Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ukma!rex!wuarchive!uunet!orca!itchy!rjones From: rjones@itchy.dsd.es.com (Ray Jones - Perp) Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy Subject: Re: SUSPEND SYSOPS, NOT STUDENTS Message-ID: <1991Jun20.183258.20739@dsd.es.com> Date: 20 Jun 91 18:32:58 GMT References: <20740@slice.ooc.uva.nl> <20790@slice.ooc.uva.nl> <1991Jun18.033333.27450@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <1991Jun18.174430.12050@dsd.es.com> <1991Jun19.050956.8626@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <1991Jun20.050524.174 Sender: usenet@dsd.es.com Reply-To: rjones@dsd.es.com Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp. Lines: 60 Nntp-Posting-Host: 130.187.85.106 In article <1991Jun20.050524.17458@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>, jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (DE Robertson james an 740-9172) writes: >In article jb3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jon Allen Boone) writes: >> >>jarober@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (DE Robertson james an 740-9172) writes: >>> From what I have read, you are AMORAL. respassing and violating my right to >>> privacy is not an alternate morality, it is the absence of one. >>>Just because >>> you know HOW to take an action does not make it ok. Like I said, this is your set of morals... In my set, if you are not harming other people, then there is nothing wrong... Yes, it does involve fairly complicated thinking sometimes, in order to decide whether or not it is actually harming someone, but in many cases it is easy to see that there is very little harm being done with a possibly very large amount of harm being averted... I don't believe in tresspassing as a general rule... But I would rush to a house if it was on fire... Computers involve some slightly different thinking... As to the two examples I gave (walking around the office and the badge/door locks)... I probably shold of given some better ones... For one thing, here there aren't always machines available in your opwn office, so you just wander until you find one that has an unoccupied one... The offices are all open (the cubicle type) and there are no doors... And I have dealt with the security here before... That example still holds, though for security types in general I have no idea... >> >> While I agree that the poster was really naive, [...] I think I jsut gave a bad example, but there is a possibility that I am naive... What does that mean, anyway? :-) >I said amoral since he felt it was ok to go sniffing >around in other peoples property. Perhaps I flamed a bit too high, but I >do wonder where the original poster draws lines. I never stated that at all... I don't know where you got that... I stated it was ok to walk into the office... But here they aren't exactly closed off from prying eyes... I can see over the walls... So being in teh office only changes my POV a little... But I said I wouldn't go through the desks... Against company policy, and what good am I going to be doing? If I needed some serial number and I knew the paper was on a co-worker's desk, I would have no qualms about going and getting it... And when I need access to a program that someone else has written, but tehy left locked, I will su to root and get it... I don't go browsing through their News directory or anything I draw the lines in a very simple method... Greater Good, Pleasure principle... Read Mill for a more in depth explanation... -- "Don't do anything I wouldn't do. And if you do, take pictures." -Al on QL "Zootlewurdle." -Marvin "Sir, they're changing color." -Lt. Worf "Not a problem." -Parker Lewis Ray Jones (Official Maintainer of Everything) tjones@peruvian.utah.edu Disclaimer : My employer doesn't know I post...