Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!spool.mu.edu!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!hela!wotan.iti.org!scs From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy Subject: Re: harassing mail Message-ID: Date: 23 May 91 12:29:37 GMT References: <1991May21.232534.17880@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <1991May23.030459.8377@osh3.OSHA.GOV> Sender: usenet@iti.org (Hela News Manager) Organization: Industrial Technology Institute Lines: 46 Nntp-Posting-Host: wotan.iti.org chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes: > [[ a long, thoughtful response to my suggestions to: ]] >>eric@geology.tn.cornell.edu (Eric Fielding) writes: >>> I am a part-time sysadmin, and got some complaints a while ago from >>>someone who received rude mail messages from one of the users of our >>>system . . . >I generally agree, but not in all cases. In the case of a corporate or >government E-Mail system the function of the gateway and its >administrator might be more than just a common carrier. Rather, in many >cases it should be regarded as a "liason" to the organization and >"representative" to the external E-Mail community. But this is clearly not the case. Eric is the guy who trundles the mail cart down the hall. He is overstepping his own authority if he attempts to manage user behaviour in any way, shape or form. Until then, the proper course for him to take is to put complaintants into touch with those who have authority. >I don't mean that E-Mail should be monitored or censored on a regular >basis but,in many cases theadministrator should support the user in >his/her organization in alleviating problems in any way possible, >including blocking mail from offensive parties if requested. You're actually advocating Eric censor (I hate that word) outgoing mail from a user over whom he has no authority. Brrrrr! If I found our site postmaster doing this, I'd fire the postmaster. >I think interconnectivity is a wonderful thing and it would be a shame >if a corporation or agency had to shut down their gateway because the >administrator told the CEO he was not responsible for the content of >mail and could not effectively help him solve the problem. That's not what was suggested. There are lots of things Eric could do to help. But he should not take those actions unilaterally, and the CEO (or person in authority) has to be made aware of both the cost of the actions taken (yeah, rewrite all the sendmail.cf files so as to exclude mail from person a to person b) and has to take responsibility for dealing with the end user. -- "SPAM is a registered trademark of a pork product packed only by Geo. A Hormel & Co. Corp." -- Sun Technical Bulletin, March 1991, pg ii