Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!rutgers!mcdchg!ddsw1!learn
From: learn@ddsw1.MCS.COM (William Vajk)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: I Accuse (the New Gestappo...)
Message-ID: <1991Jun27.025826.4243@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 91 02:58:26 GMT
References: <1991Jun16.171754.24492@athena.cs.uga.edu> <1991Jun18.023039.10671@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <1991Jun18.044042.8266@athena.cs.uga.edu>
Organization: Dares No Organization Like Dis Organization
Lines: 72


>>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.

You have presented an incomplete story here, incomplete in a very 
important aspect. If the young woman came to you as a student, then
she did learn something you seem to feel important. And that something
important is 'how to pull Michael Covington's chain.' Seems to have 
worked that way, and to her advantage.

If she came to you after graduation, then I would be much more apt
to believe that she was sincere. While it is possible, I have some
reservations that this is actually the case. If this is what you meant, 
you should have included it in the original presentation of the 
associated facts. As an "educator" you are aware that timing counts. Knowing
the answers to the questions the day after the big test, while perhaps of
personal worth, doesn't amount to much if you didn't know them in time
for the test. The problem with this discussion, Michael, has been that
you have made statements, folks have disliked the implications, and you
have repeatedly come back with 'well look here, it wasn't really that
way at all.'

> I am not the person who hands out discipline at our university.

Yep, you have already disclaimed any responsibility in the matter, in
spite of the fact you were a witless for the prosecution. Strange how
these things work. We heard many similar expressions of self-defense
at Nuremburg. Many participated. No one was responsible. People simply
"did their job."

> Unfettered by any knowledge of the facts, you venture boldly into
> amateur psychoanalysis...

What is so very neat about this particular 'accusation' is that in order
to bring it into play, you are forced to exercise 'amateur psychoanalysis'
yourself.

All is not lost. The only real difference between an amateur psychoanalyst 
and a 'professional' one is the license. Understanding that psychoanalysis is 
an art, not an exact science, is the first key to debunking mythologies 
relating to psychoanalysis. We're all amateurs. Some of us have license. 
Some of us are good at it, with or without license, others are poor performers,
with or without license.

I laugh at you, Michael Covington, and at your attempt to flame me in
this way. If you wish to flame, you'd better learn how first. Subscribe
to alt.flame for a while. Tell Rissa I sent you. Realize there's an art
to flaming also. You might never learn to do well what you have set out
to do.

> 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.

If you wish to discuss the 'hacker mentality' I will gladly continue. While
every individual is completely different, the hackers I have studied have 
something in common which draws them together. They need recognition that is 
somehow lacking. They need an acceptance which has eluded them. I didn't
bring up the discussion of gangs as a space filler in the recent CUD article
published by Jim Thomas. Both sorts display some sociopathic behaviors. Both
seem to need reassurance of worth. And that, my dear sir, is the essence of
our dispute. For want of a nail.......

Bill Vajk