Slashdot Mirror
Student Faces Suspension For Spamming Profs
edmicman sends word of a Fox News report about a Michigan State University student who is facing suspension for bulk emailing a number of professors at the university about a proposed change to the school calendar — an e-mail that the university is labeling spam. The article contains links to a copy of the original email, the allegations against the student, and the university's Email Acceptable Use Policy. The student, Kara Spencer, asked a Philadelphia rights organization, FIRE, to get involved. The article quotes the FIRE defense program director: "The fact that MSU is considering punishment of Spencer simply for exercising her right to contact selected faculty members by e-mail shows a disturbing disregard for students' freedom of expression. ... Threatening a member of the student government with suspension for sending relevant, timely e-mails to faculty members is outrageous." Spencer is awaiting the school's judgement after a hearing, and vows to take to the courts if suspended.
Clearly, the solution is to mass mail all students at the university for support.
Back in the day on Usenet, spam was more than just 'unsolicited commercial e-mail', it was pretty much any post that was cross-posted and off-topic.
So why do so many of us nowadays seem to equate spam with only 'unsolicited commercial e-mail'? In my mind, spam is any piece of unwanted bulk mail, whether it is 'commercial' in nature or not.
My blog
it's linked in the news article. It was well written, not off topic, and expressed a reasonable concern about the time period students have to get to know the school apparently. It was not "spam" at all.
It sounds like the professors are more butthurt she got their email addresses than interested in responding to the concern she expressed.
They simply should have redirected her appeal to the right people if it was not appropriate to be sent via that email list. Instead they are being punative.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
I like to sign my instructors up for SPAM, but whatever works.
Because it means that we'll finally have an exact legal threshold in terms of number of recipients for an email to be considered spam, regardless of the contents or intent of the email. Zero tolerance policies are a really good idea, because they allow us to deal with violations--now matter how minor--in a uniform manner, and don't permit bureaucrats to allow things like reasonableness or circumstances to muddy the issue.
or does anyone else think that universities are treating students more and more like cattle these days? It's as if the concept of helping students goes flying out the window after the university takes their money.
"It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
She sent what amounted to a form letter to 391 professors. I certainly don't consider this spam. Given the lazy, unthoughtful way she went about this, I also don't consider this anything more than a waste of everbody's time. Sending what amounts to a bulk form letter via email isn't going to influence anyone.
Beyond that, I think it's more problematic that she apparently refuses to comply with university policies once notified about them. Her position basically is "I intend to continue sending out poorly thought out, ineffectual bulk messages to all faculty whenever I see fit." In that context, maybe it does become spam...
#DeleteChrome
The crux of the issue is of course what you mean by spam. The best definition I've seen is: bulk, unsolicated commercial communications. (Due I think to Brad Templeton.) In this particular case the commercial aspect is missing, so this is not spam. This tendency to label of anything you don't like as either "spam" or "terrorism" is getting pretty tiresome.
If the geiger counter does not click, the coffee, she is not thick.
When I was in college, a little-known feature of the mainframe system allowed anyone with an MVS account (every CS major and anyone who took a CS class) to send a bulk instant message to everyone on campus.
Astonishingly, this had the effect of shutting down all administrative offices, from payroll to the registrar to the financial aid office. This was because all the line printers had accounts too, and would choke on an improperly formatted input. Anyone with an account could do this. Of course it would be tied to your name, so in theory you'd want to use someone else's account.
About every couple years a student would learn about the feature and innocently TELL EVERYONE HI without realizing that they were about to enter a dimension consisting entirely of pain. I do not think that even this transgression would result in a suspension---the chair might have you murdered, but no suspension.
I don't understand the free speech thing. No, it's not SPAM. Whether or not she actually abused the policy is up for someone else to decide, not me. But what is all this talk about free speech? Since when does freedom of speech mean you can break a the rules you agreed (I assume you have to agree to abide by them in order to be accepted into the school) to follow?
If she actually broke the policy, then the agreed-to consequences for it should happen. If she didn't, the school is being stupid, and the SCHOOL should face consequences. But this doesn't have to do with "freedom of speech."
It is legally much easier to regulate commercial speech. If you want any sort of anti-spam law, your best bet is there.
Is spam any unsolicited commercial email sent out to 20 or more recipients? If so, this is not spam.
Is spam any unsolicited advertorial email sent out to more than 1 person? If so, this is not spam.
Is spam any unsolicited email sent to more than 1 person? If so, this is spam.
The problem here is we need a legal definition of spam to define what it is. Then once the public knows what spam is, we can prosecute those who send it illegally, and stop wasting our damn time arguing what it is. Personally, I like the definition of any unsolicited email sent to more than 20 people...regardless of the content.
I don't really think it's fair to call this a free speech issue. There are laws against spam in many countries, and we don't call that an attack on free speech. So the only real question here is whether or not what she did was actually considered spamming. From MSU's policy on bulk emailing (linked to in article): "Bulk e-mailing may be used only by University offices to send communications necessary to the normal course of business and which typically require some official action be taken individually by recipients." Since part of the proposal Spencer was speaking against involved shortening the fall semester by two days, I guess that sort of qualifies. However, the policy also says: "Bulk e-mailing may not be used for personal purposes, advertising or solicitations, or political statements or purposes." I think had she simply sent out an email informing faculty of the changes, it would be fine. But the purpose of the email was to solicit support. It's all a little fuzzy, but I think that with a little thought, there isn't much question that her email did violate MSU's terms of use. Profs, especially ones with large classes, have to deal with tonnes of email. I'd probably be annoyed to if someone had harvested my address off a database or website intended to be use for academic purposes, and started sending me mass emails about general student issues.
http://lct.msu.edu/guidelines-policies/bulkemail.html
It's not like it's hard to find or follow.
If a "network administrator" told me I could not email all the faculty and staff at a university I was paying to attend concerning a change in university policy that affects everyone, I'd tell them to go piss up a rope, too.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
We here at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) appreciate the widespread interest in Kara Spencer's case. I would encourage everyone to check out another article on this case over at The Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-lukianoff/its-raining-spam-at-michi_b_149378.html There is also a podcast interview with Kara Spencer on our website that might be of interest to some of you who wanted more details of the case: http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/10008.html
>Unless there are policies that say that this isn't allowed. The University has policies for distributing information, and this person ignored those policies.
Well no shit, sherlock. Of course the University is going to try and control the flow of information concerning unpopular policy changes.
Such attempts at control SHOULD BE ignored and thwarted.
The university was trying to pull a fast policy change. This girl alerted everyone to it using the most efficient, straight-forward technique available. I don't care if the university "has policies" for damage contro....er for distributing information. What she did was right.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
I'm really sick of replies like this:
Civil disobedience is fine, IMO. Have at it, but don't come blubbering when Mr. Consequence arrives to the party.
This is a canned comment that tools make on any given story about someone standing up to establishment stupidity. This is the same attitude that southerners commonly took towards blacks protesting fucked up laws. Now, I'm not saying that her cause is anywhere near the same level of fighting jim crow and southern racism in general, BUT, if you look at how civil disobediance in the south(and elsewhere) actually works, you'll see that the "blubbering" about the consquences IS PART OF IT. THAT'S HOW CHANGE IS ACHIEVED AGAINST STUPID POLICIES.
You have to not only disobey stupid policies, but then you have to whine bitch and moan about the consequences it if you want them changed and if you want a just resolution. THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIANCE. You don't do that last part, you end up a door mat of the system, rather than someone who forces it to change.
The MSU Student newspaper has a more interesting take on this then the Fox News one. It looks more like she pissed someone off something horrible.
From the State News:
"Of the 391 e-mails Spencer sent, Spencer said she didn't receive any negative responses. All responses asked for more information regarding Provost Kim Wilcox's Welcome Week proposal."
"Dr. Katherine Gross, director of the Kellogg Biological Station, initially approached ATS in September with concerns as to how Spencer had e-mailed what she believed was the deans, directors and chairs list. Hall said that response led to ATS approaching Spencer."
i get mass emails from students all the time at my school, i just IP relay spam their cell phones and sign their emails up for weather updates every 5 min.
Whatever her opinion on the matter was, she WAS emailing the faculty about a change in university policy that affects everyone.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
So are laws banning grafitti unconstitutional too in the US because they restrict a person right to free speech? I did not realize that freedom of speech meant that you had the right to use other people's property in a way they have expressly asked you not to, in order to get your message across.
Many years ago there was an incident at the college I was attending where the administration searched a number of student rooms without permission. After getting caught various justifications were given for the search.
I was part of a group of concerned students who decided to write the ACLU and ask about the legality of the college's actions. We wrote the letter, but then decided it would look better if it was cosigned by the student council. Of course that brought the existence of letter out into the open.
After the letter was approved and before it was sent, I was summoned to the office of a chemistry professor, someone I had never had dealings with before. Once there, he proceeded to threaten me with expulsion if the letter was sent, claiming, if memory serves, that it would be some sort of honor code violation.
I responded by laughing at the guy and told him that the letter was going out and that if he took any sort of action against me I would sue his ass and the college's all the way from here to doomsday. He was struck dumb by my response - I don't think it had even occurred to him that he wouldn't get his way.
The letter did go out (and got the predictable response - the college's actions were clearly illegal). And I never heard a single word from this professor again. I still see him from time to time. I always smile and wave, but I don't think he recognizes me.