| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 535.1 | The Rules | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Tue Dec 24 1991 12:56 | 71 |
|
There are 6 major rules for this conference:
1. Do not speak badly of anyone.
2. Do not discuss the specifics of crimes.
3. Do not talk about pending or potential legal actions.
4. Do not interfere with DEC's business.
5. Do not use obscene language or fighting words.
6. Do not talk about sex in detail.
7. Do not harass other users.
1. Do not speak badly of anyone.
Anyone includes both identifiable individuals and groups. It
includes not only DEC employees and those who have dealings with
DEC, but all individuals. Specific people are not valid subject
matter for this conference. "People problems" within conferences
are fine, but please don't name names.
2. Do not discuss the specifics of crimes.
By this we mean that you should not admit to, encourage, or
attribute to others criminal behavior. Admitting to crimes is
clearly unwise. Encouraging them in a forum sponsored by DEC
puts the company at risk. Accusing others of crimes subjects
both you and DEC to potential legal actions.
3. Do not talk about pending or potential legal action.
It is never wise to speak in an open forum about a pending legal
action, be it criminal or civil in nature. Do not use a DEC-
sponsored forum to write about the merits or validity of any
legal action. Asserting that there are grounds for legal
action, even when such action has not been taken can involve
you and the company in all manner of complications. If you
know of a wrong, it is far better to correct it than to draw
attention to it.
4. Do not interfere with DEC's business.
This is an employee activity conference. It must not negatively
impact the business of the company. Your behavior here must
not interfere with your own work or with that of others.
5. Do not use obscene language or fighting words.
Not only mustn't you speak badly of other people, but you must
not use language in a way that is likely to offend, either due
to the specific words used or the manner in which they are
presented. "Fighting words" are words or phrases which are in
and of themselves provocative and likely to incite to anger.
6. Do not talk about sex in detail.
Although it is not likely to be a problem in this conference,
the subject of sex is sufficiently objectionable to a large
portion of the populace to warrant specific mention here. The
details of sexual behavior and practices are not appropriate
in a DEC-sponsored forum.
7. Do not harass other users.
Harassment occurs when someone takes offense with some
statement or action; asks for it to stop; and the act is not
stopped. Part of our civil rights is the right to not be
harassed by others (i.e., bothered repeatedly).
|
| 535.2 | The Guidelines | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Tue Dec 24 1991 13:04 | 128 |
|
This note is rather lengthy. It contains a fairly large number
of guidelines for members of this conference. Please read
through it completely, despite its length. A general outline
is as follows:
1. Subject matter
2. Speaking badly of others
3. Criminal behavior and legal actions
4. Interfering with work
5. Inappropriate language
6. Length of notes
7. Use of topics
1. Subject matter
This conference is for discussion of Canada and things Canadian
as described in .0
Please bear in mind that this Notes file constitutes a corporate
document. While this is a private conference, what you say in it
is a matter of public record.
2. Speaking badly of others
When discussing different approaches to a problem or issue, please
be careful to confine your discussion to the issues and not the
person. Although you may disagree vehemently with another person's
viewpoint, courteous responses are expected.
Suppose that someone makes an argument which you feel is wrong. You
could respond in any one of the following manners:
"You'd have to be out of your mind to believe that!"
"That argument is stupid."
"That argument is wrong."
"I disagree with that completely."
The first two are unacceptable. There is no reason to criticize
the person or to ridicule the argument. Merely stating that it
is wrong or that you don't believe it, and explaining why, should
be sufficient. It is, of course, more politic to say that you
disagree, but it *is* acceptable to say that an argument or
statement is wrong, provided you explain your reasoning.
3. Criminal behavior & legal actions
It can be quite hard to determine what constitutes a crime, given
that DEC and this conference's membership reach from Hong Kong in
the West (Ain't it great what computers do to you?) to Tel Aviv in
the East. To take an example that is not likely to come up here,
what if a member speaks of his experience with marijuana? Most of
us would immediately think he was talking about breaking the law,
but marijuana isn't illegal in all of the places the Easy-net
reaches, and you can get a prescription for it in many places where
it is illegal.
The best guideline is to not discuss things that are illegal in the
area where you live or work, and to avoid speaking about things
that are illegal in a large part of the world.
4. Interfering with work
It is very important that employee activity noting not interfere
with the work of the corporation. There are, however, many ways to
avoid this. In some parts of the company, activities not directly
related to your job must only be engaged in during off-hours. In
other parts this issue is handled by individual judgment or by
mechanisms such as limiting (in software) the number of notes
servers that can run during working hours.
5. Inappropriate language
Avoid "cuss-words", "four-letter words" and the like. Additionally,
ordinary words can become "fighting words" when used improperly.
There is nothing obscene (in English, at least) in calling
someone's mother a camel, for instance. It might, however, get
you punched in the nose. Provocative language of any sort is
inappropriate.
("Fighting words" is a legal concept in the U.S., by the way where
there have been Supreme Court rulings on their use. The phrase
is not intended to cover all statements which you might find
offensive, but rather those which basically communicate nothing but
aggressive or negative emotional content. They include but are not
limited to "cuss words".)
6. Length of notes
It seems that on many philosophical topics people tend to "run
off at the keyboard". There are a couple of problems with this.
First, you lose your audience about 95% of the time. Second, the
moderators have to read everything in the conference. We're a
captive audience; show some mercy (most of you know all about
this, right?).
We strongly recommend the following guidelines. (Failure to follow
them may get you mail from us asking you to follow them in the
future.)
Limit each note to 100 lines. That's a lot of text,
nearly two pages single spaced.
Limit each note to a single subject. If someone says
several things that inspire you to respond, break them
into separate replies if they are going to be of any
real length.
7. Use of topics
Users are encouraged to open new topics when they wish to discuss
a new subject. Use different topics (.0 notes) for different
thought. This allows subsequent readers to follow each chain of
thought. It also makes historical research easier. When you
give separate topics to separate thoughts, it tends to encourage
each to be responded to. When several are run together into one
note, then typically several get lost. Please do a DIR/TITLE
first, to be sure there isn't already a topic under way.
Try to make your titles, both for topics and for replies, as
descriptive as possible of the subject of your note. This
greatly aids historical research.
|
| 535.3 | The Procedures | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Tue Dec 24 1991 13:12 | 66 |
|
There are a couple of procedures that we want to have members of
the conference follow. They are intended to minimize the
disruption of the conference and limit the possibilities for
misunderstanding and offense. Please follow them.
Everyone should read through notes 535.* These notes
contain information intended for all members of this community.
Anyone writing in the conference should introduce themselves by
replying to note 536. This accomplishes two things. It helps us to
know each other and to take responsibility for our behavior, and
it helps the moderators know that you have read the rules and
procedures.
Handling Complaints
No matter how well-intentioned we are, being human, we can
expect to write notes here which unintentionally offend others
or break one of the conference rules. When this happens, we
need to handle it expeditiously and with sensitivity. It may
be necessary to involve some part of DEC's management, but we
hope to do so only when absolutely necessary. The following
procedures are intended to enable us to deal with the problems
as quickly and with as little fuss as possible. PLEASE follow
them if there are problems.
If any person finds a note in this file objectionable, they
have the right to contact the author of the note and/or the
moderator and request that action be taken.
Members of this file are obliged to immediately hide a note
when they receive a complaint about its content, if requested
by the complainer. (This is done by using the SET NOTE/HIDDEN
command.) Once the note is hidden, the author and the
objecting party should negotiate a resolution of the problem
created by the note. Normally the moderator will act as a
middleman in this process.
Alternatively, the moderator may delete the note in question,
and return it to the author indicating why the action was
taken, and give the author the opportunity to discuss the
matter if desired with the moderator, and how, if applicable,
the note may be made acceptable. This method may be used
in preference, by the moderator, since hidden notes do
attract considerable unwarranted attention.
Possible resolutions might include one or more of the
following:
- deleting the note and re-posting it in an edited form
- deleting it all together
- posting a clarifying or explanatory note
- a simple explanation to the objecting party
- withdrawal of the complaint and "unhiding" or
reposting the note
If the moderators can not find a solution that is
satisfactory to both parties, or if they are unable to
act as go-betweens, either because of involvement in the
problem or because it would interfere with their work, they
may bring the problem to the attention of the appropriate
organization within DEC. This could be Personnel, Management,
Legal or Security, depending on the issue or the people
involved.
|
| 535.4 | A Moderator's Last Request | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Tue Dec 24 1991 13:18 | 15 |
| These Rules, Guidelines and Procedures are widely used by other
conferences and have been adapted for this conference.
There may be some later modifications to these topics.
One last request ...
If you have issue with a moderator action, or moderatorial policy,
please bring it to the attention of a moderator by sending MAIL
and NOT by writing or replying to a note in this conference. Things
can be generally worked out in a far more satisfactorily way outside
the notes environment.
|
| 535.5 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Mon Jan 27 1992 09:56 | 13 |
| Just a reminder ...
All notes should be attributable back to their original author ...
therefore, if you write a note from a generic account, like SYSTEM
or USER or whatever, you should sign your note with a full name
that can uniquely identify you.
When you quote someone else's notes, a reference back to the original
note should be used, unless the note is from the immediate string of
notes in the topic being written.
If you quote from someone else's mail, you should get the author's
permission to post it.
|
| 535.6 | New Corporate Guidelines - Please Read and Follow | KAOFS::S_BROOK | | Fri Jan 31 1992 11:27 | 125 |
| The following memo from Corporate Personnel sets a far more strict
policy statement regarding the use of and contents of Employee
Interest Notes Files which includes the Canada conference.
Because these guidelines would normally require more thorough
moderatorial monitoring, I would ask that you follow these as
closely as possible. Your co-operation would be greatly appreciated.
Note that it is not clear at this stage whether some of the
moderatorial actions are meant to be applied retroactively. If
so, at some point many notes may disappear.
Thanks,
Stuart
------------------------------------------------------------------
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 29-Jan-1992 11:49am EST
From: RON GLOVER
GLOVER.RON
Dept: Corporate Employee Relations
Tel No: 508-493-9569
TO: Conference Moderators
Subject: A Message to Employee Interest Notes File Users
By way of introduction, I am the Corporate Personnel Policy Manager.
Part of my responsibility includes providing interpretation of Digital's
Personnel Policy, including the Personnel Policy 6.54. I would greatly
appreciate your assistance in posting the attached memo from John Sims in
the Notes files you moderate, and as many other Employee Interest Notes
Files as possible. Please give me a call if you have any questions.
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 30-Jan-1992
From: John Sims
SIMS.JOHN AT A1 at CORA @ CORE
Dept: Strategic Resources
Tel No: 223-7243
TO: Employee Interest Notes File Participants
Subject: A message to employee interest notes file users
A MESSAGE TO EMPLOYEE INTEREST NOTES FILE USERS
Over the last few months I have received a number of complaints
from employees, and individuals outside of the company about
material communicated in electronic mail systems and posted in
various employee interest notes files. After reading some of this
material it is clear that a reminder about appropriate comment and
behavior in these systems is necessary.
First, and most critically; the electronic mail systems and notes
files are company facilities subject to normal workplace rules of
conduct. As such, the same rules that govern conduct and comment
in any other Digital workplace apply with equal weight in these
systems. Stated simply, if you wouldn't say something in a
Digital business meeting, you shouldn't say it in electronic mail
or notes. PERIOD.
Statements that attribute improper, illegal or immoral motives or
actions to others; statements that cast aspersions on the
character or integrity of others or that amount to libel or
slander are not permitted. PERIOD. In this regard, it does not
matter whether the individuals subject to the comment are elected
public officials or directors of organizations disfavored by the
author. There is no "Public Figure" exception in these systems.
Comments of a sexual nature are not acceptable whether they are
about the author or directed at others. Similarly, comments that
degrade, devalue or discriminate against others are also
prohibited.
Neither the notes conferences nor electronic mail should be used
to solicit other employees. This prohibition covers efforts to
solicit employees for personal or political gain, to sell or
market goods or services (except authorized marketplace or
discount conferences) and efforts to solicit employees to take
action, sign petitions or support particular causes or candidates.
Finally, employees should remember that it is never appropriate to
spend working time in employee interest notes for non-work
purposes. Personal or entertainment activities in these notes
files should be limited to assigned break times, lunch time and
before or after business hours.
Employee interest notes files and conferences provide an
electronic forum to share ideas and opinions about matters of
common interest. In supporting these conferences, the company
understood that there would be occasions where employees would
disagree on issues being discussed, but we believed and continue
to believe it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.
Personnel Policy 6.54, Proper Use of Digital Computers, Systems
and Networks provides further information about appropriate
conduct and comment in these systems. Employees who fail to meet
these expectations, or who use company computer systems in ways
that are contrary to the letter or spirit of that policy are
subject to Corrective Action and Discipline up to and including
the termination of their employment.
The moderators of these conferences, along with your system
managers, personnel representatives and the Personnel Policy
Manager are all available to answer any question you might have
about appropriate use of these systems.
Please feel free to forward this memo to other Digital notes
files and conferences.
Distribution: Selected conference moderators
[Original list deleted]
|
| 535.7 | Important Policy Change | TROOA::SOLEY | Someone call my lawyers, tell 'em that I'm dead | Wed Apr 07 1993 18:54 | 32 |
| We're sorry to have to do this but we have no choice. Discussions regarding
nationalism and language policy are forbidden in the CANADA notesfile
effective immediately. Past discussions on these topics are write locked.
When you write in any notesfile you are writing in your capacity as a
Digital employee. Adding disclaimers or writing on your own time does
not change this. The Introduction note to the conference makes this very
clear. It also tries to make clear what is not acceptable, two areas where
there have been repeated lapses include attacks on persons (specific
individuals, named or otherwise, and groups) and the use of inflammatory
language.
Unfortunately we see no way of continuing to allow discussions on these
topics within the guidelines.
We urge you all to carefully re-read note 535 in particular the part of
535.6 where it says that nothing should be said in notes or e-mail that
would not be said in a business meeting. Please also read the recent
message 'Nastygrams and the network do not mix' in US Livewire and please
keep in mind that you are, in a way, representing the company with what
you put into notesfiles.
Our hope was that these issues could have been discussed without breaking
or pushing policy. We have gone out of our way to try to make these
discussions work within the guidelines, worked individually with some of
you to tone down messages and tried to recast the discussion on a higher
level framework. However the reality seems to be that no matter how cold
and intellectual these discussions start out they always become hot and
emotional, usually sooner than later. We feel the only approach to
resolving this issue fairly and without bias is to close down the
discussion entirely.
|
| 535.8 | Policy revisited | CSC32::S_BROOK | I just passed myself going in the other direction! | Wed Apr 14 1993 11:36 | 70 |
| After a lot of consideration, and discussion with others about this
policy, we are prepared to relax the strictness of our subject ban,
but it will require the co-operation of those who note here.
After the dust settles after about a month, we will remove the ban on
the topics of nationalism and language policy ... but the following
will be strictly enforced for these and all other topics ...
1) All discussions shall be on the issues, and based on factual
information. Generalities are to be avoided.
2) No one shall speak badly of any identifiable individual or group
inside or outside of Digital. This includes direct and indirect
references. It includes but is not limited to public figures,
politicians, sports players, the dead, people in the media. It
includes orgaizations, but is not limited to corporations (large or
small), private businesses, charities, and the media.
3) So-called fighting words will not be permitted. Statements likely
to cause emotional responses are to be avoided. Confrontations should
be avoided.
To enforce these, the following will occur ...
1) Any and all notes violating these rules will be hidden and returned
to the author for the author to fix or delete.
2) If a significant number of notes in a discussion are returned to
their authors, then the note will be write locked. If discussion of
the subject matter of the locked note is transferred to another note
then it too shall be locked. Such locks will remain in place for
approximately two weeks.
People have been under the impression that names cannot be used in
a discussion ... this is not correct ... Names may be used.
For example ...
John Doe writes a note saying that the moon is made of blue cheese.
You may not reply ...
. Any idiot knows that the moon is made of liver sausage. (Implies John
is an idiot)
. You cannot beleive anything written by John Doe. (Implies John Doe
is a liar)
. John's head is made of Swiss cheese ... (a general insult)
A reply should be along the lines of ...
. John, I believe you are wrong. I have a friend who tells me that it is
made of Gorgonzola. (Note the use of *believe* ... in this case you
do not have fact ... only hearsay ... Unless you have firm evidence
of your responding fact, this is the preferred form to the one that
follows).
. John, you are wrong. Scientists who analyzed the moon samples
reported in Scientific American that the moon is made of petrified
popcorn, (In this case, you have a fact, or at least a well
documented proof to back your assertion ... even so, saying that you
*believe* John to be wrong is to be preferred, because it is not
confrontational.)
Understand that the readership of this conference is far wider than
just the main stream of regular contributors. The conference is here
be a forum and an information place for things Canadian. It is not
here as a battle ground.
|