AMillar@cup.portal.com (09/26/90)
In <recent messages>, <recent posters> write: > <recent items about inside pranks> Which lead to: >Come on, Pat, lighten up. It's going to happen. It happens in ALL >areas. Some of the computer labs I have worked in DELIGHTED in >sending messages to novice users' screens. Similarly to the phone >I guess my point is, do you expect this industry to be free from this >sort of behaviour? I don't. And the topper: >Hmmm, I can only hope our Moderator is not one of those outspoken, >righteous No-Can-Do-Wrongs who society later uncovers as having an >unspeakable miasma of heretical beliefs and a past full of unameable >criminal acts against nature and the law. 8^o >What sort of chaotic little secrets do you hide that the net can't yet >see... ? ;-) Now, anyone who posts a controversial view is open to flamage, including Pat (and me for this message). And responsibility is always controversial. But I congratulate Pat for taking a stand, and not sitting by siliently. Yes, it is probably true that we can expect these things to happen. But no way should we condone them! We should all lighten up when it comes to fraud or perhaps incest because these things too are just GOING to happen, right? But wait, those are serious, and we're only talking about harmless pranks. Calling a person of a particular ethnic background a derogatory name is all in good fun; can't they take a joke? "It's going to happen anyways" is a cop-out. If you don't take a stand against unethical behaviour, then you are supporting it BY DEFAULT. Alan Millar AMillar@cup.portal.com
garif@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Major Panic) (09/29/90)
AMillar@cup.portal.com writes: >Now, anyone who posts a controversial view is open to flamage, >including Pat (and me for this message). And responsibility is always >controversial. But I congratulate Pat for taking a stand, and not >sitting by siliently. I submit that "responsibility" is not controversial. Its when an individual clearly takes a stand that needn't be taken that questions about that person arise. (In some cases you may read "controversial" as "confrontational".) >Yes, it is probably true that we can expect these things to happen. >But no way should we condone them! This is a forum of supposedly intelligent people discussing points of interest. Society dictates what is and is not acceptable. It is clear to me that everyone here understands the essential difference between right and wrong. Preaching about it in this forum SHOULD invite scrutiny. Do you take us all for fools? >We should all lighten up when it comes to fraud or perhaps incest >because these things too are just GOING to happen, right? But wait, >those are serious, and we're only talking about harmless pranks. >Calling a person of a particular ethnic background a derogatory name >is all in good fun; can't they take a joke? Not "WE should all...", YOU should. Its quite plain that such behaviour is looked down upon and often illegal. Why must you bring it up? >"It's going to happen anyways" is a cop-out. If you don't take a >stand against unethical behaviour, then you are supporting it BY >DEFAULT. Sorry, I don't agree with you there. I believe that the Usenet community as a whole to be quite intelligent and it would be contrary to that belief to say "oh, there goes a bad joke, quick: remind everyone its wrong to espouse genocide, kill people randomly, ad nauseum..." I guess when places like Portal let just anybody post, this should have been expected :-) Does this mean that every time someone posts anything even slightly "bad", they'd better have a copious amount of disclaimer or law-abiding verse to accompany??? sheesh, 'nuff said. Lee-bo() p.s. Note that my questions were rhetorical in nature - let's see if someone out there just can't let this rest.