home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!uvaarpa!darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!FRANKSTON.COM!MEREDITH_WARSHAW
- Message-ID: <9208190924.AA20490@world.std.com>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 05:20:00 -0400
- Sender: "STATISTICAL CONSULTING" <STAT-L@MCGILL1.BITNET>
- From: Meredith_Warshaw@FRANKSTON.COM
- Subject: offensive comments
- X-To: stat-l@frankston.com
- Lines: 139
-
- Last week I sent a note to the list complaining about anti-social "tags" at
- the end of
- people's messages. There seems to have been some confusion because I forgot
- to
- mention that the note had been sent to me personally, not to the list at
- large. Also, I
- originally did not post the message I had received, since I don't like
- spreading that
- sort of stuff. However, since some of the people who responded seemed to
- think that I
- was probably overinterpreting what I read, I am now including the message:
- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- + "There is something about being intelligent and Jewish +
- + that is an almost-insurmountable obstacle to niceness"
- +
- + - Bill the Carpet
- Trader +
- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-
- Some of the reactions I received [with annotations] include:
- ********************************************************************
- I have received only one rude remark from a STAT-L lister, in private
- mail to me
- rather than the list. I must have deleted without reading any that went to
- the list -- or
- were these sent directly to you? If the latter you might want to consider
- forwarding them
- to the list so that their rude behavior is a matter of public scrutiny, a
- response that I
- considered. My rude email came from Duke U., which surprised me a little.
-
- Karl L. Wuensch, Dept. of Psychology, East Carolina Univ.
- Greenville, NC 27858-4353, PSWUENSC AT ECUVM1 (BITNET)
- [I decided to allow the sender to remain private - my purpose is not to
- embarass, but to
- lessen the amount of anti-social behavior on the list]
- ********************************************************************
- I appreciate the comments from one list member about offensive
- statments in some
- messages. While the authors may think they are being clever and exercising
- their
- freedom of speech, I would hope they can accomplish both without needlessly
- offending
- those of us on the list who are sensitive to these things. I request that
- all members
- express their political, racial, religious, and sexual views elsewhere.
- A response to a statistical question from somebody I never met can
- influence me a lot.
- Political notes that express contempt for any groups disappoint me, but are
- not likely to
- influence me.
-
- Thanks,
- Alan C. Acock
- Oregon State University
- acock@ucs.orst.edu
- ********************************************************************
- I agree completely with your expressed concern. All should be able to
- participate
- without denigration or insult.
-
- Dan
- Manger Inf. Tech.
- Bryant College
- dboone@research1.bryant.edu
- ********************************************************************
- Dear statlers:
- I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE ANYONE ON THE LIST *INTENTIONALLY* MAKING
- OFFENSIVE COMMENTS. HOWEVER, SOMETIMES THESE THINGS CAN
- OCCUR BECAUSE WE ARE NOT SENSITIVE TO THE IMPLICATIONS OF OUR
- *CUTE MESSAGES*. I APPLAUD THE RECENT COMMENTS TO THE LIST
- CALLING OUR ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE OFFENSIVE MESSAGES BEING
- SENT. WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THE OFFENSIVE MESSAGES. ANY
- SUGGESTIONS?
-
- K K
- * *
- K E * K PRODUCED AND DIRECTED BY STEPHEN SALBOD
- K K ON LOCATION AT PACE UNIVERSITY, NY
- *
-
- "A KLINGON DREAM"
- ********************************************************************
- It's always been my view that people have a right to display their
- viewpoints, ignorant
- as they may be. Now, clearly this is a list about statistics, so it would
- make some sense
- to limit such displays to matters of statistics. I would definitely object
- if someone posted
- a 2-page essay on why they dislike (or like) Jewish people to the list. But,
- I don't think a
- couple line signature disrupts the statistical focus of the list in any
- significant way.
- Would you choose to eliminate all signature commentary, or only that which
- disturbs
- you? It seems to me that personalized signatures offer us a modest glimpse
- into the
- personalities of those we correspond with. The fact that what we see is
- sometimes ugly,
- should not be reason to hide it. I think the appropriate response to an
- offensive signature
- is to reply directly to the sender and let them know your feelings. At the
- very least, you
- know that person is not someone to spend time helping, and you'll know a
- little more
- about them if you ever happen to meet.
-
- Tim Dorcey BITNET: TCD@CORNELLC
- Statistical Software Consultant Internet:
- TCD@CORNELLC.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
- Cornell Information Technologies Phone: (607) 255-5715
- Cornell University
- Ithaca, NY 14853
- [I am not advocating censorship, or dropping offenders from the list - I just
- want people
- to think before they write gratuitously nasty messages! I certainly would
- not want to
- eliminate all signature commentary; some of it is rather amusing and to the
- point. And,
- yes, I did respond directly to the offending party. However, I also feel
- that it is
- important to air this issue in public.]
- ********************************************************************
- Jeff Borchers:
- ...offensive messages are like bumper stickers: You can ignore them
- 'til they go
- away, you can harp about them thereby further empowering their message (and
- clogging
- the airwaves), or you can rear-end the sonnovabitch!
- ********************************************************************
- I don't find the "attached" quote too defensible, myself. (One wonders why
- someone
- would use that as part of that person's electronic "signature".)
-
- Anyways, thanks again for the insights.
-
- Deanna
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- REPLY FROM: Wild, Deanna K.
-