Xref: utzoo alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:52 comp.admin.policy:260
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ra!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
Subject: Re: Ohio State University CIS Policies
Message-ID: <1991Jun4.190025.2131@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 4 Jun 91 19:00:25 GMT
References: <1991Jun3.173550.13928@eff.org> <1991Jun3.232500.24850@ms.uky.edu> <1991Jun4.160947.7193@eng.umd.edu>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 20

In article <1991Jun4.160947.7193@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:

>If there had been some sort of due process in the first place, perhaps I
>wouldn't have had such trouble.  Informal stuff only works when both sides are
>trying for a real solution-- not when the side with more power only wants to
>avoid what they percieve as a problem by getting rid of the student involved.

Exactly! And due process only works when it isn't grossly painful. I
once had a problem with an undergraduate IRC user at a large US
university. Despite many recorded instances of antisocial behavior
(he'd get drunk and start sending everyone /usr/dict/words...), his
system administrator's attitude was "The process of pulling his
account is so long and nasty that I'm not even going to try. Good
luck."

One would wonder if they would have taken any action if the medium had
been netnews or mail. In any case, a few technical fixes to IRC
sufficed to solve the problem. When due process fails, not much is
left. A fancy document can't guarantee that the process works, either.
It merely helps.