HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi)
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:17:28 GMT

In <1992Oct14.153735.28835@news.columbia.edu>
dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:

>The point about offensivness and harrasment is the idea of creating a
>hostile environment. If I leave the playboy open so that every woman who
>walks by must invariably see it, then that would be a basis for a claim of
>harrasment.

A library is not a workplace in the usual sense of the word, except for
people who are employed there.  The law gives special treatment to
sexual harassment in the workplace, and the enforcement is done through
the employer.

The law does not give special treatment to sexual harassment in a
library for people who are merely visitors.  For this reason only
harassment in general (e.g., assault/battery/whatever) will be
applicable, and that is unlikely to apply to the display of
pictures.

I consider a library to be similar to a movie hall, major political
party convention, or Usenet -- anybody proceeding beyond the entrance
should expect to encounter all sorts of offensive material.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@cirrus.com>
also: dhesi@rahul.net
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: I'm confused about these newsgroups
Originator: kadie@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:23:01 GMT

betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:

>Why is the discussion on comp.admin policy, much of which is
>cross-posted to comp.org.eff.talk, being re-posted here? What is
>this groupp for? 
>  thanks, Betsy
[...]

CAF-Talk is a free-speech forum focused on computers and academic
freedom.

I repost relevent articles from other public newsgroups. This allows
people without netnews to see the articles. Also it makes the forum
more comprehensive.

Archives of the forum are available via ftp, wais, gopher, and email.
The dozen or so best articles of the week (as selected by an
editor) are selected and abstracted, becoming CAF-News.

- Carl

-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: danc@gmail.psi.com (danc)
Subject: RE: [clari] Nude dancing club's manager, two dancers arrested
Originator: daemon@eff.org
Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:50:45 GMT

I hear they chased Mr. Cooper to a nearby church
where they nabbed him by the organ.
_______________________________________________________________________________

	Deputies arrested Daniel R. Cooper, 36, the manager of the 40-seat
Heavenly Angel, on Wednesday on charges of aiding and abetting the
exposure of sexual organs. Two of the club's dancers also were charged
with exposure.
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Display of nudes
Date: 11 Oct 92 22:33:22 GMT
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 16:23:41 GMT

In article <roelle.718658120@uars_mag>, roelle@uars_mag (Curtis Roelle) writes:
>>5.  He should reflect on the fact that soon he will graduate and find
>>himself working with, and quite possible for women, and that perhaps he
>>should review his attitudes towards women, if for no other reason, than out
>>of self interest.
>
>Finally you're getting somewhere!

I think I'm missing something here - what is the connection between
viewing or not viewing pictures of naked women and attitudes towards
women?  Is there a similar connection of viewing pictures of naked
men?  Animals?  Food?

By the way, I find it more than a bit tragicomic that someone working
in a place which discriminates against women on student intake has the
arrogance to complain to _students_ about the attitudes towards women
they supposedly project to visitors.

//Jyrki
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: emr@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Elizabeth M. Reid)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups not received in Australia.
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 10:03:56 GMT

u734120@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (John Lamp) writes:

>alt.sex.* is alive and well in Tasmania.  Perhaps it's because we're still
>not regarded as part of Australia. :-} Maybe you should ask the University
>of Melbourne if you have a problem.

You are probably not getting your newsfeed from munnari.oz.au (the
official AARNet Usenet source). Word from munnari's administrator
Robert Elz (kre) is that alt.sex* and alt.drugs are proscribed, at the
request of the US end of the AARNet satellite link. This was recently
stated in aus.news - the article has not expired at my site, so it may
still be at other sites which get that group, if anyone wants to read
it.

Also - as some people have pointed out to me in email - I should have
said that these groups are banned only by AARNet, not by all sites in
Australia. I gather that a number of companies who pay for their own
satellite time do import these groups.


emr

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Elizabeth M. Reid             Email: emr@eff.org (for CAF-News related mail)
Cultural Studies Program             emr@ee.mu.oz.au (for anything else)
University of Melbourne       Flames to: women-not-to-be-messed-with@eff.org


Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3168 comp.org.eff.talk:6422 comp.admin.policy:1305 alt.censorship:8060
From: thornley@milli.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:49:35 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.

In article <1992Oct2.111319.26055@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>In article <1afb5pINN9so@early-bird.think.com>, barmar@think (Barry Margolin) writes:
>>The Supreme Court has ruled that there
>>are limits to the freedom of speech the first amendment confers.
>
>The topic wasn't what any of the Supreme Courts since the founding of
>USA have said, the topic was what the Constitution says.
>
Look, guys, *words* *have* *meaning*, and the Constitution is made of
words.  Some of this stuff has clear meanings.  I think there is a useful
distinction between what the Constitution plainly says and what the Supreme
Court claims it says.  Free speech isn't a matter of the Constitution being
unclear; it's a matter of the Supreme Court deciding that what it says is
too radical and that the First Amendment can't possibly mean what it says.

Also, note that this posting is from a Finnish site.  The Constitution has
meaning outside the USA, as a major historical document and inspiration.
The Supreme Court interpretations have little importance outside the USA.

>Does the Constitution give a monopoly of interpretation to the Supreme Court?
>
Yes and no, quite literally.  The Constitution does not say by itself who
is to interpret it, but the Supreme Court has ruled that the Supreme Court
has the ultimate say in interpreting it, and that this is constitutional law.
Therefore, "no" by the words of the Constitution, and "yes" according to
the self-referential rulings of the Supreme Court.  As a matter of practice,
the Supreme Court decision is likely to stand as long as the U.S. government
remains recognizable.

DHT

That is not dead which can be elected.  Cthulhu in '92!  The polls are right.
From: u734120@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (John Lamp)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups not received in Australia.
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 07:41:58 GMT


alt.sex.* is alive and well in Tasmania.  Perhaps it's because we're still
not regarded as part of Australia. :-} Maybe you should ask the University
of Melbourne if you have a problem.

--------8<-----from .newsrc---------->8----------
alt.sex.NOT!
alt.sex.aluminum.baseball.bat!
alt.sex.bestiality!
alt.sex.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape!
alt.sex.bondage!
alt.sex.carasso!
alt.sex.carasso.snuggles!
alt.sex.graphics!
alt.sex.homosexual!
alt.sex.movies!
alt.sex.nudels.me.too!
alt.sex.pictures!
alt.sex.pictures.d!
alt.sex.sounds!
alt.sex.stories.d: 1-34
alt.sex.stories: 1-456
alt.sex.wanted!
alt.sex.wizards!
alt.sex: 1-40034
alt.sexual.abuse.recovery!
alt.sexy.bald.captains!
alt.sex.woody-allen! 1-7

--------------------------end include-------------

Cheers
John


--
   _--_|\             John Lamp, originating in Hobart, Tasmania
  /      \                 Phone: 002 23 1366 - Fax: 002 34 5685
  \_.--._/                   email: u734120@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
        v <-----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Re: Display of nudes
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:07:58 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
From: S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:51:21 GMT

In <1992Oct9.010021.18858@eff.org> kadie@eff.org writes:

>  Question [inspired by an email message]:
>  
>  What should sys admins do about nude pictures and displays of nude
>  pictures in public terminal rooms? Is a special rule banning such
>  pictures and/or displays needed?

This is from our (Uni Karlsruhe Comp. Center) HP Workstation Manual:
(note that other departments have policies not that restrictive)

"Use of the workstations not related to scientific research and
education, especially playing games and the abuse of graphic displays
for displaying non-work-related pictures, is prohibited. This is to
explicitly notify you that abuse can result in account revocation."

(please forgive me any translation errors, this is Germany :-)

Every new user gets this manual. I think that they can live with it.


MfG,
        Olaf
-- 
    o     Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student - univ of karlsruhe - germany
 _ /<_    s_titz@iravcl.ira.uka.de - uknf@dkauni2.bitnet - praetorius@irc
(_)>(_)   +49-721-60439 - did i forget something?
Eine Zensur findet nicht statt. N"aheres regelt der RZ-Leiter!  - Terra
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:00:08 GMT

In article <Bw556v.Jr2@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.153735.28835@news.columbia.edu> dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>
>>
>>   I think this is a pretty weak argument. I think a 2ftX2ft workstation
>>screen is a bit ore eyecatching than the content of a person's book in
>>a library.
>
>There is an Audio-Visual lab in Frost Library at Amherst.  If I need
>to watch a film for a class, a videotape is placed in the A/V lab and
>I can go down and watch it (with headphones) on one of the TV sets
>there.  If I were to watch something sexually explicit, whether or not
>for class, would that constitute an offensive working environment?  I
>don't think it would.  The difference between this and the case of the
>GIF on the workstation screen is minimal (in fact, I think the film
>would be more distracting).
>
   A very interesting example. I agree that it is very similar. I guess
that it _could_ be creating a hostile environment, but would require some
assesment of your motives. 
   I think harrasment must be something "excessive" or "unnecessary". If
I kept Playboy on my desk in my lab, that could be harrasment. But not if
I was a socialogist studying pornography. You have a resposability to not
so badly offend that you make it impossible for others to work or learn.

>>If I leave the playboy open so that every woman who
>>walks by must invariably see it, then that would be a basis for a claim of
>>harrasment.
>
>I don't think that would be so unless you took pains to place the
>magazine in such a way that it specifically confronted everyone
>passing through that area, which I don't think "lying face open on a
>table" qualifies as.
>
   What you say here is pretty much what I meant by "must invariably see it".

DanZ

-- 
    "I think it is a little premature to attribute the failures of American
     foriegn policy to Carl Kadie."
                                                     -Mike Godwin
This article for entertainment purposes only.
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: mjbrown@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mike J. Brown)
Subject: Re: Newsgroups not received in Australia.
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 14:45:11 GMT

I think no newsgroup should be banned, myself.  alt.drugs, for example, is
not a bunch of potheads sitting around contemplating the quality of their
latest weed, ("HEY D00DZ!!!;;*!!!!!,,"), nor is alt.sex* conversation the
equivalent of 1-900-phonesex chatter.  No newsreader I know of forces
anyone to read newsgroups they don't want to read, so the 'public
broadcast' argument for censorship doesn't even apply.

Mike
-- 
Mike Brown
mjbrown@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
"The Universe is a spheroid region 705 meters in diameter."
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3132 comp.org.eff.talk:6359 comp.admin.policy:1277 alt.censorship:7993 soc.college:4223
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Date: 9 Oct 92 12:49:18 GMT
Organization: The Puzzle Palace, UKentucky

ron@zooid.guild.org (Secret Mud) writes:
>
>I wasn't quite clear in my message, sorry.
> 1 - The publicly readable batch files were publicly readable.  What's your
>     point?  Remember, I pointed out the problems I found.

Yeah, there's no excuse for the way they treated you (if everything is as
aboveboard as it seems to be).......

> 2 - The trap program was in my own directory, and wasn't publicly executable.
>
>The tech had a habit of scanning my account every couple of days or so.  She
>had previously complained that a text encryption program was a "game".  I was
>one of the few people that was doing more than small assignments.  (My usage
>was in the evening, when nothing else was running.)

My apologies; when reading your original message, I got the impression
that your trap program was explicitly made publicly readable.

There's no excuse for the tech using system privileges to examine your
stuff UNLESS he/she had been directed to do so by 'the boss'; in that case,
your beef is with the managment, not the tech.  8)

Years ago, I was in a similar situation; I was learning languages other than 
the one for which I was given access, and my stuff started disappearing mys-
teriously.  Of course, the fact that I'd found a way to implement networked 
printing 'off the cuff' could have had something to do with it.....8)

--Wes

-- 
MORGAN@UKCC         |       Wes Morgan       |        ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan 
morgan@ms.uky.edu   | Engineering  Computing |   morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
morgan@engr.uky.edu | University of Kentucky | JWMorgan@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
  Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E  - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: I'm confused about these newsgroups
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:37:04 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston

Why is the discussion on comp.admin policy, much of which is
cross-posted to comp.org.eff.talk, being re-posted here? What is
this groupp for? 
  thanks, Betsy
--
System Administrator                  Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston               BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU
100 Morrissy Blvd                     Staccato signals
Boston, MA 02125-3393                      of constant information....
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3188 comp.admin.policy:1328
From: jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Display of nudes
Date: 16 Oct 92 03:31:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Oct16.033130.20389
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

>>This is from our (Uni Karlsruhe Comp. Center) HP Workstation Manual:
>>(note that other departments have policies not that restrictive)
>>
>>"Use of the workstations not related to scientific research and
>>education, especially playing games and the abuse of graphic displays
>>for displaying non-work-related pictures, is prohibited.

This is a completely ineffective rule for controlling the display of
nudes.  As an example, I happen to have used a large corpus of images
collected from usenet as test data for some image data compression
algorithms I was working on.  These algorithms have been published
in CACM and in the IEEE Data Compression Conference -- this isn't
just silly research.  Among the images were quite a few that were
likely subjects of censorship, yet the above policy would not have
regulated my display of such material because I had a legitimate
use for it.

In a similar vein, it is worth noting that one of the most published
and republished images in the academic literature of image processing
and data compression is actually cropped from a Playboy centerfold.
Network correspondants from Sweden have identified the subject of the
image as Lena S|derberg, born Sj||blom (| = o with two dots over it);
a correspondant who seems to have memorized all Playboy centerfolds
has identified the image as part of the November 1972 centerfold.
Academic users of this image should cite it in proper scholarly form!

				Doug Jones
				jones@cs.uiowa.edu
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3105 comp.org.eff.talk:6325 comp.admin.policy:1259 alt.censorship:7911 soc.college:4176
From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Summary: Guess you missed the original posting.
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:23:58 GMT
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa.

In article <BvG1xD.MKv@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
> In article <1992Oct1.064733.22424@terminator.cc.umich.edu> pauls@css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth) writes:
> 
> >In article <BvELx1.A4J@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
> >
> >>What if users include sexually explicit text in their .plans, preceded
> >>by a sequence of form feeds (^L) and the statement "Sexually explicit
> >>material follows; press ^C now if it is likely to offend you?"
> >
> >I take exception to the suggestion that Ice T lyrics are no more than
> >an indulgence in "dirty words".
> 
> For Christ's sake, who said anything about Ice-T?  Stick to the
> subject.

Here's who:

In <1992Sep30.065537.23479@eff.org>, kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) said:
 >Banned Computer Material 1992

 >Inspired by Banned Book Week '92, this is a list of computer material
 >banned or challenged in academia in 1992. Iowa State University has
 >the dubious distinction of being listed most often (three times).
 
[lots deleted to get to the mention of Ice-T]

 >Lyrics to Ice-T's Cop Killer in a .plan file at *Boston University*
 >     "Two people have complained to my department's chair... .He asked me
 >     informally to remove it.  I told him I would not do so voluntarily."
 >          REFERENCE:
 >          news/cafv02n35:<JBW.92Jul16195814@bigbird.bu.edu>


Does THAT refresh your memory any?

-- 
 ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                       |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 frackit!dave@uunet.UU.NET -or- dave@frackit.uucp -or-   |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
 vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu            | Harrisburg,  Pa. |
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
Subject: Re: Sysadmin for a Day, was Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:59:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: uoft02.1992Oct9.165941.10427
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

this may be a silly question, but doesn't anyone use lastcomm or other
methods of keeping track of where system resources are going?

as someone else mentioned, Crack eats a -lot- of cycles. most other
"harmful" programs are also quite visible in the amount of time/disk
space/network load/whatever.

what is wrong with a policy of 
   "We don't care what data/source files you have. Running programs
    that violate the security of our system or use of resources that 
    are otherwise needed is prohibited."?

you might get one person who gets away with something -once-. in most 
cases i've seen, a simple warning is enough to keep it from happening 
again. if it -does- happen a second time around there is no excuse. the 
user is clearly in the wrong and the sysadmin has every right to 
remove their access.

this has the side effect of making the sysadmin look good in the eyes
of most users.
   "He lets us do about anything we want as long as we don't !@#$ 
    things up."

it makes the offenders look stupid and selfish.
   "He was -deliberately- trying to break into our accounts. If he was
    -really- just trying to learn about encryption why didn't he just
	read the source in my directory? 

it scares potential troublemakers into compliance.
   "Damn, he lost his access & only did it once or twice. maybe i'll
	just look at the source."

and there shouldn't be any nasty rumors about censorship at your site.

so what do you think? am i missing something big here? or does the
combination of liberal policies combined with draconian disciplinary
measures work?

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:39:36 GMT

In article <1675@frackit.UUCP> dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) writes:

>In article <BvG1xD.MKv@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>> In article <1992Oct1.064733.22424@terminator.cc.umich.edu> pauls@css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth) writes:
>>
>> >I take exception to the suggestion that Ice T lyrics are no more than
>> >an indulgence in "dirty words".
>> 
>> For Christ's sake, who said anything about Ice-T?  Stick to the
>> subject.
>
> [reference deleted]
>
>Does THAT refresh your memory any?

Yes.  Now why don't you run along and discuss it in a relevant thread?

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "You are just naive and repressed because
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /  penis envy is here and it's now and it's
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /  all around you." -- Neal C. Wickham
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk