Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    Firstly let me say that I am not concerned about the NOW raffle
    announcement... However I suspect you should get a decision from the
    people who "own" the machine that hosts this conference, and not the
    readership.
    
    Three possible violations of PP&C exist here:
    
    1) Solicitation of money
    
    2) Promotion of Political views
    
    3) Promotion of Religious views.
    
    All appear to be forbidden by the PP&C rulings on valid use of the e-net
    for non-job related purposes. It could be argued of course that announcing
    the raffle doesn't imply support of NOW's political/religous viewpoint,
    and also that announcing how to get tickets is not in and of itself
    a solicitation for money. However your facillities management people
    may have a different view.
    
    Also I would not buy a ticket because I consider lotteries a form of
    gambling, and I disapprove of gambling on both a moral and religious
    viewpoint. I would not choose to impose my views on that on anybody
    else, but I cannot guarantee that somebody else of like mind may not
    be sufficiently zealous to enter a complaint.
    
    The bottom line is I'd hate to lose this forum over a matter such as
    this, and 'tis better to be safe, than to be sorry...
       
    /. Ian .\
    

    My view is that advertisements are inappropriate here.  Announcements
    of events, which might include an admission charge, are a bit more
    difficult to call.
    
    I feel that even the cut-down NOW raffle announcement is not
    appropriate.  If it had been connected with a larger event, and
    there had been a small mention that a raffle was also being offered,
    but no prices given, I wouldn't mention it, even though that's 
    a grey area.
    
    Basically, if the sole intent of the note is a solicitation of funds,
    I think it doesn't belong.  Many of us are thrilled at the prospect
    of using the power of the Easynet for free advertising, for ourselves
    or for our favorite causes.  We should understand that such actions
    are inappropriate for systems owned and run by our employer.
    
    A simple rule of thumb might be: would Digital This Week (or similar
    DEC-sponsored newsletter) publish this announcement?  If not, then
    I'd think twice about it.  If there's any doubt, ask the moderator
    FIRST!
					Steve

    I liked hearing about both  the cookout and the raffle.
    
    And I don't know how else I'd find out about them.  Is there other
    tap for these kinds of things?  (If you want,
    mail suggestions to me and I'll post a summary.)

    
    
    I belong to the equitation notes file.  We post ALL of our
    horseshows, benifit shows, and any events for horsepeople.
    Wouldn't be much of a file without it, cause that's what it's
    all about.  This is a file for women's issues and I've never
    been able to get the address for NOW, which I now have, and
    will join.
    
    However, I too agree that if that could cause problems for
    this notesfile, it might be wise to discourage this type of
    advertising.  However, I've seen some organizations and
    functions in DTW that I might not particularly support or
    agree with.  
    
    

    I like Steve's guidelines in .2 .  As long as groups with
    contrary viewpoints are allowed to post similar notices, I
    have no problem with the political or social aspects of the
    group(s) involved. 
    
    Difficult to consult moderators when THEY ask the questions :-)

	I think it should be okay.  I personally don't support United Way
	becuase I feel that they discriminate against charities which I
	feel are good (Planned Parenthood).  If DEC can harass me to
	contribute to them ("you *must* return this card whether or not
	you contribute"), then I don't think a simple posting of a NOW raffle 
	should be stifled.  

	...Karen

    re .6: (Karen)
    
    I was always under the impression that Planned Parenthood got a
    sizable amount of it's funding from United Way.  Could you enlighten
    us?
    
    Elizabeth
    

	RE: .7

	Well, could be my information is not up-to-date.  I recall reading
	it in a NOW flyer some time (years) ago.  I think they reasoned
	that United Way wouldn't give to Planned Parenthood because they
	sometimes recommend abortion.  But since I cannot corroborate
	that fact, I have to apologize for stating it.  Thanks for
	catching me.  I still won't contribute to them, because I want
	to know where my money goes, thus I give to many charities directly.

	...Karen

    I don't think advertisements should be posted here.
    
    I think it is entirely appropriate to list resources, events, addresses,
    and even fund-raising events if done with the tone "This is happening,
    and the subject is pertinent to this notesfile.  If you want specific
    details, contact the author."                                          
    
    I think anything posted here should be related to the subjects
    addressed in womannotes in a pretty clear way.
    
    As was mentioned about the equitation file, the folk music notesfile
    is also a good source of information about festivals, teachers, concerts,
    and recordings.  I set it up to be that way in the original base
    note.  If anyone began using the file to promote their pet cause
    for personal gain, I would object.  But as long is there is a wide
    variety of resource sharing which is open to all, it feels like
    an appropriate use of the space.  (I sent the system manager the
    base note for approval when I started the conference as a little
    extra bit of "cya", though!)
                                
    Holly

as long as DEC practically forces us to contribute to United Way I have no
problem with events being announced in notes. This united way fund has been a
pet peave of mine for awhile. I feel very coerced into supporting it so that
some VP can look good. One of the VPs came here and actually told us we didn't
give as much as IBM and that we should shape up. liesl

    Here at ZK, nobody cares whether or not you return the United Way
    card, and we don't get a hard sell either.  I think Ann Landers'
    advice is appropriate here - nobody can take advantage of you
    without your permission.
    
    Regardless, I don't see what relevance United Way has to ads in
    notesfiles.
    				Steve

    Here at SPO they send us to a 'sales pitch' for United Way every
    year. Then they give us the cards. I skip the meetings, throw away
    the cards. No feedback yet. 
    RE.11 relevant only in that the point being made is "DEC DOES
    condone some forms of solicitation". 

�    RE.11 relevant only in that the point being made is "DEC DOES
�    condone some forms of solicitation". 

     United Way is a tax-exempt registered charity.
     
     NOW is a political action group with strong humanist (ie religous)
     overtones.
     
     References to UW are not precedants in respect of NOW in view of specific
     references in PP&P about propogation of religious/political beliefs
     over the e-net.
     
     /. Ian .\

re: .13, Ian

>     NOW is a political action group with strong humanist (ie religous)
>     overtones.

    This bugs me -- are you equating humanism with religion? Are you saying
    that NOW is a religious group? What does this mean?

    					-- hs

    I think the point is more that in the case of United Way, DEC itself
    is doing the soliciting.  This doesn't imply that DEC condones
    arbitrary soliciting by its employees using corporate resources
    (and I believe there is policy in place that prohibits such
    solicitations.)
    
    To summarize my views - announcements of events that are relevant
    to the topic of a conference are appropriate.  Unvarnished
    advertisements or solicitations for funds are not.
    
    					Steve

A year ago, there were a half dozen messages here extolling the
virtues of Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale."  (I doubt
that I would have read (or heard of) the book if it hadn't been
praised here.)  Many other commercial enterprises (Moonlighting
comes to mind) have also been mentioned.

I thought the NOW raffle notice was a bit long, and out of place for
that reason, but don't see how notice of NOW activities could be
inappropriate to the purposes of WOMANNOTES.

re: .14, .13:  There are people who believe that humanism is a religion.
There are other notesfiles more appropriate for that discussion.

Martin.

    
    I like hearing about events (both political and apolitical) that
    might be of interest to women.  I'm especially interested in hearing
    about events sponsored by NOW, but it's nice to hear about Poetry
    readings and self-defense workshops, as well.  If Digital has rules
    about solicitation over the NET, perhaps one of the moderators could
    summarize those rules for us so we don't step over the line.  I suspect
    that whenever a request for money is involved, we ought to check
    it out first.  I should think it would be alright to say, "There's
    going to be a raffle to support, ___.  For ticket information contact
    ___."
    
    Justine

    Here is the official DEC policy on solicitations:

      6.19 Solicitations and Distribution of Literature        17-MAY-82

      It is Digital's policy that all employees are not to solicit other 
      employees for any purpose during working time.  Working time does 
      not include break time or meal time.  Digital employees are not 
      permitted to distribute literature of any kind and at any time in 
      working areas.

      Persons who are not employees of the company are prohibited from 
      distributing literature of any kind or soliciting employees for any 
      purpose at any time on company property.

    
    And here is part of the policy on "Proper use of Digital computers,
    systems and networks":
    
		PERSONNEL Policies and Procedures	Section 6.54
							Date 17 Nov 86

 
      PROPER USE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 
 
 
      For purposes of this policy, improper use includes, but is not limited
      to, the use of Digital owned and/or operated computer systems and
      networks for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to internal or
      external computer systems or accounts, for personal purposes that are
      contrary to Company philosophy or policy, for purposes that interfere
      with the Company's business activities, or for purposes of individual
      financial gain.  Examples of misuse could be transmitting offensive,
      harassing and/or devaluing statements, developing and transmitting
      inappropriate graphics, transmitting sexual or ethnic slurs or jokes,
      soliciting other employees, developing chain letters, communicating
      matters of private conviction or philosophy, permitting unauthorized
      access, etc. 
 
    I interpret the combination of the last sentence of the first
    pararaph of 6.19, and the mention of solicitation as a possible
    improper use in 6.54, to mean that solicitations are not appropriate
    for conferences on DEC's network.
    
    I also think that one needs to apply some judgement to each case.
    The position I stated in earlier replies is what I apply to the
    conferences I moderate.  I generally try to see what the primary
    purpose of the questionable note is.  If the primary purpose is
    solicitation, then I return it to the author.
    
    					Steve

    re .18
    
    Yes, but as per "communicating matters of private conviction or
    philosophy", this entire notesfile is inappropriate for DEC's network.
    Or at least most of what we all post is, unless we restrict ourselves
    to simple facts, such as "There will be a dinner-dance and raffle
    to benefit NOW on the 31st of June" (simple statement of fact, not
    a solicitation).                                             

    Re: .19
    
    Many of us who followed the creation of this recent policy have
    debated the intent of that part of it.  The conclusion has been
    that the various actions mentioned are examples of possible misuse,
    not automatic violations.  The policy does not prohibit "communicating
    matters of private conviction or philosophy", but does imply that
    if you do so, you should consider how it might be looked at from the
    corporate viewpoint.
    
    I don't think we should worry here about all the possible implications
    of the policy wording.  You'll note that my own text did not rely
    on the "proper use" policy alone to support my views.

    I support the idea of simple announcements.  Let the readers judge
    for themselves whether or not they want to participate.
    
    					Steve

        Although Steve has already said something on the point I think
        this is too important to let pass. I think it is very important
        that we not allow statements that this conference or any of the
        other valuing differences and employee activity conferences are
        "inappropriate for DEC's network" or against corporate policy
        stand.
        
        If we believe that it is against policy, then we must not just
        flaunt or ignore that policy. That wouldn't be good for us or
        for DEC.
        
        From that it must be clear that I don't believe the phrase about
        "communicating matters of private conviction or philosophy" is
        directed at the kinds of communications that appear in this
        conference. On the otherhand, I do admit that the phrase can
        give that impression. This is why I have opposed that phrase
        being in the policy. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to
        convince the people in personnel that the problem is big enough
        to warrant revising the policy.
        
        As Steve has said, that phrase is in a list of examples of what
        sorts of things MAY constitute a breach of policy. It does not
        say that it IS a breach. So the question that remains is "under
        what circumstances could communicating matters of personal
        philosophy or conviction constitute abuse of corporate
        resources?" Why was the phrase included?
        
        My understanding from talking with a number of people involved
        in the forming of the policy is that it is directed against two
        kinds of abuse, one of which is cited more often than the other.
        The primary concern is proseltyzing and any sort of imposition
        of personal philosophies and convictions on others. There have,
        it appears, been a couple of incidents in which electronic mail
        was used to persuade someone to join or return to a specific
        religion and the level of it reached the proportions of
        harassment.
        
        The secondary concern--which I suspect is secondary because it
        hasn't happened all that much nor drawn management attention is
        the organizing of actions for controversial social change. By
        that I mean that the corporation wouldn't--I suspect--object to
        people using the net to try to gain support for feeding the
        starving in Ethiopia (assuming that it wasn't solicitiation), or
        to organize an effort of this sort. On the other hand if
        employees used the net to organize a pro- or anti-abortion rally
        or the like, DEC might feel that it was becoming involved in
        something that it didn't want to.
        
        This idea of "controversial social change" and efforts to bring
        it about is kind of slippery. It seems clear to me that there's
        nothing wrong with debating abortion in a file such as this.
        Such debate sereves only the public good, and I don't think
        anybody disagrees with that. Having DEC's idle resources used to
        that end doesn't involve DEC in controversy.
        
        But if the debate becomes abusive then DEC's resources are being
        used to someone's detrement. If the resources are used to
        materially support or advance one of the two sides of the
        debate, by organizing social action then in the eyes of the
        other side DEC's resources are being used to advance a social
        ill. This is not good for DEC.
        
        On the other hand there are social causes that have fairly
        universal appeal, causes that  can't involve DEC in any sort of
        controversy. Support of efforts to feed the starving in Africa,
        or projects like "Hands across America", or support for public
        broadcasting don't involve DEC in controversy. These are
        probably safe. The problem is drawing the line. The line
        probably won't be drawn unless there is an incident. Until then
        we just need to use good judgement.

        Having said all of that about what I take the policy to be, how
        does it affect the question of advertising announcements?
        
        My own judgement is that NOW is a controversial and political
        organization, an may from some perspectives even address some
        religious beliefes. As such, I would say that any advertizing or
        solicitation on its behalf are inappropriate. 
        
        Purely informational postings of the address, dues rates and the
        like and mayb even a mention of the raffle and a pointer to
        further information should be acceptable.
        
        The thing to remember is that controversy can affect DEC's
        business and involving the corporation in controversy should be
        the perogative of the upper management and other policy making
        parts of the company.
        
        JimB. 

        No I'm not a tech writer and it's not by chance. I are just
        an injuneer.
        
        JimB.