From: kaplan@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (RayK)
Newsgroups: comp.org.decus
Subject: Re: membership into DECUS
Date: 7 Oct 92 01:12:00 GMT
 <6294@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>,<3OCT199207015430@misvax.mis.arizona.edu> <1992Oct05.163447.20368@eng.umd.edu>
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Oct05.163447.20368@eng.umd.edu>, you write...
>In article <3OCT199207015430@misvax.mis.arizona.edu>, kaplan@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (RayK) writes:
>>
>>In the U.S. Chapter, there is an exception.  If your name is Kevin Mitnick
>>- you are not allowed to join - this by board fiat.  As far as I know, he
>>is the only one to be embargoed from membership in the world, but I do keep
>>expecting to someone to tell me that I'm not an acceptable member, either
>>;)
>>
>>RayK 8)
> 
>Now now, it's only because they decided to enforce the Canons of Conduct for
>DECUS members... 
> 

Naw.  DEC said "we don't want him near our display floor" and DECUS said
"well, we can't figure a way to do this, so we'll just thrown him out" - so
the official story goes, anyway.  Now, this may explain why he got ousted
from the Symposia, but does not explain why he was denied membership in the
Chapter.  In a 1992 Atlanta Spring Symposia meeting with then President
Bill Brindley, Bill told me that "they (the board) denied him membership so
they wouldn't hurt him". An interesting bit of double talk.  

In my view, DEC told DECUS that Kevin Mitnick was to be denied membership
and that Lenny DiCicco (the 1/2 of the crime against DEC team that turned
Mitnick in) was to be protected at all costs.  Net = Lenny is a "protected"
member of DECUS - even though he was as guilty as Mitnick in the crime
against DEC - and Mitnick is still barred from membership.

At the 1992 Atlanta Symposium (The last time I'll talk to the GD Board),
Ralph Stammerjohn responded to my questions about the incident by stating
that DEC did not pressure him to keep Mitnick out of DECUS or to throw him
out of the Symposium.  I was flabbergasted.  You see, in the close
relationship between DEC and DECUS, DEC does not dare publically demand
anything of DECUS.  Its a lot like dealing with an espousal unit.  If they
"express a strong dislike for their mate going to bed with others" - their
mate simply understnads that they are not supposed to do it.  DECUS bends
to DEC's will, but the connection there is not the sort of thing that
you'll ever see documented or written much about.  Its all back room
politics.  In point of fact, there is no DECUS.  DECUS is DEC.  Harsh
words, but consider that DEC owns DECUS, its logo, its staff and its
resources (I'd like to see a "DECUS member" try to get their hands on any
of the cash that is in the DECUS accounts - for instance.)  After nearly
two years of dealing with this Mitnick business, I'm sorry to say that I no
longer understand.  This is a sad state of affairs since up until that time
(nearly 12 years) I had been a loyal and very active U.S. Chapter leader. 
As I sit here licking my wounds, contemplating what all has happened - I
simply do not understand.  Looks like DEC politics rules DECUS to me.

>Wait til they start frisking people at non-disclosures for tape recorders and
>hidden microphones.

:)

The bottom line is that there now is precidence for the Board of the U.S.
Chapter to deny anyone membership and throw them out of a DECUS event with
out any due process (I believe that they violated the bylaws when they
threw him about and when they denied him membership in the chapter).  But,
who am I - just a shit head in the corner grousing about abject bull -
right, you hight and mighty U.S. Chapter higherups?

Dissenting opinions, dear DECUS U.S. Chapter defenders?

RayK |(
Xref: sparky comp.org.decus:845 ne.org.decus:40