norge.freeshell.org (192.94.73.8)/192.94.73.8.tar/192.94.73.8/pub/sdf/historical/flame-smj/01-dfw.general-sp.txt

Text File | 2002-09-10 | 8KB | 151 lines

Newsgroups: dfw.general
Path: convex!news.oc.com!news.unt.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!shared!sp
From: [e-mail] (Steven Parker)
Subject: sdf.lonestar.org: The REAL story
Summary: a crime against the public
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 94 02:32:06 GMT
Distribution: dfw
Expires: Dec 31, 1994
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Shared Systems Corporation, Dallas, TX
Keywords: sdf
Lines: 136

Someone asked, "What ever happened to sdf?"

I know I should have written this months ago, but the whole thing was
so distasteful to me I preferred to abandon it altogether.  However,
continuous urging from the very few who already know the real story,
combined with the apparent lack of evidence that the knowledge has
spread on it's own, has convinced me that I must tell this now to fully
discharge my public obligations.

First, a little history...

Some of you may remember me from the days of "killer", where I served
as assistant administrator and archive librarian up until its services
were terminated.  In the Summer of 1991 a couple of teenage killer
alumni, Ted Uhlemann and Daniel Finster, turned to me for help in
converting a PC-based BBS into a public access Unix system.  The three
of us formed an administrative council to establish and begin operating
the system known as sdf.lonestar.org.  Additional administrators were
soon added to the council, and all were mature adult Unix professionals
except for Ted's roommate, Stephen Jones.

After two years of operation, as the administrative council changed,
I remained as the only original member.  Ted had lost interest, and
Daniel had been expelled by unanimous vote in February of 1993 for
continuous instances of "conduct unbecoming a trustee of a public
resource" (such as repeatedly using root privileges to read other
user's mail).  This was the only case of forced expulsion, as the
council operated primarily on the basis of mutual trust and respect
among its members, and deviations from agreed-upon policy were usually
treated with tolerance and mild reprimands from other members.

About that same time I began a campaign to encourage system donations,
which included implementation of system policies that had been selected
by the entire usership via an open vote.  The involvement of the users
in establishing policy had long been considered by the council, but
always obstructed by Daniel because of his strong personal opposition
to any kind of democratic process.  At the same time, I was actively
seeking corporate sponsorship, which I first obtained in the form of
donation "premiums".

Stephen Jones had volunteered for, and had been trusted with the
responsibility of accepting system donations, and reporting the amounts
received to the administrators and to the users at large via system
files.  It was understood that donations were not to be used by anyone
personally, and amounts in excess of monthly expenses were to be used
for much-needed system improvements as decided upon by the
administrative council.  But despite my continuous efforts to improve
donations, Stephen reported month after month that donations only
adequately covered the expenses with none left over.

I first assumed my efforts had failed, but after doing some research to
try to figure out what had gone wrong, I collected enough contrary
information to become suspicious of the donation reports.  This was
compounded by Stephen Jones' failure to appear at administrator's
meetings once the decision had been made by the council to formalize
ourselves as an incorporated public utility.  I finally confronted him
last September, and after half an hour of bush-beating, he confessed to
me that he had received donations well in excess of the expenses and
not reported it.  Shocked, I asked why, and all he would say was, "it's
nobody's business but mine".  I pointed out that he was violating a
public trust (not to mention my personal trust), and suggested that if
he did not feel he needed to be responsible in reporting the donations
accurately, then perhaps he should not be a member of the
administrative council.  I hoped he would change his mind in short
order, and took no further action for the moment.

But his reaction was to use his access to the equipment to remove the
administrative privileges of the entire remainder of the council, and
to delete all files stored in my personal account.  Shortly afterwards,
he suddenly removed the system to an unknown location, simultaneously
changing his address, and chosing not to have a listed telephone
number.  I suspect he was already considering this even before I
confronted him, and the unreported hundreds of donation dollars were
earmarked for the expenses involved and equipment acquisitions he
intended to be made only in his own name.

Unfortunately, and due in part to his delaying the more formal plans
of the council, there is insufficient documentation to make a legal
case against his commandeering of the equipment and claiming to be sole
owner.  The police consider this as a "domestic matter" and will not
get involved.  The remaining council members, disgusted by this breach
of trust and lack of recourse, have disbanded.

Ironically, despite his participation in the expulsion, Stephen placed
Daniel Finster in charge of technical administration.  Within a week or
so, Daniel was caught (for the third time) making unauthorized access to
other systems; and this time using sdf to receive files obtained during
those sessions.  The administrator of one of the city's larger Unix
installations told me that his legal department was pursuing Federal
agency involvement to confiscate sdf, and prosecute for the intrusion.
I suspect this hasn't happened only due to insufficient evidence.

I was not entirely surprised to hear that Stephen has begun to again
solicit donations for "free" dial-up services, but this time with a
P.O. box as the only means of contact.  I have heard that all of the
user-directed policies have been abandoned; replaced by a restrictive
screening process to prevent access by prior council members and law
enforcement officials.

His attitude is that on the basis of physical possession, he is the
sole owner and authority over the operation of the system from now on.
Free from the guidance of the mature professionals that made up the
rest of the council, he can now return to the practices for which he
was often reprimanded when he was only a junior (but treated fully as a
peer) member.  These practices included arbitrary removal of user
accounts and/or files, deliberately causing downtime when he was upset
about something a user did or said while on-line, and the censorship of
usenet news groups and articles based on his personal opinions of their
source and/or content.

Of course, the administrator of the system that was previously
providing the news feed to sdf is aware of the situation, and has
indicated that there is "no way" he would again deal with Stephen
Jones.  But no doubt someone can always be found who doesn't know or
doesn't care about what happened to get a feed from, or a feed can be
purchased, to keep sdf in operation.  The bottom line is whether or not
users will still want to keep putting their support in that direction.

Again, I apologize for not posting this before; and I deeply regret
having to inform you of the loss of a responsible, professionally
managed public resource as a result of one person's greed.

 - Steven Parker, formerly [e-mail]


P.S.  Even though this whole matter has left a foul taste in my mouth,
I still believe in the concept of a truly publicly-supported networking
resource.  I have had an interest in shared resources long before even
"killer" came to be.  If there are enough people who would like to help
make this a reality, I would still consider contributing my experience
and support towards it.  Let me know if you are interested.
- --
    Steven Parker, Sr. Platform Engineer     Shared Systems Corporation
    [e-mail] | uunet!shared!sp          Subsidiary of Stratus Computers
    Phone: [phone]  Fax: [phone]   Dallas, Texas
    ------>>>    My opinions may not always be shared by Shared    <<<------