Conference 7.286::dcu

288.0. "DISCUSSION ON DCU/BOD ACCESS TO THE CONFERENCE" by BEIRUT::SUNNAA () Wed Sep 18 1991 11:43

    
    This note contains notes moved from 2.* and will be dedicated to the
    discussion about DCU/BOD access to the notesfile and the extractions.
    
    Note 2.* will continue to function as extractions announcement note.
    
    Regards,
    
    Nisreen Sunnaa
    Moderator.
              <<< BEIRUT::R7XBOK$DIA0:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DCU.NOTE;4 >>>
                                    -< DCU >-
================================================================================
Note 2.73                        Is It Official?                        73 of 85
XLIB::SCHAFER "Mark Schafer, ISV Tech. Support"       5 lines  16-SEP-1991 13:13
                              -< I'm outa here. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh my.  I just figured out that this "extraction" stuff is going on.  You guys
may feel that rubbing out the names protects us, but I don't feel that way.


You should make this more prominent to readers that skip topic #2.
================================================================================
Note 2.74                        Is It Official?                        74 of 85
GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ "Someday, DCU will be a credit un" 6 lines  16-SEP-1991 13:47
                                     -< ? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    RE: .73
    
    I'm curious.  What do you feel is going to happen to you personally as 
    a result of sanitized extracts being forwarded?
    
================================================================================
Note 2.75                        Is It Official?                        75 of 85
ULTRA::KINDEL "Bill Kindel @ LTN1"                   13 lines  16-SEP-1991 14:15
                            -< Privacy NOT Assured >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re .72/.73:
    
    A little more notice (particularly since there are so many NEW readers
    of this conference) that DCU receives a "sanitized" extraction of this
    file would be helpful.
    
    I'm not sure it makes much difference, though.  The DCU BoD members
    read this conference and could provide their own extraction service
    (which may or may not be carefully sanitized) to key DCU people.
    
    In short, the BEIRUT::DCU conference IS NOT SECURE.  When entering
    notes here, you should ASSUME they will be read (in full) by the DCU
    (even if they aren't).
================================================================================
Note 2.76                        Is It Official?                        76 of 85
COOKIE::KITTELL "Richard - Architected Info Mgmt"    12 lines  17-SEP-1991 12:17
              -< I guess I'm not afraid of the BoD, should I be? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The BoD works for me. They're not doing me any favors. If I find them
unsuitable employees I will do my best to fire them. Failing that I will
take away my paltry contribution to the source of their salaries.

What are they gonna do, refuse me a loan? Pass me bad $20 bills? Make me
pay a monthly fee on my checking? Oooh, scary.

If the BoD hasn't figured out that they should be much more afraid of our
power than us of theirs, I think the new president may have started giving 
them the short course.

================================================================================
Note 2.77                        Is It Official?                        77 of 85
MIZZOU::SHERMAN "ECADSR::SHERMAN 235-8176, 223-3326"  8 lines  17-SEP-1991 12:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, actually, the BoD members are not compensated directly for the
    time they volunteer.  My own feeling is that they probably serve in
    order to enhance other career opportunities and advancements, probably
    within Digital.  That's not a bad thing at all.  What is probably bad
    is using the position of power to leverage other interests which may
    not coincide with the interests of DCU shareholders.
    
    Steve
================================================================================
Note 2.78                        Is It Official?                        78 of 85
STAR::BUDA "Lighting fuses as I go"                  12 lines  17-SEP-1991 15:00
                            -< Can we prove this? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >I'm not sure it makes much difference, though.  The DCU BoD members
    >read this conference and could provide their own extraction service
    >(which may or may not be carefully sanitized) to key DCU people.
    
    >In short, the BEIRUT::DCU conference IS NOT SECURE.  When entering
    >notes here, you should ASSUME they will be read (in full) by the DCU
    
    If youhave any facts to back this up, please feel free to forward them
    to me.  I will gladly take the correct steps to fix this problem so
    that it does not occur any more.
    
    	- mark
================================================================================
Note 2.79                        Is It Official?                        79 of 85
VERGA::WELLCOME "Steve Wellcome (Maynard)"            9 lines  17-SEP-1991 15:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What's to prove?  I'm J. Random Employee who put BEIRUT::DCU in my
    notesfile list and opened it up.  Any Digital employee who can log
    into the Digital network can do the same thing.  Why can't any member 
    of the DCU BoD do it if they want to?  They're all Digital employees,
    aren't they?  
    What is the guarantee that I, J. Random Employee, don't have a very
    close friendship with a member of the BoD and I'm not doing a nightly 
    extract and print of the new notes and sending it to my friend on the 
    BoD?  There is nothing at all secure about this notesfile.
================================================================================
Note 2.80                        Is It Official?                        80 of 85
SMARTT::MACNEAL "ruck `n' roll"                       5 lines  17-SEP-1991 15:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    and anyone who comes into a notesfile without reading the conference
    rules/guidelines/policies deserves what they get
    
    Why do people assume that writing in a notesfile is the same as talking
    to one other person behind a closed door?
================================================================================
Note 2.81                        Is It Official?                        81 of 85
HPSRAD::RIEU "Read his lips...Know new taxes!"        3 lines  17-SEP-1991 15:53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Members of the BOD said at the meeting I attended that they DO read
    this Conference. They just don't see fit to reply.
                                     Denny
================================================================================
Note 2.82                        Is It Official?                        82 of 85
BEIRUT::SUNNAA                                       16 lines  17-SEP-1991 15:58
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    RE: BOD Access to the notesfile.
    
    I am not sure what the big mess is all about. This notesfile is the
    same like any other notesfile on the network. It is owned by Digital
    Equipment Corporation and follows corporate guidelines and rules.
    
    DCU Board of Directors are DEC employees and like all DEC employees can
    access this notesfile and read it if they want to. This is not a
    restricted notesfile.
    
    What is the problem?
    
    Nisreen Sunnaa
    Moderator         
                      
================================================================================
Note 2.83                        Is It Official?                        83 of 85
STAR::BUDA "Lighting fuses as I go"                  14 lines  17-SEP-1991 23:46
                        -< Do they provide to DCU???
 >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >I'm not sure it makes much difference, though.  The DCU BoD members
    >read this conference and could provide their own extraction service
    >(which may or may not be carefully sanitized) to key DCU people.

You are missing the point...  BOD can read all they want, BUT they CANNOT
provide notes from this conference to anyone OUTSIDE of DEC, which
includes DCU employees with out approval from DEC.

IF, and a BIG IF (someone either proves it or quits saying it), BOD has provided
NOTES from this notes file, without using approved channels (extraction and
cleansing method), then they are in violation and I would push that the correct
actions are taken.  This is not ANY different than ANY other notes file.

	- mark
================================================================================
Note 2.84                        Is It Official?                        84 of 85
MUDHWK::LAWLER "Not turning 39..."                   14 lines  18-SEP-1991 07:56
                        -< potential "Modus Operendi" >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    >But they cannot provide notes from this conference...without approval
    >from DEC.
    
      FWIW,  I believe it takes a VP approval to grant outsider access
    	to notes (or to the network in general.)
    
      There is at least one VP on the DCU BOD.  
    
      Thus the potential exists.  While I have no problem with this,  
    it's probably worth pointing out for the benifit of those who do.
    
    
    					
================================================================================
Note 2.85                        Is It Official?                        85 of 85
COOKIE::KITTELL "Richard - Architected Info Mgmt"    16 lines  18-SEP-1991 10:01
                       -< why some voices aren't heard >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I stand corrected on the BoD members being compensated for their
    service as Board members. So they don't work for the members, they
    are merely elected by the members and serve at their pleasure. Or at
    least they did until they changed the bylaws so much we hardly have any
    influence over them any more. I'm confident that will change also,
    that is why I'm still a member, I think the DCU is worth salvaging.
    
    Given that, I've been contacted off-notes and reminded that some people
    *report to* BoD members. They feel very hesitant to speak out on CU
    issues, least they get slammed at their next review. I'm not in the
    position but I can relate to those that are.
    
    Thanks for the illuminating info, I'll cool my jets.
    
    Richard
    
    

    
    This is regarding people who are afraid/weary/reluctant to post notes
    for whatever reason.
    
    I would be more than happy to post anonymous notes if people would send
    them to me with a pointer to where they would like the note posted. 
    
    Nisreen Sunnaa
    Moderator.

A few notes in .0 confuse the correct statement that this file isn't secure 
with a claim that a security violation has actually occurred.  To cite an
example, an unlocked door with valuables behind it is insecure, whether or
not there's been an actual breakin.  My DIGITAL building is physically 
secure (at some level) since there are guards checking people in and out.  
There's nobody checking the bits of this file in and out -- any one can
do what they please with the notes in this file and there's no way to tell.
This file, and all unrestricted notes files, are not secured against 
invalid access.  This is why there are strict rules not to put DIGITAL
CONFIDENTIAL information in any unrestricted notes file.  And this is why
anyone who wants to be sure that a non-DEC employee doesn't see something
should not post it in this file (or should post it anonymously, as per .1).
I don't know of any actual violations, but this file simply isn't secure.  

	Enjoy,
	Larry

Re: .0

>================================================================================
>Note 2.85                        Is It Official?                        85 of 85
>COOKIE::KITTELL "Richard - Architected Info Mgmt"    16 lines  18-SEP-1991 10:01
>                       -< why some voices aren't heard >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
		.
		.
		.
>    Given that, I've been contacted off-notes and reminded that some people
>    *report to* BoD members. They feel very hesitant to speak out on CU
>    issues, least they get slammed at their next review. I'm not in the
>    position but I can relate to those that are.
		.
		.
		.

Pretty sad state of affairs, isn't it? I'd just like to point out that, if
any are in this position and feel that they have a case that they've been
persecuted in their DEC job for speaking out about the DCU BoD, they would
do very well to ODP the situation all the way to KO. Such an action by a BoD
member would quite clearly be unethical, not to mention stupid and spiteful.
If guilty of same, such a BoD member would well deserve any retribution
the Corporation could dish out. What do they think they are? Deities?
Yeah - guess they do.

-Jack

    I totally fail to understand why names have to be excised anyway.
    The BOD read this notesfile before it has been censored.
    
    I think you're just adding a LOT of unneccessary work for yourself.
    Who cares if Mary Madden actually gets to see names.
    
    And folks PLEASE stop using initials instead of real names in notes, it
    just turns the notes into alphabet soup.
    
    Dave

    
    
    Due to recent events I have asked Carl Leeber (Notes Extractor) to
    discontinue extractions of notes from the conference. The extractions
    were stripped, edited and sent to DCU to respond to the issues, and
    Carl in turn posted them in the conference under the appropriate note.
    
    Just to avoid starting a big discussion on this, the reason for my
    decision is that I do not feel that the process is serving the purpose
    it was intended for, and therefore I do not see the need to continue
    it.
    
    All DEC employees have access to this conference, including the BOD.
    However everyone is restricted (corporate policy) against passing on
    information/notes from this conference to DCU or anyone else outside
    the company. 
    
    Regards,
    
    Nisreen Sunnaa
    Moderator
    
    
    

              <<< BEIRUT::R7XBOK$DIA0:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DCU.NOTE;4 >>>
                                    -< DCU >-
================================================================================
Note 2.75                        Is It Official?                        75 of 75
BUBBLY::LEIGH "eight pounds"                          4 lines  28-SEP-1991 00:37
                            -< Sauce for the goose >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, I'd support continuing extractions, but only if Mr. Cockburn
    supplies a "business reason" for wanting them, and only if the
    "membership" of this conference approves the request...
    

    Hmph.  I seem to have left the smiley-face out of 2.75 (reposted
    as 288.6).  I didn't mean it to sound vindictive, but rather satirical.
    

RE: <<< Note 288.5 >>>

>   Due to recent events I have asked Carl Leeber (Notes Extractor) to
>   discontinue extractions of notes from the conference. The extractions
>   were stripped, edited and sent to DCU to respond to the issues, and
>   Carl in turn posted them in the conference under the appropriate note.

    Per the moderators request, extractions to DCU have been stopped.
    The last extraction was on 26-SEP-1991. I will post any DCU responses
    that might be presented by Mary Madden.
    
>   However everyone is restricted (corporate policy) against passing on
>   information/notes from this conference to DCU or anyone else outside
>   the company. 

    Information restricted by DEC policy includes employee names, DEC ENET
    node names, DTNs and site codes and DEC proprietary information. NONE
    OF THIS INFORMATION WAS SENT TO DCU. Additonally, at the moderator's
    request, DCU employees names were not included.

    Carl
    Extractor-on-hiatus-and-not-the-moderator (and now I get a REST! Whew!)

    Thanks for your hard work.  I do appreaciate the effort.
    
    	- mark

    I agree. Thanks, Carl. To the extent that the DCU deigned to answer, it
    was interesting to hear the issues from their perspective (not that
    they were particularly straightforward most of the time, but it was
    worthwhile to have made the attempt at establishing a dialog).
    
    Jim

        DCU had an oportunity to hear from actual members, and improve
        their offerings from those comments. Too bad it all fell on deaf
        (or worse) ears. I do suggest that this be re-evaluated at
        whatever time we might have a new, responsive, concerned DCU.