RE: Obscene content in cygwin file.

["Terry Dabbs" <tdabbs at staktek dot com>]

I have an incident from the early 90s that is very close to this
discussion:
I worked at a division headquarters of large company, where we had
hundreds of people who would log into their email account on the VAX.
When logging in you would see a message of the day. The guy
administering this got tired of the same old boring messages and started
rotating in messages very much like the ones in the limerick file. The
first couple were only slightly off-color, and actually got positive
responses. Then the third, and last one, had to do with a guy in
Nantucket who had some unusual practices. The effect this had in the
local work place was fun to watch, having the computer pipe that stuff
on the screen was about as imaginable as Bush saying it on TV, and
created quite a stir. The end result was not so much fun, the employee
was severly reprimanded (Andrew wouldn't work there...) and was weeded
out in the first layoff (I wonder why...). I don't know if this was a
related package, but the guy said he read the first one, and assumed the
others were no worse. There was a lot of comment about this, but other
than the general opinion the guy was a moron (he wasn't, just young),
the overall consensus was "who in the hell would provide a software
package where such a thing is possible?". You can be sure that some
scrutiny as to the supplier occurred.
I am fairly sure my vote won't count. But, we need to protect the
children, and from reading this thread, the ones that need protecting
subscribe to this list. Choices are fine, and maybe immature sysadmins
deserve what they get, but the folks that think nothing is wrong with it
do not need a temtation like this to show how cool they are.

-----Original Message-----
From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf
Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 8:52 AM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Obscene content in cygwin file.

On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 01:22:32AM -0500, Brian Bruns wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I thought that them doing this was a sign of a more 
>> innocent time, where we didn't have to worry about every single word 
>> that came out of our mouth (or keyboard).
>>
>> Seriously guy, your type is one of the primary reasons why the 
>> internet is getting - its not quite there yet, but getting - to be 
>> *no fun*.
>> It was built on freedom and free-thinking, and the very fact that 
>> this conversation is taking place is a testimony to how bitter it has

>> become.
>>
><rant>
>I tend to agree with you on that.  I was on the internet since the 
>middle 90s, and even then, you could start to see new people/businesses

>forcing their own views on the rest of the Internet, that had been 
>there long before them, and continue to be there long after they are 
>bankrupt/dead/gone/kaput.

I've been reading usenet since the early 80's and I find the notion that
this kind of discussion is a recent phenomenon sort of amusing.

This is *exactly* the type of fodder that has driven Usenet discussions
for years.  We do get the added spin of workplace lawsuites, yadda
yadda, but that just adds more fuel to what would have been a very
nicely burning flame.

If Cygwin was a true business enterprise, this would be a no-brainer.
We'd remove the content.  The reason wouldn't be because we are cravenly
caving to the PC majority.  The reason would be that it might offend a
customer who would take their business elsewhere.  You can't have that
unless you are in a position of not caring about losing a few customers.
Not many businesses are in that position.

Business issues are not the point here, though.  My issue is that I
grant others the right to be offended by the type of language we're
talking about.  It is a given that there are many people in our society
who will be offended by it.  These people do not buy Playboy or Hustler
because they do not like what these magazines represent but they aren't
out picketing those establishments, either.  So, they are following the
"Just don't look at it then!" scenario.

We do not offer these people the same choice with Cygwin.  When they
innocently download fortune means that they are using hard drives to
house unencrypted content that they consider objectionable.  That is not
fair to them.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/




--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/