Re: Seriously on the Netiquette

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by woo, Nov 8, 2005.

  1. woo

    woo Guest

    > > > > > > I have checked the real netiquette, and it has changed a lot since I last read it.
    > > > > > > My main concern is that Google does not respect privacy, and here is Rule 8
    > > > > > > asking people to respect privacy.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > I wrote that we own the messages, certainly the poster, and yet Google archives
    > > > > > > and distributes messages. Though Google claims that a message is still owned
    > > > > > > by the poster, it archives them as a private business, and distributes them for the
    > > > > > > public, be it my mother's posts or anybodies, a certain privacy is being disrespected.
    > > > > > > Why? Because what probably the real netiquette fails to mention, is that most
    > > > > > > messages are of discussions regarding personal, private interests. And distributing
    > > > > > > such materials infringes on human dignity. I don't know how to explain it better
    > > > > > > today, I wrote about this, and there is not much we can do really, other than
    > > > > > > perhaps acknowledge that Google is indeed in violation of people's privacy.
    > > > > > > Not everybody wishes to make history with every keystroke typed. Some turn
    > > > > > > to usenet for a question, a question, as this one, is really a question about why
    > > > > > > Google sells what is not for sale. Some threads may be of general interests, but
    > > > > > > Google cannot declare usenet and all its threads as a historical significance that
    > > > > > > MUST be archived and shared and distributed freely. The simple answer is NO.
    > > > > > > No, because I have seen Ceaucescu wishing the same street camera system for
    > > > > > > applied to all people. How much clearer can I get?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > From the original version, rule #8, and as always, companies are not asked to
    > > > > > > abide to the netiquette:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Rule 8: Respect other people's privacy
    > > > > > > Of course, you'd never dream of going through your colleagues' desk drawers. So naturally you wouldn't read their email
    > > > either.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Unfortunately, a lot of people would. This topic actually rates a separate section. For now, here's a cautionary tale. I

    > > call
    > > > it
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > The case of the snoopy foreign correspondent
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > In 1993, a highly regarded foreign correspondent in the Moscow bureau of the Los Angeles Times was caught reading his
    > > > coworkers'
    > > > > > > email. His colleagues became suspicious when system records showed that someone had logged in to check their email at

    > times
    > > > when
    > > > > > > they knew they hadn't been near the computer. So they set up a sting operation. They planted false information in

    messages
    > > > from
    > > > > > > another one of the paper's foreign bureaus. The reporter read the notes and later asked colleagues about the false
    > > > information.
    > > > > > > Bingo! As a disciplinary measure, he was immediately reassigned to another position at the paper's Los Angeles bureau.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > The moral: Failing to respect other people's privacy is not just bad Netiquette. It could also cost you your job.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > COMMON PEOPLE, REVOLUTION! Why not? See that's the problem.
    > > > >
    > > > > To the melody of "we are the world":
    > > > > We are the sheep, we are the nobodies, we are the big mouths, but nothing ever happening.
    > > > > We are newgroup posters, we're only here to talk,
    > > > > We're never do a thing that would make us use our brains,
    > > > > We are the sheep, we we are the posters,
    > > > > We are the ones that never make a single difference,
    > > > > There are people sighing, and others sighing too,
    > > > > Just don't expect us use our heads as we are done with you.
    > > > > We are the sheep, we are the posters,
    > > > > As long as Google archives us and thus
    > > > > we herd as... fuckit
    > > > >
    > > > > We are the sheep, we are the nobodies,
    > > > > please don't tell us what to do or else we'll, what?
    > > > > I forgot the question.
    > > >
    > > > Let's look at another one, Rule number 3 from the old netiquette:
    > > >
    > > > Breaking the law is bad Netiquette
    > > > If you're tempted to do something that's illegal in cyberspace, chances are it's also bad Netiquette.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Some laws are obscure or complicated enough that it's hard to know how to follow them. And in some cases, we're still

    > establishing
    > > > how the law applies to cyberspace. Two examples are the laws on privacy (see Rule 8 and "Email Privacy -- a Grand Illusion" on

    > > page
    > > > 125) and copyright (see "Copyright in Cyberspace" on page 133).
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Again, this is a book on manners, not a legal manual. But Netiquette mandates that you do your best to act within the laws of
    > > > society and cyberspace.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Rule 3: Know where you are in cyberspace
    > > > Netiquette varies from domain to domain
    > > > What's perfectly acceptable in one area may be dreadfully rude in another. For example, in most TV discussion groups, passing

    on
    > > > idle gossip is perfectly permissible. But throwing around unsubstantiated rumors in a journalists' mailing list will make you

    > very
    > > > unpopular there.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > And because Netiquette is different in different places, it's important to know where you are. Thus the next corollary:
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Lurk before you leap
    > > > When you enter a domain of cyberspace that's new to you, take a look around. Spend a while listening to the chat or reading

    the
    > > > archives. Get a sense of how the people who are already there act. Then go ahead and participate.

    > >
    > > In my netiquette I wrote: Stick to the topic of the thread as ignoring the topic is very humiliating to the
    > > originator of the thread. See I focus on different sides, based on my experience, more like a users
    > > guide than a moral standpoint. Moral standpoint, why treat the whole netiquette as religion, that's one
    > > of the mistakes of the netiquette. You remember at use? Citizens at use (with cameras on their foreheads)?
    > >
    > > There is a problem with people becoming Internet citizens in their behaviors. Well, this is where the Orwellianism in the
    > > whole thing comes out really, and the crimes against humanity behind it all, of what it all has become. Nicholae
    > > Googlescu Googorwell's company and his private paradise venture on the global Internet.

    >
    > Ok, let's take another random rule:
    >
    >
    > Rule 9: Don't abuse your power
    > Some people in cyberspace have more power than others. There are wizards in MUDs (multi-user dungeons), experts in every office,

    and
    > system administrators in every system.
    >
    >
    > Knowing more than others, or having more power than they do, does not give you the right to take advantage of them. For example,
    > sysadmins should never read private email.
    >
    >
    > For more on the abuse of power in the milieu of computer networks, see "Egregious Netiquette Violations" on page 83. For more

    about
    > privacy, see "Email Privacy: a Grand Illusion?" on page 125.


    A sect. A sect is a sect is a sect.
     
    woo, Nov 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Astromannix
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    943
    ho alexandre
    Aug 13, 2003
  2. woo

    Seriously on the Netiquette

    woo, Nov 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    347
  3. woo

    Re: Seriously on the Netiquette

    woo, Nov 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    401
  4. woo

    Re: Seriously on the Netiquette

    woo, Nov 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    448
  5. woo

    Re: Seriously on the Netiquette

    woo, Nov 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    540
Loading...

Share This Page