Xref: utzoo news.groups:4632 news.admin:2708 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!ukecc!vnend From: vnend@engr.uky.edu (D. V. W. James) Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin Subject: Re: Democracy at work: Big brother is watching Message-ID: <2464@ukecc.engr.uky.edu> Date: 17 Jun 88 20:16:44 GMT References: <56436@sun.uucp> <15613@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <4342@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <44373@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> <4350@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Reply-To: vnend@engr.uky.edu (D. V. W. James) Followup-To: news.groups Organization: Univ. of KY Engineering Computing Center Lines: 121 In article <4350@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) writes: >In article <44373@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: >> 1) Why comp.women instead of comp.discrimination or some such? >> Are women the only ones with these problems? If not, >> why exclude the others. >The group is not primarily for discussion of discrimination. The >moderator has said that. There have been lists of topics posted >that would be appropriate and interesting to discuss in the group >once created that have nothing to do with discrimination. [Further down you say:] >If you'll look back over the list of topics I have above and that >others have posted, you'll see that many (most?) are **NOT SOCIAL >ISSUES**! The moderator has said that repeatedly as have many, many >others (myself included). soc.* is totally inappropriate and >comp.society is not completely appropriate for these topics since they >are not all social issues. >Some examples: > How to encourage more women to enter the computing field? Is a social issue. It involves looking at and altering societal view on professions and gender. > How do we encourage a higher percentage of women to go on > for PhDs in the field? Is a social issue, very simular to above. Replace women with any other group (even men) and it is still relevant. As a social issue. > Are there certain kinds of areas in CS that women are > predisposed to, either due to social or other reasons? > (example, developing computer languages, AI work, ...?) When the topic itself uses social reasons as a part of its definition... > Why aren't there more women hackers? Why arn't there more women Xs. Can you really say that this is not a social issue? > Why aren't there more female backbone admins? See last note. Anytime you ask why there arn't more Xs you are addressing a societal issue. > Safety for pregnant women in computing occupations... > (some studies seem to indicate a higher rate of > miscarriages with VDT use) Sounds like a comp.risks topic. This one *might* not be a societal issue. The first one so far. And the only one that is female specific. > Can flextime and work-at-home schemes work well when > raising kids? (Question for both spouses, actually) Raising kids isn't a vital part of society? > What to do about harassment on the job and on the net. This is both discrimination related and social. > Why do so many netters think the name of comp.women > is more important than the content? You threw this one in to trick us, right? > Do professional organizations like IEEE-CS and ACM show > appropriate amounts and types of support for > women's issues in computing? Again, both a discriminitory and a social issue. > Ergonometrics and design issues from a female point of > view...(ex. does the choice of the command name "man" > instead of "help" imply something? Does it matter?) Other than your example being facitious, this is the second legitimate topic given, but even it is not female specific. How about the ergonomics and design issues from the point of view of those outside the norm for hieght (short and tall), wieght ( computing is a sendientary (or however you spell it) profession, how about those of us who are having trouble using our terminals because of the wieght we are putting on?), or anything else outside a supposed norm? >...and the list goes on. Trish can supply more, as can most of >the people who have been saying all along that: > 1) the group will discuss computing related issues; and > 2) the group is not primarily intended to talk about > discrimination (although it will be difficult to avoid completely > since discrimination is so pervasive even in our profession). Though you managed to score 1.5 I'm not convinced. There was a relationship to computers, yes, but most of what you listed as possible topics were *society related*, and not usually specific to either women or computers. And most of them related heavily to discrimination. -- Later y'all, {vnend@engr, cn0001dj@ukcc, mc.david@ukpr}.uky.edu; Vnend: Ignorance is the Mother of Adventure. {any vertibrae}!ukma!ukecc!vnend "Of course they can't shoot it down, the shows name is "Airwolf", not "Antiaircraft Gun!"