RE: LACC: Re: Is hate code speech?

I worry that, in the process of laying all this flame-bait, y'all are hoping
that naive people might think that a job where there's racial and sexual
hate-speech isn't a hostile work environment.  Putting this sort of language
in code does not shelter it from co-workers.

	It doesn't matter that the offensive names weren't directed at her.
It's much worse that they were directed towards an entire group.  Or maybe
you just admire ethnic slander in terms of cost-efficiency, a sort of
more-bang-for-the-buck maximization of intolerance where it's a question of
offending the greatest number with the least amount of effort, and simply
admire the mechanism by which it's been accomplished?

	This isn't an issue of free speech.  Well, maybe.  The coder is free
to name her/his/its variables what they like, all ethical issues aside, and
equally free to live with the consequences of those actions, which should
have been the company not using something so vastly unprofessional and
guaranteed to eventually open them up to a suit like this.  There are
standards of behavior in a workplace that are slightly more restrictive than
standing on a soapbox on the quad.  A software company's code is an internal
company document.  The code that you write at home is your document.  You
may find this distinction instructive.

I'm sorry to digress, since this isn't why the article was originally
posted, but I was forced to succumb to the troll.  Free speech is essential
in an open society.   Freedom from discrimination is essential in a
democracy.   Carry on.


> ----------
> From: 	William H. Geiger III[SMTP:whgiii@openpgp.net]
> Reply To: 	lacc@suburbia.net
> Sent: 	Tuesday, August 25, 1998 6:24 PM
> To: 	lacc@suburbia.net
> Cc: 	proff@suburbia.net; aucrypto@suburbia.net; cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: 	LACC: Re: Is hate code speech?
> 
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> In <Pine.SUN.3.91.980825155854.3483A-100000@baker>, on 08/25/98 
>    at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
> 
> >On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> 
> >> <sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What
> a
> >> crock. 
> 
> >	Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally*
> >	calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken.
> >	Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just
> >	jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost 
> >	his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross
> >	in our front lawn.  Woops!  Those damn PC-mongers are 
> >	making it a crime to jog!
> 
> Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken
> who are you to tell me I can't?
> 
> >	One note:  I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win
> >	on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech."
> >	If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it 
> >	wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.	
> 
> But they didn't. There is no proof that any of theses variable names were
> written to be directed at her and the majority of them were written
> *before* she ever started working there!!
> 
> - -- 
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------
> William H. Geiger III  http://www.openpgp.net
> Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0
> 
> Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
> PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
> OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Not just another pretty program loader!
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3a-sha1
> Charset: cp850
> Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000
> 
> iQCVAwUBNeM6Qo9Co1n+aLhhAQEHMAP+OdR38utDHJd4s8r3/fTVedI+xH9A+lNX
> CU/yeqOx2Y9P8K/ol1wdLf4U3Dzv3VZ+CvRUmVB4juRdFBTnor7wrS3CQiQ1krut
> K3nLi7HtUqb92VD55eCM4W61c67lqLTD7TTXW2p6sHm8ti3NgK1fGfRPTSk5Ay9S
> j2tEl6HI5P8=
> =jRNy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <6B5344C210C7D011835C0000F8012766020BB4B0@exna01.securitydynamics.com>,
on 08/26/98 
   at 02:27 PM, "Francis, Catherine" <cfrancis@securitydynamics.com> said:

>I worry that, in the process of laying all this flame-bait, y'all are
>hoping that naive people might think that a job where there's racial and
>sexual hate-speech isn't a hostile work environment.  Putting this sort
>of language in code does not shelter it from co-workers.

1: In a free and open society one should be able to debate and analyze any
topic of their choosing, even your precious PC dogma. Rather than debate
the issues at hand you choose to use words like "flame-bait" and "troll"
in a weak and obvious attempt to minimize any criticism of your cherished
beliefs.

2: y'all <-- We wouldn't be trying to make an subtle ethnic slur here are
we. Oh I forgot the PC crowd can attack whites, jews, asians (if they make
too much money), southerners, ...ect and that's ok. Do you do this at
work? Are you creating a "hostile workplace" with your anti-souther bais??
Do you see how silly this whole "hostile workplace" concept is??

3: please define "hate-speech" and show where in the 1st Amendments or the
numerous SC ruling that there is "Freedom of Speech" except for speech
that *you* don't like. Please explain where your "right" not to be offened
is derived from.

>	It doesn't matter that the offensive names weren't directed at her. It's
>much worse that they were directed towards an entire group.  Or maybe you
>just admire ethnic slander in terms of cost-efficiency, a sort of
>more-bang-for-the-buck maximization of intolerance where it's a question
>of offending the greatest number with the least amount of effort, and
>simply admire the mechanism by which it's been accomplished?

>	This isn't an issue of free speech.  Well, maybe.  The coder is free to
>name her/his/its variables what they like, all ethical issues aside, and
>equally free to live with the consequences of those actions, which should
>have been the company not using something so vastly unprofessional and
>guaranteed to eventually open them up to a suit like this.  There are
>standards of behavior in a workplace that are slightly more restrictive
>than standing on a soapbox on the quad.  A software company's code is an
>internal company document.  The code that you write at home is your
>document.  You may find this distinction instructive.


This is strictly an issue of free speech. Wether you *like* what I have to
say is not an issue, I still retain the right to say it. The fact of
*where* I say it is irrelevant. If I want to tell a dirty joke, or make a
"racist" comment at work that is my *right* to do so. If my employer
objects to that behavior then it is his right to take whatever action he
feels necessary (upto and including fireing me). This is a matter between
myself and my employer and does not involve the courts or the politicians.

>I'm sorry to digress, since this isn't why the article was originally
>posted, but I was forced to succumb to the troll.  Free speech is
>essential in an open society.   Freedom from discrimination is essential
>in a democracy.   Carry on.

Oh no, you were not "forced", you willfully jumped right in with your
emotional dribble, fearful of open, objective, debate of your precious PC
dogma.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.openpgp.net
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: Windows?  Homey don't play that!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a-sha1
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNeRdFo9Co1n+aLhhAQErrAP/Qbb1Y50R7kKXaCs3V1EZZTmeCjZRiFVY
OZm6wJcP7fy/oI1TYXE3Pio21+tOZdizy4xISiydLcjgXx6YzwYLJIZh8lAskcHl
e/2/65X4oV9dWJYdTW+tbtOYLOY+qy8kGT/A1FOsotknPvy+0k/n2pVSNufBOQpg
LBPbuFSX6HU=
=Zsad
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Sorry, but you've got it slightly wrong, or maybe you don't...

|
| I'm sorry to digress, since this isn't why the article was originally
| posted, but I was forced to succumb to the troll.  Free
| speech is essential
| in an open society.   Freedom from discrimination is essential in a
| democracy.   Carry on.

"Free speech is essential in an open society." Yup, true enough.

"Freedom from discrimination is essential in a democracy." Well, maybe.

I do take notice of your change in terms, there. All democracy means is mob
rule. We don't live in a democracy, and I think you should be glad you
don't.

Frankly, I think a better observation would follow the form of your first
one - "Freedom to discriminate is essential in an open society."

The phrase "Freedom from..." has always meant a curtailing of freedom, in my
experience.