Re: School Has Started

[cust_ts@cc.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand)]

In article <36kh45$qtc@eis.calstate.edu>,
Greg R. Achenbach <gachenb@eis.calstate.edu> wrote:
>This is an issue of ACCESS.
>Whether you or your peers consider something acceptable is
>immaterial.  What it comes down to is whether the teacher of those
>kids (or more likely the parents) thinks it is appropriate on not.
>It's not the kids we are worried about, it's the teachers. If they
>think it is inappropriate, or are told it is inappropriate by parents
>or supervisors, they may very well limit or eliminate access to the
>'net for their students.  Whether you like this or not, it is
>reality.  Come on!  Is your use of profanity so important to you that
>you are willing to compromise the educational value of the net?  This
>is not about censorship!  This is about how we can best acheive the
>goals that most of us share relative to moving our society more fully
>into the world of telecommunications (and using Apple II's to do it).

So, keep bringing up that opinion. That is all you should have the right
to do. This all started, on my part, when Joe made threats of further
actions (paraphrase).

>An analogy was made in this thread between the 'net and a bar.  Oh,
>great!  That will really help our students get proficient with
>telecommunications.  "Uh, excuse me Mister District Superintendant,
>we think your student would benefit greatly by having a bar in every
>one of your classrooms."  Get real, Tero.

No, _you_ get real. That is how Usenet _is_, as far as unmoderated
usegroups are concerned.

>  A classroom is not a bar!

No, but Usenet is. Deal with it. This is terribly blunt, but it seems to
me you're trying to present Usenet as something it isn't. _This_ is the
dangerous approach, since it can be shot down oh so easily.

>If you want UseNet newsgroups to have only such speech restrictions

It has absolutely nothing to do with what I want. It's what it is. The
only way to change this wrt c.s.a2 is to get it moderated, and you have
far _less_ chance in succeeding there than a snowball in hell.


>as would be appropriate in a bar, you are basically saying that
>UseNet newsgroups don't belong in the classroom.

If a profanity-clear environment is what parents or teachers want, then
yes, so it is. To be frank, they should then also lock their kids in a
closet, but that's another issue.

  I have been
>impressed with the quality of your informative posts to this group in
>the past, but you are way out to lunch with this analogy.

No, you are. Usenet News is not "news." Maybe it was some 20 odd years
ago, but it sure ain't anymore.

>Let me repeat, the issue is NOT the appropriateness or legality of
>certain language.  The issue IS access to this group, and to the net
>at large, by students.

Let me get this straight. If somebody, let's say <z>, has a hostage they
are threatening to kill if <x> doesn't do <y>, and <x> doesn't, and <z>
kills the hostage, <x> is to blame? Point being, if teachers or parent's
limit access to the net, it is they who are doing the disservice to the
kids.

Finally, let me once again say this started on my part when Joe made
some vague threats. I still say, voice your opinion, anything further
(re profanity) _is_ net.facsism.

Well, one more note. Once kids learn how to access Usenet, just about
nobody will remain limited to the apple2 groups. So, frankly, cleaning
up c.s.a2 is a waste of time, if your motivation is to shield kids of
profanity.
Which I happen to think is a waste of time anyway, but I digress.

>Greg Achenbach             gachenb@eis.calstate.edu (soon to be ctp.org)
-- 
Tero Sand, 2 kyu (4k*)		! "We have become... the stewards of life's
				! continuity on Earth. We did not ask for this
EMail: cust_ts@cc.helsinki.fi	! role, but we cannot abjure it. We may not be
       custts@cc.helsinki.fi	! suited for it, but here we are." -S.J. Gould