response 1 of 74:

Apr 8 18:56 UTC 1995

I was asked:

> Any thoughts about what, if anything, to do about the complaints that we
> have a user who posts personal insults to Usenet?

Here are some possibilities I have been weighing. These are my slants on
the subject. I'd like to hear comments from others.

(1) we could do nothing. We've been doing this so far. It has a certain
    idealistic free-speech flavor to it.

(It has its charm , but I am not real happy about this particular use
 of an anonymous account. It is associated with usenet abuse and makes
 grex look like a dungheap. This is what we are doing now, though)

(2) we could do our best to contact the alleged author, and ask 
    him/her to remove the offensive material, or explain it.

(Good thought, but it puts us as a referee in disputes. I hate that.
 Also, it won't work in this case, because the account is anonymous,
 except for the name given which matches the "victims")

(3) We could move the .plan to .plan.save and replace it with a 
note daying that if the author wants the text replaced, he or she
should send email to staff@cyberspace.org, and we will put it back
after verifiying the author's identity.

I kinda like #3, myself.
I am definitely open minded about this one.

response 3 of 74:

Apr 9 04:12 UTC 1995

What are "intense personal attacks in a language no on e understands"?
If no one understands it, how can it be a personal attack.  (I tried
to read .plan in blahblah, but I can't.) 

response 5 of 74:

Apr 9 22:24 UTC 1995

Re #1:  Some version of (3) also appeals to me, although I am not happy
about putting the .plan back.  In re: #2, since this is an anonymous user,
s/he has no friends here to lose, hence no social incentive.

response 7 of 74:

Apr 10 03:07 UTC 1995

   There has been some *real* acrimony in the American and non-American
Chinese community over the net, about things that I don't really understand.
But I do know of mail-bombing (like thousands of peices), hate mail,
death threats, and the like going on, on several systems.  George Washington
University is dealing with this, too.

   My personal feelings about this .plan and account is that this is
a cowardly act, and if someone does not have the courage of their
convictions to stand behind their words, they don't deserve any special
rights for their speech.

   Creating a .plan is definately cowardly.  I like Steve's #3.  But
we won't ever hear from that person, and thats fine with me.

response 9 of 74:

Apr 10 04:15 UTC 1995

I agree. I don't see any reason to coddle stupid junk. It has no
redeeming merits for protection as "free speech". 

response 11 of 74:

Apr 10 06:17 UTC 1995

Do number 3.. no one is hurt that way, even if it's used in a different
way, some later date.

response 13 of 74:

Apr 10 09:15 UTC 1995

  If you're asking if anyone disagrees (not just the board), I'd say
just leave such things alone, unless they pose legal problems.  If
people are offended by something, they should avoid reading it; a
.plan file doesn't leap out at people unless they're looking for it.
This seems little different than someone posting personal attacks in
a conference -  we may encourage the author to remove it, but it's
tolerated.  I don't think the staff should play the role of system
censor.
 
  On the other hand, I don't think option 3 is that bad, since it allows
the person to put back the offensive comments (I would assume permanently,
until the account is reaped) if they want it there.  (Though I assume they
do or it wouldn't have been there in the first place).

response 15 of 74:

Apr 10 22:40 UTC 1995

Personally, I'd want to know what something said before I 
pronounced it stupid and unworthy of consideration under
Free Speech.  But then I'm kinda weird that way. ;-)

No biggie but maybe next time we should find out what 
something says before we get all pumped and take action.

response 17 of 74:

Apr 11 11:57 UTC 1995

Sorry then.  I thought everything you know about the
content had come from the folks who were upset about it.

response 19 of 74:

Apr 11 15:49 UTC 1995

I think they created an account using that person's name.  btw- isn't
that something like "impersonating"?  I thought that was illegal..
or wouldn't creating a computer account apply to that?

response 21 of 74:

Apr 12 19:17 UTC 1995

We don't know exactly what it said. No one here can decipher the Chinese
text. We have some reasons to trust the complaining party that it was
offensive, sexually explicit, derogatory comments about his/her family.

It was almost impersonation. The name given was the same as the 
victim, but no other identification was given. Therefore we do not
(in theory) know that it was not someone with the same name.
I think the impersonation angle is too weak to pursue. If I had
become convince there was a solid case for impersonation,
I would have turned control of the account over to the impersonated
party.

The .plan was being fingered because attention was being drawn to it from 
(allegedly) extensive posting of it in the alt.chinese.text group.
This would be a very directed audience.

There have been a few well thought out objections, but I am convinced
that we did the right thing. If this kind of thing ever happens again,
we will act similarly, but much more quickly, knowing that the vast majority
of users approve of this action.

Feel free to continue or elaborate, though. We're still listening.

response 23 of 74:

Apr 13 06:22 UTC 1995

Our posted Netiquette statement would seem to be sufficient to 
zap that file. Here is a brief extract (look on lynx in Grex
Activities for Netiquette):

 "The use of the Internet is a privilege, not a right, that may
 be revoked at any time for inappropriate conduct. Examples of
 inappropriate conduct include:

 "-  placing unlawful information on networks and systems;

 "-  use of threatening, abusive, or otherwise objectionable
 language in either public or private messages;

 "-  sending "chain letters" or "broadcast" messages to lists
 or individuals; and

 "-  any activity that could cause congestion or disruption of
 networks and systems."