Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830919); site kvvax4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!ukc!mcvax!kvport!kvvax4!koksvik
From: koksvik@kvvax4.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Net.politics to Europe, Lets start net.world-politics
Message-ID: <409@kvvax4.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Jun-84 23:25:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: kvvax4.409
Posted: Thu Jun 14 23:25:33 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Jun-84 03:27:41 EDT
References: <500@erix.UUCP>
Organization: Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, CTG, P.O Box 25, N-3601 Kongsberg, Norway
Lines: 59

==============================================================================
	>A good way to have a break is to read the news, both
	>technical and otherwise.
I agree. What I think is wrong is to spend large amounts of time
arguing bullshit back and forth on the net.

I have never argued against the net as such.  I think it is a 
valuable TOOL, and a very useful source of information.  But
many of you out there treat it as a TOY.

I doubt if any of you would consider playing cards in working 
hours.  Or how would your employer react if you read the 
newspapers for two hours every day?  The analogy is pretty damn
close, you are just refusing to face it.  

	>Many of us do a lot of work (for which we don't get paid
	>extra) from terminals at home and this more than
	>compensates for the work lost by reading and posting to
	>the net.
If that is the case, then why don't you work in your working hours
and post to the net in your spare time?

	>Employers who start imposing idiotic restrictions on what
	>is not allowed in working hours usually lose their most
	>qualified staff and develop a hostile attitude to their
	>company that cost them far more than they gain.
I agree.  The psychology of computer programming is complex.  But 
who is to define what is idiotic?  You define it in one way, and 
your employer probably in another.  The trick is to find the 
compromise to make you both happy.  

	>If Koksvik thinks that reading and posting news is such a
	>waste of his company's time, why did he post his
	>article?
I don't think that at all. If I did, I wouldn't be subscribing, would I?
Posting takes hardly any time at all, and is not very expensive either.
But writing and reading bullshit takes a lot of time, and is expensive,
and it is not something we are paid to do.

That's why I carry on this discussion in my own time.

	>Of course we have about the same conditions as in most
	>other companies, and that includes a right to use the
	>computers outside of work for personal, non-commercial
	>use.
Let me point out that I was talking about things going on in 
working hours.  What you do in your spare time is naturally your 
own business.

	>But we should *not* limit groups because Koksvik thinks
	>he is the conscience of our companies!
I don't claim to be God or you to be the devil, but I am entitled
to my own opinions, just like you are entitled to yours.
In football it is a golden rule to go for the ball, not the player.
That rule could also be applied to discussions on the net.


	Rolf M. Koksvik ({decvax,philabs}!mcvax!kvport!kvvax4!koksvik)
	A/S Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, Kongsberg