Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!execu!dewey
From: dewey@execu.UUCP (Dewey Henize)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: bigoted racist misuse of email and computer accounts must be dealt with
Keywords: racist email
Message-ID: <394@execu.UUCP>
Date: 30 Nov 88 02:20:43 GMT
References: <10676@ihlpa.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: dewey@execu.UUCP (Dewey Henize)
Organization: Home for Recalcitrant Hackers
Lines: 67

In article <10676@ihlpa.ATT.COM> davidm@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Makowsky) writes:
>
>	I am posting two pieces of email received by Nancy Gould.
>I am doing this on my own, and without her permission (Nancy has
>already made it public on the net that she received such email).
>	Since I believe in the privacy rights of those who send
>email, no matter how disgusting it is, I have deleted any reference
>to user id's, or the senders' names.  However, I have kept enough
>of the headers, including the machines from which the email was
>sent and transported through, and the message id's of the email,
>that I hope any of the respective system administrators will be
>able to identify the sender of the email and take whatever he or
>she feels is appropriate action.
>	I have enclosed the two pieces of email inside of
>asterisks.
[Two pretty nasty messages here deleted by me]
>
>	One more thing.  While I no longer have it, I recieved a
>similar piece of email from machine vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu,
>although I no longer remember if it came from the same individual.
>-- 
>David Makowsky  (312) 979 - 6211

This arrived here with the following:

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,news.sysadmin,comp.mail.misc,rec.humor.d,news.misc,misc.misc,soc.culture.misc,soc.misc,comp.mail.uucp,news.admin

MR Makowsky,
   Yes, that's pretty nasty all right.  Fine, you have that part of your
judgement 'vindicated'.

   No, nice people shouldn't have to recieve that kind of mail - even not
nice people.

   Now, since it isn't YOUR mail and you ADMIT you didn't even have the 
common decency to get permission to post someone else's mail, where is the
moral imperative that you believe is so wide-compassing that it excuses
posting someone else's mail?  And to such a wide group, too!

   It IS nice and inflamatory.  Is that your goal?  Because, quite frankly,
if Nancy had decided to post it, or simply to post that she had recieved it,
I'd feel a lot more indignant.  Instead, to be honest, you come across with
your massive crossposting as someone looking for trouble instead of someone
with a real interest in redress of some wrong.

   If a person recieves such mail, there's certainly nothing wrong with them
or their sysadmin contacting the sysadmin of the site or sites where the
messages originated.  Contrary to a lot of the flaming visible in the public
forums of Usenet, most of the sysadmins around the world would much prefer
to have a chance to look over the alleged offence and perhaps have a talk
with the sender.  From that point, all kinds of good things, primarily good,
can occur to help stop a bad situation from continueing.

   Screaming through a megaphone in a crowd is more likely to result in people
covering their ears and avoiding the screamer than solving a problem.  Its
amazing how often, though, a few intelligent phrases spoken quietly will have
a beneficial effect.  If that's the intended goal.  Assuming it is the intent,
I suggest you reread you post and consider whether your actions were really
appropriate.  If it isn't the intended goal, then this is just a waste of time
anyhow.

Dewey Henize
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| There is nothing in the above message that can't be explained by sunspots.  |
|                   execu!dewey             Dewey Henize                      |
|         Can you say standard disclaimer?  I knew you could.  Somehow...     |