Associate Professor of Biochemistry
Phone: (502)852-5752; Fax: (502)852-6222
 
Based on a couple of posts today, another 0.02 may elicit other viewpoints and
help enlighten us all.
 
From what I understand, E-mail lists have few if any laws which can be
directly applied to them and our politicians are going to be hard-pressed to
correct this deficiency in the near future. The exceptions to this generality
seem to be transmission of things like child pornography or copyrighted
software.
 
On Hockey-L, Wayne does a great job of "policeing" the list and from what I
understand handles most problems privately with occassional reminders to the
list of what is appropriate. We also seem to be somewhat self-governing, both
on the list and off. I consider my two yrs on Hockey-L to have been very
informative and enjoyable with only minor attacks of stupidity and/or
immaturity by a very few posters. Relevance, decency and common sense prevail.
In contrast, I am on a Univ of Louisville faculty discussion list which,
strangely, operates at a level much below that of Hockey-L.
 
OK, so we have a high-quality list, but are we strictly a public forum or are
we a group of colleagues sharing facts and rumors. Why is Tony's rumor
regarding a high school players intellectual abilities different from all the
rumors about coaches applying for jobs or rumored to be unhappy with this or
that? My feeling is that applying for a job is very personal and should
probably only be publicized by the applicant of potential employer. Some
current employers will do everything they can to keep the applicant whereas
others will quickly show the person the door. (OTOH, I have read with
interest, the Crowder/Denver scenario which is unfolding because I learned a
lot about Crowder as a coach at UMass-Lowell, aka River Hawk U!)
 
How is it that we can defame referees and question players lack of effort or
natural abilty or pass judgements on coaches intent and apparent personality
defects without really knowing that person or his values? Shawn Walsh took a
lot of heat last year and IMO, although some was justified, there were some
that bordered on defamation of character. No one doubts that Walsh is truly
commited to college hockey and his players and is an excellent coach. So what
if he has to coach half his games outside of Orono where his bench personality
is not apprciated. The "IMO" is just that. Do I feel I should be allowed to
express it on Hockey-L? Absolutely. Are there legal limits to "IMO"? Probably,
but my guess is they will only apply when the opinion is at great variance
with the "benchmark" community standards both on and off the list. In other
words, I think our normal level of discussion is our "legal" reference and I
would be hard-pressed to believe a lawsuit is ever likely to result from
Hockey-L postings if we keep doing things the way we are now. We all may make
a mistake now and then, but that doesn't much change the value or quality of
the product.
 
Anyhow this dialog was prompted not by Tony's post, but by Michael Cavanaugh's
respose. While I was not upset in any way by Tony's unsubstantiated rumor
which I read and forgot, it seemed to me to be inappropriate to give "for your
own records" Andy Power's actual combined SAT score. Why is this not an
invasion of privacy? How did Cavanaugh come by this data and did he obtain
Power's permission to post it to Hockey-L? I believe MC's intentions were
noble, but in his effort to correct a perceived "rumor crime" he may have made
things worse, but then again, that is just my opinion!
 
P.S. This post will probably end with the cat quote I think Brian used last
week. Since I think cats make a lot less sense than the birds and ground
animals they kill for fun, I have been using it for several days and without
the permission of the original poster. Sorry about that. It is also a bit
unexpected that no UofL cat lover has sent me a private flame. Perhaps they
respect my right to express an opinion on cats. By the way, for you Hockey-L
cat lovers, I am married to one and we have a happy mixed marriage.
 
Cats are intended to teach us that not everything in nature has
a function.  Garrison Keillor