On Thu, 31 May 2001, A Kozic wrote:
> Maybe I should be more greatful for my job. I've always thought my
> employer was a little more laid back than most, but apparently he's well
> outside the norm.
>
> Do get the demographics straight, I work for a consulting company in the
> US (the employer i
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: [issues] Re: [techtalk] Sick of surf and porn addicts
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
Penguina wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Daniel Bravo wrote:
>>> Well, if American teenage college movies showed
>>> the good side of fraternities and sororities, I don't
>>> think that they would be too entertaining. Just keep
>>> in mind that there are two sides t
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Well, whatever the reason, I did get the chance to reflect on just how
> unwilling I am to compromise my behaviour for money. 8^)
>
Interesting.
___
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.li
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Daniel Bravo wrote:
>
> > Jenn,
> >
> > Well, if American teenage college movies showed
> > the good side of fraternities and sororities, I don't
> > think that they would be too entertaining. Just keep
> > in mind that there are two sides to
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Loose choice of words, and trivial definitions of 'giving up' and
> 'freedom'.
Fair enough.
> It never even OCCURED to me that anyone might interpret what I said
> as tightly as you appear to have.
Heh. I guess in the context of the human rights a
On 5/31/01 2:13 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
give up her freedom?
>
> Well, I'm giving up my freedom to NOT do whatever I'm contracted to.
> I'm giving up my freedom to behave in an unprofessional manner while
> in the work environment.
>
> Hm. Not 'giving up' per se .. bu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> "I (employee) will give up some of my time and freedom and work for
>> you for a set number of hours, doing a set group of tasks.
> I'm intrigued by your choice of words.
> and I certainly hope I haven't
> given up fr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>> Let's take a look at the basic contract - not the legal contract,
>> but the social contract of employment:
>>
>> "I (employee) will give up some of my time and freedom and work for
>> you for a set number of hours,
On Thu, 31 May 2001 09:02:54 +1200 (NZST) Penguina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ever hear the phrase, "Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and
> *perhaps* Cornell"? Dartmouth doesn't even figure into
> it. And sorry, you were saying that the faculty should
> be responsible for keeping track of when f
Hello all,
Just a stray two cents US ...
I've seen (and worked under, or have had friends/family do so) a fairly
broad range of computer/IS/IP policies from
You, the employee, may not use any part of the computer for any
non-explicitly work related function. (May not use the CD drive for music
On Thu, 31 May 2001 James Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yep. Your employer is paying you to do a job. As long as you do that job
> properly, without breaking the law etc, they can't complain - and
> monitoring behaviour not directly related to your performance is BAD.
> Ultimately, that
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Let's take a look at the basic contract - not the legal contract,
> but the social contract of employment:
>
> "I (employee) will give up some of my time and freedom and work for
> you for a set number of hours, doing a set group of tasks.
I'm intr
On Thu, 31 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> James Sutherland wrote:
>
> > The approach you seem to advocate is "let companies do WTF they want, and
> > to hell with people's rights".
>
> I'm not sure where this started, but it looks to me like both
> sides are either arguing for the extreme, or
Daniel Bravo wrote:
> Jenn,
>
> Well, if American teenage college movies showed
> the good side of fraternities and sororities, I don't
> think that they would be too entertaining. Just keep
> in mind that there are two sides to every coin.
Oh, I don't know. I could set a tearjerker t
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi, James, and everyone else,
>
> Actually, you're both guilty here. In some posts you didn't specify, and
> both of you have pontificated as if you are talking about some sort of
> universal law. I called "Penguina" on it, so I'd be remiss if I di
Jenn,
Well, if American teenage college movies showed
the good side of fraternities and sororities, I don't
think that they would be too entertaining. Just keep
in mind that there are two sides to every coin.
Dan
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Daniel Bravo wrote:
>
>
> > I am in a l
Hang it up, James. Just because the EC has misinterpreted a
Human Rights Code to mean that businesses can't do anything to
prevent misuse of their own equipment doesn't make it a human
rights violation to monitor computer usage.
It is interesting that the one person I had to let go for
excessi
Daniel Bravo wrote:
> I am in a latino frat. We work towards the upliftment
> of underprivileged latino youngsters as well as
> adults. In the 20 years that my frat has been in
> existance (our Alpha chapter being in Cornell), we
> have never had an incident where we were accused of
> raping a
James Sutherland wrote:
> The approach you seem to advocate is "let companies do WTF they want, and
> to hell with people's rights".
I'm not sure where this started, but it looks to me like both
sides are either arguing for the extreme, or accusing the other of
arguing for the extreme.
Let's
Let's take a look at the basic contract - not the legal contract,
but the social contract of employment:
"I (employee) will give up some of my time and freedom and work for
you for a set number of hours, doing a set group of tasks.
In exchange, you (employer) will give up some of your money, will
Boy are you going to be shocked when reality smacks
you in the face. First and foremost, your daughter
will not be completely safe no matter where you send
her. Even if its an all girls school. The reality of
the matter is that she can experience that horrible
thing called rape, sexual harrassm
At 17:28 30/05/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> But not while you're on my payroll, and not using my equipment and not
> >> using my telephone, and not using my internet connection. I, as a
> >> private employer, have every right to monitor what goes on with my
>stuff,
> >> including wha
Hi, James, and everyone else,
Actually, you're both guilty here. In some posts you didn't specify, and
both of you have pontificated as if you are talking about some sort of
universal law. I called "Penguina" on it, so I'd be remiss if I didn't do
the same to you.
>> But not while you're on m
On 30 May 2001, Kristin M. Fitzsimmons wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 07:47:09 +1200 (NZST) Penguina
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The other problem with frats we saw at Cornell was date
> > rape, gang rape and drug rape (since that's what getting
> > a girl so drunk that she can't defend he
On Thu, 31 May 2001, Penguina wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2001, James Sutherland wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 May 2001, Penguina wrote:
> > > > At 5/29/01 06:02 AM , James Sutherland wrote:
> > No - the very first post made it clear the discussion related to the EU.
> > You then wade in saying "No you're de
At 5/30/01 01:11 PM , Penguina wrote:
>On Wed, 30 May 2001, James Sutherland wrote:
>
> > i.e. don't mention it to the people whose human rights she's violating, or
> > the employer who'll fire her for doing so, or the police who would fine
> > the company into the ground for allowing her to do so
On Thu, 31 May 2001 07:47:09 +1200 (NZST) Penguina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The other problem with frats we saw at Cornell was date
> rape, gang rape and drug rape (since that's what getting
> a girl so drunk that she can't defend herself IS).
> Schools at which the greek system HAS been
On Wed, 30 May 2001, James Sutherland wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001, Penguina wrote:
> > > At 5/29/01 06:02 AM , James Sutherland wrote:
> > >
> > > >The *US* courts, you mean? I'm talking about *EU* law. That's the whole
> > > >point: this is legal in the US, but NOT in the EU. One of the few a
On 30 May 2001, Kristin M. Fitzsimmons wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001 05:56:53 +1200 (NZST) Penguina
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe the above
> comments were actually thanking James for his comments on
> the US system as a whole (re: Second Amend
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 05:56:53AM +1200, penguina sed:
> If the EU has its head so far up its hindquarters that it doesn't
> allow private employers to monitor and regulate the use of company
> infrastructure, then no wonder the EU is so far uh..."behind."
This kind of nationalistic attitude d
On Thu, 31 May 2001, Penguina wrote:
> > At 5/29/01 06:02 AM , James Sutherland wrote:
> >
> > >The *US* courts, you mean? I'm talking about *EU* law. That's the whole
> > >point: this is legal in the US, but NOT in the EU. One of the few areas
> > >the EU has got it right, IMHO - for the most par
On Thu, 31 May 2001 05:56:53 +1200 (NZST) Penguina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And of course, I sometimes wonder if I just think our
> > system is basically okay because it's what I've been
> > taught since I was just a wee tot. So, thanks for the
> > outside input, James. It really does
> At 5/29/01 06:02 AM , James Sutherland wrote:
>
> >The *US* courts, you mean? I'm talking about *EU* law. That's the whole
> >point: this is legal in the US, but NOT in the EU. One of the few areas
> >the EU has got it right, IMHO - for the most part, I think I prefer the US
> >system (2nd am
34 matches
Mail list logo
