From afritz@delphid.ml.org Tue Oct 27 00:37:35 1998 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:54:50 -0700 (MST) From: Adam Fritzler To: TGaArdvark@aol.com Subject: Re: hi guys Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:55:16 -0700 Resent-From: unger-haters@delphid.ml.org On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 TGaArdvark@aol.com wrote: > This is something I find hillarious. Becuase it is... > 1) It's your personal log, you can write what you want. Yes. Except, aparently, when you have a tyrant overlord called "school". Then it seems you become property of the state and must conform to them. I'm confused. > 2) What wasn't written from school is out of the school's jurisdiction. Yes. THe problem is the best stuff WAS written from school. They really have things confused. > 3) They have no right to use it against you. (Except for the stuff I wrote at school.) > 4) The only reason they have a right to view it is because it is public. And according to federal law, I have the right to write it. Aparently federal laws do not apply when you're going to high school. > 5) There is nothing in there that could possibly be used to hurt you. Well, I'm not sure about that. I admit, I did write several of the log entries at school. No doubt about that. That's painfully clear. That is in clear, aparent violation of the "technology fair use" rules cited in your handbooks (I sure wish I could find mine to read it -- I'd like to know what exactly I did wrong and what they can do to me!). What is even more of a problem is that that sheet Unger had us sign at the beginning of the year, well, mine didn't get turned in. It was an accident. But at this point, it doesn't look that way. Basically, I'm in quite a tad of trouble indeed. > 6) Most of what's in there is very bad for Mrs. Unger. Very bad. Some of it's bad for me, most bad for her. Many things bad for everyone involved. I meant it to be public, but I did NOT mean it to be _PUBLIC_ (that is, I did not mean for it to be activily distributed). There's so much FUD[1] floating around that administration department and the school in general. (Mrs Foster--English dept--even knew about it before I told her!) We should remember that just as we have our paths of communication, the school staff has theirs as well (which are just as effecient). It just happens that the staff chain of communication distributes Unger's and the admins point of view, while our's distributes ours. Sometimes one bit of information happens to be more true-to-life than the other. It may be our view, it may be their's. I can't say we have the "truth" on our side. We don't. But the good part is, neither does anyone else. In this case, there really is no "truth". There's just several skewed viewpoints of just what happened. No one can recite from memory word-for-word what was said or 100% accurately describe the events that led up to this. We all have what _we_ think happened. The problem is that what we think happened, although based on what happened, is not always going to be accurate. The things we view and how we view them are part of us, who we are. We view things differently than Unger, and things look different on paper and in our minds than what actually happened. Often, it's "her word against ours". And that's the way it will have to be. But, she doesn't have any real advantage over us. All she has is that she's the "teacher", which has shown itself to not be enough. I think the admins will eventually come through for us and see that it's not always the students' fault. The closest point we can come to the "truth" is where the two paths of communication meet, discuss, and work this out. Conflict is not a solution, it's the problem. Resolution will eventually come. Just don't piss off the admins. Be nice. Be cooperative. Stay away from the conflict. af (sorry for the preaching!) [1]FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt --- Adam Fritzler { afritz@delphid.ml.org , afritz@iname.com} http://delphid.ml.org/~afritz/ "Animals who are not penguins can only wish they were." -- Chicago Reader, 15 Oct 1982