| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 501.1 | One Vote Yes | BARAKA::BLAZEK | | Fri Sep 25 1987 15:42 | 16 |
| There are many thoughts and experiences that I haven't
placed in this NOTES file for a couple of reasons:
1. Although my personal beliefs are very strong, I am
not here to convince anyone of anything they may not
believe. Too many times I have read electronic
attacks against someone else's beliefs and I'm not
in this world for confrontations and/or defensive
action -- my desire is to learn only in a positive
way.
2. What if my managers get in here and see what a
wacko I am???!!!??? *8-)
Carla
|
| 501.3 | Another Two Cents Worth | CHGV04::ORZECH | Alvin Orzechowski @RDC | Fri Sep 25 1987 16:42 | 25 |
| > version of DEJAVU... a place where some of the concepts we get into could
> be discussed in more depth and at a more advanced level.... perhaps a
Ever hear of a thing called VAXmail?
I should hope being a born-again skeptic doesn't disqualify me from
taking part in what I still think are some interesting conversations.
Who knows the benefits derived from me or my kind pointing out
something that saves someone else from believing in something that
obviously wasn't false to them before. Or, for that matter, maybe
I'll find out something that I didn't know before. Being a skeptic
doesn't make me a die-hard unbeliever.
I believe (not falsely (:^D) that NOTES of general interest, like this
one, should always be open to everyone.
Alvin
P.S.
I *don't* believe *personal* attacks have any place in any NOTES
without a smilly attached, i.e., only in good fun. People have a
right to their beliefs and that right should be treated with respect.
A.
|
| 501.4 | Running away won't save them... | DICKNS::KLAES | Angels in the Architecture. | Fri Sep 25 1987 17:36 | 7 |
| If the Topics discussed in this Conference are legitimate, then
there should be no reason to move (i.e. hide) them in another
Notesfile, where it seems that people will just end up reading only
what they want to read.
Larry
|
| 501.5 | | WAGON::DONHAM | Born again! And again, and again... | Fri Sep 25 1987 17:44 | 26 |
|
The point about managers (or whomever) reading detailed information
about our personal habits is well taken. I sometimes forget that
the society we live in is greatly different from the community that
we belong to; values that are perfectly appropriate in this community
are certainly NOT appropriate outside of it. I run into this a lot
regarding physical contact: I'm a vey physical person, and the place
that I live is very open regarding contact...if I need a cuddle
or a hug I just drape across the nearest man/woman.
I've gotten so accustomed to this that I've lately found myself
having to really restrain myself at work; I don't think folks would
understand!
And so it is with such personal habits as mystical techniques. I
think that what is being proposed is a detailed discussion of rituals,
materials, and so on. This information is NOT APPROPRIATE in the
DEC society in which we work...even in a closed NOTES conference.
I can foresee shit hitting the fan when someone stumbles across
a file full of "satanic" rituals.
I feel the need for sharing sensitive experiences, but we've got
to find a way to do it "off-line."
Tananda
|
| 501.6 | Hooray for DEJAVU! | GLORY::WETHERINGTON | | Fri Sep 25 1987 18:52 | 70 |
| re: .1
It makes me sad when I have to seem confrontational...and to hear
beautiful ideas/ideals raped and trampled on by small minds (a phrase
which certainly DOES NOT apply to anyone in this conference)...but
remember the quote from Einstein "Great spirits have always
encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"...
I would like to make as many people aware of as possible,
the knowledge and experience that I have been blessed with (using
my discretion and good sense as to who, when, where, and how, and
whether or not they want to hear it)
consequently, if I am to do this, I will be reaching out to as many
people as possible...and some of them will inevitably challenge
the truth of my statements...without spending too much time in
argument, the ensuing debate can 1. act to reassure, and dispell doubt in
minds that did not doubt before hearing the critic, 2. teach me
where I may not be communicating as effectively as I could, and
3. clear up possible doubts or misunderstandings in the mind of
the critic. So, though I'm not here for confrontations, I will
say that one of the many things I am here for is defense; although
one must recognize where to draw the line and not degenerate from
debate into argument.
Re: .5
I (reluctantly-I wish it weren't so) agree with you. Too bad we're
all spread over 50 states and other places...but just think, 10
years ago we couldn't even do as much as we are now (which is a
lot)...I think electronic communication is going to change a lot
of things...it's certainly going to make us all more knowlegable
and (hopefully) open-minded.
********************************************************************
WOMAN IN THE MOON from "A Star is Born" (the Streisand/Kristofferson
one) (caution: feminist message is not what I wish to focus on by
quoting this song)
I was warned as a child of 13 not to act too strong
Try to look like you belong, but don't push girl
Save your time and trouble; don't misbehave.
I was raised in a "no you don't" world overrun with rules
Memorize your lines and move as directed
That's an age old story; everybody knows that's a worn out song
But you and I are changing that tune
We're learning new rhythms from the woman in the moon
Little sister, little brother, keep on pushing
Don't believe a word about things you've heard about
Asking too much to soon
'Cuz they can hold back the tide, but they can never hold the woman
in the moon
I believe there's a best of both worlds, mixing old and new
Recognizing change is seldon expected
As I've long suspected, they believe that strange is a word for
wrong
Well, not in my song.
'Cuz you and I are changing that tune
We're learning new rythms from the woman in the moon
Now little sister, and little brother
Keep on pushin'; don't believe a word about things you've heard
about
Asking too much too soon
'Cuz they can hold back the tide, but they can never hold the woman
in the moon!
DW
|
| 501.7 | *8-) | BARAKA::BLAZEK | | Fri Sep 25 1987 19:40 | 6 |
| re: .6
That's really beautiful...
Carla
|
| 501.9 | Sure they are | MOSAIC::HARDY | | Sat Sep 26 1987 01:33 | 23 |
|
.-1
If VAX Encrypt uses DES algorithms it may not be available to overseas
users.
I know of three restricted conferences, none of which are work-related
except insofar as they assist the members in functioning within
the Digital community.
.4
One of the more unusual plants I grew, a few years ago, was a vine
known as the Moonflower. It is a relative of the Morning Glory,
yet it only blooms at night.
In my own deliberations on the problem I've discovered, firstly,
that not everybody works for Digital, and secondly, that there
are mechanisms for computer-mediated communication besides VAXnotes
in the outside world.
Pat
|
| 501.10 | Personal choice | MTBLUE::PUSHARD_MIKE | | Sat Sep 26 1987 09:37 | 14 |
|
Well,as open as i have been in this conference and others,I dont
think i could say anything that would tend to make people think
i watch too many weird movies or am in the outer limits :^).I am
for open communication to all.Others will have to choose whether
to believe or not.If I,as an individual,decides not to say certain
things in this conference,for whatever reason,then so be it.It is
my choice,but,whatever i do decide to say,will be on the assumption
that it will be available to anyone who wishes to listen.
PEACE
MICHAEL
|
| 501.12 | RE .11: No. | VIKING::HARDY | | Sun Sep 27 1987 16:25 | 10 |
| Re .11
> Did it have any unusual pharmacological properties to go along with
> its symbolic aptitude? (:-))
Good guess, no go. Moonflower is Ipomoea alba (though I think that
it's sometimes put in another genus completely), ololiuqui is Rivea
corymbosa.
Pat
|
| 501.13 | newsletter could work... | THE780::WOODWARD | My Karma hit my Dogma... | Sun Sep 27 1987 23:05 | 17 |
| I like the newsletter idea... sort of a "moderated" conference.
You would set up a mailing list, and others would have to request
to be added to it. Members could contribute articles and letters
with further discussions carried on off-line. The moderator(s)
would make sure that contributions are "on topic". Different
newsletters could cover diverse topics... astrology, geomancy,
the tarot, the Qabalah, channeling...
Or we could develop separate mailing lists for various topics.
Next thing you know we'll be doing tapes... seminars...
even initiations!! :^) :^)
-- Mike_slipping_off_the_edge_into_deep_water
|
| 501.14 | being discussed in DIGITAL note file also | MILRAT::KEEFE | | Tue Sep 29 1987 09:50 | 159 |
| This is currently being discussed in the DIGITAL note file. See extract
below.
================================================================================
Note 391.0 Corporate Personnel Policy on Restricted Conferences 3 replies
FURILO::BLINN "Looking for a job in NH" 81 lines 25-SEP-1987 15:33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've moved the attached here. I originally posted it in the
TLE::EASYNET_CONFERENCES conference, inspired by a topic that
suggested creating a "restricted" conference on epilepsy, and a
reply to that topic complaining that it would be "unfair" to
restrict access to such a conference.
I have to agree with the moderators of EASYNET_CONFERENCES that
this is not a conference announcement, and by the rules of that
conference, it belongs elsewhere. It's the consensus of several
of us that this conference (DIGITAL) is a reasonable place.
As I indicated to the moderators of EASYNET_CONFERENCES in a mail
message, I think it would be a shame if some employee created a
"members-only" conference on some "employee interest" topic and
got into trouble for denying membership in the conference to some
interested employee because he or she was unaware of this policy.
Let me point out that I have no involvement with the creation or
implementation of this policy, and that the comments on the policy
that follow the extracted text below are my personal opinions, and
do not necessarily reflect the intent or thinking of the persons
who drafted the policy.
Tom
================================================================================
<<< TLE::PUBD$:[VAXNOTES]EASYNET_CONFERENCES.NOTE;6 >>>
-< EasyNet Conference Directory >-
================================================================================
Note 1478.0 Corporate Personnel Policy on Restricted Conferences No replies
FURILO::BLINN "Looking for a job in NH" 47 lines 25-SEP-1987 14:11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an extract of the corporate personnel policy on VAX Notes
conferences with restricted membership, taken from the on-line
Personnel Policies and Procedures videotex infobase. I've received
hardcopy with exactly the same text.
[** extract from policy 6.54 **]
6.54 Proper Use Of Digital Computers, Systems, etc 10-AUG-87 (Cont.)
COMPUTERS, SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS WITH RESTRICTED CONFERENCES
(VAX NOTES)
Conferences (VAX Notes) with restricted access must be in support of Company
business. Conferences (VAX Notes) not in support of Company business must be
open to all employees.
[** end of extracted policy statement **]
The policy is very clear -- the only justification for limiting
membership in a conference is because the conference is in support
of company business, presumably because access to the information
contained therein would normally be restricted (e.g., discussions
of a not-yet-announced product).
VAX Notes conferences that fall into the "employee interest" class
(such as the proposed epilepsy conference) must be open to any
employee who wishes to participate. This much is clear from the
policy.
The policy does not make it clear whether this means that access
to such conferences may not be limited to "signed up" members of
the conference, but clearly such a "members only" conference must
offer membership to ANY employee who seeks it.
The policy also doesn't explicitly state that "employee interest"
conferences must be publicized (e.g., by announcement in this
conference), but if they are not publicized, that *could* be
interpreted as an attempt to restrict access.
I've put this here in direct response to the remarks in the note
suggesting creating of a conference to share information on
epilepsy, but it is relevant to many other conferences on the
Easynet. Anyone sponsoring an employee interest conference should
be aware of and conform to this policy.
Tom
================================================================================
Note 391.1 Corporate Personnel Policy on Restricted Conferences 1 of 3
PLDVAX::MORRISON "Bob M. LMO2/P41 296-5357" 8 lines 25-SEP-1987 17:23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you agree with this policy? Do you know why it was established?
This is the first I have heard of this. I don't plan to open any notes-
files myself, but I once suggested to a friend that he open a members
only conference on a non-business subject. World-write conferences can
be a problem. They use up a lot of CPU time and disk space on the host
node and they can quickly get cluttered up with inappropriate notes and
replies. This, in turn, means the moderator(s) must be continually vigilant.
================================================================================
Note 391.2 Corporate Personnel Policy on Restricted Conferences 2 of 3
COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" 15 lines 25-SEP-1987 19:30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This policy only says that any non-work related conference must be open to
all employees. That's all it says.
It does not say that previous sign-up may not be required.
DEC employee activities clubs require sign-up; therefor so may
conferences.
It does not say that the existence of the conference must be announced.
DEC employee use of a facility for non-business use need only be
approved by the facility manager; conferences need only be announced
to the system manager.
This isn't worth babbling over; I have set this topic /nowrite.
/john
================================================================================
Note 391.3 Corporate Personnel Policy on Restricted Conferences 3 of 3
HUMAN::CONKLIN "Peter Conklin" 30 lines 25-SEP-1987 20:51
-< background on the policy >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
re .1:
"Do you know why it was established?"
This policy was established after a number of significant incidents.
It was established a about a year ago after many months of careful
discussion and review across a wide community. This policy has been
developed and reviewed at the highest levels in the company responsible
for personnel, security, legal, and computer use, among others.
For some of the background (recorded in real time), refer to DIGITAL
topic 111. That topic also contains some of the rejected earlier
drafts.
"This is the first I have heard of this."
This policy has been distributed widely throughout the company at
the time of enactment (also, unfortunately in unapproved draft form
first). When it was enacted as a formal corporate personnel policy
manual it was distributed officially to all holders of the Personnel
and Policy manual (a bright orange binder in the hands of most managers
and many others). It also appears in the public VTX infobase that
contains all the policy manuals. In addition, special efforts were
made to publish this in many of the company's employee newsletters.
Sorry if you missed these.
Because this was so throughly discussed last year, we would prefer
not to rehash the merits of this particular policy. We ask your
consideration in this regard so that the users of the host system,
HUMAN can continue to get work done, and so that the thousands of
participants in this conference don't get overloaded. Thank you.
|
| 501.15 | Annonymity service. | PBSVAX::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Tue Sep 29 1987 12:10 | 18 |
| Let me repeat the offer I have made before.
Anyone who wishes to remain annonymous in posting to this conference
may send their material to me (with some pseudonym attached, so
people can keep track of a single "chain of thought"). I will post
the note and will forward any mail replies to the originator. I
will make every effort known to me to keep their identity secret.
I will post anything sent to me, whether or not I agree or approve
of the contents. I have to draw the line, however, at posting any
note which seems to me likely to be interepretted as violating the
guidelines under which DEC allows this conference to take place
(e.g., no ethnic or religious slurs).
Other people have made the same offer, choose anyone you feel like
you can trust.
Topher
|
| 501.17 | Well said. | PBSVAX::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Wed Sep 30 1987 13:45 | 20 |
| RE: .16
Makes perfect sense. As a matter of fact, I basically already
understood it, though your lucid presentation makes it clearer in
my mind. I renewed my offer as a confidentiallity service not because
I felt it solved the whole problem, but because a need for privacy
had been presented as one factor. I saw this as an independent
problem with an independent, existing solution -- as long as people
were aware of it.
Here is a proposal for a solution within the existing notes file:
Anyone who wishes to have a "restricted discussion" can post a note
describing the topic and can write lock it. Replies can be sent
to the proposer by mail, who can then post those that they think
appropriate (maintaining annonymity or not, as per the wishes of
the replier). I'll be glad to help anyone who wants to set this
up but who is unsure of the mechanics.
Topher
|
| 501.18 | WE CAN BE TOGETHER | GLORY::WETHERINGTON | Once a fool had a good part in a play | Wed Sep 30 1987 14:11 | 37 |
| RE .16
Right on...well said.
The reason I tend to take the objective/critical view of things,
is:
1. I think knowledge of spirituality and one's relationship to the
universe and his fellow man, is a light that, if shown to the world,
could illuminate much of the darkness Man now lives in, and is directly
related to and interactive with politics, war, religions, and feelings
like Love (not the self oriented love between 2 people but a universal
Love), anger, revenge, etc...I feel a *responsibility* to my fellow
man to share (if he wants to hear it) the wonderful Light that I
have been shown. If people could experience the intensity of
Love that I have felt personally, the mere thought of violence or
war would be repugnant; and when angry thoughts do come (as is a
natural human reaction sometimes; reference how we react to our
citizens being taken hostage by Moslem extremists), we can learn
to transmute the anger to acceptance, to an even stronger, hardier,
self-strengthening Love.
2. The time grows short for a new way of life and relating to each
other to manifest; the planet is slowly dieing environmentally,
and we have a sword of Damocles over our heads in our international
relations.
This is why I tend to be more analytical. It is only my way; others
find their own way...so this reply is kind of a justification of
my attitude, not because I feel it needs defending, but because
it will give you a better idea of where I'm coming from.
I do restrict my entries in this conference, leaving politics and
such out of my replies however difficult this is for me.
DW
|
| 501.19 | Hm! | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Mon Oct 05 1987 15:13 | 17 |
|
On write-locking a topic for offline discussion - brilliant idea
my dear Topher, simply brilliant!
I'd have to agree with Doug on refraining from putting things in
here of a political OR religious nature - taboo subjects in proper
conversation aside, we could go down more ratholes than can possibly
be imagined here, and also run the risk of seeming like we're 'really
out to lunch' if we start talking in strange terms.
However, I see both religion and politics apply in a lot of cases
and would like a chance to integrate more things as opposed to
exclusion. But where does one draw the line....I don't know.
Just my thoughts.
Cindy
|
| 501.20 | knowledge is not for hoarding | ULTRA::LARU | do i understand? | Mon Oct 05 1987 16:25 | 9 |
| I'm sorry some people feel so paranoid!
This discussion makes me feel as if a priesthood is being set up
to screen acceptable initiates, process information, and dispense
it to the annointed. I find this file to be very interesting.
I've learned a lot, and have formed many more questions. I'd be
really disappointed to have any information become restricted.
/bruce
|
| 501.21 | There are good reasons for everything | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Tue Oct 13 1987 17:55 | 5 |
| Re.20
Bruce, go read #455.61. That should help explain things a bit.
Cindy
|
| 501.22 | truth shall set ye free... | ULTRA::LARU | do i understand? | Tue Oct 13 1987 18:13 | 16 |
| re .21
Well, I can't tell anybody what to do or what to feel. Fanatics
sometimes scare me, too. But when people feel that they must go
underground, the fanatics have won! And when you have gone
underground, they will hold that against you too.
The only way to fight fanaticism is by communicating the truth, to
all who want to listen.
I want to live in a world and work in a place where I don't have
to fear because of my beliefs, where I don't have to hide what I
am. If we are not free here, where can we be?
bruce
|
| 501.23 | Proceed with caution, but do proceed.... | FDCV13::PAINTER | | Wed Oct 14 1987 13:35 | 25 |
|
Bruce,
I agree with you completely.
Though there are people around who actually do think and act along
fanatical lines - at least the participants here now know a little
more about the 'anti-New Age' writings, and that the participants
here are now that much more aware of the ramifications that some of
our comments here may have. It would be nice if *everything* could
be expressed here openly and freely, but I don't believe the time
is yet. Sad, but true, unfortunately.
I believe that the so-called 'New Age' is a lifestyle dedicated
to maximum awareness. The note in #455 was not to scare anyone,
but to 'enlighten' (:^) the participants here as to some opinions
held by others.
Hopefully this world will be large enough someday that ALL opinions
and beliefs and thoughts can be expressed without fear of judgment
or retribution. I don't exactly believe that we as a world are
there yet, but this conference is one step in the right direction.
Cindy
|