how to "rectify" cats
Rob Prine
An Original Story by
J. Verhagen
Prologue
For a while after I graduated, I used to live with my
parents in a nice little white brick suburban home situated
on a secluded crescent. There were a lot of nice families
there, with little kids, smiling housewives, not to mention
a 13 year old girl who used to expose her lithe body to my
inspection. It was truly a pleasant place to live - except
for one thing. This neighborhood was *full* of cats. That's
right - CATS. Every where you looked there were cats. I mean
one cat would be okay, but picture ten of the mangy fuckers
sneaking through your yard, leaving dead birds all over the
place, shitting in your brother's sandbox, and *worst* of
all - caterwauling and hissing *all* fucking night.
One night, I was a almost asleep when I was awakened by an
almost human sounding scream. I got up and cautiously turned
on the back light. Two of the little shits were in the
backyard, making some noisy passes at eachother as a prelude
to a feline fuck. They didn't even back up when I approached
them with a broom. A few solid whacks changed their mind
however - but I wound up missing the noisy one. shit. I went
back to my room, exhausted and tired. I knew that none of
the things were spayed and in a year or two there would be
much *more*. I didn't like finding dead birds in my wonder-
ful garden, or accidentally treading on cat-shit, but I felt
consigned to my dismal fate - to have my property messed up
and used as a fucking ground for horny felines.
After laying down I heard the noise begin again (apparently
coming from the same part of my yard) and felt like crying.
But I didn't cry. An idea came to me in that moment and I
felt like praying for thanks, because it was such a wonder-
ful idea. In fact it was a *revelation*. Certainly, I had
discovered the solution to my problem. A wide grin crossed
my face as I lay down to rest - even though the noise con-
tinued louder than ever in the background.
Preparations
I was standing by the patio window when a cat went by. The
thing looked at me for a moment then progressed on - after
streaming the window with piss. "Fuck you too", I thought. I
went out into the yard with a shovel and a bucket and began
collecting the things that the little bastards leave behind.
Dead mice, dead birds, shit, you name it. If I found it - it
went into the bucket. After awhile, and after a visit to a
local park, I had a bucket that was *filled* to the top with
the stuff. It was great. I next proceeded to dig a deep
hole in the garden that was about a foot wide and around
four feet deep and tossed the stuff in. I made up a nice
wood cover for the thing, with fiberglass insulation nailed
to the side that goes face down (as I figured that it would
make great soundproofing).
Collecting the cats
I decided to leave milk and fish out on the porch every
night and made cute wooing noises whenever one of the things
appeared. "Here Venus", I wooed to the cat named Venus.
"Here Venus - you little penis - you little turd, c'mere
Venus". I said this in the nicest possible voice of course.
When he began sniffing the meat I stroked his fur - pausing
at the yellow furball's neck. Next thing you know - I had
him, carrying him in my arms to the garden. He was looking
around hastily, trying to find an appropriate place and time
to leap from my arms but I didn't let him go. No siree!
Into the hole he went! I nabbed 3 of the cats in one night.
I would have had four but one got away when I was carrying
him to the garden. I guess I was a bit tired from all that
activity in one night.
I caught the rest after about a week, and kept them alive in
the hole by throwing in scraps of fish every so often. The
noise they made was unbelievable. I had to make up a better
cover incorporating multiple layers of an old rug to further
reenforce the sound-proofing. Apparently, cats don't like
proximity to other cats. After I had caught all the buggers,
I fed a pipe in through the cover and took a long piss on
them. I never knew that vengeance could feel this good.
Disposing of the cats
Now came the fun part. I had to come up with novel and in-
teresting ways to get rid of them. I mean what was the point
of killing them if you didn't derive some pleasure out of
it. Why - it would be a waste of cats! I had to fabricate a
cage and one of those noose things that the humane society
uses to handle animals at a distance. It was easy to haul
them out of the hole and contain them when you had these.
Local Roads
Taped the sucker down to a relatively quiet road near my
place with duct-tape, and sat in some bushes to watch what
happens. About 3 cars came by and *missed* the thing com-
pletely before I decided to take matters into my own hands.
The fact that I (again) stepped in cat shit while in the
bushes only contributed to my decision. At the end of the
road I floored the pedal. VROOM! VROOM! I accellerated and
hit the sucker, almost losing control of the car. Aside from
a satisfying thud, and my almost getting killed, I found
this technique of disposal to be rather annoying and decided
to discontinue it from this point on. I was going to peel
off the duct-tape so that the cat looked like regular road
kill when I noticed its guts were all over the place and
didn't feel like touching it.
Cannon/See-saw/Sling
What a lot of fun!. I experimented with different ways of
projecting cats into the air at a nearby construction site.
I'm sure they enjoyed it too (before they hit the ground)
There were several techniques I tried. One technique (the
cannon method) involved placing a bundled cat into an ABS
pipe with a sufficiently explosive substance and suitable
fuse installed at the base. The first attempt blew the bot-
tom out of the cannon, and damn near scared the shit out of
me. The cat didn't come out but remained smoldering in the
barrel. What an awful smell!. The next attempt (after I
fixed the bottom) was better but I didn't use enough gun-
powder and I packed the cat in too tightly. Parts of the cat
came out - but not the whole thing. I finally got it right
(after burning my fingers retrieving the remains) and merri-
ly blasted 3 of the suckers off into the distance. It was
amazing - they described long graceful arcs through the air
with a wonderful MROOOOOOW sound - a sound which abruptly
terminated as they struck the side of a stationary bulldozer
at the other end of the field.
Another technique (circus see-saw), though less spectacular
involved placing a bundled cat on a board laying on a bunch
of bricks. This was just like what the acrobats do in the
circus. You place the cat on one side, jump on the other,
and the little fucker flies. Unfortunately it didn't kill it
- so I resorted to the more fun cannon technique to finish
it off.
The last technique (the sling technique) is the easiest to
do. All you need is a towel and sufficient strength to swing
a cat around and around again, before releasing it into the
air. It was so much fun. I was sorry I didn't bring along
more cats today for these truly significant experiments into
feline flight.
The Railway Track
We live near a railway track and I have often thought of
trying something like this. Trains come whizzing by at in-
credible speeds and the thought of harnessing these speeds
for a destructive purpose has constantly been on my mind. I
wanted to use the sling technique again but couldn't get the
car to bring the cats down to the construction site today. I
would up doing something better. I put the cats in the cage,
and brought the mewling things down to a secluded spot be-
side the railway line.
Woo! Woo! the train whistled - apparently because something
was on the track further down the line. Here it came, and it
was a long one. I couldn't see the end. I waved to the en-
gineer - a big smile on my face - and watched him pass be-
fore I got the first cat. I noticed a bunch of cars stocked
with automobiles go by. "This is perfect!", I thought,
slinging the cat around and around in a tight circle. I
released it. MRROOOOOOW! it screamed as it described a
graceful arc through the air finally hitting *SMASH* - the
windshield of a brand new pickup truck. I tried again with
the last cat but it wound up encountering the fender of a
volvo.
Epilogue
I packed my things and went home. I briefly wondered about
the bizarre reactions that people would have to the cat
remains I left all over the city. They would probably think
it was the work of some satanic cult. Or maybe they sit in
awe and admire the ingenuity of the person who came up with
these unique disposal techniques. For the most part I was
too tired to care. I knew society was a better place because
of my actions, and -more importantly- that *my* life in my
nice little suburban house on that secluded crescent would
be a better one as well.
Alma Whitten
Luckily, this is one of the reasonable sites:
>From: Karl Denninger <ka...@mcs.com>
>Subject: Re: gratuitous harassing post
>To: Alma Whitten <al...@GS140.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>
>Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:42:36 -0500 (CDT)
>
>
>|> Your client, Rob Prine, has posted the following to rec.pets.cats,
>|> which can certainly have no other purpose than to upset and harass;
>|> I hope that your site has some policy for educating its clients
>|> about the appropriateness of such behavior.
>|>
>|> Thanks for your consideration.
>
>We do have such a policy, and I've sent a message to the user in question
>regarding this. Thanks...
>
Carol Reed
get these hateful, spiteful, sick, pathetic, inconsiderate, rude,
lying, and so obviously immature little morons who were never taught
to respect the rights of others and who have nothing better to do
in their sorry, empy little lives than to try to upset others for
no better reason than their despicable little minds find it amusing
OUT OF OUR NEWSGROUP!
what's the current status of this effort? if you have an answer to
my question that you've already posted, send email so as not to
further clutter up our newsgroup.
thank you.
Carol Reed
gee, that's funny. the reply i got was more like this........
~Come at me with a request for inquiry rather than an attitude and you'll get
~a lot further. I've already spoken to the user in question about this.
~Did you before sending this to me?
well, at least he doesn't just stomp on everyone.
Rob Prine
Subject: Re: how to "rectify" cats
Summary:
Expires:
References: <2r3nt2$2...@Mercury.mcs.com> <2r3th8$r...@bmw.hwcae.az.honeywell.com>
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution: world
Organization: MCSNet Subscriber Account, Chicago's First Public-Access Internet!
Keywords:
Cc:
In article <2r3th8$r...@bmw.hwcae.az.honeywell.com>,
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>ok, people. i've had it. i officially jump on the bandwagon to
>get these hateful, spiteful, sick, pathetic, inconsiderate, rude,
>lying, and so obviously immature little morons who were never taught
>to respect the rights of others and who have nothing better to do
>in their sorry, empy little lives than to try to upset others for
>no better reason than their despicable little minds find it amusing
>OUT OF OUR NEWSGROUP!
Quick answer: dial into your local BBS and stay off the net.
\\\//
(oo)
--oo0(_)0oo---------------------------------------------------------------
Still in Vietnam, | Robp...@mcs.com
My brother calls me a killer, | If you dont like what I say,
My father calls me a vet. | play with your marbles elsewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Prine
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>In article <alma.76...@GS140.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>, al...@cs.cmu.edu (Alma Whitten) writes:
>|>
>
>~Come at me with a request for inquiry rather than an attitude and you'll get
>~a lot further. I've already spoken to the user in question about this.
>~Did you before sending this to me?
>
>well, at least he doesn't just stomp on everyone.
and if you do not like this, there is cheap housing in iraq.
\\\//
(oo)
--oo0(_)0oo---------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, Mr President, What about Haiti, | Robp...@mcs.com
where radio stations are fire-bombed, | If you dont like what I say,
reporters beaten and tortured. | play with your marbles elsewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Denninger
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>In article <alma.76...@GS140.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>, al...@cs.cmu.edu (Alma Whitten) writes:
>|>
>
>~Come at me with a request for inquiry rather than an attitude and you'll get
>~a lot further. I've already spoken to the user in question about this.
>~Did you before sending this to me?
>
>well, at least he doesn't just stomp on everyone.
C'mon Carol, tell the truth.
You, and a few other people (including one supposed attorney who uses
Netcom) didn't ask us to look into this matter, you instead INSISTED that
we censor Rob, and one of you was even so far out of line as to make
allusions to "hate speech".
There were a few reasonable requests for us to investigate. Those we
did more than make wallpaper out of for our office. The rest got
summarily bounced back to the complainer with the response that I
believe they deserved.
Give it a rest folks. If you want to file a <complaint> about the actions
of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
None of those activities will get a fair hearing here. If you're sincerely
interested in our looking into these kinds of problems you might start by
<making a request> that we look into something you perceive as a problem.
Your FIRST action should be to contact the poster in question.
Mailing to "root" or "news" is a <last> resort if you get no satisfaction
from the first course of action (or get mailbombed in response, etc), not
an instant knee-jerk response to anything you see on the net that displeases
you.
And quit the hyperbole. Especially here, as I both read rec.pets.cats and
own a furrball (who is licking my face as I write this message from my home
PC.)
No disclaimers on this one; I run this site.
--
--
Karl Denninger (ka...@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP, leased) in Chicagoland
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "in...@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
READ OUR NEWSLETTER TODAY! | WWW: http://www.mcs.net, gopher: gopher.mcs.net
Alma Whitten
<snip>
>Give it a rest folks. If you want to file a <complaint> about the actions
>of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
>blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
>to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
>or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
<snip>
>Your FIRST action should be to contact the poster in question.
<snip>
I agree with the first bit wholeheartedly, and think your actions
as a sysadmin have been entirely appropriate both in response to my
request and to the tone of the requests you describe. BUT, there
is no point in contacting directly a poster whose action is so
clearly intended to harass - what would one say that would not
simply lead to further unpleasantness? Maybe "Stop that or I'm
contacting your sysadmin", but I do think harassing posters
should not be rewarded with direct evidence of their success.
I would like to hear if you truly disagree with this (although
this should probably be taken to email).
Gerry Allwein
>Give it a rest folks. If you want to file a <complaint> about the actions
>of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
>blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
>to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
>or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
>None of those activities will get a fair hearing here. If you're sincerely
>interested in our looking into these kinds of problems you might start by
><making a request> that we look into something you perceive as a problem.
>Your FIRST action should be to contact the poster in question.
>Mailing to "root" or "news" is a <last> resort if you get no satisfaction
>from the first course of action (or get mailbombed in response, etc), not
>an instant knee-jerk response to anything you see on the net that displeases
>you.
>And quit the hyperbole. Especially here, as I both read rec.pets.cats and
>own a furrball (who is licking my face as I write this message from my home
>PC.)
>No disclaimers on this one; I run this site.
>--
>--
>Karl Denninger (ka...@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
>Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP, leased) in Chicagoland
>Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "in...@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
>READ OUR NEWSLETTER TODAY! | WWW: http://www.mcs.net, gopher: gopher.mcs.net
Your reference to net.superiority games says more about your attitude than
ours, bud. However the offensive posts were presented to you, acting superior
was not the intention of any of the posters and you know it. There are
responsibilities your company shares and apparently you realize that. The
internet is not some free public good your company can make a living off
without some restrictions. Censorship is too strong a word for something that
is not even political or religious speech. You and everyone else still have
the right to say anything you want, you simply cannot choose any forum and
demand to be given bandwidth...unless, of course, you think you can go to the
Chicago Tribune and demand they write a story about you. Try it!
Gerry
Karl Denninger
>>of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
>>blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
>>to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
>>or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
>
>
>>Your FIRST action should be to contact the poster in question.
>
>
>I agree with the first bit wholeheartedly, and think your actions
>as a sysadmin have been entirely appropriate both in response to my
>request and to the tone of the requests you describe.
>BUT, there
>is no point in contacting directly a poster whose action is so
>clearly intended to harass - what would one say that would not
>simply lead to further unpleasantness?
Perhaps. But you cannot make that statement without knowing the mind of
the poster, which is IMPOSSIBLE unless you contact him or her directly.
Further, if you <do> get unpleasantness in reply you then have two issues
to raise as possible policy violations instead of one -- and the second
one is likely to be much more egregious than the first. Cheap ammunition,
easily obtained, and by the poster's own hands. Not a bad deal from where
I sit, and it helps your case.
> Maybe "Stop that or I'm
>contacting your sysadmin", but I do think harassing posters
>should not be rewarded with direct evidence of their success.
Then put them in a kill file and give up.
If I decide to pursue sanction, the first thing I'm going to do is forward
a copy of your complaint to the accused and ask for a response/their side
anyway. You may as well start there and save me the work.
To those who scream "email is private", I say "not when you make an
accusation of wrongdoing against another party." You lose the privacy
when you ask me to perform the function of judge. Then I resort to due
process requirements, which means that the person accused has a right to
see the charges, specifications and evidence against them.
>I would like to hear if you truly disagree with this (although
>this should probably be taken to email).
Yes, actually, I do.
If someone is pissing in your pond, the first thing you do is ask them
to stop; they may not realize that they're pissing or that its your pond.
If and only if they refuse to do so (or return the favor by leaving a crap
there as well) should you call the cops.
Many people post things without realizing that it will cause great offense
to be taken. Some do, that's a given, but you cannot <assume> that everyone
is a jerk and is out to cause harm.
Frankly, <I> did not take offense at the article in question, and I am a
cat owner (or rather, the damn furball -- his name is "Bear" -- owns me).
That doesn't mean that others would not take offense, but it does mean that
there are at least two points of view operating here.
If you want to be a cynic, then go ahead, but you won't get very far taking
complaints to me without first trying to resolve them amongst the
participants (or is that "combatants"?)
Andreas Ramos
position that "if someone says something offensive, and another person
complains, then the second person will be put in contact with the first
person." (i'm paraphrasing).
This is very odd. The flamebait posters are deliberately trying to incite
a response. They then follow up by passing the names to other
troublemakers, who then start a war of harassment against that person.
This has happened to several women here on rec.pets.cats who complained
about the extremely offensive messages that were being posted here. For
Mr. Denninger to say that he will pass the women's complaints to people,
who by their actiions are nothing short of sociopathic (just try and say
in a public place the things they say. You'll be arrested very quickly and
held for psychiatric evaluation.) is a very odd policy. He seems to think
that these flamebaiters are "reasonable persons", with whom one can have a
reasonable discussion.
Karl Denninger takes the position that anyone can say whatever they
please. If there are complaints, he then holds the right to judge whether
it is a problem or not.
That's not quite correct. There are plenty of laws about harassment,
sexual harassment, obscene phone calls, assault (assault is a verbal
statement of violence. To say "I'm gonna punch you!" is an assault. To
actually hit someone is battery. Thus assault and battery are two
charges.)(And there have been threats of violence here). These laws cover
such statements. One does not have the right "to say whatever they
please." Furthermore, Mr. Denninger isn't the judge on this. The courts
are.
It would seem to me that if Mr. Denninger is the postmaster and if he
permits his users to use his system to harass other persons, and that he
states publicly that such users are acceptable to him, then Mr. Denninger
is treading very closely to assuming liability as well. There have been
cases of employees who have attacked clients and customers; the companies
knew that the employees were violent; the companies were therefore held
liable. (In fact, specific knowledge isn't necessary; the mere fact that
the attacker was employed at the company is sufficient for liability.)
The closest argument is the liability of the telephone company. If a
customer of telephone company A is harassing customers of telephone
compnay B, then Company A is obligated to stop the harassment. Just check
the front pages of your telephone book; the phone companies have many
years of experience in this. Mr. Denninger thinks that he is excused.
Interesting position. Not very strong, but interesting.
Mr. Denninger says he is the postmaster of the site. I read his .sig
carefully; it doesn't say that at all. To all appearances, he is just
another user there. He should add to his .sig that he is indeed the
postmaster, or owner, or director, or whatever his title happens to be.
The experiences of rec.pets.cats may be rather important for the future of
the Internet. Until now, the internet was run almost in a wild west saloon
style: if two gents disagree,they flame each other, go outside, etc. It
was up to them and the sysadmin didn't interfere or take sides.
With the encroachment of civilization, the suburbs of St. Louis and the
train and the telegraph, the saloons were brought under the law: no more
dueling, liability of the owners, etc.
The students at universities have been getting away with pranks, etc.;
all part of the cowboy libertarian attitudes that reigned on the Internet.
I've been using nets since '88; for most of the early days, nobody at all
controlled these nets; the world at large had no idea of what netpeople
were up to. Sysadmins have been a kind of dungeon lords (I ran the first
BBS for our platform for five years).
Now, as hundreds of thousands, yes, even millions of newbies are showing
up who only USE the nets, who haven't been (or ever will be) a sysop or
sysadmin, we are seeing a complete change of the nets. Since the telephone
company is the closest analogy to the net, I suspect that the laws and
traditions of the telephone company will replace those of the nets. It
appears that the FCC and NII (National Information Infrastructure) are
going to let MCI run the internet, along with four other megacompanies. At
this point, the entire flamebaiting will end; the trouble makers will not
just lose their accounts at one point of access (and then just switch to
another provider) they will lose all access to the net, and possibly
access to telephone service altogether.
Throughout this summer, we will see some 3 million new users as America
Online, Compuserve, Prodigy, et al open their systems to the internet.
The net grows at about 20% per month, with about 20 million users in April
94 (numbers from the NII).
It won't be long until some woman somewhere is either threatened (there's
already plenty of examples of that) or even physcially attacked by another
user. At that point, the police, the lawyers, and the courts will get into
the fray. They don't have any ideas of the traditions of the net, nor will
they get into a tortuous discussion about "oh, wow, man, free speech,
man". They have their own traditions and policies, which are backed up by
200 years of American civil and criminal law. Let's guess who will win.
When some university or commerical provider loses a liability suit,
regardless of the amount ($5K or $5million), then it'll take about 2
nanoseconds for the entire net to know it. And every sysadmin on the net
will get a letter from the company's legal department on the new policy.
At that point, the "oh, wow, free speech" tradition of the net will
disappear.
All of this is inevitable: it's part of the process of civilization and
structuring of any social structure. Very soon now, we will see the first
"History of the Internet". When the histories appear, then you know the
institution is no longer in a state of childhood. It has entered it's
midlife state: solidify, responsiblity, policy, standards, and rule. And
punisments, etc.
If one wants to put it differently: okay, guys, the game's over. For
years, we ran around here in the mountains: shoot whatever varmint gets
into our plate o' beans, shave once a season, take a bath each spring
(hell! even it warn't needed, even!) and jes' plain having fun. But them
wimmin's arrived! Dangged, if it warn't the reason us 'n huck and jim lit
out from back east in the first place! Shoot it all! now's we's gotta
start wearing shirts, stop talking straight, and start acting like
gennlemen.
It's no coincidence that all of this started on the rec.pets.cats group.
Did any of you read this week's Newsweek? It's about the net, and how men
and women communicate on it.
Yrs,
andreas
--
yrs,
andreas
_____________________________________________________________________________
Andreas Ramos, M.A. Heidelberg Sacramento, California
Karl Denninger
Andreas Ramos <and...@netcom.com> wrote:
>I don't understand Karl Denninger's replies at all. He seems to take the
>position that "if someone says something offensive, and another person
>complains, then the second person will be put in contact with the first
>person." (i'm paraphrasing).
Really? Since when did due process get exempted on the net?
The people doing the complaining are levelling CHARGES and SPECIFICATIONS
alleging that a violation of our policy has occurred. US law says that you
have a right to face your accuser. That is, if you're going to bring a
charge, you do it IN PUBLIC.
Backroom trials died in the American Revolution in this country. You may
have them wherever you hail from, but we DO NOT HAVE THEM HERE.
Period.
>This is very odd. The flamebait posters are deliberately trying to incite
>a response. They then follow up by passing the names to other
>troublemakers, who then start a war of harassment against that person.
You cannot possibly substantiate that this posting from Rob was, in fact, a
part of organized harassment. Or, if you can, you have not done so. So do
it -- then you have a case.
As the complainent it is YOUR responsibility to present your evidence.
>This has happened to several women here on rec.pets.cats who complained
>about the extremely offensive messages that were being posted here.
One example does not make a case against others. Period.
>For
>Mr. Denninger to say that he will pass the women's complaints to people,
>who by their actiions are nothing short of sociopathic (just try and say
>in a public place the things they say. You'll be arrested very quickly and
>held for psychiatric evaluation.) is a very odd policy.
Oh, really? So now you're going to quote private email which someone
forwarded to you? Shall I quote the REST of that message, and bring into
this someone who you would probably rather leave out (Susan and I have
discussed this matter and understand one another now)?
Your best off to leave her out of this, IMHO.
>Karl Denninger takes the position that anyone can say whatever they
>please. If there are complaints, he then holds the right to judge whether
>it is a problem or not.
No, I take the position that I, as admin here, are the person qualified to
judge if a VIOLATION OF OUR POLICY HAS OCCURRED.
You, whoever you are, are NOT in that position. Period.
>That's not quite correct. There are plenty of laws about harassment,
>sexual harassment, obscene phone calls, assault (assault is a verbal
>statement of violence. To say "I'm gonna punch you!" is an assault. To
>actually hit someone is battery. Thus assault and battery are two
>charges.)(And there have been threats of violence here). These laws cover
>such statements. One does not have the right "to say whatever they
>please." Furthermore, Mr. Denninger isn't the judge on this. The courts
>are.
So file a lawsuit or complaint. Have your ducks in a row before you do it,
because the countersuit if you do not will end with my owning every
posession that you might have in this world and all that you gain in the
next 20 years. Further, NOWHERE have I said that any of our users has
the right "to say whatever they please." I submit that you had better be
able to back that up -- which, unless you are forging messages, you cannot.
I'll give you a hint -- my system automatically archives all my email and
news postings for me just in case I need them for such a reason.
The posting IN QUESTION is not an "assault". It was directed at NOBODY,
and, in fact, not even an identifyable individual animal. You're the one
who is so far out in left field as to require a psych evaluation.
I respectfully submit that you need to learn a LOT more about the law
before attempting to practice it here.
>It would seem to me that if Mr. Denninger is the postmaster and if he
>permits his users to use his system to harass other persons, and that he
>states publicly that such users are acceptable to him, then Mr. Denninger
>is treading very closely to assuming liability as well.
Where have you gained that idea? You have not requested our policy
statement, you have not alleged any violation of that statement, and you
have not made any charge and specification against ANY of our users, or
myself personally. You sent me ONE message asking what my policy was
regarding the posting in question. I asked if you had talked to the user
involved, and stated that we had. Then you posted this.
MCSNet does not, has not, and will not be party to harassment. We also
will not accept complaints from weenies on the net who think they have the
right to send harassing, condescending and threatening messages to the
postmaster at the first sign of a message from a user here that someone
disagrees with.
>The closest argument is the liability of the telephone company. If a
>customer of telephone company A is harassing customers of telephone
>compnay B, then Company A is obligated to stop the harassment. Just check
>the front pages of your telephone book; the phone companies have many
>years of experience in this. Mr. Denninger thinks that he is excused.
>Interesting position. Not very strong, but interesting.
And not stated. You're putting words in my mouth which I have NEVER said
nor typed. I know its fun to do this, but you risk a libel lawsuit by doing
this. Think about it, then retract your libelous statement. I'm waiting.
Again - I have never said that I am excused. Nor am I obligated to help
anyone until and unless they can present evidence that our policies or a
law have been or are about to be violated. Posting messages describing how
to dismember cats does not qualify as illegal. It <might> qualify as a
violation of policy.
The particular issue at hand, the single posting, is a closed matter here.
We have done all we intend to do regarding this single incident.
>another user there. He should add to his .sig that he is indeed the
>postmaster, or owner, or director, or whatever his title happens to be.
Try President. You should not ASSume who you are talking to when you begin.
>The experiences of rec.pets.cats may be rather important for the future of
>the Internet.
Yes, it will prove beyond all doubt that people such as yourself will lie,
cheat, and fabricate positions to buttress arguments that are complete and
utter bullshit, will promulgate those to the detriment of the person
involved, and will eventually (if they continue to the point where someone
gets sufficiently annoyed) get sued and lose their house, retirement
income, pension, 401ks and BMW. 'Nuff said.
>I've been using nets since '88
And I have been an admin since '87 on Usenet running this site. So what?
>Since the telephone
>company is the closest analogy to the net, I suspect that the laws and
>traditions of the telephone company will replace those of the nets. It
>appears that the FCC and NII (National Information Infrastructure) are
>going to let MCI run the internet, along with four other megacompanies.
Keep dreaming. Harassment must be <directed>; I cannot harass you in a
public posting of this sort. Via email perhaps, but certainly not by
posting about how to kill and dismember a cat, especially when I don't
reference YOUR cat by name or likeness.
Gods, how some people will stretch reality to fit their delusions.
>It won't be long until some woman somewhere is either threatened (there's
>already plenty of examples of that) or even physcially attacked by another
>user.
You sexist pig! (there, now I've flamed you) What the hell does gender
have to do with this?
Again, when you can allege a specific policy violation then come talk to
us. When you can allege harassment come talk to us. Otherwise save your
hot air for someone who cares to listen, and a forum that is relavent to
the issue at hand.
Which isn't rec.pets.cats.
Followups to news.admin.misc.
>Andreas Ramos, M.A. Heidelberg Sacramento, California
--
Karl Denninger
Gerry Allwein <gt...@ogre.cica.indiana.edu> wrote:
>In <2r5dg0$e...@Venus.mcs.com> ka...@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>
>>Give it a rest folks. If you want to file a <complaint> about the actions
>>of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
>>blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
>>to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
>>or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
>
>>None of those activities will get a fair hearing here. If you're sincerely
>>interested in our looking into these kinds of problems you might start by
>><making a request> that we look into something you perceive as a problem.
>
>
>ours, bud. However the offensive posts were presented to you, acting superior
>was not the intention of any of the posters and you know it.
Bullshit. I was threatened with legal action, told that I must remove the
poster's access, and had all kinds of other nonsense slung my way.
I also had a few people (the SERIOUS minority) ask me if there was a policy
violation contained in the message. Those people got an investigation AND
a polite response. The user has been contacted. I doubt there will be a
repeat, and if there is sanction may be applied <AT MY DISCRETION>.
NOT -- and I repeat -- NOT -- at your discretion or that of anyone else on
the net.
ONE of those people who issued threats has since retracted them and calmed
down. That's one decent person out of a couple of dozen. My hat is off to
Susan (you know who you are) for being a reasonable individual. She is in
the minority.
> There are
>responsibilities your company shares and apparently you realize that.
And some rights for our users as well, which we choose to grant. One of
those is a close parallel to this pesky thing called due process, an item
which you should be familiar with since you are posting from the US.
> The
>internet is not some free public good your company can make a living off
>without some restrictions.
You're right, and we have a policy statement and contract which all users
read AND SIGN to get an account here. Unlike, I'm sure, your site, which
obviously permitted this unsubstantiated personal attack against other
sites and their admins.
>You and everyone else still have
>the right to say anything you want, you simply cannot choose any forum and
>demand to be given bandwidth...unless, of course, you think you can go to the
>Chicago Tribune and demand they write a story about you. Try it!
You are forgetting one thing sir. I pay for the bandwidth here, I sign the
checks, and it is by my own sense of responsibility to this medium, which I
have helped grow in the capacity of an admin since 1987, that I formulate
our site's policies and procedures.
Should I choose to, I could drop those policies.
Messages such as this tempt me to do so, for if you can make such an
off-topic, ad-hominen verbal attack with impunity in any newsgroup you
choose then so can anyone else -- on man or beast -- including a cat.
Or are you claiming rights that others do not have?
Followups to news.admin.misc and comp.org.eff.talk.
Stephen Dennison
>ok, people. i've had it. i officially jump on the bandwagon to
The management of mcs.com is aware of Mr. Prine's prank. They are preparing
to take action and were prompt and courteous in replying to me when I
forwarded the article to them.
-- Stephen
"Always sleep on your stomach !"
John Wayne Bobbitt
Stephen Dennison
>Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats
>Subject: Re: how to "rectify" cats
Quicker answer ... ro...@mcs.com ... bye-bye, rob.
Stephen Dennison
>gee, that's funny. the reply i got was more like this........
>
>~Come at me with a request for inquiry rather than an attitude and you'll get
>~a lot further. I've already spoken to the user in question about this.
>~Did you before sending this to me?
>
>well, at least he doesn't just stomp on everyone.
Hard to say what prompted this, but Karl was very nice (if succinct) in his
reply to me. A lesson here is to assume that the root is *probably* a nice
and receptive person when you send your complaint. Don't let the vitriol
from the moron's original post spill over into your reply.
I haveto resist the urge to add Mr. Prine to the alt.spanked faq until I
hear about final disposal of this incident ...
BTW, Carol, Karl's last line was uncalled for. Anyone who sent Mr. Prine a
personal e-mail expecting that he just erred in sending thst story to rec.
pets.cats raises naive to an art-form ... Karl had no right to expect
anyone to be reasonable with Rob.
IMHO, of course.
Karl Denninger
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>no, i insisted on nothing. i requested that you read the FAQ and YOU decide
>if that was an appropriate post. MCSNet must decide that not me, as i cannot
>yank that jerks account. i still do not feel that i was out of line, nor do
>i appreciate being called a liar in a public forum. i still have the mail
>messages to prove that i insisted on nothing.
YOU did not insist, but you did come at me with an attitude of demanding
things instead of ASKING that we look into it. A few others DID insist,
and in fact made legal threats (which have since been retracted with one
exception).
>furthermore, that rob prine fool is right. there's obviously nothing i can
>do about it. fine. i give. the jerk wins. he can post anything he wants
>anyplace he wants. i won't bother complaining again.
You're wrong. He can't, and I doubt he will. We DO have a policy, and DO
enforce it.
m...@biosym.com
'Rob Prine' needs to be fixed!
Q What's the difference between Rob Prine and a full litterbox?
A There is no difference.
Catspaw
--
*******************************************************************************
* DISCLAIMER: Unless indicated otherwise, everything in this note is *
* personal opinion, not an official statement of Biosym Technologies, Inc. *
*******************************************************************************
Carol Reed
if that was an appropriate post. MCSNet must decide that not me, as i cannot
yank that jerks account. i still do not feel that i was out of line, nor do
i appreciate being called a liar in a public forum. i still have the mail
messages to prove that i insisted on nothing.
furthermore, that rob prine fool is right. there's obviously nothing i can
do about it. fine. i give. the jerk wins. he can post anything he wants
anyplace he wants. i won't bother complaining again.
Terri A. Mabry
>|> did more than make wallpaper out of for our office. The rest got
>|> summarily bounced back to the complainer with the response that I
>|> believe they deserved.
>|>
>|> Give it a rest folks. If you want to file a <complaint> about the actions
>|> of one of our subscribers, you can do so without resorting to innuendo,
>|> blowing the matter out of proportion, dictating to us, acting superior
>|> to the world and asking us to bow to you, drawing parallels to hate speech
>|> or otherwise playing the net.superiority game.
>|>
>|> None of those activities will get a fair hearing here. If you're sincerely
>|> interested in our looking into these kinds of problems you might start by
>|> <making a request> that we look into something you perceive as a problem.
well, so much for attitude. so who's on the power trip now? my, my...give
someone a position of power and see what happens...
>|> And quit the hyperbole. Especially here, as I both read rec.pets.cats and
>|> own a furrball (who is licking my face as I write this message from my home
>|> PC.)
>|>
>|> No disclaimers on this one; I run this site.
well thanks very much. translation: i am god. don't argue.
standard disclaimer: this is my opinion; i am entitled to it. i think most
people on rec.pets.cats agree. it's a shame we have to put up with all of
this bull****, but i guess, like carol, i acquience. again, it's a shame.
both irma (my roommate, the cat) and i are sick of this. goodbye, r.p.c.
terri
...who is tired of this garbage power trip free speech thang and would rather
monitor even alt.music.alternative than this place anymore
____________________________
Terri Mabry <tam...@uci.edu>
University of California, Irvine (home of "Escape from the Planet of the Apes")
"This is a very interesting situation!"
Craig F. Harmon
: I don't understand Karl Denninger's replies at all. He seems to take the
: position that "if someone says something offensive, and another person
: complains, then the second person will be put in contact with the first
: person." (i'm paraphrasing).
: It's no coincidence that all of this started on the rec.pets.cats group.
: Did any of you read this week's Newsweek? It's about the net, and how men
: and women communicate on it.
Wow, no wonder why you like cats. No human would subject themselves to
such long winded tirades.
Anyway, as a RESPONSIBLE cat owner, I have no problem with what the James
Knowlton's or Antebi's write. I thought Rob Prine's CATS series was
hilarious. Unfortunately, due to the fragile inner childs of many posters
to this group, you have to go to alt.flame to read the other parts of the
series.
What I don't understand is the net.cop mentality of many posters here. I
have never seen so many net.cops in one group. If some people can post
stories about how their cat attacked birds on T.V., why can't other's
post stories about why they hate cats? No one is forcing you to read the
stories, if you don't like them, put the authors in kill files.
It seems to me, the more you people scream at these obnoxious
posters, the more who show up.
You people look so ridiculous, running around trying to revoke access
accounts of people who post anti-cat stories here. How are these post
HURTING anyone? It is all just ascii, you know virtual, ie not real.
Besides, who are you to censor what I read? If you can't see the humor
in some of these posts, that is your fault, not mine.
Hopefully these posters will move on. They should have learned it isn't
polite to pick on mentally challenged individuals.
: Yrs,
: andreas
Craig.
erin rebecca miller
[mucho deletio]
>>|> No disclaimers on this one; I run this site.
>
>well thanks very much. translation: i am god. don't argue.
>standard disclaimer: this is my opinion; i am entitled to it. i think most
>people on rec.pets.cats agree. it's a shame we have to put up with all of
>this bull****, but i guess, like carol, i acquience. again, it's a shame.
Well you are wrong. Don't assume what 'people on rec.pets.cats.' agree
with. As far as I'm concerned, it certainly ain't you. I have been on RPC
for a while now, much longer than I remember seeing you, or many of the
newly-founded RPC-defenders which seem to have sprung up in the past 6
months or so. I've never met this Karl or his system, but EVERYTHING
he has said is logical and intelligent. Even if this Karl were a
cat-hater, his posts have been far more refreshing to this group than
most of this hyper-paranoid, anyone-who-flames-us-will-be-abolished
attitude. I don't doubt that Karl got commanding instead of requesting
emails about this latest violator, and I think the action he has taken
has been sensible.
I have from the beginning emphasized my feelings about this
"blacklist" which is being circulated, and it has gotten to the point
where the Nazi-hunters are worse than the Nazis. If you're sick of it, then
please leave because it is this insanely righteous, and VERY NEW TO RPC I
might add, attitude which is causing the multitude of idiots to stick
around.
erin
& Oliver (moggy maine coon) and Jack (american eskimo)
--
Carol Reed
i await the public apology to counter the public implication that i lied.
YOU read an attitude into my message that was not there. YOU were mistaken.
please post it here where everyone can read it.
Elizabeth Schwartz
As a sysadmin, I have a responsibility to prevent abuse of our facilities
and of our Internet connection. I *also* have a responsibility to our
users, to protect their rights of freedom of speech and of due process.
Sometimes there is genuine misunderstanding, sometimes posts are forged,
sometimes people accidentally post when they meant to e-mail, and sometimes
people just have rotten senses of humor.
The first step should *always* be to confront the user, ask them if they
are responsible for the offensive post and inform them of the rules.
You have to have a certain sense of humor and ability to roll with the
punches. Posting an annoying message is wrong, but it's not a felony.
Giving a warning for a first offense is perfectly reasonable.
Also, as a sysadmin, you can't always give a long reasoned response to
every person who writes you. Personally, I try to use a "canned" response
so that I reply with an even tone to each person. My experience, and I
think my site is much smaller than Karl's, is that someone ALWAYS gets
offended. All I can do is make sure that our response is fair; I can't make
everyone happy.
I do think that it is sometimes more appropriate to contact the sysadmin
directly, especially if the offensive post has overtones of violence. But,
there's nothing wrong with contacting an offensive poster to see if they
are responsible for the post.
Betsy
--
System Administrator Internet: bet...@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston Phone : 617-287-6448
100 Morrissey Blvd Staccato signals
Boston, MA 02125-3393 of constant information....
Stacie A Shirko
Look, people, give it a rest. This thread is just perpetuating the flamage and
taking up bandwith. Which is the flamers' goal, to have the newsgroup be off
topic. The best thing is to ignore the flame bait. These people aren't worth
the emotional energy rpc has spent on them. And if you want to complain to a
sysadmin, please be courteous and polite. Wait a while before writing if you
need to cool down. Courtesy doesn't cost anything and in fact, it's what you
are asking for when you write to a sysadmin about flame bait. It's only fair
to give it in return.
I think the idea of having someone keep a list of people who post flame bait
here and samples of their posts is a good idea. If I had the technological
experience I would. But I think it should be someone who is a reputable
rpc-er. Maybe it should become part of the FAQ and posted periodically. That
way people new to the group can avoid flame bait even if they've not encoutered
it before.
I read this group for entertainment and information about taking care of my
cats (keeping them _alive_). That's the point of this newsgroup. If you want
to read/write about killing them start your own.
Stacie
Stephen Dennison
>Andreas Ramos (and...@netcom.com) wrote:
>
>>Wow, no wonder why you like cats. No human would subject themselves to
>>such long winded tirades.
This from a guy who almost choked my editor when I tried to reply to your
post ?!?!?!?! :-)
>Anyway, as a RESPONSIBLE cat owner, I have no problem with what the James
>Knowlton's or Antebi's write. I thought Rob Prine's CATS series was
>hilarious. Unfortunately, due to the fragile inner childs of many posters
>to this group, you have to go to alt.flame to read the other parts of the
>series.
Please understand, Rob's cross post to rec.pets.cats *almost* certainly was
an attempt to offend admittedly delicate sensibilities ... the posts
themselves aren't nearly as offensive to me as the impunity with which
they're posted. Arrogance and blatent disregard for the *obvious*
sensibilities of a group ... toying with people's emotions ... these are
sociopathic tendencies. Ignoring them is probably the most effective way to
deal with them, but it goes against the grain to ignore sociopathic
behavior, and ultimately may be irresponsible.
I caught children playfully torturing a cat once ... they were just jumping
at it and scaring it, but were not physically harming it. Yes, they were
innocently getting their jollies by ruffling this cat's feathers a little
bit and no one was hurt ... I suggested to them that the cat had feelings
too, and that *they* wouldn't like to be teased in this manner, and
considered it a closed matter.
These same children caught 4 kittens 6 months later and threw them into a
swimming pool overflow chamber and closed the lid on them, leaving them to
drown slowly when their strength gave out and they could no longer stay
afloat. I took the non-confrontational route that time and look at the
result.
Bullies *early* in life often, if not checked, escalate their behavior in
later life. Ignoring them ... moving out of the town ... it doesn't solve
the problem ... it contributes to it.
>What I don't understand is the net.cop mentality of many posters here. I
>have never seen so many net.cops in one group. If some people can post
>stories about how their cat attacked birds on T.V., why can't other's
>post stories about why they hate cats?
Why don't blacks attend KKK meetings or White Supremists (sp?) attend
meetings of the NAACP to air *their* views ? C'mon, it doesn't take a
genius to realize that the malicious acts of these children (Antebi,
Knowlton, Prine, et al) is counter to the charter of this group. To argue
otherwise in indefensible.
>No one is forcing you to read the
>stories, if you don't like them, put the authors in kill files.
>It seems to me, the more you people scream at these obnoxious
>posters, the more who show up.
This is unarguable ... however, as I have said many times, the easiest path
isn't always the correct path. Hate relies on apathy to propagate.
>You people look so ridiculous, running around trying to revoke access
>accounts of people who post anti-cat stories here. How are these post
>HURTING anyone? It is all just ascii, you know virtual, ie not real.
And verbal hate is just paragraphs made up of words made up of letters made
up of some phonetic rules. No harm, no foul, eh ?
>Besides, who are you to censor what I read?
Read it in alt.flame or alt.syntax.tactical or rec.humor.morbid. Until
someone attempts to prevent *all* of your access to something, your claim of
freedom of speech violations is ludicrous.
>If you can't see the humor in some of these posts, that is your fault,
>not mine.
Humor isn't the issue ... appropriateness and courtesy *are* the issues.
>Hopefully these posters will move on. They should have learned it isn't
>polite to pick on mentally challenged individuals.
If they learn *that*, they will leave *you* alone.
Adam Beneschan
> It's no coincidence that all of this started on the rec.pets.cats group.
> Did any of you read this week's Newsweek? It's about the net, and how men
> and women communicate on it.
Hmmmm . . . do you think maybe that the boys who are making the
offensive posts are the same ones who pulled all the girls' hair in
first grade to get their attention? The tools (i.e. computers) may be
more sophisticated, but the communication level unfortunately hasn't
progressed.
-- Adam (Catalina's pet human)
Clifton T. Sharp
|Luckily, this is one of the reasonable sites:
|
|>From: Karl Denninger <ka...@mcs.com>
|>Subject: Re: gratuitous harassing post
|>To: Alma Whitten <al...@GS140.SP.CS.CMU.EDU>
|>Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:42:36 -0500 (CDT)
|>
|>
|>|> Your client, Rob Prine, has posted the following to rec.pets.cats,
|>|> which can certainly have no other purpose than to upset and harass;
|>|> I hope that your site has some policy for educating its clients
|>|> about the appropriateness of such behavior.
|>|>
|>|> Thanks for your consideration.
|>
|>We do have such a policy, and I've sent a message to the user in question
|>regarding this. Thanks...
Speaking as someone who has dealt with Karl on occasion, as someone who
has a good friend who is an old friend of Karl's, and as someone who gets
his newsfeed through mcs.com, I can say without compunction that Karl has
always been both an outstanding netizen and an ultraresponsible system
administrator. He has made several contributions to the existence and
continued growth of the net for years, many of them silent and unsung
(see, for example, the installation documentation for the "smail" package
for mention of his contributions in advancing this important utility for
intermachine UUCP communications).
I guess my point is that we should all take a deep breath before composing
that mail to postmaster, just to make sure that we're nice to the guys who
are in there and really trying to keep things on the nice.
--
Optimists say, "The glass is half full."
Cliff Sharp Pessimists say, "It's half empty."
WA9PDM We realists say, "Before I decide,
cli...@indep1.chi.il.us tell me what's in the glass."
William December Starr
In article <2r8vlh$p...@garuda.csulb.edu>,
har...@csulb.edu (Craig F. Harmon) said:
[A lot of rude and/or insulting stuff along the lines of "Unfortunately,
due to the fragile inner childs of many posters to this group" and "They
[the alt.syntax.tactical-type posters] should have learned it isn't
polite to pick on mentally challenged individuals."]
Yeah, right. Craig, I have no idea what it is that drives you to be
obnoxious just in the hopes of eliciting some sort of reaction, but if
that's what turns you on, fine. Just don't do in the street and disgust
the horses.
Anyway, Craig also asked a real question -- a question couched in
slanted terms, to be sure, but nonetheless one which should be answered
lest casual readers get the mistaken impression that the implications
that Craig seeded the question with are correct...
> If some people can post stories about how their cat attacked birds on
> T.V., why can't other's post stories about why they hate cats?
The answer to your question, Craig, is this:
The regular denizens of rec.pets.cats tend not to post which they
know or reasonably should know either:
(a) are blatantly inappropriate in light of the group's charter,
purpose or character, or
(b) (i) are false, fraudulent, deceptive or otherwise misleading as
to their content and/or veracity _and_
(ii) are likely to harass, annoy, cause emotional anguish to or
otherwise "make the blood boil" of persons who read that
group with the reasonable expectation of not encountering
such articles in that forum.
The various net.vandals who have been harassing rec.pets.cats, on the
other hand, have, at least as it appears to me, _deliberately_ posted
to this newsgroup articles which meet the criteria listed in (a) or (b),
above, or both.
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>
Karl Denninger
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>|>
>|> YOU did not insist, but you did come at me with an attitude of demanding
>|> things instead of ASKING that we look into it. A few others DID insist,
>|> and in fact made legal threats (which have since been retracted with one
>|> exception).
>
>YOU read an attitude into my message that was not there. YOU were mistaken.
>please post it here where everyone can read it.
I quote from my saved files, since you insist:
> no, i didn't talk to him. i don't converse with the likes of someone
> who would write such a piece and then post it to be read by people that
> it would simply upset.
If that's not an attitude in writing I don't know what is.
My previous statement stands. The comment above was in reply to my asking
if you had attempted to resolve this with the poster, and as you were
attempting to tell me that the initial inquiry was not made with an
attitude.
My original statement stands. If you wish to read into the original
statement an implication that's your right and decision.
The point, Carol, for the last time (then I'm out of this one as it is
major off-topic here; I want to read about FELINES in this group) is that
if you wish to gripe and complain you may do so, but you'll tend to get a
much more receptive audience from admins when you attempt to resolve these
things with the originators of the issue first.
Followups to alt.flame; that appears to be a relavent newsgroup for this
(even though I don't read it).
michael brian scher
>In article <2r82td$6...@bmw.hwcae.az.honeywell.com>,
>Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>
>YOU did not insist, but you did come at me with an attitude of demanding
>things instead of ASKING that we look into it. A few others DID insist,
>and in fact made legal threats (which have since been retracted with one
>exception).
I must say that I completely agree with Karl here. As someone who
has been on USENET (yes, usenet, I was at Duke) for 7 years now, I must
say that it has never been a "sense of decency" or "old west attitude"
that kept the groups going, but in fact the contracts between sites.
Karl's attitude reflects this contractual responsibility of a sysadmin on
the net: contractual OBLIGATIONS between him and his site's users,
between them AND HIM, and between him and his provider, his provider and
him, his provider and other providers with whom they link.
As such, his policy agreement with his users is the sole basis on
which he can remove their accounts, and of course, that policy must
include an agreement not to use the system to break the law. In fact,
that's the only point Karl made that I even slightly differ with: there
is no way he could have no policy of that sort, since a) his users using
the service provider to implicate Karl in an illegality would allow him
to break it, and thus that situation is read in as a 'policy' item, and
b) karl would be opening himself to civil liability by not having any
such policy.
But he does have such a policy. And no crime was committed. And he
MUST MUST MUST not take the word of some random person writing him as
verbatim truth on what someone with whom he shares contractual
obligations has done. He owes the net from the implications in his
providers' contracts, and their intersite contractual obligations, the
duty to not allow his site to break down communications (thus, Cornell
had to act quickly & responsibly when one of their users sent out the
smail virus a few years back as an extreme example). Netetiquette
consists in part as a residue from these agreements to keep the net as
information and not noise. But Karl also owes his user the duties under
the contract, which include not wrongfully breaching it by cutting them
off because some random person says he should. He is obliged to make
sure the claim is real and that the user has breached the policy, a
policy which Karl has noted has the force of contract.
I have disagreed with karl about a lot in the past, but I think his
view of this situation is correct--you must give the poster one try--I
personally would write them & see what happens while writing the sysadmin
that you are doing so, then send a copy of the reply you receive. I
think most sysadmins would then WARN the user. The user is then informed
and if he repeats the kind of action, the admin can terminate the
account. I should also note that, from a contracts point of view, one
minor breach of contractual terms is almost never grounds for termination
of the contract. I don't think a provider service like MCS.COM is in any
different situation.
Please, people, when you do complain, please DO think of the duties and
obligations on a system administrator, duties owed to the user about whom
you complain, and duties to the general network connect providers
directly and vertically--but NOT any duty to your direct sensibilities
except the basic duty to act in a reasonable manner to prevent someone
under his control (to a degree) from using something he provides to do
ACTUAL harm.
When you complain to a sysadmin about an offensive post, you are
REQUESTING that that site review the alleged actions as a breach of the
contract between the poster and the site. Only if you allege immanent
harm to yourself are you invoking any duty owed TO YOU. Letters to
sysadmins should reflect what you're asking them to do: to investigate a
breach of their contract with their client, or their client's placing
them in potential breach of their contract with their provider, or their
client's placing them in potential civil liability. Only the last
warrants a demand. Imagine if someone "demanded" your account be deleted
on some empty assertion; you would want it, no you would DEMAND it be
investigated, yes? You cannot expect that any responsible net connect
provider would do less--or more--for either party.
>You're wrong. He can't, and I doubt he will. We DO have a policy, and DO
>enforce it.
And so long as they have it, do it, and it doesn't itself lead to
breaches of MCS's contracts with its net providers, MCS's policy is
Karl's proper touchstone for action.
-Mike
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael B. Scher | str...@xochi.tezcat.com
Law and Cultural Anthropology | mbs...@ellis.uchicago.edu
Ken Zuroski
>In article <alma.76...@gs140.sp.cs.cmu.edu>,
>Alma Whitten <al...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>>ka...@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>
>><snip>
>
Believe it or not, not every site has mail readers that allow you to
construct a kill file. It's rather difficult, for instance, for the
average user at CMU to find a mail-reading utility that permits kill
files.
But from the the tone of your previous messages, you'll probably simply
respond by saying: not my problem.
---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ken Zuroski
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
R S Rodgers
Carol Reed <re...@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> wrote:
>ok, people. i've had it. i officially jump on the bandwagon to
>lying, and so obviously immature little morons who were never taught
>to respect the rights of others and who have nothing better to do
>in their sorry, empy little lives than to try to upset others for
>no better reason than their despicable little minds find it amusing
>OUT OF OUR NEWSGROUP!
So, are you saying you're not posting here anymore?
>what's the current status of this effort?
Don't know. Perhaps Ku Klux Kolling could comment.
--
Visit your local library and request If you know what the rules are,
a form to join Caning Party USA, the then you can break them carefully.
pro-punishment party.
Reply to rsro...@wam.umd.edu
Ken Zuroski
har...@csulb.edu (Craig F. Harmon) writes:
>Andreas Ramos (and...@netcom.com) wrote:
>What I don't understand is the net.cop mentality of many posters here. I
>have never seen so many net.cops in one group. If some people can post
>stories about how their cat attacked birds on T.V., why can't other's
>post stories about why they hate cats? No one is forcing you to read the
>stories, if you don't like them, put the authors in kill files.
Not everyone has kill file capability. It's not a universal solution.
And I can see that to some people even subject headers like "KILL CATS
NOW!" are disturbing.
>It seems to me, the more you people scream at these obnoxious
>posters, the more who show up.
That may be true.
>You people look so ridiculous, running around trying to revoke access
>accounts of people who post anti-cat stories here.
I don't think they look ridiculous. I think they look like they're
fighting back.
How are these post
>HURTING anyone? It is all just ascii, you know virtual, ie not real.
People can be traumatized by what others write.
I bet I could write something that would offend you terribly. I don't
know what it is, but if I knew you better, I bet I could say something
that would really set you off. Everybody has some button which, if
pushed, hits home. To some, talk about cats getting launched out of
cannon etc. are extremely upsetting and disturbing.
>Besides, who are you to censor what I read? If you can't see the humor
>in some of these posts, that is your fault, not mine.
Uh-huh. Right. I guess if I burn some crosses and people get upset,
that's their problem. I'm just exercising my free speech. Hey, I'm not
hurting anyone. I'm just making a little joke.
The word is "sensitivity." How much you want to go out of your way to
avoid possibly offending people. There is no law that says you have to
be sensitive to other people's feelings. But don't expect to be liked,
then. And don't be surprised when people hate you for what you joke
about.
But if I had to say this, it probably won't make an impression
anyhow.
>Hopefully these posters will move on. They should have learned it isn't
>polite to pick on mentally challenged individuals.
>
>: Yrs,
>: andreas
>
>Craig.
---
Ralph Knapp
<zuro...@CMU.EDU> wrote:
> Not everyone has kill file capability. It's not a universal solution.
> And I can see that to some people even subject headers like "KILL CATS
> NOW!" are disturbing.
Those kind of people would be well advised not to pass newstands,
where they are likely to see many "offensive" headlines.
(I'm not making this up) The lead story on our local news last night
(WTVF, channel 5, Nashville) concerned a letter received by a local
animal shelter offering to "buy" stray animals for 10 cents "a pound."
Evidently, shelters across the country have received a similar offer.
While I suspect this is a hoax, the question remains - was this story
too "offensive" for the general pet-loving public? Should I have the
right to "discuss" it here? Is it more or less offensive than threads
about pet potty habits?
> People can be traumatized by what others write.
> I bet I could write something that would offend you terribly.
Attempt to censor and sanitize speech -- that would work.
> Uh-huh. Right. I guess if I burn some crosses and people get upset,
> that's their problem. I'm just exercising my free speech. Hey, I'm not
> hurting anyone. I'm just making a little joke.
No, actually that could involve trespassing, arson, and making an
implied threat of physical violence - a little more serious than words
on a computer screen.
Stephen Dennison
>In message <2r5pjs$i...@Venus.mcs.com>, ka...@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>In article <alma.76...@gs140.sp.cs.cmu.edu>,
>>Alma Whitten <al...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>>>ka...@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>
>>Then put them in a kill file and give up.
>
>Believe it or not, not every site has mail readers that allow you to
>construct a kill file.
More to the point, not every newsreader allows killing by *author*, which is
what would have been required in this latest barrage of garbage. the
answer to arson is *not* "get a better fire department" ... it's
enforcement of the arson laws.
>But from the the tone of your previous messages, you'll probably simply
>respond by saying: not my problem.
If you're talking about Karl, *his* tone was justified, and quite
reasonable in light of the crap he took.
Carl M Kadie
>Believe it or not, not every site has mail readers that allow you to
>construct a kill file. It's rather difficult, for instance, for the
>average user at CMU to find a mail-reading utility that permits kill
>files.
I thought I'd heard that CMU was finally getting bozo filters for its
news/bboard readers.
(Historical note: In 1992, in a situtation very similar to this one,
CMU told one if its students that if he didn't stop writing offensive
things in an a open CMU bboard, he would be brought up on sexual
harassment charges.)
In any case, as difficult as it is to "manually" ignore articles or to
find and setup a newsreader with a bozo filter, punishing a student
for mere offensive speech is even more difficult (and often
impossible).
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/news/cafv02n11">
news/cafv02n11
=================</a>
Includes information about CMU.
=================<a href="ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/news/cafv02n08">
news/cafv02n08
=================</a>
Includes information about CMU.
=================
=================
If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command
gopher gopher.eff.org
These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred
method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp
to ftp.eff.org (192.77.172.4), and then:
cd /pub/CAF/news
get cafv02n11
cd /pub/CAF/news
get cafv02n08
To get the file(s) by email, send email to ftp...@decwrl.dec.com
Include the line(s):
connect ftp.eff.org
cd /pub/CAF/news
get cafv02n11
cd /pub/CAF/news
get cafv02n08
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= Email: ka...@cs.uiuc.edu =
= URL: <ftp://ftp.cs.uiuc.edu/pub/kadie/>
Bette M Winer
>>Then put them in a kill file and give up.
>Believe it or not, not every site has mail readers that allow you to
>construct a kill file. It's rather difficult, for instance, for the
>average user at CMU to find a mail-reading utility that permits kill
>files.
I thought that was the case for my mail reader, but I was happily
surprised. Look a little closer for the Kill or ignore capability.
Alternatively, see if your server makes other readers available.