HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,soc.motss,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Date: 17 Aug 92 20:40:16 GMT
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems; a div of Booz, Allen & Hamilton

tdbear@tandon.com (Tom Barrett) wrote: 
->Read all of my signature line... you will find a similar one
->on just about everyone's...
->
->-- 
->Tom Barrett (TDBear)    tdbear@tandon.com                 voice 805-378-6207
->Tandon Corporation      tdbear@p6.f1006.n102.z1.fidonet.org fax 805-529-8895
->Sr. HW Design Engineer  "War is Peace, No is Yes, And We're All Free!" 
->[The views expressed herein may not be shared by the organization of origin]

actually, i don't see the disclaimer on very many ~/.signatures at all
... i see some embedded in the header, where nobody is likely to see
it.

[and no, i don't speak for the boozers.  honest.]

--
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <henry@ads.com>
From: jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,soc.motss,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Date: 13 Aug 92 16:14:32 GMT
Reply-To: jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc.

In article <1992Aug12.223742.12937@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <1992Aug10.225036.15252@ntmtv> jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski) writes:
>
>>If I owed a company, I think it would be reasonable to limit the way 
>>they use resources for non-company activities, particularly when the 
>>company name gets attached to it, or when it harms other employees.
>
>So articles in support of gay rights or the KKK or against Serbia or
>the US would be grounds for dismissal depending on your personal
>prejudices?

When articles are posted with the company's name, and using the
company's resources, yes, the company can take reasonable action.
Please note that Sun had given the guy *several warnings*, including
written warnings, that this action was in appropriate.  He chose
to ignore them. I think Sun took reasonable action since he ignored
company policy. 

I'm surprised this has hit so many hot buttons, especially with the big
H. Ross Perot fan club that exists.  I've known several people who have
worked for EDS (and have all quit) and his company is the worst at
limiting the control/"rights" of  employees:
They tell you what to wear (matched suit, dark colors only) censor 
people's conversations (any discussion of salary resulted in immediate 
termination), tell you when to get a haircut, and monitor employees
actions outside of work (getting picked up for drunk driven results in 
termination.) etc!  I think this is outrageous, so I choose never to
work there.

My opinion, again, is that using company resources can be used at company
descretion. I agree with the other poster that compared this with sending 
out the same information on a sheet of company letterhead.

I don't think my employer owes me the right to this forum here.
It's a perk that they can control (along with how much $$ they
think I am worth or how many hours a week I should work 40? 50? 80?,
how much vacation time I get etc etc)  

Patti
From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Freedom of Association
Date: 20 Aug 92 11:51:09 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

> :> What you mean to ask, "what if the entire planet is made up of greedy, 
> :> ignorant, stupid slobs, who'd sooner cut their own throats before giving 
> :> me any sort of break?"
> :> Simple answer?  You die.
> :
> : All right, you caught me.  I knew that my scenario wasn't reasonable; I was
> : just fishing to see what I'd catch.
> 
> And me, like a dope, walked right into your trap!  OUCH!  Perhaps I can
> chew my leg off?

You misunderstand me--you didn't walk into the trap, you very neatly avoided
it.  I knew very well that I was not presenting a real-life situation.  You
recognized that and responded to my hyperbole with a little hyperbole of
your own.

> : [real-life scenario where every insurance company and every bank in]
> : [every town across most of the country is run by white males.]

Correction here--I didn't make that claim.  I made a very specific claim about
a cross-section of banks across the Midwestern states.  I suspect that my
scenario would not apply to e.g., New York.

The rest of your posting was quite reasonable.  I'm still troubled, though.
Newsweek had a story this week about women getting frustrated with the
glass ceiling and starting their own businesses.  Interesting reading in
that it supports both of our viewpoints.  It supports mine in that these
women had an awful time getting funding and acceptance, but it supports 
yours because, in the end, they did get funding and a certain degree of
acceptance.  I wonder about the women who didn't have the persistence to
persevere, though.

Right now, I think the only solution I can suggest is the one of using
government money as leverage.  For example, those banks that hire minori-
ties in positions of responsibility and cultivate minority entrepeneurs
receive deposits of government accounts.  Those that do not, don't.  This
is not a truly satisfactory solution because you still have the same
problem that Affirmative Action does--token minorities and quota systems.

Ah well, all we need is a perfect world where discrimination doesn't exist.

Regards,

Paul
Xref: sparky ca.politics:6694 soc.motss:34919 ba.politics:4436
Newsgroups: ca.politics,soc.motss,ba.politics
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:42:11 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Aug12.050848.8082@boy.com> pat@boy.com (It's just Pat!) writes:
>Does anyone else share my opinion that posting _anything_ from your
>company's site is tantamount to sending a letter on your company's letterhead.

No.  Read news.announce.newusers.

Also, look at the disclaimers that almost everyone inserts at the end
of their posts and the automatic disclaimers that some companies (like
Oracle) insert in posts.

>I have just as many opinions as anyone else, but I don't feel it is
>proper for me to use my company's USENET feed to voice them. (Of course,
>I'm using RTFM UN*X Solution's system to voice _this_ opinion, but I am one
>of the owners of this small consulting company. I work for a software
>firm in Cupertino during the day.)
>
>In the Bay Area there are many systems that allow anyone access to USENET for
>a small fee (NETCOM, Portal, WELL, &c.). If I wanted to discuss an issue
>that was the slightest bit controversial, I wouldn't use my company's 

>From this perspective, I see nothing wrong with firing employees for
>improperly using USENET. Especially because they are representing the
>company, whether they "disclaim" it or not.

Mind explaining why they represent the company?

>Consider this: would a company be justified in firing an employee who
>sent letters on compnany letterhead that contradicted company policy? 

Note that most of us disagree with your letterhead analogy.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: NORML California <canorml@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:59 PDT
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Nf-ID: #R:olivea.atc.olivetti.com:55671:cdp:1333300013:000:1117
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!canorml    Aug 20 23:59:00 1992


  Us drug reform people are more than ready to join the recall Wilson
drive.  We're hopping mad at his recent call for a "Smoke a Joint, Lose
Your License" bill, as well as his idiotic insistence on increased 
spending on prisons, cops, and punishment.  
    Like most Republicans, Wilson is a spendthrift on law and order issues.
He recently proposed a bill that would have effectively doubled the time
serve by all state prisoners, without so much as submitting a cost estimate.
    At least Willie Brown and friends have blocked Wilson on this and
other civil liberties issues.  As long as Lungren and Wilson are there,
we need a Democratic legislature.
    We are waiting to see whether Wilson signs the needle exhcange bill.  If
not, he is a sufficient menace to public health that he should be removed
from office immediately, like his Republican mentors in Washington.
   It takes 840,000 valid signatures to remove Wilson.  There are at least
800,000 state employees who are hopping mad enough to sign it.  Wilson is  
a  class-A jerk.
   For our news release on this, contact California NORML: 415-563-5858.
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Date: 19 Aug 92 06:13:59 GMT
Followup-To: ca.politics
Distribution: ca
Organization: Apple Computer

In article <55767@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>, davepat@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com
(Dave Patterson) wrote:

> >>What I would really like to know is why on earth are you just going after
> >>the Governor?  This is part of the "Blame the Executive Branch" mode of
> >>thinking that seems to hold our country in this death grip.  
> 
> As I've stated before, this "blame the Executive Branch-mode of thinking"
> is NOT what has our country in a death grip, it's the old whining started
> by Ronald Reagan:
> 
> "It's the Democrat's fault!"
> 
> Reagan started it, Bush made it fashionable, and now Wilson is trying
> to emulate Bush.  

Ah, I see.  So you don't hold Democrats responsible AT ALL?  You would
rather blame the executive?  Okay...
 
> It is a LACK of LEADERSHIP at these top posts which is currently driving
> our state, (not to mention, the country), down.  Everyone wishes to
> "pass the buck" when it comes to fault.  No one is willing to, at least,
> try to fix it.  Wilson has consistently failed to come to a compromise
> when it comes to education, health issues, and welfare issues.  To 
> senselessly cut programs which are desperately needed in a state which
> is in a depression, (yes, I said depression: current figures are *very*
> similar to those experienced in the '30s), is wrong, unethical, and
> immoral.  The longer Wilson waits on the budget gives him more time to 
> blame the Democrats, which creates anger in the electorates.  He does 
> not have to worry about November, (as the members of the Legislature
> are up for re-election in the fall), because his term is up in 1994.

So, okay, you're the Gov'nr.  What would YOU do?  To pay for services, you
have to have money.  To get money, you have to raise taxes.  When they
raised taxes last time, people began to leave the state.  More importantly,
COMPANIES began to leave the state.  When employers leave the state, you
lose revenue.  When employees lose jobs, you lose more revenues.

So I ask you, what is Dave's magic formula for the government of
California?

> And, another tidbit:  Prop 165, (coming in Nov, authored by Wilson), 
> is a proposition which gives the Governor "greater fiscal responsibility" 
> in creating the state's budget.  We feel that this would give the 
> Governor way too much power when it comes to creating a budget.  If you 
> wish to have stupid kids, poor health care, and many more homeless people
> than there exists now, vote yes on it.  If you want responsible 
> government, fiscal responsibility shared by all of YOUR representatives,
> (ie. YOU have more of a say in where the tax dollars go), then you had 
> better vote this one down, because this is Wilson's reaction to the
> Legislature, and you.

Here you talk about not giving him more power, when it seems you're giving
him all the blame.  If you wish to put ALL of the blame on him, give him
the reins.


--
Rick Eames
athos@apple.com
I don't speak for Apple.  Really, I don't.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:31:31 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: ca.politics

In article <55671@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>, ses@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com
(Darlene Wiedman) wrote:
> 
> There seems to be a lack of leadership in Sacramento (witness the budget
> fiasco), so I am considering starting a petition drive to recall Gov.
> Pete Wilson.  I have called the Secretary of State and I will be receiving
> all the info I need in a few days.
> 
> What are your views on this matter.  Is it worth my time to try to get this
> initiative under way?
> 
> If so, anyone interested in helping out?

What I would really like to know is why on earth are you just going after
the Governor?  This is part of the "Blame the Executive Branch" mode of
thinking that seems to hold our country in this death grip.  I would think
a "Get Rid of Willie Brown" campaign would do better.

--
Rick Eames
athos@apple.com
My opinions are my own, thank you very much!
From: howard@hasse.hal.com (Howard Gayle)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Easier to just blame liberals than specify your plan
Summary: Don't forget to blame the conservatives, too.
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:00:14 GMT
Reply-To: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle)
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc., Campbell, California
NNTP-Posting-Host: hasse.hal.com
In-reply-to: jlbrand@pb2esac.UUCP (Jack Brand)

In article <1132@pb2esac.UUCP>, jlbrand@pb2esac (Jack Brand) writes:
>(Of course it's easier to put one's mouth on auto-pilot and just blame 
>anything and everything on the liberals...)

I blame liberals for about 49% of the problems caused by
politicians, and conservatives for the other 51%.  I think
liberals deserve a slight break because their intentions are
usually good, although the results they produce are usually
not.  If liberals could combine their generally good intentions
with effective knowledge (especially knowledge of neoclassical
or Austrian economics and public choice theory), they could do a
great deal of good.
--
Howard Gayle
HAL Computer Systems, Inc.
1315 Dell Avenue
Campbell, California 95008
howard@hal.com
Phone: 408-379-7000 ext. 1080
FAX  : 408-379-5022
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu (John Flanagan)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,soc.motss,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Date: 13 Aug 92 02:43:58 GMT
Organization: University of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy

In article <1992Aug12.050848.8082@boy.com> pat@boy.com (It's just Pat!) writes:
>Does anyone else share my opinion that posting _anything_ from your
>company's site is tantamount to sending a letter on your company's letterhead.

Not me.  Using your company's or school's net link is equivalent, in
snail-mail terms, to using an on-site or on-campus mail box to post a
letter.  The institution provides the information channel, but does
not claim responsibility for what passes through it.

>Consider this: would a company be justified in firing an employee who
>sent letters on compnany letterhead that contradicted company policy? 

Probably, since letterhead paper designates official correspondence.
It indicates, "I write on behalf of the company."  Internet feeds
carry no such recognized cachet.  Especially not if an explicit
disclaimer is attached.

--John
-- 
John Flanagan                          ||
johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu           ||"No need to overheat your rhetoric,
U. of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astro.|| Exaggerating items in your pride..."
2505 Correa Rd., Honolulu, HI 96822    ||        -- Mephistopheles, _Faust_
From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Levi Strauss & The Boy Scouts
Date: 13 Aug 92 09:01:27 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

In article <11715@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> 
> There are people who purport to follow Judaism or Christianity,
> yet are homosexual.  Not many, though.

And your evidence for these statistics?  Or are these made up out of your
own pointed head like most of the stuff you post about homosexuality?

> In any case, both Judaism and Christianity have pretty clear prohibitions
> on homosexuality.  To say that you subscribe to either religion,
> while engaging in homosexuality, is rather like claiming to be
> a Marxist, while capitalizing a company.

Not at all.  First of all, it depends on which translation of the Bible you
read.  There is convincing evidence that the Bible was mis-translated and
that some of those so-called prohibitions on homosexuality in the Bible
actually referred to prohibitions on the use of male prostitutes in the
temples.

In any case, the Bible contains a number of prohibitions that are no longer
in practice -- e.g., the role of women, food and behavior restrictions, etc.
People who no longer follow these are not considered un-Christian.  I
suspect, in fact, that many people don't even know exactly what the Bible
proscribes and would be surprised to find out.  I'd be willing to bet,
Clayton, that I could find more than one thing that you're doing that is
forbidden or discouraged in the Bible.  Does this make you a lousy Christian?
So why should someone who chooses to ignore the rules on homosexuality be
considered less of a Christian than you?  Gad, what a hypocrite.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (aaron greenwood)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Date: 15 Aug 92 14:34:30 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: University of California, Riverside

In article <athos-120892153038@athos.apple.com- (Rick Eames) writes:
-In article <55671@olivea.atc.olivetti.com-, ses@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com
-(Darlene Wiedman) wrote:
-- 
-- ... I am considering starting a petition drive to recall Gov.
-- Pete Wilson.  I have called the Secretary of State and I will be receiving
-- all the info I need in a few days.
 
-What I would really like to know is why on earth are you just going after
-the Governor?  This is part of the "Blame the Executive Branch" mode of
-thinking that seems to hold our country in this death grip.  I would think
-a "Get Rid of Willie Brown" campaign would do better.

Hear! Hear!  Thank your stars for term limits.  Willie Brown will be gone
one way or the other in time.

starbuck
From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:09:18 GMT
            <1992Aug13.030755.24573@oracle.us.oracle.com>
            <19607@fritz.filenet.com>
            <1992Aug17.220901.23067@aero.org>
            <19654@fritz.filenet.com>
            <104@steiny.com>
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Distribution: ca
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <104@steiny.com>
 by steiny@steiny.com (Don Steiny):

: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
:
:> But, as I said, the legislature got creative.  Prop 13 forbids creating
:> specific taxes for specific purposes without a 2/3 popular vote.  So, 
:> they came up with "bond issues."  Bonds need only the simple majority 
:> (50.1%) to pass.  We won't have to pay for today's pork until tomorrow, 
:> or next tuesday, wonderful.  How are we going to pay for it tomorrow,
:> without increasing taxes?
:
:	 Inititives are responsible for many bonds issues.   Special interest
: groups of all sorts write inititives.    

You're right.  It's not 100% correct to lay 100% of the blame at the 
feet of the legislature.

So we get to spread the blame around.  The legislature and governor who
are more than happy to spend like crazy, special interest groups who are
more than happy to spend for _their_ favorite programs, voters who are
_fool_ enough to vote for it all, and eligibles who _don't_ vote.

Let's get the eligibles out there voting.  If they do nothing but vote
"no" on everything without even thinking about issues, mayhaps they can 
at least slow the decline!

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
YOUR selfishness is greedy and self-serving, MY selfishness is needy and 
altruistic.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Distribution: ca
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:50:10 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <63948@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>If you want to talk about people not paying their fair share of taxes,
>consider David Bailey!  He is posting from a NASA site, so I am assuming
>that he works for the government.

>If he were working for a private firm, he could probably earn more money,
>and would thus pay more income tax.  By making less money than he could,
>he is cheating the rest of us!  The only fair thing to do would be to
>tax him on what he *could* earn if he went for the highest paying job
>available to people of his skill level.

>That may sound silly, but that's how property taxes worked before
>Proposition 13.  Does anyone really think that is a fair way to
>determine taxes?

Yes.

Property taxes are taxes on your wealth.  Income taxes are taxes on
your income.  What you are suggesting with David Bailey is a wealth
tax based on his skills and knowlege.  The only major problem I see
with it is that it is impossible or nearly so to calculate the proper
tax rate for each person.


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.