Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!webber From: webber@athos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: Commonly asked questions, homework on the net, etc. Message-ID: Date: 18 Mar 90 03:06:29 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 102 In article <7169@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gg10@prism.gatech.EDU (Gregory L. Galloway) writes: > In article <1990Mar17.025303.17752@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, elf@dgp.toronto.edu (Eugene Fiume) writes: > > In article <204@usna.NAVY.MIL> dfr@usna.NAVY.MIL (Prof. David F. Rogers ) writes: > >> ... A lot of stuff about student dishonesty, homework, expected apologies, > > ... A lot of stuff about hoaxes and jokes, abuses, etc. > I don't think this is a joke or a hoax. Clearly from the signature this is > a deaf individual from Gaulladet (sp?) University. I replied once before to > this person and her friend to give them bibliographic information so that > they could better find their sources. The root of their problem seems to > be their lack of a good technical library or book store. They are unable to > get a hold of sources that a lot of take for granted. > > I could be wrong, but this is how it appears to me. Gallaudet (named after Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet) is located in Washington D.C., an area characterized by usable public transportation and a number of publically available technical libraries and bookstores. A month or so ago, I sent email indicating that if their local library was inadequate, those of GWU and UofMD were near by. It might be worthwhile putting the posting from dfr in the context of a recent discussion in comp.theory along similar lines that resolved in a call for people to publically protest usage of the net for doing homework. It is a complicated issue. Taken at its narrowest, one might compare it to the situation of seeing someone in a drugstore put a magazine in their pocket. The options are three: 1) ignore it and perhaps let a wrong go unrighted; 2) bring the issue to the attention of the authorities (store owner or local police) and deal with the inconvenience of having the matter officially resolved [comparable to calling the D.C. operator to get the number of Gallaudet and the person administratively overseeing math/comp sci instruction] or 3) complain to other customers about the fall of civilization, which relieves frustration but leaves one open to the possibility of mistakenly accusing someone (something that really can't be undone in a forum this large). I guess most of us have been human long enough to know which options get exercised and why. There are those who would say that the above analogy is false, that the net is closer to being a library than being a bookstore. But even in the case of library usage, there is a rigid rule against the use of sources without attribution. For technical subjects, this usually isn't a problem because it is so difficult for the inexperienced to locate the answers in the technical literature (and most schools don't have reference librarians that understand the literature at the level of doing these kinds of searches), thus the path of least resistance becomes to fulfill the implicit contract and work the problem out for oneself. Of course, at a University there is generally a pool of people addressing the same problems (or having had addressed them in a previous year) and again, there is a clear notion that with appropriate documentation, pursuing this route can result in separation from the school [of course, if the transaction takes place by posting to the net, it is well documented -- although the people seeing the postings are often not the ones primarily concerned with this matter]. The notion that one could somehow ``solve'' this problem by not giving students access to the net is even more absurd than the notion that it would be a good idea for a University to not allow students in the Library. Not only are students major contributers to this group (particulary in the matter of contributed source, which is something that tends to be valued highly on the net), but it is technologically impossible. Although a university account is convenient for people at universities, in most urban areas, there is enough public access unix connectivity to make the costs of an individual getting on the net quite managable for those who know where to look and have the motivation (and of course, it is easier to disguise one's connection with a university when one isn't posting from one). But I think the more interesting issue here is the less narrow one of what is that status of a questioner on the net. Most places that take net feeds sell it to management and new users as a free information source. As such, the most natural new user response to getting net access is to post requests for whatever information they want (after all, if they were just going to read, they might as well go down to the library). Most of the people who have been on the net for a while eventually learn that it is not really an ``information resource'' like a library, but rather more like the local meeting of a technical group where people can meet, mix, discuss common problems, etc. At its simplest form, the person who posts a question is much like someone dropping in and saying ``does anyone have a six pack so that we can party.'' Obviously such a person wears their welcome out soon and never elicits the same response as a person who shows up with a six pack and says ``anyone want to party?'' Since a relatively large portion of the net is new users (the joy of resource growth in computer technology), it is amazing that we haven't long ago gone the way of comp.sources.wanted. But perhaps enough of us are repelled by such a vision of the net, that even in comp.sources.wanted, sometimes a conversation breaks out. For a while now, we have had postings of ``commonly asked questions'' appearing in this group. I would submit that this is fundamentally the wrong approach because it encourages the usage of the group as ``public library'' which is the attitude that is at the root of the problem. There have been many discussions about group splitting and such and doubtless will continue to be. But, except possibly for the name comp.graphics.noquestions, I doubt if changing names will solve anything. The answer instead I suspect lies with the people who choose to post -- given the alternative of making a quick and easy post answering some questioner and posting a reply to some other poster that adds something to an existing discussion chain, choose to be a discourser instead of an ``information resource;'' using a human as a book is a terrible waste, but it takes two for this to happen. ---- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)