NanciNet Digest 8-29-03
// More discussion of the archives and privacy...
// enjoy... (?) [BP]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Archives and privacy
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:17:13 -0500
From: Bill Page (bpage3@earthlink.net>
One early autumn day in 1996, I received an email at my work address
(anybody remember when my address used to include "sparton.com"?). It
was
from a guy with an address from the same company, but who worked in our
facility in Michigan (I was then, smoe of you may remember, still in
Florida).
First he congratulated me on my wooing of the inimitable Dawn-Marie, and
then noted that he found my parodies funny, although he wasn't familiar
with
my source. He had used a search engine (not google) to look for emails
from
our domain, and had read not only my notes to the NN, but also some of
my
private notes to Dawn!
Although I was at first very angry, I have since appreciated that early
lesson into the public nature of the Internet. I have kept that in mind
over
the intervening years, always aware that nothing on the net is truly
private
unless it is, in today's world, closely guarded by encryption programs.
I have, for some time, continued to keep the NN in this venue, rather
than
moving it to one of the free sites such as Yahoo Groups. Certainly with
Yahoo my administrative burden would be next to nothing, we could keep
the
archives private, and we would have a space to share files and pictures,
etc.
We would also lose the personal approach that has characterized the
NNet.
While I understand the concerns voiced here in the recent days, I would
prefer to keep the status quo. If some of the suggestions about placing
guard bands around the files can work, that would be great, but it
wouldn't
bother me if we left the archives as they are.
It has been nice to see some old names pop up in the last couple of
weeks.
Where've y'all been?
Bill "my parodies didn't make it to the digests and archives anyway"
Page
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: "musikerin4u@yahoo.com" (musikerin4u@yahoo.com>
Poetmuse wrote:
"Aren't you guys sort of...I don't know, letting this get to you a bit
much?"
Hi Christina -- I can surely understand your point of view. However,
there are indeed some of us who are in certain professional or personal
situations where we need to guard ourselves a bit more around a certain
genre of people. Don't ask, just trust me.
But on a for-example basis, let me tell you that I have a very slick
and ill-meaning new boss here at my work, and find myself in the very
unfamiliar situation of having to guard my personal life with great
resolve. I don't want him to know anything about me that he would then
use against me -- yes, believe me, it has happened already. So, this
guy is pretty Internet-savvy..... let's say, he googles me and finds my
very open accounts about my life back in Germany and all sorts of other
personal things I've shared with you nancinetters in good faith over
the years. I believe I've addressed issues regarding my family, my
personal and political convictions, hobbies, religious/spiritual
orientation (maybe even my sexual orientation? ), some personal
heartbreaks, my view about the corporate world in which I make my
living, etc..... If there's any way I could help it, I wouldn't want
this guy to even know my maiden name !
So, it's not that we fear that someone would want to search for
suspicious folk music fans or NG followers -- it's that someone with a
personal agenda might want to see what this Christina Myers is all
about...... hmmm, let's see....... and VOILA ! , all your postings to
the NN in the past are there for that person to read. Some of us
have shared their pain about a break-up of a relationship; their
financial woes; problems with their kids; anecdotes from their younger
lives when we might have done a few stupid, maybe even illegal, things
..... etc. etc.
Conor's descriptions of possible scenarios, while highly speculative
and very funny indeed (I enjoyed your post, Conor!), are actually not
that far-fetched when you have a little insight into the workings of
this country's government and some of their agencies. Anything you
say can and will be used against you.
Yep, my plans to run for political office are thus shattered..... I
shudder to see my NanciNet musings plastered all over the gossip papers
-- can't you just see it in bold letters? "German Immigrant Tree
Nymph Bares All !" :):):)
And yes, you're absolutely right about getting a "pseudonym" which I
should have done consistently but didn't -- lesson learned. So,
going forward, there are a number of solutions to this dilemma. But
what about the past? The things I said before are the things I'm
worried about and those are obviously edged in stone forever unless and
until the archives are protected or removed.
Hmmmmm, should I re-read my post here and make it less honest? What
about my grammar and spelling? Will that come back to haunt me?
After all, I am at the brink of having some of my work published --
will today's post make potential fans think twice about me?
.................
Ah well, it's all in good fun. At least we finally had a bit of fire
back in this forum, eh? It's been so quiet lately -- all the fun
conversations seem to be taking place over at the nancinetcafe.
Donate (you know the one who used to post as 'DvBGardner'....)
P.S: For the record.... I say it here for once and for all for all
future employers, political foes, fans, readers, listeners, admirers,
new spouses or in-laws: I did NOT, repeat NOT, have a relationship
with that woman !
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Paranoia
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:48:46 +0100
From: "John Graveling" (kai21@dial.pipex.com>
Seems that there is a certain paranoia out there. Just because the
Americans, like us Brits, are governed by lying, deceitful, individuals
i.e.
Bush and Blair, why should that constrain us from speaking as we feel
and
find on music and life? Those wonderful Dixie Chicks arrive here
shortly for
their tour and Britain is embracing them and their stance. Rock on
girls. Of
course we don't want our troops killed in the Middle-East, but as the
parents of more and more soldiers are asking here, why did they go to
war?
The truth has not been told and until we rid our countries of Bush and
Blair, we may never find out. Now I am apoltical, but these men raise my
ackles and make my skin itch. It seems a shame that at present neither
country has any viable opposition, but that is no excuse to vote either
one
back into power, when the time comes. Unless of course they take the
honourable course of action, and resign. That seems unlikely as they
both
seem to believe that what they have done is right, and no amount of
democracy will pull them off that course. Democracy, now isn't the USA
supposed to be the land of the free, not the land of Bush repression?
John "speaks it like it is" Graveling
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Re: googled
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:05:29 EDT
From: Singingfem@aol.com
Hi all - I haven't been on this list in years; I resubbed after googling
myself. :-) Is wal@village.ios.com still on this list? Is Mark
Ferguson? We
were soldiers together in the time of the unidentified plastic object...
~Eireen (googled as Bonnianne)
"People talk about living one day at a time, which is good advice
except in
New York, where I preferred living every other day at a time. That way I
didn't have to move my car."- Cliff Eberhardt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Un-Googling the Archives
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: "David E. Mahaffey" (musemaker@oddpost.com>
I've been doing a bit of research and have discovered ways to remove the
archives from Google's listings, prevent them from being reindexed in
future, and prevent Google from "caching" these pages. The answers may
be
found at Google itself, actually, here:
http://www.google.com/webmasters/3.html#removed
I deeply appreciate the work that goes into maintaining our archives.
The
solutions described above involve adding a couple of lines of HTML to
the
archive's directory, and, if implemented, hopefully will not be seen as
an
inconvenience to our illustrious archivist. There is a bit of lag
between
the time the code changes are made and the time Google picks up on
them, and
hopefully this delay will not cause further panic for list members who
require a more secure arena in which to wax poetic or politic.
David
P.S. My Oddpost email address symbolizes my individuality and belief in
personal freedom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: NN: Un-Googling the Archives
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:09:22 -0400
From: DvBGardner@genelogic.com
David -- thank you for this research. I hope our esteemed archivist
will be
able to work with these modifications.
That is, of course, if that is the general consensus among the rest of
the
nancinetters. If they object to making these changes to the archives,
I
shall certainly yield to the majority opinion and respectfully bow out.
Again, Shelly has done a terrific job with the archives and I certainly
hope
that she knows that the concerns that some of us have about the
accessibility of the archives, are not meant as a reflection on all her
good
work.
It would be good if Bill/Shelly et al could let us know if they want to
keep
things as they are or if they might consider making the modifications
below.
A quick yay or nay will help me figure out how to go from here.
Peace,
Donate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Archives
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:09:39 -0400
From: "O'Sullivan, Brian" (OsullivB@ummhc.org>
At the risk of offending anyone in this lovely neighborhood, to those
concerned about the openness of the archives I can only say, "Get over
it!!"
There is no privacy on the internet. There never has been. No one ever
said there was. Anyone who thought differently was naive.
Every key stroke you make is saved somewhere and (in the words of
lawyers)
is discoverable. A search by any of those big, nasty government groups
or
news organizations you worry about can bring back to life every post on
the
'net you've ever made. I doubt many people will care what you wrote to
as
innocuous a site as the Nancinet. Posts to pedophilia sites or
pro-terrorism sites might be different. A little bit of
self-examination
and bearing of the heart on the Nancinet is not going to cost anyone a
job,
a loved one, or the respect of another (unless, of course, you dissed
his/her favorite Nanci album or song!).
I vote for keeping the archive open and keeping the posts to the net
thoughtful, emotional, and revealing. No one will know or care outside
of
this group -- and it is only you who lose if you censor yourself and
eliminate from your life one of the few places you can be so open and
honest.
Brian O'Sullivan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Re: Archives
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:47:28 -0500
From: "Jan L. Hodges" (7sisters@earthlink.net>
I recently discovered a post I sent to one of my own lists had been
reprinted on five other lists without my permission. In the footer of
all
messages that come through this particular list of mine is a disclaimer
that
all posts are the property of the sender and should not be reprinted,
quoted
or forwarded without their permission.
However that is exactly what happened. A list member took my post and
resent
it to other lists. It doesn't matter that my archived messages are
closed to
all but list members. My message went where I didn't want it to be.
But that is the risk we take when we publish on the internet. Password
protecting would limit access to messages posted on NanciNet, but it
wouldn't be foolproof.
Jan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: Re: Archives
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 08:29:41 +1000
From: "Tony Cox" (tonycox@pacific.net.au>
> I vote for keeping the archive open and keeping the posts to the net
> thoughtful, emotional, and revealing. No one will know or care
> outside of
> this group -- and it is only you who lose if you censor yourself and
> eliminate from your life one of the few places you can be so open and
> honest. > Brian O'Sullivan
I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments here, Brian - although I'd
even
take out the bit about no one outside the group knowing or caring.
Whilst
the concerns expressed by Donate and Conor (i.a.) are legitimate ones,
I for
one am glad to have a potentially global forum to right the world's
wrongs!
It's what the decent folk of the Nanci generation do. When
opportunities in
one's own life to make a major contribution to world events are
limited, as
they surely are for most of us, then posting a well thought-out message
- or
even an emotional tirade - on the Net is perhaps the only way we have of
'making a difference'. It's carrying on the tradition of the protest
era of
the sixties, embraced so powerfully by Nanci and many of her illustrious
peers in the music biz, where people stop thinking exclusively about
their
own material welfare for a moment and turn their attention to righting
the
world's wrongs.
OK, I'm not so naive as to think that anything I've posted to the
NanciNet
or the Cafe will of itself turn the tide of world events, but
collectively I
really do believe we can make a difference. It's said that the Net
will be
a major force for change for the better in the years ahead, and I for
one
and happy to stand up and be counted rather than live the lie that the
establishment would prefer I live by stifling expressions of dissent.
If
not us (as admirers of Nanci and all that she represents), then who?
And
even if it does all fall on a globally deaf audience, it still feels
good to
release the internal pressure valve now and again! Let it out and let
freedom ring!
Tony "throw another veggie burger on the barbie" Cox
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NN: RE: Archives
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:51:49 -0500
From: "Kaczmarczyk, Peter A" (pkaczmar@indiana.edu>
> I vote for keeping the archive open and keeping the posts to the net
> thoughtful, emotional, and revealing. No one will know or care
> outside of
> this group -- and it is only you who lose if you censor yourself and
> eliminate from your life one of the few places you can be so open and
> honest.
While I don't have a problem with the archives as they are, I think
that the
point of view above is far more na•ve than to views of those who are
worried
about bosses and others finding this information out. That fact that
the net
has always lacked privacy is irrelevant.
Donate (and others, and can I still use your name?) have illustrated
quite
well why this is a concern for them and I can only second their
thoughts,
the business world is cutthroat and there are certainly plenty of folks
out
there who would use whatever information they could gather on the web to
their advantage or to the detriment of others. As for people who work
for
the government, well, I shouldn't say any more for fear Ashcroft might
be
listening, but suffice to say I don't trust them in the least and don't
blame others for not trusting them.
Peter K.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:09:13 +1000
From: "Tony Cox" (tonycox@pacific.net.au>
Hey - why don't you guys step into the Cafe now and again for a bout of
lively banter? It's disappointing that not more of the colourful
characters
from the NN have jumped into the general melee with their lively
contributions. Come in and give it some!
Tony
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Shawn Kimbro (shawn@mountainsoul.net>
I'll second that. It's been kinda interesting in the
Cafe of late with a certain outspoken country music
personality dropping in to add a somewhat eclectic two
cents. No membership is required and anyone can post.
Just drop by
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nancinetcafe/
anytime and check out the most recent topics. The
NanciNet Cafe is not a fan list so you won't see many
concert announcements or show reviews like on the
NanciNet, but you will find lots of social commentary
and passionate discussion about many topics Ms.
Griffith holds dear.
-Shawn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:01:59 -0500
From: Bill Page (bpage3@earthlink.net>
Shawn Kimbro wrote:
> The
> NanciNet Cafe is not a fan list so you won't see many
> concert announcements or show reviews like on the
> NanciNet, but you will find lots of social commentary
> and passionate discussion about many topics Ms.
> Griffith holds dear.
And lots of other stuff, too. :)
BP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions about NanciNet? Send e-mail to bpage3@yahoo.com
Return to Archives or The Blue Moon Page