Deputy Director of IT ask for an interview by blocking me?

c0olflame · Post by **c0olflame** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:10 pm

The next biggest student entreprenuer idea - how to out source broadband internet service provider into campus residential hall? It's going to be a multi-million dollar busines.

Above is a forum topic I posted two days ago, and my port was subseuently blocked........ following is the intersting correspondent that may be you would be interested to know how ITS is doing their job.

------------------------------------------------

I believe I have not been able to use DC++ since it had been blocked (unless you are telling me the expensive device that you bought is not working). Your request to block my port base on my posted forum topic is unreasonable. I believe it is exploitation of authority to punish free speech.

What I voiced out in the forum is what I truly believe in. If a student were to outsource a broadband service to campus, it is going to significantly improve the efficiency of ITS. it is just according to what I learn from free market in Economics.

I would refuse an interview with the deputy with my port being blocked without good reason. Please understand I am refusing this interview not because I am afraid to speak to you, but my reluctance to obey your unreasonable command. i.e. blocking my port is not a good way to ask me to speak to you.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Further to your correspondence with regards to the usage of DC++ and subsequently your post on the forum, a request has been made by the Deputy Director of IT, Mary Visser for your port to be blocked pending an interview with Mary.

Please contact Mary Visser this afternoon on 024 765 73820 or Gill Buxton, the Departmental Secretary on 024 765 23254.

Regards

Bee Mistry

---------------------------------------------------------------

Post by **astropoint** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 1:22 pm

Ah good, the facist state comes to life. Hmm...had betetr not say anything in case my port gets blocked by the evil imcopetant stupid pointless ITS and their oh so useful wanknet.
My suggestion is just to do there and threaten them with legal action over cutting you off for not actually doing anything wrong

Post by **BigG** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:56 pm

Random point - it's not ITS that doesn't allow external ISPs, it's Estates

c0olflame · Post by **c0olflame** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:17 pm

Quote: it's not ITS that doesn't allow external ISPs, it's Estates

What does that mean? What kind of policy is that?

Post by **BigG** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:05 pm

In order to get an external ISP you would need to install a telephone/cable socket in your room - estates won't let you do this as it would involve drilling an 'ole in your wall - they no likey you doing stuff like that.

To be honest, I think that not allowing you to cause structural damage is a reasonable enough policy, however, in order to compensate for this there should be either a) a decent connection provided [which there is currently not] or b) install the sockets in each room themselves.

c0olflame · Post by **c0olflame** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:39 pm

Oh ... I actually meantioned wireless connection in the forum to safe the trouble of cracking the walls ^_^

Zeus · Post by **Zeus** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:37 pm

i don't see the problem with the campus being shrouded in a wireless network instead of having random hotspots whch work pathetically as i've been told.

all they need are a few fckoff large dishes/antennas whatever and voila!

Post by **BigG** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:05 pm

Apart from the fact that when many people use wireless it gets really shite. Plus of course... comptuer->computer transfers would be megashite!!

[n.b. the campus hotspots are OK unless the above situation occurs...]

Onik · Post by **Onik** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:41 pm

I noticed that ITS have also taken down a blog on warwick blogs that was complaining about how crap the resnet has been...and here I was thinking we lived in a democracy that promoted free speech.

Freefaller · Post by **Freefaller** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:16 am

Apparently, naming ITS A bunch of incompetent twats and calling for the sacking of their management isnÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t considered kosher. The fact of the matter is, I fully intended to incite their wrath just to see what action they would take.

Your blog has been suspended. This is not the first time that you have posted in a way which goes beyond criticism into abuse.

The terms and conditions are quite clear about this: the page http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/its/ ... s/use/not/ states that "if you are attacking a person rather than a position, and in particular if you are essentially name-calling, then this can easily become harrasment, and that's against the Acceptable Use Policy which you signed up to when you received your IT Services account."

Since you apparently don't understand or are unwilling to abide by this term your blog is no longer active.

Blogs Admin

I really have two main points in response to this.

1) Which ever Muppet wrote the terms and conditions misspelt harassment (incompetent twat?)
2) How exactly does criticizing an organisation constitute attacking a person? I found the idea that my blog harassed ITS to be a jolly good tickle. No doubt I shall sleep soundly tonight knowing that I hurt somebody in that shamble of an organisations feelings. If my comments had not been aimed at ITS, do you think that my account would have been deleted?

adfad666 · Post by **adfad666** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:34 pm

i dont suppose you saved the blog someplace else?

replace the word "ITS" with another abitary group, like say "The Conservative Party" and i bet they would have laughed their heads off, not got on their mighty moral horse and deleted it for "abuse"