From: “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@openpgp.net>
To: mcw@atreus.ncs.ncsc.mil
Message Hash: 0357409c2c64d3e14c5cc5e2d0f1c5dab3156ba2b13153a00791da81f7ea7c17
Message ID: <199808261721.MAA014.73@geiger.com>
Reply To: <9808261651.AA06929@atreus.noname>
UTC Datetime: 1998-08-26 17:14:09 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@openpgp.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
To: mcw@atreus.ncs.ncsc.mil
Subject: Re: Is Hate Code Speech?
In-Reply-To: <9808261651.AA06929@atreus.noname>
Message-ID: <199808261721.MAA014.73@geiger.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <9808261651.AA06929@atreus.noname>, on 08/26/98
at 11:51 AM, mcw@atreus.ncs.ncsc.mil said:
>I've searched the web and newsgroups several times, and found no mention
>of "Willa Jackson". I find it unlikely that this is real.
>Despite my respect for Mr. Geiger, I must disagree - I don't find the
>suit frivolous at all.
>Briefly, I think that anyone who maintains software will agree that
>naming variables & functions by any standard other than that of their
>function is poor programming practice, and impedes maintenance. Clearly
>the authors of the code had some intent other than that of writing
>maintainable code. The fact that there were one or more coherent themes
>in the names chosen indicates that their agenda was probably coherent.
>The fact that management took no action when informed of this indicates a
>complicity.
>In essence, I believe that we are all entitled to a workplace free of
>hate, and full of respect for our professional abilities. For sheer
>economic reasons, I think that the management of any responsible firm
>will act to ensure that (respect is worth quite a few $$ in
>compensation).
>I acknowledge that you're welcome to use whatever variable names you want
>in code you write in private. BUt if you want to sell that code, it
>should be held to a standard of professionalism.
Yes but should this "standard" be enforced by law? Last time I looked
there was no Constitutional right not to be offended. There is a very
strong Constitutional right to freedom of speech and the courts have long
ruled that it is not just popular speech that is protected.
IMHO, this whole matter is an internal company matter. The courts and
politicians should have no say in it.
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
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? WINDOWS?!? Hahahahahehehehehohohoho...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a-sha1
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000
iQCVAwUBNeREH49Co1n+aLhhAQFOMAP/XfSLbwpHMjGhoAdRX/lVsO1o8Esu+Zzk
xbTscHRO8Kw8pEHZkc3PJ9jX/sHy4sd5+LCul6sNjR1pK4s3zwkVAwd3/MbHuW4S
JoFBr6k/myD675LAMgYFpkecntmCN6XPxNmsLFtawPURMAUmu0vAyCgmM9w7smTo
VIcI3N6C3mU=
=mJTj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Return to August 1998
Return to “Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu>”