From: RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.personals
Subject: Re: I'll tell you why there aren't any women here
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:11:56 GMT
 <JBW.92Aug11212557@bigbird.bu.edu>
 <1992Aug12.134712.2964@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
 <JBW.92Aug12102544@bigbird.bu.edu>
Organization: Penn State University

In article <JBW.92Aug12102544@bigbird.bu.edu>, jbw@bigbird.bu.edu (Joe Wells)
says:

>In article <1992Aug12.134712.2964@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>,
>Victoria.M.Haliburton@dartmouth.edu writes:

>Even if a harasser makes threats, they can be ignored.  Unless someone
>breaks into the office at Shecora Associates and gets the address list
>from Darryl's computer, there is no danger.  Even if this happened, I'm
>sure Darryl would post a warning to the net that it had happened.

>Seriously, what are people worried about?  I wouldn't be afraid of a
>person who doesn't know who I am or where I live and who didn't have any
>way to find out.

  The question is not whether _you_ would be afraid of harassment by
such a person.  The question is whether _some_ people are.  The number
is indeed some.  And a nontrivial fraction of the population at
that.

  The threat of violence _is_ a crime.  Even though 'nobody' is
damaged by threatened violence.  This is the distinction (in the
US at least) between assault (the threat of violence) and battery
(carrying it out).  Both are criminal offenses.

  In the situation here, even though there is no readily obvious
means of carrying out the threat, the threat is there.  And
someone sufficiently far from social norms to be sending the
mail, is quite possibly (enough to make concerns realistic)
also capable of investing the time and energy into finding
addresses.

  You mention that, if the address file were broken in to, you're
sure the administrator would notify everyone.  Not a help.
Many userid's lead to real addresses and phone numbers, which
can not be readily changed.  (You're also assuming that any
unauthorized use will necessarily be detected, which is not
very good assumption.)

  To get back to the practical issues.  A newsgroup is in
part a social group.  The behaviour of the members of the group
will determine who joins or leaves the group.  If there are
people reading alt.personals who routinely send harassing
mail to women, then women are less likely to participate.
Those who didn't know so already, now know that there are
people who do indeed send harassing mail.  You have your
choices.  Do nothing about the harassment, and it will
continue or grow.  This will lead to an even lower participation
rate from women.  (or more generally, the people being harassed.)
If you do not like this outcome, then you should assist in
doing something about the harassment.

  The posting of harassing e-mail, including the mailer's
identification is one way of responding to the harassment.  Mail
can be readily discarded based on a userid.  Otherwise, some
part must actually be read.  This is not an unbounded mechanism
either.  If I post something that I claim is harassment and
suggest that you trash mail from this sender, you can agree or
disagree with me.  If you disagree, I've made it public what it
is that I find harassing, and you can say that you do not find it
to be so.  This is basically what you're doing in your note.
Actually, from your note, you seem to feel that it is impossible
to harass someone through e-mail since the reader can always
trash the mail.  That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
Those of us who disagree with you, though, are entitled to
take reasonable action.  Since you don't feel that messages
of the type being discussed are harassment, you should have
no argument with the notes being posted to the group.

  E-mail should not be posted casually.  And it hasn't been.
It should only be posted when the harassing nature of the
note is so great as to override the proper ettiquete that
dictates that mail (paper or e-) not be publicized.  People
who are oversensitive will get e-mail themselves telling them
that they are being so.  i.e., there is a feedback to prevent
the 'slippery slope' argument from applying.

  I've noticed through this line that many of the commentors
seem to think that Victoria is some flighty female who
considers almost anything to be harassment.  I've been
corresponding with her for almost a year (having met when we both
posted to this group) and know first hand that this is not
the case.  Her judgment on harassment is distinctly restrained.

  (Aside to a previous poster, even if I were the only example,
which I'm not, Victoria is indeed well aware that there are
decent guys to be found reading this group.  I think it is rather
this knowledge that has prompted her to take up the issue.  There
are enough decent guys looking for women that she is attempting
to help improve the atmosphere of the group for all concerned.)

Bob Grumbine
(Yes, a real name and a real address.  Even though I personally
don't feel the need for electronic anonymity, I can understand
why someone else might.  That is, and should be, their priviledge
and decision.)