Re: [Leica] Re: archiving

[Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>]

Hi, Phong.  I agree with much of what you have said here.  However, 
I wonder if the obsession with privacy has another cause today?  A 
few years back, a person's life and opinions were his own. With the 
intrusion of government (all levels) and employers (usually large) into 
the individual employee and constituents lives, what once would have 
been "paranoia" is now warranted.  I work in an extremely large 
school of art (one of the largest in the country).  Freedom of 
thought and freedom of expression is guaranteed UNLESS your thought 
and expression is "offensive" to the wrong people.  Then you have 
NO protection, especially if you look to your leadership for support.
As I have constant contact with hundreds of people, ONE of them is 
always going to get their feathers ruffled. Luckily, I have not been 
called onto the carpet for my "views" or "lifestyle" -- whatever that 
may be.  But fear of that day is what I live with, rather than 
tempering my views or thoughts to fit the "mold".  If a person has 
such worries, as one poster stated a couple weeks back (employers
or potential employers looking at newsgroup postings on employees!)
I sympathize with them.  The first amendment has been trampled in 
the name of "fairness" and perhaps the "Mr. X" fears for his 
carreer.  It is a shame that a group that contains so many journalists
should have such a worry.  Perhaps it is justice, however, as these 
same "journalists" embraced "political correctness" and carried 
it's flame early on.  May they suffer the consequences, if any, 
of their actions.  
I shall respect the desire for privacy, but I despise the reason 
for such need, on many occasions.......

Best to you, Phong, and group,
Walt

On
Sat, 28 Nov 1998, phong (Doan huu Phong) wrote:

> Hi Charles,
> 
>   This is an issue about privacy, not one of litterature.
> 
>   I take this stuff seriously because I am weary of my government's
>   and big corporations' intrusion into the lives of individuals.
>   It's like a bunch of friends sitting around the table and then someone
>   pulls out a tape recorder, "just for the record".   It has nothing to do
>   with how (in)valuable Mr X's writing is.   Would you, especially
>   as a journalist, extend the courtesy of respecting other people's
>   privacy ?
> 
>   One of the saddest moments in my LUG participation is the fiasco
>   when one member directed the attention of the LUG to another
>   member's posts about his alternate (for lack of better word from
>   my part)   lifestyle, in a totally unrelated forum.   The new search
>   engine recently put into place makes it much easier to look for
>   posts from a particular individual to scrutinize.
> 
>   So when a fellow LUG member wants to preserve his sense of privacy,
>   I am very apt to respect his wish.
> 
>   Sincerely,
> 
> - Phong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Summicron1@aol.com <Summicron1@aol.com>
> 
> >Oh for god sake.
> >
> >Now there's someone who thinks what he has to say on this list is so
> >wonderful, so deathless, so valuable that he has to sign his name with a
> fake
> >name to keep it "his"??
> >
> >And others are taking this seriously????
> >
> ...
> 
>