Conference 7.286::digital

    	Yes, I think the time has arrived to come to grips with what is
    going on here in Notesland. There's been this attitude (it seems)
    that if we just kept quiet, management would leave us alone to do
    as we pleased, and the feeling has been "Don't tell them about us,
    and we'll be safe for a while". 
    
    	Let's try this on for size: How would people feel now if all
    non work related files were removed? 
    
    	No pushing and shoving, there's plenty of disk space for everyone,
    one reply to a customer...for now.
    
    
    
    	I'd feel very sad, and empty. If I didn't have time to collect
    mailing addresses from the conferences before they were eliminated,
    I would feel very lonely. 
    
    	It's time that we, the Noters recognized and expressed what
    Noting means to us, and time that Digital as a company recognizes
    the value of this intrinsic art form/community tool.
    
    	If this episode increases communication and awareness of the
    value of the people of this company to each other, then this action
    taken could be the best thing to happen to DEC since KNOTES. If
    it serves to lock the network gateways to all but "company business",
    then I will have little problem circulating my resume outside as well
    as inside the company. (Something I haven't even considered doing,
    though I've been looking internally for several months now)
    
    	Ed

    I won't flame.
    
    There are two problems here, interrelated.
    
    First is that, no matter what else, before VAXnotes became a product,
    everything, from technical notes to recreational ones, were a
    semi-hack; an "underground," as it were.  With the advent of VAXnotes,
     the notes have more or less "come out into the open."
    
    A difficulty is that different things affect different people
    differently.  Silly as that sounds, it's true: what might not offend
    you might offend me, and vice versa.
    
    Second is that with greater access to VAXnotes (i.e., more people
    becoming aware of it), the statistically probability of someone
    abusing a note/response (e.g., extracting it out of context or
    presenting it to a hostile audience) more nearly approaches unity.
    
    In this instance, it was not the note at fault; it was the way it
    was reportedly used.
    
    However, there could be a unreasonable impact on some notes, if
    we're not vigilant.
    
    A shame.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

>    What happened is that "a man in the area this person manages
>    extracted a note from this file and placed it on a womans 
>    desk and started discussing the extracted note, the woman 
>    became offended and put in a complaint.
    

    If you replace " a note from this file" with "an article/picture
    from Penthouse" it is unlikely that the manager would start a review
    of the source of the material. The problem being solved is once
    again the wrong one.
    
    Everyone on the net is free to NOT read what they want. None of
    us have the right to display information which may offend someone
    in any form, hardcopy or electronic.
    
     This is one of the great advantages of VAX notes. You must take action
     to read something. If someone extracts information from it and
     displays it to someone who is not part of the conference or has made a
     choice not to read about certain subjects then the person that
     displayed the information is at fault for their ACTIONS not the
     source for providing information.
    
    
    my $.02
    
    /tb/

	I see that SEXCETERA has now been closed pending a decision from
	on high.
	
	Does anyone know where or with whom opinions can be registered?
	Do those who will make this decision care what we think? Would a
	list of a few hundred or more employees who believe
	non-technical conferences are a positive aspect of DEC make a
	difference?
	
	It's a shame that, as Steve said, one obnoxious use of (if my
	guess as to what was extracted is right) an example of Sexcetera
	at its worst may lead to a purge. And it's ironic that in terms
	of "redeeming social value" (the legal yardstick for obscenity),
	this was perhaps the best conference on the net, as anyone who
	actually bothered to read it can attest.
	
	Mike

	.3 slipped in while I was composing my last response...
	
	Exactly right! The person who was presented with objectionable
	material (or perhaps her manager) is trying to slap the wrong
	wrist.
	
	Mike

Re .3:

I agree.  I am looking at the part of personnel policy 6.24 where it
says the following (in upper case!):

"
IN GENERAL, EMPLOYEES CAN ANTICIPATE THAT ACTIONS HARMFUL TO ANOTHER
EMPLOYEE OR TO THE COMPANY ARE CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES OR
POSSIBLE DISMISSAL. . . .

EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO RESPECT THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY
OF OTHERS.

For example, they will not:

. . .

o Behave in a manner offensive to others.
"

I hope that the man who offended the woman is being dealt with.  While
specific details may be personnel confidential, and thus unsuitable
for public disclosure, it would be reassuring to know whether something
is being done.
				/AHM

     
     Tom Beaudet hit the nail on the head: the problem is the employee and
     not the conference.  Suppose an employee wrote a vicious, racist
     diatribe, using a directory file, then printed the file and posted it
     on a bulletin board.  Would that be reason to prohibit all files that
     are not work-related?  Of course not. 
     
     There's also another question here, namely, the 'ownership' of e-net
     conferences.  Traditionally, note files and then conferences have been
     seen as the property of the system that hosted them, and subject to
     the sometimes arbitrary decisions of the moderator.  It seems that it
     might be time to rconsider this: should conferences that are available
     over the e-net be considered to be in the interest of Digital, and
     should they be considered to be in the 'public domain'?   
     
     --Don

	Just been having more thoughts on the both the hints of panic in
	this discussion, and larger ramifications.
	
	We hold a stereotype of the entity known as "upper management"
	being stodgy and inflexible - I don't know the people in upper
	management (or how far up has this been kicked, for that
	matter), but we may be pleasantly surprised. After all, Digital
	has a strong history of "laissez-faire" regarding its employees.
	I'd like to think that would have more influence than an
	isolated complaint.
	
	And I think that laissez-faire attitude is a fundamental part of
	"DEC Culture" - not one to be undermined lightly. Many people
	who could make much more money with a competitor stay with
	Digital - why? Could it be because the DEC culture makes this a
	very attractive place to work? I think the importance of this
	issue should not be under-estimated - the reason laissez-faire
	is attractive to the people that work here is that it implies
	trust - as Digital employees we are trusted to do our jobs as
	well as we can, and to act in a responsible manner. We don't
	have our hands held - we are each responsible adults and Digital
	treats us this way. At least, it has up till now...
	
	Mike

    SEXCETERA.NOTE was taken off the net this afternoon, due to the complaint.
    
    
    The information that I have is that it was voluntarily removed by
    the system manager because it was getting too hot.  This may turn
    out to be a wise move because the consequences of a negative decision
    could have repercussions for all Noters.
 
    It seems the issue became very political, which to me is a bad sign
    in itself.  The first inkling of a problem came last week, with
    a report of a complaint that the file was offensive and should be
    removed from the net.  The compaintant was not identified, the
    information presented in the file was that someone had complained
    to management, that the system manager was told that there was a
    request for removal of the file, and that he told the moderator
    who entered the note warning participants.  Then we were told that
    the system manager was pushing back by requesting more details about
    the problem, and that as a result it was being passed up the management
    chain for a determination.  Even my off-line inquiries did not reveal
    the nature of the complaint, nor the management involved (except
    that it was outside both the organization and facility of the host
    system).  The developments over the past couple of days include
    the posting that Mike reposted here in .0, apparently the complaint
    is being pushed and no opportunity is being given for answering
    it.
    
    I'm very bothered by the way it seems to have developed, with an
    unspecified complaint from an anonymous source causing an initial
    demand for removal of the file without any investigation or
    notification.  Then the review and determination by "higher management"
    occurs, still without specifying the nature of the complaint, and
    without identification of the management responsible for the action.
    Now the system manager of the host system has been intimidated into
    removing a file supported by a large user community, because one
    individual complained about one instance of misuse of material from 
    the file.  The reviewing manager was cited as believing that there
    was some good material in the file (but that it wasn't work related)
    so even the person responsible for its removal from the net saw
    value in it.  I'm concerned about the process issues within the
    corporation when such a situation does not seem to include any effort
    to preserve the positive value.
    
    I posted an entry in the SEXCETERA discussion ensuing over this
    issue (which I will post here if it can be retrieved) commenting
    that I believe that the SEXCETERA notesfile was actually work-related
    as well as contributing to a positive workplace environment.  It
    is my contention that sexual issues are a major factor affecting
    employee performance, that interpersonal relationships are significant
    in a large organization such as Digital and that sexual matters
    have considerable effect on interpersonal relationships, and that
    sexuality is therefore an issue related to workplace performance.
    The intent of SEXCETERA was to provide a forum for "open and frank
    discussion of sexual matters" (quoted from memory from entry 1.0
    in the late SEXCETERA file), and I believe that it generally contributed
    to employee well-being, health and morale, reduced stress and frustration
    over sexual issues, and probably helped improve performance and
    productivity.  It seems to me that such a discussion forum was every
    bit as work-related as the EAP.
    
    Personnel Policies and Procedures section 6.24 begins "Digital strives
    to create and maintain a positive work environment."  The existence of
    non-work related notesfiles is part of this, SEXCETERA certainly was
    for a large number of us.  The same policy 6.24 several paragraphs
    later states that employees "will not behave in manner offensive to
    others" which certainly covers the incident leading to the complaint.
    But I find it offensive that the actions described led to the demise of
    a notesfile which has not been established to be offensive!  Even if
    the contents of SEXCETERA were offensive no action was taken to suggest
    ways of making it inoffensive.  To me the way that this has been
    handled has a very negative impact on my work environment.  
    
    My answer to the question about seeing other notesfiles go down should
    be obvious by now.  This incident alone is enough to make me relate to
    the comment about circulating my resume outside, I'm not looking yet
    but I've sure repented about working as hard as I used to.  In fact,
    I sometimes regret that I ever did... (something about rewards not
    living up to commitment)
    
    well, enough for now - if I can I will see about posting some of
    the material I entered in SEXCETERA about this issue.
  

    repies .4 through .8 slipped in while I was composing .9 (penalty
    for searching out the Policies & Procedures manual I quoted, I guess).
    
    Anyway, while reading them another thought or two occurred to me.
    
    Digital is a big place, different parts of the organization are
    different cultures.  Manufacuring attitudes may not be as liberal
    as engineering, etc.  The reason this may be a consideration is
    that there had been fear voiced in previous SEXCETERA entries of
    repercussions as a result of participation.  The removal of the
    file from the net may have been a good way of preventing such
    repercussions once a management review was known to be underway.
    (That is my interpretation of some offline communications with various
    people including the system manager who removed it).
    
    Other point, made in one of those responses, about ownership of
    notesfile conferences.  The moderator for SEXCETERA apparently first
    knew of any problem when his system manager got the request to remove
    the file.  Seems that being moderator of a conference just means you
    put your ass on the line for somebody to shoot at without any assurance
    that you'll even get the courtesy of being told they've started
    firing.  I fault the complaintant's manager on this one, they've not
    only tried to solve the wrong problem, they went about it the wrong
    way.  Too bad they can't be held accountable... (guess that's why
    they've kept the details hidden as much as they could)
    

    
    
      Actions like this are really depressing, especially when you've
    been looking for the file for months and when you find it, it's
    gone. I must say the file must have been getting really "intresting"
    for this to happen. If anyone remotely knows why this happened,
    could you elaborate???
    
                                            Thanx,
    
                                                             prc

        So if I stop of at a bookshop on my way to work, and buy a
        magazine. During my lunch break, I read this book and leave
        it on my desk. Someone wanders into my office, starts reading
        and decides to show it to a third party, who finds it offensive.
        
        Bear in mind that the magazine could be 
        
        "Screw"                           ...offensive to women
        "Soldiers of Fortune"             ...offensive to pacifists
        "Satanic hoo haa...."             ...offensive to Christians
        "Bible news"                      ...offensive to satanists
        "Better Business"                 ...offensive to Communists
        "Barbeque cooking..."             ...offensive to vegetarians
        "IBM Employee newsletter..."      ...offensive to my boss...
        "Vax Cobol manual"                ...offensive to C programmers
        
        Am I to be held responsible for an interaction that I did not
        solicit and was not even aware that I am involved in (until
        an indignant person storms my office and demands that I cease
        buying the magazine(s) that I find enjoyable.)?
        
        q
        

    You know, I find it really sad that Digital "upper management" (whoever
    that is) would even consider removing ALL non-work-related notes files
    because of one note in one file among literally hundreds. I am a line
    manager and a Noter, and read SEXCETERA regularly, contributing
    occasionally.  The name was misleading, since the file was more about
    human relations than sex. 
    
    I do not agree for one minute that all noters should be penalized
    for one person's stupidity.  Yes, the note I suspect as the culprit
    was in very poor taste and certainly contributed nothing of value
    to the file.  Whoever printed it out and put it on a female's desk
    should be SEVERELY disciplined, but the rest of the noting community
    should not be made to suffer.  The analogies that were drawn to
    putting a Penthouse article on someone's desk are valid; would "upper
    management" then order all Digital employees to not purchase Penthouse
    magazine, or would they deal with the offender as a performance problem?
    I think I know the answer.
    
    I apologize for entering this without any original ideas.  I feel very
    strongly, but unfortunately am fresh out of creative ways to solve the
    problem.  I will gladly join in any mass effort to reverse the decision
    that now seems inevitable.
    
    							Patricia

    Ok, lets try to be calm and rational about this. At least for the time
    being. If rational fails we can get crazy.

    All the ranting and raving we can do in Notes (and I've done my share)
    is not going to get this resolved to our satisfaction because the managers
    who might decide to shut things down don't read notes. We need a plan to
    lobby management quietly. We all agree (don't we?) that the problem
    is *a* Noter not Notes. Management has to be made to usderstand
    that. Anybody know what management is involved? Anybody want to
    suggest a calm plan?

		Alfred

	Re: Note 111.15 -< Let's not lose our cool (yet) >-

	Thanks, Alfred.  I'm as distressed as anyone else about 
	what is happening.  But that won't change things. 

	Ok, I'm for any positive or constructive action we can 
	take.  Anyone for an electronic petition or some means 
	of having our voices heard?  We need some creative ideas.

	Steve

    First of all, I'd like to stress that the system manager of
    SEXCETERA's host system has only closed the conference until
    a final decision has been made as to its fate. This is a
    reasonable action.
    
    Secondly, the analogies about leaving around a copy of PENT-
    HOUSE, or whatever, are not necessarily valid. The logic seems
    to be the same, but remember that DEC would not be paying for
    those issues of PENTHOUSE. Part of the issue, albeit buried
    underneath a lot of other trash, is that DEC's property (the
    systems and the network) is being used to "further" this
    alleged offensiveness.
    
    If the "upper management" that is dealing with this situation
    can be approached, perhaps a meeting between them and a select
    group of concerned Noters can be arranged, so that we may present
    our side.
    
    It would be a tragedy (lets not mince words) if non-work-related
    conferences were removed from the Enet. While it's certainly
    possible to make friends and acquaintences through work-related
    ones, I've found that the non-work related conferences are much
    more relaxed and provide a better opportunity to get to know other
    folks. And this is perhaps the most obvious benefit to DEC.
    
    --- jerry
    
    P.S. Needless to say, I would volunteer to help represent our
    side, should such a meeting as I suggested be arranged.

    I'm with Alfred and Jerry.  Let's be calm.  Just because someone
    alleges that "upper management" is considering closing down all
    conferences unrelated to work doesn't mean that it is so.  Also,
    let's not be overzealous in our defense of SEXCETERA.  Digital's
    resources are involved here; the network is not a public domain.
    
    This is a serious matter and cannot be ignored.  Eventually we have
    to deal with it one way or another.  However, we would only hurt
    what we cherish by overreacting, for example, by sending a barrage
    of mail to the management of the system on which the conference
    resides.

    Having been here ten years, I still have faith that Digital looks
    out for the interest of the employees.  I also believe that most
    employees, including managers, are basically responsible people.

  --Simon
    

        Every n months (10, 12, 16 or so), something like this
        comes up on EasyNet.  There's massive electronic "panic",
        as people become concerned that "upper management" is going
        to start removing conferences, games, personal files,
        whatever.
        
        And then nothing happens.
        
        I'm not going to panic, or do anything else differently,
        until I get a specific message, from MY management, to
        remove non-work-related conferences.
        
Jim Stratton (moderator of BOSTON, FELINE, MUSIC, SPORTS, ...)
        

    re .19:
    
    Can't quite agree.  There's no sense going into a panic.  However,
    it does make sense to be sensitized to this two ways:
    
    1) In discouraging frivolous use of notes; and,
    
    2) Keeping a weather-eye out for storm signals.
    
    Particularly in relation to [2)], according to previous notes, the
    first the moderator knew about a problem was when his manager
    reportedly told him whatever.  If there are any ways of seeing a
    storm is starting to brew, being aware of the possibility makes
    it easier to prepare to weather it.
    
    The non-work-related files do have a piurpose and do contribute
    to a better overall work environment.  But this is known only to
    the users, not the outsiders; there's the rub!
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    As a previous reader/contributor to SEXCETERA, I am dismayed
    that the file has been removed.  This is especially upsetting
    since it seems to have resulted either because of the inability of
    one manager to deal with his/her employee's misbehavior or because
    someone is over-reacting.  As has been previously stated, the file
    was not really about sex, it was more about human relations.  As
    such, it was as important as the lunchtime seminars on various
    human topics.  In fact, given that the file was there whenever
    someone needed to reach out for help, it may have been more important.
    
    Perhaps one first thing that we should do is create and maintain
    an offline file containing names/nodenames of all the people who
    want to be involved in some sort of protest.  I know that, for me,
    the worst thing about having the file closed was that I had no way
    to communicate with any of the participants.  If we're going to
    make any difference in our protest, we have to have many employees
    working together.  I would be willing to maintain a list, should
    people agree that it should be done.  I would also guarantee that
    no name on the list would be given to anyone without their approval,
    and look for suggestions as to how it should be managed.
    
    --Louise

    I don't access the file for one day and this happens....
    
    I'll be very sorry to see this file deleted.  I've had someone
    put something on my desk that was extremely upsetting to me
    and it took awhile for me to feel safe approaching my desk.
    
    Hope "they" get this settled soon.
    
    marie

    Just a clarification, since I've received a mail message regarding
    my last reply:  I'm not suggesting that we run out and put
    together a protest petition right away.  I'm still hoping that
    this will blow over.  However, if it doesn't, and if it begins
    to affect other files, we need a way to communicate.  It's
    pretty hard to communicate when the notesfiles are closed and
    we don't have any names.  So I've offered to keep a list of
    names, in the form of a mail .dis file (as has been suggested to
    me) and act as a forwarding point for communication in the event
    that other means of communication (like this file) are closed.
    If you want to be on this .dis file, send me mail on
    {VIRTUE, GUIDO, AURORA, NOD}::aitel or SQM::aitel.
    
    --Louise

    more inside information (my interpretations, based on offline
    communication with the system manager involved): 
    
    the management pushing the complaint seems very cautious about how
    they handle this, it's probably perceived as a very sensitive and
    hot issue, so they are going strictly by the book.
    
    the two organizations involved (the one pushing the complaint and
    the one hosting Sexcetera) report to different VPs so the formal
    chain of command merges at a stratospheric level, thus going by
    the book in handling the complaint involves a lot of high-level
    management attention.
    
    the attention to Sexcetera generated by this issue, and discussions
    such as this one or Mike's entry in Soapbox, could attract lots
    of attention that might not be desirable under these circumstances
    for participants who have freely discussed intimate matters.  Removing
    the notesfile pending resolution was a way to let things cool down
    and avoid unsympathetic attention.
    
    unfavorable resolution of this issue could set a precedent regarding
    other non-work notesfiles, and could even be interpreted as a
    reflection upon participants.  Voluntary removal of the file might
    be a way to minimize such undesirable consequences, and if the
    complaining management really regards this as a "hot potato" might
    even forestall any formal resolution if they'd rather drop the issue.
    
    ***********************************************************************
    Personal opinion:  it's too bad it had to happen this way, but this
    may be the most prudent handling now that it's happened.
    
    also, the guy who misused the material seems to me to be more in
    need of professional help than strict discipline (not to say
    that discipline isn't called for, just that therapy is too).
    
    finally, I'm in favor of generating a participants' list, there
    are people I'd like to get/remain in touch with, and it could also
    be a starting point for organizing a members-only conference if that
    proves necessary.
    

I have to agree with the general sentiment expressed by others
that the various non-work-related notes files are just as valid
a form of employee activity as softball, aerobics, chess clubs,
band, etc. etc. which are clearly encouraged under existing
corporate and personnel policies.  Hopefully, the powers that
be will see it that way when the question is evaluated in
a cool and rational manner.  As a 13+ year veteran of DEC,
and a Senior Consultant, I intend to lobby wherever and whomever
may be appropriate.  I think we would all be well-advised
to do such lobbying "softly" however in the interest of not
provoking emotional reactions from those who may be undecided.

I am also aware of some other issues that have been raised
regarding non-work notes files, and I think there is validity
to some of these concerns:

1. Work-required or -related use of network resources, compute
time, and disk space clearly has priority over non-work notes.
Presumably, system managers who host non-work notes files do so
only when they believe that the resources are not otherwise
required. All non-work notes files users can help the situation
by accessing notes during times of non-peak loads.  This
minimizes the possibility of complaints about notes use causing
poor system response to work users.   Also, frivilous or "me
too" replies should be avoided since they take up disk space
without contributing anything to the discussion.

2. As with any other employee activity, be sure that non-work
notes use is not interfering with getting your job done. 
If some people begin to show signs of "notes addiction", it
could result in problems for everyone.  Again, off-hours
accessing of notes reduces the likelihood of this being seen
as a problem.

3. With regard to SEXCETERA, the point that one abuse shouldn't
ruin things for everyone has been well stated.  I need hardly
note that our society is such that differing view on sex create
a lot of controversy, and there is, unfortunately, no universal
agreement to "live and let live" in the matter.  Since a typical
compromise in these kinds of cases is to take additional steps
to ensure that only those who WANT to see the material will
see it, I suggest that when (hopefully) SEXCETERA is reopened,
it be a "members only" file as are a number of others.  I
realise that this is an additional burden on the moderator,
but then at least, a person will have to take positive action
and make him/herself known in order to access the file.  Any
abuse of the file (including distributing its contents) would
result in revokation of membership.  Anonymous entries would
also be eliminated.


Dan Murphy

    
    Not much to add but my protest.  I hate to see the notes arena turn
    in just technical like the old days.  I think the "human being"
    side of us techs have got to enjoy non-work notes.  I am/was fairly
    new to the conference and, yes SEX lured me there.  I had to find
    out but what I found was some great open and frank discussions about
    issues that effect us all.  And, yes, some material I didn't like.
    But, see the <KP,>....
    
    Add my name to any petion needed to return *OUR* conference....
    
    George O'Grady
    AKO - 244-6993
    MRO - 297-4183
    CYGNUS::OGRADY
    

I wonder how much noise this incident would have generated if the conference
removed (for whatever reason) had been about comic books or paper airplanes...

Stephen

RE: .27
>I wonder how much noise this incident would have generated if the conference
>removed (for whatever reason) had been about comic books or paper airplanes...


    Just as much I think. There is a principle involved. Many maybe
    even most of the people complaining (me for example) are not followers
    of the affected file. I'd be just as upset if the fuss was over
    a paper airplane file. Especially if there was the same indication
    that files I follow would be next.
    
    		Alfred

As someone with little interest in SEXCETERA, but a significant interest in
non-work related notes files, I find the removal of a notes file very
disturbing.  Digital does have the right to make resources for notes
unavailable, but I for one would be very upset.

To me, the ENET in general, and notes in particular, are very important
to the of quality of life in the work place.  Whenever I think of leaving DEC,
I am reluctant to give up all my connections to the culture and people here.
MAIL via ENET and VAXnotes are a major part of DEC culture.   And surprising
though it may seem to those unfamiliar with notes, the "unproductive" exchanges
that take place in notes files unrelated to work are very important to the
social and cultural development of the corporation, and that translates to
dollars.  Communications for business purposes is greatly enhanced by
the social relationships developed in notes files unrelated to work.

I would recommend that this discussion (this note) be made accessible to
the management addressing the complaint.  The obvious vehicle is via the
system manager who felt obliged to remove SEXCETERA, as he (she?) appears
to have some knowledge of the parties involved, at least at the lower
levels.  If the future of notes is being discussed, then notes users need
to speak up.  Carefully thought out and rationally expressed ideas
are always welcome.  Let's make ours available.

A final point: We are on the edge of a new era of electronic communication.
IBM and other competitors are way behind in this area.  So why cut off
a cultural phenomenon which puts us at the head of the pack?  Ten years from
now, such discussions will be commonplace.  We are in on it early.  Let's
stay there.

    re .27-.29
    
    As it happens, COMICS.NOT _is_ in my notebook, and I'd be even more
    upset if it or several others of the "non-work-related" files were
    expunged because I _don't_ read SEXCETERA.NOT and so (pragmatically)
    won't miss it.
    
    The question in .27 could be taken two ways, thoyugh.  I'm not sure
    whether the question was if people would miss the SEXCETERA file
    or whether there would have been that much fuss made over a note
    from, say, COOKS.NOT (I wouldn't imagine anybody lodging a complaint
    for getting printout of a poor recipe for bean soup).
    
    At any rate, the principle _is_ important.  If any notesfile is
    imperiled, they all are.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

         Even though I do/did not contribute to SEXCETERA, I still feel 
    very strongly that it should not have been touched. As a 'NAM vet, 
    it makes me wonder what in H-LL I fought for over there. 
    
         I absolutely refuse to work for a corporation where the will of 
    the (one) minority affects and over-rules the will of the majority. 
    
         If this is allowed to happen, we might as well go to South 
    Africa or Russia, as the minority government (management) rules
    there.
    
    /jmp
    
    

    This is the way censorship works.  The voices of the few who would
    censor are counted, while those of the many who oppose it are not.
    This company and, in fact, this country have become less free in
    the past ten years.  Each will probably be FAR less free in another
    ten.
    
    

      In my opinoin it would be wrong to eliminate SEXCETERA by means
    of censorship. I feel if someone is offended by sexual material,
    why are they in there reading in the first place? 
    
      On the other hand, if notesfiles were eating up CPU time or using
    up too much disk space thereby cutting into DEC's production resources,
    I can see why it would be then necessary to eliminate them.
    
    Also, if a petition to reinstate SEXCETERA is distributed, I would
    like my name on it.
    
    
    
                                                                  Bruce

    I think the idea of making SEXCETERA  a "members only" conference
    is excellent.  This is a good example of how useful this new feature
    is. 
    
    It seems to me (clearly a biased observer) that this would be a
    good compromise that would effectively deal with the situation.
    
    BTW, I just started reading SEXCETERA recently, and I think it's
    great!  I'd hate to see it go.
    
    Don

    
    
    
    As with all notes files, a person has to make a concerted conscious
    effort to get into the conference and start reading. If after going
    through the effort of adding an entry to a notebook then opening
    a conference the person is offended by what they read they should exit
    and delete then they won't be bothered and everyone else will be
    happy. This is not like smoking where there is no control over where
    the odor may drift or a radio in an open work area on a station
    playing only music you don't like.
    
    If, as has been stated, someone extracted a note and deliberately
    placed it in front of a third person, then the one doing the extracting
    should at the very least be required to appologize. It is unfair
    to the rest of the participants in a particular file to have to
    suffer because of one persons ill advised activities. I am a non
    drinker so if someone extracted a note from WINES.NOT and showed
    it to me should I ask for the file to be deleted? I would think
    not.
    
    If notesfiles are to be deleted it should be for legimate business
    or system space constraints, not big brother type censorship, and
    if one goes they should all go. Frankly, as has been stated before
    notes offers a valuable srvice to the employee that in most cases
    is available when it is needed, unlike some of the  EAP forums or
    consultations that have to be scheduled far in advance or may not
    be at convenient times and locations. Notes also offers a sense
    of annonimity in that it is not a face to face discussion so people
    tend to be more honest about their feelings. This can lead to benifits
    of vented frustrations or settling of personal problems that may
    be affecting the job performance of the participants. A relaxed
    employee is a safe productive employee.
    
    If there is a list of supporters being compiled in favor of maintaing
    notesfiles please add my name to it.
    
    
    Steve

     When I read the reply that talked about the difference between
    The woman having something from Penthouse placed on her desk
    vs. something from SEXCETERA placed on her desk.  DEC is more
    closely involved when the offending material comes form a file
    on a DEC system.
    
    Here is a scary Idea:
    
    What if the woman were to sue?
    
    We might expect that a greedy layer might go after DEC and try
    to claim that DEC was partly responsible (because the file was on
    one of their systems) and try to get DEC for lots of money.
    DEC might argue that to stop the file would violate the first
    amendment rights of the participants.
    
    The upper management might like to let the file continue as it was
    but they might not be able to because of the liability.
    
    I even wonder I should put this here because it might give someone
    the idea.
    
    I hope it does not come to this.
    
    					MJC

	I don't see how restricting the conference would help any. In
	the first place, it wouldn't have prevented the incident that
	triggered all of this. Anyone who asked would be allowed to
	join, which isn't any different than now where anyone who wants
	to read it can (except that one more step is involved). It could
	only serve to discourage some of the read-only noters, who
	perhaps wouldn't want their names on the publicly available list
	of members. What can the moderator do, say "Oh, I know you,
	you'd be offended so I won't let you join."?
	
	Let's look at a concrete way that personal noting has helped
	Digital - the Notes product itself. If NOTES-11 hadn't been
	heavily used for personal noting, would VAX Notes have ever
	become a product? Even if it had, would it be nearly as good a
	product without the feedback from all those people reading
	personal conferences?
	
	How many midnight projects have become Digital products? How
	many of these owe their quality, and sufficient in-house
	popularity to be considered as products, to a notesfile which
	gave the developer feedback and publicity? Would notesfiles for
	discussing midnight hacks be directly work-related enough to
	survive a ban on non-work-related conferences?
	
	Resource consumption can be a legitimate reason to close down a
	conference, but the resources being consumed are mainly at the
	host node. If a host node feels they don't have the spare
	resources to host a personal conference, they are well within
	their rights to shut it down (although etiquette suggests
	looking for an adoptive parent). This has happened several times
	- it disappoints the noters reading the conference in question,
	but I don't think anyone really complains. At any rate, if the
	issue should be resource consumption, then it's a matter for
	each host node to consider, not a matter for a company-wide
	policy.
	
	Bruce, you seem to know more about what's actually happening -
	does whoever this has been kicked up to have input from anyone
	but the complainant? Are they getting all sides of the issue?
	I'm concerned that it may be a matter of the offensive note
	being dropped on a VP's desk with the suggestion "We don't want
	this sort of filth on our net, do we?".
	
	Mike

        (Be warned, I don't read this file, so I may not answer you
        very promptly if you ask questions.)
        
        I'm a moderately regular reader of SEXCETERA, and will say that
        I'm neither surprised nor disheartened at what has happened to
        that conference. Don't get me wrong, if it goes away I will miss
        it, but I think this was predictable and not necessarily a
        tragic thing. (I've been asked not to say "I told you so", so I
        won't point out that it was predicted.) 
        
        Some of what I have to say on the subject is, I believe a
        restatement of what I've said on the subject in SEXCETERA, but
        clearly I can't verify it. 
        
        First, about the file. There are three kinds of notes in
        SEXCETERA. A number are of a juvenile and prurient nature. An
        even greater number are dull and boring. Finally, there are some
        notes which are touching, candid and quite enlightening.
        Unfortunately the gems are hiding amongst real drek. 
        
        Second, about our management. Our upper levels of management are
        tremendously ethical men. It is one of the attractive things
        about the company, I feel. They are also middle aged or older.
        Several are very religious (whence the get their ethical
        stance), and many are quite conservative. 
        
        I would say that most of our upper management would find quite a
        few notes in SEXCETERA repugnant and would not want the
        corporations resources used to support them. I also think that
        if they were properly presented, they would find some of the
        notes to be quite worthwhile. Unfortunately, I fear that it is
        almost inevitable that if and when they encounter the file it is
        virtually guaranteed that the bad stuff will appear more
        prominent, and could hide the good.
        
        I would say that it was inevitable that some clown cause the
        file to come the management's attention and for management to
        react badly. My hope is that they will show the same spirit and
        principles they have in the past, and not over-react.
        
        This brings us to the point of our behavior. It is clearly
        within our power to make the situation worse. Panicky
        over-reactions like the comparisons with South Africa, and
        Russia in 111.31 are not likely to sit well. They are likely
        make us look like wild-eyed radicals with disdain or dislike of
        the company. 
        
        I would definitely NOT recommend following the suggestion in
        111.29 that "this discussion (this note) be made accessible to
        the management addressing the complaint", at least not all of
        the notes in this discussion, for as the author of 111.29 points
        out "carefully thought out and rationally expressed ideas are
        always welcome". Not all of the replies here are carefully
        thought out or rationally expressed. Flames will just get
        us trouble.
        
        Beyond the way our reaction to this issue could affect its
        outcome, I would say that there are other problems on our side.
        Specifically, as the very first reply stated, "There's been this
        attitude (it seems) that if we just kept quiet, management would
        leave us alone to do as we pleased, and the feeling has been
        `Don't tell them about us, and we'll be safe for a while'".
        Well, this is a truly dreadful notion. It implies that we're
        doing something wrong, that we've got something to hide! 
        
        Look, if you wouldn't want your boss, or KO or someone in between
        to know what you are doing on company time or company property
        or anything related to the company, DON'T BLOODY DO IT! At the
        very least, it is unwise--you stand the risk of being caught.
        More to the point, it is somewhat dishonest. (That, by the way,
        given the moral fiber of our management, is in and of itself
        unwise.)
        
        Personally, my manager and his manager are well aware that I
        participate in a number of conferences, both work and non-work
        related, and that I moderate some of each and that I was at one
        time running an electronic correspondence game across the net.
        Beyond that, I have mentioned both my non-work-related noting
        and even the electronic PBM game to a senior vice president. Of
        course I make sure that all of these people understand that my
        priorities are correct and that I care about doing what's right
        for DEC.
        
        If we act like we're doing something wrong, or worse yet do
        something we feel is wrong, we're asking for trouble. First of
        all, you can't keep a secret that involves thousands of people.
        Second if we hide it from management, we greatly increase the
        probability that they will learn about it from some-one who
        disapproves.
        
        I will repeat the recommendation I gave in SEXCETERA. I think we
        need to conduct ourselves with greater decorum. More of us need
        to show greater considerations for the sensibilities of others.
        We need to realize that in a corporation that stretches from
        Hong Kong in the west to Israel in the East, there are going to
        be great differences in culture, standards and taste. In such an
        environment you need to conduct yourself with great attention to
        what may be seen as offensive.
        
        Additionally, we need to be true to our convictions. If what we
        are doing is right, we should do it proudly and with courage. If
        what we are doing is wrong, we should stop doing it, not do it
        in secret.
        
        Bottom line: We need to be guided by etiquette and ethics.
        
        JimB. 

    Jim,
    
    What you say is quite sensible.  However, I'm not sure I agree about
    the content of SEXCETERA.  I've only gotten through the first 25
    notes or so (and not all responses for those), but I have found
    little of an offensive nature.  Maybe I missed the nasty stuff,
    or maybe I'm just harder to offend.
    
    As far as boring notes, *all* notes files contain a lot of material
    that is boring to some one.  That's the nature of the beast.
    
    Don

    
    As one who has been reading (and occasionally contributing to)
    SEXCETERA since it's inception, I'd like to add that it's been a
    real pleasure to watch the participation in the conference develop
    and mature in a very positive way.  At the outset, much of the
    discussion reminded me of 'locker-room' talk, but since then the
    file has really evolved, in most cases, to include really serious
    discussions of sexuality and human relationships.
    
    I don't feel the file is essential, but desirable, and in its own
    way, symbolic of what is good about working for Digital.  It would
    be a shame to lose it.
    
    Sandy
    

    	re .38 and everything else:
    
    		It's true that an awful lot of notes are boring, some
    are stupid, some are offensive. SEXCETERA does have some very nice
    conversations in it, but I often gave up reading it for lack of
    finding them. There were usually too many new replies and notes,
    and too few that really interested me...or at least interested me
    enough to step through and read all the replies, and I generally
    try not to respond to a topic if I haven't read through what came
    before. Why is SEXCETERA this way? Could it be any other way?
    
    	I've been wondering about notes a lot, and since this whole
    issue came to a head, wondering how to express what I've thought
    of. For me, and I suspect much of the larger Noting community, Notes
    are not just a convenient way to communicate with a large number
    of people, it is a unique medium of expression and community. It
    is an advance glimpse of a new class of software products which
    will make the telephone, the television, radio, newspapers, magazines,
    books, encyclopedias, libraries, and who knows what else obsolete.
    As has been pointed out, our collective experience with notes, work
    and non-work related, can only keep DEC well ahead of any and all
    competition, at least from the other large computer companies. 
    
    	Now, it would be nice to somehow make every note a piece of
    earthshattering text, well thought out, impeccably spelled, perfectly
    articulate and enjoyable to read. The other side of the coin is,
    notes are typed, usually fairly quickly at a particular time by
    people who are giving their own personal opinions on any and all
    subjects of many interests. Certainly, everyone typing notes should
    realize that the words they are typing will potentially be accessed
    by anyone and everyone in the company. On the other hand, everyone
    should feel free to type in their views without having to be a
    classified expert. 
    
    	The benign neglect which management has tacitly offered to the
    Notes community since its quite inception have allowed the truest
    direct democracy imaginable to develop. I think this is something
    that is worth preserving at all costs. The system resource question
    is certainly a valid one (as the system manager of a '750 with a
    wopping 2 Meg of memory, I could tell you horror stories...!) as
    is the "notes addiction" question. Both of these, I feel need to
    be addressed. We just need to keep in mind all of the benefits which
    Notes have offered, and even streatching our imaginations to ways
    they can be even more useful. After all, this IS a product. 
    
    	If there were a "Notes Company", which sold accounts on VAXen
    that only ran Notes, and let's say the variety of non-work Notes
    conferences were at least as large as the E-Net, and the size of
    the community were the same or larger, what would it be worth to
    you, in dollars, every month? What if there were other services,
    like a food coop, electronic equipment coop, a gateway to US Mail?
    I'd pay $20 a month, plus maybe a per-use connect charge. If the
    community were larger, it would be worth more. Now how many people
    could be supported by, say, one microVAX and a 3-stack of RA81's?
    I'd susect a lot. Buy a couple of lines to TYMNET or TELENET or
    whoever, and you've created a network, that could be self supporting.
    Now, can you do banking on such a thing?
    
    	Maybe I'm getting off the subject, but it doesn't feel to me
    like I am. What we're doing here is more than a "neat hack", or
    a "game", it is a form of communication, a depth of communication
    that is absolutely unprecedented. Now, I know there are other bulletin
    board programs, and things like the USENET, ARPAnet, etc...but what
    we have is Notes, and they are FAST, EFFICIENT, FUN, and POTENTIALLY
    A BIG TICKET ITEM TO DIGITAL!!! 
    
    	So while I've been typing, I thought of a way that maybe we
    could make a presentation on some of the values of Notes. 2LITTL::PROSE
    has been coughing and sputtering over a copyright question that
    will not go away. I'd like to suggest an alternative way of using
    it, which was already alluded to in a fairly early note there: how
    about people start using it as a repository for truly outstanding
    topics and replies from any and all other conferences. Please, try
    to be selective, and when in doubt, just copy the BEST parts, leaving
    pointers to other conferences for the contextual information. It's
    hard to say what will be done with these notes ultimately, but at
    least as a first step, it will give a centralized place to look
    for the pinacle examples of notes. Notes regarding Prose as unique
    literary art form are also welcome.
    
    	It's late, and I'm getting fuzzy. Notes always play tricks with
    my brain, because it is almost too much to grasp, the tens, hundreds,
    thousands of eyes that might read this in a day, in a week, in a
    year, in ten years...I sit and ponder, sometimes, what I'm going
    to type next, should I just ^Z it, or should I think more about
    what I'm saying...should I erase the last paragraph, or should I
    let it stand, and fly through the Ether? 
    
    	And by the time you read this, it's too late for any of that.
    All my words, all their frailty, all their human faults and drives,
    falling into your face, into your mind, into a voice in your head
    that repeats eacone. Hello. The bottom line is, I'm here to be your
    friend, and I thank you for giving me the same chance to recite
    each of your words, with all of their faults, with all of their
    mispellings, with all of their wit, and humor, and wisdom. 
    
    	<KP7> <SELECT> or whatever to add entry PROSE. 
    
	I hope you understand what I say when I write, I love you all,
    and I thank God and Ken Olsen that you could be here tonight...and
    I hope you understand the wonderful, funny structure of communication
    that let's me end it all with a tiny Zen ;-)
    
    	As Talk Talk says in a song of the same name, 
    
    	"Life's What You Make It"
    
    	Ed

Ahh Gi'day...

    Please DON'T  be  complacent!  I  don't think that non-work conferences
    will  be threatened in the long term, but there will be a few political
    battles to win first. There are, unfortunately, people in this company,
    as  elsewhere,  who  take  great  pleasure  in appointing themselves as
    enforcers of what they perceive to be the common good.
    
    If, as  I suspect will happen, a case is put to the upper management by
    one  of  these  people,  then expect some problems, at least until some
    rationality  prevails.  I remember only too well the node-name battles.
    Ever wonder why some nodes have such cryptic names?

    I worked  for  this  subsidiary  for quite a time without ANY corporate
    access  bar  telex,  and  you probably have no idea what notes and mail
    have done to the corporate identidy around here.
		  
				{dennis{{{ --

    
    Just to refer to the Penthouse remark.
    
    There are many 'mens' magazines on the market and from what I can remember
    Penthouse was usually 'soft' in appearance and also was artistic
    and I would class it in the 'very soft porn' category. There are
    other mags which are definitely 'hard porn', showing expilicit shots
    both passive and action, and usually the participants are ugly which
    is in contrast to Penthouse who can afford better models. This is
    also true of the SEXCETERA notes file. The majority of the topics
    where genuine comments, hints, tips etc which are 'soft' porn - if porn
    at all. Some of the replies are humorous (and maybe childish). But
    there were a couple in the 'hard' porn (or offensive to some) category.
    The point is - had a copy of Penthouse been put on the individuals
    desk would the reaction have been different to that of a really
    'hard' porn magazine. I think YES. Which brings me to my next comment.
    
    Titles of topics.
    
    I think I can guess which topic caused offense and if my guess is
    correct IT WAS TITLED CORRECTLY, the title giving a good indication
    of the contents. However, some of the titles are not indicative
    of the contents ie 'HIM' and 'Hmmmmmmm' are two of the topics that
    spring to mind. So noters, etiquette please - meaningful titles
    will help. The following is not intended as censorship but could
    the moderator of SEXCETERA give topics an X rating, after all HE
    (SHE) IS the moderator and has a duty to moderate and warn noters
    that some parts may be offensive. After all, in the UK all 'porn'
    magazines are displayed on the top shelf in the newsagents and ALL
    carry a warning for the buyer and the vendor. Lastly....
    
    The EMPLOYEE who started it all
    
    Let us know his(her) name. Make them apologise publicly through this
    media to all honest, decent and truthful noters. A sincere apology
    would give weight to the argument that we can control 'the monster'
    that notes has become. Notes should be available to all and if it
    is abused then we must be seen to 'police' the airwaves ourselves
    before it is 'policed' for us. (Do not read vigilante instead of
    police - that is not what I meant)
         
    David Banks
    

    
    	In agreement with the spirit of .29 and all the others -
    
    	We at Digital have a unique oppurtunity, held by no other group
    in the world, to communicate world wide in nearly real time. Before
    I even heard of a "problem" I thought about entering a note to say
    how WONDERFUL the world wide communication network is to have and
    use freely. I'm a "simple" user; I dont know ALL the protocols.
    Yet, I have communicated with people in Sweeden and Japan. I cant
    see their faces (yet; vt125) but I can feel their concern. We truly
    are at the forefront of communication technology; 10 years ahead
    of what will someday be commonplace. (betcha cant do this at DG
    or WANG, or PR1ME, or TI, or Burroughs, or CRAY reasearch, or...)
    
    Communication, leading to world wide understanding, further leading
    to the wholistic environment this planet was meant to be, will be
    the savior of the future.
    
    							Joe Jas
    

Geeez.   Like a reactor fire, where will it stop?  Notes is not the only
company wide information system with a fairly open readership.  VTX comes
to mind.  If non-work related conferences go away, will we see the VNS
menu option on the Lerouf:: VTX server go away also?  Will my ultimate
frisbee distribution list be axed?  I don't think upper management can use
"non-work-related" as an excuse for getting rid of sexcetera (Which I don't
follow).  As mentioned before, the issue may not be so much work/non-work
related as sexual.  I would hope our upper management isn't so stupid as to
use the excuse "non-work related" for removing this notes file.  Maybe if
we can figure out what's really got the censors pissed we can build an
effective case for keeping this conference around (perhaps in some modified
form -- conference membership already having been suggested). 

I find it hard to believe that a company that has staked a large part of
its future on Networking (We are the folks with the most installed nodes
aren't we?) would take actions that could limit the net. O.k. certainly
some guidelines/control are needed in a general sense, but let's not kill the
tree by pruning it.  We are our own best selling point when it comes to
networks and the products that use them.

-Byron

    
    	Hopefully whoever makes the final decision will take the time
    	to familiarize themselves with notes and a few of the other
    	files around.  Just like taking a single reply out of context
    	can be very misleading,  looking at one specific notesfile
    	does not give you a true picture of what the file stands for
    	or what the value of these files are to the users.
    
    
    	Jake

    RE:19 Every year they threaten to take away games etc. but it never
    happens.....
    
    
    so sorry, games have gone from this plant, unless of course, you
    work for MIS........so sorry...can you say some people are more
    equal than others?
    
    If you believe it can't happen here, you will eventually be surprised.
    
    Add me to the list of people who oppose deletion of any notefile.
    
    dave
    

    Here is my tuppence worth - The issue is not the NOTES, nor the
    SEXCETERA notes as far as DIGITAL is concerned. It must be the person
    who placed the notes extract in front of the woman employee. For
    all I know, it could be a mis-judgment rather than an inability
    to relate. So on that issue, I urge all notes to request that SEXCETERA
    is re-opened.
    
    There is, however a legal issue. As far as I understand, there are
    censorship laws in most countries, which restrict the publication
    of Obscene material. Now, DIGITAL as a company must resolve whether
    NOTES is a publication or NOT, in the legal sense. If it is not,
    then, I see now reason why SEXCETERA should not be re-opened. If
    it is a publication, then we must obey the laws of ALL the countries
    where SEXCETERA may be read. I shall certainly raise this issue
    with my manager. Look forward to other notaries doing likewise.
    
    Cheers - from a moral, ethical, law-abiding, non-sexist, non-racist
             guy - Shantanu Karve.

    Please put the conference back.  Handle the offender.
    
    Eric Osman, PK03-1/27C.  223-6664, RAYNAL::OSMAN.
    
    /Eric

RE: .44

>     The EMPLOYEE who started it all
>     
>     Let us know his(her) name. Make them apologise publicly through this
>     media to all honest, decent and truthful noters. A sincere apology
>     would give weight to the argument that we can control 'the monster'
>     that notes has become. 

Let us know his(her) name??? Make them apologize???

That is exactly the thing NOT to do! How would you like to be made to apologize 
to everyone on the EasyNet? 

What happens to the person that did it is up to that person's supervisor 
and/or manager. Period. There is no reason for everyone on the whole 
network to know who did it.

They probably shouldn't have done what they did. Then again, they have
probably guessed that by now (especially if they happen to keep up with this
conference)!  Plus, they may even regret what they did.

By the way, lynching was abolished some time ago in the U.S.

Jack

The following was posted in the CANINE Notesfile, which I Moderate.
My statement speaks for itself. Please add my name to any effort
or petition to retain Sexcetera.

Tom Reilley


               <<< SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]CANINE.NOTE;1 >>>
                           -<   Gone to the Dogs   >-
================================================================================
Note 209.0                  The futrure of CANINE                     No replies
OWL::REILLEY "Reil"                                  73 lines   1-MAY-1986 12:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I would like to take a few minutes to address a very hot issue which is
currently raging within the VAX Notes community.

	[ a brief description of the Sexcetera events followed here]


As Moderator of the CANINE file, I felt I should announce this problem and
warn you that there is a possibility that this file might be shut down
and removed from our system, should the upper management decide that
all non-work-related files must be banned from DEC.

As Moderator of this file, I will take a very strong stand in support
of all non-work-related Notesfiles.  What affects other files will also
affect THIS file.  

I stated the purpose of this file in Note # 1:
	"This file will be used for holding general discussions
	on any and all dog-related topics, including health and
	welfare issues, ... and local, state, and national canine
	legislative news."

	"Sharing news and information here will hopefully 
	contribute to the education and well being of 
	everyone and their dogs."

This file contributes to our lifestyles. For many of us the raising
and training of dogs goes well beyond being "just a hobby". Our canine
friends depend upon us for their very existence.  In return they provide
us with a deep personal relationship which affects our daily lives.
The bonds developed between our dogs and ourselves contribute to
our personal happiness and mental well-being, which carries over to
positively affect our business performance and attitudes. This Notesfile
is a logical extension of our lifestyle and it certainly enhances, 
encourages, and fosters our mental capabilites especially in regards
to our daily jobs. Every time I Open this file I am reminded of my visit
to the local nursing home with my Therapy Dogs International registered
therapy dog, and the affect the visit had on the elderly autistic woman
who managed to speak for the first time in years !  Nobody can immagine
how thrilling and satisfying it was for me to have participated in
her recovery, and to have been able to _share_ this with you. This mental
happiness and satisfaction carries over into my work environment where
the phrase "you CAN make a difference" and "you can do it" constantly
pushes me to do the best job I possibly can.  As a direct result of
this "non-work-related" file, Digital has yet one more devoted employee
who gives a 110 % effort into contributing to the success of the
company. This would NOT be the case if this file were shut down,
especially considering if it were the direct result of the lack of
judgement and irresponsibility of a single individual. 

I apologise for the lengthly discourse here, but I feel VERY strongly
about this issue and I felt a statement must be issued. If one non-work-
related file is endangered then all non-work-related files are endangered.
I will support any petition or move to keep Sexcetera because it will
also mean keeping CANINE on the air.  The loss of _all_ non-work-related
files WILL affect our attitudes towards corporate management decision making,
our morale, and ultimately our job effectiveness.

Tom Reilley,  CANINE Moderator.

	Please hit PF7 or SELECT.


	Michael	BAGELS,DEBATE Moderator.

    re .51:
    
    I partially agree.  A lynch mentality doesn't help a thing.
    
    An apology, by the way, would be counterproductive.  If the person
    has any idea what he (or conceivably she) precipitated, that person
    will have one of two reactions:
    
    1) Real remorse, in which case an apology would be superfluous;
    or,
    
    2) An "I don't give a damn" attitude [some people are built that
    way], in which case _at best_ the "apology" would be insincere.
    
    If the person is amused by causing other people to be bothered,
    by the way, his or her act has succeeded beyond that person's wildest
    dreams, judging from the heavy response this note has drawn.  All
    these responses might really be giving this person the jollies.
    
    Publicizing that person's name would inevitably result in frictions
    within the whole Digital community.  Not a good idea.
    
    Another possibility is that the person was so stupid that he or
    she had no idea of the consequences of the act; in which if I were
    that person's manager, I'd want to be careful what job I gave that
    person that called for reasoned decisions, but that's another matter.
    
    As I've said before both here and elsewhere: don't panic, but enable
    "alert caution."
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    Re: those attacking the alleged transgressor
    
    Amazing.  All this talk of tolerance, freedom of speech, and other
    appeals to lofty goals, from the left hand, while the right condems
    "a male who allegedly placed offending material on someone's desk".
    
    This done without facts, details, or an opportunity to defend (in
    an objective environment).  People are ready to "fight to their death"
    to protect _their_ notesfiles, but not lift a finger to protect
    _another_ individual's basic right to be presumed innocent until
    proven guilty beyond some reasonable doubt.
    
    Sure the story sounds damming, AS TOLD.  But just in case this person
    is innocent of the charges, how about waiting till you have the
    facts.  We've enough innuendo like "well, I can probably guess what article
    it was", and "... I think I know who it is", and, "based on some private
    conversations" [no doubt with 'reliable sources'], etc.
    
    - greg

	First, re last few, the specific employee who did it is none of
	our business, and let's not judge him without knowing all the
	facts.
	
	The real reason for this reply is that, with 56 replies so far,
	we have total unanimity on the basic issue of maintaining
	non-work-related conferences, including Sexcetera. I can't ever
	remember a discussion about anything, especially something as
	potentially controversial as this, going on that long without
	dissent. Just an observation...
	
	Mike

    Yeah, we have unanimity (sp? [no access to DECspell :-)]) on non-work
    related notes files in general, but not with specific reference
    to SEXCETERA - see Mahler's introduction to his DEBATE conference.

	I have to agree with Jim Burrows and others.  Getting all
	hot and bothered is not going to help this situation at all..
	Taking the conference off the air until a decision is made
	was probably the smartest thing done.. Moving the discussion
	to here was also a good idea..

	I think that many of you should go back and re-read Jim Burrows'
	reply very carefully.  In order to work out (not fight!) this
	issue you have to understand the other side..(If you choose to
	call upper management "the other side") You have to understand the
	responsiblities and background of DEC's VP's and take that into
	consideration. I'm quite sure that they will gladly do the same
	when this all comes out. You don't get to be a VP in DEC by being
	close minded.. Our company is not built on close minded people.
	If it was we wouldn't be here..

	This was bound to happen. It is something that must be dealt
	with. I am not for removing files.. But I am at DEC to do a 
	job as best I can. I consider NOTES and the like to be one of
	the greatest fringe benifits available and I, like others, don't
	want to lose it. Many have pointed out the great advantages 
	that noting has given to the DEC community. These should be
	compiled and presented in a professional manner WHEN asked
	for. (I know, suggest=do but I don't have the time)

	I suppose the bottom line is sit back and see what happens..
	And trust our upper management with making the right decision
	for you, me AND DEC.

						mike

    re "The culprit":
    
    	While it may have been a stupid thing to do, this incident is
    no longer the issue. The circumstances have been building for as
    long as non-work notes have been proliferating. It's really about
    time these sorts of discussions (the ultimate value and cost of
    Notes) were had. 
    
    	Maybe we should find the man, and the woman (both necessary
    to the event, they each had their part to play) and ...well... what
    do we say? I'd say, "Thank you for forcing us out of our network
    closets."
            
    	I guess I should start looking at "the DEBATE."
    
    	Ed
    

    re: .56,.57
    
    Unanimity?  Baloney.  Read these replies again.  I may, or may
    not agree with you, but please stop trying to create a concensus
    where none exists.
    
    Geeesh.  People will read whatever they want to hear.  !!!
    
    -  g

                     In support of Non-work Related Notes
    
    Just last week I was asked to give a presentation on VAX Notes to a
    very LARGE customer (not naming names but they just bought RCA) at
    another office in my district. The reason I was contacted for this was
    that my name appears after our node-name more often than anyone else's.
    After the SEXCETERA situation came up I called back the salesman and
    asked just where he had seen my name. You guessed it, in a non-work
    related conference. So if anyone needs a good, business oriented,
    reason for keeping these notes alive, try sales dollars. As others have
    said before me, we now form the vanguard of networking. We are the ones
    whose job it will be to sell this concept to the world. If we give up
    now, who will take our place?
    
    
                            What Notes means to Me
    
    I was already into networking long before I came to Digital. I've used
    APRAnet, UUCP, and USENET while at school and working for NASA. I have
    accounts on Compuserve, The Source, Dow-Jones and others commercial
    networks. I "dial in" to bulletin boards all over the country. My
    monthly phone bills have often exceeded $100 and the monthly charges
    for the pay services ran upwards of $200. But since joining the E-net
    community I find little reason to use these "outside" networks anymore.
    The savings from this are substantial and I consider it part of my
    company paid benefits. Should the facilities of the E-net be restricted
    to the extent that I would return to the use of outside networking, I
    would feel justified in using the monetary loss in making any carrier
    assessments. This net is also VERY valuable to me in ways that are
    not so easy to add up on a calculator. 
    
    Keep the Faith,
    
    Paul.
    
    
    
    BTW - By my count we should be up to about $1.20 by now. Maybe someone
    should establish a lobbying fund?

    re: .58   ... fringe benefit
    
    I agree competely with this and with the employee activity concept. I
    get more enjoyment out of reading current events discussed in FORUM and
    someones anecdote about their 2 year olds first words in PARENTS
    than any sponsored activity currently offered.
    
    In my view, any response from senior management will be nothing more
    than a firm reminder to us of our responsibilities as members of the
    Digital family. I base this on one single fact 
    
      Notes files offer management a form of control that is unavailable in
      more conventional companies.  They have a direct ear to the imformal
      communications channels.  Mail does not offer any feedback to
      management.  With Notes, they can read it for themself.  Management
      is, or should be, very interested in how we feel.  Notes represents a
      pulse to the heart of the company.  Not something you would want to
      loose. 
                
    I cannot conceive of a more impractical and ill advised response than
    'clamping down on this garbage'. Consider the possible results of such
    a policy. 
    
    - We would probably revert to mail, or some other untrackable form of
      communication.  Management would loose its tap on current events
      within DEC and we would simply have relocated our 'channel'.  Another
      possibility is to create underground member-only conferences.  We
      *will* have our imformal organization, and management can either
      foster the channel and stay imformed, or censor it and loose a major
      management tool. 
    
    - The noter-base (if thats a proper phrase) would diminish.  Without
      a free and unfettered medium (and knowning that THEY are watching),
      many would drop out of the picture, so to speak.  Everyone would
      suffer.
    
    - Its positions management as the bad guy.  Anger and resentment
      would follow.  Consider the responses to date.  Note the anger
      in some against management already and nothing has even been done,
      if in fact anything ever is.
    
    - It would be contrary to the basic principle underling the Digital
      work ethic.  As individuals WE are responsible for our actions. When
      we are not acting in a manner consistant with our employment, it is
      our managements responsibility to remind us of our responsibilities.
      A flame of a response would imply that we were not responsible and
      that lower management was not doing their job,  forcing senior
      management to step in and assert itself. 
                                                          
    I also echo Jims comment about our actions; If you feel guilty, don't
    do it.  As a result of my own feelings, I do most of my noting at home.
    I could not justify most of my reading in my job. Therefore, I don't do
    it during work - too much :-). I also give Digital 45 - 50 hours a week
    in consideration of the amount of time I do spend on non business
    activities.  For instance, I often play basketball during lunch, and
    this will take 2+ hours.  I play softball once a week and leave around
    4:30.  These things, included with noting, make me feel that I must
    return the benefit.  They also keeps me working here. 
    
    Phil

          1/ There has already been limited buy-in by management
          - at least in Corporate Comm., the EASYNOTES.LIS on ANCHOR::
          is allowed to include non-work-related notesfiles. Remember
          that battle? It was EXTREMELY brief. Commonsense prevailed.

          2/ Touchy subjects such as sex or politics always provoke
          trouble. I moderated a file long ago in which the Irish
          'troubles' were a topic. Irish Management ensured that
          a ton of bricks descended and I withdrew the file to
          avoid further trouble.
          
          Commonsense dicates that Sexetera would be killed off
          sooner rather than later.
          
          3/ Choose your battleground carefully. When discussing
          non-work-related conferences mention Parenting, Whoareyou,
          Carbuffs, etc, not Sexetera, Communism,
          a_n_other_contoversial_topic. Lets not lose our freedom
          to discuss reasonable topics in a reasonable manner by
          fighting "to the death" on a subject that frankly is
          probably offensive to a least a large minority. I know,
          "they don't have to read the conference", but it scarcely
          matters. What does matter is that we should ensure that
          "Upper management" - and even LOWER management ie mine,
          realise that there is redeeming value to using system
          resources other than for work. 
          
          -- Andy

    In my opinion, this "I don't read SEXCETERA; let's sacrifice it
    to save the other non-work related files" is a narrow-minded attitude
    which avoids the basic issues: use of company resources, and noters'
    responsibility to (as Jim Burrows said) "conduct ourselves with greater
    decorum".
    
    Don

Re .63 and possibly others:

I couldn't disagree more.  SEXCETERA is just as deserving
of existence as PARENTS, CANINES, COMICS, etc. etc.  I will
now transfer to DEBATE for the remainder of this discussion.

    (I've been away for a few days, just now catching up)
    
    A reply back somewhere around .37 or so commented about my having
    knowledge about Sexcetera beyond that made public.  Someone in a
    later response objected to making judgements without knowing all the
    facts, and quoted personal communications (which is what I've been
    citing) as one of the objectionable factors in people not knowing
    the full story.  So it seems I should explain my involvement a little
    more...
    
    I've recently been a fairly regular contributor to Sexcetera, and
    when the problem was first reported the moderator mentioned possibly
    putting the file up for adoption.  I contacted him offline to offer
    my assistance if this was necessary, since I wasn't confident that
    I could make a public offer of hosting it (and I still am not).
    We then exchanged a couple of messages about the situation, since
    I was unwilling to extend my involvement without knowing what was
    going on.  Both the moderator and the system manager have given
    me a pretty good picture of the events involved, without naming
    names or interpreting them.  I have offered my own interpretation
    based on my reading of the information they've supplied, but always
    clearly identified as interpretation (I hope).  I have not had any
    contact with the situation in the past couple of days.
    
    One thing that has bothered me is clear from both the public postings
    in Sexcetera that first warned of the problem and the offline mail
    exchanges that I've had.  That is that the source and nature of the
    complaint were initially concealed from the targets of the complaint.
    At present I am not sure that the identity of the deciding management
    is known to the moderator and system manager involved, if it is known I
    am unaware of that fact as well as the identity.  This makes it
    difficult to answer the question in .37 about both sides being heard,
    it in fact makes it seem that both sides will not be heard.  I wonder
    if it will lead to a policy decision made without knowledge of the
    facts - if nothing else, it does not engender confidence in the
    management process involved.  Why not make that process public?
    
    A comment on .38, discussing an earlier reply and the feeling of
    "something to hide" in some notes participations.  My own
    interpretation was not that it necessarily implied guilty feelings
    about doing something wrong on the part of noters, but instead could be
    a lack of confidence that there would be a sympathetic attitude on the
    part of management.  The events surrounding Sexcetera certainly make me
    question whether elements of higher management are friendly or should
    in fact be viewed as "the other side".  The phrase "the other side" was
    used earlier, and questioned as possibly unfounded - my feeling is that
    in view of this manner the question is still open, and my own
    determination will depend in large part on both what is decided about
    the fate of Sexcetera, and how the process is handled.  Thus far on
    process, I believe that there are elements of upper management that
    have different beliefs than I about our corporate culture and our
    working environment.  Ergo, I should try to avoid being noticed
    in order to minimize hassles, and I may be justified in regarding
    such management elements as "the other side"...
    
    Which brings me to the point made in .58 when it was said "I'm at
    DEC to do a job."  True, I am here to do a job, instead of being
    elsewhere to do a job.  Why am I here and not there?  Because the
    environment here has been more to my taste.  Will it remain so?
    I'm not sure.  The discussion of business advantages of network
    culture has been very much to the point, but it also has missed
    one factor that I feel is significant, and that is the effect on
    retention of good talent.  My wife works for Honeywell (previously
    fulltime permanent employee, now on contract) and she has told me
    of managers there wondering why they aren't more competitive with
    Digital because they obviously have equal talent since many of their
    people who leave go to Digital.  My first question to her was "how
    many people move from Digital to Honeywell?" and the intuitive feeling
    was not many.  Evidently (to me at least) Digital is perceived as
    a preferrable workplace, and may be siphoning talent from competitors.
    We may also be making better use of that talent, and my belief is
    that at least part of that is because of employee morale (Honeywell
    has had too many layoffs to have good morale).  How much of the
    overall employee satisfaction really comes from corporate culture,
    which could be compromised by heavy-handed management action such
    as seems a risk with the Sexcetera problem?
    
    To reiterate, the process initially used in handling the complaint
    about Sexcetera has already alarmed me about whether the quality
    of management (and perhaps of corporate life) here is really as
    good as I'd previously believed.  So for me, the corporate culture
    has already seen a negative impact, not because of the complaint or the
    result of Sexcetera leaving the net, but because the handling of
    the situation has caused me to lose confidence that my expectations
    about my workplace are shared by management.

    As far as practical issues, Dan Murphy made some good suggestions
    about general notesfile usage in .25, and as I recall specifically
    that Sexcetera could be made members-only (if my memory has glitched,
    I apologize to both Dan and the real author of that suggestion).
    I had suggested this option to the moderator, but with reservations
    because of the potential effect of discouraging read-only participants
    who may not want to reveal their interest (minor flame: it doesn't
    reflect well on our corporate culture that some areas of the company
    were identified in a discussion in Sexcetera as being unsympathetic
    to individual employees who revealed unexpected or unpopular sexual
    attitudes to the point that it was alleged that at least one
    performance review was affected).  Also, it would not prevent incidents
    such as the one triggering this problem, although offenders could
    be removed from the conference, and arbitrary casual review could be
    controlled.  Most of all, it could be a way of arguing for a
    compromise, that anyone who requests access agrees to responsible
    usage and if that agreement is violated the consequences should
    befall the individual and not the conference.  I would prefer not
    to see a members-only conference, but better that than no conference
    at all.
    
    I was also going to suggest that a policy of having the moderator
    remove material likely to be offensive could be helpful in reducing
    the chances of complaint, but again the situation that occured would
    still not be prevented because the offense was as much the context
    and usage as the material itself.  It would be very undesirable
    to promote censorship, in any form.  However, as an expedient to
    preserve a conference forum at the expense of some material and
    value it might still be better than an "all or nothing" attitude
    forcing corporate censorship by deleting the file.
    

    I ve gone thru all these replys to see everything from "reasonable
    to radical, from live and let live to hang the bum and chastise
    her." It goes to show the " cross section of ideas and attitudes"
    that the people in this CO have. 
    
    I dont believe in sacrificing ANY conference to save the others.
    Odds are you could go into any conference and find something that
    offended or disturbed you, so to say Sexcetera is the only "guilty"
    conference is fooling yourself, irregardless of whether you were
    involved with it or not.
    
    Ive looked into a number of conferences and replied to a number
    also. They all, in there own way have value and merit. Each in its
    own way represents a key element in this CO's culture and needs to
    be able to continue. Notes etiquette talked about using "judgment"
    in writing or replying to conferences. The problem comes in when
    and by what standards do we (the noteing community) judge the 
    individual contributors ?? Opinions are like the nose on your face,
    everyone has one, yet there all different. 
    
    If you go back a bit in time we have lost a few conferences to 
    new system managers that would not support non work related notes
    on their systems (IE arts, jokes come to mind quick) yet how many
    of us rallied to stop that from happening ?? None save the people
    concerned with that conference. Now there is rumblings of all non
    work related conferences going down the tubes. My fellow noters,
    we are all guilty of not stopping this long ago when it started
    with any conference. We all need to stand behind the entire notes
    system and get a self disciplined procedure in place to not only
    save notes but to insure its continuance with out problems.
    
    Needless to say,  put my name on the "list" of notes supporters.
    
    Bob Barber  DTN 241 3204   NODE SEINE::BBARBER   WMO/U5 

                   <<< HSC003$DUA2:[NOTES]SEXCETERA.NOTE;1 >>>
                                   -< Sorry >-
================================================================================
Note 1.0                         Worse news...                        No replies
CADLAC::SYSTEM                                        9 lines   2-MAY-1986 16:47
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This conference has been officially closed.
    
    It is forbidden that this conference (or backups of this conference)
    be passed on to anyone.
    
    A *HARD*COPY* of all the topics in this conference has been delivered
    to plant security.  They took it UP.  High.
    
    				- Sorry.

    there seems to be considerable question about the value and future
    of DEBATE.NOTE compared to this forum, I have posted an entry in
    that file pointing out that dicussions of this issue that relate
    to the way we work should probably have the exposure of discussion
    in this file as well (not that I've suggested killing off DEBATE,
    just that when material appears there that it should also be propogated
    here as well).  
    
    The following extract is from a discussion about use of material from
    Notes (and Mail, etc.) - the consensus was that material should not be
    propogated, except possibly with the author's permission (it is copied
    here after Ed gave me permission).  It seems to me that it touches on
    issues not only relevant to this particular issue but also having
    implications extending much beyond it. 
    
                <<< WHOARU::HSC003$DUA3:[MAHLER.DEBATE]DEBATE.NOTE;1 >>>
                   -< Discussion of Non-work related files >-
================================================================================
Note 4.4                      Internal use only?!                         4 of 6
2LITTL::BERNSTEIN "ITS over to you."                 50 lines   2-MAY-1986 11:18
                             -< Warning! Warning! >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    .
    .
    .
        
    	The draw and the strength of Notes and the Noting community
    is founded on open communication between people. As communication
    develops, as we become more and more comfortable with the medium,
    and as the subjects broaden and deepen, we are breaking new ground
    in many subjects. Do we really have the right to exclude others
    from information which can help all aspects of their life? 
    .
    .
    .
	Let's be careful, and reasonable. The power of Notes is communication.
    The more people that can be reached, the more power is available to all
    noters in the future. Opening up with information leads to more people
    communicating, and having more to offer each other. Closing down and
    keeping secrets leads to isolation, suspicion, conflict,
    misunderstanding, war, and death. 
    .
    .
    .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Ed has hit on a very fundamental feature, and issue, not only regarding
    notes but also regarding how this company is run, and how we all
    interact within and without the company.  "Open communication" is
    a powerful tool, and one that can be seen as very dangerous.  People
    are far from unanimous in regarding it as positive (for example,
    the Soviets have been proving that quite obviously, but even closer
    to home there is one supervisor in our group who has argued with
    me in favor of having knowledge about corporate activities outside
    our group restricted on a "need to know" basis because there might
    be negatives if too many of us knew too much).  
    
    With Notes we are breaking new ground in methods of communication using
    computer networks, it has been pointed out that this in itself can be
    an important competitive advantage for the company as well as a tool
    for improving our internal performance.  This goes beyond the material
    involved and affects the way we work ("we change the way the world
    works" ?).  
        
    But this could be regarded as a two-edged sword by anyone who is
    not comfortable with communication being what they consider too open.
    I've already criticized the process by which the complaint about
    Sexcetera was handled because it was not open and communicated very
    effectively.  Ed's comments made me realize that this should not
    be surprising since the people involved in pressing the complaint
    may not place a very high value on the "open communication" provided
    by Notes and the "open discussion" mentioned in the introductory note
    in Sexcetera.  I feel that if they were sympathetic to open
    communication then the complaint would likely have been handled
    differently, but that is my subjective interpretation.
    
    	"...The power of Notes is communication. The more people that can
    be reached, the more power is available to all noters in the future. "
    
    Could it be that this is regarded as undesirable in some circles?
    Those who have power (or believe that they do) are sometimes loathe
    to share it.  An occasional demonstration of management power to
    control the availability and use of notes could be a good way to
    remind noters that their power is circumscribed...
    
    I like the sociological implications of our continued experiments
    in living on the net, I just wish that I were free to explore such
    technological effects without having to engage in ideological warfare
    over the locus of control for these experiments.  I'm still not
    convinced that there isn't "the other side" lurking in various
    management niches waiting to try to rein us all in - not to say
    all management is the opposition, but if there's any opposition
    than we must defend ourselves.  
    
    Keep the network "peer-to-peer" *not* "centrally controlled" !
    

    re .68 - the possesion of a *HARD*COPY* by Security raises interesting
    legal questions about possible repercussions - I'd expect that if
    anyone who participated in that file ever had any suspicion of
    discrimination because of that participation that they could make an
    interesting case out of it.
    
    I for one would be very interested in how that material is being
    treated, and particularly what safeguards will be in place to assure
    that it will not be misused.
    
    (Isn't it interesting that I find no problem with having the file
    publicly accessible on the net, but am concerned about safeguards
    when it's taken offline and placed in the hands of Security?  Guess
    it says something about how the handing of this matter has affected
    my feelings about corporate management!)
    

    What possible interest could security have in the file?  Especially
    a *HARD*COPY* of it?  Wasn't this supposed to be a personnel issue?

    I doubt that security had any interest in the file, they may've been
    innocent bystanders that all the involved management could agree were
    the appropriate party to stick with a hot potato.  just at a guess,
    that copy was just too hot to handle... they had to have an archive
    copy but it had to be somewhere safe and inaccessible.  ergo, not
    machine readable (not in this company!) and in a vault somewhere.
    So, security gets to hold the bag.
    
    I suspect that the incident cited as triggering all this is being
    persued as a sexual harassment complaint, and the file could be
    considered evidence.  Or there may be fears of such a complaint,
    or a complaint about obscenity - as was pointed out earlier, this
    network is international in scope, and SEXCETERA had overseas readers
    too, so it could have been subject to many different laws and
    standards.  And as material written by employees using Digital
    resources, stored and transmitted via Digital's hardware, the file
    and its contents would be owned by Digital, so the corporation is
    placed in a potentially vulnerable position by the mere existence
    of the file.  But even if it would be desirable from management's
    viewpoint to have the file deleted that might be destroying evidence,
    so a copy must be preserved but safeguarded.
    
    On the other hand, because the file is so controversial it's difficult
    to know what to do with it.  The company can't risk using the material
    in the file in a fashion that could be questioned as sexual
    discrimination.  I think that the company might be legally bound to
    protect the privacy of personal information about individual employees
    that comes into its possession, but I'm not sure about the extent of
    that.  I do believe that disclosure by the company of material
    contained in the file in a fashion damaging to the individual
    contributors would expose the corporation to legal action by those
    individuals. 
    
    So it's between a rock and a hard place.  But what's important is that
    it isn't just because it was SEXCETERA and the topic of Sex is so
    controversial.  It's the material, and how it's used both in and out of
    context, that determines the ramifications.  It's just easier to make
    them stick to SEXCETERA than other places. But if somebody puts an
    entry in SOAPBOX or somewhere that's offensive (for example,
    characterizing someone's actions as psychotic) then all those issues
    are encountered.  The example ("psychotic") was in some non-work
    notesfile other than SOAPBOX, but it quickly got a request for removal
    of the offending entry.  Inquiries did reveal the nature of the
    complaint, and it was ultimately resolved by the file moderator without
    removal of the entry - but after review and discussion.  As I said,
    SEXCETERA was easier to make things stick to... 

    enough, I'm escaping this place (wish it didn't feel that way :-(
    for a weekend of recovery.
    

Well, it sounds like it is FINAL and irrevocable.  What now?  Will we ever know 
what criteria were used to make the decision to shut SEXCETERA down?  Will 
FLIRTS or POETS perhaps follow?  I don't know.  But I have a few idle thoughts 
on the subject at the midnight hour.

SEXCETERA covered a broad range of topics.  And there was a very broad range of 
latitude permitted in the language tolerated and topics discussed.  Perhaps too 
broad (yes, I'm American and I believe in free speech, so don't flame at me, 
please).

I'm not personally offended by the language.  I can choose to ignore it.  Same 
with the jokes and "names" discussions.  Like others, there were occasional 
notes or replies that "grossed" me out.  But rather than be offended, I just 
skipped past them and forgot them.  Why make a Federal case out of it?

However, I can not help but wonder if topics or practices such as these are 
what led to the demise of the conference?  Killing SEXCETERA took care of all 
these.  It also "took care" of some valid discussions and exchanges of 
information on other topics including birth control and human relations and 
helpful information exchanges.

With that forum gone, where can these ?more meaningful? (to some) topics be 
discussed?  Will a HUMAN_RELATIONS conference appear?  Would it be permitted?  
Would the moderator or participant noters police it more closely to prevent a 
repeat of this very sad event?  Should they?

I've got many questions and few answers.  I can say that if perhaps we 
participants of SEXCETERA had collectively encouraged a greater degree of 
restraint (gee, might it be called censorship?), that that particular forum 
might still be around for our use.  Perhaps you disagree.  That's your right 
and privilege.  I just offer it as a potential lesson.

So I ask again ... where do we go from here?  Are certain topics now taboo?

And I am REALLY CURIOUS about this HARDCOPY that has been given to Security.  
That must've been quite a printout, and I can imagine someone is sitting very 
red-eyed right now reading through it somewhere.

I think it will be awhile before I put another smiley-face in notes.  I think 
we lost something special and precious today.  And while it's not the end of 
the world, it's still worth a little thoughtful mourning.

Steve

Re .68 and foregoing events:

I wish some hard information would be provided about all
this.  WHO is doing the closing and the forbidding?? In the note
quoted in .68, there was nothing but passive voice sentences...
"conference has been officially closed" ..."It is forbidden that"
... "A *HARD*COPY* ... has been delivered".  I don't want/need to
know the identity of the persons allegedly involved in the
original alleged incident, but I'd like to know WHO in management
is making decisions and giving orders here.

If we aren't told what the problem was as seen by whomever
is making the decisions, we won't know how to fix/avoid the
problem in the future.

Suspicion and distrust grow quickly in the absence of clear and
rational communication.  This should be evident from all the
speculation offered in this topic and elsewhere.  Must we
continue to guess about WHO closed the file, WHO is forbidding
such activity and WHY, and WHAT Security is doing with a hard
copy???

Does anyone else feel like the proverbial mushroom?

RE: .74
    Interesting, Dan, I logged in this morning for the sole purpose
    of writing a reply to express what you just said.  The comment about
    security giving a hardcopy to "management", high, really made me
    fume.  Who?
    
    I don't argue with the right of Digital management to make a decision
    on this, or with our obligation to live by that decision whatever it is
    and whether we like it or not.  But I DO feel those managers owe it to
    us to make themselves known, and to communicate their decision to us.
    Right now they seem to be communicating through anyone they can find to
    keep their identity from becoming known: security, the moderator
    and system manager who I'm sure fear for their own safety and therefore
    aren't publishing names.
    
    While I am very upset at this whole incident, I believe management's
    refusal to identify themselves is what bothers me the most.  You
    can't fight what you can't see -- no, bad choice of words -- you
    can't DEFEND YOURSELF against attacks from someone you can't see. 
    I realize that this (and any other company) can't be successful
    if it's run as a pure democracy, and don't really expect them to
    hold a vote on this issue, but I do expect the decisionmakers to
    identify themselves and listen to both sides before making a decision.
    
    I sincerely hope that very soon the management involved will
    communicate directly with us through whatever forum they feel is
    appropriate.

    I really don't care "WHO" but I care about "WHY".
    
    Some criteria have been applied to a non-work related NOTES file to
    trigger it's removal. All I want to know is what criteria are.  In the
    past, about the only criterion was lack of interest.  And at that it
    was voluntary on the part of the moderator. 
    
    Then we can get self-righteous about everything, but first we should
    insist on knowing what the criteria are before getting caught up
    in power and censorship questions.  Are are all the policies ex-post
    facto?
    
    The incident that started this all was a violation of our sexual
    harassment policy which says nothing about permissable uses of
    computers connected to the EASYNET. 

     The following may  turn out to be miscellaneous ramblings and if so, 
     I apologize in advance.    My  intent  is  to relate some first-hand 
     experiences which may be used to extrapolate where "personnel's" and 
     "security's" heads are at as it  affects the availablity of non-work 
     related NOTESfiles.
     
     In "Personnel" matters, when decisions are handed down "from above", 
     frequently even the line-management aren't told the reasoning behind 
     the  decisions.  In my first position at DEC,  I  was  a  first-line 
     supervisor  in a manufacturing environment.  I fired a WC1  Employee 
     for stealing (signing his timecard for 2-1/2 hrs of OT, when he left 
     the Plant for home.  BTW:  The ER rep reached him  at  home  approx.  
     45  minutes  after he left and 1-3/4 hr before the signed-out time!) 
     in accordance  with  the Personnel Policies Book.  We did it "by the 
     numbers", but the Employee got an attorney to write a letter for him 
     and the Employee hand-delivered it to Ken Olsen's house.
     
     The Employee  alledged  that  his  (digital)  watch was off by 1-1/2 
     hours and that  he  believed  that  he was entitled to a 1 hour paid 
     meal time for working  overtime!    [We  had circumstantial evidence 
     that he had been doing  this  for  >6  months,  but  two supervisors 
     witnessed the specific event leading to his firing.]
     
     Ken turned the  matter over to a certain high-level personnel person 
     and we had a  "hearing"  on  the  matter.  I was TOLD to re-hire the 
     Employee and offered no  reasonable  explanation  of the reason why, 
     except that he  had  always  been  an  exemplary  Employee  (he  was 
     probably  my  best,  most   productive  Employee,  except  for  some 
     attendance problems).  The convoluted point that I am trying to make 
     is this:  It is extremely  unlikely  that any of the Noter Community 
     will  ever  learn  the  "real"  reasons behind  the  demise  of  the 
     NOTESfile, or whatever disciplinary actions may befall the principal 
     parties involved.
     
     As for the fate of NOTESfiles in general,  I am afraid that we could 
     be in serious trouble:  About 5 years ago,  I held a meeting with Ed 
     Schwartz  (VP  who is in charge of Legal and Security),  the  former 
     head  of  DEC  Corporate Security (ex-FBI agent), and I don't recall 
     who else may have been present.  Somehow, the discussion got off the 
     track and turned to a  point  where  someone  from  Security  (don't 
     recall who it was anymore) was  decrying  the  "theft  of  Corporate 
     Resources"  by  Employees.  His contention was  that  Employees  who 
     played games on DEC machines or dialed in from home and did personal 
     work  on  DEC  equipment were STEALING DEC RESOURCES and  should  be 
     terminated!  I tried to refute his arguments (I didn't  even have an 
     ENET  account back in those days), but got absolutely no place  with 
     him.  I told him that it was a way that Employees could learn how to 
     use the computers  better, becoming more proficient, learning how to 
     use  certain  utilities,  gaining   a  confidence  factor  in  using 
     computers, etc.  all to no avail!
     
     Subsequently, a DEC lawyer who I had some dealings with told me that 
     she  had  been  flabbergasted  by   a  high-level  security  manager 
     admitting to her that he routinely  went  through his Employees ENET 
     files,  looking  for  any  evidence of "personal  use"  of  the  DEC 
     resources.  (This was only a year ago,  not  ancient  history.) This 
     same  security manager also told me that he did  an  audit  of  some 
     computer  equipment  which was signed out on property removal passes 
     for  Employees  home-use  and  grilled  some line-managers as to the 
     justification of  having  their  Employees maintain DEC equipment at 
     home.
     
     This security manager  has his Employees so paranoid that they don't 
     even use the computer  terminals  in  their  offices!  I came across 
     some DEC phone numbers and  passwords  on a local BBS and downloaded 
     the information to my ENET account  to forward to security for their 
     action.    I  contacted someone who works  for  the  above-mentioned 
     manager and advised him of what I had.    I  asked  him for his ENET 
     NODE::USERNAME  to  forward  the info to him, he got  aggitated  and 
     insisted that I mail him a Hardcopy through Interplant Mail!
     
     The message here  is  very  clear:    Those people in high levels of 
     Security at DEC don't  use  computers  themselves  and  they are not 
     attuned to the "DEC culture".    They  will not be very receptive to 
     keeping  ANY non-work related information, games,  NOTESfiles,  etc.  
     on the systems.  [I am sure  there  are individuals in Personnel and 
     Security who feel otherwise, but unfortunately some in  high  places 
     feeel otherwise.]
     
     Corporate Security tends to look at things as Black  and  White:  If 
     you  take  a  DEC  pen  home and write a personal  letter,  you  are 
     stealing  DEC  resources and should be fired!  Luckily, DEC Security 
     can't fire anyone, that responsiblity is left to the line-management 
     (but I am  sure  that  sometimes  there is pressure coming down from 
     "above").

    But if we don't find out WHY, then either:
    
    [1] a HUMAN_RELATIONS notefile _will_ be created, and someday this same
    thing will happen again and again and again ...
    
    [2] All non-work notesfiles will go away, and so will a lot of good
    DEC employees.
    
    Complex systems (like corporations) work much better when they contain
    feedback.

    I couldn't help thinking about this as I watched Ken Olsen on CNN
    a few minutes ago.  He mentioned that our employee relations are
    built on trust.  He's said that many times.  Wonder what he would
    say about this whole thing?  About SEXCETERA specifically, and about
    the entire non-work-related conferences question in general?

        I wonder whether anyone has asked him.  I don't see him all
        that often.  I doubt he would support the truly fascistic
        attitudes of some of the people in the Corporation (just as
        I doubt he would support sexual harassment).
        
        Tom

    Based on the "State of the Company" video it would seem unlikely that
    Ken even knows of VAX Notes.  It the video he mentions trying to find
    someone's office in the Mill and not finding it.  He wanders into
    someone's cube and asks the occupant if he knows where the desired
    person happens to be.  The person replies that he doesn't know but can
    find out and gets into ELF to find out sending Ken on his way with
    the proper pole number.
        
    Ken relates how great it is that we have tools like that available
    for our use.  He never mentioned ELF by name and certainly appeared
    unaware of its existence prior to the event in the story.

    Like any good Digital digit I believe that Ken is one of the most
    brilliant men of our time.  I believe that he approves of what we
    are doing as Noters.  I believe that he would be offended at some
    of the things that have been placed in many conferences - I have
    been.  He often talks of the trust that he has in the employees
    of the company and I feel that trust.  Remember that trust SHOULD
    be a two way street.  We are all citizens of Digital and should
    DESERVE the trust.
    
    People in security and finance are trained that trust is a dirty
    word.  They trust in only what they have complete control over.
    That doesn't make them bad people or useless.  It does tend to go
    against much of the principles of Digital.
    
    Let's ALL try to work together to maintain the trust.
    
    Don

    This has certainly turned out to be a bit of a shock to me. As with
    all good things (even going back to school days) it again happens
    that the actions of a few ruin the benefits for all. I had never
    dreamed that this would happen in a proffesional work place like
    DEC. 
    In the remoter digital branches around the world, the rate that
    information (technical and otherwise) filters down ranges from slow
    to never. I DEC went bankrupt the only way we would find out about
    it is when we didn't get paid the next month :-). To this end notes
    and the E-net have been invaluable. Notes is an excellent tool that
    enables us to do our job better and increase customer satisfaction.
    On that basis alone we could justify the technical notes, simply
    by the number of 'fixes' found in notes files. 
    Non-technical notes files are harder to justify. My manager made
    my day a couple of weeks ago when he stated that he had no objections
    to my use of non-tech notes simply because I was still learning,
    even if it wasn't related to my work. 
    Notes have also made me into the DEcie I am today (sounds terrible
    doesn't it?). Without being able to interface to other people out
    side this office and to find out more about the world within DEC
    and external ot DEC I certainlty wouldn't be as hapy in my work
    enviroment as I am.
    If anyone wants my signature on a petition or wishes to use my vote
    etc feel free to do so. Also is it possible to get a manager who
    is involved in this fracas to write a reply in here to explain what
    is happening and any explanations?
    
    .jim.
    
    

    Let's not get too worked up over this.  I know from personal experience
    that the anticipation of a feared event is much worse that the actual
    event.
    
    Probable the worse that will happen is that the "top management"
    will closely scrutinize any notesfile that gets put under their
    noses.  They are probably to busy playing golf to find "make work"
    for themselves.
    
    So the real trick seems to be to try to keep a particular notesfile
    out from under their noses.

    I'm reminded of a small boy I once saw (aged 5 or so) sitting
    next to a fire and saying (in an undertone) one obscene word
    after another (with furtive glances at the adult in the room,
    wondering how much he could get away with).
    
    Other than by way of people's reactions here, I've heard no mention
    WHATSOEVER of any conference other than SEXCETERA (no loss) being
    in jeopardy. From what I know of KO (never met him directly),
    he would neither approve of the abolition of non-work-related
    conferences as a class, nor of SEXCETERA remaining available.
    
    Trying to inflate this issue into a First Amendment-class "matter of
    Principle" is not only silly, it further wastes Company resources on
    the Chicken Little Syndrome. I can't think of anything less likely
    to bolster the cause (a ridiculous concept to start with) of
    recreational notes files than blowing some group's timesharing
    machine off the network blathering about it. This isn't Chernobyl;
    it's not even Three Mile Island; it's simply a sensible action taken
    to protect Digital against the potential of a lawsuit. 
    
    How's about we give the whole subject a rest until something
    significant occurs?
    
    P.S. Somebody made reference to "management" telling "us" about
    "reasons" - I believe the reasons for the decision should be
    communicated to the owner/moderator of the file in question (and
    it sounds to me as though they have been, from the outset); from
    there, any further dissemination ought to be the responsibility
    of the erstwhile owner.

        Thank you, Paul. I concure.
        
        Mikie (111.83), please read my 111.38. I think your attitude
        is very dangerous, as explained therein.
        
        On the whole the only thing in this whole incident that bothers
        me (aside from the panic, paranoia, distrust and hysteria I've
        seen) is the giving of a hard copy to security. I don't see
        where they have a signifigant interest, and am concerned about
        the possibility of abuse. I intend to look into this.
        
        JimB. 

    If, in fact, management's concern is the possibility of a law suit
    charging sexual harassment on the job, then it makes perfect sense
    for security both to keep a copy and to furnish a copy to the legal
    department.  I'm not bothered by security having a copy; they could
    have had all they wanted several weeks ago, without telling anyone.
    
    I do agree that we should remain calm.  While I'm an ardent supporter
    of the First Amendment, I understand that this is a business issue,
    and not a Free Speech issue.  I just hope that the managers involved
    have enough confidence in whatever decisions are reached to be willing
    to share their reasoning with us.
    
       Gary

Do we want a policy about the existance of note files?

We could force one - either now, or when more "damage" happens
in the future, with our united voice.

Or do we continue to "trust in DEC", sigh about the live-and-let-live
attitude which lets us do things with "trust in us", but doesn't 
always provide reasons for actions management must take when trust fails.

My 1/0 mind would find it very easy to point to a page and determine 
if a policy was followed, but doing that all the time is not the way 
this company operates.

There should probably be a policy, and that might be the best outcome of all 
this comment.  Without one, we have no way to deal with situations where
participants cannot handle "The DIGITAL way of doing things".  All we 
have to do now is figure out how to form such a policy and then find a 
way to suggest it to the right mgmt. Could be a chance for positive 
action (read that several ways, best left unstated here).

As for SEXCETERA, it is probably seen (by mgmt) as being too dangerous
to exist in a corporate environment, even though it might have every 
right in a democratic environment.  Lets hope the reason that is 
given for its removal will not be misused in future actions.

I would like to know, too, who welds the power and what they would state 
publicly about their actions, for what it is worth (not much, in 
reality)

Gary McCready

    How about cooling down a little all of us. Let's continue all of
    us "noters" just as if nothing ever happened. We should however
    as an experience from the recent thunderstorms give the right to
    any moderator to do whatever he (she) feels appropriate to protect
    him (her) self from any sort of trouble. This would include hiding/
    deleting notes and even closing conferences. Free to anybody to
    take over and start a conference him (her) self. I believe the
    individual who sacrifices time and effort to moderate a conference
    should have the right to stop doing it whenever he she feels so.
    I believe that the less we raise hell about non work related topics
    (difficult to define anyway) the more will we be able to continue
    using this fantastic facility.
    
    So FULL POWER to the MODERATOR !!
    
    Maybe a moderator could surround himself with some kind of council,
    helping him to keep his conference "clean".
    
    Fred, non-moderator.
    

    Re .81 (and others):
    
>        "People in security and finance are trained that trust is a dirty
>    word.  They trust in only what they have complete control over.
>    That doesn't make them bad people or useless.  It does tend to go
>    against much of the principles of Digital."
                                                
    I disagree with this sentiment. I know many people in finance and
    several in security. ALL HAVE THE SAME PRINCIPLES OF DIGITAL AS I
    DO. They all believe in trust. They work by influence, not control--
    just as the rest of us do. They do have a job; and one that is
    particularly difficult given the Digital culture. But they enjoy
    it--that is why they work here, not somewhere else.
                                                   
    I would prefer to see no more smearing of others, especially those
    in authority, without specific actions being given. And in this
    conference, we should stick to "the Digital Way of Working", not
    the exceptional case of one or two individuals.

  I certainly disagree with .88, speaking as both a moderator 
  and one who has often dis-agreed with the decisions of a 
  moderator.

  Censorship is, essentially, a binary issue.  You can't have 
  the permanent situation of 'a little censorship', whether 
  imposed by supposedly malevolent forces (like 'management' 
  :-) ) or supposedly benevolent forces (like the moderator).
  Over time, censorship either tends towards absolute censorship
  or no censorship at all.

  I think it is essential that we have a corporate policy 
  defined now.  I also think it is essential that the policy be 
  promulgated publicly, along with the name of the corporate 
  officer who is responsible. In turn, we will all be able to 
  evaluate just what kind of corporation Digital will become 
  as a result of this and other policies.

                                         Atlant

                              "Finally, they came for me,
                      and there was no-one else left to defend me"

                             (Yes, I take it *THAT* seriously)

    Re .87:                                                                
    
>    "There should probably be a policy, and that might be the best outcome
>    of all this comment.  Without one, we have no way to deal with
>    situations where participants cannot handle "The DIGITAL way of doing
>    things".  All we have to do now is figure out how to form such a policy
>    and then find a way to suggest it to the right mgmt. Could be a chance
>    for positive action (read that several ways, best left unstated here)." 
 
    I agree that we need such a policy. I think it should include a
    simple statement of NOTEing ethics and a code of proper behavior.
    Given that the noteing community is non-hierarchical, I suggest
    that the community itself develop this policy. It could be disseminated
    in such places as the easynet conference listing, and in many of
    the actual conferences, especially the non-work or quasi-work
    conferences.
    
    I suggest that the development of this policy be done in the ETIQUETTE
    conference (on HUMAN, <select> to access it).

.90>    I think it is essential that we have a corporate policy 
.90>    defined now.  

.87>    "There should probably be a policy, and that might be the best outcome
.87>    of all this comment.  Without one, we have no way to deal with
.87>    situations where participants cannot handle "The DIGITAL way of doing
.87>    things".  

.91>    I agree that we need such a policy. I think it should include a
.91>    simple statement of NOTEing ethics and a code of proper behavior.
.91>    Given that the noteing community is non-hierarchical, I suggest
.91>    that the community itself develop this policy. 

	The outcome I fear most from this incident is a corporate policy.
	While in theory policies are designed to insure that the right
	thing is done it seldom works out that way. Policies usually wind
	up being used to justify bad decisions.

	I agree with .87 and .91 and others that something is needed. A
	statement of Noting ethics and code of behavior *is* something I
	would like to see. To be both fair and effective such a code must
	written by Noters and agreed to voluntarily by the Noting community.
	A management dictated policy would be unlikely to be accepted by
	the Noting community and would therefore be counter-productive.

	On to ETIQUETTE to start work on it.

		Alfred

    This has really got me depressed.  Someone said that losing SEXCETERA
    was "no great loss", and there seems to be a general sentiment that
    "if that's all we lost, then it's not too bad".  I disagree.  We
    know now that there is some unstated standard which if varied from
    will result in the deletion of the conference.  But nobody has any
    idea what that standard is.  And so far we haven't got any indication
    that the standard will be made public.  
    
    It means that from now on, whenever we say anything in a conference,
    we have to ask ourselves "could this result in the deletion of this
    conference?"  For me, it kind of takes the fun out of the whole
    thing.
    
    Don

    I, too, think we are all panicking too much.  
    
    The basis of this panic is that "SOMEONE" has the power and inclination
    to take things out of our hands and make decisions without identifying
    himself or explaining his decision to the affected parties.  (Indeed,
    he may not know just how many parties consider themselves affected.) We
    don't yet know what that decision will be -- it may be very liberal or
    very conservative -- but we know someone is pondering it. 
    
    I don't care who left what on whose desk.  I don't care what facility
    it was in or what management was involved.  I will be sad to see
    SEXCETERA off the air because I believe it served a useful purpose,
    but I won't be heartbroken.  I talk to most of the people I knew
    from SEXCETERA in other conferences.  
    
    I care very much what level the decision about SEXCETERA has been
    pushed to and what the manager involved feels about noting, non-work
    use of the net, etc.  I care whether the manager involved has any
    personal experience of using VAX Notes for work.  I care about what
    he/she plans to do with the contents of the file.

    It would be very nice if the manager involved would introduce himself
    in a conference, perhaps this one, perhaps another, and just let us
    know where he is coming from, even if he did so from an anonymous
    account to avoid a rash of mail.  This would do a lot to quell the
    widespread panic now seizing the net. 
        
    I believe the upper management of Digital are generally in agreement
    about DEC Culture.  Perhaps if the manager who gets the listing put on
    his desk used a conference to discuss this, he would gain fresh insight
    about conferencing.  This would help in this (and future) decisions
    about conferencing. 
    
    If anyone knows who the manager involved is, and the manager is willing
    to present his views (or her views -- better not be sexist) (or even
    [hope, hope!] discuss the issue so he or she can get a feel for the
    possibilities in noting), I would be willing to offer the space on
    MLOKAI and even an anonymous account for the manager to use. 

    I think discussion of this issue in the absence of the people actually
    involved in the decision-making process is pointless, so I will only
    open a conference if I hear from the management involved, and only
    for the purpose of quelling the panic. 
        
    If anyone knows who is handling this (or know of a way of getting this
    reply to him), could you pass this along?  I have a feeling that a lot
    of people's work has been more affected by the ensuing paranoia than by
    the event itself.  I would like to see the net at peace so we can
    continue making DEC the best in the world. 

    					Thanks,
    
    					    Ralph

    I've been pursuing various avenues offline, trying to find out
    more about what's happening with this, and it just gets worse. 
    PLEASE READ THE ENTIRETY OF MY RESPONSE.
    
    first, I'm afraid .95 seems to have missed the entry reporting on
    the fate of SEXCETERA.
.95>    We don't yet know what that decision will be -- it may be very
.95>    liberal or very conservative -- but we know someone is pondering it.
    We do know the fate - off the net, no copies to be distributed,
    hard copy delivered to security, the system manager involved ordered
    not to discuss it - but we still don't know who decided that, nor
    why.  Not very liberal, is it?
    
    I learned from the Easinet Program Manager in Corporate Telecomm that
    Corporate Telecomm was recently reviewed by the Internal Auditors, and
    one of the concerns they voiced (albeit a relatively minor one) was
    over notesfiles.  And, there are a number of other groups who are also
    making some noises about NOTES on the network - like Corporate Security
    and the Law Department, and to a lesser extent some folks in DIS. The
    bottom line was his opinion that things will probably get worse. 

    Batten down the hatches, mates, storm's a-brewing...
    
    

        I have also looked into this off-line, and I would like to
        respectfully disagree with Mr. McCulley. I have some concerns
        over the way some of it has been handled, but I believe that in
        the end cool heads can prevail. The worst danger here is if a
        bunch of people, "batten down the hatches" and prepare to do
        battle. 
        
        There are, I feel, proper reasons for concern. I'm not entirely
        comfortable with security's interest in this. The only
        explanation I have heard is that they were brought in as a
        disinterested party. The implication here being that there are
        two management groups in conflict over the issue. If this is the
        case, then it is understandable that an outside neutral group be
        involved. I would have used legal myself, but security is not
        too outlandish. It is perhaps an unfortunate choice due to the
        "big brother" image that it seems to suggest to some. 
        
        Also, it would appear that some managers are trying to keep a
        very tight lid on this situation. Obtaining information is quite
        hard. This, too, is quite understandable. The identity of the
        lady who was offended by the material put on her desk, the
        identity of the offender, and the nature of the disciplinary
        action resulting are none of our business and ought to be kept
        confidential. However, the impression given by an over-zealous
        blanket of secrecy is of sinister workings or cover-ups, and is
        thus, I feel, unwise. 
        
        I have also contacted a number of lower and middle level
        managers about this, mostly personal friends and acquaintances.
        They include managers in my area, in the VAX Notes area, and
        other portions of engineering. The attitude is uniformly
        reasonable. Several are concerned about the unexplained role of
        security and the secrecy. Most feel that this can turn into an
        opportunity to settle out some informal or even formal
        guidelines for moderating and noting. None are panicking or
        shutting down note files.
        
        In the end, the conclusions you draw from the available evidence
        is determined as much by your own expectations and viewpoint as
        by the evidence. If you want to be paranoid or combative about
        it, there is enough unexplained to support fairly outlandish
        tales of sinister intentions and secret machinations. If you are
        willing to trust, and to understand, and to work slowly through
        the system, it doesn't look all that bad.
        
        JimB. 
        
        PS: Would anyone who is working through this issue contact me. I
        am still attempting to ascertain that the proper safe-guards are
        in place to insure that the hard copy is not abused. We don't
        really need a lot of us pushing this issue right now, just one
        or two calmly and firmly. Thank you.

        A prediction:  One of the next files to go will be THE_PHOENIX on
        MTV::, etc.  This file was described to me this afternoon by
        someone in Corporate MIS (who called to tell me to quit
        re-distributing jokes via DECmail, which one of his staff stumbled
        over while moving someone's DECmail account from one node to
        another -- and read the person's mail, naturally) as a "dating
        service" -- which it is NOT.  What will be next?
        
        Let's remember that, in the case of SEXCETERA, the offending
        action was not what was written in the conference (if I recall
        the account of the incident correctly), but rather the fact
        that someone printed out something that had been written by
        someone, and left it on the author's desk!  Maybe my memory
        is fading, but I seem to remember that the description of the
        incident (admittedly hearsay) was that the author objected
        to having (her?) statement extracted onto paper and left on
        (her?) desk.  If that's so, then it could have resulted from
        ANY conference, or from MAIL that was forwarded without the
        author's permission, or from any of a WIDE variety of ways
        that have little or nothing to do with the actual medium.
        
        It would be really nice to know the facts behind what is going
        on.  In the absence of facts, I see no reason to be complacent,
        and believe that the storm is not brewing.
        
        By the way, at least one acquaintance has been threatened with
        being FIRED for using NOTES and MAIL for non-work-related topics.
        Can each of us say that we have NEVER done this?  Does each of us
        want to work in a company where this goes on? 
        
        Tom
        

Re .-1:
	... someone in Corporate MIS (who called to tell me to quit
        re-distributing jokes via DECmail, which one of his staff stumbled
        over while moving someone's DECmail account from one node to
        another -- and read the person's mail, naturally) ...
        
        ... at least one acquaintance has been threatened with
        being FIRED for using NOTES and MAIL for non-work-related topics.

I can't help it.  Don't panic, the wise say, but in the face of the above,
I think panic is justified.

    - it's after hours. Check the timestamp. However, the lights are
    still on and the system's still up.
    - I discovered notes about 12 weeks ago. We just recently came up
    on the Enet out here in the desert. I've learned more about Digital
    technical products AND culture than I would in a year of phone calls.
    - I participate in two or three 'personal interest' files. Whether
    after hours or not, well, find some notes and check the times. It's
    all right there. I took the (few) references to the 'Network Police'
    to be misguided humor. Not so sure now. 
    - A moderator does take on a job, voluntarily. However, it starts
    to feel that the moderators themselves have taken on the... what?
    duties? of the Network Police, WITHOUT APPARENT COERCION. When I
    see notes' topics hidden, replies deleted/edited for (public?)
    consumption, I start to wonder where the rot begins. The perfect
    repressive society is one where the people repress themselves.
    - About 6 weeks ago I posted a topic in this very conference. It
    is mildly critical of certain internal accounting procedures. I
    was very gratified that it was not shot down, but discussed 
    seriously and knowledgeably. Would I TODAY post a topic critical
    of the corporation ? Maybe not.
    - A noter's society? naahh. This creates an entity which can be
    seen by management as an opposing force. Creates polarization.
    The best 'noter's society' is the one we have now... some of us
    may even BE management, and, outside of one's acquaintances, who
    would know?
    - Statistics are against a perfect NOTES world. I myself have gotten
    ..uh... rather heated at times. In retrospect I'd probably delete
    certain replies posted on various subjects. But there they are.
    Dissemination of internal technical information. Apparent sexual
    harassment. The personell committing these aberrations deserve
    disciplinary action. Removing/censoring the NOTES involved is 
    an inappropriate response. NOTES is a neutral medium.
    
    Karl Moeller SWS    
    
    

    Re: .89
    
    Peter,
    
    I'm afraid that you misunderstood my intent in the paragraph you
    have taken offense toward.  In reviewing it I can see that I did
    not write it particularly well.
    
    I was TRYING to advocate that we ALL trust one another as I said
    as the last line of the note.
    
    I was TRYING to point out that in disciplines SUCH AS security and
    finance CANNOT have the same ATTITUDE toward trust as someone in
    disciplines such as engineering.  I was NOT trying to smear ANYONE
    - quite the opposite.  I was trying to indicate that we are all
    Digital employees and should work together.
    
    I apologize for my poor writing.  I believe that you and I are in
    complete but violent AGGREEMENT.
    
    Don

        Re: 111.100, and the notion that a noter's society would
        be seen as the opposition by management.
        
        At least three of the people who have suggested the ideas
        are managers themselves!
        
        JimB.

    re .100, about moderators and deleted notes - sometimes the authors
    will reconsider and delete their own notes.  I just logged in to
    this conference specificallhy to do so, I deleted my entry 111.93
    which disagreed with Peter Conklin about trust and sharing the same
    philosophy of Digital - not because I reconsidered my main position,
    but in the course of offering the specific examples that Peter
    requested I made an ill-advised statement that I later decided
    reflected unfairly upon my present management - I may re-enter it
    when I can provide sufficient context to explain that a specific
    imperfection doesn't negate my overall satisfaction with this
    organization.  I still feel that I've seen too many exceptions
    (including the SEXCETERA affair) to be quite as sanguine as 
    Mr. Conklin, but I did not do an acceptable job of advocating my
    position.
    
    So don't blame the moderators for censorship, sometimes self-censorship
    is the wisest course.
    

    .102 responded to .100's comment about a "noter's society" perhaps
    being perceived by management as a polarizing influence, by pointing
    out that several of those suggesting it were themselves managers.
    I think this goes back to Conklin's comment about sharing the same
    philosophy of Digital, those managers who are themselves noters
    and do share a common culture with the rest of us are not the problem.
    But if there are elements in management, or if things are different
    in upper management, then there may be a problem.  In 112.8 I used
    the "U" word which immediately drew objections although I offered
    a parenthetical explanation of why I felt it was appropriate to
    my feelings.  I too would object to such a development within Digital,
    I firmly believe that polarization would be counterproductive. 
    But I also remember some of the material that I copied from DEBATE.NOTE
    in .69 which discussed the "power" of open communication being an
    important contribution of Notes, and I wonder if there might be
    some individuals in management who see that as undesirable.  If
    so, they too might see a noter's society as creating a pole of power
    opposite their own.
    
    I would prefer to see the power of open communication through notes
    harnassed as a tool to strengthen our Digital society, but right
    now it's difficult to be optimistic about that.  The secrecy and
    questions surrounding the handling of SEXCETERA make it easy to
    see threats to open communication coming from at least some of the
    management structure.  Until I see evidence that that isn't real,
    I will continue to be concerned.
        

    
    I wonder if Len (K-Notes) Kawell knows what a ruckus he's 
    started? :-)  I also wonder if the person that invented paper
    had this many problems.....
    
    I think I read my first note about 2 1/2 - 3 years ago.  So while
    noting is not in its infancy, it is certainly still a toddler!
    I look around and see countless positive examples of conferences
    and their participants that are "doing the right thing".  That
    goes for non-work related as well as work related conferences.
    When you step back from the frenzy and ponder what something
    like VMSNOTES or ASKENET has done for us, not to mention
    for *you* (*me*) in particular, it's amazing.  And I'm not just
    talking about technical stuff here either;  ask anyone in Australia
    or the far east, or in West Podunk about how Notes has improved
    the quality of work life, morale, etc.  I know many of you have
    heard this but, it bears repeating.
    
    The point is, we've had 99+% success with conferences to date. Anyone
    who thought "this incident" would not or could not happen is being
    naive, or at best over optimistic.  It happened with MAIL after all,
    and continues to happen today! 
    
    Although the facts surrounding "this incident" are muddled, I can
    easily imagine it being worse.  There may be subsequent incidents
    that *are* worse.  So KEEP NOTING - learn from your (and others')
    mistakes.  We're doing a great job!
    
    Brian
    
    

    	Whatever DEC culture is, Non-work Notes Conferences embodies
    it.
    
    	To restrict it, censor it, control it, coerce it, threaten it
    from the outside, through an uncommunicative corporate hierarchy,
    is to cripple if not destroy a social network the likes of which
    has never existed before, anywhere.
    
    	There are many people who's primary reason for not seeking a
    job outside the company for more pay and comparable benefits is
    the Notes community, which is irreplacable and unique
    
    	Noters have stumbled onto a use for DEC computers that is not
    limited to research, business, games, or academics, though it is
    useful to all of those. VAX Notes is by definition pushing towards
    the most general use imaginable for computers...as communication
    and permanent reference material, in one. Rather than strive to
    pound it into innocuous paranoia, how about making it required of
    all employees, in order that Digital maintains an unexcelled leadership
    role in what must be the wave of the future in computer communication.
    
    	Why don't we encourage the establishment of a public VAX Notes
    network? Noone can do what Digital can do in terms of networks.
    Why are we waiting until someone else can? Create a marketing strategy
    that shows how ANYONE can put a financially self-supporting network
    up, based on a uVAX and RA disks, and hooking up with other
    independents who've done the same thing. That is power. 
    
    	If interested in doing something instead of yabbering, send
    me mail.
    
    	Ed

	I think that there should be some sort of standard concerning what 
kind of note files are acceptable on the network.  The problem with "community 
standards" is that the person in charge of a particular part of the company 
can be MORE restrictive than those standards.  A policy can state what IS 
allowed, as well as what it prohibited.

	Aren't there policies concerning what sort of things can be put up in 
our offices?  It may have been at a former job, but I remember a policy that
prohibited political posters, religious tracts, commercial ads, etc., but
specifically allowing "want ads", event announcements, and so on.  Because the 
potential resources are greater (WITHOUT cutting into business use) a notefile
policy need not be so restrictive.

	Without any policy, you can have restrictive and permissive abuse.  A
manager "out to get" someone could try to get them fired for abusing company
resources, i.e. setting up a CARE_BEARS notefile.  On the other hand, what
happens when someone sets up a NAZI notefile; is it within his manager's
rights to have him remove it, or fire him if he won't?  Don't claim that it
wouldn't matter - would you want even a tiny portion of your hard work for the
company to support the dissemination of racist propaganda? 

	If we want to have the right to non-work related note files, lets get 
it down on paper.  If some non-work related subjects areas aren't acceptable 
topics, lets get those down to.  Lets NOT continue getting into uproars each 
time a manager makes an ad-hoc decision.

Steve 

    I would like to insert some realisim into this. While most
    line managers know about notes and notes files most middle
    managers don't. There for you have a whole lot of managers
    who look at the use of the network for other then work related
    as a very large no no. Dec is gotton so big that a lot of
    the middle managers are not with in promoted from the ranks,
    there for they have not, don't see the use of dec equipment
    for nonwork related use as a benifit, but as a abuse.
    
    Now how many managers who use notes, better yet how many of
    them who have accessed Sexcetera would be willing to go to
    their managers and fight to keep it or start another one.
    I don't think you will find many.
    
    New topic.
    To all the system managers and notes moderators, You had better
    make sure your management have knowledge of the notes files on
    your systems and approve. If they don't and especially now that
    Sexcetera has been shutdown, and someone puts a complaint in
    you will have no one to cover you. Also call it censorship or
    what ever, system managers / moderators you see something that
    looks abusive, or out_fo_line don't hesitate to remove it. Its
    your rear thats on the line. Thats where the bucks going to stop.
    
    My opinion is that the notes files and their use will start be
    looked at in the near future. If there is abuse or preceived
    abuse , look out.  No I don't have any inside information, just
    a gut feel.
    
    
    If you are wondering who I am, I'm the system manager of the 
    CADSE cluster and that's where the buck is stopping right now.
    
    dave
    

    I go away for one week and when I come back, I've missed all the
    big events, a nuclear melt-down and a NOTES explosion.  I bet the
    deceased notesfile didn't have as many topics as this topic has replies.
    
    I do not care to know who was involved, what happened, or why.  And
    I don't worry about management or Security activities.  They are
    responsible people..., PEOPLE, just like you or me. 
    
    I wouldn't want people to know what goes on between my manager and
    myself.  We feud over simple things, mostly performance reviews and
    schedules.  If my manager complained that I was spending too much time
    reading NOTES and sending MAIL, then I would adjust those activities.
    To not do so would invite disciplinary actions. 
    
    Mark

    (Side issue:
    
    	A previous note mentioned Person A reading Person B's MAIL file.
    
    	Isn't this a forbidden act?  I seem to recall getting a memo
     that said reading someone else's mail was grounds for dismissal.
     
        What's the story?
    				-John Bishop)

[note: this is a work-related note]
    
           <<< HUMAN::ARKD$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SECURITY_POLICY.NOTE;2 >>>
                   -< Worldwide Software Security Policies >-
================================================================================
Note 27.0       Bill Heffner's memo could become a Corp. Policy        4 replies
PRSIS3::DTL "Paris, France"                          51 lines  24-FEB-1986 02:52
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


   This is the famous Bill Heffner's memo on software privacy.
   
   I ask the question: If this document becomes a Corporate Policy,
   is all software we develop still Digital property or the employee's?
   
   
*****************
* D I G I T A L *       I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
*****************


TO:  Systems Software			DATE:  29 July 82
     ZK Employees 			FROM:  Bill Heffner
					DEPT:  Systems Software
					EXT:   264-8348
					MAILSTOP:  ZKO1-3/J35


SUBJECT:  Employee Conduct

Over the last few months, there have been several violations of DEC 
work rules related to individual rights and privacy.  We all understand 
that it is a violation for an employee to go through the desk or files 
of another employee without having proper permission.  In fact, such 
an invasion of the property of another may be grounds for immediate 
dismissal.

What is, perhaps, not as well understood is the fact that DEC 
considers the computer files of an individual to be as private as his 
desk.  Consequently, persuing another user's directories or files is a 
violation similar to going through the person's desk.  System manager, 
operators, people with privileged accounts, etc., must treat their 
privileges accordingly and respect the property and privacy of others. 
Similarly, it is a violation to gain access to a computer on which one 
does not have an account and impersonate another user.  This, to me, is 
the most flagrant of violations and will not be tolerated.

Similarly, giving account names, passwords, telephone numbers, etc., 
to people who have no right to use our computers is a violation of DEC 
work rules.  Our computer resources are a company asset that are to be 
used only by people so authorized.

My intent is to provide an open, honest environment in which all of us 
can be productive and grow.  I do not want to institute locked 
computer rooms, restrict our incoming lines, etc., but rather ask each 
of you to assist in implementing and enforcing the emplyee conduct 
policy.

Thank you.

Re .-1: A perfectly good policy.  Note that it would not abridge
Digital's right to the productive output of employees pursuant to
the agreement you sign when you come to work, but it does say
even your manager should not go groveling through your desk or
your computer files without proper notice and justification. 

Re. Noters committee, etc.  My preference is for as free and
unfettered communication as possible, and therefore that
etiquette, rules, etc. come from within the community of noters
without any designated group to bless them.  HOWEVER.... it
is a fact that Digital resources are being used here, and
therefore ESSENTIAL that we know of any rules and limits that
may be determined to be necessary by the corporate legal
department, security, or whomever.  In other words, what EXACTLY
was it about Sexcetera that warranted its removal.  What exactly
do we have to observe/avoid in the future re. topics, language,
etc.  I want as few rules as possible, but there clearly are
some rules lurking out there, and we need to know them.

The most common question in ALL of this LONG discussion, and one which hasn't
been answered, is "what SPECIFICALLY was WRONG with SEXCETERA"? 

If that ONE question was answered, I think it would defuse most the the
contention. 

Can't anyone out there tell us, for sure, 

	What SPECIFICALLY was WRONG with SEXCETERA?

Steve

    I must say that Steve Blotcky brought up a good point. What if
    someone wanted to start a conference that was implicitly pro-
    racism? Should we tolerate it just because we don't approve of it?
    
    Actually, the answer is easy: no.
    
    The difference between SEXCETERA.NOTE and (a hypothetical) KLAN.NOTE
    is that the former was a forum to discuss sexual issues without
    promoting any one system of standards and practices over another.
    The latter would be promoting a particular view. DEC as a company
    does have an "obligation" to discourage a racist atmosphere among
    its employees, but it doesn't have an "obligation" to discourage
    any sexual proclivities (other than any that would interfere with
    work :-)) unless those proclivities would encourage a sexist, racist,
    or other (nasty)-ist atmosphere.
    
    --- jerry

    Careful there.  Where do you draw the line?  Would BIBLE.NOTE (to
    name an example) be required to be open to discussions of all sacred
    writings of all religions, or would it be open enough if all views
    of the Bible could be expressed?
    
    Suppose there is a MUSLIM.NOTE.  Would it be acceptable to limit
    it to professed Muslims only?  What about non-religious special
    interests?
    
  --Simon
    

    It looks more and more like the "burning question" from .114 (What was
    wrong with SEXCETERA?) may never be answered, my own belief is that
    Dave Harding is correct in .109, many middle managers do not understand
    Notes, don't read notesfiles and wouldn't answer here if they did.
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying that many managers do read
    notesfiles, but we should face the fact that Noters are still a pretty
    distinct subculture and not the majority of employees, let alone
    managers. 
    
    My own interpretation is that SEXCETERA was an easily identified
    (and easily banished!) piece of a very hot and very visible issue,
    and that the instincts of self-preservation in the line managers
    who found this tossed into their laps was to find the quickest way
    out for themselves.  So there might not even be a clear objective
    argument for banning SEXCETERA beyond "it was dangerous to my career
    to have it remain."  One of the problems with the secrecy and failure
    to explain the decision is that it allows and encourages such
    speculations as this when in fact there might be some better
    justification for the decision - but without the explanation
    speculation is the only approach possible to learning from experience
    in order to avoid future problems.
    
    Getting back to my assertion that Noterdom is still a distinct
    subculture, in .106 Ed Bernstein claims that "Whatever DEC culture is, 
    Non-work Notes Conferences embodies it."  I maintain that this is
    partially true but misleading.  It is true to the extent that there
    is a unified "DEC culture", Notes is an open communication medium
    that epitomizes that culture.
    
    But this is a very big corporation now, and this open communication
    tends to obscure the fact that each seperate area of the company has
    its own style.  I've worked in several different places and experienced
    this firsthand.  Things are encouraged in Engineering that would never
    be tolerated in Manufacturing, etc.  And we are geographically
    dispersed, so both corporate and public social mores are different in
    different areas.  The hidden discussion in 113.* dealt with an incident
    that occured because DTL unthinkingly reported an action that would be
    accepted as standard practice in his home country, and someone else
    acted on the local US cultural interpretation that it was unacceptable.
    Or for another example, Didier today mentioned that he has been
    criticized for his unenlightened sexist attitude for using the
    masculine pronoun "he" when discussing in English individual roles that
    would be of neutral gender in his native French.
    
    One point of this is that we must all be careful to remain cognizent
    that while the network offers tools such as Notes and Mail for easy
    open communication, the people involved in that communication are
    often very far apart figuratively as well as literally.  So while
    the tools can help knit our culture into one unified whole, they
    also can cause misunderstandings that might mask shortcomings in
    that unification.
    
    The other point that I see is that the same effect makes it easy
    to overlook the non-participants in this network culture.  The point
    in .109 about middle managers hired from outside our unique culture
    is an important one, if they don't share our experience living in
    the network how can they share our cultural viewpoint about it?
    More to the point, how can they be introduced to it in a positive
    fashion, without risking a backlash that might hurt it?  History
    seems full of situations in which the meeting of two dissimilar
    cultures led to one surviving and triumphing while the other was
    either assimilated or destroyed, but lost in either case.  Ed Bernstein
    refers to "a social network the likes of which has never existed"
    while I see it more as a social network which is just beginning
    to evolve, and I'd like to be part of it and see it into maturity.
    This is why I wouldn't really be interested in leaving Digital,
    and it's what I feel any push against non-work notesfiles threatens.
    

    RE: .110
    
    (no flame, just information...)
    
    When SEXCETERA went to VAXNotes, I remember about 5000 replies.
    When the file died, someone told me that there was over 6000 replies.
    While I could be  wrong, I do remember seeing at least 275 topics.
    While there is no way to prove this, I think that there were about
    20 "voyeurs" for every contributor. It's a safe bet that it was
    the most-widely-read notesfile.
                   
    
    The company is very concerned about harassment and lawsuits; they
    don't need any more justification to shut down the file (even if
    I don't agree with the decision). The same thing happened last year
    when the local security wouldn't let us play frisbee during lunch
    on the lawn outside because they were afraid that we would get hurt
    and sue the company.
    
    
    The Mad Chinaman
     
    
    

    re:.116
    
    In the absence of a "re:", I assume that you are responding to
    my .115, Simon.
    
    I'm not aware that I was drawing a line anywhere, nor am I sure
    that a religious special interest group really falls anywhere
    near any sort of DMZ wherein the hypothetical line falls. I was
    pointing out that certain viewpoints are deemed, if not just by
    society in general, by law to be inimical to the rights and well-
    being of others, and DEC is required, if not just by social con-
    science, by law to discourage (or at least not encourage) the
    practice of such views at the company. The hypothetical NAZI.NOTE
    would fall into this area. Something like BIBLE.NOTE, that does
    not foster an explicit or implicit "threat" to anyone's rights or
    well-being, is a different species of creature altogether. I lump
    SEXCETERA in the same area (if you don't mind my equating SEXCETERA
    with BIBLE :-)).
    
    Where the line is drawn is not clear, but certain things seem to
    be clearly on "this" side or "that" side.
    
    --- jerry

      
    Hi, 
        Aren't notes wonderful - I've just started my own (contact me
    and I'll give you the location) on socialism and capitalism.
    
    
    One point that seems to be picked up on, but not challenged, is
    that in DEC we manage ourselves most of the time, but we are always
    responsible to upper management, yet they have no responsibilty
    to us, let alone us being able to challenge those decisions.
      Don't get me wrong, I'm all for DEC social policy - No connections
    with south africa, not much business with the military, it's got
    to be good. However the fact remains management are not responsible
    to us. The Sexectra buiseness is an example, but I've come across
    murmurings with work related issuses as well.
       We should call for government of the workers by the workers-
    not by a priviliged bunch of <DONT TAKE THIS PERSONALLY KEN OLSEN> 
    golf players (someone else's description). Yes management make strategic
    decisions, but we should be able to challenge those...
       We are half way there, so why not set an example to every company
    that the WORKERS can GOVERN !  We might have a lot less problems
    in the world then !!!!!
    
    (strewth, I can see Lenin turning in his grave !!)
          ALL POWER TO THE NOTERS
    
                 Cheers
                     Winton 
    
    
    
    
    

    SOAPBOX has been made read-only as of today.  It will be resurrected,
    with "rules", according to one of the final entries.
    
    Joe (who happened to be looking through it when it happened)

The Supreme Court (on its better days) talks about the "chilling
effect" of various laws and legal procedures -- things which
can cause enought hassle and/or expense to someone that they
decide not to exercise their rights to something which is
fundamentally legal.

I believe we are seeing a "chilling effect" on non-work-related
notes.  What happened to Sexcetera will not be an isolated
incident which can be forgotten.  Other files are already closing
down as moderators and system administrators decide not to risk
problems, even though there may have been no complaints and no
reason to assume there will be.

Ask not for whom the bell tolls...

    	An overriding concern by management is the legalities of owning
    the equipment on which potential liabilities reside. (is that the
    right legal term? you know what I mean) I suggest a way around this
    (and I've suggested it before, though maybe not this clearly) is
    for the employees to pool resources to buy enough equipment independently
    of the company to host the non-work conferences. The organization
    might be something like DECUS, IDECUS, or ay number of employee
    organizations. The amount of resources needed are reasonably
    affordable, especially if DEC sells them for internal transfer costs,
    or whatever a reasonable internal cost might be. The Network links
    into the independent "Notes-Net" could be leased by the independent
    organization from a company like TYMNET or TELENET, so that employees
    could still dial into the N-Net from anywhere in the world 
    (though I'd expect outside the US it would cost a more) but without
    the "ax" of management hanging over their heads. 
    
    	I'm not saying this is preferable to free communication within
    Digital, but the liabilities of text cannot be ignored by a corporation
    the size of DEC. It could be handled (and with much "shallower pockets")
    by a small independent.
                                                                            
    	An added benefit of an independent network would also be the
    ability to use the resources of such a network (even if it's just
    one microvax and three RA81's, the resources of the people involved
    with it would be impressive) for uses which are specifically prohibited
    on company equipment, such as saving money, making money, ensuring
    copyrights belong to the writers of stories, etc...at least I believe
    this to be true.
    
    	I have two people on a mailing list who are interested in working
    on this idea...I'd like to hear from others.
    
    	Ed
    

        RE: 111.123
        
        An independant net is an absolutely terrible idea, if you'll
        forgive my saying so. First of all, without being a lawyer, I
        doubt that it would help the liability at all. Please remember
        the issue about corporate liability for drunk drivers leaving
        from parties in private residences, whose only connection with
        the company is that the host is a manager.
        
        Then there's what it would do to security. Either this is a DEC
        net, and non-employees are verboten, which would I'm quite sure
        would eliminate what possible liability shelter the scheme might
        provide, OR it is a publicly accessible net, and non-employees
        are allowed on it but not on the Easynet. The only way to insure
        that would be to make them two completely independant nets. But
        to serve their purpose they'd have to be accessable from every
        DEC facility, or we'd just be tossing our back-water cousins out
        in the cold. 
        
        Worse than the fact that it would gain us nothing, and cost us
        dearly in access, security, and in money, is the problem that it
        would build up this damned "us vs. them" that is rearing its
        ugly head. All this talk of "the 'ax' of management hanging over
        [our] heads" only aggravates the problem. 
        
        Not only does it divide "us" from "them" but it draws a clear
        line between "legitimate work" and "frivolous non-work". Once
        you have such a line, it becomes quite clear that all non-work
        belongs on the non-work net. Move the games there. Move the
        novel you write while waiting for compiles. Move the math and
        mandelbrot stuff regardless of how good a test of the equipment
        or a honing of your abilities.
        
        It also sets a lousey precedent. Employees pay for their fringe
        benefits. Let's make the shower rooms, volleyball courst,
        "wellness centers" be rented to the employees. Make 'em build
        their own auditorium for the Spitbrook singers and the visiting
        musicians to play in. Keep 'em out of company-own rooms. 
        
        I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that it is a
        teerible idea. It would either cost the employees or DEC or both
        a lot of money. It drives wedges in, wher we should be trying to
        patch up. It wouldn't solve any of the problems it is intended
        to address and would cause innumerable head-aches of its own. 
        
        JimB.

    Although it seems contrary to where this conference was headed,
    I have to admit that I agree whole-heartedly with .125.  Instead
    of enhancing an "us vs them" confrontation, maybe of more benefit
    would be: (1) clear & definitive guidelines as to what would constitute
    an "unacceptable" notesfile, where "unacceptable" would not necessarily
    be defined as non-work-related, and (2) maybe some "management
    awareness seminars" that explain the benefits to the employee AND
    the corporation of notesfiles.
    
    Jon

    .125>    I have to admit that I agree whole-heartedly with .125.  
    
Do you always start off with a pat on your own back?   I love it!	:-)
    
    I too am concerned with the polarization of an "us vs. them" attitude,
    it's one of the more negative effects of the way the original issue
    was/is being handled.  That's one of my disagreements with the
    socialist rhetoric in (I think it was) .120 - it would just polarize
    things more.  (Some of my other disagreements are that I would trust
    "workers committees" or similar structures even less than I trust
    professional management;  they'd run into the same pragmatic realities
    that any other management does so they couldn't act too much
    differently anyway;  and voicing such extreme opinions can only
    help fuel reactionist measures from the opposite extreme - which
    is the polarization problem again!)
    
    I like the idea of "management awareness seminars" or something
    along those lines.  This could be an effort specific to notesfiles
    or other appropriate topics, or a more general communication explaining
    the peon's view of things to key management figures - or even an
    interactive session trying to work issues like how to handle
    notesfiles.  I think all of those would be useful in their own way,
    and that we should explore the concept and maybe try it out.  I'd
    be glad to participate if such an effort were to be made.
    

    
    In reference to the early 111 notes...I miss SEXCETERA, does any
    one know what is happening and /or who in "upper management" I 
    could call or send mail to to find out?
    			----leslie
    

        Re: .128 -- Leslie, if we knew what was going on, we wouldn't have
        to speculate here.  You could, of course, call Ken Olsen, but I
        doubt very much you'd get through to him, and I doubt that even he
        knows what's going on. 
        
        As for the earlier remark about SOAPBOX, the intent of the system
        manager is to DELETE it from his system sometime over the weekend.
        Since it is not world-readable, it is impossible for any other
        enterprising soul to give it a home. 
        
        As Dan Murphy remarked, it has a chilling effect.  Simon Szeto's
        mail the moderator of FLIRTS has had the effect of getting that
        conference deleted as well (once again, without the option of it
        being adopted). 
        
        How does the saying go?  Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean
        they're not out to get you?  Why am I not feeling real comfortable
        with the recent events?  Does this feel like "The right thing"?
        
        Tom

    RE: .120
    
    Is he serious???????????????????

    He is entitled to his opinion.
    

My, my!  Go away to DECUS for a week and the whole world collapses!  :-)


I can understand the hard-copy-to-security part.  The SEXCETERA file has
become evidence in a sexual harrassment complaint.  The hard copy preserves
the contents of the file as of the time of the complaint.  Giving Security
custody of the copy assures it won't "conveniently disappear" before it's
needed.

Shutting down the file is probably the prudent thing to do until the sexual
harrassment complaint is resolved.

I do not like the way that this whole operation has been carried out under
orders from some shadowy, unnamed "higher-up" in management.  It would be
more in keeping with the generally open way we do things in Digital for the
responsible manager to identify him/herself.  On the other hand, I'm sure
that the responsible person has better things to do than deal with the
inevitable ill-advised flaming and hate mail that would result if he identified
himself.

A group of us, including our senior manager, were discussing this issue
yesterday.  My manager pointed out that the manager of the group that hosted
SEXCETERA was probably completely unaware of the file's existence until it
was brought to his attention in this bizarre way.  This can be quite
embarrassing and shocking to the manager involved.  Our manager was unpleasantly
surprised and quite upset a while back to discover that there were non-work-
related notesfiles (VAX NOTES not invented yet) on our systems.  The knee-jerk
reaction is to get rid of the offending files.  While I do not agree with
the reaction, I can see how it comes about.

The bit about "stealing company resources" is USUALLY pure stuff and nonsense.
I say USUALLY because there are times when non-work-related noting can
interfere with real work.  As far as I can tell, the NOTES community has been
exemplary in policing itself in this regard.  There are lots of cases where
conferences have been relocated, assumed restricted hours, been restarted, etc.,
because there was interference with real work.

I consider non-work-related NOTES conferences to be a major fringe benefit of
working at Digital.  I hope we don't lose it.

--PSW

.132>The SEXCETERA file has become evidence in a sexual harrassment
.132>complaint.  The hard copy preserves the contents of the file as of the time
.132>of the complaint.

My understanding of the problem is that a woman became offended by someone
placing an extract from SEXCETERA on her desk and attempting to discuss
the extract with her subsequently.  The extract sounds like the only
relevant physical evidence in the matter.

It makes less sense to save an entire copy of SEXCETERA in this situation
than it does to save a copy of the Digital Phone Book for evidence in
an obscene phone call investigation.
				/AHM

    And I ask:
    
    HAS MANAGEMENT SAID ANYTHING ABOUT PERSONAL OR PRIVATE USAGE OF
    THE E-NET ON A CORPORATE WIDE BASIS?
    
    HAS A POLICY STATEMENT BEEN MADE IN A NON-CORPORATE WIDE BASIS?
    
    I don't think I have heard one.  My suggestion is to proceed as
    normal till a policy statement is made somewhere then voice our
    concerns.
    
    My experience with Dec is that Dec will give you more than adequite
    warnings before they do something.
    
    So what's all the ruckus for?  It can lead to a domino effect if
    fears siezes the noter community.  Let's just be patient and see
    how it washes.

                                  (*)

    re .134
    
    I agree (I said the same thing back in the midst of the blather
    somewhere) with the one caveat that people remain cognizant of the
    fact that these ARE company resources. 
    
    The continued doom prediction and bunker mentality here come very
    close to shouting "Fire" in a theater instead of stepping on the
    cigarette. 

RE: .133

A hard copy of the entire file provides the complete context from which was
drawn the extract that was allegedly used for harrassment.

--PSW

Re. 134:  Have we been seeing and hearing the same things??

>> My suggestion is to proceed as
>>    normal till a policy statement is made somewhere then voice our
>>    concerns.
    
>>    My experience with Dec is that Dec will give you more than adequite
>>    warnings before they do something.

For those who were participating in Sexcetera, Flirts, Soapbox
(others?), it is not possible now to "proceed as normal" because
something HAS BEEN DONE without warning and without explanation.
At least that's what it looks like from here.

        Thank you, Dan.  I think you've hit the nail on the head. So far,
        three conferences are gone.  How many more will follow? 
        
        Tom

    I'm aware of ONE conference that was removed by official action.

    Unless there's been some other news that I haven't heard, two more
    were removed as the result of knee-jerk reactions by their own
    moderators, rather like swallowing cyanide because you thought you
    heard a noise. It takes a rather strong sense of paranoia to see the
    latter two as deliberate action on the part of company management
    when management wasn't even involved. 
    
    Which is not the same thing as saying that removing them was a
    mistake. I believe that NWRNF (non-work-related-notes-files) have
    gotten out of hand and that some voluntary pruning of the more
    frivolous is a good idea. (Defining "frivolous" is no mean task,
    although the three in question qualify easily, as would jokes files
    or TRIVIA.) If you just add up the disk space taken by NWRNFs and
    try to configure a set of systems capable of supporting them at MLP,
    and especially if you add in the network bandwidth involved, I think
    you'll find that as a "benefit", NWRNFs cost a lot more than showers
    and jogging trails.

       I beg to differ with the statements about FLIRTS being deleted
    without warning and without a chance to be adopted.  
    
       I don't read flirts, but even I was aware over 24 hours before
    the demise of the files that a) the moderator wished to be rid of
    it and b) if no one contacted her by 4:45 Friday to adopt it, it
    would be deleted.  The fact that no one saw fit to adopt it perhaps
    says something about the desireability of it being around.
                                          
    Let's not distort the facts, please.  There's enough hot-headedness
    and over-reaction about this whole issue already.
    
    tlh
    (Although I've been following this discussion from the beginning,
    I've kept out of it because I have nothing of value to add to the
    calm reasonable statements that Jim Burrows and Simon Szeto have
    been making, and I didn't want to waste everyone's time by just
    saying "ditto".  But while I'm here.  Jim and Simon, Thanks guys.
    You're saying what I would -- only a lot better.)

        For the record, the moderator of FLIRTS decided NOT to allow the
        conference to be adopted, for reasons that undoubtedly made good
        sense to her.  Her decision to delete the conference earlier than
        her original stated deadline (the end of the month) was based, in
        part, on pressure from management (the manager in question knows
        who he is -- and he is not her manager).  The pressure was VERY
        subtle, but it was there.  So, if you don't know the facts, please
        don't speculate that there was no pressure, or that there was an
        opportunity for the conference to be adopted.  (I'm NOT arguing
        that FLIRTS should have been adopted, or that it is needed on the
        net, or that the amount of disk space and network bandwidth it was
        taking up will not be used in other ways, e.g., MAIL and PHONE). 
        
        Tom

    re: .120
    
    WANTON DEVIOUS HAS DISCOVERED NOTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    God help us all.
    
    I nearly gave up VOGON because of his diatribes, now its goodbye
    VAXnotes.....maybe....hmmmm....the good outweighs the bad.....I'll
    stay and see.
    
    Sorry for the digression.
        
    A sufferer.
     
    David.

    re: 111.142,.131,.130,.120
    
    Sorry I upset you Dave - But I've set up a notes file, and I promise
    I won't let you in as you seem to object so much to ideas of us
    controlling our own lives... - Look I'll do you a favour and set
    ACLs to stop you from being tempted to look for it !!!!
           
              Winton
    
    ps  No, I'm not arguing for a revolution to solve the Sexectra problem,
        just pointing out where the root of the problem is. To solve
        it, I agree we should ensure that it is the person who misused
        the notes in harrassing a female employee who is punished, and
        to defend vigourously the use of notes enviroment for NWR conferences. 
        OK ?    
       
    pps As long as the US Military are used in the cause of US Hegemony,
        I'll keep on writing to VNS. 

.132>...My manager pointed out that the manager of the group that hosted
.132>SEXCETERA was probably completely unaware of the file's existence until 
.132>it was brought to his attention in this bizarre way...
    
    I was told that the host system manager had asked for and gotten
    approval from his manager before hosting the file (as I believe any
    prudent system manager would).  I don't know how high up the management
    chain that request traveled but I'm sure that if you went high enough
    there would be some level at which the interest in knowing about
    such mundane details would (properly) be lacking - until it hit
    the fan!  So the supposition in PSW's entry is probably true, but
    so what?
    
    The "knee-jerk" reaction of any manager confronted with such a surprise
    should be to immediately ask his/her subordinates for information, and
    then to consider that in his/her evaluation and actions.  From all
    that has been said about the handling of SEXCETERA there seems to
    have been little if any movement of information up the management
    chain, except for the complaint.  And movement of information down
    the chain has been limited to the orders disposing of the file,
    without anything offering insight into the rationale behind that
    decision.
    
    To me that's the hard part to accept.  Somebody in a recent reply
    here said something about dec not doing things without warning,
    yet this episode not only lacked warning, it still lacks explanation.
    I feel that there is a general responsibility of management to explain
    the rules of conduct to employees in order that employees can comport
    themselves in accordance with those rules.  In this case the
    explanation is lacking, but employees may still be held accountable
    (the system manager hosting SEXCETERA is still worried about
    repercussions, apparently he hasn't been assured there won't be
    any).  So I see it as a failure on the part of the management involved
    to fulfill their responsibilities to the employees.
    
    Which leads to the problem of what employees can do about such
    situations?  The open door policy is a sham in such a situation, the
    anonymity of the management involved raises an extremely significant
    possibility that the complaint would unknowingly be taken to the very
    manager being complained about.  For someone complaining because of
    fear over career consequences such a possibility would most likely have
    a "chilling effect" on the decision to pursue a complaint.  So, how can
    we effectively address this sort of problem?
    

RE: -1   
     
>        Which leads to the problem of what employees can do about such
>    situations?  The open door policy is a sham in such a situation, the
                  ==================================================   
>    anonymity of the management involved raises an extremely significant
>    possibility that the complaint would unknowingly be taken to the very
>    manager being complained about.  For someone complaining because of
>    fear over career consequences such a possibility would most likely have
>    a "chilling effect" on the decision to pursue a complaint.  So, how can
        ===================================================================   
>    we effectively address this sort of problem?
     ===========================================
    
    Lets face it, the open door idea is mainly to suggest new ideas.
    On the surface it is said we can make critiscm, albeit constructive
    critiscm, but even that likely to be taken the wrong way. I know
    you are saying that the open door in this situation doesn't work
    because we don't know who the manager is, but that can be found
    out can't it? The  problem is then what do you do about it?  
       I would suggest that it is the very vulnerability of employees
    (fear felt, even though in some cases that there is very little
    chance of a comeback in terms of employement/promotion) that is
    the problem. 
       Yes, Digital is a new breed of company, very prosperous, and
    fairly generous to its employees, and that to have confrontations
    between a management/employees would not be helpful in most situations.
       But individual managers  can act in shall we say a "wrong" way,
    and as any threat to their decisions would be bad for respect of
   management,  those decisions will probably remain, however wrong.
       Thus we have come back to my reply .120, which although is a
    bit of a diatribe/polemic, rings true - that at the end point, we
    as employees are subject to the vagaries of management, as long
    as we have no REAL power other than polite persuasion.
        And how do we get that force ?
              - as individuals  or as a union of individuals ?
            
                   Winton
    
     PS   Remember Aesops Fable about snapping the bundle of sticks ...
       

    
    
    
    
    

Sorry about the blank reply ( I must remember to INCLUDE not GET :-))
    Anyway I found this and several other pertinent comments in Note
    15 in this conference ....
    
Note 15.0
========
"Do you want to do something funny? Ask people around you the following
 question: What do you think of the Open Door Policy?.. You will see the
 funny responses, that you will get"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[One of several answers ...}
The answer:  (with DEC since 5 years)

1. Yes I know about ODP. But this only works, when you have something
positive to say. When you want to give your suggestion for something new,
to do better. Never try to go and complain. You will be looking after
another open door downstairs right after..

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
    

    re .141:
    
    Not every mucky-muck who wears a suit represents "management." 
    The nameless and impersonal "management" that has been the bogeyman
    in this topic hasn't, to my knowledge, put any pressure whatsoever
    on the moderators of FLIRTS and SOAPBOX.  Granted, I don't know
    all the facts, but the only "management" action known to me in this
    context is with regard to SEXCETERA.
    
    This is not to say that now isn't a good opportunity to reassess
    the collection of non-work related conferences.  If we aren't proud
    of what we're doing, perhaps we shouldn't do it.
    
  --Simon
    

RE: .120
    I can't resist any longer throwing in my $.02 worth.

    >...we are always responsible to upper management, yet they have no
    >responsibilty to us,... However the fact remains management are not
    >responsible to us. 
    
    Digital owes me, yes, for the contribution I make.  That debt is
    settled every Thursday and we start over again even-Steven.  That
    is the extent of Digital's responsibility to me.
    
    Digital IS responsible to its stockholders, however, and part of
    that responsibility is to provide a return on investment for those
    stockholders.  That means hiring and keeping good people, and
    developing and growing those people to provide maximum productivity.
    
    This is a business.  Digital doesn't treat people good or bad because
    they're nice people and we're nice people and everybody likes each
    other.  We live in a capitalist world and Digital is a capitalist
    company.

	Why is it that Management never  involves themselves in NOTES?
    
    
    	I remember the same thought when th{ Engineering Net became
    the Easynet.
    
    	I'd{sure like to hear from them!!!!!!!{!
    
    	-John

Re. 111.144 - agreed.  As noted in 10.4, stated company policy is
that "Digital is a place with a spirit of openness and
informality", whereas I could find nothing that would clearly
disallow the contents of Sexcetera as an internal discussion
among employees.  Hence, I conclude that it is the manager(s)
who have banned Sexcetera without publicly owning up to that
decision (much less openly inviting input on it) who are not
following company policy.

    How do you know that management hasn't been participating in this
    very discussion?
    
    Are management people supposed to identify themsleves in some special
    fashion?
    
    There is certainly a lot of a seige attitude among a lot of people
    here.  Management are workers too.  This is certainly very true
    in Digital where managers must lead in order to survive.
    
    In spite of what many writers in this note seem to feel, management
    are just normal people with slightly different jobs than indivdual
    contributors. They are NOT evil and they are NOT the enemy.
    
    Digital is built upon trust.  Trust is a two way relationship. 
    Management should trust us and we should them.
    
    Overall, I find Digital's management VERY trustworthy.  Give it
    a try.

    Positively Don 

        RE: 111.150
        
        I hate to break the news to you, but you have heard from
        management several times in this note. In case no-one noticed,
        Simon Szeto and Peter Conklin ain't been grunts in years. Then
        there's the system manager of the cluster in question. He ain't
        a "manager" manager, but he has been here. I haven't DIRed
        the note, but I think I saw 1 or 2 other managers in this
        discussion. I also know that it is being talked informally
        up through the VP level.
        
        RE: Noise versus light
        
        I asked a while back if anyone working this issue would contact
        me. Well, one person (who's dropped out of this conversation),
        has responded. The rest of you are just bitching, or bitching at
        people who are bitching. As I said, I am working this. It is
        taking a lot of time, mostly 'cause I've got a real job to do.
        I've contacted management, security, and legal. I have meetings
        phone calls and mail going. 
        
        There are a couple of things I can tell you so far.
        
        1) No-one is eager to do anything about this hastily, even talk
        about it. 
        
        2) No-one who knows anything wants to be indiscrete. They don't
        want to talk about anything having to do with harassment,
        punishment of same or anything else touchy. 
        
        3) Management works at secretary-typed inter-office paper mail
        speeds, NOT panicked E-NET rumor speed. 
        
        4) Every lower to middle manager who knows anything about this
        that I can find is on "our" side. 
        
        5) A good deal of the delay in my getting information is that
        I'm hard to play telephone tag with. In the last three weeks
        I've written a functional spec and a design spec and staffed a 5
        man project in the time I'm not devoting to this. 
        
        6) The managers and other people I've talked to about this are
        just about as busy as I am. 

        JimB.
        
        PS: Don't panic.

    
    	Well, I believe saying "don't panic" in this case IS easier
    said than than done, especially since you seem to have an inside
    track going Jim, that most of us (for sure in Colorado) don't
    have the resorces for. All we can do is try and get info based
    on people like you doing what you can to find out what the heck
    is going on. (Personal note: Thanx for the effort and dedication)
    
    	And because we have a lack of information, and a lack of
    education concerning "upper management" of DEC out here,
    we must assume the worst in some cases and hope for the best.
    
    	I must say that if a discussion takes place on this issue,
    in some sort of open forum, I beleive just taking comments from
    this note would show just how professional, educated, moral,
    folks' use confrences to communicate, educate, and better their
    work environment. 
    
    	No matter the outcome of this, my hat's off to you people
    for showing your true colors, and may "the management" use the
    upmost discression, and wisdom in this matter.
    
    Todd
    
    PS. I don't have DECspell, so any spelling errors' are indeed cause
    for an apolgy.
    

    maybe terminology needs to be clarified.
    
    I've written a few replies here that made references to "management"
    as a collective noun, and others have done the same.  Some people
    have commented or objected to the distinction between the group
    referred to by that collective reference and the participants in
    this discussion, since some of the participants here are themselves
    managers.
    
    I can't speak for others, but in my case the distinction is very real,
    but entirely psychological.  I use the term "management" to refer to
    those who view their jobs as being the manipulation of people and
    organizations (for whatever goals).  I consider as co-workers those who
    have the job of providing me with the matrix necessary for my job.
    "Management" operates on workers and other objects; coworkers are
    people working together for a common goal.  It's a matter of inclusion,
    coworkers who happen to be managers include consideration of/for the
    people working with (instead of *for*!) them while "management"
    depersonalizes considerations in their decisionmaking. Consideration
    of/for people may have to be traded off, but it isn't lacking.  When it
    appears to be lacking the faceless collective term "management"
    applies. 
    
    Ideally Digital would consist entirely of coworkers, some of whom would
    have the job of providing a good environment in which the rest could
    work.  But so far we're considerably short of that ideal.

>    Ideally Digital would consist entirely of coworkers, some of whom would
>    have the job of providing a good environment in which the rest could
>    work.  
 
    I have worked closely with quite a number of Digital Vice Presidents
    over the years. I know that they, and Ken all subscribe to your
    definition of coworkers. By your definitions, they are not management.
    This seems strange to me. Certainly the officers of the corporation
    are management--any they all believe in creating the environment
    for the success of all of us coworkers.

    
    Thank you, Jim, for the information in .153.  Like my fellow worker
    in Colorado, here in California it is sometimes real tough to know
    exactly what is going on.  Please keep the updates coming, your
    time is appreciated!---------leslie
    

    thanks to Peter Conklin for .156 confirming my belief in a vision
    of the Digital philosophy that's shared all the way up the ladder.
    Sometimes the failure of reality to live up to the ideals of that
    vision makes it difficult to remember that it is shared by most
    of us.
    
    I'd argue semantics a little with his title for .156 though.
	    "-< I know no management by your definition >-"
    My thought is that we are all management, that jibes with my
    understanding that the Digital philosophy invoves pushing
    responsibility down to the lowest appropriate level, giving us all
    a high amount of autonomy.  So, under that view we all manage at
    least ourselves.
    
    I admit that my definition is an artificial construct that is a
    (probably clumsy) attempt to explain the polar references to management
    as a seperate and often opposite entity to workers.  It was trying
    to address objections to such references by offering a specific
    (and admittedly rather idiosyncratic) meaning for them.

    I just want to tie my concept in .158 of managing ourselves back
    to the issue with SEXCETERA.
    
    A big part of my concern over the secrecy involved is that I lack
    guidance to manage myself so as to avoid such problems in the future.
    So it affronts my concept of the Digital philosophy in that way
    too.
    

Following is the approved subject Personnel Policy Statement. It 
will be published in the August update to the Personnel Policies and 
Procedures manual.  Please distribute this throughout your 
organizations.

The DIS Policy, same subject, is in the process of update and will be 
distributed shortly.

*************************************************************************

	  MISUSE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS

POLICY

Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in support 
of Company business activities.  The efficient operation of these 
vital resources is critical to the success of the business.  
Therefore, it is the responsibility of all employees to ensure that 
these resources are being used properly.

DEFINITION

For this policy, misuse 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 purely personal purposes, for 
purposes that are not in support of the Company's business activities, 
for purposes that are contrary to Company Philosophy or Policy, 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 
philosphy which is unrelated to the business, permitting unauthorized 
access, etc.

RESPONSIBILITIES

Information Systems Managers:  Information Systems Managers must 
ensure that computers, systems and networks that they manage are 
clearly operating in support of company business activities.  This 
would include reviewing equipment usage and educating users, issuing 
periodic systems management advisories.  Information Systems Managers 
will also immediately investigate and report any incident of misuse 
by an employee to the employee's manager.

Managers:  Managers should periodically remind employees about 
Digital's policy governing the use of Company computer resources and 
should periodically monitor the use of these resources to insure that 
they are not being used in violation of this policy.  In addition, 
managers of employees, who there is reason to believe are guilty of 
misuse, must discuss the situation with the employee.  If it is 
established that misuse has clearly occurred, the employee must be 
dealt with in accordance with the Corrective Action and Disciplinary 
Policy ( 6.21).

Employee:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored computer 
resources only to support company business activities.  In addition, 
employees should report all potential misuses to the appropriate 
Information Systems Manager and/or their supervisor.

REFERENCES:

Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest; Policy 6.21, Correction 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibility.




    

    I beleive that .160 says what needs to be said. (I just goiit this
    message in electronic mail, and I opened this conference to see if it 
    had been posted yet.)
    
    Now we have the direction and understand what the policy is regarding
    non-work related conferences. 
    
    As always, evaluations of material that may be considered sexual,
    harrasing, discriminatory, etc., is subject to managerial
    interpretation - which is how it should be.
    
    On that point, perhaps this topic should be set /nowrite, and we
    (the noters of Digital) should heed the direction set forth?
    
    

In accordance with 111.160, I have created a new conference,

	NSSG::HUMAN_RELATIONS,

to discuss subjects arround the issues and problems of human relations at
Digital.  Anyone is welcome, but some might (and already have) find the
"Rules" for the conference to be different that those of other conferences. 

DRL

    The real question is whether Marge's interpretation is correct: are
    even those files that contribute to employee morale and a sense of
    community (i.e., most of them) to be considered "non-business-related"?
    They certainly could be, but it is not clear to me that they must be. 
    
    					=maggie

        RE: 111.160 (I haven't read all intervening notes)
        
        [HUMANs: sorry for the time.]
        
        I've talked directly to the person responsible for both the DIS
        and personnel policies. It still isn't time to panic. The
        *intent* of the policy is quite reasonable and "engineering".
        Very few of the 120 "Personal" files that exist today are
        intended to be banned by the policy. I have suggested that
        the current wording is unfortunately prone to misunderstanding.
        
        More later (after work hours).
        
        JimB. 

        WARNING: The below is my personal opinions and impressions
        gathered from talking to several people in management, security
        and legal. Although it is based on what they told me, and
        accurate to the best of my ability, it may be flawed by my
        interpretation. 
        
        As I said in the previous note, I have talked with the man in
        security who drew up both the DIS policy, which was seen as an
        interim solution, and the Personnel policy which has been
        accepted but not yet published. His interpretation was clearly
        very much in keeping with what most of us would like to see. He
        sounded very much the way we categorize engineering managers and
        not at all like the stereotypes of security/DIS/personnel and
        faceless "management" that we hear so much of.
        
        I do have serious concerns about the wording of the policy. It
        is very easy to misread it as condemning and banning all
        non-work conferences. This being the case, some middle managers
        will so misread it. I have suggested this will be a problem, but
        he is not terribly worried about it, assuming that the system
        and DECkish good sense will win out. I hope to get together with
        him and a few others to see if we can come up with a way to
        avoid the temporary inconvenience.
        
        He told me about a couple of incidents which have caused the
        concern, and I must agree that there are real problems which the
        policy addresses.
        
        I mentioned the fact that the idea of a IDECUS NOTERS-SIG, and
        a set of noters/moderators guidelines were being discussed. He
        was very supportive of the idea. He appeared to feel that if
        some sort of grass roots effort to solve some of the problems
        didn't appear, then the existence of the non-work related files
        would be jeopardized, and this was something he didn't want to
        see happen and which he felt would be bad for the company.
        
        I have also talked with my person in the Legal department, and
        it turns out that he is also a noter, and occasional reader of
        non-work files. He, too, feels they could be jeopardized if the
        policy is read over-strictly or the problems are not addressed
        informally. He also felt that would be a sad thing, and bad for
        the company.
        
        Both Security and Legal have assured me that there will be no
        individual reprisals or investigations involving Sexcetera
        participants. The only action they want to take regarding
        Sexcetera is shutting it down.
        
        So, what are the things that the policy is intended to stop or
        control? First, the vast majority of existing files are not
        considered a problem, SO LONG AS THEY HAVE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT ON
        BUSINESS. The fellow in security explicitly suggested that
        moderators or system managers request that no noting be done
        during work hours if it would degrade performance. He further
        suggested that if this request was unheeded the system manager
        enforce it with a self-submitting batch job that turned access
        on and off. Sorta like here on HUMAN, no?
        
        Second, there are certain types of material that are not to be
        permitted. These would seem to include the obvious things:
        racism, sexual harassment, obscenity, defamation, and one that I
        had not thought to be a problem: the imposition of a world view
        or philosophy on others. Files like PHILOSOPHY and BIBLE appear
        safe, as they represent the exchange of ideas among peers. Files
        that attempt to declare or dictate how things will be at DEC or
        in a facility or the like are out. (An apparently related
        non-notes incident involved a new convert to some religion whose
        attempts to convert others got so out of hand that it had
        negative impact on productivity and customer relations.)
        
        So what should we do?
        
        I would say, that if we, the noting public, will conduct
        ourselves as responsible professionals and good corporate
        citizen's, there is little to fear. This means that must we not
        engage in anything that could be regarded as harassing,
        discriminatory, coercive, or slanderous. Further, we must
        remember that the primary purpose of company assets is company
        business. We must not compromise DEC's security or other
        corporate rights, nor tie up company resources for non-work
        purposes. 
        
        Perhaps harder to accept, but true nonetheless, is that we must
        act in a way to avoid offending the sensibilities and tastes of
        others, even when we do not accept their standards. Digital is
        now becoming a truly international company and an international
        community. Notes is contributing very heavily to the latter.
        Standards of behavior are very different in different parts of
        the world. It is important that we not harm the sense of
        community by offending our coworkers, and it is important that
        we not damage our business by offending our customers. 
        
        This problem of needing to recognize the sensitivities of others
        may be where Sexcetera failed the most. There were notes in that
        file that I felt qualified as harassing, slanderous or
        discriminatory, but they were fairly rare, and usually deleted
        by the moderator quite quickly. On the other hand, the standards
        of taste were sufficiently low (to be somewhat judgmental) to
        seriously offend a good many people. It's all well and good to
        claim that no-one HAD to read the file, but that is by the
        point. It is inevitable that the contents of the file leak
        beyond its boundaries and come to the attention of employees or
        customers who would be deeply offended. AND THAT IS BAD FOR DEC.
        
        I feel that "management" was correct in saying that Sexcetera
        had to go, that it's potential for harm was too high for the
        company to allow. I also feel that the number of files which
        share this quality is quite low, and I believe that my view on
        this is shared by very senior management in Engineering and in
        Security, and by at least that portion of the legal department
        that I have talked to. 
        
        JimB.

    I received the policy memo this morning, but refrained from entering
    this conference until after hours. I'm glad that to see that discussion
    is already going on it.
    
    I'm also glad to see that there's still no reason to panic (as per
    JimB), that despite the wording of the memo, which bothered me no
    end, the intent of the people behind it is not inimical towards
    the noting community.
    
    To be honest, though, what bothered me more than the implied
    anti-NWRN (Non-Work-Related Noting) stance was that the wording
    gave one the idea that reading and posting things to Usenet (which
    has been implicitly sanctioned by its publicity in DECWORLD), or
    even worse, that non-word-related VAXMail messages between folks
    on the Easynet was taboo. This seemed a little too strict to be
    believed, but as pointed out, an overzealous manager could use
    the letter of the "law" to squash that type of activity.
    
    I wish there was some way of getting the thing re-worded to reflect
    a more positive view.
    
    --- jerry

Ahh Gi'day...

    Quite a  bad  statement,  because  it  reinforces  both  sides  of  the
    argument,  without  giving a guidance to the spirit of the policy. If I
    was  against  NWRN, I would consider this policy as a licence to pursue
    the closure of these files.
    
    It is  worth noting that the policy did NOT include the word REASONABLE
    in the whole text.

				{dennis{{{ --

It is slightly reassuring to hear the comments in .166, but
only slightly.  The fact is that the written words are much
more restrictive than that, and anyone who continues to do
noting activity does so at their own peril once this policy
has been disseminated through the management hierarchy.  The
following are direct quotes, all in context:

     For this policy, misuse includes, but is not limited to, the
     use of Digital owned and/or operated computer systems and
     networks ... for purely personal purposes, for purposes that
     are not in support of the Company's business activities, ... 

     Examples of misuse could be ... communicating matters of
     private conviction or philosphy which is unrelated to the
     business, ... 

*    Employee:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored *
*    computer resources only to support company business        *
*    activities.                                                *

The last sentence is unambigious and contains no exceptions. It
says "only to support company business activities".  If the
authors of this policy don't mean that, then they shouldn't say
it. And much as I would agree that some noting activity helps
morale, that does not fall within the definition of company
business activities. 

Sorry, but I can't accept word of mouth about someone's good
intent in the face of written statements to the contrary.
It's the old story: read what you sign.  It doesn't matter
what the salesman says, it's what the contract says that counts.

Let me put it this way: if _I_ were a system or cost center
manager, I would not risk my a** supporting non-work notes
files with the resources I was responsible for if this policy
were in effect.  My present boss may accept it, but what
about the next one?  He may see it as willful and continuing
disregard of written policy.

I would agree with one thing: don't panic.  It won't do any
good.  But if you believe non-work notes files aren't in serious
serious trouble, I've got some beachfront property in Florida
I'd like to sell you...

        As has happened on several occasions in the past, Dan Murphy
        has not only beat me to it but said it better than I could.
        
        I can only conclude from the wording of what was posted that
        the *intent* is to eliminate ALL use of Digital's systems,
        both NOTES and MAIL (not to mention, e.g., your "personal"
        telephone number list in your TEAMDATA directory), that is
        not in DIRECT support of business activities.  No sending mail
        to a friend in another facility to arrange to go out to lunch,
        unless you're working on business.  No using the telephone,
        or interoffice mail, unless it's business.  And so on...
        
        I'm trying not to panic.  I'm not finding it easy.
        
        Tom

    Since you're bound and determined to panic, feel free. You'll
    feel better afterwards. I recommend cold sweats, shaking, and
    jumping at every noise. Checking under the bed won't hurt, either.
    

    I certainly agree that the policy is badly worded. The thing is, I
    would be surprised by any *official* statement of policy which came
    out and *endorsed* private use of corporate resources, especially in
    this period of economic retrenchment. It simply won't happen, in my
    expectation, any more than a policy that states that it's okay to
    take that Pilot Razor Point from the supplies closet home with you.
    Nobody's likely to frisk you on your way out for Company Pens, but
    nobody's going to tell you it's okay to take them home, either (you
    would ONLY use them for writing programs or specifications, right?).
    

    If I may add,,,,,I find no problem with any policies that this company
    has. I have been i DEC for over seven years, and find that if "we"
    use our common sense as a guide, there is nothing to worry about.
    
    What is the use of quibbiling over words.  We are all intelligent
    enough to cut through that.  It is unfortunate that some people
    in the company do not have this "common sence" quality, but isn't
    DEC a melting pot of society?  These things are not uncommon.  I
    myself use my feelings, and sense of responsibility to guide me.
    I have no problems.  I want to continue to have a successful career
    in this company.  It has done alot for me, and the least that i
    can do is to follow it's policies.
    
    Sorry if i'm in left field with this, but i don't afford myself
    the time to read all of the responses because my job "does" come
    first.
    
    Bruce

	The attitude of the author of the policy sounds OK to me - it's
	too bad that's not what the policy says! It appears to me that
	by having an official policy which is very restrictive, combined
	with an informal message that the policy will "really" only be
	applied in specific cases, leaves a situation where selective
	enforcement may be a problem.
	
	Mike

    Jim, thanks for talking to those folks that were responsible for
    the new policy and for summarizing those discussions for us.  I
    too, agree with the majority of the reactions to .166 that there
    seems to be a difference between the wording in the policy and the
    author's intentions, and that this difference could lead to a problem
    with continuing non-work related notes files.  Seems to me that
    now is the time, before the policy becomes too deeply entrenched,
    to try to clear up some of that harsh wording.  The comments since
    .166 are very clear in how the noter community interprets the policy
    -- how about feeding back some of those comments to the authors?
    It may save some company resoruces that will be used later in
    straightening out the mess that can and, in my opinion, probably
    will, develop!

    	It is very easy to write a harsh policy. Nothing is more dangerous.
    
    	We can all agree how the document should be interpreted, but
    who are we? The document is POLICY, which means that it is only
    a matter of time before the literal meaning of it becomes practiced
    and enforced. Either this policy is re-written, or within some finite
    period...maybe a year, maybe five years, maybe ten years...Digital
    as we know, love and respect it will not exist. I personally feel
    that strongly about this. 

	I'm sitting here, staring at what I've just written, considering
    cutting it all out. I've started four other paragraphs where this
    one (for the moment) grows, but I've deleted them. 
    
    	I try to be careful with my words...text has power. Text IS
    power. 
    
    	Flesh is mortal, and limited, and subject to all manner of doubts
    and insecurities. Text is immortal, and static, and NEVER in doubt.
    It simply says what it says. 
    
	Another paragraph, written and gone. Maybe it's not time to
    panic. Where can I write a letter, electronic or paper, to suggest
    as powerfully and pursuasively as I can muster that this policy
    be severely re-written? Will anyone read it Would it help to collect
    names for a petition?
    
    	Oh yeah...the WORST part about the policy noone has NOTEd about
    yet, but it's mentioned at least twice (I forget exactly, I read
    it only once earler today). Enforcement. I don't care WHAT the
    intentions of the authors might have been. It is a direct philosophical
    and psychological attack on the heart of Noterdom. Allow me to
    elaborate...
    
    	Nothing is more open than an open conference. Anyone on the
    E-net needs only know the node and name of the conference, and they
    can read the whole conference. This policy tries to make every employee
    and the manager of every employee a SPY, lurking around the net,
    looking for wasted disk space, watching for waste of network bandwidth,
    checking up on users...what conference is that, labeled
    "BUDGET_MANAGEMENT"? NOTEing works, and thrives, on trust. In the
    modern world, we are isolated from our neighbors, self-conscious
    around our friends, when things get sufficiently rocky, we talk to
    our spouses, lovers, and creditors through lawyers. Yet technology
    and the Digital style of computing has spontaneously created a
    clearing...a paradise of honesty, openness, and compassion. Now,
    we are being asked to turn this paradise into a desert, or an urban
    jungle of young hoodlams and reactionary cops waiting for
    transgressions to be noted. I don't remember anything in the policy
    that suggested any kind of process for determining whether any given
    system use was worthwile or not...it is either directly related
    to business, or it is not. If it is not, it shouldn't be there.
    If you happen to notice it, you should report it. If it is reported,
    disciplinary action will be taken. That is what I've gleened from
    the policy. 
    
	I am not a child. I resent being treated like one. 
    
    	Ed
        	
    
    

First, I'd like to point out that the period in which notes has achieved
it's current popularity, has been a period of great success for DEC. Are
these completely unrelated?

Second, the policy posted earlier seems quite clear about prohibiting
uses of computer resources we have taken for granted in the past.

I have to agree with Dan Murphy's comments in .169.

No more using the "mortgage program" to figure out if the time is right
to buy or refinance your house. No more sending mail to a friend in another
facility. No more FORUM, or CDSWAP, or FLYING.

Those activities "are not in support of the Company's business activities".

There is obviously more than a few of us that have problems with the wording
of the policy. Can we, as a group, "open door" it?


				Tom_K

REL .177

Er, the period of greatest proliferation for Notes files happens to coincide
with one of the WORST periods of performance of DEC as a company--the years
of hiring freezes, flattening revenues, and greatly reduced margins.  I think
the two phenomena are completely unrelated.

Beware of open doors, lest they be slammed shut in your face.

--PSW

Many of you may be aware that a new policy prohibiting the use of computer and
network resources for any purpose other than those directly related to the
business of the company has been developed by a manager in our Corporate
Security organization and accepted as an official policy, to appear in the
next version of the Personnel Policies and Procedures manual.

I have thought about how this might affect distribution of the SF-Lovers
Digest, and decided to make the following statement:

Distribution of the SF-Lovers Digest is in direct support of the Company's
Business Activities.  It is the business of the company to encourage employees
to challenge their minds in many ways.  Science Fiction, although it is fiction,
and the discussion of topics related to it, help to challenge the thought
processes of Digital employees along the lines of future technology.  Many
things which were Science Fiction only a few years ago, even in the lifetimes
of some of our employees, are commonplace today.

SF-Lovers Digest will continue to be distributed within DEC in accordance with
the new policy.

Regards/john

        While we are all running around like chickens without heads. Is 
        anyone  doing  anything concrete? Have the reasons for the sane 
        and rational use of Resources been conglomerated  and  prepared 
        for  presentation  to  the  appropriate  bodies.  I hope people 
        haven't been silly enough to Mail K.O.   about  the  issue yet. 
        Give  the  intermediate  management  the  chance  to handle the 
        problem themselves first.  Prepare a case  for  presentation to 
        the powers that be.
        
        As  an  Aside,  The  Policy  formulated by a Corporate Security 
        Manager.  So often I grow  tired  of  the  Lack  of  touch with 
        reality  and  communication  that  exists in this organization. 
        Something is working just fine, and grows.  Suddenly,  it needs 
        control  and  someone  new is brought in to Manage it.  We have 
        just  seen  the  People  that  `manage'  our  network  here  in 
        Australia finally receive training on the principles of Decnet. 
        We  have  a  policy  here  in  Australia  that  we  shall   not 
        communicate  electronically  with  any  outside organization in 
        Australia which seems to have grown from a  Naivety  about  how 
        Mail Gateways work.  Hell, if a Customer can send us Electronic 
        Mail and Vica Versa, then what's to stop them logging into  our 
        systems????  What  is  to  stop company secrets being mailed to 
        Customers.  (Nothing more than  currently  slipping  a printout 
        into  an Envelope.) But because parts of this company have been 
        taken over by Bureacracies that have yet  to  fully  understand 
        the  technology over which they have control, the technocrats - 
        the people that invent,  and  manufacture,  and  support  those 
        boxes  that  pay  our way, - will have to suffer constraints on 
        their creativity, their productivity, etc...
        
        sigh... 
         

RE: .179

There is a much more direct benefit to the corporation of the SF-LOVERS
distribution.  During the development of the Message Router product, SF-LOVERS
was instrumental in our learning (and fixing) the problems of handling
large distributions in a store-and-forward mail system.  It continues to
provide a means for studying and developing that technology today.

--PSW

    re the last few replies:
    
    It is true that usage of the network for employee activities has
    helped us tremendously in developing our technology.  For that matter,
    computer conferencing (a.k.a. Notes) itself went through a development
    stage that consumed unbudgeted resources, and the company has benefited
    immensely from it, not to mention the real revenue that is now coming
    in from the product.
    
    This does not give us carte blanche to do whatever we want.  We
    can justify the medium, but we must also act responsibly in what
    we do with the medium.  We do not have a license for offensive
    behavior, for example.
    
    I'm also becoming concerned about coming up with debatable rationales
    for our favorite conferences, no matter how well-meaning we may
    be in the pursuit of preservation of employee oriented conferences.
    This could backfire and undo the behind-the-scenes work some of
    us are carrying out to keep sanity in a confused situation.
    
    Please remember that there is no one whose job it is to advocate
    the use of computer conferences, be they related to technical topics,
    products, customer support, or employee development and activities.
    The handful of people who volunteered to be the ad hoc committee
    to work this issue all have full-time jobs.  Getting results takes
    time, and made harder with many Chicken Littles.
    
    Besides asking you to remain calm, I offer you the opportunity to
    become part of the solution.  The time is ripe to form a Special
    Interest Group for users of Notes.  A major goal of this SIG will
    be to form a consensus of our "code of ethics" or "guidelines,"
    if you will.  We need an actual statement of purpose and goals,
    and we need identifiable representatives and leaders.  Without such,
    "noters" are just as much a nameless bunch to policy makers as
    "management" is to us who have to live with policies.
    
    The ad hoc committee will be organizing a meeting soon.  A small
    group of volunteers will be needed to carry on the work.  For the
    most part, those interested in becoming members of the SIG are expected
    to elect representatives and give these people input.  There will
    be a NOTERS_SIG conference to communicate with the SIG, though perhaps
    not quite as interactively as some might desire.  There are reasons
    for this.  (HUMAN will not be the host system of this conference!)
    
  --Simon
    (for the ad hoc committee)
    
    P.S.  I receive enough mail, thank you.  Please don't call us; we'll
    call you.

    This was mistakenly entered as a separate note, rather than a reply.
    
    - M 
    
               <<< HUMAN::ARKD$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 123.0         work-supportive notes files will thrive.           No replies
ROXIE::OSMAN "and silos to fill before I feep, and " 21 lines  16-MAY-1986 10:25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, let's not throw in the towel just yet.

"Digital This Week" runs employee ads for houses and pianos.  This
SOLICITS employees, and is often for employee PERSONAL PROFIT.
I don't believe this column will be stopped.

It is for COMPANY BENEFIT to aid in employee well-being, and
PERSONAL PROFIT is towards this end.

Also, PERSONAL ENJOYMENT is for company benefit, and hence company
better business too.

Hence notes files on birding, hiking, biking, yes even PERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS, are all quite important for better business,
as they are important in prompting employee WELL BEING.

So don't worry.  Non-"work-related" notes files will live on
and thrive.  They are "WORK-SUPPORTIVE" and should perhaps be
called that instead of "non-work-related".

/Eric

RE .178

	I confess that I may have been listening too well to our
	own propaganda.

	Thank you for the warning.

			Tom_K

DTW is neither a computer, system or network.  The policy only deals with 
those.

It is not comparable to a note file, since it is someone's job to edit it;
assuming that person does a reasonable job, there is no problem with
objectionable matter being printed. 

DTW is also limited - it has X number of pages and Y copies are printed; its
cost can be directly controlled by management.  It isn't clear that computer
and network resources can be as tightly controlled.

If the policy is not meant to prohibit ALL personal use of computers it should
be rewritten.  You can (and should) not depend on managers to go against a 
published policy, "because they understand its intent"; that invites anarchy.

I've heard of managers who enforce the "limit" published in the PPP for daily
meals on business trips. There are no limits in the PPP, only guidelines 
indicating reasonable expenses; in a specific circumstance it might be 
reasonable to spend more.  If a guideline can be treated as a absolute, then 
anything worded more strongly (as the policy in question is) will be too.

Steve

    
It has been brought to my attention that this "policy" should 
really have been sent out with the appropriate headers, and did 
I, in fact, publish this after recieving it?  The answer is 
"yes", so here (attached) is the complete DECMAIL message I
received from John Carchide on the subject of computer (mis)use. 
I have no other information about the source of this policy. 

I do, however, have some opinions.  If it is deemed non-business 
related, then the simplest and most expedient action would be to 
eliminate the NOTES utility.  I could also see putting time locks 
on the offending files, restricting their use for after-hours 
(whatever that means in a world-wide network....).

That type of reaction to the use of the NOTES utility strikes me 
as very short-sighted.  After all, DEC has in its own internal 
networks one of the largest (THE largest?) living network 
laboratories on the face of the planet.  It seems to me that 
the use of NOTES by DEC employees is only a part of the
experimenting required in order to understand how PEOPLE will USE 
networks in the future.

I view this activity as an INVESTMENT by DEC in its own future, 
even if it means having people spend some time doing non-work 
related things(a subjective measure, at best), or tying up 
computer resources (more objective, relatively).  If performance 
is truly being affected, then usage policy might be warranted in 
some areas.

As a non-technical user of VAX applications, and as an individual 
extremely interested in the future of computing, I'm excited to 
be a part of this network, and hope I can learn and share with 
others about where we're going.  

End of lecture.  But philosophizing is part of the deal!!

Attached, is the complete text of the computer usage policy as I
received it. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I n t e r o f f i c e    M e m o r a n d u m


To: see "TO" DISTRIBUTION               Memo: 5309468257NAT14
                                        Date: Wed 14 May 1986  2:52 PM EDT
                                        From: JOHN CARCHIDE
                                        Dept: SECURITY/SAFETY
                                        Tel:  276-9029
                                        Adr:  OGO1-1/P18

Subject: FYI




"TO" DISTRIBUTION:

BOB BARNARD                             PHIL BURNS
BOB HEYLIGER                            LINDA KING
ROY MATHEWS                             JOHN RIEDL
RICHARD SARNIE                          LEE SPECTOR
MARK SULLIVAN                           ANDY WEIGL*
BILL WIEMER                             


Attachment: Memo

I n t e r o f f i c e    M e m o r a n d u m


To: DIS MGT:                            Memo: 5309468274NAT15
    ISC:                                Date: Wed 14 May 1986  1:21 PM EDT
                                        From: MICHAEL CARTER
                                        Dept: CORP. SECURITY
                                        Tel:  223-4232
                                        Adr:  MSO

Subject: MISUSE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS


Following is the approved subject Personnel Policy Statement. It 
will be published in the August update to the Personnel Policies and 
Procedures manual.  Please distribute this throughout your 
organizations.

The DIS Policy, same subject, is in the process of update and will be 
distributed shortly.

Regards.
*************************************************************************

	  MISUSE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS

POLICY

Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in support 
of Company business activities.  The efficient operation of these 
vital resources is critical to the success of the business.  
Therefore, it is the responsibility of all employees to ensure that 
these resources are being used properly.

DEFINITION

For this policy, misuse 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 purely personal purposes, for 
purposes that are not in support of the Company's business activities, 
for purposes that are contrary to Company Philosophy or Policy, 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 
philosphy which is unrelated to the business, permitting unauthorized 
access, etc.

RESPONSIBILITIES

Information Systems Managers:  Information Systems Managers must 
ensure that computers, systems and networks that they manage are 
clearly operating in support of company business activities.  This 
would include reviewing equipment usage and educating users, issuing 
periodic systems management advisories.  Information Systems Managers 
will also immediately investigate and report any incident of misuse 
by an employee to the employee's manager.

Managers:  Managers should periodically remind employees about 
Digital's policy governing the use of Company computer resources and 
should periodically monitor the use of these resources to insure that 
they are not being used in violation of this policy.  In addition, 
managers of employees, who there is reason to believe are guilty of 
misuse, must discuss the situation with the employee.  If it is 
established that misuse has clearly occurred, the employee must be 
dealt with in accordance with the Corrective Action and Disciplinary 
Policy ( 6.21).

Employee:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored computer 
resources only to support company business activities.  In addition, 
employees should report all potential misuses to the appropriate 
Information Systems Manager and/or their supervisor.

REFERENCES:

Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest; Policy 6.21, Correction 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibility.

> I do, however, have some opinions.  If it is deemed non-business 
> related, then the simplest and most expedient action would be to 
> eliminate the NOTES utility.
    
    But it isn't VAXNOTES that's "deemed non-business related", it's
    just conferences that are the "problem". A good percentage (most?)
    conferences *are* work-related. To eliminate VAXNOTES just because
    it *can* be used for non-work-related conferences would be like
    eliminating pens so that no one will be able to take them home.
    
    --- jerry

       Some informationfrom the source...
    
       Since I was concerned about the effect this policy would have
    on my job, (I'm system manager of a general purpose/mail machine
    that by its very nature would make my job constant hell under the
    new policy) I started trying to trace back the policy and let my
    manager see a copy of the policy, told her my concerns about it,
    all the background I knew, and what I was attempting to do (give
    feed back to the author of the policy).
    
       My manager quite agreed that the wording of the policy would
    put us in an untenable position.  (Particularly since the locals
    are inclined to interpret policy in the strictest manner possible
    as has been shown by previous incidents.)  
    
       I'm very glad I said something to her about this on Tuesday.
     As it turns out, their was a supervisors and managers meeting
    Wednesday afternoon and one of the speakers was... ta da... the
    author of this policy.   My manager talked to him this morning and
    got clarification on the policy.  The intent is indeed not to close
    down games or notes or to make every take their resume' off the
    system, etc, ad nauseum.  The policy is geared toward outlawing
    abusive (sexist, rascist, etc) material and clear abuses for personal
    profit.  (Sexcetera was *not* the only factor in this policy.  There
    was evidently an employee who had their own video rental service
    going over the net.  Had over 1000 tapes and was raking in the bucks
    using company resources.)
    
        One of my biggest concerns about the policy is that it seemed
    to require me as system manager to go into other people's accounts
    to monitor usage.  Having had it drummed into me that "person's
    account is as sacred as his desk.  No browsing allowed." I was
    concerned about the implications of this.  (I had visions of being
    turned into the local Gestapo.)  I was told that this policy is
    in part for my protection.  If I have to investigate a suspected abuse,
    (and I must investigate if a suspected abuse is reported to me)
    I don't have to worry about a personal law suit against me by the
    affected persons for invasion of their privacy, since I am *Required*
    by company policy to investigate and report abuse.  (Legal eagles
    feel free to correct that, that's just what I was told.)
    
        The upshot is that the two levels of management above me have
    been informed of the way I wish to ienforce this policy and what
    the policy's author had to say about it (he agreed I was following
    the intent) and I have a name to point to say "he said I'm following
    policy."  So I feel OK about my situation now.  (I's still prefer
    to have the policy say what it means, but I personally don't feel
    threatened now.)
    
         I suggest that if you are concerned, you take it up with your
    manager.  Perhaps, if enough people do this, the policy will be
    reworded.  If not, at least you know where you stand with your bosses.
    
         Oh, BTW, the word we got from this meeting was that the policy
    will be in effect starting JUNE.
    
    tlh
    

    re .189:
    
    I'm glad to hear the "intent" of the policy's author.  But it still
    leaves the whole thing rather up in the air, since there are those
    who go by the spirit of the law and those who go by the letter.
    
    I'd say some "CYA" disclaimer would be as good as wording _quite_
    that restrictive.
    
    Whatever the intent, I still say, "no panic but keep `alert caution'
    mode enabled."
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    My three sense:
    
    1) notes are a Good Thing, provide effective means of communication
       regarding resources and life-findings that enhance the liveliness
       of the general spirit of Digital...
    
    2) arpanet frequently goes through the same sort of tizzy we've
       been running on about here since they're technically only in
       the business of supplying reliable comm. to technical resources
       scattered throughout the world which normally wouldn't have access
       to various issues effecting state-of-the-art technology, national
       defense, etc.  however, there is quite a bandwidth of "noise"
       occasionally from some joke thing or other, and every now and
       again there's flak about it (rumblings from DARPA about prosecuting
       offenders, revoking access to the net, etc.), but usually, since
       the norm is a standard of decorum and professionalism, a few
       flames a permitted and sometimes necessary.
    
    3) digital has always struck me a human company.  consider the size
       of the employee base...84,000 some odd folks who can read this
       message right here i'm typing;  as someone above suggested, DEC
       owning one of the greatest "living" network labs in the country
       should be a source of pride for company...and a few blocks of
       disk storage should be tolerated for "personal" interests like
       the non-tech side of notes.
    
    maybe the policy should be couched in terms that would enable it
    the responsibility of each system manager as to whether or not certain
    files were allowed to exist, how big they could be, etc.
    
    The corporate policy shouldn't and hopefully won't be one of complete
    in-hospitablility to personal note files.    DEC is a great company.
    This little "aside" in the day and life of a humungous network should
    be considered a good thing...I greatly enjoy being able to use NOTES
    for gleaning technical info from people I otherwise might never
    know.  Likewise...the human side of personal interests provides
    one more unique facet of Digital which the corporation should "play
    up", not try to dress down.   This is *great* public relations stuff,
    here, Ken!!!
    
    			Livin' for the net...
    					...moondoggie
    

It will be interesting if every system manager has to repeat the
process described in .189 in order to find out that non-work
notes can in fact continue to exist despite the apparent wording
of the policy to the contrary.  That will take a lot of time, and
some won't do it, they'll merely enforce the policy as written.
Indeed, I believe the policy will be seen as restrictive by
normal, average DEC managers, not just a few extreme ones.

Now I suppose one could nit-pick the wording, e.g.

       ... for purely personal purposes, ...

       ... only to support company business activities ...

and say that, e.g. FLYING or FORUM or even COMICS isn't _purely_
personal since it encourages communication among employees,
benefits morale and all the other good things we've mentioned.
And similarly, these activities indirectly "support company
business activites" for all the same reasons.

I _suppose_ one could claim that.

However, I would feel much better if the wording were changed so
that the average person, applying contemporary community
standards, and possessing at least average facility with the
english language, would get the desired meaning from merely
reading the policy. 

    I must be going insane:
    
    WHAT THE HELL'S THE POINT OF A WRITTEN POLICY IF WHAT IS SAYS IS
    NOT WHAT IT MEANS.
    
    Personally I think all this stuff about about it doesn't mean what
    it says is a smokescreen that's being put up until the policy appears
    in the PPP. At which point I bet all non work related notesfiles
    will be removed from EASYNOTES.LIS closely followed by the files
    themselves.
    
    This is the only rational explanation as to why the policy is worded
    the way it is.
    
    Dave

    re .193
    
    I don't think you're going insane.
    
    The point of a written policy that "means" other than it says is
    to cover the company in the event of lawsuits.
    
    The _danger_ of such a procedure is that nonwithstanding the intent,
    it could be taken literally, and it stands as a time bomb for the
    whole informal notesfile continuum.
    
    Don't get paranoid.  But don't get complacent either!  The policy
    _as written_ is a SERIOUS THREAT to the cobntinued existence of
    all so-called "non-work-related" conferences.  That the threat may
    not be deliberate (and probably isn't) doesn't make it less a threat.
    
    Don't panic.
    
    But don't think thge problem is resolved yet, either.
    
    It isn't.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    Why end it...
    
    Does anyone know why some conferences are shutting down and not
    bothering to look for new homes?
    
    A policy...
    
    One should expect the corporation to take care that through ignorance
    or carelessness we don't comply with the law.  If a conference
    substantially contained material that was offensive to minorities,
    women, and so forth, then the corporation has a role in creating
    a policy to limit that.
    
    Likewise a policy ought to make it clear that theft of copiers,
    terminals, and so on isn't condoned.
    
    On the other hand, a lot of incidental usage of copier paper, pens,
    and so forth isn't spelled out in policy, nor are sheets of copier
    paper and pens physically audited.  It's assumed that employees
    have a high enough regard for Digital so that they do not waste
    the company's money, _even_when_ no one is watching.
    
    What sort of resources are we talking about here?  A few Mb's on
    a disk here and there and a piece of the network bandwidth.  I'll
    accept no one's judgment as to what constitutes a better use of
    those Mb's and bandwidth, because my cost center paid for it.
    
    I'll accept an argument the non-technical notes files have transformed
    themselves from "a few sheets of copier paper" into "copier" in
    terms of how substantive it is to the total overall costs of all
    the disk space and total network bandwidth -- when the statistics
    are computed.
    
    There's a world of "waste" out there; and system managers can identify
    idle disk blocks and find a lot more disk space with a little work
    than deleting a popular notes file.
    
    It's not the waste of assets, it's the people who use notes...
    
    My feeling is that as it just rubs someone the wrong way to see someone
    leave their desk to get coffee, it just rubs some one the wrong way to
    see someone opening a non-technical conference.  That's not waste
    at all but one view of working style; and that can't be turned into
    a policy.

    Where it will end...
        
    It'll be a very hollow victory if the end result of all this is
    an acceleration of the creeping bureaucracy that's afflicts DEC.
    
    How can we attract and retain the creative people we need when our
    policy manual becomes bigger than our product catalog?  We will
    need a lot more security people who'll tell us when our computers
    are being used in conformance to policy.

    re: .194 and .193
    
    I wish I could remember the reference, but isn't an un-enforced
    rule nolonger capable of preventing lawsuits?   I think there
    was a case involving a no trespassing sign.  A court ruled that
    a no trespassing sign was not sufficient for the property owner
    to avoid liability.
    
    I wish I could remember the reference ...
    
    	KC

        As some of you may have noticed, I don't believe in panicking or
        even in assuming the worst, regardless of the situation. What I
        do believe in is effect =ive action. Although we shouldn't panic
        at the wording of the policy or assume deep sinister motives on
        the part of the policy makers, we mustn't let the policy stand
        as worded, nor must we allow it to be the only word on the
        subject.
        
        I have therefore been going through all sorts of semi-official
        channels in my copious spare time. I am aware of two revised
        versions of the policy that have been completed within
        Engineering, and a third in draft stages. One is definitely
        going up through official channels. The other is chasing it
        informally. We can hope, and perhaps lobby for (I'll let
        you know if I find out a useful place to do that) the policy
        to be revised before it is officially issued.
        
        Beyond this, there is the IDECUS Notes SIG which is being
        organized along with its attendant documents: the SIG
        bylaws/charter, the moderators guidelines and the noters code of
        ethics/guidelines. These will, we can hope, give some
        consistancy to noting behavior, help us communicate among
        ourselves and with officialdom, and help set expectations on all
        sides.
        
        In closing: It is never time to panic. It is definitely time to
        act--firmly and reasonably. Several people are doing that.
        
        JimB.

	    What business does DIS have regulating the content of our
	NOTES conferences and MAIL messages?  They are, after all, only
	responsible for the operation of the Easynet.
	    Look at it this way:  Does the phone company have the right
	to tell us what we can say and what we can't?  Can it tell us
	not to use the phone lines for arguments and flirtation?  Of
	course not!  The phone company is only concerned with making
	sure the message gets to its destination; that should be DIS's
	only concern, too.
	    There are, of course, laws against using the the phone lines
	to harass, or to make obscene phone calls.  These laws, however,
	are neither made nor enforced by the phone company.  Likewise,
	DIS has no say about the content of that which we choose to send
	over the Easynet, and they certainly should not be in the busi-
	ness of policy enforcement!
	    Just keep the network running, thank you.

	    Of course, it is possible that their proposed policy will
	become part of Policies and Procedures (and thus derive itself
	from a proper, recognizable authority).  This leaves to us the
	task of petitioning Personnel not to enact any such policy.  We
	are, after all, the users of the Easynet.  Likewise, we should
	petition Personnel not to sanction any sort of "Network Police"
	to enforce any rules:  we don't have Big Brother enforcing the
	other policies, and as professionals we should not be forced to
	endure such an indignity.
	    Perhaps it should be pointed out that the SEXCETERA trans-
	gression does not indicate the need for a new policy:  the old
	policies apply quite well to it.
			<_Jym_>

    Please note that the policy that has been circulating on the net is
    still going through the approval process in Corporate Personnel, and
    has not yet taken effect.  The revisions that Jim Burrows referred to
    in a previous reply will at least have the opportunity of being fed
    back into the review process.
    
  --Simon
     

    re: .198 - DIS enforcement
    
    The big difference here is that you and I PAY for the right to abuse
    the phone systems.  DEC clearly has the right to keep its own assets
    in use for its own purposes.  That would apply to employees, as
    well, I suppose.....
    
    The issue is not WHO enforces it (DIS), but rather HOW, and WHY,
    and TO WHAT EXTENT.

    Wow, I hadn't realized that this topic was being discussed in such
    depth, or at least *length*.  I poked through the last few replies,
    and found that some of the following had been said before.  I wrote
    this in another conference (unnamed -- I *don't* need hundreds of
    replies there :^), but will post it here, as well, 'for the record'.

					- Gilbert
					VAX Notes Project Leader

    < Note 685.5 by CLT::GILBERT >

    I've heard (second- or third-hand) that some conferences had been
    shut down either because of 'questionable' subject matter or because
    they were non-work-related uses of Digital's computers.  In a billion
    dollar company, what's in the interest of the Corporation certainly
    runs the gamut -- from tracking proposed changes to FCC regulations,
    to improving the quality of life in south Boston.  One thing that Digital
    considers important is improving the cohesiveness of the company -- to
    build a maintain a team of employees who work, and work well, together.
    As long as extraneous activities foster comraderie, and don't become
    liabilities or interfere with work, I expect Digital will support them.

    Anyone who's followed *this* conference knows that 'Noting' can be
    addictive, injurous to your health, and can cause you to forsake other
    activities -- like getting your work done.  Some uses of our computers
    have certainly overstepped the boundaries of what can be considered to
    be the interest of the Corporation (fortunately, we try to not ship those
    as products).  I suspect that the Sexcetera conference was really pushing
    the limit, and that the way it was handled was due to inexperience in
    handling such borderline cases, especially on such a 'touchy' subject.
    I don't expect a purge.

					- Gilbert

        Attached is my reply to Gilbert in the un-named conference.
        I asked his permission to copy his reply here, which he most
        graciously granted, but he has beat me to it.  I also attach
        his reply to my answer, as it also has value.
        
        Tom

        PS:  The consensus has been that the original note's reference
        to "total animosity" was intended to be "total anonymity"..
        
================================================================================
Note 685.6           Total Animosity in Notes and Replies                 6 of 7
FURILO::BLINN "Dr. Tom @MRO"                         20 lines  27-MAY-1986 17:30
                         -< Don't shoot the messenger >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Gilbert, if you are not personally familiar with the Sexcetera
        conference, it might be wise to avoid speculation that it was
        "really pushing the limit".  I've received much more offensive
        material in some of the "bad joke of the day" distributions than I
        ever encountered in Sexcetera, but I don't consider that a reason
        to shut down the use of MAIL.  And, like Sexcetera (but not the
        misuse of some material from Sexcetera that lead to its
        abolition), participation is voluntary. 
        
        As for total animosity, the best conference for total animosity
        was Soapbox, but unfortunately, it has been the victim of the
        recent purge of a number of not-directly-work-related conferences
        (which fostered the cohesiveness of the company). 
        
        The discussion of this issue is taking place in HUMAN::DIGITAL,
        topic #111.  Your points about how notes fosters the cohesiveness
        of the company are very well taken, and with your permission, I'd
        like to post them there. 
        
        Tom
================================================================================
Note 685.7           Total Animosity in Notes and Replies                 7 of 7
CLT::GILBERT "Juggler of Noterdom"                   10 lines  27-MAY-1986 20:16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

re: pushing the limit

    You're right, that I'm not personnaly familiar with that conference.
    Sexcetera probably exceeded some folk's boundaries of good taste, but
    what *I'd* consider more important is the liability vs the benefit:
    some contributors could get *hurt*.

re: posting .5 elsewhere

    Yes, please do.

    re: 200
    
    I beg to differ, who enforces such policies _is_ the issue.
    
    Part of what makes DEC the DEC that we want to work for is a simple
    concept, operating units (ie cost centers) are charged for the
    resources they use and have, while complying with federal, state,
    and local law, autonomy with respect to their use.
    
    For the systems not "run" by DIS, the role of DIS is to determine the
    extent to which network bandwidth can be demonstrated to be wasted
    and to advise the system managers.
    
    Regulating the time employees spend in NOTES conferences from the DIS
    ivory tower, makes as much sense as a formal policy on when coffee
    breaks can be taken, how much discussion of the weather can take place
    in business meetings.

    Consider a new employee who begins to use NOTEFILES.  There are
    one heck of a LOT OF OLD NOTES to go through!!  That would be a
    terrific time waster, whereas for an experienced "noter" the
    incremental cost of reading notes is rather small.
    
    I Propose that we need a lot of moderator/member EDITORIALIZING
    to make the historical record (read "old notes") both accurate and
    usefull.  Some notes/dialogues need to be condensed and reposted;
    some titles need to be improved and keywords added; et cetera et
    cetera.
    
    And finally, some entire files need to be removed.  I propose the
    criteria that if a new employee would not potentially benefit from
    the file that the file should be deleted.  
    
    Who should decide?  We, the noting community, should decide by posting
    our pos/neg opinions in the file and to the moderators.
    
    	Rick Merrill
    

    re .204                                       
           
    It's hard for me to imagine that a new noter would have  the  tenacity
    to  read  all  of  the  historical  notes  in  even a relatively small
    conference (much less one the size of this one).   Whenever  I  decide
    to  add  a  conference  to  my notebook, set seen/before=today (or, at
    worst, yesterday) is the first command I issue.  Unless  a  conference
    is about something of burning interest to the individual, most noters,
    new or otherwise, just don't have the time to read a lot of historical
    notes.   (Of  course,  with more experience, a new employee will latch
    on to one of the automatic notes mailer/printer command files floating
    around the net.)
    
    re:  the general discussion of this note
    
    I want to add my voice to those who have been  saying  "don't  panic."
    Most  of  us  are  reasonable people ... let's act that way.  Read and
    write your notes during off hours (that's off hours  for  the  network
    ...  you  know  ...  when  it's  easy to open conferences ... before 8
    AM and after 5:30 PM at the  EST  or  EDST  ...),  don't  enter  stuff
    that  you  wouldn't want ANYONE and EVERYONE to see, etc.  In general,
    if we show some respect for each other and ourselves,  this  wonderful
    communications  tool  of  ours  will  be  seen for what it is and will
    continue.
    
    Terry

    re: 204
    
    I think trust starts with letting the new employee peek at old TRAX,
    GIGI, and PDT manuals if that employee is so inclined.
    
    I might mention that, oh by the way, we don't sell or support that
    product anymore, but I'm not about to put up barriers to block the
    curious.
    
    A new employee can judge what the best use of their time is.  (And
    my advice is to read HUMAN::MARKETING backwards all the way to July
    27, 1984.)

    	Who's the poor soul who has to start condensing old notes
    discussions? Not only will noone ever be satisfied that they did
    it right, but working full time, they MIGHT get through MUSIC_V1
    in (say) two weeks, working full time. 
    
    	Old conferences stand on their own. To spend time trying to make
    them into something else is a waste of precious time. Better, start
    a conference that teaches new employees how to use Notes in a
    reasonable, responsible fashion. 
    
    	Ed

Looking at the draft policy on use of computers, I was less than happy. It
is good that various other proposals have been made. 

I would tend to look at the policy as putting in place a mechanism to
permit undesirable activities to be, if necessary, terminated rapidly and,
where appropriate, to deal with any offending people. 

The trigger point for real action should be where activity is clearly
detrimental or potentially detrimental to employees or the corporation, or
is consuming resources to such an extent that business-related activites
are adversly affected. 

Jeremy Barker

        DIS, Security and Personnel are completely aware that DIS can't
        try to run the company. That's why the first policy on this
        subject was a DIS policy. It was intended as an interim policy
        until a corporate policy could be drawn up. The Personnel policy
        is intended to go into the Policies and Procedures book and will
        be a corporate policy. It was drawn up by the same person as the
        original DIS policy. He is or recently has revised the DIS one
        to agree with the corporate one. 
        
        As has been said, several senior people in several sites have
        drawn up revised versions of the Personnel procedure in hopes of
        making it more reasonable, and more clearly state the stated
        original intent of the policy.
        
        JimB.

From:	WITNES::CARTER       20-JUN-1986 08:55
To:	VMSINT::SZETO,CELICA::SACKMAN,CARTER
Subj:	MISUSE POLICY

Simon, the policy distributed was approved by the PMC as written. Due to the
confusion on interpretation it was decided to rephrase the policy. We are
not certain what the rephrasing will be exactly, however the intent is
to make it easier for managers/employees to understand. I would hope that
we are able to do this on all policy statements, current and future.

Thank you for your continued interest and assistance in this matter.

Regards.

RE: -1:

I received this today. As the language has changed somewhat, I take
it this is the "rephrasing"  mentioned in .210. Personally, I still
think the language has serious problems, and is easily open to
misinterpertation. I don't want to start the panic up again, but I thought
it important enough to post here. As far as my organization is concerned,
this is the official policy until it is actually placed in the PPP manual.

Fred 


From:	9356::CHICOINE "JOHN CHICOINE  17-Jun-1986 1119" 18-JUN-1986 16:41
To:	@USER
Subj:	NETWORK USAGE




YOU SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF THIS. THE CORPORATION IS BEGINNING TO LOOK
VERY SERIOUSLY AT ABUSIVE UTILIZATION OF ITS ASSETS.

NOTE:  Four people have recently been immediately terminated due to
       misuse of mail.  (They were authors of chain letters.)

Subject: MISUSE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS

Following is the approved subject Personnel Policy Statement. It 
will be published in the August update to the Personnel Policies and 
Procedures manual.  Please distribute this throughout your 
organizations.
*************************************************************************

	  MISUSE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS

POLICY

Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in support 
of Company business activities.  The efficient operation of these 
vital resources is critical to the success of the business.  
Therefore, it is the responsibility of all employees to ensure that 
these resources are being used properly.

DEFINITION

For this policy, misuse 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 purely personal purposes, for 
purposes that are not in support of the Company's business activities, 
for purposes that are contrary to Company Philosophy or Policy, 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 
philosphy which is unrelated to the business, permitting unauthorized 
access, etc.

RESPONSIBILITIES

Information Systems Managers:  Information Systems Managers must 
ensure that computers, systems and networks that they manage are 
clearly operating in support of company business activities.  This 
would include reviewing equipment usage and educating users, issuing 
periodic systems management advisories.  Information Systems Managers 
will also immediately investigate and report any incident of misuse 
by an employee to the employee's manager.

Managers:  Managers should periodically remind employees about 
Digital's policy governing the use of Company computer resources and 
should periodically monitor the use of these resources to insure that 
they are not being used in violation of this policy.  In addition, 
managers of employees, who there is reason to believe are guilty of 
misuse, must discuss the situation with the employee.  If it is 
established that misuse has clearly occurred, the employee must be 
dealt with in accordance with the Corrective Action and Disciplinary 
Policy ( 6.21).

Employee:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored computer 
resources only to support company business activities.  In addition, 
employees should report all potential misuses to the appropriate 
Information Systems Manager and/or their supervisor.

REFERENCES:

Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest; Policy 6.21, Correction 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibility.

    re .211:
    
    No, this is the same old policy that was previously approved and
    has been subject to various interpretation.  It's because this memo
    was still being circulated that I asked Mike Carter if a new revised
    version is out yet, and the answer is "not yet."
    
  --Simon
    

    re .210 and .211:    I don't know who the people are who sent these
    memos, but you should note that mail containing the policy is dated
    three days earlier than the mail which says that the policy will
    be modified again.
    
    Burns
    

    The policy quoted in .211 is the same, word for word, as what was
    posted in the SECURITY_POLICY notefile back in 14-May-1986.
    
  --Simon
    

    In notesfile RAJA::OSCARS you can vote for the best/worst notesfile
    (Not notERs!).  
    
    The hope is that the good ones will be used more and the bad ones
    will fall by the wayside without mgmnt intervention!
    
    	Rick
    

re. -1

>    In notesfile RAJA::OSCARS you can vote for the best/worst notesfile

	So much for DEC culture, make way for Hollywood glitter and glamour!

						-DAV0

    In an effort to promote responsible use of computer communications,
    especially NOTEing, a group of Digital Employees has banded together
    and formed a Digital Interest Group, sponsored by IDECUS.
    
    See 158.0 for their announcement. To be an effective force, the
    DIG needs active membership participation.

This new draft clears up most of the problems that Alan Kotok and I saw
with the first and second drafts.  I would still like to see a statement
about the privacy of individual mail and files to counterbalance the
requirement for managers to monitor.  (Policy 6.18, Employee Privacy,
deals only with employee records mantained by management, and not with
the privacy of an electronic communication an employee might receive
from someone within the company or through an electronic gateway).

When I met with John Murphy, I suggested adding to the phrase "monitor
these resources" the words "with proper consideration of privacy."

/john

The following is a draft, scheduled for approval at the end of August.
 
PROPER USE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 
 
POLICY
 
Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in support 
of Company business activities.  Systems should be used to enhance the 
cost effectiveness and efficient running of the business, to assist 
employees in being more effective in executing their duties and 
responsibilities, to foster appropriate open and efficient 
communications and to perpetuate the use of computers in day to day 
activities.  The efficient operation of these vital resources is 
critical to the success of the business.  Therefore, it is the 
responsibility of all employees to insure that these resources are 
being used properly.
 
DEFINITION
 
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.
 
RESPONSIBILITIES
 
INFORMATION SYSTEM MANAGERS:  Information Systems Managers must ensure 
that computers, systems and networks that they manage are clearly 
operating in support of Company business activities.  This could be 
accomplished by reviewing equipment usage and educating users, issuing 
periodic systems management advisories.  Information Systems Managers 
will also immediately investigate and report any incident of misuse by 
an employee to the employee's manager.
 
MANAGERS:  Managers should periodically remind employees about the 
proper use of Company computer resources and monitor these resources to 
insure that they are being used in accordance with this policy.  
Additionally, in cases where there is suspicion of improper use, 
managers hould discuss the problem with the employee in question, and 
if appropriate involve Security.  In cases where improper use has been 
clearly established, the employee should be dealt with in accordance 
with the Corrective Action and Disciplinary Policy (6.21).
 
EMPLOYEES:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored computer 
resources in accordance with this policy and to support company 
business activities.  In addition, employees should report all 
potential misuse to the appropriate Information Systems Manager and/or 
their supervisor.
 
REFERENCES
 
Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest Policy; 6.21, Corrective 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibility; Policy 
6.18, Employee Privacy.

Mr. Murphy's reaction was "he would take it under advisement."  He seemed to
feel that 6.18 covered it.  As the third draft shows, he didn't include it.
I have written to him again.

6.18 does not say anything about perusal of private effects; it is exclusively
concerned with Employee Personnel Files, Medical Files, (Chemical and Physical
Agent) Exposure Files, Managers/Supervisors Files, and Security Files.

What "monitor" means is certainly subject to local interpretation.  I wouldn't
want to work for someone who felt that it was license to look at the contents
of my disk files.

Another question is "what is an information systems manager?"  One senior
manager at ZK just asked that question, commenting that he had developers
and release engineers rotating as system managers of his systems.

/john

    
    RE: 111.221
    
    Isn't the "privacy" issue somewhat moot in the case of Notes???
     That is if a manager is going to monitor, he doesn't need to look
    at personal files, he only needs to add the "suspected" conference
    to his personal notebook and decide if the conference is following
    Corporate guidelines.  This would handle the public conferences,
    and still leave employees their privacy in regards to private, or
    restricted conferences.

    re .222
    
    This policy is about a lot more than NOTES, and as I recall the
    original development of the policy predated some of the noting
    "problems". For example, it applies to mail messages, even if between
    two employees. It would apply to text files (or any files) whether
    or not used/sent/.... And of course it would apply to private
    conferences, including ones whose only member is the owner.

>
> ... communicating matters of private conviction or philosophy ...
>

I hope that this also applies to religious messages in personal names?

(At least I assume that is the intent when I see capitalized third-person
pronouns in personal names.)

-cw

    ".......communicating matters of private conviction or philosophy..."
    
    Is not the draft itself a sum of private convictions based on certain
    philosophies??            

        Re:  "personal" files stored on Digital's computer systems..
        
        Like it or not, if it's stored on the corporation's computer
        systems, it's corporate property.  You don't own it -- the
        corporation owns it.  If you believe otherwise, don't store
        it on the corporation's disks.  (After all, you don't want
        to be discharged for misappropriating corporate property, do
        you?)
        
        Common courtesy suggests that a manager should not routinely
        peruse an employee's MAIL or other files.  Practical matters
        suggest that few managers would have the time to do so on a
        regular basis.  However, the argument that "it's my personal
        property" just doesn't cut it when it's stored on company
        computers.
        
        Of course, you could always encrypt things you don't want read.
        
        Tom

    RE: .226 Does this mean I gave up ownership of my calculator
    when I started storing it in my desk? Another reply somewhere
    in this file (this topic, maybe) includes a memo from a DEC VP
    who does not seem to agree that private files on disk are any
    different then private files in a desk.
    
    		Alfred

	The same goes for you car in the parking lot - SOLD to the bank
    for parking on the white dividing line!  ;^)

						-DAV0

Today I received another draft of the policy from John Murphy with the one
change which follows:  (*>* *<* highlight the change)

MANAGERS:  Managers should periodically remind employees about the 
proper use of Company computer resources and *>*with proper consideration
of employee privacy,*<* monitor these resources to  insure that they are
being used in accordance with this policy.  

/john

RE: .229

I think we have a winner here.

--PSW

    While I don't believe that the policy is meant to abridge First
    Amendment rights, the current wording is still subject to
    interpretation. 
    
  --Simon
    

    While I am very pleased with the privacy addition, I share Simon's
    concern about the possibilities of disappointing interpretations
    of a phrase like communications of private conviction.
    
    A side note. This issue has been the subject of more grass roots
    lobbying then any other policy I can remember. The influence that
    certain individuals (with wide support do to Notes) have had may perhaps
    be a sign of things to come. Without unions or management driven
    hearings a wide cross section of the Corporations employees have
    seen and responded to early drafts of a policy. They have been able
    to make and have heard by the policy makers informed and reasoned
    arguments. This appears to be resulting in a policy that will be
    widely accepted, understood, and approved of. This should result
    in the policy being followed widely. This of course being the desired
    result of any policy. Notes and the network may actually be changing
    the way DEC is managed.
    
    		Alfred

    
    

RE: .231

Policies are always subject to interpretation.  That is what makes them
policies, as opposed to direct orders.

--PSW

The policy has been approved by the Personnel Management Committee and will go
to the Executive Committee next month.  It should appear in a November interim
update to the P&P manual.

Warning:  Someone in Virginia Road yesterday distributed a bad copy of the
policy which did not contain the "proper consideration of employee privacy"
phrase and still instructed employees to use resources *only* to support
company business activities.  I called John Murphy to verify that the copy
he had sent me last month was still the correct copy.

At the beginning of November I should be able to post the final, approved
policy.

/john

    Just received the approved policy in paper mail from Geoff Sackman,
    the publisher of the Personnel Policies and Procedures. (Memo dated
    16 Oct 1986). His cover memo states "Please communicate this policy
    within your organization."
    
    The content is exactly as John replied in note 111.219 with the
    addition of John's suggested phrase "with proper consideration of
    privacy."
    
    I believe that a huge vote of thanks and appreciation is deserved
    by John and all the others who worked to make this policy clear
    and enlightened!  Thanks!
    
    (I have editted the draft and it will be posted as the next reply.)

		PERSONNEL Policies and Procedures	Section 6.54
							Date 17 Nov 86

 
PROPER USE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 
 
POLICY
 
Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in support
of Company business activities.  Systems should be used to enhance the
cost effectiveness and efficient running of the business, to assist
employees in being more effective in executing their duties and
responsibilities, to foster appropriate open and efficient
communications and to perpetuate the use of computers in day to day
activities.  The efficient operation of these vital resources is
critical to the success of the business.  Therefore, it is the
responsibility of all employees to insure that these resources are
being used properly. 
 
DEFINITION
 
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. 
 
RESPONSIBILITIES
 
INFORMATION SYSTEM MANAGERS:  Information Systems Managers must ensure
that computers, systems and networks that they manage are clearly
operating in support of Company business activities.  This could be
accomplished by reviewing equipment usage and educating users, issuing
periodic systems management advisories.  Information Systems Managers
will also immediately investigate and report any incident of misuse by
an employee to the employee's manager. 
 
MANAGERS:  Managers should periodically remind employees about the
proper use of Company computer resources and with proper consideration
of employee privacy, monitor these resources to insure that they are
being used in accordance with this policy. Additionally, in cases
where there is suspicion of improper use, managers should discuss the
problem with the employee in question, and, if appropriate, involve
Security.  In cases where improper use has been clearly established,
the employee should be dealt with in accordance with the Corrective
Action and Disciplinary Policy (6.21). 
 
EMPLOYEES:  Employees are expected to use Company sponsored computer
resources in accordance with this policy and to support company
business activities.  In addition, employees should report all
potential misuse to the appropriate Information Systems Manager and/or
their supervisor. 
 
REFERENCES
 
Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest Policy; 6.21, Corrective 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibility; Policy 
6.18, Employee Privacy.

    Overall, I like the way it reads, except:
    
>   Examples of misuse could be...communicating matters of private
>   conviction or philosophy....
    
    Does this mean that all political and religious notesfiles are now
    in violation of company policy?
    
    							Ralph

RE: .237
    
>        Does this mean that all political and religious notesfiles are now
>    in violation of company policy?

	No it does not. Note that the line says "misuse could be" not
    "misuse is". So know they are not automatically in violation. If
    they become a problem or centers for problems then they could become
    in violation but they are not so now.

    			Alfred

    	I've been away from noting for a long time and was taken aback
    that SEXCETERA was no longer available.  I've been reading a few
    of the responses to its loss and the ensuing pursuit of a clear,
    understandable policy for notes and system usage. I'm also happy
    that afew people have not let an issue die, but have persevered
    to carry a cause to the end.
    	I noticed that only a few people wrote notes after May and that
    may be due to the fact that SEXCETERA was dead and they felt betrayed.
    Am I wrong in assuming that the good folks who participated are
    now dead or is there another file that they have scattered to?
    	Have all of those people, who told all of their deepest secrets,
    shared their fantasies, and even went to parties to meet their fellow
    SEXCETERA noters, gone?      
    
    If you exist somewhere, please let me know.......
    
    Ken
    	 

    RE: .237, .238
    
    Statements of personal philosophy or religious conviction which
    are found offensive or threatening by a DEC employee are considered
    harassment under law.  If such statements are a Federal offense
    when overheard in the corridor, how much more so when transmitted
    via FCC-regulated common carriers, across state boundaries?
        In some countries our network crosses and connects to, the
    utterance or publication of a remark construed to be against a
    religious or national group is a felony.  Some institutions dropped
    their USENET connections (in Denmark or Sweden, I believe) because
    of some of the traffic in religiously-oriented mailing lists.
        Even where criminal law does not apply, any reader of material
    offensive or damaging to him/her is entitled to bring suit against
    all responsible parties.
        Basically, DEC does not want to sanction any activity which
    can make it a party to a criminal action if an employee complains
    to the authorities.  By making a policy statement, it clearly puts
    the responsibility (properly) on the individuals involved.
        If you broadcast a statement which offends an individual, and
    he/she takes legal action, then DEC protects itself by reminding
    you that you are acting against published DEC policies, and are
    subject to dismissal.  Even the government recognizes that an employer
    cannot be held responsible for the actions/words of its employees.
    The offender, if convicted, is subject to stiff penalties, as is
    the employer, if found negligent in preventing such offenses.
        Unfortunately, the nature of electronic communication is such
    that people will use it to make statements they would never make
    face-to-face.  It also, perhaps fortunately, keeps a fairly
    untamperable record of one's words.  DEC should not have to be
    accountable for the statements of individuals who refuse accountability
    for their own words.  It should discourage them in every way, including
    putting a "chill" on the holding of VAXnotes conferences whose contexts
    invite bigotry.  Moderators of such conferences should be made
    painfully aware of the special responsibility they bear.
                            

	Re: .240

	Are you a lawyer ?  

	Why oh why do people have to make such a BIG DEAL over noting ?

	
	Chuck                            

Minor aside re: that missing file.

While in no way being a "born again" SEXCETERA file, there is a notes
conference on QUARK::HUMAN_RELATIONS in which noters exchange opinions
and discuss issues pertaining to relationshps and interactions between
people. The file is actively moderated, and has well defined criteria of
good taste for submission of notes. It's often interesting, too.


Re:241:

 As has been said in other conferences, we are making a "big deal" over the
electronic noting issues because of their (and our) vulnerability. The
following represents my opinion on the matter:
a. Digital Equipment Corporation is LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE for the contents of
all and every notesfile which is maintained on machines owned and operated
by Digital. If someone posts a note of dubious taste, or which incites 
(explicitly or implicitly) the commission of an illegal act, or which 
advocates or incites harassment of a third party, then Digital is liable
to suffer legal action, either civil OR CRIMINAL.

b. One solution to the problem of this liability is to close down all
non-work-related notesfiles, and to severely monitor all workrelated
notesfiles. 

c. Digital management has made a considerable effort not to do this, aided
by certain members of the "noting community", and has provided mechanisms
(such as this new policy) by which the "noting community" can in a sense be
responsible for its own actions, SOMEWHAT. Management has tried to "do the
right thing", and has, I would say, succeeded.

d. An alternate view of (c), and of the new policy, is that we (the "noting
community") have been given enough rope with which to hang ourselves. If we
do not take care to abide by the spirit and letter of the new policy wrt 
harrassment, obscenity, dubious taste or even just plain common sense, then
we are going to suffer. 

e. And just a few irresponsible notes will do it. We are being treated as
adults in the real world here (which is apparently a new experience for some
of you!). Let's live up to the expectations of our management, rather than 
down to their fears.

f. But we have to be careful, and somewhat self regulating. Hence the fuss.

(disclaimer): I'm in no way associated with upper management at Digital, nor
was I involved in the setting of the new policy. I was (however) pleasantly
surprised that it was not more sweeping than in was. 

			Nigel

    The material behind the form feed was posted in a restricted conference
    of which I am a member. I feel this interpretation of the official
    policy will see the elmination of several types of conferences--those
    which are restricted due to the sensitive nature of the discussions
    (GDE for example) and those which involve matters of personal
    conviction (CHRISTIAN for example).
    
    
    
    Message-class: DECMAIL-MS From:
    NAME: FOLB INITLS: SHARON 
    FUNC: PERSONNEL DATA SYSTEMS 
    ADDR: CFO2-2/F53
    TEL: 251-1739 <121111@DECMAIL@CELICA@CFO> 
    Posted-date: 02-Dec-1986
    Subject: PROPER USE OF COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 
  
    Message-class: DECMAIL-MS From:	
    NAME: CARTER INITLS: MICHAEL 
    FUNC:CORP. SECURITY 
    ADDR: MSO 
    TEL: 223-4232 <98576@DECMAIL@CELICA@CFO>
    Posted-date: 01-Dec-1986 
    To:	SHARON FOLB @CFO 
    Subject: Proper Use of Computers Systems and Networks 

Sharon, please distribute to the IDCMF for them to distribute through 
their respective organizations.

Thanks.



*******************************************************************************
THIS MEMO IS FROM:

RON GLOVER,  LAW DEPARTMENT

JOHN MURPHY,  CORPORATE EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

ALAN ZIMMERLE,  CORPORATE EEO/AFFIRMATIVE ACTIONS

MICHAEL CARTER,  CORPORATE DATA & INFORMATION SECURITY

*******************************************************************************


Attached is our new policy on the Proper Use of Digital Computers,
Systems and Networks.  This policy was written to provide guidance to
managers and users around the appropriate use of Digital's
extensive computer resources.

As you can see, the policy continues to encourage broad use of our
systems. Towards that end, we continue to allow employees to use our
systems for purposes that are not classically and directly related to
their job responsibilities, but which are in line with the company's
"Valuing Difference" policies.  For example, under this policy a
Veteran's networking group made up of Digital employees would be free
to set up a NOTES file for the purpose of sharing information (between
themselves and other Digital employees) about veterans, the Veteran's
experience and activities for and about veterans.  At the same time,
the policy identifies specific catagories of use that are prohibited
because they are matters of private conviction/philosophy or are
contrary to the company's interests.  So for example, while it would
be appropriate to use the notes file described above to list a
Veterans related activity sponsored by and held at a local religious
organization, it would not be appropriate to list that religious
organization's religious activities.

Managers and employees share responsibility for implementing this
policy.  Employees are responsible for understanding the policy and
using computer resources in accordance with its terms.  Managers are
responsible for counseling and training employees about their
responsibilities under this policy.  System Managers should take steps
to verify that users and moderators understand and abide by the
requirements of this policy and understand the limits of our ability
to provide privacy and security in our systems.  Managers and
employees, whether users or conference moderators, must understand
that non-business related files are accessable by all employees.
Restricted Conferences are permitted only when they are directly
related to, and in direct support of the business.

Finally, in carrying out that responsibility, Systems Managers can
look to their client managers and personnel resources to help them
identify those uses that are outside the bounds of the policy.


Per our recent meeting, attached is the final version of the
Proper Use of Digital Computers, Systems and Networks.  This
policy is effective November 17, 1986.


       PROPER USE OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS


POLICY

Digital owns and operates computers, systems and networks in 
support of Company business activities.  Systems should be used to 
enhance the cost effectiveness and efficient running of the 
business, to assist employees in being more effective in executing 
their duties and responsibilities, to foster appropriate open and 
efficient communications and to perpetuate the use of computers in 
day to-day activities.  The efficient operation of these vital 
resources is critical to the success of the businesss.  Therefore, 
it is the responsibility of all employees to ensure that these 
resources are being used properly.


DEFINITION

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.


RESPONSIBILITIES

Information Systems Managers - Information Systems Managers must 
ensure that computers, systems and networks that they manage are 
clearly operating in support of Company business activities.  This 
could be accomplished by reviewing equipment usage and educating 
users, and/or issuing periodic systems management advisories.  
Information Systems Managers must immediately investigate and 
report any incident of misuse by an employee to the employee's 
manager.

Managers - Managers should periodically remind employees about the 
proper use of Company computer resources and with proper 
consideration of employee privacy, monitor these resources to 
 
insure that they are being used in accordance with this policy.  
Additionally, in cases where there is suspicion of improper use, 
managers should discuss the problem with the employee in question 
and, if appropriate, involve Security.  In cases where improper use 
has been clearly established, the employee should be dealt with in 
accordance with the Corrective Action and Disciplinary Policy 
(6.21).

Employees - Employees are expected to use Company sponsored 
computer resources in accordance with this policy and to support 
company business activities.  In addition, employees should report 
all potential misuse to the appropriate Information Systems Manager 
and/or their supervisor.


REFERENCES

Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual; Policy 6.03, Harrassment 
Policy; Policy 6.06, Conflict of Interest; Policy 6.21, Corrective 
Action and Discipline; Policy 6.24, Employee Responsibililty; and 
Policy 6.18, Employee Privacy.
    
    

    re .243:
    
    Hmm.  That would seem to impact a file like CHRISTIAN while allowing
    a conference like BIBLE to exist, as long as the discussion in BIBLE
    would be restricted to the scholarly rather than as statements of
    conviction.  Very interesting distinction.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

        Re:< Note 111.245 by INK::KALLIS "Support Hallowe'en" >

                I must  comment that the policy is both fair and liberal.
        I'm proud to  be  working for a company that recognizes that it's
        valuable to haver employees  using  it's  resources  for purposes
        that do not directly relate to their jobs.
        
                I  can understand, but do  not  fully  support  the  rule
        agains issues of conviction.  But  that's  the only "flaw" that I
        see.
        
        Anker

    It looks to me that Mike Carter's cover letter is not consistent
    with the text of the policy itself.  He seems to have read the examples
    of what _could be_ abusive to mean that these _are_ abusive.
    
    I think the text itself was unchanged in that regard; it was just
    the person forwarding it along, who hasn't been active in this
    conference.  I  hope.

The cover letter was actually written by Ron Glover in the Corporate Law
Department.

/john

    re .243:
    
    Looking at the latest EASYNOTES.LIS, there are 3 conferences listed
    under non-business related that have "contact..." instead of listing
    a conference location.  They are:
    
    	gde (gay digital employees)
    	recovering alcoholics
    	jokes
    
    I don't know about jokes, but the for the other two, I can see both a
    strong reason for their existance and their need for some level of
    confidentiality.  I suspect that both conferences would disappear if
    forced to be unrestricted conferences.
    
    Suppose these conferences disappeared.  What kind of message is
    that sending to the employees?  Answer:  "These conferences used
    to exist.  We (royal we here) decided that unrestricted conferences
    were not going to be allowed so they had to go away.  We won't explain
    or justify our decision.  We won't even identify the person resposible.
    Instead, we'll hide behind ``It's coporate policy, tough.''"
    
    Sorta destroys the entire Valuing Differences Program doesn't it?
    
    

    re .249
    
    With reference to Gay and Alcoholics conferences.
    
    Surely when it comes down to it, these two conferences are work
    related and provide a 'social service'. There are many pressures
    in the world that we live in and to live under the 'stigma' of being
    an alcoholic or gay must be made easier when these groups of people
    can share their views and problems. This must make their life easier
    and therefore, one would hope, not divert their attentions from
    being a 'good Digital employee'. This must also reduce the work
    load on such managers who see it as a responsibilty to 'look after'
    and counsel said persons. If ever the gay conference was banned
    then this would be 'sweeping the problem under the carpet' and those
    participants would once again feel isolated.
    Before I am shouted at about the word stigma - note it is in quotes,
    I have nothing against gays etc, its how the world in general percieves
    such persons, lets hope that Digital never reflects 'the world in
    general' in its policy to minority groups (with or without problems).

    If the alcoholic conference stops just ONE person from killing someone
    on the road, then it has done its job.
    
    David who_is_a_very_tolerant_human_being Banks.
    

    
    Please explain what the Valuing Differences policy is.

The policy as it is worded seems unreasonably restrictive. If strictly
interpreted I can't even send VAXmail to my colleages on technical issues
that are directly related to my job if they contain statements of my own
conviction or philisophy, such as "I beleive it is time for a new product to
address market X" or "I think simplicity is a virtue in software design."

Don.

    re .252:
    
    	More than that, the policy statement itself is someone's
    conviction. It shouldn't be allowed on any Digital Systems.
    
    
       (-: I couldn't resist :-)
    
    
    	Ed

    "Why didn't you follow the rules?"
    
    "That's why we have managers.  If we had perfect rules, then we
    wouldn't need managers to enforce, interpret, or bend them when
    necessary."
    
              --From a conversation I overheard some years ago.

    I have seen a rough draft of a proposed network and computer security
    policy which reads a lot like the proposal here.  It's still under
    revision, so I can't discuss it much or issue it here.  however,
    the issues are the same.  In both cases, I hope reality overtakes
    literalism when/if the polic[ies] get implemented.

>    I have seen a rough draft of a proposed network and computer security
>    policy which reads a lot like the proposal here.  It's still under
>    revision, so I can't discuss it much or issue it here.

The policy presented here is *not* a proposal; it is the official policy which
is part of the policies and procedures manual.

No one else should be coming up with policies on this subject; if they are,
I think the same people who were involved in making sure the policy posted
here was reasonable (Alan Kotok, myself, and some others) should be involved.

The memo by Ron Glover preceding the policy is an interpretation of the policy.
Lawyers (such as Ron Glover) may change their interpretation given more input.

/john

>     I'm proud to  be  working for a company that recognizes that it's
>     valuable to haver employees  using  it's  resources  for purposes
>     that do not directly relate to their jobs.

Me, too!!

(I wonder if IBM has a "Valuing Sameness" policy :-) :-) )

Frank

    re .251:
    
    "Valuing Differences"
    
    We believe that Digital's success is dependent upon our ability
    to maintain a working environment that truly values people with
    different physical abilities or different cultural, ethnic, racial,
    sexual, organizational and geographic backgrounds and life experiences.
    We have expanded our Equal Employment Opportunity philosophy to
    include this notion of "Valuing Difference."
    
    source: "DIGITAL and You, 
   	     A Handbook for U.S. Employees of Digital Equipment Corporation"  
   	     Revised June, 1986.  Catalogue #EB-29051-86

To what extent do Ron Glover's interpretations of policy apply to those who
do not work for him?  What is his jurisdictional authority to dictate actions
based on interpretations of these policies?

--PSW

The following extract from the Euro_Forum conference is posted here with
David Banks permission, I think it speaks for itself.

*** Please respect David's position and do not access the conference ***


              <<< TMCUK2::MSC:[NOTES$LIBRARY]EURO_FORUM.NOTE;1 >>>
                         -< European Discussion Forum >-
================================================================================
Note 1.4                         Introduction                             4 of 4
TMCUK2::BANKS "Nihil Caborundum Illigitimus"         45 lines   8-DEC-1986 13:34
                          -< Important announcement. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This conference was announced as a members  only  conference,  the 
    one   and   only  reason  for  announcing  this  non-work  related 
    conference as restricted was to reduce the initial load that might 
    have  been  placed on the node TMCUK2 if the announcement was made 
    worldwide. It has never been my intention that the conference stay 
    restricted  as  the  very  nature of its subject matter requires a 
    wide audience, both geographicaly, politicaly and otherwise.
    
    The fact that this member only  non-work  related  conference  had 
    been  announced  was  communicated  to  corporate legal, corporate 
    employee relations, corporate data security and  corporate  EEO/AA 
    within 2 hours of my announcement.
   
    The  moderator,  system manager of TMCUK2, my manager, in fact, no 
    person in the UK was given prior warning of this communication and 
    this  has  raised a number of important questions in my mind.  One 
    important fact is that this conference has  been  given  premature 
    publicity  in  a  manner  that  is  not conducive with its subject 
    matter and was contrary to my express wishes.  This will  place an 
    unacceptable  burden  on the moderators and I feel, will limit the 
    scope of subject matter discussed,  but  most  importantly,  could 
    place  any  contributor  and  his  contribution  in violation of a 
    corporate policy and procedure and/or directive.

    My system manager has placed the trust in me that he will  not  be 
    bothered  by  the existence of this conference and my manager, who 
    believes in management by exception,  will  not  wish  to  involve 
    himself  unless  I  cannot  contain  the  situation.    Due to the 
    actions of Friday, I am no longer in control of the situation of a
    membership  only  non-work  related  conference  on   TMCUK2   and 
    therefore cannot guarantee to them their non-involvement.

    It is  therefore  with  extreme  reluctance  that  the  EURO_FORUM 
    conference  must be closed.  This note will be left in place for a 
    short time and if the worst happens, the whole conference will  be 
    deleted. 

    The  membership  list  will  be retained in the hope that the time 
    will come when I can re-announce this  conference,  until  then, I 
    remain yours sincerely,
    
    		David Banks.
    

    

    I don't understand. Let me explain what I think I understand and
    where I get lost.
    
    1) A restricted conference was announced to a group of people so
       it could get started cleanly and not over power a system. That
       I understand, I've done it myself.
    
    2) Someone told security, personal, and other management people.
    
    3) Because of 2 the file has to be closed? Now I'm lost. Have the
       management people caused any trouble? Have they even hinted that
       they would cause trouble?
    
    		Alfred

    There are a number of problems:-
    
    1)	Interpretation of policies and procedures and/or directives.
    	It was spelt out to me in no uncertain terms that the existence
    	of the conference was contrary to corporate policy and procedure
    	and a directive thereof. The existence of the conference would
    	be to aid and abet any member of said conference to 'break'
    	these rules, a position I as moderator did not feel comfortable
    	with.
    
    2)	Management have not caused any trouble, I have prevented that
    	by my actions and I hope it stays that way. They have a trust in
    	me that I do not want broken and I would hope others will respect
    	that trust.
    
    3)	Interpretation of policies and procedures and/or directives by
    	the UK Board of Management. I am not privy to how, or when, or if we
    	will ever have a UK interpretation of these policies etc. For
    	my own health I have taken the course of action which is most
    	beneficial to me. When UK policy is fully understood, then we
    	will review the situation.
    
    4)	Your point 1) is precisely what I intended doing, but as explained
    	in .259, I cannot operate a conference whilst under the scrutiny
    	of corporate personnel and nor would I expect any contributor to
   	either. The subject of the conference was a European Discussion
    	Forum and the publicity it received at corporate level was not
    	conducive to 'free and frank discussion', therefore nullifying
    	its very existence.
	
    Basically, the local management have not caused trouble, it is the
    trouble they and I may get from corporate that worries me and I
    owe it to my management not to place them in an embarrassing situation.
    

    It's not at all clear to me that such a conference is, in itself,
    a violation of the policy.
    
    What's clear to me is that conference initiators are subject to
    anonymous harassment.  It seems that a case can be made that supression
    of conferences which have demonstrated appeal may itself be a
    discriminatory act. 

        At the risk of being monotonous, it is not yet time to panic...
        
        There are several of us who are working, slowly (after all, this
        is a spare time effort for most of us), to resolve many of the
        issues involved here, and to fix some of the problems that exist
        with the policy and its interpretation. Such efforts are not
        made any easier either by incidents or by controversy.
        
        Please, do not be hasty in bringing either conferences or
        specific problems to official attention, unless they absolutely
        *have* to be. Most problems and issues (regarding NOTES or
        anything) can be handled informally. It is the DEC way to handle
        things at as low a level and as informally as is possible.
        
        Similarly, please don't be too hasty in impugning the motives of
        others or about speculating about the details of any incidents
        which occur. It is easy to say that it is obvious that such a
        person is harassing, or that such a file is in clear violation
        or that it is clear that whatever. It is also almost never true
        that it is obvious or clear.
        
        JimB. 

    re: .263
    
    Hear! Hear!
    
    This is quite a milestone, in that I actually agree with everything
    Jim said in toto.  The article on Ken Olseon in FORTUNE magazine
    said that KO likes things to run on automatic.  I suspect that these
    policy issues will resolve themselves through the efforts of Jim
    et al. over time, but pushing for high-level or specific rulings
    will disable the automatic-regulation approach--and possibly result
    in a policy that no one is hapy with.

    A conversation that I just overheard in the computer room, might
    give some NOTErs cause for reflection. The conversation seemed to
    be started off by the fact that some folks took listings off the
    printers and left the printers off-line. One person apparently
    remarking about how much stuff was being printed.
    
    Yeah, most of what gets printed is garbage!
    
    This guy's printing out a whole bunch of jokes!
    
    Yeah, there's a lot of garbage on the network.
    
    One thing that should be done is to get the notes files off the
    network. You should see the stuff out there. They swear and
    everything right where anybody can see it. There's all kinds
    of stuff out there, did you know they even have one for homo-
    sexuals!!!?
    
    People abuse the systems.

    Just my thoughts....


        Well I agree that some people abuse the system/network, however
        the VAXnotes gives me a vast source of information that helps me
        with my job.  Also as a wealth of info for my RAINBOW, general
        interests and other enjoyable stuff.  So I wouldn't worry about
        what some people think, I believe upper mgt. feel the same way.


                                                Regards,

                                                  Rich

    re .265
    
>                                               There's all kinds
>    of stuff out there, did you know they even have one for homo-
>    sexuals!!!?

    
    So?
    
    Lee

    <--(.267)
    
    I think he was quoting a conversation, Lee.
    
    						=maggie

    
    Seems like a good topic to discuss this.
    
    <Long distribution deleted>
    
From:	NAME: BEL CROSS @VRO                
	FUNC: DIS                     
	TEL: 273-5464             <CROSS.BEL AT A10 at RELIEF at VRO>
To:	See Below
CC:	See Below

    There have been a number of complaints recently as to the abuses of 
    "Notes Files" and other computing resources.  Many more people have 
    become aware of excessive use for nonbusiness purposes and our 
    distribution of business communications not intended for wide 
    dissemination.  There are a number of specific policies which do exist, 
    but that are not being adhered to.  I think it's time for all cost 
    center managers, systems managers and notes files moderators to step up 
    and exercise their responsibility.
    
    During times like these when business is difficult we must take the 
    necessary steps to tighten up on the use of company resources, 
    especially those used for purposes other than direct business support.
    
    I have re-read the "Personnel Policies and Procedures" for the United 
    States, section 6.24 on Employee Conduct and Section 6.54 on Proper Use 
    of Digital Computers, Systems and Networks.  These two policies are 
    quite explicit on expectations and responsibilities.  I'm sure Europe 
    and GIA have similar policies.  It's time for us to manage to these 
    policies and stop turning our heads the other way when we see abuse.  
    
    Please forward to all of your managers so that we can bring this issue 
    to the attention of all managers in Digital.
    

    
    <many distributions deleted>

    Incidentally I feel comfortable posting .269 as it has received very
    wide distribution. If anyone has a problem with my posting it, please
    mail me.
    
    Andy

    In answer to:
    
          <<< HUMAN::DISK$HUMAN_WRKD:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 821.58                        Waste Watch                          58 of 59
ASABET::CORBETT                                     118 lines  30-MAY-1989 15:45
              -< Please reply in note 111 - AJL, DIGITAL Co-Mod >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	Does anyone know what this means??  Will non-work realted notes files
be removed?  No avaliable during work times??  anything??

mike corbett
-----------------------------< Bel Cross Memo removed >----------------------
    
    Unfortunatly this is a rather imprecise memo dealing with a rather
    imprecise (US area) P&P item.
    
    My beliefs are the following:
    
    	o Any 'crackdown' will be a matter of interpretation by Moderators
          and their Management. As a Noter and DECcie of 6 years, I find
    	  this comforting, I believe my Management support the notes
    	  conferences I (co-) Moderate and that I can defend my involvement
    	  adequately.
    
    	o No Moderators that am I aware of deliberatly flout any company policy
          and indeed we are very much on the side of keeping within P&P
    	  so as to help our Managers have to trust us as DEC employees to 
    	  'do the right thing'.
    
    	o Furthermore I believe that such imprecise statements as in .269
    	  do not demonstrate an adequate understanding of how Notes
    	  dominates communications within Digital and adds significantly
    	  to the quality of life as a Digital employee.
    
    In concert with other reputable long-time Noters I would be happy to
    help with any drafting of policies regarding internal communications (as
    indeed we have in the past).
    
    However, I would strongly urge Moderators and Noters adopt a position
    in regard to US area P&P with read to Notes and electronic
    communications (or a local equivalent if it exists) that they feel they
    can defend and is within the spirit of P&P.
    
    Andy Leslie
    Co-Moderator
	    	DIGITAL
	    	UK_DIGITAL
    		DECWINDOWS
    		FRIENDS
    		CDSWAP-UK
    		etc

    Best advice I've read (Martin?) was to write only what you would be
    happy to see attached to your resume.
    
    Marge

    re 111.269  Bel Cross memo
    
    �  I have re-read the "Personnel Policies and Procedures" for the United 
    �  States, section 6.24 on Employee Conduct and Section 6.54 on Proper Use 
    �  of Digital Computers, Systems and Networks.
    
    In order to facilitate discussion, I have posted sections 6.24 and
    6.54 as replies to this base note.  Unless someone else is replying
    at the same time (which is quite likely in this conference) they
    should be assigned numbers 111.273 and 111.274 respectively.
    
    Don Gresh

(B)0lqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqwqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqk
x                      PERSONNEL                      x Section 6.24           x
x                                                     x Page  1 of 2           x
x               POLICIES AND PROCEDURES               x Effective 04-FEB-85    x
mqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqvqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqj

                               Employee Conduct


COPE:  WORLDWIDE

Digital strives to create and maintain a positive work environment.
To achieve this, the Company encourages courteous and respectful
behavior, a responsible attitude toward work and respect for
employee and Company property.

The Company feels strongly about this and has developed this
Employee Conduct Statement to help clarify differences in judgment.
This statement outlines general principles on which employees are
expected to base their behavior and cites examples of unacceptable
conduct; the examples are not meant to be all-inclusive.


IN GENERAL, EMPLOYEES CAN ANTICIPATE THAT ACTIONS HARMFUL TO
ANOTHER EMPLOYEE OR TO THE COMPANY ARE CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINARY
PROCEDURES OR POSSIBLE DISMISSAL.  SPECIFICALLY, EMPLOYEES ARE
EXPECTED TO BE AT THEIR WORK SITES AND ATTEND TO THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES.

EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO RESPECT THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY
OF OTHERS.


For example, they will not:

     o Discriminate on the basis of race, sex, age, religion or
       ethnic background.

     o Fight with or physically abuse coworkers or the employees of
       vendors or customers.

     o Behave in a manner offensive to others.

     o Solicit from others on working time.


EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO RESPECT THE PROPERTY OF OTHERS.

For example, they will not:

     o Destroy, deface or damage property belonging to Digital, its
       customers, vendors or employees.

     o Misuse or misappropriate Company assets or steal from the
       Company, its employees, vendors or customers.



                        DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

 
(B)0lqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqwqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqk
x                      PERSONNEL                      x Section 6.24           x
x                                                     x Page  2 of 2           x
x               POLICIES AND PROCEDURES               x Effective 04-FEB-85    x
mqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqvqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqj

                               Employee Conduct


     o Help anyone gain unauthorized entrance to or exit from
       Company facilities.

     o Use Company equipment or property without authorization.

EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO TREAT INFORMATION APPROPRIATELY.

For example, they will not:

     o Misrepresent or intentionally omit facts to obtain
       employment or falsify employment, medical or security records.


     o Disclose to any unauthorized person any Company Confidential
       or government classified information or material.

     o Intentionally falsify any Company record or report.

     o Access computer files or give information to others to
       access computer files when not properly authorized.

     o Possess or use on Company or customer premises any photo-
       graphic equipment which hasn't been properly authorized by
       security.


EMPLOYEES ARE EXPECTED TO HELP MAINTAIN A SAFE WORK ENVIRONMENT.

For example, they will not:

     o Possess or use on Company or customer premises any weapons,
       firearms or explosive devices.

     o Work under the influence of, possess or use intoxicants or
       illegal drugs on Company or customer premises.


     o Participate in any form of illegal gaming or gambling on
       Company or customer property.

Interpretations for some of these general principles may be subject
to legal and cultural mores in countries where Digital has
facilities.  If you have questions, please talk with your supervisor.

                        DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

 

    As P&P 6.54 indicates, non-business conferences are not precluded.
    They just must be open to all and, as indicated in the previous
    P&P, be used so as not to interfere with Digital Business (loose
    paraphrasing).  So as with most things, use good judgment.
    
    /Ed

    As I parse this, Bel Cross refers to two problems:
    
    (1) "Excessive use for nonbusiness purposes"
    (2) "our (sic) distribution of business communications not intended for
        wide dissemination"
    
    I think (1) refers to the loss of productivity of employees who are
    "excessively" connected to employee interest conferences.  This is
    clearly a matter between a employee and his or her manager.  VAX Notes
    does not provide, nor should it provide, a tool to monitor excessive
    usage.
    
    No action here is required by particpants or moderators whose access to
    employee-interest VAX Notes Conferences isn't affecting their job
    performance.
    
    If (1) refers to systems, or network links, that would be a surprise to
    me.  Usually this sort of this source of "excessive use" is
    self-regulating and conferences move to systems and network links that
    do not impact business.  Conferences are not imposed on cost centers.
    
    (2, "distribution of business communications")  on the other hand
    represents a real problem, but one that I see in Mail more than Notes.
    It's part of the Digital culture to forward mail regardless of the
    original author's intent.  Each recipient makes the judgement regarding
    it.  The same is true for paper, of course, but electronic
    communications makes it far easier.
    
    In VTX, an infobase manager must explicitly handle each new "page".  In
    VAX Notes, the moderator has only a veto power.
    
    In taking this to heart in the conferences I moderate I'll probably
    hide notes that I consider to be "distribution of business
    communications not intended for wide dissemination", and ask the
    participant to obtain permission from the original author.
                                                              

    Boy, this memo has managed to pop up in a lot of places in a very
    short period of time!  So far, I've counted it in 7 conferences!
    
    IMHO, for whatever reasons there may be for scrutinizing non-business
    computer usage, the timing of this is unfortunate.  It certainly
    comes at a time when US employees are reeling from a few other morale
    busters, like the wage freeze.  I know that the heretofore generous
    access that DEC employees have had to the company's computer resources
    have played a large part in making our job environment a desirable one.

    I read with interest the note about IBM's view of "non-business"
    computer conferences.  There are a few areas where we could benefit
    from copying IBM, but I don't believe this is one of them.
    
    Geoff
    

    
    re .280
    
    	I also found out about the freeze before my superior. She came
    	from IBM a while back, and unlike the picture you paint, she
    	is very nice, open, and a great manager because she concentrates
    	on organization, not power. One of the best I've ever had.
    
    	She realizes that I do Note, and I'm also probably one of the
    	more "informed" people around my particular group because of
    	the vast amount of contacts I have established in my 5 years
    	of Noting. 
    
 	In my history with DEC, my Noting has never been an issue for
    	one reason:
    
    	I get my work done, and I do it well.
    
	/prc    	
    
	

Re .277
    
    
    
>    If (1) refers to systems, or network links, that would be a surprise to
>    me.  Usually this sort of this source of "excessive use" is
>    self-regulating and conferences move to systems and network links that
>    do not impact business.  Conferences are not imposed on cost centers.
    
    
    While this is true with reference to our systems, I don't think we are
    that good at managing the network usage.  There are no easy tools, for
    example, that can tell us what any given link is being used for
    (DECnet object level accounting, for instance).  When it comes to
    networks, as a general rule we tend to add more capacity as needed,
    rather than analyze and adjust the usage.  There are places where
    we are beginning to anlalyze the usage but it's isolated and not
    part of running the ongoing network business.....yet.
                                
    At the risk of puting words in someone's mouth, so to speak, I would
    say it's probably Bel's opinion that there is excessive employee
    interest NOTEing throughout Digital and that it takes up far too
    many resources (human, system and networks).  The problem is that
    if an individual agrees, then they probably are not "a part of the
    problem".  If an individual disagrees, then by their own definition
    there is no problem.  So, saying it has very little affect on the
    individuals.
    
    I think what he would really like to see is the owners of the system
    resources to constantly re-evaluate the usage of those resources,
    and to eliminate "excessive" employee interest NOTEing.  The problem
    with that is there are over 35,000 nodes on the network and probably
    just as many conferences.  If you look at the usage of NOTES on
    any one node, with few exceptions it doesn't look like much.  But
    if you step back and add it up, it probably is significant.
    
    I agree with a previous reply that indicated we have to internalize
    the message and act accordingly.  But then, we all think we already
    do that.
    
    

                      DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY

    
                   I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:      14-Mar-1989 11:41am GMT
                                        From:      Sergio GIACOLETTO @GEO 
                                                   GIACOLETTO AT AMISA1 @EHQMTS @GEO 
                                        Dept:      Information Services
                                        Tel No:    821-4951

TO: See Below

Subject: INAPPROPRIATE USAGE OF COMPUTER RESOURCES

    
         FOR YOUR ACTION
         ===============
    
         As you all know, we encourage the usage of Computer 
    Conferencing (VAXnote) to support our organization, specifically 
    in the coordination of distributed resources in relation to both 
    customers and internal projects and activities. We also recognize 
    and admit the usage of Computer Conferences for social employee 
    activities and interests.
    
         We have however noticed that a small percentage of our 
    employees utilize this facility for discussion on topics which are 
    of offensive nature (ethical and sexual jokes) or at least of bad 
    taste.
    
         There is a specific Corporate policy stating that this is 
    considered inappropriate usage of company resources, and 
    Management has the authority and obligation to pursue those cases 
    of abuse and to remove conferences and topics of offensive nature.
    

>ethical jokes

No Jim Wright jokes allowed!

    re: .282  "policy"
    
    This policy makes its point in a much less threatening way than
    the other memo floating around.  The recognition of VAXnotes as
    a means of *employee* communication, rather than strictly for
    business functions, is clear and reassuring.  The focus is on
    the proprieties involved in computer conferencing, and on the
    responsibilities of 'noters to behave accordingly.  It's not
    a question of "waste", but of "doing the right thing".
    
    Thank you, Mr. Giacolleto, for reminding us to do the right thing.
    
    Geoff Unland
    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    
    Well I has happen I received a memo and a phone call from my boss, 
    The just of it is listed below.

        
                      <<< USRD3$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MICHIGAN.NOTE;1 >>>
              -< Let's Talk About Michigan The Great Lakes State >-
================================================================================
Note 1.3                            Welcome!                              3 of 4
GLDOA::ROMANIK "Ken Romanik"                        256 lines  14-JUN-1989 06:37
                  -< Don't go away yet I am working on this >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am very sorry But because of the attached memo from my boss
this conference will be write locked until I can get a answer
from personnel.

Ken Romanik





 
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Doc. No:  000459
                                        Date:     13-Jun-1989 09:11pm EDT
                                        From:     WAYNE GOLDSMITH @EFO
                                                  GOLDSMITH.WAYNE
                                        Dept:     METRO DETROIT F.S.
                                        Tel No:   (313) 546-4001
 
TO:  Ken Romanik @EFO                     ( ROMANIK.KEN )
 
CC:  RAY TURCOTTE @WDF                    ( TURCOTTE.RAY )
 
Subject: NOTE FILE
 
KEN THE ATTACHED A1 MESSAGE IS FROM UP ABOVE.
 
YOU ARE TO STOP ALL ACTIVITY WITH THE NOTE FILES ASAP. THEY ARE ONLY
 
TO BE USED FOR BUSINESS.
 
WAYNE GOLDSMITH
 








 
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Date:     07-Jun-1989 02:02pm EDT
                                        From:     RAY TURCOTTE @WDF
                                                  TURCOTTE.RAY
                                        Dept:     METRO DETROIT DISTRICT
                                        Tel No:   DTN 471-2013
 
TO: See Below
 
Subject: FYI
 
 
 
 
Distribution:
 
TO:  MIKE BOSAK @FHA                      ( BOSAK.MIKE )
TO:  WAYNE GOLDSMITH @EFO                 ( GOLDSMITH.WAYNE )
TO:  Ken Koehler @WDF                     ( KOEHLER.KEN )
TO:  PAUL LUKKARI @WDF                    ( LUKKARI.PAUL )
TO:  JOHN MALLETT @EFO                    ( MALLETT.JOHN )
 
 
Use the RDL option to see remainder of distribution lists.
 
 








 
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Date:     06-Jun-1989 09:59am EDT
                                        From:     Bill Cummins
                                                  CUMMINS.BILL
                                        Dept:     ECA FLD SERVICE
                                        Tel No:   DTN 471-5552
 
TO: See Below
 
Subject: NOTES FILES - USE OF DIGITAL ASSETS - ATTACHED
 
FYI
 
BILL CUMMINS
ATTACHMENT
 
 
Distribution:
 
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( BILL CUMMINS @OHF )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( BILL NOSEWORTHY @OHF )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( BOB GLASER @OHF )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( DAN LONGTON @OHF )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( REGINA LOVE @OHF )
 
 
Use the RDL option to see remainder of distribution lists.
 
 








     
                      I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
     
                                            Date:     05-Jun-1989 02:23pm EDT
                                            From:     Reggie Linebarger @OHF
                                                      LINEBARGER.REGGIE
                                            Dept:     ECA Administration
                                            Tel No:   DTN 471-5496
     
    TO: See Below
                    
    Subject: FWD:  NOTES FILES - USE OF DIGITIAL ASSETS - ATTACHED
     
    FWD:  FYI, If not already received.
     
    Regards,
     
    Reg
    /pr
     
    attachment
     
     
    Distribution:
     
    TO:  Bob Burke @FAC                       ( BURKE.BOB@A1@ECASWS@RDC )
    TO:  Gary Chicoine                        ( CHICOINE.GARY )
    TO:  Bill Cummins                         ( CUMMINS.BILL )
    TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( JOHN DELISLE @MRO )
    TO:  Dorothy Gleason @OHF                 ( GLEASON.DOROTHY )
     
     
    Use the RDL option to see remainder of distribution lists.
     
     








 
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Date:     02-Jun-1989 12:05pm EDT
                                        From:     Mike Kalagher
                                                  KALAGHER.MIKE AT A1CLUSTER at CHMMTS at CHM
                                        Dept:     U.S. Admin
                                        Tel No:   272-7001
 
TO: See Below
 
Subject: Notes Files - Use of Digital Assets - Attached
 
 
For your immediate attention and implementation.  Please ensure 
dissemination to all levels.
 
 
MJK:hm
 
 
Distribution:
 
TO:  DETLEV SUDEROW @CHM
TO:  BILL SCOTT @OGO
TO:  DICK ROGERS @MEL
TO:  ED REISS @CHM
TO:  DENNIS PEARCE @BKO
 
 
Use the RDL option to see remainder of distribution lists.
 
 








 
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M
 
                                        Date:     26-May-1989 08:49am EDT
                                        From:     BEL CROSS @VRO
                                                  CROSS.BEL AT A10 AT RELIEF AT VRO
                                        Dept:     DIS
                                        Tel No:   273-5464
 
TO: See Below
 
Subject: NOTES FILES
 
 
    There have been a number of complaints recently as to the abuses of 
    "Notes Files" and other computing resources.  Many more people have 
    become aware of excessive use for nonbusiness purposes and our 
    distribution of business communications not intended for wide 
    dissemination.  There are a number of specific policies which do exist, 
    but that are not being adhered to.  I think it's time for all cost 
    center managers, systems managers and notes files moderators to step up 
    and exercise their responsibility.
    
    During times like these when business is difficult we must take the 
    necessary steps to tighten up on the use of company resources, 
    especially those used for purposes other than direct business support.
    
    I have re-read the "Personnel Policies and Procedures" for the United 
    States, section 6.24 on Employee Conduct and Section 6.54 on Proper Use 
    of Digital Computers, Systems and Networks.  These two policies are 
    quite explicit on expectations and responsibilities.  I'm sure Europe 
    and GIA have similar policies.  It's time for us to manage to these 
    policies and stop turning our heads the other way when we see abuse.  
    
    Please forward to all of your managers so that we can bring this issue 
    to the attention of all managers in Digital.
    
 
Distribution:
 
TO:  WIN HINDLE @CORE
TO:  JIM OSTERHOFF @CORE
TO:  JACK SHIELDS @CORE
TO:  JOHN SIMS @CORE
TO:  JACK SMITH @CORE
 
CC:  ROB AYRES @MLO
CC:  DAVID BARRETT @MLO
CC:  ROBERTA BERNSTEIN @MLO
CC:  CAROL BURKE @CFO
CC:  BEL CROSS @VRO
 
Use the RDL option to see remainder of distribution lists.
 

================================================================================
Note 1.4                            Welcome!                              4 of 4
GLDOA::ROMANIK "Ken Romanik"                         32 lines  14-JUN-1989 06:38
                            -< Memo sent to Wayne >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WAYNE,

I Too have read the Personnel Policies and Procedures manual. But I doNOT
get in any way shape or form that all nonbusiness notes files are to be
forbidden. I fact the last sentence of section 6.54 says something very 
different.
                   |This is that last sentence|
"Conferences (VAX Notes) not in support of Company business must be open
 to all employees"

Now I will have to say that there are a small number for notes files out
there that do not fellow the guidelines set forth in section 6.24, that 
is "Employee Conduct" The only one that comes to mind is "Jokes".(this is in
my opinion only)
I am very sure that other notes files are not following the guidelines
stated in section 6.54 the sentence listed above.

However I think that the Bel Gross memo is more a call to have the 
conference moderates and management look at what is out there and clear
up the files that complaints have been raised about, and not to send a
memo that says "STOP ALL ACTIVITY WITH NOTES ASAP. THEY ARE ONLY TO
BE USED FOR BUSINESS". This to me is over reacting.

From what you have told me you want me to close down the "Michigan"
conference. So what I will do is write lock the conference so that no
new notes can be added, and will delete it when ever I get a answer 
from personnel on this issue.

Ken

Interpreting Bel's memo to require termination of non-business use of VAX Notes
when Bel's memo says nothing of the kind and policy 6.54 specifically authorizes
non-business use of VAX Notes (show your manager a copy, get it from VTX)

reminds me of another message which went around last week, and even got sent
from DEC out to Usenet

with subjects saying "Eyewitness accounts of Beijing massacre from DEC employees
			in Beijing"

when the actual messages came off the Usenet and were written by students in
the U.S., Canada, and Switzerland.

/john

    No one is saying that a local decision cannot be made to terminate the
    hosting of employee interest VAX Notes Conferences.  These local
    decisions have been made several times in the past.
    
    Where these decisions have been made for relocation, it has been
    because the popularity of the conferences themselves.  A low activity
    conference such as MICHIGAN or NEWYORK (which I moderate) has a
    neglible impact on resources.
    
    Where the decision has been made to close an active conference, it's
    been made because of some controversy around its content, such as
    conferences concerning jokes or sexual matters.  Such conferences "stay
    closed", that is so say no person decides to host the topical area
    because such controversy is probably going to repeat itself.
    
    A local decision not to host an employee interest VAX Notes Conference,
    stands or falls on the weight of local concerns over the resources that
    hosting the conference will consume.  Indeed, closing a conference
    with no visible impact on freeing up significant resources could be
    seen as arbitrarily terminating a popular employee activity.
    
    A local decision not to host an employee interest VAX Notes Conference
    based on a reading of recent corporate memos and policies and reading
    them "Corporate has decided to ban employee interest VAX Notes
    Conferences" is simply an incorrect interpretation.  It's not even an
    extrapolation of what has appeared in memos and policies on the
    subject.

    Yes Michigan is still around, Only because the cluster manager has
    Taken over as the moderator.
    But I am still working with my Boss HE still things that all non
    business conferences should be shut down.
    Thanks to the DIS manager however We are waiting for a answer from
    Personnal.

    My question is what makes your boss think that all non business
    conferences should be shut down? There is nothing in either
    policy or Bel Cross' memo that say that.
    
    			Alfred

    Or maybe this is his personal opinion? In which case point out that
    6.54 SPECIFICALLY allows e-i conferences.
    
    However....
    
    		if your boss says "don't note" and can't be argued with,
    then take note, for he fills in your salary change form.
    
    - A

FLAME ON --

  If your boss says "Don't note" (meaning never run VAXnotes for
  any reason), find a new boss.  That dinosaur hasn't got long in
  this brave new network world.

FLAME OFF --

  If, on the other hand, your boss says "Don't do personal notes
  on my time", then heed the request.

                                   Atlant

    The various batch Notes extraction tools are a great compromise
    between noting and job productivity!
    
    Mike

    Please do not equate Noting with performance problems.
    
    PLEASE realise that if a person has a performance problem it will find
    some outlet. Notes is just an outlet for a performance problem to show
    itself, it is NOT the problem.
    
    The myth that "Noting" == "Performance problem" MUST be dispelled.
    
    Andy

    
    re .295
    
    How true, Andy. Well said as usual.
    
    /prc

    Well it appears that this memo is being heeded by someone... I just
    returned yesterday from a business trip, and I was given the news
    about how this has effected the Southwest Area...
    
    *  No more entries into "non-business" VAXnotes conferences.
    
    *  Remove all entries in said conferences.
    
    
    When I asked my manager if I could see the memo, I was told there
    wasn't one.  So i asked who espoused this policy - he didn't know!
    He said that his boss had been told by his boss to "tell the troops"
    that "it is so".   
    
    We discussed (Deccie to Deccie) that this policy is strange and seems
    capricous [perhaps a bit strong]... 
    
    q: What conferences are now off limits? 
    a: Wasn't defined.  
    
    q: Are we only prohibited from entering notes?
    a: Appears so, no mention about just reading.  
    
    q: What was the business reason given for this action; network resources? 
    a: None were given.
    
    q: If it were a case of network resources, don't you think that
    	going back to find all the notes we've ever posted - to be deleted -
        sounds just a bit strange??!
    a: Hmm, you may be right on that.
    
    q: Dosen't this sound kinda strange to you that we're restricted
    	from participation, yet the conference(s) remain open to other
    	corporate employees - in direct contast to the PnP rule that
    	says all conferences (paraphrased) must be open?
    a: I know, but we gotta do it.
    
    So now I come to the cruxt of my note... WTFO?!
    
    [this reminds me of my days in the Navy - Crisis Management 402]
    
    Jp

       
       
       	Methinks someone who doesn't have a clue is "making policy" by
       spreading it around.. And I suspect that they aren't a very 
       computer literate type..
       
       	When it gets in the P&P, then it's time to listen up..
       
       							mike

    "Remove all entries in said conferences."
    
    That's a good one.  Many people have been noting in non-work-related
    conferences for *years*.  Do they have any idea how long it'll take to
    delete every one of those entries?
    
    I can assure you if that order is ever given to me, all deletions will
    take place on company time.
    
    		Pat_who_fears_NWR_noting_may_be_nearing_the_end_of_its_life

    I've decided, in what may be "Custer's last stand", to "high light"
    this somewhat erronous decision to my mgmt through the open door
    policy.                                
    
    I enjoy the information that is "gleemed" from NWR noting, and don't
    appreciate being told (contrary to the PnP on NWR conferencing)
    that I can not participate -> at any time. 
    
    If you have strong feelings on this issue, as I do, I would appreciate
    your views on how you would tackle it.  Afterall, your site may
    be next on this hitlist!
    
    Regards,
    
    -Jim
    
    P.S.  If the moderators feel this is improper then they may remove it.

You're obviously doing the right thing by pursuing the open-door policy.

You must realize though, that the cost center managers of each system do have
the right to specify how their systems will be used, including during off hours.
They do not have the right to tell you that YOU cannot do off-hours employee
interest noting, if you can find a way to do it without using any of their
resources.  (Buy your own terminal, dial into an account in a friendly cost
center, ...)

Good luck/john

    re: -.1                 
    

�You must realize though, that the cost center managers of each system do have
�the right to specify how their systems will be used, including during off hours.
�They do not have the right to tell you that YOU cannot do off-hours employee
�interest noting, if you can find a way to do it without using any of their
�resources.  (Buy your own terminal, dial into an account in a friendly cost
�center, ...)

    
    John, most of the folks i've spoken with here are in agreement about
    the "unusual" requirement, i.e., they don't think it's proper; and
    your absolutely correct in what you say above, but that's not what
    is at issue here.
    
    Laidbk is a 9MB �VAX II which is utilized as a General User System
    (GUS) - VAXnotes, mail, document processing, ect.  The system is idle
    when everyone leaves for the day (except for folks like myself who hang
    around to get those last minute notes...;^).  All of the specialists in
    my unit have a terminal, modem, and printer at home - and my unit
    manager has never minded me using them for reading VAXnotes from home,
    at night. 
            
    All of a sudden comes this policy that states:
    
    *  NO writing of notes in NWR conferences.
    
    *  Delete all previous entries in same.
    
    This new policy seems to be in conflict with the Policy and Procedures
    6.24 which (paraphrased) says that all NWR conferences must be open
    to all employees.  I also iterpret it as a slap in the face that
    employees can not be trusted to "do the right thing"!
    
    What I want to be resolved is:
    
    1.  Outline who the memo was from, and give responsibility to it's
    	author - instead of hiding it in ambiguity.
  
    2.  If the participation in NWR conferences presents a problem, 
    	then spell out what that problem is and what WE need to do
        to correct it.
    
    3.  Correct the implication that employees can not be trusted to
    	use good judgement in the judicious usage of Dec's time and
    	thier duties.                                           
    
    4.  Correct the image that NWR notes do not have a place in Dec
    	culture.      
    
    5.  If there is evidence of NWR conference abuse, then treat it
    	as an individual employee performance factor - don't punish 
    	everyone!
        
    
    Just my view...
    
    -Jp

    SOunds like the right course of action. Let us know how you get on.
    
    - ���

    A small semantic point: the VAX Notes Conferences under fire are
    "Employee Interest Conferences" not "Non-work related".
    
    Digital officially sponsors many activities of interest to employees
    that make no contribution to the 13th line of the corporate income
    statement.
    
    "Non-work related activity" is, for example, the purchase and display
    of art work in a Digital facility.
    
    Opponents of employee interest conferences keep hammering away at it
    being "non-work related" as if that really mattered.  So keep hammering
    back that employee interest noting activity is as voluntary an employee
    activity with less financial consequences to the bottom line than many
    other employee activities.

	I have a feeling that the meaning of "delete entries..." was to delete 
NOTEBOOK entries, not notes themselves.  After all, that's the context in 
which "entry" is used in NOTES.  Obviously a high level of management involved 
here! :>)

	Look forward to the resolution of this in the SW Area.  Your Area SWS 
Manager used to work for mine (SOA), and he hired me into DEC 13+ years ago!

    I'll stop contributing to "non-work-related" (employee interest)
    electronic conversations (AKA Notes) when everyone else stops
    contributing to non-work-related oral (face-to-face) conversations.
    
    After all, the only difference is the medium.  I submit that a
    vice-president saying "How's your golf game?" to another vice-president
    is conducting exactly the same non-work-related, employee interest
    conversation as the hypothetical noter asking "How's your golf game?"
    in the hypothetical golf notes conference.   One conversation is
    oral; the other is electronic; but the differences end there.
    
    ...and wouldn't it be pretty silly for some dope to put forth the
    edict that henceforth no employees shall take part in non-work-related
    conversation?
    
    It's just one more example of self-important dopes with power (real
    or imagined) trying to exert control over something they do not
    understand.  
    
   	Don Montgomery
    	co-moderator of RED_SOX  (obviously "employee interest")

    The only difference in the two "golf" cnversations is that one is
    "public and lives forever (or until the conversation under discussion
    is deleted from motes)."  Just thought of another.  The verbal, if done
    on company time probably costs much more in company $ than the
    electronic one after hours, no matter how long it lives. 
    
    I, for one, plan to disregard any such instructions until given a
    personal face-to-face order to cease and desist.  It sounds like some
    have already had this happen to them. I have not had any such word
    other than this note.
    
    Like the company car situation, DEC culture in general, etc., someone
    (KO) eventually will hear about it.  It, and someone, will be "fixed." 
    
    After all, what about our bragging to customers about our network and
    all the stuff (not very good for them) I have been reading about what
    that other company thinks about "notes and electronic conferencing." 
    
    Fred

    
    
    Flame On.
    
    Having just completed 11 years in DEC, I find this topic horrifying.
    This isn't DEC. It smacks of someone "trained" in "management school"
    who has no idea of what being part of a community like DEC really
    means. It's more suited to a Victorian sweatshop!!
    
    As a previous reply hinted, if "non-work related" noting is not on it
    implies that every time 2 or more DEC employees talk it must be about
    work. So, guys, next time you're over the pub with your workmates talk
    about work and wait to see the dirt hit the fan when the world finds
    out about all our new products. :-)
    
    You could easily take this a step further. It implies that all
    "non-work" (ie, social) activities that DEC sponsers should be
    terminated. That would include Sports and Social Clubs, sports teams,
    time out for education (other than learning about DEC
    machines/systems/processes).
    
    You could also ban all magazines that are not specifically to do with
    DEC. Computer industry magazines and newspapers are only indirectly DEC
    related (although a good source of information on what DEC is up to!),
    so if NOTES goes, so should they.
    
    All in all this creates an impression of a terrible, boring, oppressive
    environment. That's the sort I don't work well in.
    
    I too would like to know where this order came from (and that isn't DEC
    style for a start), why, and what the problem is. I'm not a child. I am
    able to divide my time between DEC and social. 
    
    So. What are WE ALL going to do about it? Compose a collective memo to
    KO?
    
    Any ideas?
    
    	Keith                          
    
    Flame Off.

    Re:.308
    
    By the way, the reason I've had time to enter the past note is:
    
    1.	I'm waiting for DOCUMENT to complete processing of a book which, 
    	until complete, I can't do a lot else.
    
    2.	In the interim I thought I'd find out what's going on in the rest 
    	of the Corporation.
    
    Keith.

Re: .306
>
>    ...and wouldn't it be pretty silly for some dope to put forth the
>                                                ^^^^
>    

Careful, you might be construed to be referring to "drugs" and be subject to
testing! :-)

Steve

>    2.	In the interim I thought I'd find out what's going on in the rest 
>    	of the Corporation.
    
    I think you just summarized the whole problem.  I (and my fellow
    employees) can find out more about what's going on in the rest of the
    corporation by logging into the net than by using the communications
    that management provides me with.  I think that's really buggin' 'em.
    
    							Pat

    
    This note posted on behalf of a DECcie who wishes to remain anonymous
    for reasons that will become obvious.
    
    - ���
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    
    During my recent review, my manager stated that it was decided by
    those higher up the corporate ladder (who unknown) that non-business
    oriented noting should discontinue.  I was further informed that my
    district and area managers wished to be the first to be able to claim
    their areas free of non-business oriented noting.  I was then asked
    (read told) to delete all non-business related notes. 
    
    Do I believe that my management has a right to do this?  Yes.  It is
    DIGITAL's equipment, DIGITAL's resources, and DIGITAL's right to use
    (or not use) these resources as they see fit. 
    
    Do I believe that it is wise?  No.  One of the things that attracted
    me to DIGITAL in the first place was something known as "The DEC
    Culture", and I believe that non-business noting is a very valuable
    part of that culture.  I also believe that this culture is a very
    valuable asset, one that cannot easily have a price tag placed on it. 
    
    Will I abide by my manager's wishes?  Yes.  Morally, I see nothing
    wrong with the order that I have been given (assuming of course that
    it is not arbitrarily applied). 
    
    Will I miss noting?  Yes.  I see noting as a way to draw a company
    that is literally spread throughout the globe together.  It is a way 
    to help those who do not get into the office on a regular basis 
    (i.e. residencies) to still feel a part of DIGITAL. 
    

    I'm sorry if this sounds repetitious but the short version is:
    
    Paticipation in employee interest VAX Notes Conference  should be
    regarded as any other employee activity that is accepted as part of
    ordinary employee to employee communication: conversations in the hall,
    in the cafeterias, mail, etc.
    
    If an employee's productivity is impacted by any form of
    employee-employee communication, it is the Digital philosophy to deal
    with that one employee's performance as opposed to a blanket ban of one
    form of communication.

One wonders if the district/regional managers mentioned in .-2 perceive a
productivity/performance problem caused by non-business related noting, but
are simply too lazy to work with the employees to identify the problem.

Managers often have trouble managing individuals and prefer to manage groups.

/john

re .312:

>                                        I was further informed that my
>   district and area managers wished to be the first to be able to claim
>   their areas free of non-business oriented noting. 


    Sounds like a "notes-free workplace."

    I just heard about this discussion and, seeing the volume of notes
    involved, just went back to .270 and read from that point on --
    which included the posting of the Bell Cross memo from May.
    
    Is the sky falling, or what?  There seems to be a whole chain of
    "chicken little" hysteria, here.
    
    Cross's memo just says for people responsible for monitoring
    "excessive" use of Notes to do their jobs.  That seems to ME to
    mean, Moderators should watch out for misuse of Notes in the
    sexual/ethnic slur areas (particularly), Managers should discuss
    impressions of overuse of Notes with their subordinates if they
    think a problem exists, and so on -- normal (although sometimes
    ignored) procedures.
    
    If some individual managers are having hysterical reactions to this
    and cannot substantiate their rulings with a specific memo or
    regulation from a tracable source, point out that they are reacting
    (or THEIR boss is reacting) to rumor and that they should do some
    research before conflicting with the Personnel Policies of record.
    Stop personal noting on work time until it's cleared up, but use
    the open door or other channels to trace the "stop" command to it's
    local source, then ask THEM to contact Bell Cross or Personnel or
    whomever for clarification of Noting on your own time, or during
    otherwise non-productive times while at work.
    
    One of the main reasons for Notes is to make people "day-to-day"
    users of DEC systems -- what do our sales folk say when trying to
    SELL VAXnotes -- that it's a huge time-waster?!  (KO would fire
    them! IMO) Day-to-day implies that you hve a comfort level beyond
    simple business necessity.  I have been planning my wedding lately
    -- Notes has been a tremendous help for locating advice from a much
    wider range of contacts than I could ever meet personally. My wedding
    site, reception site, florist and photographer were all found through
    Notes.
    
    But nobody has produced (that I saw) a high level ruling on
    non-business Noting that could possibly be appealed -- and since
    the alleged policy has not appeared in the Personnel Policies and
    Procedures Manual, *I* would assume that it doesn't exist until
    proven to exist.
    
    DON'T PANIC!!!!
    
    Sherry

    Had lunch today with UM and DM and asked if they'd heard any of this. 
    Answer was NO.  They are both noters and the area SWS V.P. reads
    several employee interest conferences (this one and its local
    equivalent) to keep track of what the "troops" are thinking.
    
    -dave
    

    Does K.O read notes?
    
    Keith R>

    re .315
    
    That crossed my mind as well. Maybe the moderators should change the
    title of this note to "War on Notes" :-)
    
    gary

    The reason for "panic" is clear.  It's not the written policy on the
    usage of computer resources that is the problem, but ex-DIS manager Bel
    Cross's interpretation of that policy, and the local interpretation of
    Bel Cross's interpretation.
    
    It's the several-generations-mutated interpretation that has the force
    of a management directive to "stop noting" that we have panic over,
    where there may not even be a local copy of the actual policy.
    
    From the lofty heights of the DIGITAL conference, where the server is
    that hosts this conference, and those client systems where we read it,
    we can feel comfortable and cozy and say "Don't Panic"... where we
    _really_ know the difference between policy and interpretation and are
    savvy about it.  But in the real world, things are far more grim and
    gritty.
    
    For some managers who have provided state-of-the-art VT52's and VT100's
    to their employees, it's simply intolerable to them that an employee
    could communicate to another employee over a matter of mutual interest
    using that expensive resource and consume that expensive employee's
    productivity.  To these managers ANY reading of employee interest
    conferences is excessive.  To these managers ANY allocation of 1,000
    disk blocks to a conference on quilt making or bottle cap collecting 
    is excessive.

    DEC should practice what DEC preaches.  If we sell Notes, we should
    use it to its fullest potential!
    
    Another hot button (maybe for a new note):  If we sell to customers
    the idea of a workstation on every engineers desk, we should do
    the same!
    
    Mike

    FYI:  The Managing Director of Digital in the UK, Geoff Shingles, reads
    the UK_DIGITAL conference and has entered at least one entry.
    
    Andy, Co-Moderator of DIGITAL and UK_DIGITAL.

    So, is DIGITAL a work-related or an employee-interest notesfile ?
    
    Jon

    Could this conference be anymore work related?! It's a file for
    employees that take an interest in the going on's in the company
    that they work for. Everyone should read it.
    
    It's to bad that Manager & VP's don't consider themselves "employees".
    It's always written managers and employees. Well I think those managers
    should indeed be interested in what the troops are talking about,
    I think they would find it very insightful and useful.

    Gail

    re .323:
    
    Technically, it's listed as a "Valuing Differences" conference in the
    Easynotes listing.
    

The moderators believe that the DIGITAL conference is in support of
corporate business activities, and operate it in that fashion.  The
categorization in the Easynet conference listings is more or less arbitrary.

			Steve

Re:        <<< Note 111.312 by LESLIE::LESLIE "andy ��� leslie" >>>
    > This note posted on behalf of a DECcie who wishes to remain anonymous
    > for reasons that will become obvious.
    
    I must be thick.  They aren't obvious to me.
    							Larry

    re .-1
    
    When you've been directly told not to participate in a notesfile,
    it's somewhat self-incriminating to post a note in a notesfile 
    explaining how you've been told not to participate in a notesfile
    (even if you "post" the note via mail).
    

    re .-1
    
    I guess you've got a point, IF this conference is non-business related. 
    But that's not obvious to me either.
    							Larry

       
       
       	If you've been told not to note in non-business related
       notesfiles then you'd probably also tend to shy away from noting in 
       general. I would. (Until I got a new job) No sense tempting fate
       in these tough times..
       
       						mike

    Anyone considered how long it would take to find and review all of
    their notes in order to figure out which ones meet different criteria
    and then do something about the ones which offend someone's new rule?

    ON COMPANY TIME? 
    
    It'd be like reviewing one's life (they say it happens pretty quickly
    to a drownee).  I can't help thinking of a book "View from the 34th
    Floor", but am convinced this does not go that deep.  Sometimes I can
    be an optimist. 
    
    This whole business is nonsense until we take VAXnotes off the market
    and off the net (not too likely)! 
    
    Fred

    RE: .325 As of this Friday, this conference will appear in the
    "Other Work-related" section where it more properly belongs. Note
    that that section is where the UK_DIGITAL conference has been for
    some time.

    I wouldn't want anyone to think I didn't think this conference was
    work related.

    			Alfred

Personally, though, I agree with a few of the previous replies: I
don't accept any distinction between work-related and
none-work-related conferences (or however they're catagorized). It's
fair to say that Digital owns the resources (discs and the net etc) so
can say what use their put to, but Notes to me seems a pretty good 
way to help make a good working environment very cheaply. People like
to talk, people like to gossip, people like to discuss: doesn't matter
if its about Apiary In The Iberian Peninsula or about VAX DOCUMENT, it
all makes for an efficient workforce (if you want to talk about in
those terms).

Take away the 'none-work-related' talk and you have discontented
people, much as you would if that was stopped round the coffee
machines. Good work doesn't just come from concentrating on work. As a
great writer on cricket (Neville Cardus) put it: 'He who only cricket
knows, does not know cricket'.

    
    *WARNING* - I am about to be provocative just to keep this going.
    
    Although i don't believe this myself, i will try to make an arguement
    for why digital, as well as many other conferences, is a
    non-work-related notesfile. after all, if noting and notesfiles are
    under attack, as some people seem to be saying, this will be the crux
    of the debate.
    
    The whole premise is in definitions - if "work-related" is defined as
    topics that directly relate to the conception, development, production,
    manufacturing, marketing and selling of our products to our customers
    (which is what most of us do for work), the digital notesfile cannot
    possibly be work-related. 
    
    Most of the topics discussed in the notesfiles pertain to the
    interaction between the employees (i include managers in this category
    also) and the company. Discussions around which VP is on 'leave of
    absense' or how bad JH is at processing claims may affect our public
    image and internal morale but neither of these things is actually what
    we do for a living (i.e. get paid for).
    
    As has been said elsewhere, discussions between individuals on topics
    which affect their personal or professional interests will go on
    regardless of what medium may or may not be available but from a
    company point of view but it's more visible to management if somebody
    is wasting (company) time and resources if they are standing around in
    groups, large or small, than if they are sitting at their desks
    'working' away at their terminals. From a productivity point of view,
    the only notesfiles that can be justified in any tangible way by
    Digital management are those that deal directly with the operation of
    the company in generating revenues.
    
    I've already thought of many rebuttal arguements to this thesis but
    none that i came up with would stand up to a really tough
    cost-justification exercise that the company is in the right shape to
    have to consider seriously. I look forward to some more lively debate
    on this subject.
    
    Jon

    Re .334 (Jon):
    
    Can't resist the gauntlet.
    
    >Most of the topics discussed in the notesfiles pertain to the
    >interaction between the employees (i include managers in this category
    >also) and the company.
     
    I cannot believe that interaction between employees and the company
    could _not_ be considered work-related.  The work environment has
    a direct bearing on enabling us optimally to conceive, develop,
    produce, manufacture, market, and/or sell our products and services.
    
    >As has been said elsewhere, discussions between individuals on topics
    >which affect their personal or professional interests will go on
    >regardless of what medium may or may not be available ....
     
    True; however, with a worldwide network, a greater diversity of
    viewpoints is available.
    
    >............................... From a productivity point of view,
    >the only notesfiles that can be justified in any tangible way by
    >Digital management are those that deal directly with the operation of
    >the company in generating revenues.
     
    This can be answered two ways.  If "intangible" activities don't
    count, then why do such things as advertise?  On the basis of someone
    buying a Digital product _as the direct result of reading an ad_,
    the return on investment is near zero.  In point of fact, the same
    can be said of most advertising (automotive, home appliance, etc.);
    ads merely (and it's an important "merely") increase receptiveness
    to other means of closing sales.  As an exercise, see what other
    corporate functions can be eliminated if they don't deal directly
    with sale of products and services.
    
    From a "productivity" aspect, feedback from employees, via the
    Conference, can result in conditions that enhance individual productivity.
    Creativity, for one, cannot be turned on and off like a faucet.
    A relaxed mind, with minimum tensions, is more creative than one
    beset with rumors, uncertainties, and isolation; this Conference
    helps minimize those concerns anent the workplace.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    First off I don't believe that notes conferences are under attack
    by the company. I do believe that there are some managers and
    others who are attacking notes conferences but that they are
    doing so, for the most part, based on incorrect assumptions and
    misunderstandings of existing policy. I hope that the policy
    will one day be clarified and the companies true feelings, which
    I believe to be basically supportive of employee interest Noting,
    will be made more obvious. Until that happens we'll have to use
    some energy to counter thesis such as the one in .334. I'll give 
    it a try.

>    The whole premise is in definitions - if "work-related" is defined as
>    topics that directly relate to the conception, development, production,
>    manufacturing, marketing and selling of our products to our customers
>    (which is what most of us do for work), the digital notesfile cannot
>    possibly be work-related. 

    Define "directly relate". I believe that this conference does directly
    relate to the conception, development, production, manufacturing, 
    marketing and selling of our products to our customers. Not every topic
    does but how else would you classify the discussion regarding how/what
    to tell a customer regarding being borrowed for an other project for
    two weeks? There are quite a number of such topics in this conference.

>	Discussions around which VP is on 'leave of
>    absense' or how bad JH is at processing claims may affect our public
>    image and internal morale but neither of these things is actually what
>    we do for a living (i.e. get paid for).

    I believe, with out being willing to name names, that there are people
    in the company whose job it is to handle and be aware of things like
    these. Some of them do follow this conference.

>	From a productivity point of view,
>    the only notesfiles that can be justified in any tangible way by
>    Digital management are those that deal directly with the operation of
>    the company in generating revenues.

    Not so. Lots of things indirectly contribute to the operation of the
    company. EAP just to name one. Things that contribute to employee
    moral and information do contribute indirectly to the companies
    operation. Besides the costs of employee interest notes conferences
    are just not that great. Notes files that impact productivity get
    moved. Fast. The notes files that are out there do not take up room
    or CPU cycles that is needed for other work because if the disk or
    cycles are needed the conference is the thing that gets changed. As
    long as people don't try to host conferences that effect productivity
    on a system there is little cost associated that is not lost in the
    "noise" of normal usage.

    Personally I don't look forward to more debate on this because I've
    been listening to it for years (5-6) now. I'm hoping that the company
    just clears up what it really means and wants so that the managers
    who are hurting the company by arbitrarily shutting down conferences
    and bouncing people out of Notes can get on to finding productive
    work.

    			Alfred

    Re: .334
    
    You want it simple, here it is:  
    
         The possibility for interaction with a particular group of
         people through a variety of channels is a part of the 
         compensation package here.  
    
         Fellow DECcies, conversations in the hall, on the phone, and
         via notes form part of my remuneration.  In my case, one of
         a few thin threads which hold me here (the others have NOTHING
         to do with compensation as viewed by personnel).  If the
         career-mongers want to caqncel notes, I hope they have a nice
         time afterwards.  I hope they'll be able to find a market for
         what must be their only possible product, too: position-jockeying.
    
    
    Don
    

    re last two:
    
    I have to agree with Alfred - Digital does take morale seriously
    and the litmus test of the current mood is fairly clearly reflected
    here (something that has grown, not an element that one would ever
    have consciously planned for). 
    
    Personally, professionally, the ability to access resources across
    organizations, product areas and levels of responsibility is a plus
    that sets Digital even farther ahead as a professional environment
    than any other employer I can think of.  It certainly has factored
    in to my committment to stay here and grow. 
    
    And you have heard EXACTLY this same response, from me and from
    others in this very file over the past few years.  
    
    Nothing new!  My management knows that the answers I need are more
    likely "out there in notes" when we have a technical issue or problem.
     
    
    Irene 

    From the perspective of a SWS resident, this conference, and others
    like it, are what keep me aware that I work for DIGITAL and not the
    Fubar Bank & Pretzel Co., Inc.
    
    -dave

        I got a message today from "higher up" about using VAX Notes.
        I believe, from the way the message was phrased, that it
        applies to everyone in (at least U.S.) Educational Services,
        which, I think, is several thousand employees.
        
        The only "don't" is this phrase: "the personal-type notes
        files should not be accessed during prime business hours.  The
        reasons should be obvious to everyone."
        
        The rest of the message recognizes the importance of VAX
        Notes within Digital and discusses communicating this message
        throughout our organization.
        

	Its a little late for spring cleaning this year isn't it?  ;^)
    After all, there seems to be a pattern of such notesfile discussions
    in that the momentum usually begins towards late spring and culminates
    by mid summer.  This discussion seems to be slightly behind the usual
    schedule, or is that because upper-level management seems to be getting
    involved this time (just kidding ;^).

	Seriously, I would not be able to function in my present position
    without VAXnotes (or some sort of close derivative) PERIOD.  As it is,
    with the aid of VAXnotes, I am able to single-handedly provide adequate
    user [IVIS] support, as well as software maintenance engineering support
    for various [IVIS] software that have been developed in the past, as well
    as those currently under development *to the entire world* (even though
    [my group] is only actually funded to support the IVIS needs of Field
    Service (recently renamed to "Customer Services") Training.

	In addition to my regular job, I am able to form "virtual teams"
    literally overnight to work on most any project from DECworld demo
    projects to side-line ventures for my own cost center.  I am also able
    to perform software maintainance engineering on a Network ASSETS tool
    I created [entirely on my own time I might add] entitled "PULSE", along
    with an assortment of other such tools I have created in the past (as
    well as the many more I plan to create and support in the future)
    using VAXnotes as my primary communication tool.

	Obviously, VAXnotes are a useful tool when it comes to work-
    related noting.  As a matter of fact, VAXnotes (along with VAXmail)
    are listed in the 1988 edition of the Software Engineering Manual
    (pages 3-3 through 3-16) as being Primary (as opposed to merely
    Occasional, or not applicable) tools for *every* single phase of
    software development.  However, as usual, that is not the issue here.
    At issue instead is the usual baloney over the use of VAXnotes for
    what is sometimes referred to as "non-work-related" (or "NWR") noting.

	As usual when panics such as this set in, the first reaction is to
    jump to conclusions about what is and what isn't work-related, so as to
    hopefully have one's favorite notesfiles (DIGITAL in the case of many here
    perhaps) be included in the "WR", as opposed to the "NWR" category so
    that when the theoretical "purge" occurs, one's notes (and consequently
    one's livlihood) might be spared.  Similar scramblings undoubtedly took
    place during pre-war Germany to hopefully seperate oneself from the "NA"
    (or Non-Aryran) label before that purge occurred as well.

	But isn't the issue more to do with alternative modes of communication
    than it is with anything else?  After all, part of the problem is that
    not all internal organizations have yet learned to utilize VAXnotes to
    their fullest extent, and even among those which have, there will always
    be certain people who simply can't deal with the medium and choose not to
    use it (even though they might well be capable of using it).  In my
    particular case (as well as some of the other seemingly more ubiquitous
    VAXnoters among us), I come from a journalistic and creative writing
    background, and as such, it is not unusual for me to spew forth pages
    of seemingly coherent text in a matter of minutes (or between support
    calls - as is the usual case).  Likewise, I am able to absorb a modest
    amount of written material in a short time as well.

	Therefore, to apply some sort of measure (or rationing system) to
    the amount of [perhaps non-work-related] material generated by a particular
    VAXnoter would therefore also seem somewhat ridiculous.  To do so would
    be equivalent to rationing the use of the DTN (phone), VAXmail, VAXphone,
    VTX, and any number of other easily measurable forms of communication that
    normally takes place within the confines of a given workday.  The fact
    is that some people will always feel more comfortable in using this
    particular communications medium over another, and should be allowed
    to continue to do so (unless "intellectuals" are somehow being targetted
    by this particular decree - whatever it is).

	As to the relative worth of "NWR" (otherwise known as Employee-
    Interest) noting, it has already been pointed out that such discussions
    tend to, among other things, build management and worker morale, provide
    an efficient means of organizing one's life (thereby reducing the need
    to be on the phone or running around "doing errands"), improve worker
    self-esteem, improve communication skills, increase available contacts
    (thereby increasing overall productivity for a given organization),
    provide a productive outlet for "null-time", encourage familiarity with
    the VAX/VMS operating system (as well as many others), provide a pool
    of educational knowledge as well as generally useful information (the
    on-line Constitution of the United States in the Soapbox notesfile for
    example), and so on ad infinitum.

	In addition to the many reasons already listed as being useful
    reasons for supporting Employee Interest Noting, however, it turns
    out that Employee Interest Noting turns out to be somewhat work-related
    anyway in the long-run.  After all, it is extremely difficult to totally
    separate one's work from ones interests (unless, of course, one isn't
    very interested in ones work to begin with - in which case, they
    may stumble upon another field of work to which they are interested in
    via VAXnotes as well).

	In order for DEC to penetrate the market, we must also thoroughly
    understand the market.  The best way to do this is through constant
    analysis of current trends in scientific research, space travel, even
    knitting.  This sort of analysis is best done with the aid of Employee
    Interest VAXnoting.

				    -davo

    .341
    Thank you very much Davo, very well said!
    Bo

    re. .341, Double the motion on well said! Notes is the single most
    important tool available to me that helps me keep and feel more in
    touch with the rest of the company as a whole. If not for the more
    "worldly" input and gathering of knowledge that I can freely utilize
    with the notes facility (both work and non-work related) I and most
    probably the other 5 people in this office would have a pecerption
    of "Digital" being us 6 people and a "great magic hole in the sky
    from where paper originates and disapears" and the company would
    loose alot of the personal touch that comes from notes.
    					Ted
    

    re: .337
    
>< Note 111.337 by CGOA01::DTHOMPSON "Don, of Don's ACT" >
>                        -< "Notes" is part of my pay! >-
>
>    Re: .334
>    
>    You want it simple, here it is:  
>    
>         The possibility for interaction with a particular group of
>         people through a variety of channels is a part of the 
>         compensation package here.  
 
    A lot of people thought that being able to smoke cigarettes at their
    desks if their neighbors didn't mind was in the same category of
    standing agreements/benefits/compensation.  The "big boys" didn't seem
    to care much about that line of reasoning. 
    
    -joe tomkowitz

    > A lot of people thought that being able to smoke cigarettes at their
    > desks if their neighbors didn't mind was in the same category of
    > standing agreements/benefits/compensation.  The "big boys" didn't seem
    > to care much about that line of reasoning. 
    
    Has the Surgeon General determined that reading other people's NWR
    notes may cause cancer????  (^;
    
    							Pat

    Probably...all that radiation from the video terminals.   ;)
    
    kim

This topic appears to be now continued in topic 934.

I would suggest that the moderators either:

	- write lock this topic (and set its title to "DONE")

or	- delete this reply and move 934.* over to here.

/john