jcp@brl-tgr.ARPA (Joe Pistritto <jcp>) (11/28/84)
In article <330@stcvax.UUCP> jps@stcvax.UUCP (Jeff Snover) writes: >Is the white house (1600 Penn. ave.) on the net? If it is not >(as I suspect) how can we get it on? It seems to me that they >would be interested in getting feedback from as many people as >possible and the net would be a perfect medium. (keep any flames >about "the white house doesn't care" to yourself or else feel free >to post them to /dev/null or anywhere else where I don't have to >see them!!). > >I know that if I want to write to the white house I should pick >up pen in hand and go for it via the US SNAIL but when it gets right >down to it I usually won't because I fluked penmanship and I don't >have a typewriter and to get to the point: its a pain in the ass! The net >is easy and fun to use and if I had a path to the white house I would >mail them feedback on things pro and con on a fairly frequent basis >and I think alot of other folks would do so also. > >What do you think guys? (colloquialism - implies women, wombats, wackballs) > >-- >Jeffrey P. Snover - STC StorageTek (Disk Division) >uucp: { hao, ihnp4, decvax}!stcvax!jps > { allegra, amd70, ucbvax }!nbires!stcvax!jps >USnail: Storage Technology Corp - MD 3T / Louisville, CO / 80028 >DDD: (303) 673-6750
jpm@calmasd.UUCP (John McNally) (11/30/84)
From: jps@stcvax.UUCP (Jeff Snover) Subject: Lets get 1600 Penn. Ave on the net. Posted: Tue Nov 27 09:53:53 1984 >(keep any flames >about "the white house doesn't care" to yourself or else feel free >to post them to /dev/null or anywhere else where I don't have to >see them!!). >The net >is easy and fun to use and if I had a path to the white house I would >mail them feedback on things pro and con on a fairly frequent basis >and I think alot of other folks would do so also. The White House's attitude to this form of communication with the American people seems to be the major impediment to this proposal. There is already a mechanism whereby you can express your views to the President via telephone - you can call the Executive Office of the President (call the White House switchboard, ask for the Exec Office of the Prez). My experience with this medium indicates that an electronic mail connection will not serve the purpose of feedback suggested by the original article's author. About six weeks ago I called the Exec Office to express my views on the recent rash of abortion clinic bombings throughout the United States (for info only, there have been more than 14 in the past year). Well, my experience with this was less than satisfactory. The person dealing with me on the phone seemed uninformed. They responded to my concern with "Bombings?? I hadn't heard anything about that", with a unsubtle implication that I was just a crank caller. When I pointed out that a sympathetic editorial had recently appeared in the San Diego Tribune, this seemd to get a bit more interest, but I definitely got the impression that my message got routed to /dev/null. Facts seem to support this - the Justice Department seems completely uninterested in investigating what appears to be an interstate conspiracy in domestic terrorism. (nuff said, this aint net.politics). So, I suspect that an electronic mail forum will fare no better than the existing mechanisms. If you want to just dump e-mail on the White House because you think that its neat, well I don't want to pay any part of that bill. If you want to let them know that Ronnie is the best thing since sliced bread, I am sure they will listen. But, if you want to tell them something they don't want to hear, I think they aren't going to listen. Until we can change the attitude of the White House toward such forms of contact with the American people, I don't think that any such mechanisms are very useful. Has anyone else had any experiences with talking to the White House, positive or negative??? (and maybe this belongs in a specific newsgroup???). And now for the obligatory lack of nettiquette: For many of the issues that seem most important to me, The White House doesn't care! -- John McNally Calma 11080 Roselle St. San Diego CA 92121 ...{ucbvax,decvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!jpm (619)-458-3230
grm@drutx.UUCP (MartinezGR) (11/30/84)
i think this is a great idea -- to get the White House on the net that it. However, I think that this is wishfull thinking... what would all those thousands of media types do if the Executive branch had a quick and easy way to pass out info without their help and "valuable" commentary? Matter of fact, we should push for getting EVERY member of Congress (national, at least!) on the net!
rick@uwmacc.UUCP (the absurdist) (12/02/84)
[ Are you out there, Bug? ] I don't think there's any point in sending E-Mail to the White House; or any other form of mail. You should call your Congressional Representative, or write him/her. They represent a small enough segment of the population to actually read what you say; and are selected by a small enough segment of the voting population (ESPECIALLY during the primaries) to be motivated by self-interest to pay attention to you. I know from experience that at least some read anything that is addressed to them personally. <....> represents omissions from the jpm's article. In article <210@calmasd.UUCP> jpm@calmasd.UUCP (John McNally) writes: >About six weeks ago I called the Exec Office to express my views <.... on the recent bombings of abortion clinics ....> > The person dealing with me on the phone seemed >uninformed. They responded to my concern with "Bombings?? I >hadn't heard anything about that", with a unsubtle implication that I >was just a crank caller. "I'm sorry, I'm not authorized to answer that question. Have you contacted your local Business Office? Their phone number is..." I used to say that a lot at a job I had one summer. No business allows just anyone to be making policy statements over the phone. Why should the Govt. be any different? > <....> Until we can change >the attitude of the White House toward such forms of contact with >the American people, I don't think that any such mechanisms are >very useful. >John McNally Calma 11080 Roselle St. San Diego CA 92121 >...{ucbvax,decvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!jpm (619)-458-3230 Politics is a collection of substitutes for personal contact between the candidate & the voter. There just aren't any good ways to allow contact with the President. There ARE ways to get personal contact your Representatives, so use them. -- "But Dinsdale...Dinsdale used <pause> sarcasm!" we all know where this quote came from, don't we? Rick Keir -- MicroComputer Information Center, MACC 1210 West Dayton St/U Wisconsin Madison/Mad WI 53706 {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!rick
bob@islenet.UUCP (Robert P. Cunningham) (12/02/84)
White House and other executive branch staffers already use an
"executive electronic mail service" to exchange electronic mail between
themselves, supplied by Compuserve Information Services. There is also
limited use of ARPANET/MILNET for similar purposes. About half of the offices
and staffs of the House of Representatives use Dialcom, and probably some
Senators' staffs. I'll conjecture that there may also be some limited use
MCI Mail and other similar services.
I think that's a remarkably good beginning towards an involvement in "Worldnet"
(the concept of a universally useful world-wide inter-connecting collection of
computer networks, see the last few years back issues of Human-Nets for
further information and extensive discussions). And I'll venture to
predict we'll see considerably more interest in, and use of various
computer networks by portions of the U.S. government during the next decade
or so.
Meanwhile the White House and Congress get almost more citizen feedback
than they can handle through traditional media: U.S. mail, telegrams,
telexes, etc. plus news and views published in major U.S. and foreign
newspapers and on the various television networks. Those are precisely
those channels of communication open to most U.S. citizens and the media
watched by most people.
Pragmatically, I wouldn't expect to see publically-known electronic mailbox(es)
for the White House until there is considerably more use of the various
electronic mail networks by a larger number of people and recognition of
that fact at the White House.
(Perhaps around the turn of the century key U.S. government officials just
might sit down and review mod.worldshaking.developments in preference to
viewing the nightly network TV news or scanning the New York Times :-)
--
Bob Cunningham ..{dual,ihnp4,vortex}!islenet!bob
Honolulu, Hawaiimoriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (12/03/84)
My guess is that the people at the White house read mail to get a general
opinion of the public's reaction to the administration's policies. Two
reasons that they would probably not care to weed through the net: 1) we are
probably not more representitive of the general public than the mail they
get (I believe the net poll showed 60% for Mondale), and 2) letters they get
by US Mail show that people had the gumption to spend $0.20 and the time to
write it to show their opinion... people who do this are probably more
likely to feel strongly enough to vote or put money into a PAL (political
action lobby) for their opinions, than a person like me who spouts opinion
every day, free of charge (to me personally), instead of taking the trouble
to print it out and mail it in (and it does take time, because I do it for
issues I consider important).
Anyway, even though the White House isn't reading it, the NSA (CIA?
S.H.I.E.L.D.?) is probably poring through it :-).
"Dammit, man, that's unprofessional! A good bartender laughs anyway!"
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPAbarry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (12/08/84)
[] > White House and other executive branch staffers already use an > "executive electronic mail service" to exchange electronic mail between > themselves, supplied by Compuserve Information Services. There is also > limited use of ARPANET/MILNET for similar purposes. About half of the offices > and staffs of the House of Representatives use Dialcom, and probably some > Senators' staffs. I'll conjecture that there may also be some limited use > MCI Mail and other similar services. Some congresscritters also have accounts on The Source. Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry SOURCE: ST7891
tli@uscvax.UUCP (Tony Li) (12/12/84)
> Personally, the white house is too close to the CIA/NSA for my tastes. > I'm not sure what THOSE guys would think of all this freedom-of-expression- > gone-berserk. > > Carl Dierschow / Hewlett Packard I have the feeling that they're already here.... Hi there, Big Brother! -- Tony Li ;-) Usc Computer Science Uucp: {sdcrdcf,randvax}!uscvax!tli Csnet: tli@usc-cse.csnet Arpa: tli@usc-ecl
bob@islenet.UUCP (Robert P. Cunningham) (12/19/84)
[with apologies to Kevin Throop]
Most of you have seen occasional future-dated mail and news articles
occasionally showing up thru uucp -- the so-called "time warp" bug/feature.
While cleaning out the /usr/spool/uucp directory here the other day, I
discovered some future-dated mail reply messages with an intriguing
signature. Could these possibly be future mail replies to various people
on Usenet from a Significant Person in the White House?
I'm reproducing the messages here, for you to decide (after deleting the
possibly-erroneous dates and the names of the addressees to preserve the
privacy of what might be private mail).
--------
To:
I cannot but agree with your arguments that those responsible for
the development and deployment of weapons used to kill and maim must
share the guilt for the thousands of innocent victims.
By the way, who did invent the automobile?
curiously,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
From the sound of it, the hardware modifications you've done on your
microcomputer are Really Neat, and we appreciate your offer to do the
same for the ones around here. But I really don't think it's right for me to
have Customs "look the other way" when you bring in all the necessary parts
from the orient.
conscientiously,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
I'm really sorry I haven't found time for detailed replies to your letters.
The reason is that, while I would never question that your ideas are
profoundly important and urgently needed by mankind, you couch them
in such language that I can seldom figure out what they are.
Dialog is more fun when both parties share some idea of what they're
talking about.
I can hardly wait to learn more details on how you plan to save the world,
but I'm afraid you'll have to explain it in a language I understand.
May I suggest something other than LISP?
eagerly,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
Thanks for your suggestion on cutting governmental costs. Your proposal
to stop paying the interest on -- and not repaying not repaying the
principal of -- the national debt certainly would trim the budget.
However, there would be some side effects.
Many individuals, businesses and virtually all the banks hold government
bonds. Having those assets vanish overnight would not only be disconcerting,
but would also probably lead to the collapse of the banking system, most
businesses, and probably the entire world economy.
Not to mention what it would do to the government's credit rating...
regretfully,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
The results from your input-output analysis of the entire world's economy
for the next century certainly are interesting. So were your projections
on the strategic alternatives open to the Soviet Union over the next
decade. Almost as interesting as the results of your global climate model
showing the effects of shifting from petrochemical fuels to alternative
energy sources.
Strangely enough, after I receive your analyses via net mail,
I usually receive a similar report through official channels from the
government "think tank" where you work ... supposedly authored by a
whole team of Ph.D.s
While I'm sure that you've really done all that work -- as a summer hire
jr. assistant student programmer -- I'd really hate to put all those Ph.D.s
out of work. Instead of the net mail previews, why don't we just let the
results of those massive studies come through official channels, and let those
scientists with all those Ph.D.s feel that they're doing something productive
for the country?
considerately,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
I read with interest your urging fellow netlanders to transmit
supposedly-encrypted nonsense files overseas to amuse and entertain the
people in the various government agencies that monitor overseas
communications links to find out if national secrets are being disclosed
to potential adversaries.
It seems that enough people have taken your advice that the appropriate
agencies have asked me for additional staff and computer facilities to
handle the extra volume of possibly-encrypted telecommunications traffic
and sort the garbage from the potentially important material.
However, don't you agree it's not really all that fair to charge this
extra cost to the average American taxpayer?
I'm sure you'll agree. I'm charging the cost to your VISA bill.
I'm sure you'll be amused and entertained ... for the next few centuries it
will take to pay it off.
always cost-conscious,
whouse!pres
--------
To:
Your idea of an artificial intelligence program which can handle network
note and mail responses certainly would be a time-saver for a busy executive
such as myself. The A.I. program could answer electronic mail for me that
I don't have time for.
As you point out, if done well, the recipients of the notes and electronic
mail would never realize that what they were receiving the output of an
artificial intelligence program.
Alas, your idea is not original. In fact, several government
labs have been working to refine such a program for several years already.
I don't see the need for the government to fund such work. Anymore.
yours in A.I.,
whouse!pres
--
Bob Cunningham ..{dual,ihnp4,vortex}!islenet!bob
Honolulu, Hawaii