computer fee monies
d) some PV machines belong to DEC (i.e., 248 Durham)
John
Article 658 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: michael@iastate.edu (Michael M Huang)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>, <1991Dec15.182458.7461@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 19:59:17 GMT
Most money coming from students? Hmm... the last time I read about it
somewhere, it seems that money for the universities, on the most part,
came from research grants and such. The students' tuitions and fees
cover merely a few percentage of the university cost.
Correct me if I am wrong. :)
-michael
--
Michael M. Huang MAC Slave at High Tc Update
(michael@IAState.Edu) Superconductivity Info. Center
Opinions are my own & noone else's. Ames Labs, ISU, Ames, Iowa, USA
"If train stations are where trains stop, how 'bout 'em workstations?"
Article 659 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sartre@iastate.edu (Michael J Wendling)
Subject: Re: TRIVIA FACTS ABOUT THE FACIST NEWS POLICY
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.200732.11732@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References:
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 20:07:32 GMT
> Did you notice that the new facist policy will take effect over the
> break when no one is here?
>
> Just a thought
>
> dave
This seems to be a favorite ISU tactic. Seems every year the
University us a lump of coal for Christmas.
Remember last year when they(not the comp center of course!) tried
to sell the bookstore before anyone found out. I don't appreciate
this method.
Also, ditto to all comments on the Big Brother, fascist nature of this
policy.
Mike Wendling
Article 660 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: vencill@iastate.edu (John A Vencill)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.202210.12585@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 20:22:10 GMT
In article shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
>....but [ISU] sure is the entity that purchased and owns the machines.
>Student money did not pay for it. :-)
>--
> Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
> 2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
> Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
> Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
I don't give a flying leap WHO paid for the machines. I find it hard to
believe that NONE of my tuition and NONE of my computer fee went toward those
machines, but even if this is the case, these machines are maintained mostly
for student use (esp. those in 139 Durham). I think that project Vincent does
an excellent job of introducing students to a workstation environment, and I
can now say that I am completely at ease in a networked workstation atmoshpere.
I find it very strange, for this reason, that this policy is now pushing news
readers over to Wylbur. I only use vincent for mail and news, but I think that
the ability to communicate in this fashion is wonderful. It would be a shame
to see this freedom restricted purely out of fear of the law, when in fact ISU
is doing nothing wrong but encouraging information exchange. BTW, I think the
comp center should also restrict irc. Wouldn't want people talking freely
over the net. They might discuss sex or drugs or something bad like that. :)
Just out of curiousity, why is an AE EM grad student from India _DEFENDING_
this policy? As stated, it's not gonna stop the pictures that you don't like.
If you don't want to read it, don't subscribe. But don't prohibit me from
having access to something because you don't like it. As a student, you can
surely appreciate open access to information?
-John Vencill vencill@iastate.edu
Article 661 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: moore@iastate.edu (Brian J Moore)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 20:29:30 GMT
In <1991Dec15.060838.23868@news.iastate.edu> sjeckels@iastate.edu (Steve J Eckels) writes:
>In article <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> spam@IASTATE.EDU (Michael L Begley) writes:
>>
>>
>>this is long, but please read it all, carefully.
>>
>>The new ISU Usenet news policy is completely unacceptable, because it assumes
>>the irresponsibility of the reader before they prove to be unable to handle
>>the content of the groups.
> I think were missing the point here. The problem is not here becuase of
>what we read on the computer, but because of what we look at. Groups such
>as alt.sex.pictures were pictures are posted that are not just in bad taste
>but could also be against state porn laws. Can't you see the joe blow
>pulling up a full screen graphic sex picture in the computer lab. This
>could cause problems and you know it. I fully agree with the new rule. The
>machines in the computer lab should not have these accounts on them. I
>think they are doing the only fair thing for all people envolved. You can
>still look or read as you please (after getting your slip) but not in public.
Restricting newsgroups will not stop people from displaying whatever they want
in the labs. The idea that it will is 'missing the point'. If that is the
problem as you suggest, we need a labs policy not a news policy.
--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ / /
/ Brian J. Moore / moore@iastate.edu /
/__________________________________/____________________________________/
Article 662 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: goldberg@iastate.edu (Adam Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups
Message-ID:
Originator: goldberg@vincent1.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 20:38:45 GMT
Chris Schweda says:
>>Okay, I'll say: the new news policy is bullshit. Bunch of greyhaired
>>comp center bastards think they can tell me what I should and shouldn't
>>read.
To which Shivanand Shenoy responds:
>Okay, I'll say for the nth time: Policies are not made at random by
>so called 'greyhaired comp center bastards'. The computation advisory
>committee consists of students also (50%) who have an equal say in
>the matter.
While it is true that the CAC was 'consulted', they rejected the proposed
change. Truly, the new policy IS that of the 'comp center bastards'--
it was offered up to the CAC for rubber-stamp...and the CAC refused to
stamp it...and it got implemented (or will, very soon) anyway.
> The irony of it is people like you find it so easy to sit
>in your comfortable little offices and talk of censorship, what the
>comp.center is not doing, and so on. Where were you when there was a
>call to get student representatives to serve on the committee? We
>literally had to force students to join the decision making process.
Excuse me. I am one of the student representatives. There must be 50%
student representation on the committees (and in the meetings) where
MONEY is dealt with. There is no such rule for other committees, although
there are students on the particular CAC subcommittee which refused to
rubber-stamp the policy.
>To get back to the talk of censorship: No one is preventing you from
>reading or subscribing to any newsgroup. All they are doing is asking
>you to take the responsibility. The only way to do this is sign a
>piece of paper which explicitly transfers responsibility. Just get a
>wylbur account and read/subscribe to your heart's content. This is
>currently not available on Vincent due to purely technological
>reasons.
Hogwash. I read news on Vincent. If I cannot read the news I would
like to on Vincent, then I am being censored. The fact is that the
Wylbur newsreading system is particularily inconvenient to those used
to the Unix-style newsreaders. Any technological problems on Vincent
can be solved relatively quickly (with an extra bit in the user record
and a small patch to rn, nn, xrn and trn). However, this is not necessary.
Merely put a .motd for the newsreaders which say "There are groups available
which may be offensive. Stick to the inoccuous groups and avoid those
with names like alt.sex or alt.bondage if they bother you".
This is the same sort of thing as putting the Playboys (in our library)
on an 8th floor reading room, and force those who wish to read it to
hang upside-down using anti-gravity boots (ie, Wylbur). That's nonsense--
if Playboy offends you, then you don't read it.
>At the end of the next semester, you really should consider becoming
>a member of the Comp. Advisory Committee.
I am. So what, it made no difference.
--
Article 121 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: s2cws@isuvax.iastate.edu (Chris Schweda)
Subject: Re: New Usenet News Policy on 1/6/92
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.210437.14441@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec13.220424.7995@news.iastate.edu> ,
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 21:04:37 GMT
In article , shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
>In tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee) writes:
>
>> There's no law that says that the computer center must provide
>>us with access to anything at all, but it can't be denied that this new
>>policy smacks either of plain and simple censorship or of acquiescence
>>to imaginary, groundless future lawsuits.
>
>Try explaining this to Joe Legislator in Des Moines who holds the
>purse strings.
>
>
Maybe that's just it: there's something vaguely conspiratorial in the
democratic process itself. On isu.talk.misc people bitched at me for posting my
gripe but not actually taking part of the process that allowed all this news
bullshit to come to pass. Well, I didn't *know* this shit was going down, and
know that it *has* gone down, there's not a damn thing -- it seems -- that can
be done about it. What it is the so-called enlightened minority -- the comp
center bastards et al. -- deciding for me -- the so-called unenlightened
majority. "You can read this, you can't read that, blah blah blah."
It's bullshit. It's bullshit. It's all bullshit. We aren't savage shitheads in
the wilderness, but that's what we -- the unenlightened majority -- are treated
as. I'm mad as hell and wish I didn't have to take it. But what're my options?
The grey-haired suits have put us in a tough bind: we got no options now. We
can bitch, moan, complain -- but let's face it: they got us all by the nuts.
ANd because we -- the OUTSPOKEN majority -- because we "failed" to participate,
because we, as students in this institution failed to "disengage our
solipsistic, apathetic tendencies" -- we're getting our balls busted.
Chris
----
we're getting our balls busted.
>
>--
> Shiva Shenoy | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu
> 2066 Black, | Office: (515)-294-0082
> Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home : (515)-296-7640
> Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010 |
Chris Schweda, Graduate Assistant, English Department
Iowa State University, 206 Ross Hall, Ames, Iowa 50010
---------------------------------------------------------
++ I used to have a .sig file until someone filched it ++
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 663 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tgreen@iastate.edu (Todd A Greenfield)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU>
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 21:17:58 GMT
"Eye of the Beholder"
Do you see what I see?
Truth is an offence
Your silence for your confidence
Do you hear what I hear?
Doors are slamming shut
limit your imagination, keep you where they must
Do you feel what I feel?
Bittering distress
Who decides what you express?
Do you take what I take?
Endurance is the word
Moving back instead of forward seems to me absurd
Doesn't matter what you see
or into it what you read
you can do it your own way
if it's done just how I say
indepenence limited
freedom of choice
choice is made for you my friend
freedom of speech
speech is words that they will bend
freedom with their exception
Do you fear what I fear?
Living properly
Truths to you are lies to me
Do you choose what I choose?
More alternatives
Energy derives from both the plus and negative
Do you need what I need?
Boundaries overthrown
Look inside, to each his own
...
from "... And Justice for All", Metallica
(alt.rock-n-roll.heavy.metal)
Article 665 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sourada@iastate.edu (Steven D Ourada)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec14.230519@IASTATE.EDU> <1991Dec15.194642.10763@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 21:21:56 GMT
In <1991Dec15.194642.10763@news.iastate.edu> john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
>It is not the job of the library to act "in loco parentis".
Thank you for saying that... I was going to bring that up in my next post,
but now I don't have to :)...
I'd like to extend that, though, and say it is not the job of the library,
_or_ the C C, _or_ the professors, _or_ the legislators, _or_ the regents,
_or_ any other body _except_ parents (or those who parents wish to) to act
as "in loco parentis".
--
-----------------
Ask me how my university is censoring my Usenet access!
sourada@iastate.edu
-----------------
Article 664 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: sourada@iastate.edu (Steven D Ourada)
Subject: Re: The new netnews policy
Message-ID:
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.064637.25183@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.182458.7461@news.iastate.edu> <1991Dec15.195833.11222@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 21:29:40 GMT
In <1991Dec15.195833.11222@news.iastate.edu> john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
>A large part of ISU's money comes from students, but tuition, fees, etc. do NOT
>make up more than 50% of the budget (of course, lots of students are tax payers
>as well). As for specific equipment:
On the subject of funding, I'd like to think that the funding sources other
than students are also interested in seeing that students get what they
want/need to have a well-rounded education.
--
-----------------
Ask me how my university is censoring my Usenet access!
sourada@iastate.edu
-----------------
Article 666 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: tjlee@iastate.edu (Tom Lee)
Subject: ISU Newsgroup Censorship Policy and the Bill of Rights
Message-ID:
Originator: tjlee@pv7428.vincent.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 22:19:17 GMT
Today is the 200th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. Isn't it
ironic that the new newsgroup policy was announced so recently?
"Congress shall make now law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably
to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances."
First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution
(Ratified December 15, 1791)
-- Tom Lee, 206 Physics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, (515)294-5266 --
Internet: tjlee@iastate.edu | My computer center administrators are about to
or: tab47@ccvax.iastate.edu | become my Big Brothers, and protect me from
Bitnet: tab47@isuvax.BITNET | groups that might offend me! Nice of 'em, hmm?
Article 122 of isu.talk.misc:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: Janeane Hascall
Subject: New News Policy: An Insult to the First Amendment
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.224608.17666@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: john@vincent1.iastate.edu
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Distribution: isu
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 22:46:08 GMT
Today is the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.
On this day of all days, it seems especially ironic that the administration of
the Computation Center appears to consider themselves wiser than our Founding
Fathers.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom
of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
ISU has an opportunity to do something important -- take a stand when so many
others are waffling on perhaps our most important freedom: freedom of speech and
expression. Berkeley was in the 1960s a bastion of free speech and thinking -
and is still lauded as such to this day. Much talk has been of making ISU the
"MIT of the Midwest"; is it not be equally important to have ISU be the
"Berkeley of the Midwest", where free speech and expression are protected? When
universities - which have traditionally been considered centers of the free
exchange of ideas - are at last assaulted, what does this bode for the rest of
our civilization?
I have always been proud to be an alumna of Iowa State, but this action makes
me ashamed of my alma mater.
Janeane Hascall
Class of '85
Article 667 of isu.cc.general:
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: spam@IASTATE.EDU (Michael L Begley)
Subject: New news censorship policy at Iowa State University
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.164750@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 22:47:50 GMT
Hi. I'm a staudent at Iowa State University, and the university
just recently unveiled a policy designed to censor the following
groups from virtually every student and most faculty. The groups
specificly being censored are:
alt.personals.bondage
alt.drugs
alt.psychoactives
alt.sex
alt.sex.bestiality
alt.sex.bondage
alt.sex.motss
alt.sex.pictures
alt.sex.pictures.d
ISU has a new athena-like distributed system. Most of the machines
are not owned by the computation center itself, by by specific
campus departments and are under the administration of professors
in these departments. Nearly all of these machines are not
accessable by the general student body. These exist a small (20 or
so) number publicly available machines. The above groups will not
be accessible from any of these public machines. The groups will
be accessible to the department-owned machines, if the system
administrator fills out a form of some sort. Then only those people
with access to that machine will be able to receive the full feed.
This policy leaves the above groups out of reach of nearly all the
students and most of the faculty, for only those users with access
to a machine with a 'full feed' will be able to read them.
There's now some pretty fierce opposition to this on the local news
groups regarding this censorship, and I tried to wade through some
of the legal issues and laws documented via ftp at eff.com. Could
someone with more experience with this issue please point me to some
of the most relevent information regarding htis issue on eff.com
and any other source? Thanks.
-mike begley
spam@iastate.edu
--
mike begley "I will not waste network bandwidth"
spam@iastate.edu "I will not waste network bandwidth"
hz101@ccvax.iastate.edu "I will not waste network bandwidth"
-------------------
From cafnews Fri Dec 13 16:15:02 1991
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups
Message-ID: <1991Dec15.231639.18638@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
References: <1991Dec15.144730.2812@news.iastate.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1991 23:16:39 GMT
shenoy@iastate.edu (Shivanand Shenoy) writes:
} The irony of it is people like you find it so easy to sit
}in your comfortable little offices and talk of censorship, what the
}comp.center is not doing, and so on. Where were you when there was a
}call to get student representatives to serve on the committee? We
}literally had to force students to join the decision making process.
Maybe the GSS had to for their 3 spots on the committee, but the GSB had
more than enough applicants for their 9 spots.
John
Article 123 of isu.talk.misc:
