Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!unc!tim From: tim@unc.UUCP (Tim Maroney) Newsgroups: net.general Subject: Censorship: A Case History (part 3, 26 Jan 84 to 9 Feb 84) Message-ID: <7188@unc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 7-May-84 22:34:11 EDT Article-I.D.: unc.7188 Posted: Mon May 7 22:34:11 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 9-May-84 01:24:04 EDT Organization: CS Dept., U. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill Lines: 301 From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 26 Jan 84 22:15:59 EST (Thu) From: Tim Maroney Subject: grievance committee To: weiss@unc Status: RO Steve Bellovin informs me that there is a faculty-student grievance committee. I have been given a restriction on use of networking facilities (use none ever) by Dr. Brooks and Capt. Mason; Dr. Brooks refuses to discuss the matter, having turned it over to Capt. Mason; Capt. Mason has cited figures which he refuses to explain the source of, saying I cost a lot of network money, and he has also refused to respond to evidence from Tim Seaver that my network usage costs almost nothing. There are a few other complaints. Is the committee still alive and kicking? From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 27 Jan 84 11:45:17 EST (Fri) From: Steve Weiss Subject: Re: grievance committee To: Tim Maroney Status: RO There is a grievance committee, but it is not for that kind of grievance. If you cannot get satisfaction from Ralph, write me a letter and I'll present it at a faculty meeting. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 27 Jan 84 19:53:08 EST (Fri) From: Tim Maroney Subject: Re: grievance committee To: Steve Weiss In-Reply-To: Message of 27 Jan 84 11:45:17 EST (Fri) from weiss@unc Status: RO Thanks. I will probably get in touch with you next week. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 27 Jan 84 23:10:17 EST (Fri) From: Tim Maroney Subject: yet more on this junk To: smb@ulysses Status: RO The grievance committee is, according to Dr. Weiss, not for that sort of grievance, but if Mason doesn't begin dealing in good faith next week, the matter will be brought up by Dr. Weiss with other faculty members. Gievn this, a letter from you seems to be the best approach. Please make the recipients Capt. Mason, Drs. Brooks, Snodgrass, and Weiss, and myself. Thank you. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 29 Jan 84 21:16:13 EST (Sun) From: Tim Maroney Subject: Bardez loan request To: mason@unc Cc: brooks@unc Status: RO Since my paycheck has been delayed, I am requesting a Bardez loan in the amount of $350. I have read the posted document on the loans and understand the terms. Tim Maroney From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 31 Jan 84 18:17:06 EST (Tue) From: Tim Maroney Subject: networking restrictions To: mason@unc Cc: brooks@unc, tas@unc, weiss@unc, rts@unc Status: RO Capt. Mason, Now that the payroll issue has been resolved, we can continue discussing the issue of the appropriateness of the ban. As I see it, the main issue is whether or not my use of networking facilities costs the school any money, since the primary charge was that I was spending too much money, and the secondary charge was that the alleged "bad taste" of my submissions was a waste of resources. If there is no cost, then the first charge is shown to be false, and the second to be irrelevant. Two weeks ago, Tim Seaver claimed that my use of the networking facilities here costs nothing. However, some figures claiming that my expenditures were large were put forth by the administration at around the same time. The issue seems to be resolvable simply by determining which of these incompatible claims is accurate. If Tim is correct, then the restriction is groundless and should be lifted; otherwise, it is justified and should remain in effect, unless I promise to keep the cost at acceptable levels, now that I have been warned. I believe that you will readily accept that Tim is an expert on these matters, and I am inclined to accept his claims. What is the source of the administration's figures? Thank you for your cooperation. Tim Maroney From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 31 Jan 84 22:09:20 EST (Tue) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Re: networking restrictions To: Tim Maroney Cc: weiss@unc, snodgrass@unc, mason@unc Status: RO I have erred in leaving Captain Mason to take the heat for a joint decision for which I will gladly take full responsibility. Even were he inclined to lift the networking restrictions, I would not do so. Cost is not the issue. Appropriateness is. I am quite unwilling for you to represent this department to the world at large with the kind of communications you have been sending. This is not the result of any second-hand charge from Hedlund and Reed, or their friends. After the matter came up, we read for ourselves a sample of the correspondence. You may not use our facilities for the dissemination abroad of such bitterness, anger, and intemperate abuse. If this policy gives you trouble, I shall be happy to discuss it with you man-to-man and face-to-face. Neither Captain Mason nor I shall enter into any more correspondence about it. Indeed, I would welcome a chance to talk about this with you, but it's your option. :wq From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 31 Jan 84 22:22:37 EST (Tue) From: Tim Maroney Subject: Re: networking restrictions To: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Cc: weiss@unc, snodgrass@unc, mason@unc In-Reply-To: Message of 31 Jan 84 22:09:20 EST (Tue) from brooks@unc Status: RO Good. However, before any such meeting, I would like to see copies of the specific articles to which you are objecting. For the record, I would like to say that although I have lost my temper on the net more than once, it has never been without provocation in the extreme, such as people responding to rational arguments with personal attacks on me. We can discuss this at our meeting. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 1 Feb 84 13:19:08 EST (Wed) From: Tim Maroney Subject: offending articles To: brooks@unc Cc: weiss@unc, rts@unc Status: RO As I stated, I would like to know which articles you object to before we meet, but I realize you may not have copies saved. If you will tell me the subjects of the offending articles, I will see if they are among those which I have saved on my own tape. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 2 Feb 84 13:50:37 EST (Thu) From: Tim Maroney Subject: off-site mail To: brooks@unc Status: O Since you have now made it clear that the objection to my use of the network relates only to news posting, may I consider the ban on outgoing mail lifted? (If you prefer, we can discuss this at our meeting, but it seems fairly clear-cut.) I do not like failing to respond to people who write me letters; it is rude. Tim Maroney From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 2 Feb 84 17:35:54 EST (Thu) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Re: off-site mail To: Tim Maroney Cc: fpb@unc Status: RO Date: 2 Feb 84 13:50:37 EST (Thu) From: Tim Maroney Subject: off-site mail To: brooks@unc Since you have now made it clear that the objection to my use of the network relates only to news posting, may I consider the ban on outgoing mail lifted? (If you prefer, we can discuss this at our meeting, but it seems fairly clear-cut.) I do not like failing to respond to people who write me letters; it is rude. Tim Maroney The ban stands. I don't have in hand copies of documents I read last fall, but can retrieve some. Since the problem wasn't subject but expression, there is no easy way to characterize them. I'll be out of town Monday and Tuesday but hope to be prepared for a meeting by Wednesday. I am willing, but may or may not be able, to identify documents to you before a proposed meeting time. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 2 Feb 84 20:02:59 EST (Thu) From: Tim Maroney Subject: Re: off-site mail To: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. In-Reply-To: Message of 2 Feb 84 17:35:54 EST (Thu) from brooks@unc Status: O I consider knowing which articles you objected to to be a precondition of any meeting, and I will wait any reasonable amount of time for them to be retrieved before meeting. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 3 Feb 84 13:41:25 EST (Fri) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Re: off-site mail To: Tim Maroney Cc: fpb@unc Status: RO Just to put things back into perspective: I gladly offered a meeting; I didn't ask for one. I understood you to have a grievance and to want a hearing. If this is the case, let me know. Date: 2 Feb 84 20:02:59 EST (Thu) From: Tim Maroney Subject: Re: off-site mail To: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. In-Reply-To: Message of 2 Feb 84 17:35:54 EST (Thu) from brooks@unc Status: RO I consider knowing which articles you objected to to be a precondition of any meeting, and I will wait any reasonable amount of time for them to be retrieved before meeting. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 3 Feb 84 17:26:33 EST (Fri) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Re: meeting To: Tim Maroney Cc: rts@unc Status: RO I'm sorry; during this interval Wednesday has now been scheduled with architects. How would Thursday at 11:00 do? From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 8 Feb 84 22:52:43 EST (Wed) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Meeting To: tim@unc Status: RO I have found in Ralph's file the two messages that precipitated our discussion and action last fall. Copies are in your physical mailbox. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 Date: 9 Feb 84 08:01:51 EST (Thu) From: Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Subject: Messages To: tim@unc Status: RO After sending you last night's mail, and on the way downstairs to put the messages in your mailbox, I got interrupted by Henry Fuchs and accidentally left for home with them still in my pocket. I'll put them there when I come in, about 10:00 a.m. From root Mon Feb 27 16:09:22 EST 1984 From: smb@ulysses Date: Thu, 9 Feb 84 14:18:40 est From: ulysses!smb (Steven Bellovin) Message-Id: <8402091918.AA25106@ulysses.UUCP> Received: by ulysses.UUCP (4.12/3.7) id AA25106; Thu, 9 Feb 84 14:18:40 est To: unc!tim Subject: Re: request Via: Ulysses; 9 Feb 84 14:23-EDT Status: RO Yes, I would be willing to talk with Dr. Brooks by phone. My schedule is pretty flexible (though I tend to dislike anything that requires met ot think before 10am....). Or I can write a somewhat longer letter by netmail; that might be an easier way than playing telephone tag with fpb. I'm sorry I haven't sent anything sooner; life here has been pretty hectic lately. [[Note from Tim: I am sorry that no on-line copy of these articles exists -- I was given only hardcopy, which has been packed now as I am travelling to my new home in Pittsburgh tomorrow morning. However, the first article was an obviously tongue-in-cheek piece condemining those who did not sign their full names to eternal torment; the second was a short extract from a reply to an article of mine in which I had said that heterosexuals with a fanatical hatred of homosexuals were probably unsure of their own sexuality. Both were discarded as evidence by Brooks in our meeting. 7 May 84.]]