toml@druxm.UUCP (LaidigTL) (05/26/84)
Several people (including me) have thought or said something like "UNC should present their side of the story so that we can judge the issue better, but I don't think they ever will." Generally, this is said with the thought that UNC is tacitly admitting total guilt in this affair by not giving us their side of the story. Obviously, they have no obligation to justify their actions to us, but, if they were innocent, surely they would want to clear their name by telling us. This is true, but there is another side. Suppose UNC had some good reason for their actions re Tim. In order to present their side of the story, they would have to broadcast (very likely damaging) private information about Tim. I hope we all agree that a university should not do this. A university can't even send someone your transcript unless you authorize it, so they certainly couldn't publish (to the net) descriptions of your transgressions and punishments. Tom Laidig AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver ...!ihnp4!druxm!toml
debray@sbcs.UUCP (Saumya Debray) (05/30/84)
toml@druxm.UUCP (LaidigTL): > Suppose UNC had some good reason for their actions re Tim. In > order to present their side of the story, they would have to > broadcast (very likely damaging) private information about Tim. > I hope we all agree that a university should not do this. Yes, but they can certainly explain that this is the reason for their silence. Saying nothing does little to inform us of any constraints they may be under. -- Saumya Debray, SUNY at Stony Brook uucp: {cbosgd, decvax, ihnp4, mcvax, cmcl2}!philabs \ {amd70, akgua, decwrl, utzoo}!allegra > !sbcs!debray {teklabs, hp-pcd, metheus}!ogcvax / CSNet: debray@suny-sbcs@CSNet-Relay