From: feit@ERA.COM (Mark Feit)
Subject: Re: Banned Computer Material 1992
Summary: Arrgh!  Mut everything be spelled out?
Organization: Engineering Research Associates, Vienna, VA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:09:19 GMT

Two very generalized cents' worth, and then I'll put a sock in it.
Flames to /dev/null.

When most colleges/universities give you an account, you get it for
the sole purpose of completing assignments in a course, for research,
etc.  True, plenty of other stuff (reading news, etc.) goes on and the
rule isn't enforced when the outside activities don't interfere with
those who are using their accounts to the end for which they were
issued.  But you're still using the university's resources.  If you
keep doing something you've been asked to stop because it eats
resources others need to use, then as far as I'm concerned they've got
all the right in the world to pull the rug out from under you and
start due process.  I don't see why due process can't start _after_
the rug pulling, since the perpetrator likely to keep pulling the same
stunts if the account remains in place.

As for having the right to express yourself, you've got it.  But as
was pointed out in another thread on another newsgroup, just because
you've got the right to express yourself doesn't mean that others have
to provide the soap box.

COMMON SENSE, people...  COMMON SENSE.  It worries me that everyone
(especially here in the U.S.; any comments from elsewhere?) seems to
want the rules and regulations of what is and what isn't allowed
spelled out in excruciating detail.  I knew a fella who got away with
a lot of mischief with "there's no rule against it," and he was let
off the hook many times because of it.  How 'bout if I walk over and
hold down your Control key while you're trying to type?  Common sense
(and courtesy) says I really shouldn't, but there's nothing on the
books that says I can't.  Okay.  So make a rule.  Then somebody else
will come up with something else way off in left field they'll have to
make a rule against.  And another.  And another.  And another.  Seems
kinda silly, doesn't it?

[Ed. Note: "Offensive" as used below is, of course, a subjective term.
But people are subjective critters.]

As for "offensive" material, a healthy injection of common sense and
courtesy is in order: If I see something I find offensive in your
.plan, I won't argue with your right to put it there.  But I certainly
have all the right in the world to form opinions on you based on the
type of material you display in "public."  I also have the right not
to look there again.  On the other hand, if I drop something offensive
to you in your mailbox and you ask me not to do it again, I'll stop.
Honest.  I'll even apologize for having offended you.

Rationalize, folks, don't institutionalize.  You're trying to quantify
something there's no measurements for and then trying to find the
lowest common demominator.  If some of want to be completely shielded
from everything that offends you, I have a cave for rent at a very
non-offensive rate.

						- Mark

 ................................. .................................
: Mark A. Feit             KD4TAJ : Internet: feit@era.com          :
: Engineering Research Associates : USENET: ...!uunet!era!feit      :
 ................................. .................................