Saturday, January 28, 2012

The State's Computer Policy

As far as I can tell, this is the state's most recent iteration of its computer policy (2008). Its here:

A look at that policy reveals that the activities enumerated under prohibited actions include: "Libelous, slanderous, degrading, insulting, vulgar, obscene, offensive, or hostile remarks, and/or emails, and/or websites." Obviously, this has some problems since I'm not sure how we would define things like degrading or offensive remarks (not to mention vulgar or obscene), but it seems far more specific than “Electronic mail and all other electronic communication (including websites and blog posts) should adhere to the University standards of conduct which prohibits any communication which tends to embarrass, humiliate or shed a negative light on any member of the community. Respect others you contact electronically by avoiding distasteful, inflammatory, harassing or otherwise unacceptable comments." As has been pointed out repeatedly, these definitions are so vague that they could encompass almost anything.


  1. It is quite interesting how much faculty complain. While I certainly agree that the present administration leaves much to be desired, I find the faculty wanting as well. I have yet to hear the faculty talk about the students! One could assume that the faculty are only concerned about the faculty. Chicago State would do well to get a new administration and new faculty members in most of the departments at the university.

    one area where the presiden't lackey's were correct is that some faculty do spend all their class period discussing the administration and rarely discuss the content of the course. But I guess faculty members have nothing to say about that little tidbit.

    And no I am not a lackey of the president. I think he is incompetent and maybe even corrupt. But after teaching here for quite some time, it is quite boring to see this play out over and over again while our students are ignored. Some of your are using our students to play out your little activist fantasies in an attempt to rekindle your "revolutionary" glory days.

    Finally, the faculty union needs to take this up with the State and not use it as an attempt to bash CSU. My friends at other Illinois State instutions have to sign the same document.

    1. You are certainly entitled to hold any opinion you want about our activities. However, if you want to enter into the argument, perhaps you could avoid basing your claims on nothing more than your suppositions and generalizations about people's motives. Nonetheless, I will attempt to respond to what points you make.

      First: your complaint about the faculty. Why do you think we do so much "complaining?" If you have read the blog regularly, you must be aware that we most often have specific complaints about specific individuals or policies. You bloviate about how the school "would do well to get a new administration and new faculty members in most departments . . ." Got any specific evidence for that statement or is it simply intellectually lazy? I'm sure that since you claim to teach here that you're an exception to this rule. In any event, it would be helpful to provide specifics if you're going to make those kinds of accusations. Frankly, they sound suspiciously like the kind of non-specific nonsense that emanates from our administrators.

      Second: as far as your third paragraph is concerned, I suppose you must be able to read minds since you have no qualms about claiming to know that "some of you are using our students to play out your little activist fantasies . . ." Again, some specifics would be helpful, who are you talking about and what evidence do you have for that comment?

      Third: you claim in the last paragraph is simply untrue. Your "friends at other Illinois State institutions" certainly do not have to sign the same document since the vague, contradictory computer policy written for CSU is not replicated at any other state institution that I examined. Again, please provide an example of an institution that has "the same document."

      As for your general observation about how the faculty are in this for themselves and "ignore" the students, why do you think we're trying to effect change at this institution? I haven't gone back to reread all the posts on this blog, but my recollection is that on numerous occasions, concerns about students are an important part of the conversation.

      Fourth: you make the comment that you are "not a lackey of the president," that you think "he is incompetent . . ." I would point out that the two are not mutually exclusive, that one can be someone's "lackey" and still have no respect for them. I would also ask, given your feelings, what are you doing about him? Do you speak out when he or his acolytes do things with which you disagree?

      I cannot speak for anyone else who posts on this blog, but I have a high regard for evidence. When I post something, I can prove it, I usually have substantial evidence to back up what I claim. How about you?

      In any event, I would be happy to continue this conversation in any venue. If you want to drop by my office, it's at Science 275.

      Bob Bionaz

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.