Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    
    Maybe it's a good time to post a complete list of the rules, as
    outlined in the Personnel manuals.  I HAVE seen a few conferences get
    clobbered for various reasons (usually harassment of fellow noters),
    but it wouldn't hurt to make the rules clear for all to see.
    
    Ed.

    While I want to see the notes files protected,it strikes me as strange
    that one would have to worry about a negative review. I always thought
    that this conference was like a group of people in a room expressing
    their thoughts,and as such have always said what I would say if
    I were present. However if there is a problem I'm all for taking
    whatever steps is neccessary to meet the guidelines.
    								bill

    Surely if it were to be announced that all reviews in this notesfile
    were personal opinions of the reviewer, and DEC in no way supported
    any damaging reviews, then DEC would be in no way resposible for
    any comments made.
    
    And surely DEC cannot be sued for allowing people to voice their OWN
    opinions over the network, and as Digital employees we are purfectly
    within our rights to use the network to voice opinions.
    
    Maybe there should just be a memo stating this at the start of the
    notesfile, or when people view the notesfile when they type the
    command 'dir/conf BOMBE::'.
    
    I for one would prefer to know when a product is not worth buying,
    if it was naf, rather than spend a sum of money on it (and let's
    face it, none of this stuff is cheap!).
    
    So come on, lets keep the reviews but just make sure to include
    that these are your own opinions.
    
    Lewis.

    Stating that they are your own views may not be enough if you are
    raking over a big DEC customer and they get wind of it.  I'm not
    saying this is right but after all DEC is paying for this.  Indirectly
    you might even say it is partially paid for by that big customer!
    
    - steve

    So what's the answer. Non reviews unless they are good? In that
    case i'm sure that saying a product is non-reviewable may well be
    just as bad as saying it is not very good (putting it mildly).
    
    Lewis.

    RE: .3
    
    You don't understand! This equipment belongs to the company you
    work for! The plug got pulled on a notesfile I mentioned in a 
    previous note. Why do you think that happened? I made those statements
    for a reason!!!
    
    Trust me, there's no argument you can come up with!
    

    
    For those of you who do not read the HOME_WORK notes file I have
    included the note from the moderator explaining why HE terminated the
    file. From what I read, it did not have it's "plug pulled".
    
    The way I read it, the moderator is attempting to make a statement
    in response to pressure put on him to watch what is said in his notes
    file. I think he over reacted and has been mentioned before, employees
    are entitled to their opinions. All the notes files are INTERNAL USE
    ONLY and how the "contractor" mentioned even heard that he had been
    flamed in a notes file is beyond me.
    
    
    
               <<< JOET::DUA1:[NOTES$LIBRARY]HOME_WORK.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< HOME_WORK is now closed >-
================================================================================
Note 1.0                       Life in the 90's...                    No replies
JOET::JOET "Question authority."                     18 lines  17-JAN-1990 09:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Because of an issue with an "un-recommendation" of a contractor in the
    conference that reached levels of DEC with which I am not comfortable,
    I have closed HOME_WORK. (This file is write-locked as well.)

    I, myself, will never reopen it but should anyone else more tolerant of
    current state of DEC bureaucracy wish to adopt it, I will be happy to
    send them a BACKUP tape.

    I'm very sorry it had to come to this, but there's nothing I can do
    about it.

    I would like to thank the many contributors who have taken their
    valuable time over the years to help others in the true sense of
    community spirit.  

    It was beautiful while it lasted, don't you think?

    -joe tomkowitz
    

    re .7
    
    I agree.  It sounds like the moderator might have gotten a slight
    amount of pressure from someone above him and immediately wimped out
    and closed the file.  
    
    Common sense guidelines should be sufficient to protect this notesfile
    without over-reacting in a similar manner.  Our moderator can (and will)
    hide any notes he feels are inappropriate for this conference.  As far
    as I am concerned, if we are only allowed to say good things about
    every company and product that exists, then they can close this
    notesfile down and I won't miss it one bit.
    
    If certain individuals want to follow a more restrictive path regarding
    their personal comments, then they are certainly free to do so.  For
    myself, I'll wait for word from the moderator and abide by his
    decisions.
    
    Ken

    The policy, or rather lack of uniform policy, on non-work-related
    notesfiles has been debated in notes conferences for at least the
    3 years I've been at Digital.  Several horror stories in the title
    note boil down to some Higher Up getting offended at a) some specific
    statement or b) too much noting during work hours.  Said H.U. then
    demands or pressures the notesfile moderator for changes.  Rather
    than put up with the hassle, the moderator then closes the notesfile.
    
    Now, for the author of .0 or anyone else, what _specifically_ leads
    you to believe that someone is annoyed about BOMBE::AMIGA?  This
    notesfile seems to me, at least, to be one of the more laid back
    recreational notesfiles in the corporation.
    
    Wes

    RE: .9 - Youre dead right...after spending time in the 'viper nest'
    (Soapbox) this conference is extremely tame by comparison! ;^)
    
    re: .0 - are you really serious? DEC may own the machines and have
    certain rules about noting - but the rules are still flexible enough
    to allow one to express their opinions in an open forum. I agree
    with past notes and would suggest that you are over-reacting to
    the situation...
    

    Phil

    I don't know how many of you read the CONSUMER notes file, but it is
    about 75% recommendations and "un-recommendations".
    
    If there were anything in the wind I'm sure it would be the first to
    go.
    
    Keep the reviews coming (with tact, of course.)
    
    	Regards....   Clint

    Sorry about that. In .3 what I said was misleading. I was in a hurry
    and a bit PO'd about it! You see, I was asked to delete it! But I can
    assure you, it was not a flame at all. Just facts. "He came..He went...
    He never came back!" Really!
    
    You are correct. The moderator decided he wanted to shut it down. 
    I wasn't trying to imply that this notesfile was in any danger of 
    being shut down.
    
    Regarding the question of how people know about notes, well meaning
    people say things like "You were recommended by someone in the Digital
    Notesfile". Ask Mo from the Software Shop! There's also family and
    friends. They may actually put the recommendation in to begin with!
    
    This has really made me a sceptic. But think about it. Haven't you
    ever had a conversation with someone where it was obvious that you were
    right, but that has no bearing. 
    
        The horse is dead! I'll stop here!
    
                    Again, my apologies
     End of note
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    As moderator, I've been trying to decide how to respond to this topic.
    This kind of 'the sky is falling' alarm has appeared in various
    conferences from time to time.  I usually trust common sense to prevail
    in the end, and so far it always has.

    I can't imagine even the lawyer weasels building much of a case around
    a single negative review.  Unlike traditional publications, this notes
    conference is an interactive exchange.  False statements won't be left
    unchallenged for very long, so it's unlikely anyone would mount much
    of a 'mis-information' campaign through this medium.  I, and I'm sure
    many others, generally wait for at least a second (confirming) opinion
    before any review (positive or negative) would alter my purchase plans.

    I view this (and many other) non-work-related conference as a sort of
    'electronic club'.  The company is kind enough to allow us the use of
    their facilities for our 'meetings'.  Members exchange opinions with
    fellow enthusiasts in much the same fashion as they would by meeting
    every third Wednesday evening at 7:30 PM in the multi-purpose room at
    a local schoolhouse.  It's my responsibility to see that order is
    maintained and nobody trashes the 'room', etc.

    By the way, I nominate Ed for club president...    8^)

    Mabye we could modify thr NRA bumper sticker
    
    "You will take my notebook from me only when you pry 
     my cold,dead fingers from the keyboard!"
    
    ;^)

    
    Moi?
    
    Seriously, I've been mulling over this a bit more...  I am not known as
    an extremely tactful person, but I do know when to tone down the
    invective.
    
    Here's an example of a statement that could place DEC at risk if it
    were publicized outside of the conference:
    
    "Vendor X is a thief."
    
    Vendor X might be able to make trouble over this.  A better way to put
    it would be:
    
    "I purchased the following items from Vendor X and had some problems. 
    These are the problems that I had..."
    
    Another example might be "Package X is a bug-ridden piece of overpriced
    garbage."  A more tactful (and informative) comment might be "I have
    discovered what appear to be bugs in Package X (list of bugs)."
    
    As a rule of thumb, one could try to state factual comments only,
    leaving out the libelous slander (even though it's frequently fun).
    
    Ed.
     

    re:  Ed for president...I second the motion.
    
    mark

    Oh sure! It's always the guy with the fanciest, shiniest, most expensive
    equipment that gets to be club president! :-) :-) :-) 

    Well ok, but only if Ed lets us use his fancy new printer!

    
    Whoa!  Have you guys ever seen Steve Peters' Amiga showroom?  When he
    fires up his GVP 68030 system, the lights dim in Eastern mass.
    
    Ed
    

    I post the following only because I think it presents a legal opinion
    and contains some guidelines in an area close enough to have some
    bearing on the current discussion.
    
    
               <<< HUMAN::WRKD$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 1.11                         Introduction                          11 of 11
HUMAN::CONKLIN "Peter Conklin"                      100 lines   1-JUN-1987 23:09
            -< Employee Statements as Evidence of Corporate Intent >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


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


To: GEORGE CHAMBERLAIN                  Memo: 5347246525COR92
                                        Date: Wed 27 May 1987  8:44 AM EDT
                                        From: CARY ARMISTEAD
cc: MARIETTA ETHIER                     Dept: LAW
    TOM SIEKMAN                         Tel:  223-3980
                                        Adr:  MSO/M6 (DECMAIL @MSO)

Subject: Employee Statements as Evidence of Corporate Intent


This memo expands on some of the points made during my recent
presentation to the Finance Staff. 
        
Intent Counts -- 
        
The pending patent and antitrust litigation has created a need to
reissue an important message - DIGITAL'S INTENT CAN BE AN ISSUE IN
LEGAL CHALLENGES TO ITS BUSINESS CONDUCT AND MAY BE PROVED FROM
STATEMENTS IN DOCUMENTS WRITTEN BY EMPLOYEES. 

Under antitrust law proof of corporate intent may be a critical
element of a plaintiff's claim.  In some cases intent is all that
separates appropriate, vigorous competitive activity from predatory
conduct that may subject a company to significant liability. 
        
Internal Documents are Discoverable -- 

Some employees do not appreciate that documents marked "Company
Confidential" or "Internal Use" are not immune from discovery in
litigation and, therefore, may become available to our adversaries.
Nearly every document that our employees create can be admitted into
evidence at a trial.  It is, therefore, very important that everyone
takes care to avoid inaccurate, misleading, speculative or overzealous
statements in what they write. 

Areas of Concern -- 
        
Inaccurate statements about the intent of Digital's selective
distribution and licensing programs present one immediate area of
concern.  These programs have been examined closely.  They have strong
pro-competitive aspects and are legally appropriate and defensible.
However, if they are challenged, any uninformed, inaccurate
speculation by employees about the reasons for Digital's practices
might jeopardize our position and would undoubtedly increase the cost
of any defense. 

Aggressive comments capable of being misconstrued to suggest an
anticompetitive intent or the potential for an adverse affect on
competition sometimes appear in memoranda and presentation materials
proposing new products, promotional campaigns or distribution
practices.  Negative statements like "this program will make it
impossible for competitor x to compete" or "the attached proposal will
lock out x and y" are quite troublesome.  Invariably, more positive
alternative statements, in terms of product acceptance, technological
advantage and customer satisfaction, would more accurately convey the
message without the potential risk of later use by an adversary in an
attempt to prove predatory intent. 

The degree to which a company has "economic" or "monopoly" power in a
"relevant market" is often an issue in antitrust litigation.  The
existence of market power depends upon how the "relevant market" is
defined.  The word market has no precise definition and is used in a
wide variety of contexts.  Its use in business documents rarely
creates a problem, but should be avoided when referring to Digital's
customer base.  Documents inaccurately suggesting that Digital is
"dominant" or actually has economic "power" in a market segment are
clearly troublesome. 

Some General Guidelines for Drafting -- 
        
  o  Be accurate and avoid speculation or exaggeration. 
        
  o  Accentuate the positive aspects of programs, technologies and
products for customers and avoid speculation about their potential
negative impact on competitors. 
        
  o  Avoid statements that could be misconstrued to suggest an intent
to "control", "dominate" or "monopolize" a customer or market. 
        
  o  Avoid statements that could be argued to suggest an intent to
"lock out", "drive out" or "eliminate" competitors or "raise barriers"
to competition. 

  o  Remember that any document relevant to an issue in litigation may 
be produced to the opposition and used at trial.
        
It is difficult to assure that every employee will remain constantly
aware of the dangers of inaccurate, overly aggressive or ill-chosen
statements.  The topic has been included in a wide variety of Law
Department training modules and guides, and I understand that Marietta
Ethier will be addressing the subject further at an upcoming Finance
Staff meeting.  As education on the subject of inappropriate
statements in Company documents is a continuing effort, you should
feel free to circulate this memorandum broadly. 

    re:.20
    	The only comments that I've seen in this file which might fall
    under that cautionary message were those regarding the proposed
    DECnet/Amiga project. We do not in any way compete with anyone for
    sales of Amiga software or hardware and only indirectly against
    the Amiga itself. Nothing from this file should ever reach the mass
    media in any form so the only way most of the negative entries here
    could be "discovered" would be if someone publicly - as in "outside
    of this file" - libled or slandered a person or company such that
    the person's comments in this file might become relevent.
    	The users of this file tend to be reasonably decorous and to
    remain in informative mode. The closest most ever come to discussing
    business is when they cite a wish-list or mention a hack. Linking
    an Amiga to an LPS40 IS a business-like activity even when it is
    obviously done for personal reasons.
    	I seriously doubt if anyone in their right minds could find
    a reasonable quible with the use of this file. As long as all flames
    are stated in a factual, rather than vitriputive, manner, all suggested
    hacks are discussed as "personal and private" projects, and nobody
    "publishes" any of the contents of this file then there should be
    no problems with it.

Gee ... Home_Work is gone. Can anyone provide specific details on why
Joet closed it. Note 1.0 mentions an "un-recommendation." Was it a legal
matter?

]Re: .15

>    As a rule of thumb, one could try to state factual comments only,
>    leaving out the libelous slander (even though it's frequently fun).

Actually, the comments are not "libelous slander" as long as the
person making the allegation took reasonable care in investigating
the fact.

For example, UltraCard V1.2 is a bug ridden piece of crap.  I know
because I own it.  Joe Random in this notesfile can't repeat what
I just said because they haven't met the minimum amount of verification.
(unless they also have used Ultracard).  Of course, they can report
that Randy Meyers said it was a piece of crap.

Re: .20

Doesn't have a thing to do with this notesfile as long as it confines
itself to discussing the Amiga from the point of view of a user's
group, as opposed to DEC competing with Commodore.

(For goodness sake, don't anyone start posting messages like "I always
thought it was wrong for DEC to ..."  That's the stuff that gets a
company broiled alive during a trial.)

Re: General

There is no reason for the interaction in this notesfile to be modified
in any way.  No Digital policies or legal problems have surfaced.

If it makes a lot of people feel better, the moderator should post
a message (as a reply to 1.0):

	The entries, reviews, and opinions expressed in this
	notes conference are those of the individual authors
	of each note.  Digital Equipment Corporation does not
	necessarily endorse or share the opinions and conclusions
	expressed in this notes conference.  This notes conference
	exists solely for the personal use of the participants.

The moderator has my permission to cut-n-paste the above paragraph,
in whole or in part, if he wishes.

This notesfile is fairly innocent;  there is no need to inhibit
discussion.


About Ultracard:

I sort of expect that it will get better, but I think it'll take
awhile and several updates.

	re .22 - This was in the Woodworking_and_Tools notesfile


A contractor who had a bad reference in Home_work apparently contacted KO
directly through a common friend.  Home_work is not going away for good,
but it is closed temporarily while some issues around references in general
are resolved with the legal department.

It is fairly safe to say that at some point, the majority of Home_work
will return.  Whether that will include the recommendation section is another
question.

Stay tuned.

Paul [One of the Moderators of Home_work]

    RE: .24
    
    Actually it was a letter to Mr. Olsen from the son of one of his fellow
    church members! And the letter is quite amusing. At least it is now.
    
    I'm out of here for two weeks...getting hitched and going home to Jamaica!
    The only thing is, she won't let AMY go! Actually, I'm not getting
    hitched until th 27th, but one has to work up to this kind of thing you
    know!!
    
    By the way Tom Baker, if you saw the note, what would you say about its
    content regarding it being slanderous? I don't think it was even close!
    Like I said before it was just " He came, He went, He never came back!"
    with a little more detail of course!
    
    

>    I'm out of here for two weeks...getting hitched and going home to Jamaica!
>    The only thing is, she won't let AMY go! Actually, I'm not getting
>    hitched until th 27th, but one has to work up to this kind of thing you
>    know!!

Congratulations!

John    
    

>    By the way Tom Baker, if you saw the note, what would you say about its
>    content regarding it being slanderous? I don't think it was even close!
>    Like I said before it was just " He came, He went, He never came back!"
>    with a little more detail of course!
    
    
    I never saw the note in question in Home_Work before it was closed,
    nor do I have any other knowledge of the case. I just pulled .24 out
    of Woodworking because it was written by a moderator of Home_work so
    I thought maybe he knew something about it. I guess I should have put
    it in quotes. I meant to include the header but I lost it with
    DECwindows cut and paste.
    
    I personally hope that everyone will continue to put their honest
    opinions about products and companies in this notesfile. That's what
    makes this notesfile so valuable to me. 
    
    tom

    re: .23
    
    Its bearing on this notesfile has to do with the aspect of discovery. 
    In the advent of a lawsuit, both parties may have access to information
    that would normally be considered confidential or proprietary.  No
    matter how many disclaimers or qualifiers you place on information, if
    it has the potential to cause Digital damage, then it has no business
    being in this notesfile.
    
    I also agree though with the sentiment that says little to nothing in
    this notesfile could be construed as damaging to anyone or anything.
    
    -tl
    
    PS  I was under the impression that Digital did consider the Amiga a
        competitive machine (although after dealing with our workstations for
        the last several years, you'd be hard pressed to convince me that
        we make anything close to the Amiga.)  Wasn't this the reason for
        all the heat about the VT100 emulator and related software projects?

Re: .23

You are quite correct about discovery can cause a company's most
secret information to be turned over.  A few years ago, the Coke
company was sued by it bottlers.  At one point, Coke was in great
danger of having to disclose the formula for Coke and Diet Coke
so that the court could decide if the price difference between
the two syrups was justified.

>    PS  I was under the impression that Digital did consider the Amiga a
>        competitive machine...  Wasn't this the reason for
>        all the heat about the VT100 emulator and related software projects?

Digital considers the detailed descriptions of the escape sequences
supported by its terminals to be company proprietary information.  In
fact, I use to know a guy in terminals whose job was to take clones
of DEC terminals and test them to see how good a job they did.  Most
failed.

So, when a guy from the terminals group writes a terminal emulator (Smokey),
its no surprise that he is prohibited from distributing it outside
of DEC.

    I don't believe that Digital considers the detailed descriptions of the
    escape sequences supported by its terminals to be company proprietary
    information.  We publish those descriptions in manuals, for goodness'
    sake, so our customers can use the terminals!  However, I wouldn't be
    surprised if we considered the sources for the microcode to be
    proprietary.
        John Sauter

    Ordinary VT100 behaviour is an ANSI standard.
    Tom

>=============================================================================
>Note 3353.18              
>HPSCAD::DMCARR "Asleep at the mouse"                  4 lines  18-JAN-1990 
>                           -< Typical club :-) :-) >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Oh sure! It's always the guy with the fanciest, shiniest, most expensive
>    equipment that gets to be club president! :-) :-) :-) 

Yes ... but where is the electronic flag and the fanfare of the club ?

pekka

Re: .30

Its true that every Digital terminal comes with a little programmer's
manual that lists the escape sequences and what they do.  However,
the information isn't good enough to be able to produce a Digital
terminal clone that behaves the same in all the special cases.

The complete terminal architecture specification is DEC propriety.
It isn't rocket science, and it is possible to reverse engineer,
but people can screw it up just the same.

Some of the clones (and terminal emulators) get it wrong in obscure cases.
DEC sometimes sells its terminals on that fact.

About a year ago, I remember that the author of ATALK 3 posted to
usenet his own torture tests of Amiga terminal emulators reporting
how VT100 compatible they really were.  He posted the information
because it made his product look good; he got some obscure and not-
so-obscure cases right that his competition got wrong.

Re: .31

>    Ordinary VT100 behaviour is an ANSI standard.

No.  VT100s make use of many ANSI standard defined escape sequences.
However, many of the most useful escape sequences supported by
the VT100 were invented by DEC and were not part of the ANSI
standard.

Amiga old timers may remember early Amiga terminal programs claimed
to be VT100 compatible.  Instead, they merely supported the ANSI
standard escape sequences with no DEC extensions (easy to do on
an Amiga since the console device already supports them!).  But,
since the terminal emulators didn't support any of the DEC extensions,
they failed miserably with most DEC screen editors.  The reason why:
Most DEC editors used "scrolling regions" to perform insert line.
Scrolling regions were a DEC invented escape sequence.

    Isn't it also true that just because DEC publishes the escape sequences
    and the information became available to the general public, that
    DEC doesn't give up the rights to it. DEC has the right to use and
    publish the escape sequences - and even withhold prosecution of
    those that attempt to copy them - and still have the rights to them
    and possibly enforce them at will.

    re: .33
    
    I agree.
    
    re: .34
    
    DEC doesn't have any rights to the ANSI escape sequences.  If it ever
    had any (which I doubt) it lost them when the ANSI standard was
    published.  That's the point of standards---lots of people can
    implement them in their products.
    
    As far as the DEC-private sequences go, DEC has copyrights on its
    manuals, and "VT100" is a trademark, but there is no way that I know
    about to protect an escape sequence.  You certainly can't patent it,
    and if you want people to use it you have to describe it, so it can't
    be a trade secret.  Copyright protection only refers to the expression
    of an idea, not to the idea itself.
    
    Actually, I'm glad that things like escape sequences and subroutine
    names and parameter lists can't be protected.  If they could, AT&T
    couldn't build IBM 3270 lookalikes, and other companies couldn't build
    Unix(tm) look-alikes.
    
    Also, I don't believe a company can choose who to prosecute for
    stealing its intellectual property.  It either has to go after everyone
    or give up its rights.  It's awfully easy to lose the rights to
    intellectual property by not safeguarding them.
        John Sauter

    I tought DEC was the instigator of the ANSI standards for escape
    sequences.
    
    Jean
    

    The ANSI committee that worries about escape sequences, X3L2, is
    chaired by Tom Hastings, a DEC employee.  The escape sequence standard,
    X3.64, is based on the VT52.  The sequences are not VT52-compatible,
    however.
        John Sauter

    It's late so you'll have to excuse me but...I just read this .0 to .37
    just for grins. It's funny but somehow the two end points just don't
    relate unless you do read the whole thing. Geeze!

re .38:

>  Want some soup or did you ride the bus?

I guess if they serve soup on the bus, it makes sense...

John

Is this notesfile related to DEC's business?

Yes.  I use an Amiga in my office to do work for Digital.  This 
notesfile is useful in making the system more productive.  
Opinions on products help me to make informed decisions about 
what software I will use in my work.
It also allows me to understand more fully how the Amiga compares 
to DEC hardware.  This helps in future capital purchasing issues 
as our group investigates new equipment to invest in.

The moderator has the ability to Set Hidden any note that is felt 
to be too strong for the audience.  The author then has the 
chance to modify his original entry or delete it.

I don't understand what the big deal is here...

    > I don't understand what the big deal is here...
    
    There isn't a big deal here.  This conference is not in any danger, as
    far as I can determine.  I'm not aware of any unresolved complaints 
    regarding either the contents of this file or conduct of its members.
    
    - Mr. Moderator -

>    regarding either the contents of this file or conduct of its members.
                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    You obviously haven't been reading any of my replies ;^)

    Re: -somewhere back there

    Sorry Ed, but the NCP (National Cheapskaters Party) must encourage its
    members to nominate Tom Senna for club president. Not to worry though;
    because he's officially married, once elected he'll gladly step down
    and accept the position of Treasurer...
    
    Pete