10/16   OK, plea from me (and a lot of others, I'm sure):  write what you
        want to, who cares, that's the whole point, but when you've written
        it, please please please just take a second to read it through and
        ask yourself, "is tihs teh ghei or n0es?"  I'm not asking anyone to
        self-censor based on whether they write stupid shit, no matter what
        they're trying to get across, but just ask yourself that quick
        question.  It doesn't take long, is great practice for life, and helps
        save put off the point at which we reach peak byte.  -John
        \_ Well, amckee has mistakenly sorried one person (since remedied),
           and he has threatened to sorry at least one more (me), for content
           that he finds objectionable.  In my case, because I quoted him
           self-describing his role in the Politburo.  Does this sound like a
           person can "write what you want"?   - tse
           \_ Yes, it does.  They're not sending you to fucking siberia, they're
              threatening to turn off an email account.  I'll write exactly
              what the fuck I want until the minute they turn off my account,
              and so should you.
           \_ Yes, it does.  The whole discussion is moronic on the scale of
              galaxies (both the fact that some measures like this have been
              proposed at all and peoples' reaction to them.)  Look up "tempest
              in a teapot."  Threatening to sorrying alumni (or anyone) for
              stupid shit like this is about as mature as saying "you go home
              now, you can't play with my toys anymore.  The only proper
              reaction is to just leave.  It's a fucking _account_, and if
              someone doesn't want to let you play with their toys anymore,
              guess what, it's a nice day outside.  -John
              \_ It's more than an account. Some of us old farts have been
                 around here for decades. soda is the occasional meetingplace
                 where get to poke each other and say hi. That is why CSUA has
                 been described as a social club as opposed to a hardcore
                 techie org. Nice as it is outside, I'd rather hang here and
                 piss off tse and psb. Feel the love!
                 \_ Alas, since I refused to toe the line amckee drew for me
                    by continuing to criticize him on MOTD, I am afraid I will
                    likely be sorried shortly after the next Politburo meeting.
                    It has been 19 years since my first cc account.  I was
                    hoping to make it 20 before I call it quits.  - tse
                    But at least I will be sorried following the official
                    process rather than at the whim of amckee.  I will
                    probably count that as a small pyrrhic victory. - tse
                    \_ This is all frightfully stupid.  Amckee wrote some
                       self-indulgent, stupid mails, psb was being difficult
                       as always, and the CSUA moves on.  Stop being such a
                       drama queen.  -John (only 15 years, alas.)

10/16   I was walking in downtown SF today and I think I saw
        blojo walking past me, I was thinking of flagging him down
        and telling him how much pain and suffering turning on the
        'write' bit for all on /etc/motd was causing but then I decided
        it wasn't worth the effort. - danh
        \_ Are you the father of /etc/motd.public?

10/16   are people really getting sorried for hurting
        politburo's feelings in email?
        \_ In motd.  amckee sorried one person and threatened to sorry at
           least one more.  That was just Saturday.
        \_ I'm an alumnus who has donated to the hardware fund, and likes the
           MOTD the way it is, not that that seems to matter. I also just read
           amckee's e-mails to psb.
           - Why should I donate anymore if there really is a chance my
             account could be taken away?
           - Why should I donate anymore when the money is incompetently spent
             on hardware that doesn't work with BSD?
           - [Deleted entry about hardware purchasing incompetence and BSD,
              since anyone can make that mistake. And I
              appreciate all the officers' and VP's hard work.]
           Sorry I missed the whole brouhaha, but some clarifying statements
           from the Politburo seem in order.

10/16   C'mon people, stop threatening to not hire anyone, or sorrying
        people.
        \_ I agree, that was done in very poor taste.  Amckee has put
           a _lot_ of work into this organization and just because you
           disagree with him is no justification for the threats.  You
           have also disproved the benefit that the alumni offer, this is
           like counter-networking, not offering csua members jobs but
           making sure that a csua member is not hired.  You certainly should
           be ashamed of yourself. -mrauser
           \_ "Go go mrauser networking skills!"
           \_ No one guarantees anyone a job.  If there is an offer of help,
              the offer has been to help when a fellow csua-er seems
              competent and reasonable, or at least doesn't seem incompetent
              and unreasonable.  It's not about the decision to de-anonymize
              motd; it's about amckee's response to criticism afterwards.
              Looking dispassionately at his emails wth Partha and his posts
              on motd, does he seem like a reasonable person to you?  Does
              he seem like someone you would want to work with?
              Looking dispassionately at his emails and his posts on motd,
              does he seem like a reasonable person to you?  Does he seem like
              someone you would want to work with?
              \_ Much of the psb emails were taken out of context, he really
                 was being sort of a pain.  He would retort to an argument
                 with a completely sarcastic comment that deserved no response.
                 That said, no matter how I feel about how amckee acts I would
                 never start a "blacklist" campaign.  Thats obscene.  YOU are
                 welcome to not hire him all you want but its truly not fair
                 to go out of your way to ensure that hes not hired anywhere
                 else. -mrauser
                 \_ Give the grownups a little credit.  We're not all that
                    amazingly juvenile.  -John
                 \_ do you really think sorrying someone over 'being
                    annoying in email to politburo/root' is valid?
                    you should read my mailspool, it would make
                    you cry. - danh
                    \_ No, I don't think that, nor do I believe I said that.
                       I thought I just said it isn't right to organize a
                       "blacklisting" movement.  -mrauser
                       \_ I must be reading The Psb Files in a different
                          language than you.  I think you threaten to
                          sorry psb for being annoying.  Or maybe it's
                          someone else.  I must admit I get the logins of
                          current politburo members confused.   Also, you got
                          trolled pretty hard, it happens to most people
                          eventually.
                          \_ I think if you will look at emails that I sent
                             the word sorry does not appear in them at all
                             (although I'm not positive).  Please aim your
                             flame more selectively. ;) -mrauser
                             \_ If it had been a flame, you would have noticed
                                real quick.  -John
>To: amckee@berkeley.edu, psb@ucsee.eecs.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: Character attacks
>Cc: politburo@csua.berkeley.edu
>From: "Partha S. Banerjee,,," <psb@ucsee.eecs.berkeley.edu>
>Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:16:47 -0700
>>This is your first and last warning, Partha. If I continue to see character
>>assassinations against any member of the politburo, myself included, I will
>>sorry your account. If I continue to see defamation against my character, I
>>will file for a restraining order against you that bars you from your
>>behavior. No friends that you think you have on the 'inside' will be able
>>to help you. I have no tolerance for your bullshit and I am keeping a log
>>of the things you say which, so far, have been happily easy to attribute to
>>you. If you wish to debate an issue or represent a political idea, do so as
>>an adult. You're welcome to come to the next Politburo meeting and discuss
>>the concerns you have, but you will not be able to hide behind a computer
>>screen and cast your vitriol on our servers.
                 \_ It seems to me that a "blacklist" campaign based on a flame
                    war over a text file would have the main result of causing
                    people to think that Berkeley CS grads are raving lunatics.
                    \- look i am getting fed up with this "out of context"
                       comment. i have "released" essentially all the context.
                       at this point you have to claim people lack comprehensio$
                       at this point you have to claim people lack comprehension
                       or intelligence. because what they are NOT lacking are
                       the bits and the bytes. the only think i didnt make
                       public is mr. mckee last reply to me, because it seems
                       like in that case he sort of asked me not to make
                       it public. is "being a pain" and sarcasm in the
                       evergrowing lists of sorryable offenses? i shall now
                       enjoy my iftar chicken. --psb
                       \_ I only say out of context because not every email
                          was posted there (I'm almost certain I had 2-3 more
                          replies to you than the one I saw).  And Some innane
                          comments you made were:
*While we respect your right to be a complete troll and to voice your
>
do you know what troll means?
just curious.
*there might be an 'easier' solution to them.
>
we might even call it "the final solution".
happy belated yom kippur.
                          There was also another one, but I don't want to
                          bother to find it in my emails.  -mrauser
                          \_ Are you saying you *want* Partha to publish every
                             email that passed between him and members of the
                             Politburo concerning the motd policy change?  And
                             that would satisfy in your mind the question
                             whether amckee was quoted out of context?  Is
                             this an official Politburo position?
                             \_  Thankyou for scewing my words.  I said that
                                 it was out of context because not all the
                                 emails were published, it was not a request
                                 for him to publish them.  I was the one who
                                 originally told him I was fine with him
                                 publishing them, but I would prefer he not,
                                 just because it will create more and more
                                 spam (of which I don't intend to reply) but
                                 he is free to post any emails he wishes
                                 (unless in that email amckee asked him to not
                                 post it). -mr
                                 \_ It seems somewhat disingenuous to on one
                                    hand not to want psb to publish all the
                                    hand to not allow psb to publish all the
                                    emails and on the other hand castigate him
                                    as "quoting out of context" for not
                                    publishing all the emails.
                             \- The above quotes are (already) included at:

                             \- The above quotes are included at:
                                 http://home.lbl.gov:8080/~psb/Articles/CSUA
                                The only psb-pburo email not included
                                there is one sent to me after the above
                                quote [and thus arguably not relevant to
                                assessing my state of mind and intentions
                                writing the above]. I certainly would
                                be happy to reciprocally trade your right
                                to "release" all of my email if I have the
                                same right with the pburo emails. The only
                                email not on the site above is this one:
                                  From amckee@berkeley.edu Sat Oct 15 14:39:04
                                  To: "Partha S. Banerjee
                                  CC: politburo@csua.berkeley.edu
                                which ends with a post script saying he
                                did not give me persmission to share his
                                emails. which certainly was not my impression
                                and i leave it to the spectators to judge
                                that for themselves. i personally think it
                                was courteous for me to ask. i think i
                                should have unilateral right to share
                                email sent to me about me in his official
                                capacity as the csua president. So if
                                mr. mckee wants to "relese" me w.r.t. to
                                the last email, then we can truely say
                                the record is complete and people can make
                                their own decisions. --psb
                                \_ The decision I've made is that both psb
                                   and amckee are idiots and should get
                                   a life outside of motd. -neutral guy
                                   \- i have a lot of free time during
                                      ramadan. khudah hafiz. --psb
                                      ramadan. --psb

10/15   As recent ('05) alumnus, I'm very disturbed about the tone being taken
        towards alumni by the current pburo. Is this because of bad feelings
        towards people like psb & etc for bitching about the MOTD change, or
        is it really about the mass alumni community? I found the (recent)
        alumni community to be an invaluable resource to me when I was a student;
        I even attended social functions with 'geezers' like nevman and felt
        enriched for it. I never partied with nweaver, though. Everyone is
        right about networking, but I think that the CSUA alumni community
        goes beyond that. It's just a pretty freaking awesome group of people!
        Where else could I go and have a handful of people spend three hours
        recovering my fubared laptop hdd (thanks ajani, vadim, mconst!) and
        then laugh with me at my stupidity? Current members are running the
        CSUA, no ifs or buts about it. But I hope amckee is not representative
        of the majority of pburo or current memberships when he asks "Why
        should we even allow alumni on our servers?" The whole point is that
        alumni have jobs and lives and our servers are what really creates
        the crossroads for the alumni community to flourish. Would you rather
        have irc.csua be for current csua members and make dbushoung delink
        and run an irc server for alumni? A serious schism between alumni
        and current membership strikes me as the worst thing that could come
        out of the MOTD changes, whatever happens. -jhs
        \_ I have been fortunate to have worked with several alumni, and
           almost all of these interactions have been positive and rewarding.
           The politburo, and me, have nothing but respect and admiration
           for the vast majority of alumni. Hell, we even respect psb. However,
           there is a very vocal miniority of alumni that are helping to
           derail the CSUA. As others have said, the alumni are an invaluable
           resource - for jobs, for insight, for a million things. However,
           how likely is it that the majority of them - reasonable, level-headed,
           non-trollish peoplt that they are - will look to the CSUA with
           repect, given the environment that we're seeing here in the MOTD? If
           I had a job opening, of which I've represented many in the past,
           I most certainly would not take it to an environment that appeared
           to be filled with petulant children, as I would argue we see here.
            \_ No, you'd take it to individual people whom you've seen provide
               a high signal to noise ratio compared to the petulant children.
               Trust me, people are grown-up enough to know not to rely on
               the tenor of a publicly writeable text file as a primary means
               for judging the membership of an organization.  -John
           It's not that the majority of CSUA alumni are like this, far from it,
           it's just that the vocal minority of ones that are seem to
           disproportionally represent the 'culture' of the CSUA. So yes, we're
           frustrated with some of the alumni that you see here, but that in no
           way translates to all of them. Hell, perhaps some of them would even
           come back into the fold, if they didn't think this would end up like
           some kindergarten in the Bronx. And no, there are no plans to boot
           alumni - that was never a proposition. What was said was that we
           put a *LOT* of effort into this environment, mainly used by alumni,
           and the generosity of this does not seem to be appreciated. We're
           not a free ISP, we're a professional student organization, and it's
           only reasonable that we have -some- expectations out of how we use
           our servers. Like, "don't act like children". We desperately want
           alumni to be a more important part of this organization, but we
           need to constantly evaluate whether that is happening and what we
           can do to improve it. And, it's important to note, the 'alumni
           commmunity' stretches much wider than the MOTD audience, and we
           try to keep that perspective in mind, as well. Not only will a
           slightly less  hostile MOTD be good for new students, it may
           very well attract more alumni who have been turned off on it.
           -amckee
           \_ Just as a tiny piece of advice, if I may be so bold, consider
              paring down your essays a bit and working on making a point
              in a more succinct manner--it's more effective.  -John
        \_ And the "why should we allow alumni.." quote was a rhetorical one,
           intended to solicit retrospection and perspective. Communicating
           subtleties of intent are often difficult in 'informal' environments
           like this, and there's at least a fair chance that much of the
           animosity comes from both sides misinterpreting the intentions of
           the other. As always, talking about things like this face to face
           is always far more productive. Alumni are always welcome to
           attend politburo meetings (Mondays @@ 7pm) and share their thoughts.
           As people like mconst and dlong  can attest to, we (and I, especially)
           make a lot of effort to solicit their views. An alumni representative
           actually sat with us during the MOTD debate and provided more insight
           and dialog than any other participant in the audience (politburo
           included). This insight was invaluable. We ultimately decided on
           the side of anonymity, which was not the position they represented,
           but it helped give us a much deeper perspective. If you feel strongly
           about something, then the place to broach that is in person at our
           meetings. To be honest, with all the emotion on the MOTD, it's hard
           to take things too seriously - and it's easy to get into too 'defensive'
           a mode of debate. And as much of an apparent schism as seems to exist,
           this almost always collapses when you realize that the person on the
           other side of the debate is an actual 'person'. -amckee
           \_ Above, you write "we ultimately decided on the side of
              anonymity"?  In the minutes of the meeting, I thought
              the 4-1 vote to "Modify the system" was a vote to
              institute motd logging?  Please explain.
              \_ I typed too quickly. We decided to enable a provision such
                 that, in extreme circumstances, the politburo could identify
                 the source of an motd edit and deal with them offline, through
                 our normal disciplinary channels. This would never include
                 de-anonymizing them to the motd. amckee
           \_ It seems clear that the decision to deanon is one for the pburo
              to make. The most reasonable complaint I've heard is that the
              proposal was not structured or formalized well. This seems fair,
              and it may be that the MOTD's importance to some alumni was
              underestimated? Putting in the effort to get both a technical
              solution and a policy that is robust and as liberal as possible
              seems worth it (especially if alumni can be made to do most of the
              work?). But I'll likewise agree that some of the same people who
              are complaining the loudest don't seem to understand the reality of
              today's student body, and don't give credit when credit is due
              to the work put in by the current pburo. Of course this is *some*
              people, I've seen plenty of jvarga props in the last few months.
              -jhs
              \_ And yes, jvarga deserves definite props. We sometimes ride
                 him a bit hard, but he's always had what he felt was the
                 best interests of the CSUA at heart. We may disagree occasionally,
                 but he's been one of the most self-sacrificing individuals I've
                 known. -amckee
              \_ The decision I actually proposed was more alumni friendly
                 than what was originally proposed, in my opinion. We
                 decided that we needed the capability to identify motd edit
                 authors, but I wanted to leave the implementation
                 (technical and theorhetical) largely up to the alumni. This
                 got thrown back in our face as "we don't want to eat your
                 dog food". Reasonable, but perhaps more rooted out of
                 initial frustration. Although we aren't negotiable on the
                 need for the provision, we're pretty flexible on how it's
                 done and we're fairly open to suggestions on how
                 disciplinary action should be handled. My own idea was that
                 if someone is making threatening, slanderous, or hostile
                 attacks or comments against another person - the sort of
                 things that you would not expect to find in a work place or
                 professional environment - that we need to be able to deal
                 with that person. In most circumstances, this would
                 probably start out with a warning. In circumstances like
                 the one that initially prompted this whole mess, it might
                 lead straight to sorrying.  As with all such disciplinary
                 actions, this is a matter decided upon by the
                 politburo. (Granted, if someone is being a real pest, an
                 officer or root staff may need to temp-sorry them until a
                 vote can be made.) At no point did we ever discuss or
                 suggest that we would "tell the world" who the offender
                 was, that'd just be silly - especially since most of us
                 don't even use the MOTD. For the most part, it'd probably
                 be a system such that we only got involved if someone
                 complained (or how else would we know about it?)
                 Hopefully, once tempers calm down, we can get some more
                 productive suggestions on a solution that is as palatable
                 as possible to the users of the forum.  - amckee

10/16   How exactly did "make motd anon, semi-anon, or non-anon" turn into some
        hostile "students/politburo vs. alum" hate fest?  I keep reading stuff
        that strongly implies that "total anon motd" is the "what alums want"
        and a "logged motd (of some sort)" is what "students/politburo wants".
        This is clearly not the case.  Some alums want a totally anon motd,
        some want a semi-anon motd and others have wanted it completely
        non-anon going back many years.  Given that the vote on this vaguely
        defined motion was not unanimous in pburo and that they have "already
        spent over 50 hours" discussing and dealing with it, it seems like
        "the students/pburo" aren't of a single mind either.  This whole
        students vs alums thing is a red herring that seems intended to
        misdirect the entire non/anon motd discussion.  Unfortunately, it
        seems to have succeeded. :-(   Wake up, the strings are being pulled.
        \_ I was with you up till that last line.  Who's pulling the
           strings?  The Illuminati?
           strings?  The Illuminaiti?
           \_ It's not a conspiracy.  There's someone who wants us to not talk
              about the real issue but to babble about this us vs them,
              students vs alum nonsense.  If not we wouldn't have been
              diverted off the original topic on to this hatred garbage.
              I'm asking everyone to ignore that noise and go back to the
              real issue: the motd and how to make it not suck.
              \_ Are you saying we got Karl Roved?  --PeterM
        \_ The issue is that the politburo has decided that it wants to make
           a change (whether it was unaninmous or not is not really germane).
           There is an uproar about the change, and I am confident that 100%
           of the people who are complaining about the idea are not current
           students.  I think it is quite difficult to argue that the MOTD
           in its current state serves the CSUA's active members, and
           similarly hard to argue that the proposed change will have any
           deleterious effect on MOTD discussion.  -tom
           \_ So what does qualify for being on the motd? HW and test answers?
              Sunshine, pretty flowers, fuzzy wuzzy bunny rabbits and baby
              \_ Don't fuck wih Fuzzy Bunnies.  -John
              chicks, and meeting announcements? Does the motd get to be a
              disasterous insane and inane public forum or the same chirpy,
              go-CSUA-happy-happy-joy-joy message every day? What is the
              politburo's "vision" of the motd?
              \_ Complete non sequitur and red herring.  -tom
                 \_ Not really. If I don't want to be sorried for posting to
                    the motd, what are the rules? If there are no rules, well,
                    just say so and note that people will be sorried by fiat.
                    If you know what will best serve the active members of
                    the CSUA in the motd, I'd be happy to read it.
                    \_ How about, the exact same as the rules about being
                       sorried for walling.  It's not that complicated to
                       figure out what you should and shouldn't do.  And
                       that's completely separate from the question of
                       whether usage should be logged (as it is in every
                       other form of electronic communication).  -tom
                       \_ And the official wall rules are? And as shown over
                          the weekend, logging can lead to arbitary sorrying.
                          Changed this time, but still sets an interesting
                          precedent. What is the politburo's vision of what
                          the CSUA should be? (not really directed at tom
                          per se, but an open question)
                          \_ Actually, it was lack of logging that led to
                             arbitrary sorrying; if the MOTD were logged,
                             you would never sorry "the wrong man."  -tom
                             \_ I think it's more unchecked ego than lack
                                of logging that led to arbitrary sorrying
                                in this case.

10/16   So, what happens to shareholders in a mutual fund if the mutual fund
        company goes belly-up?
        \_ I imagine they stand in line with the other Chapter 7 bankruptcy
           debtors. They probably stand pretty close to the front though.
           \_ That sounds mighty suspicious. -op
        \_ The "mutual fund company" just manages the fund. Each fund is its
           own separate entity under the Investment Act of 1930something, and
           owns its assets on behalf of its shareholders, with its own
           board and everything. The managers and its debtors have no legal
           claim on the fund's assets.
           \_ So if the mutual fund place closes shop, do they liquidate the
              funds and return to shareholders, or what?
              \_ yes.

10/16   Setting up /etc/motd.public, 10 seconds.
        Posting motd, 100 hours.
        Writing a stupid and unreliable logger that can be easily fooled
                via scp and other mechanisms, 10 hours.
        Squishing someone based on the unreliable logger, priceless.
        \_ Re stupid and unreliable logger -- are you talking about the
           proposed one or the current one that a user created?
           ... oh yeah, you're talking about the current one.  I guess that's
           all the more reason to create the proposed one! </troll>

10/16   I accidently overwrote a file in my home dir.  Is there a process
        where I can request the version of this file from, say, 1 month
        ago?  Or are there even backups/archives like this at all?
        \_ mail root
        \_ Yes, backups do exist.  Right now, they are not mounted, so
           you will need to email root.  Be aware that backups do rotate out,
           and are currently being sporadically manually done, so email sooner
           than later -- njh (the guy who runs backups)
           \_ Thanks!!  Now that I think about it, I might actually have my
              own backup from the time I want, though it would be on a PC
              that I don't have access to today.  I'll check for my own
              backup before emailing root, but it's good to know that root
              can help me if necessary.  Thanks!  -op

10/16   Dear danh, geordan, psb, peterl, tse, lafe, mice, john, and many
        others who have been posting on motd. I'd suggest you guys stop
        publicly criticizing amckee because he has no problem squishing
        all of you. I'd take his threat seriously as he already squished
        someone who threatened to blacklist him at HRs and headhunters
        throughout Silicon Valley. I for one will stop saying anything
        bad on motd because I value my soda account.    -fearful alumus
        \_ Troll troll troll your boat  -John
        \_ funny, these are among the members who have consistently
           provided the most support when I've ran into horrible technical
           problems during the course of my work and have turned to the
           motd or wall for help.  -sax
           \- I have a feeling Mr. Tse will be unavailable when the pburo
              is looking for HSPICE help or hotel recommendations on the
              Cote d'Azur. :-) --psb
              \_ 1 for 2.  No Cote d'Azur for me.  Even you should remember
                 my dislike of the French.  My advice is to go to Valencia,
                 Hotel Ad Hoc Monumental.  I can answer most questions spice
                 and verilog related though. -tse
              \_ I've evolved beyond spice and cote d'azur.  - tse
        \_ You remind me of the grad students who accuse the grad student
           union people of "intimidation" because they're annoying, and claim
           that grad students live in fear of "union intimidation tactics".
           "Union intimidation tactics" means coming by your lab and trying to
           get you to go drink coffee and hear about their union.  You only
           have to tell them to fuck off and threaten to call the cops on them
           once, and they *never* come back, and mark your entire department
           as "anti union", avoiding that whole section of the building.
           Just as blathering about a union is not "intimidation", threatening
           to turn off an email account is not a serious threat.
           Have you also started to self-censor what books you check out from
           the library because the feds might come after you?
        \_ Heh, thanks for looking out for me, man.     -mice
        \_ I think you need to relax. Nobody is going to get squished
           for their motd post without a politburo vote. -mbh, vp
           \_ Didn't amckee sorry Brett (and then had to unsorry him when it
              turns out Brett was the wrong guy)?  Did amckee manage to sorry
              the right guy eventually?
                \_ It is rather amusing that after politburo members
                   pedantically promise to be fair and impartial after
                   they possibly implement motd logging, and after
                   politburo members write, at length, about how reasonable
                   and wise they are...  one of them goes off the handle
                   and sorries someone for strange reasons.  I guess
                   sorrying someone is a lot easier than emailing someone.
                   Anyway I don't have much of anything useful to add,
                   please don't destroy the CSUA, it's been nice knowing
                   many of you. - danh
              \_ Yes, that was a mistake and amckee has acknowledged it.
                 That kind of impulsive sorrying is not the regular course
                 of action. -mbh
                 \_ What CSUA policy has the person posting about the
                    "blacklist" violated?
                     \_ None, it was just a troll -mbh
                        \- just for clarification: is the mbh position
                           "the user who posted the blacklist post should
                            not have been sorried because he was just
                            'trolling'". while the acmkee position is
                            he should have been sorried, but because we
                            do not know who it is we cannot do so, but if
                            we do discover who it is, then we will sorry
                            the user? i inquire because there are a lot of
                            thoughts attributed to "the politburo" and it
                            seems like they are not of one mind here. --psb
                            \_ I apologize I should be more clear when speaking
                               on behalf of the CSUA. psb you stated my opinion
                               clearly. That post should have read "my position
                               would be to ignore it". -mbh
                 \_ Is there an established CSUA process to sorry someone?
                    Is there an established CSUA policy to punish root staff
                    who arbitrarily sorries someone without following
                    the established process?  Is there a plan to follow
                    the established policies and punishments in this case?
                    \_ I read through the CSUA constitution and
                       /csua/adm/doc/policies, and it appears that the rules
                       are VERY non-specific, probably intentionally.  Now,
                       if you wanted a heavyweight approach to policies ...
                       \_ It seems to be up to the discretion of the
                          politburo.  I am guessing nothing will be done.
                          Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
        \_ Whatever.  I'll say whatever the hell I want.  I've made backups
           of my homedir here.  Oh noes, amckee might flip out and wield
           his AWESOME POWER and squish me.  It's fine, learn 2 govern.
           -geordan
           \_ You go geordan! Go kick ass the same way you kicked Susan
              Graham's ass in 164... or not. :)
              \_ Savage Susan is still terrorizing undergrads in 164?  Wow.
              \_ You make a good point.  I'm nowhere near as Powerful as
                 amckee.  That's probably why I've never been christened as
                                 a 'Critical Asset'. -geordan
                 \_ Stop it, your minority voice is gonna cause every single
                    alumni to be squished. There goes 30 years of tradition
              \_ Yes, and amckee has acknowledged the mistake. And there is no
                 'right guy' either because the post was a troll.
                 and that kind of impulsive sorrying will not happen. -mbh
        \_ I'm pretty sure I didn't actually post anything
           about amckee. --peterl
           \_ You don't have to actually post anything.  amckee just has to
              think you posted something.  And the post doesn't necessarily
              have to do with amckee; he just has to think it does. - tse
              \_ Btw, I've told all the opera companies I've sung with not
                 to hire amckee.  Yes, he has the voice of an angel, but
                 his diva 'tude and doesn't-play-nice-with-others issues
                 makes him impossible to work with.  --not-scotsman
                 \_ that's right kid! you'll never work in Broadway again.
                 \_ Was amckee a Critical Opera Asset too?

10/16   dear motd financial adviser,
        i'm interested in learning about investing in the stock market and
        would like to hear recommendations about books to read on this
        subject. I am not looking for general advice on "what to do with your
        money" but specific advice on methods and strategies for picking
        stocks and mutual funds to invest in for someone without a lot of
        experience and no background in economics.
        \_ Wow, psb hasn't answered yet.  I'm incapable of imitating psb, but
           he would tell you to read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street."  ok tnx.
           \- 1. i was at the opera. 2. good advice. --OTpsb
        \_ I would read a Peter Lynch book.  Then I would try yahoo finance
           and all the news on the particular stock you are interested in.
           WSJ is always good, and Economist helps too, but is not
           essential, since it doesn't need to be too complicated.  The
           basic but important things are careful research on the company
           (the industry it is in, competitors, products, business model,
           risks, valuation, etc. etc.), patience and discipline
           (let good stock run, cut loss early on bad picks).
           Also, resist the urge to start trading instead of investing.
           Of course, don't forget asset allocation, but I have mixed
           feelings about that.  I think sometimes one should go for it.
           If you can do the above well, you should be fine.  You can
           learn other more fanciful, but not necessarily more useful,
           stuff as you go along.  Before buying a stock, be able to
           give a 1 minute explanation on why you are getting it, and
           what are the possible risks and downsides for the stock.
           Oh, also Smartmoney magazine is pretty decent for picking stocks
           and funds.
        \_ start with Investing for Dummies or Personal Finance for Dummies.
           After that, let us know.
           \_ in addition, that Peter Lynch book, and maybe also
              writings by William O'Neil (How to Make Money in Stocks),
              and Jim Cramer (latest book).
           \_ http://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/03/050803.asp

10/16   So any sun old timers still reading the motd? I was recently named a
        SARC "intern" and I wanted to find out if anyone has been through the
        "intern" process and if they had any tips/pointers. txn.
        \_ I'm a Sun "old timer" in several ways, especially if you count me
           playing with the first prototypes when I was 11 years old ... I
           was a Sun intern in summer of 1991 and had a blast.  My take from
           that was that if you actually do useful work and get anything
           accomplished you can get a job there once you graduate (I did).
           You get to meet Scott McNealy and hear his puppy calendar stories
           and for me it was the most fun I've ever had in a job, especially
           with the huge water battle between SunSoft and SunLabs. -eric
           \_ maybe I wasn't clear - I'm a staff eng at sun and I was put
              on the Software ARC (arch. review committee), and I wanted
              to get some pointers on what ARC members do, &c.
                \_ Nope that wasn't clear.  I joined Sun as an MTS-1 and only
                   worked there 2 1/2 years so I never got anywhere in that
                   regard -eric
              \_ neato.  sounds like a paper pushing job.
                 \_ From what I can tell it is mostly paper pushing, but
                    this is in addition to my regular job, so it just
                    means more work for me.

10/16   These are some conditions and precepts so that morally aware youth do
        not inadvertently imitate heretics and polytheists when playing
        soccer ... Hell awaits those who die playing soccer according to rules
        established by heretical countries, at the head of which is America.
        http://NYTimes.com: http://csua.org/u/dqm
        \_ "6. Do not play in two halves. Rather play in one half or three
           halves..."  Hmm.. someone need to look up the meaning of "half."
           \_ Why do you hate Allah?

10/16   The Slacker's New Bible: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5698558