This file is a collection of numbers and addresses of systems that may or may not have anonymous 'ftp' plus notes on access. FTP Sites See /usr/doc/ftp.internet TELNET is accessed by Via 'c .swrl/80' at the Pad> prompt. 35.1.1.26 Master List The majority of the mailrus archive has moved to terminator.cc.umich.edu, 35.1.33.8 31.1.0.1 Melvyl 10.2.0.6 MIT AI From rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu Fri Feb 11 09:32 PST 1994 Return-Path: Received: from wiley.csusb.edu by silicon.csci.csusb.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA06220; Fri, 11 Feb 94 09:32:49 PST Received: by wiley.csusb.edu (5.67a/1.34) id AA12813; Fri, 11 Feb 1994 09:34:03 -0800 From: rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu ("Dr. Richard Botting") Message-Id: <199402111734.AA12813@wiley.csusb.edu> Subject: Libel on the Internet (fwd) To: dick@silicon.csci.csusb.edu Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 09:34:03 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1125 Status: R Forwarded message: From IPCT-L@GUVM.CCF.GEORGETOWN.EDU Thu Feb 10 18:22:39 1994 Message-Id: <199402110222.AA09030@wiley.csusb.edu> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 21:11:27 -0500 Reply-To: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Sender: Interpersonal Computing and Technology From: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Subject: Libel on the Internet To: Multiple recipients of list IPCT-L From: IVEH@LAGUNA.EPCC.EDU Hello everyone! >Deborah Okey writes: > > wonder how long it will be before libel laws are applied to Internet. > I understand that libel laws are there and they apply to the Internet too. FCC or federal laws can be used. If a user receives a message that contains improper language it should be forwarded to receiver administration for proper handling. In some universities there are fines that are applied to users who send indecent messages. Also, the accessibility to the Internet can be affected. Sincerely, Ivelisse IVEH@LAGUNA.EPCC.EDU From rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu Fri Feb 11 09:37 PST 1994 Return-Path: Received: from wiley.csusb.edu by silicon.csci.csusb.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA06232; Fri, 11 Feb 94 09:37:13 PST Received: by wiley.csusb.edu (5.67a/1.34) id AA12918; Fri, 11 Feb 1994 09:38:28 -0800 From: rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu ("Dr. Richard Botting") Message-Id: <199402111738.AA12918@wiley.csusb.edu> Subject: Bill of Rights (fwd) To: dick@silicon.csci.csusb.edu Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 09:38:28 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 7778 Status: R Forwarded message: From IPCT-L@GUVM.CCF.GEORGETOWN.EDU Fri Feb 11 05:03:23 1994 Message-Id: <199402111303.AA10811@wiley.csusb.edu> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 07:54:58 -0500 Reply-To: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Sender: Interpersonal Computing and Technology From: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Subject: Bill of Rights To: Multiple recipients of list IPCT-L From: "Gerald M. Phillips, Ph.D." Some of you may be interested in this document. I am posting it with permission of Prof. Stephen Smith of University of Arkansas who is currently doing research in the area of freedom of speech and law, in general on the internet. THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ELECTRONIC LEARNERS PREAMBLE In order to protect the rights and recognize the responsibilities of individuals and institutions, we, the members of the educational community, propose this Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for the Electronic Community of Learners. These principles are based on a recognition that the electronic community is a complex subsystem of the educational community founded on the values espoused by that community. As new technology modifies the system and further empowers individuals, new values and responsibilities will change this culture. As technology assumes an integral role in education and lifelong learning, technological empowerment of individuals and organizations becomes a requirement and right for students, faculty, staff, and institutions, bringing with it new levels of responsibility that individuals and institutions have to themselves and to other members of the educational community. ARTICLE I: INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS The original Bill of Rights explicitly recognized that all individuals have certain fundamental rights as members of the national community. In the same way, the citizens of the electronic community of learners have fundamental rights that empower them. Section 1. A citizen's access to computing and information resources shall not be denied or removed without just cause. Section 2. The right to access includes the right to appropriate training and tools required to effect access. Section 3. All citizens shall have the right to be informed about personal information that is being and has been collected about them, and have the right to review and correct that information,. Personal information about a citizen shall not be used for other than the express purpose of its collection without the explicit permission of that citizen. Section 4. The constitutional concept of freedom of speech applies to citizens of electronic communities. Section 5. All citizens of the electronic community of learners have ownership rights over their own intellectual works. ARTICLE II: INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES Just as certain rights are given to each citizen of the electronic community of learners, each citizen is held accountable for his or her actions. The interplay of rights and responsibilities within each individual and within the community engenders the trust and intellectual freedom that form the heart of our society. This trust and freedom are grounded on each person's developing the skills necessary to be an active and contributing citizen of the electronic community. These skills include an awareness and knowledge about information technology and the uses of information and an understanding of the roles in the electronic community of learners. Section 1. It shall be each citizen's personal responsibility to actively pursue needed resources: to recognize when information is needed, and to be able to find, evaluate, and effectively use information. Section 2. It shall be each citizen's personal responsibility to recognize (attribute) and honor the intellectual property of others. Section 3. Since the electronic community of learners is based upon the integrity and authenticity of information, it shall be each citizen's personal responsibility to be aware of the potential for and possible effects of manipulating electronic information: to understand the fungible nature of electronic information; and to verify the integrity and authenticity, and assure the security of information that he or she compiles or uses. Section 4. Each citizen, as a member of the electronic community of learners, is responsible to all other citizens in that community: to respect and value the rights of privacy for all; to recognize and respect the diversity of the population and opinion in the community; to behave ethically; and to comply with legal restrictions regarding the use of information resources. Section 5. Each citizen, as a member of the electronic community of learners, is responsible to the community as a whole to understand what information technology resources are available, to recognize that the members of the community share them, and to refrain from acts that waste resources or prevent others from using them. ARTICLE III: RIGHTS OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Educational institutions have legal standing similar to that of individuals. Our society depends upon educational institutions to educate our citizens and advance the development of knowledge. However, in order to survive, educational institutions must attract financial and human resources. Therefore, society must grant these institutions the rights to the electronic resources and information necessary to accomplish their goals. Section 1. The access of an educational institutions to computing and information resources shall not be denied or removed without just cause. Section 2. Educational institutions in the electronic community of learners have ownership rights over the intellectual works they create. Section 3. Each educational institution has the authority to allocate resources in accordance with its unique institutional mission. ARTICLE IV: INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES Just as certain rights are assured to educational institutions in the electronic community of learners, so too each is held accountable for the appropriate exercise of those rights to foster the values of society and to carry out each institution's mission. This interplay of rights and responsibilities within the community fosters the creation and maintenance of an environment wherein trust and intellectual freedom are the foundation for individual and institutional growth and success. Section 1. The institutional members of the electronic community of learners have a responsibility to provide all members of their community with legally acquired computer resources (hardware, software, networks, data bases, etc.) in all instances where access to or use of the resources is an integral part of active participation in the electronic community of learners. Section 2. Institutions have a responsibility to develop, implement, and maintain security procedures to insure the integrity of individual and institutional files. Section 3. The institution shall treat electronically stored information as confidential. The institution shall treat all personal files as confidential, examining or disclosing the contents only when authorized by the owner of the information, approved by the appropriate institutional official, or required by local, state or federal law. Section 4. Institutions in the electronic community of learners shall train and support faculty, staff, and students to effectively use information technology. Training includes skills to use the resources, to be aware of the existence of data repositories and techniques for using them, and to understand the ethical and legal uses of the resources. (August 1993. Used by permission) From rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu Mon Feb 14 11:41 PST 1994 Return-Path: Received: from wiley.csusb.edu by silicon.csci.csusb.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA12033; Mon, 14 Feb 94 11:41:03 PST Received: by wiley.csusb.edu (5.67a/1.34) id AA01285; Mon, 14 Feb 1994 11:42:15 -0800 From: rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu ("Dr. Richard Botting") Message-Id: <199402141942.AA01285@wiley.csusb.edu> Subject: Re: Encyclopeida Britanica, Copyright, NYT - an FAQ! (fwd) To: dick@silicon.csci.csusb.edu Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 11:42:15 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1853 Status: R Forwarded message: From IPCT-L@GUVM.CCF.GEORGETOWN.EDU Mon Feb 14 10:19:11 1994 Message-Id: <199402141819.AA00190@wiley.csusb.edu> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 13:11:27 -0500 Reply-To: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Sender: Interpersonal Computing and Technology From: Interpersonal Computing and Technology Subject: Re: Encyclopeida Britanica, Copyright, NYT - an FAQ! To: Multiple recipients of list IPCT-L From: koopman@ctc.com (Michael G. Koopman) I wonder if Dr. Bondi will sue me for this timely crossposting? Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 18:49:34 +0800 To: online-news@marketplace.com From: Richard Bondi Subject: RE: Encyclopedia Britannica, Copyright, NYT - an FAQ! Sender: owner-online-news@marketplace.com Mr. Thompson and Mr. Weaver may be interested to know that there is an FAQ on copyright available that touches on posting articles on the Internet; see Carol Odlum's guidelines in part 2. This FAQ is available for anonymous FTP from rtfm.mit.edu [18.70.0.209], in directory /pub/usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ, files part1 - part6. If you do not have direct access by FTP, you can obtain a copy via email: send a message to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with the following lines in it: send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part1 send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part2 send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part3 send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part4 send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part5 send usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ/part6 quit ---------- Richard Bondi Philosophy Dept./Darden Business School, UVa 521 Cabell Hall Charlottesville, VA 22903 rsb5c@faraday.clas.Virginia.edu Tel. (804) 296 0768 From rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu Fri Mar 18 13:09 PST 1994 Return-Path: Received: from wiley.csusb.edu by silicon.csci.csusb.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA13855; Fri, 18 Mar 94 13:09:37 PST Received: by wiley.csusb.edu (5.67a/1.34) id AA18773; Fri, 18 Mar 1994 13:10:24 -0800 Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 13:10:24 -0800 From: rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu ("Dr. Richard Botting") Message-Id: <199403182110.AA18773@wiley.csusb.edu> To: dick@silicon.csci.csusb.edu Subject: (fwd) EXCUSE ME Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1386 Status: RO Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Path: csus.edu!wupost!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!ub4b!reks.uia.ac.be!jpbogers From: jpbogers@reks.uia.ac.be (John-Paul.Bogers) Subject: EXCUSE ME Message-ID: <1994Mar16.113620.27057@reks.uia.ac.be> Organization: U.I.A. X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5 Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 11:36:20 GMT Lines: 20 Dear reader, Yesterday a "pyramid" letter was send from our PC to your usenet-group. This letter caused an enormous amount of reaction. I would like to apologize to anyone if I caused any inconvenience. Some of the reactions were very personal and brutal against me in person. I would like to stress that this "letter" was started merely as a joke after office hours. We had no intention to harm anyone neither did we expect to gain a substantial amount of money. If any money will be send to me, I will send it to charity. Again, I'm sorry. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- J.P. Bogers, M.D. Universitaire Instelling Antwerpen (UIA) Lab Pathology -- rbotting@wiley.csusb.edu. rbotting::=`Dr. Richard J. Botting`, wiley::=`Faculty EMail System`, csusb::=`California State University, San Bernardino, CA 92407, USA`. Aka::=`dick@doc.csci.csusb.edu`. Disclaimer::=`CSUSB may or may not agree with this message`. Copyright(1994)::=`Copy and use as you wish as long as you include this copyright and signature`. From news.csusb.edu!csus.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!tada Fri Apr 8 09:48:34 1994 Path: news.csusb.edu!csus.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!tada From: tada@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael J Zehr) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Schemes for "improving" comp.lang.c Date: 8 Apr 1994 12:41:46 GMT Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lines: 69 Message-ID: <2o3jea$21m@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: vongole.mit.edu There's been a lot of talk about rules or procedures for making comp.lang.c work better (where 'better' is defined differently for different people, adding even more to the confusion). For example, one person said recently that people posting an article that might be a frequently asked question should put "FAQ" in the subject. But this runs head-on into an underlying problem. People who post FAQ articles don't *know* they are frequently asked. Telling newbies to put "newbie" in their subject so that wizards can skip the questions and cut down on flames also doesn't help. By my definition of wizard, a wizard would never flame anyone. (To be a comp.lang.c wizard, one must know both C and how to use the net. Flaming indicates not knowing how to use the net. qed.) There is already a scheme for making a newsgroup work effectively through voluntary compliance. It's describe in the various netiquette and new user documents. Any scheme we develop that relies on voluntary compliance is not going to be any better. The vast majority of the net troubles are not caused intentionally, but by people who don't understand the rules. Changing the rules isn't going to make that situation improve. This is the one major advantage of moderation -- the moderator can enforce any rules she/he wants, and the net forces posts to go to the moderator to have those rules applied. Anything else requires the poster to know the rules, which has time and again been proven not to work. I think the only long-term solution is to have the people responsible for connecting others to the net do a better job of educating the users. Imagine if you would, the following situation: (hmm, let's see, I know I have an analogy lying around somewhere... ahh -- here it is!) Suppose no one had phones in their houses. Children grew up never seeing one, until they get to college. Then someone hands them a phone, a phone book, tells them how to dial, and tells them to have fun and learn. Oh yeah, and they don't have to pay for the phone -- someone else does. There'd be near havok, just like you get on the net sometimes! Electronic communication is one of a few forms of communication which most people don't have the opportunity to learn by imitation, or by looking over the shoulder of a mentor for a while before trying it. (Romantic relationships is another example, but that's for different newsgroup. *grin*) So what's my point? I'm not sure. Maybe I just needed to dust off my soapbox. I guess the point is that the people who know and follow the existing rules are not the problem. So changing the rules while relying on voluntary compliance isn't going to improve the situation. But the readers aren't in a terribly good position to do that. Here are a few things we can try to do: if you introduce someone to netnews, make sure they know the right way to use it before you turn them loose; be kind to newbies (you were probably one once, and it proably isn't their fault) and explain to them the right way to use the net, don't just tell them they're wrong; complain to the system admins of sites where net abuse is originating -- get them to accept their responsibility for education. After several years of this (yes, grass roots movements take a long time), the ration of people who understand the rules to those that don't should go up. -michael j zehr