Student Faces Suspension For Spamming Profs 516
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.
Is it just me (Score:4, Insightful)
Always comes down to definitions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I read her entire email (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems almost obvious that she's being prosecuted simply because she made the provost look stupid.
If any student can use mailing lists like this to challenge the provost so effectively... imagine the mayhem!!
Not SPAM, but what's this about free speech? (Score:3, Insightful)
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."
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
No that would be ineffective. Clearly the proper course of action is to contact the media so millions of uninvolved strangers can mock the university for such stupefying misapplication of policy.
Interestingly, it seems as a student government representative she was fulfilling her duties by attempting to negotiate change between students and faculty. Her email was well written, clear and concise.
I fail to see how the university can justify any reprisal.
Because in the US (Score:3, Insightful)
It is legally much easier to regulate commercial speech. If you want any sort of anti-spam law, your best bet is there.
Re:I read her entire email (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds like the professors are more butthurt she got their email addresses than interested in responding to the concern she expressed.
As a professor, I doubt it: most of us couldn't care less if we get one more unsolicited email from a student.
More likely she is the victim of some jobsworth in an administrative office who was on the mailing list and has nothing more important to do.
Re:That brings up an interesting question... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I read her entire email (Score:5, Insightful)
Spam is unsolicited bulk email, regardless of whether or not it is well written, relevant, or reasonable.
Then the student can counter-sue if the University ever her sent her spam over an upcoming basketball game, art exhibit, Last Lecture speech, etc.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:0, Insightful)
I fail to see how the university can justify any reprisal.
She was already informed that she had violated policy, and she refused to change that.
Civil disobedience is fine, IMO. Have at it, but don't come blubbering when Mr. Consequence arrives to the party.
Re:I read her entire email (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought that too, at first, but then I noticed in TFA that her e-mail was not informative but rather dissension...
On Sept. 15, Kara Spencer, a senior and the associated students director at MSU, sent a letter to 391 university professors speaking out against a proposal from the Provost to shorten the fall semester by two days and to shorten Fall Welcome, reducing the amount of time new students would have to adjust to college living.
Probably that falls under "personal purposes" or "political statements or purposes", both of which purposes are explicitly prohibited in the document from which you quoted.
And that was the correct response, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:That brings up an interesting question... (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
"I didn't want to read that. You just spammed me." Wow... we've certainly come a long way from "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Re:And that was the correct response, too. (Score:3, Insightful)
She wasn't e-mailing them about "a change in university policy that affects everyone". She was e-mailing them about why said change was a Bad Idea(TM), and apparently they didn't care to read her editorial column.
Re:I read her entire email (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mass mailing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
Civil disobedience is fine, IMO. Have at it, but don't come blubbering when Mr. Consequence arrives to the party.
I thought that was the point of civil disobedience, that you showed the world the injustice by suffering through the situation in a more public way.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
An opinion blog or forum opinion does not determine constitutionality.
<nitpick>
Not so. Anyone can determine constitutionality by examining a law, and the constitution, and telling you whether or not it violates the constitution. Now, that won't save your ass in court, but to say that the only valid judge of constitutionality is the courts is not only wrong, but against the spirit in which our nation was founded (that the people should keep the government in check).
</nitpick>
Re:Mass mailing (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, what?
The whole point of civil disobedience is to draw the consequences onto yourself and bring the issue to light so it can be stepped on and killed. The "blubbering" - as you so childishly put it - is directed at the original wrong, not the consequence! It's part of the process.
That's stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:2, Insightful)
You fail to understand the purpose of civil disobedience.
The purpose is to change things.
You break the rules and you stand defiantly when Mr. Consequence shows up. If your cause is just, hopefully people stand with you. It may take a little blubbering.
Quietly allowing Mr. Consequence to screw you is not the way to engage in civil disobedience.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Personally (Score:1, Insightful)
only on slashdot will you have a pedant being corrected by an even more pedantic critic
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
The university dilemma:
-If the students can disrupt the system, then the administration has failed to do its job.
-If the students can't disrupt the system, then the professors have failed to do their jobs.
This case is nothing new. The university had a policy and had good reasons for that policy. A student broke the policy and had good reasons for breaking that policy. Student gets called for judicial review. If she can defend her actions, nothing happens. If she can't, she gets disciplined. Either way, nobody is walking away with any scars...there is no way she's getting the boot for this.
Neither party is doing anything wrong here, and the process generally works fairly well.
Re:I read her entire email (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:That brings up an interesting question... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Probably because it is by far the most prevalent and annoying form of spam and because it is clearly definable. Off-topic can be somewhat subjective, commercial and unsolicited are much more objective.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
Spam is:
Unsolicited,
Bulk,
Commercial email.
It is not solicited email of any kind, it is not personal email of any kind, and it is not non-commercial email. A local school emailing your entire neighborhood to tell them that the school is closed due to snow is annoying, but it is not spam. A teenager who emails a chain letter to your entire domain is annoying, but it is not spam.
This was (barely) bulk, and it was mostly unsolicited. It was not, however, commercial and thus it was not spam.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:3, Insightful)
Except her email wasn't an [informative] communication about the changes, it was a [personal and political] protest against the changes. As other have pointed out, the former is specifically permitted, the latter specifically forbidden.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
no, while most spam is commercial, it doesn't have to be. i.e. "commercial" is NOT one of the defining attributes of spam. "unsolicited" and "bulk" are. spam is not about content, it is about consent.
e.g there is political spam, religious spam, and chain-letter spam.
if your example local school sent their notification to an opt-in list of people who wanted such notifications then it would not be spam. if, however, they sent it to everyone in the neighbourhood (or just to every parent) without first receiving a subscription request or obtaining prior consent then it would be spam.
a teenager who sends a chain letter to your entire domain IS spam, as well as annoying.
the student's email that this article about may or may not be spam. there isn't enough detail in the article to tell for sure.
if she sent it to an existing staff list at the university which ordinarily allows students to email staff then it certainly would not be spam.
if she constructed her own list then it might be spam. in any other context it certainly would be spam, but students DO have an implicit right to contact their teachers which makes it a grey area rather than clear cut.
if she repeatedly sent email to her self-constructed list in order to harrass or cause annoyance or disruption of mail service then it would be mail-bombing (a form of DoS) rather than spam.
Re:That's stupid. (Score:1, Insightful)
One person's whining, bitching and moaning is another person's insprirational speech. Segregationists would have called him a whiner among other things.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
To help students and faculty agree on the properness of university policies and programs is what student government is all about.
Really? I thought it was about giving the ambitious and meddlesome a chance to hone their people-annoying skills while padding their resumes.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree with your characterization. MSU had never, until that point, enforced the policy even on actual spam and hacking activities. They enforced it the moment someone disagreed with a faculty position. One of the professors got bent out of shape by being confronted with discord from a student (the temerity!).
There's no blubbering here, just righteous defiance. Remember, she insisted that charges be brought against her.
Gotta give her credit for standing up for herself. Furthermore, it was only one professor out of some four thousand who registered a complaint. Apparently this wasn't a big problem for the faculty at all ... just for the Administration.
That Lou what's-her-name President of the school will probably end up regretting this. She wanted to make a clear statement to the students: do what we tell you, and don't try to get the faculty on your side.. Instead, they ran up against someone who wouldn't cave when threatened. Now they're going to have to put up or shut up. Not only that, but if Ms. Spencer sticks to her guns, they may end up having a Federal judge tell them where to stick their email policies.
Re:Mass mailing (Score:3, Insightful)
I consider this spam. She sent this to almost 400 instructors. When I went I had maybe 25 instructors.
If it was something that she believed was relevant to all instructors, then it doesn't seem like spam. 400 is hardly an outlandish number when discussing email.
Now it appears that she did violate the school's email policies, but those policies seem extremely conservative. One of the things she was writing about was the very limited time to comment on the issues that she was addressing. The email policies seem to contribute to that problem. So yeah, she violated the policies. She'll have to face the consequences for that. The school deserves the spotlight on its policies too though. Looks like she gets to be a martyr.