RE: Block me Amadeus

[SIANNON -at- VISUS -dot- JNJ -dot- com]

The constraint of word selection in electronic communications can raise 
some definite discussion along that broad, fuzzy gray line, well within the 
purview of technical communications.  While I can understand the reasoning 
behind the use of such filters -- concerns over legal, image, antivirus 
issues, etc., I personally don't like them. Their implementation is 
definitely something that shouldn't be ignored, as they can eventually 
conflict with one's work and workstyle.

Filters seem to be applied for three major reasons:  (1) to enforce 
professional etiquette in order to prevent legal disputes regarding 
employee behavior, (2) to enforce professional etiquette in order to 
prevent abuse of company resources by employees, and (3) to serve as an 
additional line of defense against some common email viruses.  All three 
have their own issues for argument: efficacy, scope, privacy (the balance 
between Big Brother-ing employees and letting them rob a company blind), 
enforcement of corporate culture.

As for efficacy: I personally think filtering strategies are not effective 
enough to be worth the use, due to the nature and ambiguity of the 
language.

Scope is the one that gets amusing.  I remember working in a health 
insurance company trying to implement such filters for the first time.  I 
believe they went with a standardized list at first, because words like 
"breast" and "penis" that appeared in reference to medical claims started 
bouncing, much to the case workers' surprise. There was one small hiccup, 
too (fixed very quickly), where words like "assumption" triggered alarms 
because of the first three letters.

I'm afraid I was a wise-aleck on the privacy topic there.  Before they 
implemented external web access for the standard employees, I used to email 
work-relevant stuff I found surfing the web from home at night, to my work 
address for followup the next morning. I suspected some items (with 
non-profanity verbiage) were being scanned by human eyes, so I emailed 
myself a well-written, thorough, professional article about keystroke 
monitoring software, and the legal and ethical issues and implications 
thereof.  When it finally showed up in my mailbox late the next 
*afternoon*, it had been forwarded through Internal Audit, rather overtly.  
I was amused.

As per the enforcement of a corporate culture, I have no suitable opinion 
to express. I find it silly to be prohibited from emailing a family member 
(who you know to be online, using the only phone line in the house) that 
you need a ride home or are working late, when a phone call would be 
allowed. I find it sillier to prohibit the phone call as well. If 1/3 of 
our daily hours is going to be spent at a place, there *will* be some 
fuzzing of the edges between our existence at that place and the other 
2/3's of our daily lives. People working under overrestrictive environments 
are more stressed and less happy working there, which can cut efficiency 
considerably.


Granted, this is all just opinion based on my observations.
Shauna


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Announcing new options for IPCC 01, October 24-27 in Santa Fe,
New Mexico: attend the entire event or select a single day.  
For details and online registration, visit http://ieeepcs.org/2001

  Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
  5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
  Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.