Xref: utzoo alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:40 comp.admin.policy:241
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!world!eff!kadie
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl Kadie)
Subject: Re: Ohio State University CIS Policies
Message-ID: <1991Jun4.004016.20415@eff.org>
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
References: <1991Jun3.165946.12637@eff.org> <1991Jun3.173550.13928@eff.org> <1991Jun3.232500.24850@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 00:40:16 GMT
Lines: 30

morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:

>Why, oh why, is *everything* turning into a "formal" or "due
>process" situation?  We've never had any problem with a student
>that wasn't solved with a face-to-face conversation.  I've 
>stopped chain letters, obscene files, and email flood wars with
>a simple "please drop by to see me" message.

At most places and in most cases no formal hearing is necessary. As
you point out, an informal face-to-face conversation is usually
sufficent. The *right* to a formal hearing, however, is a necessary
check on the sys admin's power. Consider the situation at Ohio State.
According to a sys admin there, at least three students are being/were
punished because a sys admin thinks they are "real jerk[s]". The
students apparently have no way to appeal this judgement.

>Sure, users have
>been locked out here; this only occurred when the student ignored
>several requests to come in for a meeting.  I haven't had to lock
>anyone out yet; those few occurances were several years ago.

A student at Ohio State student tells me that users there are also
locked out (denied access to their computer account) when they are
wanted for a meeting. The difference is they are given no notice
before the lock out.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@eff.org or kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- But I speak for myself.