Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!att!emory!athena.cs.uga.edu!mcovingt From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: I Accuse (the New Gestappo...) Summary: Cut the insults and get some facts! Message-ID: <1991Jun18.044042.8266@athena.cs.uga.edu> Date: 18 Jun 91 04:40:42 GMT References: <1991Jun16.032125.19880@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <1991Jun16.171754.24492@athena.cs.uga.edu> <1991Jun18.023039.10671@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Lines: 150 In article <1991Jun18.023039.10671@ddsw1.MCS.COM> learn@ddsw1.MCS.COM (William Vajk) writes: >In article <24492@athena.cs.uga.edu> Michael A. Covington writes: > >>The University had two concerns: >> (1) To get this student to grow up and understand his ethical obligations; >> (2) To deter others from attempting computer break-ins. > >With all due respect, I agree with precept #1, and disagree totally with >precept #2. > There's a third concern, retribution. (See C. S. Lewis, "The Retributive Theory of Punishment," or any ethics textbook.) Each of the three concerns puts limits on the severity of the punishment. To this extent I agree with you, and disagree with the views you are so glibly attributing to me. We are _not_ punishing this student for the (past or future) "misbehavior of others." He himself knew he was aiding a series of break-ins in progress. That is, he willingly endangered a computer that hundreds of people were relying on. >Student judiciaries are almost always rubber stamps for administration >wishes. And they are used, as it is being used in this instance, to >deflect blame from the administration. Exactly what should the administration be blamed for? >>My own feeling is that 2 quarters' suspension is exactly right. It's >>desirable to get this person away from the University's computers for a >>while, and away from the small circle of crackers that he was apparently >>associating with. I don't think this will make him a college dropout. > >YOU don't think? Who the hell appointed you to make this decision ? I did not "make this decision". I posted my opinion because someone here on the net asked for it! > You >have single handedly taken this student's entire academic, and perhaps >professional life, and made this decision in the matter of minutes. Did >you call the parents ? Did you review his records, all of them, even >back to High School. Did you discuss this with other facalty members ? Dear sir, I did not do anything "single handedly"! I was not even the one who brought the charge. (The Athena sysadmins did that.) I am one of several who were asked what we thought would be an appropriate punishment. Counselors in the Office of Judicial Programs did all the kinds of reviewing you ask for, and took about a week to make their decision, which is now undergoing further review as the student is exercising his rights to an appeal. >I accuse you of seeing very little past the precious computer system which >you see "attacked." I accuse you of putting your precious computer above the >human understanding and compassion. I accuse you of not noticing this student, >and perhaps others like him, who within your academic environment of learning >has without a doubt given more than one indication of needing a little help >to mature. That's a lot of accusing! We bent over backward to be compassionate. As for noticing the student, he's not a student in my program and I had never set eyes on him before. I have no idea what his teachers thought of him. The Office of Judicial Programs presumably contacted people who knew more about him. >heavy hand of self-righteousness. I accuse you, and the Georgia Tech >administration What does the administration of a different university, 80 miles away, have to do with this? >>We especially ruled out computer-related community service (e.g., making him >>work, unpaid, at a help desk) because of the widespread myth that if you get >>caught cracking passwords, some employers will view this as proof that you >>are a computer genius. We wanted to make it clear that unethical behavior is >>never a qualification for a technical job, paid or unpaid. > >Once more you are more concerned about what others might think. What >business is it of yours to be concerned with anything other than doing >those things necessary to do justice to this student. We are responsible for educating _all_ our students, not just this one. If we establish a policy that "the way to get a helpdesk job is to get caught hacking" we'll have a whole generation of hackers. > >Those who would punish to the detrement of a student instead of making >the outcome a positive learning experience Are you sure it _won't_ be a positive learning experience? Several years ago I caught a student cheating on a test and referred the matter to our Office of Judicial Programs. She got a quarter's suspension. Later she _thanked_ me for it, saying that it was one of the most valuable parts of her education -- simply learning that it _matters_ whether or not one is honest. >lack the imaginaton necessary >to be a good educator. And to take this one step further, why is it that >you are here NOW, when the decisions have been made, asking such questions? I am not the person who hands out discipline at our university. The counselors at the Office of Judicial Programs are professionals at this kind of thing and are always asking these questions. I had not come across comp.org.eff.talk at the time the case transpired. That's why I had not asked anything _here_. Believe me, everyone sought (and got) input! >The fact that you and the administration >were hell bent to reach a solution, even a bad one, adds credence to my >accusations. Fact? Evidence? >Further, this bit is a clear indication to me that you >personally are just now coming off the high brought on by the discovery >of the "attack" on your baby. And we all know what riding on such a high >does to wisdom and good judgement. Unfettered by any knowledge of the facts, you venture boldly into amateur psychoanalysis... >I suggest you get in touch with Mike Meyers, the former owner and system >administrator of M-net, a public access system in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Mike's >solution to bad behavior was to give the individual some responsibility >on the system, and some support. His 100% positive results would doubtless >amaze you. If you're really interested, I'll e-mail you his phone number. I understand that "hackers" are usually hungry for the role of a sysadmin, and that one way to rehabilitate such people is to give them some responsibility. This was considered and ruled out in this case for various good reasons not all of which I can reveal here. I think _your_ problem is that you do not think computer break-ins are crimes at all. What do you think we should do if we caught a student breaking and entering the University Bookstore? (This has actually happened.) Give him a job in the bookstore? -- ------------------------------------------------------- Michael A. Covington | Artificial Intelligence Programs The University of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602 U.S.A. -------------------------------------------------------