Xref: utzoo alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:100 comp.admin.policy:359 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!agate!cgd From: cgd@ocf.Berkeley.EDU (Chris G. Demetriou) Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy Subject: Re: Due process and computer policies (was OSU Policies) Message-ID: Date: 8 Jun 91 10:35:30 GMT Article-I.D.: monsoon.CGD.91Jun8023530 References: <1991Jun4.160947.7193@eng.umd.edu> <1991Jun5.143833.21547@eng.umd.edu> <1991Jun6.200457.7743@eff.org> <1991Jun8.035801.11343@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator) Organization: UCB Open Computing Facility Lines: 48 In-Reply-To: otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu's message of 8 Jun 91 04: 03:58 GMT In article <1991Jun8.035801.11343@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (John Otto) writes: In article <1991Jun6.200457.7743@eff.org>, kadie@eff.org (Carl Kadie) writes... >In the past, I have tried to argue for due process and participation >rights with appeals to idealism and authority (e.g the Joint Statement >on Rights and Freedoms of Students). >This thread of conversation highlights the pragmatic reasons for >supporting these rights. Due process gives the disgruntled user a >nondestructive path. It may also helps keep the policy enforcer honest >(to use an expression from poker). User participation in the >formulation and application of policy gives the policy a feeling of >legitimacy. It also helps fight us vs. them attitudes. No. That's not adequate. What happens with "student participation in the setting of policy" is that only brown nosers get appointed to the policy committee. Even among large groups of students (student governments), problems have arisen recently with the imposition of political correctness doctrines. You say that "only brown nosers get appointed to the policy committee." I don't think this is true, especially where the students have any say in who represents them on the policy committee. And if the general body of students (or users) has no say, then it cannot be said that they really participate, or are represented. I honestly don't think that comments on the wonderful subject of "political correctness" (the topic amuses me...) are relevant to this discussion - in some things, such as academics, and funding situations, arguments can probably be made in favor of PC or against. However, in the world of computers, i've yet to see an opinion biased by race, creed, color, etc - it simply is not relevant. If you will attempt to argue that students who *ARE* *REPRESENTED* by peers on a policy-making committe (or whatever) are not better off (in most cases) than if they were not represented, well, let's just say that i'll be very amused. cgd UCB OCF Staff - Though these are my words, and mine alone... -- < Chris G. Demetriou | "Everybody's playing the game, > < cgd@ocf.berkeley.edu | But nobody's rules are the same. > < ...!ucbvax!ocf!cgd | Nobody's on nobody's side." - Chess > <=============================================================================> < Annoyance for hire. Name a time. Name a place. Name a target. I'm there.>