From douglas Mon Mar 3 15:05:39 1997 From: douglas (Doug Schuler) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 15:05:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: DIAC-97 ... on teevee --- some of it anyway... Message-ID: <199703032305.PAA24172@scn.org> For those of you who missed the Community Space and Cyberspace conference (or for those of you who would like to see it again) the opening hour of the conference (featuring -- I think -- an opening by me and Howard Rheingold's talk) will be shown tonight (Monday) at 10:00 pm and tomorrow (Tuesday) at 7:00 am. Here are some of channels it will be shown on... In Seattle, Municipal channel 28 Summit channel 52 Tacoma channel 12 Pierce County channel 28 Thurston County channel 63 Snohomish county channel 28 Kirkland channel 29 King County channel 59 Mercer Island channel 28 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Thu Mar 6 09:35:50 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 09:35:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: What's the value of Professional Volunteer Management in a Volunteer Organization? Message-ID: Or perhaps better stated: What are the risks and liabilities of not having professional volunteer guidance??? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 09:04:32 -0800 From: Nan Hawthorne To: king-socserv at scn.org Subject: Resources for Recruiting Volunteers Free Recruitment Services from Sound Volunteer Management Be sure to take advantage of all the following services from Sound Volunteer Management! Workshops for Volunteers SVM offers regular workshops at Discover U and North Seattle Community College Continuing Education for Seattle area adults looking for rewarding volunteer opportunities. Send your volunteer recruitment brochure or flyer for inclusion in resources available to workshop participants. Volunteer "Job Hotline" "Volunteer Opportunity of the Week" available as a free, recorded message at 206-781-5708. Send your volunteer recruitment announcement (one minute or less in length) for inclusion on a first-received first-used basis with preference given to date-sensitive announcements. We'll announce your volunteer opportunity from the Hotline on a popular local Internet newsgroup too! Seattle Area Volunteer Resources Web Site Be sure your program and its phone number are listed under "Seattle Organizations that Use Volunteers" on http://www.halcyon.com/penguin/vols.htm. And if your organization has a website, we'll add a link to it! Also ask about... Internet Resources for Volunteer Programs The Volunteer Program Management Mini-University on the Web and CyberVPM and VOLUNTEERS discussion groups give you resources and networking on a global scale. VOLUNTEER! TV Show DOVIA of King County sponsors a monthly public access TV program, an interview show focusing on a different area of volunteering each program. Call Lisa Yeager at 562-4028 or Nan Hawthorne at SVM if you'd like to be a guest on this show. Training from Sound Volunteer Management Nan Hawthorne of SVM is available for hire for training on volunteer recruitment, retention, recognition, volunteer-staff relationships and other areas of volunteer resource management for your program or networking organization. Call for information or to be placed on a mailing list for upcoming scheduled events. Sound Volunteer Management 9594 First Ave. NE #413 Seattle WA 98115-2012 206-525-2104 FAX 206-525-3320 Volunteer "Job Hotline" 206-781-5708 E-mail: penguin at halcyon.com Web: http://www.halcyon.com/penguin/svm.htm * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe king-socserv END * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Sat Mar 8 08:24:08 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 08:24:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mail Bombs and the CDA Message-ID: Re: The Following Message What's the appropriate response to porn spam? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:17:45 +0000 From: john134 at iceland-c.it.earthlink.net To: You at aol.com Subject: Hey Baby!! XOXO Click Here 18 and over only! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Sat Mar 8 11:29:15 1997 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 11:29:15 -0800 Subject: 1: Re: Mail Bombs and the CDA; 2: Netiquette lecture Message-ID: <199703081929.LAA21878@grogatch.seaslug.org> Doug said [blank lines collapsed]: >Re: The Following Message >What's the appropriate response to porn spam? >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:17:45 +0000 >From: john134 at iceland-c.it.earthlink.net >To: You at aol.com >Subject: Hey Baby!! XOXO >Click Here >18 and over only! >[...] First, get a grip. I don't know why the CDA is mentioned in the subject-line of this post, unless it's a subrosa attempt to find some "legitimate" use of the CDA to curb spammers. Frankly, spam is *preferable* to the CDA. While this is a spam, it's not a porn spam. It's a spam that *mentions* a pornographic site (maybe -- unless you've visited the site, you don't really know). There's a *crucial* difference. The map is not the territory. The signifier is not the significand. The name is not the object. The pointer is not the thing pointed to. Get it? I have found a pretty effective way of responding to spams is to mail back the offending posting [ a *complete* copy (which, as I discuss further below, will be *no* *problem* for most of my readers), with appropriate quoting conventions applied ] to the various concerned parties, which in *this* case would be: root at iceland-c.it.earthlink.net postmaster at iceland-c.it.earthlink.net abuse at iceland-c.it.earthlink.net root at it.earthlink.net postmaster at it.earthlink.net abuse at it.earthlink.net root at earthlink.net postmaster at earthlink.net abuse at earthlink.net That's 9 recipients (3 users at each of 3 addresses)! Talk about leverage, and it's in your hands, not theirs! The "root" and "postmaster" users should exist on every site, and it's their job to get this stuff (among other things). The "abuse" pseudo-user is rapidly becoming a convention precisely because of the spamming phenomenon. In this case, it's pretty likely that earthlink.net is the ISP and will take some sort of action. At the very least, your dissatisfaction has been duly registered. You will notice that no reply went back to john134 in the above example. You should never reply directly, but always to those who are likely to be in positions of authority over john134 and his ilk. It's pretty likely that john134 is not a real human being. If you reply directly to john134, your name will trigger whatever response mechanism was planned: your e-mail address gets collected as a responder to the spammer's message, as planned, and you set yourself up to get more of the same. Don't collude with your oppressors! :) Be prepared for a number of these to bounce (just throw them away); often you will get back replies thanking you for bringing it to somebody's attention. And if you ever get back *threats*, *save* *them*! Their ISP and/or the cops will be *very* *interested* and you can cause them lots of trouble. CHANGE_OF_SUBJECT: I have another beef, which applies to nearly every posting I see these days, including those from old.net.hands who ought to know better. I am sick and bloody tired of seeing replies to postings quoting the whole ^^^^^ damned thing they are replying to, as if all of our memories were so short ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ that we needed that stuff, repeated again and again and again, preceded by ever-increasing strings of ">" ad nauseam. Take note that replies to spam-mail to originators is about the only instance where quoting the whole message back could be regarded as appropriate and proper. Frankly, complaints *about* spam that quote the whole message being referred to as spam, sent to non-spammers, are spam themselves. Don't recurse on spam! Doug, in your posting, there were no less than 68 *empty* lines being quoted. You *could* have taken the trouble to edit them out, but you chose not to, or just-as-bad, don't know how to. Now what I want to know is why people should take your complaint seriously when you are such a netiquette violator yourself, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Come on, you newbies, it's about time you got your Mail User Agents under control (Read the Manual, dammit!!!!!), so that when people see your posts, they don't immediately tag you as a net.tyro (or a net.old.hand that doesn't give a shit) and lower their index of respect accordingly. Like..., *edit* on the reply (if you can't take time to do that, why should others take the time to read what you post?). It takes up storage space and wastes bandwith, which I'm sure you are all acutely aware, is a *scarce* resource. >[68 deleted empty lines... see? what you are looking at is a convention to indicate elision, i. e. where material was deleted. It's a good idea to do this for the sake of Truthful Context, i. e. when somebody sees the elided quote, they don't assume it's the whole thing. When I'm not lecturing newbies specifically (like right now), I often use the construction ">[...]" to indicate that editing was done. ] With the advent of widespread net communications, you all had better get aware that you are all, rolled into one, authors, editors and publishers. It's the ^^^^^^^ middle role that is being slacked on. --kurt a fan of H. L. Mencken, whom I know would just *love* the net! :) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From jj at scn.org Sat Mar 8 23:08:27 1997 From: jj at scn.org (John Johnson) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 23:08:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spam FAQ URL Message-ID: Once again, for everyone interested in spam, check out the following: http://digital.net/~gandalf/spamfaq.html/ === JJ ================================================================= * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Sun Mar 9 19:56:43 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:56:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1: Push'd Porn; 2: Put in Place of Arrogant Net.dinosaur/administrator.nut 3: General Point about Proactivity In-Reply-To: <199703081929.LAA21878@grogatch.seaslug.org> Message-ID: > While this is a spam, it's not a porn spam. It's a spam that *mentions* > a pornographic site (maybe -- unless you've visited the site, you don't > really know). There's a *crucial* difference. Excuse, me, its spam 'for porn'. The distinction though is meaningless. Would you think it any different to give out free Penthouse Copies at a school or to give out offers to subscribe for free? The rhetorical, albeit moderately inflamatory exageration, was a conscious choice. The rhetorical question asked in this post was whether there should be stronger mechanisms than the SOP you ably documented. > You will notice that no reply went back to john134 in the above example. > You should never reply directly, but always to those who are likely > to be in positions of authority over john134 and his ilk. Adminstrators never have 'authority over' any user. They do have some methods of recourse, but never 'authority over'. Got it? > I have another beef, which applies to nearly every posting I see these days, > including those from old.net.hands who ought to know better. > I am sick and bloody tired of seeing replies to postings quoting the whole > damned thing they are replying to, as if all of our memories were so short > ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ > that we needed that stuff, repeated again and again and again, preceded by > ever-increasing strings of ">" ad nauseam. > > Take note that replies to spam-mail to originators is about the only instance > where quoting the whole message back could be regarded as appropriate and proper. > Frankly, complaints *about* spam that quote the whole message being referred > to as spam, sent to non-spammers, are spam themselves. Don't recurse on spam! > > Doug, in your posting, there were no less than 68 *empty* lines being > quoted. You *could* have taken the trouble to edit them out, but you chose > not to, or just-as-bad, don't know how to. Now what I want to know is why > people should take your complaint seriously when you are such a netiquette > violator yourself, whether wittingly or unwittingly. > > Come on, you newbies, it's about time you got your Mail User Agents under > control (Read the Manual, dammit!!!!!), so that when people see your posts, > they don't immediately tag you as a net.tyro (or a net.old.hand that doesn't > give a shit) and lower their index of respect accordingly. Like..., *edit* > on the reply (if you can't take time to do that, why should others take the > time to read what you post?). It takes up storage space and wastes bandwith, > which I'm sure you are all acutely aware, is a *scarce* resource. > > >[68 deleted empty lines... see? what you are looking at is a convention to > indicate elision, i. e. where material was deleted. It's a good idea to > do this for the sake of Truthful Context, i. e. when somebody sees the > elided quote, they don't assume it's the whole thing. When I'm not lecturing > newbies specifically (like right now), I often use the construction ">[...]" > to indicate that editing was done. ] Sir the post was a short one, a total of two text lines. For the benefit of anyone who has bothered to page through your totally meaningless rant it should be painfully obvious that the only thing you've got a proble with Mr. Cockrum is yourself. My sincere apologies for not attempting to page past the apparent end of the message. > > With the advent of widespread net communications, you all had better get aware > that you are all, rolled into one, authors, editors and publishers. It's the > middle role that is being slacked on. > --kurt Being an editor is important. Consider yourself edited out Mr. Cockrum till you can show the ability to deal with what is going on here and now rather than whatever tragedies apparently befell, and froze, you some ten plus years ago. SCN needs to be proactive here on the net, and frankly the negative, know-it-all attitude Mr. Cockrum displays in this post is all too often the norm on SCN. I happen to think that getting spam reffering to porn is obectionable, actionable, and important to act upon. 'Pushing' porn ain't no different, at many important levels, than pushing drugs, including alcohol, especially when there are minors present. Most importantly it was something that the discussion of I felt clearly to be worth 'bandwidth', in part through continuing a thread seen on the list previously. Your reply, Mr. Cockrum, is the rambling rant of an incoherent loser - truly a waste of 'bandwidth', as often is SCN. Wake up dude! -Douglas Tooley Net Aware since 1983 Reality Aware since Birth * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Mon Mar 10 01:20:28 1997 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 01:20:28 -0800 Subject: ...Kurt's a Net.dinosaur/administrator.nut, neener, neener...etc. Message-ID: <199703100920.BAA00282@grogatch.seaslug.org> Reference: <199703081929.LAA21878 at grogatch.seaslug.org> In-Reply-To: You (Doug) said: >[...] >Excuse, me, its spam 'for porn'. The distinction though is >meaningless. Anybody with enough brains to keep their ears from touching knows the difference. The map is not the territory. > Would you think it any different to give out free Penthouse >Copies at a school or to give out offers to subscribe for free? I'm having difficulty parsing this. Are you asking me if "giving out free Penthouse Copies at a school" is equivalent to "give out offers to subscribe for free"? Certainly it could be argued that school is an inappropriate venue for such activity, but the sexually titillating aspects of the publication are insignificant compared to the act of hawking one's wares on a school campus. That's the real obscenity. It would appear that the Seattle School board chose to back down at the last minute over the same issue. Certainly, if advertising is permitted on school campuses, whether or not there is any sexual content is moot, IMO. The damage is already done. > The >rhetorical, albeit moderately inflamatory exageration, was a conscious >choice. Yes, and I called you on it. Rhetoric is the tool of politicians, demagogues and lawyers. It deserves no respect and has no place in rational discourse. It tends to inflame emotions and makes it impossible to reason productively about the subject at hand. Much injustice is perpetrated using the tool of rhetoric, especially in the political and legal arenas. Rhetoric amounts to a verbal firearm (bang!). >The rhetorical question asked in this post was whether there should be >stronger mechanisms than the SOP you ably documented. Sir, you invoked the name of the most egregious legislation of the century, comparable to the Smith Act (which made it illegal to be a Communist). Shame on you! That's comparable to "dirty fighting" IMO. >[...] >Adminstrators never have 'authority over' any user. They do have some >methods of recourse, but never 'authority over'. Got it? IMO the ability to "86" somebody certainly qualifies as "authority". >[...] >Sir the post was a short one, a total of two text lines. For the benefit >of anyone who has bothered to page through your totally meaningless rant >it should be painfully obvious that the only thing you've got a proble >with Mr. Cockrum is yourself. My sincere apologies for not attempting to >page past the apparent end of the message. You added 2 lines to a posting that already mostly consisted of blank lines and a URL. That's not more than 2 cents of added value to something that was nearly worthless in the first place. Even puffed rice is more nutritious than that. Have you considered running for election [ -blanch- ] ? >[...] >SCN needs to be proactive here on the net, and frankly the negative, >know-it-all attitude Mr. Cockrum displays in this post is all too often >the norm on SCN. No, we *don't* need to be "proactive here on the net", at least in the areas you are getting all heated up about. If this is what you consider to be "professionalism" then I'm all for amateurism. As far as negative, know-it-all attitudes, well, good! I'm glad it's the norm, and it's nice to be in good company. As it happens, I know more than you do, and I don't even have a degree in science :) ! >I happen to think that getting spam reffering to porn is obectionable, >actionable, and important to act upon. 'Pushing' porn ain't no different, >at many important levels, "many important levels"? Say what? (more rhetoric) > than pushing drugs, including alcohol, >especially when there are minors present. Well, that's an opinion. But opinions don't automatically deserve respect, unless they are backed up by facts or reasoning. Rhetoric doesn't cut it (except for dittoheads). The best way to get adolescents interested in drugs or pornography is for adults to buy into all the hooplah about them, and to run around in circles, anguishing over the innocence of their children. The kids, seeing that something so apparently innocuous can get the adults all riled up, sense the cognitive dissonance and conclude correctly that the adults are just being silly. Loss of respect quickly follows. Not only that, but the kids learn how to push the adult's buttons, and pretty quick the tail's wagging the dog. Hark back to the days when you were a teen. Didn't you ever see this pattern? Didn't you ever do it yourself? (be honest). If adults really cared about their kids, instead of just wanting to feel good about themselves, they'd conduct themselves in such a way as to win the respect and admiration of the kids. The kids then would attempt to emulate them, achieving the desired result. Does anybody seriously think drugs or pornography would be an issue between parents and kids that had genuine respect for each other? The best way to get a kid to shove a bean up their nose is to forbid them to do it. >Most importantly it was something that the discussion of I felt clearly to >be worth 'bandwidth', in part through continuing a thread seen on the list >previously. This is irrelevant. If you chose to post to this list, apparently out of context, you have to expect replies based on the content of the posting. To expect otherwise is unfair and unreasonable. If you can't deal with that, don't post at all. You could have quoted less and supplied some reasonable and coherent argument and substance instead of your "2 cents worth and the puffed rice". You could have summarised the context for the benefit of the list you posted to. Instead, you took the easy way out and did the equivalent of tossing a tear-gas grenade into a meeting, and now you're complaining because somebody lobbed it back, beaning you. >Your reply, Mr. Cockrum, is the rambling rant of an incoherent loser - >truly a waste of 'bandwidth', as often is SCN. >[...] Ipse dixit. --kurt * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From jimh at scn.org Mon Mar 10 12:55:28 1997 From: jimh at scn.org (Jim Horton) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 12:55:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: UW Computer Fair Message-ID: It's time for a second call for volunteers to help with the SCN booth at the UW Computer Fair on March 19 and 20. Don't assume that I have been flooded with offers, I haven't. My last note netted 5 replies. For those that have not helped out with previous fairs, there is very little to it, just talk to folks about SCN. The good thing about the Computer Fair is that the 'public' you talk to is already very computer and network aware. We will have a computer set up on site to give demonstrations. The fair runs 10 am - 8 pm on Wednesday the 19th and 9 am - 5 pm on Thursday. If you are interested and available to help, please let me know. thanks, Jim -- Jim Horton jimh at scn.org Seattle Community Network * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Mon Mar 10 13:07:34 1997 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 13:07:34 -0800 Subject: Risks of deploying a legislative virus, or "legislative mal-ware" Message-ID: <199703102107.NAA03398@grogatch.seaslug.org> [The following is a somewhat edited excerpt from a letter I wrote to the editor of a small local radical periodical, "Eat the State" . This should be of interest to all the recipients. --kurt] >From a discussion of pending legislation in the Washington State Legislature in ETS #26: > Another gem: The > Restoring The Balance of Powers Act actually > abolishes it by giving the state legislature the right to > override any state Court of Appeals or Supreme Court ruling > that a law is unconstitutional. Yes, that's the legislation's real name. This is even nastier than it appears, because it appears to contains a "self-repairing" property. That is, if *it* is declared unconstitutional, by subsequent *self-application*, the law is sustained and doesn't go away unless yet another undefined 3rd power (a revolution? the US Supreme Court? China?) intervenes between the time the court makes it's ruling and the time the legislature meets to overturn the ruling. (GEEK ALERT -- In software engineering, such situations are called "race conditions" and are practically always bugs that need to be fixed. Legislation is basically software for humans and the same principles apply. The situation here is strongly analogous to attempting to eradicate a virus (this proposed law) with antivirus software (the rules by which allow the court to declare a law unconstitutional) infected with the same virus, only to see the virus re-infect the just-repaired software (by the legislature overruling the court's action). END GEEK ALERT). For this reason, the RTBOPA is easily the most dangerous bill, since it infects the legal process with a self-propagating bit of nastiness that will be legally near-impossible to remove. One might justifiably tag the sponsor(s) with the term "legislative cracker" (what journalists unfairly and inaccurately call "hackers"), with all the implications carried by the dark journalistic image (bogus) of the anti-social teenage cracker with a PC and time on their hands, and thus accuse the sponsor of an attempt to sabotage the legislative process... It's already illegal to loose computer viruses upon the computer-using population. A broad interpretation of law-as-software could make the sponsor legally liable for attempting to deliver a virus. --kurt * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From alboss at wolfenet.com Mon Mar 10 14:37:18 1997 From: alboss at wolfenet.com (Albert W. Boss) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 14:37:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: What is this, a hockey game? Message-ID: ENOUGH, already! This list is for discussion of operations pertinent to the running of Seattle Community Network. It's not, despite recent appearances, a virtual boxing ring for people who obviously don't like one another. If you want to argue with someone, take that stuff off the list and keep it between the two of you. In this recent discourse, I can see the original posting as being relevant to SCN; the topic is one we should all think about. I can even see the reply as bringing up more issues that we should all think about. But, folks, when the matter metamorphosizes from educating the community of SCN volunteers and changes into an exchange of pointed verbal assaults between personalities, then please restrict it to the people involved and leave the rest of us out of it. Volunteers leave SCN because of this kind of display. If you care about the community network, act like a member of the community and stop fouling our public square. Or, be accountable for your actions and assume the responsibility to take on the activities of every single one of us you chase away as we get sick of this kind of thing and drop out of the project. I do not want to believe that anyone on this list consciously wants to do anything that would harm Seattle Community Network; we've all put too much into it to perform an act of assisted suicide on this on-line community that exists because of our efforts. And that includes the combatants. You are people whose opinions and assistance and energy I value, and I respect all the positive things you've done for SCN. I merely ask that we ALL take care not to become a negative force within the community network; it's much easier to destroy a community than it is to create and maintain one. No one got on this list by doing things the easy way, so just remember why we're here and treat the list accordingly. Thanks for listening. And, if you want to point out that I'm an anal orifice, the e-mail address is alboss at scn.org, NOT scn at scn.org Al Boss * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From ljbeedle at scn.org Tue Mar 11 06:08:25 1997 From: ljbeedle at scn.org (Lois Beedle) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 06:08:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: What is this, a hockey game? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hooray for Al When you're retired you don't get weekends off * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Tue Mar 11 18:19:15 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 18:19:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: ...Kurt's a Net.dinosaur/administrator.nut, neener, neener...etc. In-Reply-To: <199703100920.BAA00282@grogatch.seaslug.org> Message-ID: > >Excuse, me, its spam 'for porn'. The distinction though is > >meaningless. > > Anybody with enough brains to keep their ears from touching knows > the difference. The map is not the territory. It's not a map - it's the ticket to the territory - with transportation provided at the speed of light (or rather the speed of fiber). > Certainly, if advertising is permitted on school campuses, whether > or not there is any sexual content is moot, IMO. The damage is already done. > Okay - so we have school age children here on SCN and you feel that it is inappropriate to advertise to them. So is my argument moot or is yours??? > > The > >rhetorical, albeit moderately inflamatory exageration, was a conscious > >choice. > > Yes, and I called you on it. > Rhetoric is the tool of politicians, demagogues and lawyers. It deserves > no respect and has no place in rational discourse. It tends to inflame > emotions and makes it impossible to reason productively about the subject > at hand. Much injustice is perpetrated using the tool of rhetoric, > especially in the political and legal arenas. > Rhetoric amounts to a verbal firearm (bang!). You misuse the word rhetorical - it refers to a greek school of arriving at the truth through the debate of two advocates, advocates acting from a perspective, but rational nonetheless. This entire thread is 'rhetorical' and by your very response you are commiting the crime you appear to be condemning (bang!) though I'll have to say I'm not exactly sure what your point is? Are you in favor of Spam, porn or otherwise on SCN? > > Sir, you invoked the name of the most egregious legislation of the > century, comparable to the Smith Act (which made it illegal to be a > Communist). Shame on you! That's comparable to "dirty fighting" IMO. As you wish. > >[...] > >Adminstrators never have 'authority over' any user. They do have some > >methods of recourse, but never 'authority over'. Got it? > > IMO the ability to "86" somebody certainly qualifies as "authority". > The overly general statement 'authority over' has led to many wars. This would be a area to very precise and narrow as you describe your 'powers'. > Have you considered running for election [ -blanch- ] ? No, but I certainly have my hand in building the playing field for them. Campaigns in general are filled with royal assholes - it's time to bow out of the fray generally by the primary for this boy. > >[...] > >SCN needs to be proactive here on the net, and frankly the negative, > >know-it-all attitude Mr. Cockrum displays in this post is all too often > >the norm on SCN. > Ditto. > >I happen to think that getting spam reffering to porn is obectionable, > >actionable, and important to act upon. 'Pushing' porn ain't no different, > >at many important levels, > > "many important levels"? Say what? (more rhetoric) > Levels: (The level of Spam(the level of distributing porn(the level of what is appropriate on the net(the level of what we can do with the resources of SCN) in this democracy the priviliges and comprehensiveness we claim to further)to recipients who 'choose' not to receive it) delivered into SCN users mailbox) > > than pushing drugs, including alcohol, > >especially when there are minors present. > > Well, that's an opinion. But opinions don't automatically deserve > respect, unless they are backed up by facts or reasoning. Rhetoric > doesn't cut it (except for dittoheads). > Ditto. > The best way to get a kid to shove a bean up their nose is to forbid them > to do it. I was into raisins myself. You could have quoted less and supplied some reasonable > and coherent argument and substance instead of your "2 cents worth and the > puffed rice". Sure, send it to P.O.Box 85084 Seattle WA 98145 pending establishment of micropayment - assuming of course that you are making an offer - not just violating your own definition of the word 'rhetorical'. You could have summarised the context for the benefit of the > list you posted to. The subject has been a general one on this list and this particular example provided a perspective that had not been considered before. Summarizing context perhaps is a good idea - generally though I find that the quality of list submittals is a relative thing and that standards tend to be set by the list itself. Instead, you took the easy way out and did the equivalent > of tossing a tear-gas grenade into a meeting, and now you're complaining > because somebody lobbed it back, beaning you. > > >Your reply, Mr. Cockrum, is the rambling rant of an incoherent loser - > >truly a waste of 'bandwidth', as often is SCN. > >[...] Ditto. -DT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Tue Mar 11 18:33:03 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 18:33:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Risks of deploying a legislative virus, or "legislative mal-ware" In-Reply-To: <199703102107.NAA03398@grogatch.seaslug.org> Message-ID: > It's already illegal to loose computer viruses upon the computer-using > population. A broad interpretation of law-as-software could make the > sponsor legally liable for attempting to deliver a virus. A good point, and well said - however you've missed one point - human beings are not electrons. The courts may well share your opinion on this matter, but frankly given the performance of our courts lately (like for instance on the stadium issue, sidewalk loitering, etc, I have a greater faith in our elected representatives. At least we, the people, have **some** form of recourse with these individuals. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From Jmabel at orcamed.com Wed Mar 12 13:33:30 1997 From: Jmabel at orcamed.com (Joe Mabel) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 13:33:30 -0800 Subject: FW: Problems with Committee time.. Message-ID: I am forwarding a message from a friend of mine. We had a conversation the other night about his frustration in trying to volunteer for SCN. I told him if he'd put it in an e-mail I'd forward it appropriately. What he doesn't mention here is that he is highly experienced with HTML, CGI, etc., has experience working in tech support capacities, and is someone who doubtless could do a lot if we'd give him something to do. It's hard to imagine why someone like him even has to go through a "mentoring" workshop as step one, harder still when we don't seem to have anything to give him to do once he completes that workshop. - Joe M. >---------- >From: eamon at whatever.org[SMTP:eamon at whatever.org] >Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 1997 11:36 AM >To: Joe Mabel >Subject: Problems with Committee time.. > >Joe -- > >Aside from the irony that the message is not travelling through SCN's >messaging system, it is still about SCN. > >As we had discussed, my first interaction with SCN was back last May. >It >was at this time that I expressed interest in helping with web >projects. >I was told, that would not be possible until I had attented a "mentors" >class. After months of waiting, the class was finally held last fall. >Finally, about two months ago I was added to the "mentors" mailing >list. > >This is an unusually long time. However, after attending a few >meetings, I >never got a sense of inclusion or of a compelling need for people to >work >on pages, despite claims to the contrary. I'm not certain what it >would >take to correct or address these problems. > >Eamon > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From rclark at aa.net Wed Mar 12 14:33:48 1997 From: rclark at aa.net (Rod Clark) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 14:33:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: FW: Problems with Committee time.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > What he doesn't mention here is that he is highly experienced with HTML, > CGI, etc., has experience working in tech support capacities, and is > someone who doubtless could do a lot if we'd give him something to do. > It's hard to imagine why someone like him even has to go through a > "mentoring" workshop as step one, harder still when we don't seem to > have anything to give him to do once he completes that workshop. Joe, Oh, we have lots of projects that need gobs of work. Please have him get in touch directly with webmaster at scn.org. The friendly SCN bureaucracy may have overdosed on paperwork and official "process" much of the time, and as a result left highly skilled and interested volunteers like this without a quick, clear way to start contributing right away in areas where their skills could make a difference. Actually, we've been wondering where some of these great volunteers have been, all along. Thanks, Rod Clark for webadm at scn.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Thu Mar 13 16:42:48 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:42:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Downtown Library Proposal/The other details and numbers to call Message-ID: Hi all- Following is a forward from Kent Kammerer regarding the Seattle Library Bond Issue. Kent has been a neighborhood activist in the City for 30 years and is, in an arena filled with burnout, probably the most senior and experienced neighborhood activist in the City. He hosts a monthly breakfast attended by quite a diverse group of active voices in this City and has developed for himself a singular voice that is respected by both the City's strongest critics and the City itself. Although it might be tempting for a growth management activist to jump on board the Library band wagon for many of the same reasons as the Seattle Commons, or for a computer activist to support the bond because of its technology elements. I would urge you to consider Kent's points and ask yourself just what do we need to do to do things **right** in Seattle. What follows is a summary of a 20 page document, which reads as a better analysis of the issue than any consultant or bureaucratic report I've read in quite a while. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 10:24:18 -0800 From: Kent Kammerer Subject: Library Dear Neighbor, I have just completed a nearly two month involvement as a member of the city library advisory committee. Our mission was to advise the Library Board on the adequacy of the facilities plan for the construction of a new downtown library and remodeling of branch libraries. Also included was a technology plan. The Library Board which operates independently of the City of Seattle, must still obtain City Council approval, to place a bond issue on the ballot. Though a ballot amount has not been determined, the estimated cost of the downtown library is approximately $168 million. The advisory committee, accepted the downtown library plan, except for the amount of parking. They, however, questioned the plans' over-all balance between downtown and branch libraries. They also raised issue with the proposal for placing the bond issue on the fall "97 ballot. I filed a personal report to the board which took an even stronger view of how branch libraries are being shortchanged in relation to the central library. When it appeared the Federal Government was ready to select the current library site for a new building, there was pressure to plan a new central library. Now that the federal government has indicated they are looking at other sites, the need for abandoning the current central library and constructing a new one, has been severely weakened. The timing of a library bond issue is of critical importance. Some have suggested that we may get only one chance in a generation, to pass a library bond issue. Having the best possible plan and the opportunity for our neighborhood planning process to participate in the planning of branch libraries, is essential. In addition, it seems sensible for us to have our new city librarian hired and be given an opportunity to be involved in the planning of the system they are expected to manage. A real public planning process, and our public needing to feel ownership of a plan, simply cannot be done well between now, and the fall 97 ballot. I am a library advocate, and will support at some later date a library facilities plan that serves all of Seattle's residents, particularly its young people. I don't feel the existing library facilities plan does that. Based on actual usage (not visitors), population served, books checked out, and children served, branches are the backbone of the system. They do most of the work. N.E. branch, in one week, checks out nearly half as many books as the central library, in a fraction of the space. In the proposed plan all of our branches together, would receive 6 times less money than a new showcase central library. Under the current management style, a central library is needed to support the branch system, though some libraries, like the King County System, do not use a large central library to manage it's branches. It is my personal view that a new central library should serve library users and not be build as a administrative center, urban renewal project, tourist attraction to augment the downtown core, or as a monument to Seattle's literacy. We already buy and read more books than any city of comparable size in the US. We must build libraries to serve our educational needs and our children, not service the egos of those who want something to brag about. You may, or may not, take my position on the size or grandeur of a downtown central library. But I hope you will carry the message to the City Council and library board, that the branch plans are functionally inadequate for the population they serve. Public involvement and ownership is essential in the planning process so that we can pass a bond issue. There are branch libraries in this city where school age children must wait to get a seat so they can do their homework or use a computer. I think they need our help. We spend three times more money on housing our criminals than we do on the children who will inherit the bond debt. I think we own them more. Call Today! Kent Kammerer Call if you wish a full report. 784-7217 Library Board 386-4636 City Council 684-8888 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Thu Mar 13 16:53:19 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:53:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Conduct of SCN Message-ID: Hi all- My apologies for any offended by the tone of the exchange between myself and Mr. Cockrum. It is a fact that this type of atacking behavior is an inherent problem on SCN. I do however, when attacked, defend myself. Perhaps if we saw a bit more participation from our elected board in these discussions (anything at all actually) these discussions might prove more fruitful and productive. Although I do have a standing complaint, waiting for response from the board, against a member of what appears to be the net.old.hand faction on SCN I'd also like to come to the defense of Mr. Cockrum. Mr. Cockrum is an experienced flamer and he is aware of what he is doing, I do feel that he goes to far, but it's not an uncommon behavior on the net. Frankly I'd much rather have communication of the sort of Mr. Cockrum's than the silence of our current board. Mr. Cockrum's tone and quality was also improving and his final post was of a very high caliber, one that merits more of a response than I gave it at the time. -Douglas Tooley * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From dltooley at speakeasy.org Sat Mar 15 13:06:25 1997 From: dltooley at speakeasy.org (Doug Tooley) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 13:06:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sunday's Seattle Times Article on Taxing the Internet Message-ID: Hi all- In the business section of the Sunday Seattle Times is an excellent article on the Internet taxation - worth a whole month's subscription price just for the single article. This piece, by writer Diedtra Henderson, summarizes the internet taxing efforts of some 30 states, as well as the proposed Federal legislation to ban all such taxes. State Senator Finkbeiner (R. Carnation) (originally a democrat) has garnered a small piece of national fame for his efforts to ban taxes for the next two years - a forward looking, balanced, and fair approach to the issue. I'll not bother to summarize the rest of the article, rather just urge you to read it. I would though likely to comment a bit upon the relationship between Taxes and the development of the internet. The internet is not just a a new technology to be regulated by the government. It will fundamentally change the operation of government itself and it is crucial that we understand this as we go forward. In a recent issue of Wired a contributor suggested that the way to influence the government is to make political contributions. This is certainly important, but this approach merely touches the surface of the impact the internet will have upon the internet, and also falls victim to the perspective that we are subjects of our government, not that our government is subject to our collective, and articulated, will. Recently a SCN User, Curt Cockrum, put forth a post comparing our court system, and the law, to a computer program, arguing that our society is facing a infinite loop in our legal system. This is frightening - to think that the internet might be used to 'program' all of us is shocking. Our society is not directed by the law, the law is rather an error trap to handle those things that go wrong. The single largest way our government 'programs' society is through education, but in the final analysis it is all of us that take the vast majority of the responsibility for 'society' through each of our interactions. The net is infused with this belief, and it is crucial that we work to see the communication powers of the net used to influence government as much as possible. One would think that education alone would substitute the need for a strong legal/criminal system. Peculiarly that does not appear to be the case in Post WWII America. Unfortunately though the relative proportions of educated vs 'working folks' has switched we seem to need the law all the more. Though the communication tools, and an educated populace, have made it possible to avoid some of the 'constitutional short cuts' adopted by the legal profession for practical reasons these same short cuts have now developed to the point where, in some cases, the legal profession is now working in direct contradiction to the Constitution of the United States, the document that serves as the basis for all legal authority. Enhanced access to court records now also means that the results of these 'constititional short cuts' are public knowledge throughout the Country and world. This violation of privacy leads to a result whereby the Legals system of the United States is becoming a threat to public safety as well as our right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. That rant said let me propose the following, big picture, general approach to internet taxation, for your consideration: The internet should not be taxed, nor regulated till the following occurs: The federal government runs on a balanced budget After that point all communications related revenues, including bandwidth licensing, should be dedicated to the reduction, and eventual removal of, the federal deficit. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Sun Mar 16 13:39:05 1997 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 13:39:05 -0800 Subject: anti-spam idea Message-ID: <199703162139.NAA24070@grogatch.seaslug.org> Yet another way of expressing sentiments of extreme distaste for received SPAM-mail is, when returning the SPAM-mail to the familiar trio of {root,postmaster,abuse}@spammer.com to Cc: to the fictitious e-mail address "requests at unabom.org". Of course, it'll bounce (really -- I tried it) (you might be in big trouble if it didn't!) :) :) Oughta be good for a few laughs, anyway. Other neato-keeno fictitious cc-recipients might be: fatwa-requests at Laffs-R-Us.sharia.ir adjustments at happy-face.khmer-rouge.kh Caveat: don't do this if you e-mail your congress-critter or the Big Cheese :) ;) --kurt I've been thinking that not only should the Unabomber be freed, we ought to give him a MacArthur Grant. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From douglas Wed Mar 19 10:07:59 1997 From: douglas (Doug Schuler) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 10:07:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: two quickies Message-ID: <199703191807.KAA18533@scn.org> Two brief messages for your consideration... (1) Steve Cisler and I were asked recently by people at Howard Rheingold's Electric Minds forum if we'd participate in an on-line discussion on community networks. Of course we both readily agreed. Unfortunately an embarrassing problem arose at just about the same time I was expected to participate: I couldn't get my web connection working (nor does it yet). To make a long (and pathetic) story short I have been unable to do much of anything on the discussion. I am still trying to figure out a way to join in but I've temporarily put getting the web connection working on the back burner. At any rate I wanted to mention that this discussion is -- hopefully -- going on and it might be a good place for you to check out. I think that there is probably good visibility there and that the e-minders would probably be a good audience for some of your thoughts and ideas. Check it out! http://www.minds.com (you have to get an id but my request took less than a minute...) (2) Recently I presented a paper in Oslo at a "Technology and Democracy" conference on the need for practitioners and researchers (mostly University) to work together on community networks and other types of grassroots computing and communication projects. As one reviewer said, "researchers need to get their hands dirty!" In the paper, I discuss the reasons why I think this collaboration is critical and make a variety of concrete suggestions. At this point I can still make revisions before publication and I'd LOVE to get YOUR critical feedback on the paper. If you're a professor (or any type of researcher credentialed or not) please think about giving it a look. (It's at http://www.scn.org/ip/commnet/oslo-1997.text) I'm looking for comments that will help make the paper stronger. Thanks! -- Doug * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From rclark at aa.net Sat Mar 22 13:41:15 1997 From: rclark at aa.net (Rod Clark) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 13:41:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Telecommunities 1997: Partnerships (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 17:31:30 -0400 From: Robert Cormier To: webmaster at scn.org Subject: Telecommunities 1997: Partnerships The Fourth Annual Conference of Telecommunities Canada will be held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 15-18, 1997. This conference brings together people from across Canada and around the world who are involved in Community Networking. Building on a tradition of combining pragmatism with a vision of the future, this year's conference has as its theme "PARTNERSHIPS". Visit our site: http://www.ccn.cs.dal.ca/TC97/Home.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END From kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org Fri Mar 28 15:21:13 1997 From: kurt at grogatch.seaslug.org (Kurt Cockrum) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:21:13 -0800 Subject: lost hat Message-ID: <199703282321.PAA15874@grogatch.seaslug.org> I lost a wool hat at the Computer fair last week. It's mostly light tannish in color (actually multicolored, but after dither (squint your eyes), it's tan :) , coarsely knit, kinda grubby. The sort of hat a middle-ages peasant would wear. If anybody picked it up and is wondering who it belongs to, it's me. I'd sure like to get it back. thanks. --kurt * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From the Listowner * * * * * * * * * * * * . To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to: majordomo at scn.org In the body of the message, type: unsubscribe scn END