×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

College Threatens Students Over Email Addresses

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the unclear-on-which-side-of-the-at-sign-it's-at dept.

Education 452

superdave98 writes "As a sign that a CIO has way too much time on his hands, Santa Rosa Junior College is sending emails threatening lawsuits to staff and students who have the letters 'SRJC' in their private email addresses. They contend that people could be confused and think these are official email addresses. Sure, I suppose people who fall for 419 scams probably could be fooled, but not any reasonable humans. I can't believe they found a lawyer who thought this was a good idea."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

452 comments

Greed is Good (4, Insightful)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877339)

For 150 dollars an hour, a lawyer will never tell you any idea of yours is bad, even if it's suing McDonalds because your hot coffee is (gasp!) HOT, and should not have been poured all over your crotch.

Re:Greed is Good (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877407)

The thing is, if coffee is too hot to be poor over your crotch then how the hell wouldn't it ALSO be too hot to be drank?

And I don't care if you're a testosterone-driven moron who thinks he's a hot stud because he can drink boiling hot coffee. Normal people can't and restaurants keep making fucking boiling hot coffee, that's just insane.

Re:Greed is Good (3, Interesting)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877881)

Actually
Go eat a nice hot pizza.
Now get some of that hot cheese on your thigh.

Easy to eat, yet it can still burn.
AMAZING!

Re:Greed is Good (0)

Bentov (993323) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877453)

Actually, she sued(not that I agree with it) because the lid was not on when the coffee was handed to her and it spilled. She went back inside to see if she could have another cup of coffee. She was denied, so then she sued. Penny wise, pound foolish I say.

Re:Greed is Good (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877549)

Actually, she sued(not that I agree with it) because the lid was not on when the coffee was handed to her and it spilled. She went back inside to see if she could have another cup of coffee. She was denied, so then she sued. Penny wise, pound foolish I say.

[citation needed]

Re:Greed is Good (5, Informative)

ifdef (450739) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877657)

Why don't you read about what happened before you guess about it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants [wikipedia.org] seems to be a good summary of the case. Basically, a 79-year-old woman suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed. The issue was that McDonald's required franchises to serve coffee at 180-190 F, which (it was claimed) is much hotter than coffee from other places.

Not that I can understand why anybody would want to drink McDonald's coffee anyway -- it's HORRIBLE! But that's just my opinion.

Ms. California Defense (-1, Offtopic)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877769)

Why don't you read about what happened before you guess about it?

In support of "opposite marriages" everywhere, don't ever let facts get in the way of a good old fashioned opinion! And when your opinion doesn't jive with facts, just say, "well that's how I was raised" and you too can be Ms. California!

Re:Greed is Good (3, Informative)

infaustus (936456) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877825)

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/food/beverages/coffee-tea/coffee-taste-test-3-07/overview/0307_coffee_ov_1.htm [consumerreports.org] Your are apparently in the minority. CR's taste test found McDonald's coffee was the best.

Re:Greed is Good (1)

Old97 (1341297) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877887)

How can you get 3rd degree burns from a water-based liquid heated to only 180-190 degrees? Second degree yes, and it certainly would be painful, but I understand 3rd degree burns result in charred flesh. Also, the coffee would have cooled a bit while being transported to her and then much more once it was spilled.

I've had coffee at that temperature spilled on me (an entire cup) when I was a kid and I got blisters, not 3rd degree burns. In my case the coffee was made with boiling water that was poured directly into a cup. It spilled on me less than 30 seconds from being poured. I was only wearing a t-shirt on the area where it was spilled - my chest and stomach.

Can anyone explain how what is being claimed here is possible?

Re:Greed is Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877463)

Hot is one thing. Hot enough to cause immediate 3rd degree burns is another thing entirely.

Re:Greed is Good (1)

nicolas.kassis (875270) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877525)

And they have a policy to do this. They keep the coffee at extreme temperatures on those burners for some reason. I can't drink a McDs coffee unless I let it cool 5 minutes. I can drink a Starbucks coffee when they serve it to me.

Re:Greed is Good (5, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877495)

"For 150 dollars an hour, a lawyer will never tell you any idea of yours is bad, even if it's suing McDonalds because your hot coffee is (gasp!) HOT, and should not have been poured all over your crotch."

For free, any number of internet denizens will propagate distortions and urban legends.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0122-11.htm [commondreams.org]

"Third Degree Burns

Here's what the talk show pundits and columnists neglected to mention about the McDonalds coffee burn case:

79 year old Stella Liebeck suffered third degree burns on her groin and inner thighs while trying to add sugar to her coffee at a McDonalds drive through. Third degree burns are the most serious kind of burn. McDonalds knew it had a problem. There were at least 700 previous cases of scalding coffee incidents at McDonalds before Liebeck's case. McDonalds had settled many claim before but refused Liebeck's request for $20,000 compensation, forcing the case into court. Lawyers found that McDonalds makes its coffee 30-50 degrees hotter than other restaurants, about 190 degrees. Doctors testified that it only takes 2-7 seconds to cause a third degree burn at 190 degrees. McDonalds knew its coffee was exceptionally hot but testified that they had never consulted with burn specialist. The Shriner Burn Institute had previously warned McDonalds not to serve coffee above 130 degrees. And so the jury came back with a decision- $160,000 for compensatory damages. But because McDonalds was guilty of "willful, reckless, malicious or wanton conduct" punitive damages were also applied. The jury set the award at $2.7 million. The judge then reduced the fine to less than half a million. Ms. Liebeck then settled with McDonalds for a sum reported to be much less than a half million dollars. McDonald's coffee is now sold at the same temperature as most other restaurants. "

Re:Greed is Good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877697)

Well, I knew the full story, and the case is STILL bullshit.

Consult a burn specialist to serve coffee? Have we totally lost our minds as a species? Just don't spill your fucking coffee. Maybe not try to add sugar to a hot coffee in a fucking drive through! Liebeck's behavior was reckless and a disregard for her own saftey! Screw her and screw whiny enablers like you, scumbag.

Re:Greed is Good (4, Insightful)

inviolet (797804) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877845)

79 year old Stella Liebeck suffered third degree burns on her groin and inner thighs while trying to add sugar to her coffee at a McDonalds drive through. Third degree burns are the most serious kind of burn. McDonalds knew it had a problem. There were at least 700 previous cases of scalding coffee incidents at McDonalds before Liebeck's case. McDonalds had settled many claim before but refused Liebeck's request for $20,000 compensation, forcing the case into court. Lawyers found that McDonalds makes its coffee 30-50 degrees hotter than other restaurants, about 190 degrees.

You know that coffee is brewed with water that is on the verge of boiling, right? Ditto for hot tea, at least if you follow worldwide British/Indian custom. So if your coffee is served fresh, as Starbucks does serve it, then it will be about 190 degrees. There would be a storm of "ZOMG my five-dollar coffee isn't fresh!!1!" complaints if they didn't.

So I'd like to know the definition of "other restaurants" that plaintiff claims are serving cooler coffee. It is very telling that they do not cite any coffee- or restaurant-industry standard for coffee serve temperature.

For added enlightenment, next time you brew a pot of coffee, let it sit in the carafe for a while with the coffeemaker still on to keep it warm, and then check the temperature with a cooking thermometer. Then come back and tell us whether plaintiff was justified in claiming that McDonalds' procedure was somehow out-of-the-ordinary.

Re:Greed is Good (5, Informative)

debrain (29228) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877563)

For 150 dollars an hour, a lawyer will never tell you any idea of yours is bad, even if it's suing McDonalds because your hot coffee is (gasp!) HOT, and should not have been poured all over your crotch.

Lawyers have an obligation to advise their clients of the good and bad of the client's case. In addition to duties under their respective governing society and regulations, the practical reason is rather simple: Where a lawyer is negligent in failing to properly advise their client of the risks in a litigation, that lawyer could be liable to their client in negligence.

Re:Greed is Good (1)

ImNotAtWork (1375933) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877609)

The thing about the hot coffee lawsuit is that she was not the 1st person to complain about it. There was 700 people who filed complaints in a ten year period burn by the high temp coffee (some with 3rd degree burns. Yet McDonalds knowingly (documenting itself too) kept the temperature way too hot. This showed negligence on their part.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm [lectlaw.com]

Re:Greed is Good (2, Interesting)

inviolet (797804) | more than 4 years ago | (#27878003)

The thing about the hot coffee lawsuit is that she was not the 1st person to complain about it. There was 700 people who filed complaints in a ten year period burn by the high temp coffee (some with 3rd degree burns. Yet McDonalds knowingly (documenting itself too) kept the temperature way too hot. This showed negligence on their part.

Turn in your geek card immediately, for failing to differentiate between gross and per capita rates.

700 coffee incidents is what percent of McDonalds' total coffee sales? Answer: about 1 in 24 million. And you call that 'negligent'?!

Re:Greed is Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877619)

Others have pointed out why her case was justified. I'll simply point out that for 150 dollars an hour, her lawyer gave her good advice, financially speaking. She won, didn't she?

Your point may be valid, but next time pick an example where the plaintiff didn't win. SCO, for example.

Facts on the McDonalds coffee case (1, Informative)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877705)

Why is it when people get indignant about law, they bring up the McDonald's coffee case? Here [lawandhelp.com], read about it.

For those of you that are "tl:dr", here's the case in a nutshell. McDonald's knew it had a problem with coffee temperature, thought that it would be cheaper to settle potential cases rather than fix the problem. The jury awarded punitive damages (which the plaintiff did not ask for) which amounts to the total of two days worth of profit McDonald's makes on their coffee sales. The plaintiff, who suffered third degree burns, would have not filed suit if McDonald's would have compensated for her medical issues which included skin grafts to her groin, thighs and buttocks and her stay in the hospital.

Being indignant is so much easier when you are ignorant about the facts.

Re:Greed is Good (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877917)

> For 150 dollars an hour...

That's a really cheap lawyer these days! For a legal situation I was in recently in corporate law, we were paying more like $550/hr.

Won't someone think of the... (1, Funny)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877345)

Shelter Rock Jewish Center or Serangoon Junior College or

Samuel Robert James Colbert?

Re:Won't someone think of the... (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877435)

Yeah, someone should tell the school that Shelter Rock Jewish Center is domain squatting on srjc.org

Re:Won't someone think of the... (1)

adam613 (449819) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877501)

That would actually be very amusing, given the number of well-paid lawyers that probably go to Shelter Rock Jewish Center...

Re:Won't someone think of the... (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877789)

That would actually be very amusing, given the number of well-paid lawyers that probably go to Shelter Rock Jewish Center...

Back in my day, they only went there once.

Re:Won't someone think of the... (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877713)

    I had a look at their .com site. santarosajunioncollege.com. I guess they run a link farm too. Oh, they're just being annoying, picking worthless battles with the people that pay their bills.

   

Re:Won't someone think of the... (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877639)

Won't someone stand up, and tell the fscking business world that the internet was not created just for them?!?!

Seriously, it wasn't built for businesses to make money, sell things or what-have-you. Sure, you can do it, but, that was not (and hopefully will not) be its primary purpose.

Re:Won't someone think of the... (2, Informative)

Ironica (124657) | more than 4 years ago | (#27878007)

Won't someone stand up, and tell the fscking business world that the internet was not created just for them?!?!

Seriously, it wasn't built for businesses to make money, sell things or what-have-you. Sure, you can do it, but, that was not (and hopefully will not) be its primary purpose.

What on earth are you talking about? They're threatening people with a valid affiliation with the college, not random Joe Blow who put "srjc" in his e-mail address because he wanted it to say "Señor Jesus" or whatever. The issue is that people who *do* have an affiliation with the college might be confusing people as to the officialness of a particular email channel, which definitely could cause problems.

Of course, the *real* issue here is that people create yahoo, gmail, hotmail, etc. accounts with their employer or school name in the username if they CAN'T USE THEIR OFFICIAL EMAIL ADDRESS. That is usually due to draconian spam filtering, poor support for email reading software, excessive downtime, small inboxes, or other technical or procedural issues that fall under the (you guessed it) CIO's purvey.

It is a real problem when people use free personal email boxes to conduct official business; see Sarah Palin's Yahoo account. But it's up to the technical leadership of the organization to make their own email domain useful enough that people have no good reason to do this.

Saphic Retarded Jesuit Cunts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877647)

The Lord is displeased that thou toucheth thyself in such manner!

Of course they did... (3, Insightful)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877359)

A lawyer will take any case he can make a buck on.

Re:Of course they did... (2, Insightful)

chris098 (536090) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877497)

You're absolutely right most of the time, but there is the odd lawyer out there with morals. One that may actually recommend something that is in your own best interest, instead of theirs. If you can manage to find one of those, you've found a resource for life!

Re:Of course they did... (2, Informative)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877561)

It's not their job to make moral judgments on their clients. Their client has a grievance, their client is paying them to pursue that grievance. They may choose not to pursue it, but really, this is hardly a situation where you're going to excuse yourself for moral reasons.

Re:Of course they did... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877999)

maybe not for a satanist. Anyone with any real morals (or one millionth of a brain) would recognize it's immoral to sue students and faculty over characters in their email addresses.

Re:Of course they did... (0, Troll)

M-RES (653754) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877511)

A lawyer will take any case he can make a buck on.

A lawyer will take any case he or she can make a buck on.

There, corrected that for you - we do live in equal opportunity times you know ;)

Single Female Lawyer (4, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877735)

Single Female Lawyer -
fighting For Her Clients,
wearing Sexy Mini Skirts,
and Being Self-Reliant.

Re:Of course they did... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877867)

Jesus fucking Christ, can you please die?

Re:Of course they did... (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877737)

Indeed. Even when that case is obviously unjust, or illegal.

Lawyers, like journalists, like to proclaim themselves as pillars and protectors of democratic and free society. In reality, they are often the people at the very forefront of that societies destruction. It makes you wonder why they are granted the powers and privileges that they enjoy.

Hahaha (1)

mc1138 (718275) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877375)

Really? I mean seriously? I could maybe maybe understand if it was the whole name of the college, but just the acronym? Plus was this ever in their acceptable use policy? Do they even have a remote leg to stand on here?

Doubly Strange (5, Interesting)

hedronist (233240) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877381)

This is more than a bit surreal since SRJC has a long history of being on the net.

For example, Santa Rosa Junior College is one of the very few non-4-year colleges to have a .EDU domain name. In the early 90's they had two junior admins, Dane Jasper and Scott Doty, who went on to become the founders of a Mom-and-Pop Internet company that actually succeeded. It started as Sonoma Interconnect, but is now known as Sonic.net [sonic.net].

It's a shame to add this squirrely episode to that history.

Re:Doubly Strange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877615)

For example, Santa Rosa Junior College is one of the very few non-4-year colleges to have a .EDU domain name.

I'm not sure if you are referring to the 90s or now, but most community colleges in California have a .EDU domain name.

Re:Doubly Strange (2, Interesting)

hedronist (233240) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877797)

You know what? You're right! I just looked at a list of CA Community Colleges [cccco.edu] and they almost all have .EDU's. I know that today you have to be a 4-year school, but I guess that didn't used to be true. Huh, you learn (or unlearn) something every day.

I will note that santarosa.edu shows an activation date of 19-Oct-1989, so that goes back a way.

Re:Doubly Strange (4, Informative)

i.r.id10t (595143) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877903)

Backwards. Educause used to require that you were a 4 year accredited school, now any school can get a .edu domain

Re:Doubly Strange (1, Troll)

whitehatnetizen (997645) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877621)

srjc.admin@gmail.com bite me lawyers - I'm not even in the same country.

Re:Doubly Strange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877773)

srjc.admin@gmail.com

bite me lawyers - I'm not even in the same country.

ken.fiori.srjc@gmail.com

Er, Lawyers? (1)

Ian Alexander (997430) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877385)

"I can't believe they found a lawyer who thought this was a good idea."

Anything that makes paid work for him/her is a good idea to a lawyer.

Re:Er, Lawyers? (1)

multisync (218450) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877677)

Anything that makes paid work for him/her is a good idea to a lawyer.

Yeah, personally I hate anything that brings business to my company. I stand out front with a big sign that reads "Don't bring your business here. We don't want it."

Thank goodness we're not like those greedy lawyers who just want to make money off their trade.

Re:Er, Lawyers? (1)

butlerdi (705651) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877717)

Just like the programmers who work in Langley and elsewhere writing code to do nasties to their fellow humans. I find it funny how all on this list attack others when we as a profession are doing so much to provide guv's with all the tech they need to screw us.

Pretty normal for a government agency (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877389)

This was one of the complaints I got fired for. Nevermind that nobody on slashdot or technocrat at the time was stupid enough to think that an employee of ODOT was speaking for ODOT (especially since, in the article that got me in trouble, I only identified myself as being in a certain building not actually an employee).

It's a time-honored tradition! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877405)

Suing students works for the MAFIAA... obviously, these kids are loaded with extra money, and the college clearly isn't already taking enough from some of them.

It's low-hanging fruit, you know; these kids can't protect themselves and their parents will roll right over and hand out the extra cash.

(Wow, I didn't know my tongue could go that far into my cheek!)

/. Editor With Too Much Time On His Hands (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877409)

Yeah, you kdawson.

Get back to work and fix the missing comment count in the frickin' summaries.

Nothing better to do... (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877411)

"I can't believe they found a lawyer who thought this was a good idea."

What, you think they just came up with the titles "Ambulance Chaser" and "Blood Sucking" just for shits and giggles? Some lia, er I mean lawyers earned these unofficial titles.

And the REAL issue isn't the lawyer would came up with this bullshit, but the judge who allowed it anywhere past his or her bailiff in a courtroom. See my sig for futher info...

Work on real problems. (1)

JorgeFierro (1304567) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877421)

Well, whatever study drove them to conclude that people may be confused to think that those emails containing "SRJC" are official is the root of the problem.
I mean, anyone with 9 dollars a month can set up their own my@domain.com email, let alone universities, that also get an .edu.

Re:Work on real problems. (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877483)

9 dollars a month? You're not doing it right.

www.iweb.com
www.powweb.com

Note: I don't work for any of those, but I did get many years of excellent service from both so far.

Re:Work on real problems. (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877723)

I run a domain of mine through Google's free domain/email hosting. It's a hell of a lot better (so far) than the paid email hosting you get through Network Solutions, or similar.

How lawyers learn (1)

DriedClexler (814907) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877425)

I can't believe they found a lawyer who thought this was a good idea."

Well, we recently learned how lawyers feel obligated not to read anything [slashdot.org] that could give them a clue how the world works...

What if my initials are... (5, Funny)

ganjadude (952775) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877439)

SRJC Sam Robert Jacob Christinson? Can I sue the college for using my initals in their offical email? Someone may confuse me with them

Re:What if my initials are... (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877625)

on behalf of the Shelter Rock Jewish Center, I'd like to inform you that you'll be hearing from our lawyers.

Re:What if my initials are... (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877669)

No, they will sue you to change your name. SRJC was founded in 1918. If you are posting on Slashdot, they have prior art and right to the initials.

If you are posting from the afterlife, you might have a case to sue them: "Santa Rosa Junior College vs. the late Sam Robert Jacob Christinson."

"Greta can you comment on that?"

Re:What if my initials are... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877861)

I am Sam Robert Jacob Christinson XI you insensitive clod.

Re:What if my initials are... (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877805)

Sam Robert Jacob Christinson
His name is my name too.
When ever we go out
the people always shout
her come s Sam Robert Jacob
fa la la la la...

That's MY damn email address! (2, Interesting)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877441)

Seriously, if you're a company/whatever, then the email address to contact me is YOUR damn company/whatever name @mydomain.com

So if I get a single godamn piece of spam at that address, I know you're the ones responsible for selling/giving that address to the spammers.

Oh Noez (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877467)

Anyone is well within their rights to put these letters into their email address. Just like Yahoo can't stop people from putting Yahoo in their non-Yahoo email addresses.

The college is well within their rights to threaten to sue, as you can pretty much sue for any reason, but the court will decide if it needs to be shot down or actually go to trial. Scare tactics.

Steven Ray Justin Curtis (2, Insightful)

Narnie (1349029) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877493)

I, Steven Ray Justin Curtis, take great offense to this. My initials are SRJC you insensitive clods!!

What utter fucktards... (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877513)

I'm not saying I'm surprised; because idiocy is hardly surprising; but this move shows both legal asshattery and truly incredible ignorance of the technically mediated mores that exist on the internet.

With an email address, everybody knows that the local-part (before the @) is arbitrary and the domain corresponds, of course, to a domain. Using the local-part as an organizational identifier, except in flaky ad-hoc setups for small sub organizations(student_club@school.edu style), just isn't done. The domain is always where you look for organizational information.

This seems to be a case where somebody(who should know better, since he is part of their tech department) is treating all parts of the email address as being equally salient. If somebody had grabbed santarosa.com or santarosacollege.com (as opposed to the school's santarosa.edu) and was using email addresses in that domain for misleading purposes, I could sympathize with the case. Trying to dictate the form of email address local-parts from other domains is just bullshit, though.

Re:What utter fucktards... (1)

Chazerizer (934553) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877765)

With an email address, everybody knows that the local-part (before the @) is arbitrary and the domain corresponds, of course, to a domain. Using the local-part as an organizational identifier, except in flaky ad-hoc setups for small sub organizations(student_club@school.edu style), just isn't done. The domain is always where you look for organizational information.

Actually, the sad part is, everybody doesn't know this crucial piece of information. It's why Nigerian schemes and other e-mail junk-shit works occasionally. Because people are clearly stupid. All that said, what a way to waste a reputation for a place. The concept that you can claim all uses of an abbreviation are absurd. Just to check it out, a quick Google search also turned up Shelter Rock Jewish Center in Nassau, NY and Serangoon Junior College in Singapore.

Re:What utter fucktards... (1)

horatio (127595) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877817)

Furthermore

"Let's say I'm a student named Mary Kay Rudolph and I have a Yahoo account" said Mary Kay Rudolph, vice president of academic affairs. "But, instead of asking to be mkrudolph@yahoo.com I am mksrjc@yahoo.com. Or, I am santarosajuniorcollege2@yahoo.com. Those are both illegal."

These dumbasses really think that because they decree a policy, that somehow it automatically becomes codified law - and therefore illegal? Go back and take gov't 101, the elected legislature decides what is legal or not.

The summary makes it sound like it was just one asshat lawyer, but TFA indicates that the rest of the administration stands behind it. With these kind of morons running it, no wonder our education system is in the toilet.

Sue me... santa.rosa.junior.college.edu@gmail.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877877)

Everyone should set up their own free email accounts with SRJC in the name and post them in the comments on this story. Send the court summons to santa.rosa.junior.college.edu@gmail.com I'll be there with bells on. :)

Publicity (3, Funny)

Translation Error (1176675) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877515)

I have never heard of Santa Rosa Junior College and if they hadn't gotten themselves on Slashdot, I never would have. Even if they don't get a single email address changed, they've gotten something out of this move.

Oblig. Mencken (1)

greenguy (162630) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877535)

Sure, I suppose people who fall for 419 scams probably could be fooled, but not any reasonable humans.

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

Confused me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877559)

When I read they were suing students with SRJC in the name I thought, "what the fuck is SRJC?" Oh, it's the school. Good for them. I know when I see an email addy with SRJC I think of that school whatever its name is.

Bad Press (1)

RancidPickle (160946) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877595)

Considering they're trying to get more students in the door, this is a terrible public relations nightmare. What student would want to attend a college that threatens to sue over something as trivial as an email adress -- and a private one at that? Very unfortunate for the students and faculty, and a black eye for the administration.

No problem dude (3, Funny)

bobdotorg (598873) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877703)

"Unless they have been given permission to use that, we are asking them not to use it," said Ken Fiori, director of computing services at the college.

No problem dude, I'll just change my email to FU_KenFiori@gmail.com .

Re:No problem dude (5, Funny)

Nihixul (1430251) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877943)

No problem dude, I'll just change my email to FU_KenFiori@gmail.com .

Florida University would like to have a word with you....

I double dog dare you... (1)

Jerrry (43027) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877741)

I just created a new Gmail account with SRJC in the name. Let's see if I get a nastygram from one of the college's shy^H^H^H lawyers.

Sure would be a shame... (5, Funny)

Morphine007 (207082) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877777)

The two people mentioned in the article as being behind the policy are:

MK Rudolph - mrudolph@santarosa.edu and

K Fiori - kfiori@santarosa.edu

The latter created the policy (director of computing services) and the former has her weight behind it (VP Academic Affairs). Just figured it'd be useful information to have. I'm in no way suggesting that all of slashdot go out and register variants of hotGritzIn_SJRC@gmail.com and youSuck_SJRC@yahoo.com or anything like that. And using hundreds of those emails to spam the everliving bejeezus out of their mailboxes would be nearly as morally questionable as suing your own students for making similar addresses. So I'd never suggest that either.

My new email address... (1)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877793)

I was having trouble thinking of a new email address to use. Now I know it will definitely contain the letters SRJC.

Number of comments?! (3, Insightful)

x78 (1099371) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877809)

Is it me or has the number of comments of an article been taken off the beta index?!
I for one am not happy with this!
Going back to the original, hmph.
To keep on topic, yeah it's a little silly :)

Shouldn't they worry more... (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877835)

Shouldn't they worry more about people outside the university trying to look like they are from the college rather than students and staff who actually are?

Dubious Understanding of Law (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877889)

"Let's say I'm a student named Mary Kay Rudolph and I have a Yahoo account," said Mary Kay Rudolph, vice president of academic affairs. "But, instead of asking to be mkrudolph@yahoo.com I am mksrjc@yahoo.com. Or, I am santarosajuniorcollege2@yahoo.com. Those are both illegal."

I'm very anxious to hear Mary Kay's legal theory that makes a four letter string in an email address "illegal".

"I could see how misuse of the SRJC name might be used ... to misrepresent the college or worse yet solicit funds, fees, or money," he said in an e-mail Thursday.

Yes, that's called fraud. It's a crime. (Also, what on Earth could be the distinction between "funds, fees, or money"?)

But you can't dictate other people's behavior simply because you can imagine a scenario where they might commit fraud.

-Peter

Re:Dubious Understanding of Law (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 4 years ago | (#27878017)

Please send any information or complaints relating to this message to SRJCAdmissionsAndRecords@hutnick.com.

I'm not kidding.

-Peter

This happens all the time (4, Interesting)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877905)

I worked for the California Community College system. A lot of these schools are running on old exchange installations on aging hardware with tiny quotas, that tend to have poor uptimes. (My school was 60MB for faculty due to Exchange 5.5's 16GB information store limit). Many professors within the college simply told their students to mail them at prof_name.(college_initals)@gmail.com because of higher quotas for massive amounts of students sending poorly optimized attachments as part of their assignment, that was web/client accessible in a better interface than 5.5 had, and had much better uptime. As an institution we advised them to use their college-provided account so IT could view the logs and say "yes or no" this student did/did not attempt to submit their paper ontime.

If anything, this helps students and faculty make sure they are communicating with the right "John Smith, Professor" out there.

Every single student whom crosses the door of SRJC is making a statement that "I feel qualified to be a college-level student." Part of being a student is understanding the tools you use to get the job done. Not taking minimal effort to verify an e-mail address for validity, particularly given most students are forced to use an Online Courseware system that is at something.mycollege.edu, so they know that "this address does not match this address", is no excuse for acting foolishly.

One of the biggest merits of going to any college is that after 18 years of hand-holding in the home and public education spheres, the college is not going to baby sit you, beg you to pay your fees on time, order you to attend lecture (though sadly some professors attempt to to artifically give merit to their poor instruction in the form of attendance-grades), or anything else for that matter. You are there because you want to learn, and almost no career has zero computer interaction, so you should learn to use the computer, just like you learned to read even though you didn't plan on being grammar or literature teacher. I am shocked and disappointed how many people flatly refuse to properly learn to use a tool that can make their job easier. I've never met anyone who "regretted" spending the necessary time to use a computer effectively.

Using the college's name (3, Interesting)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877911)

administrators said using the college's name in e-mail addresses could potentially confuse people.

The administrators seem to be trying to keep people from using the college's name in their private e-mail addresses. So why are they going after abbreviations? I guess I could see it if someone registered SantaRosaJuniorCollege@yahoo.com and started spamming people, but attempting to claim ownership on SRJC? That's simply ridiculous.

I just checked the USPTO (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877957)

I just search TESS on uspto.gov for a trademark ( SRJC ) and got this result:

No TESS records were found to match the criteria of your query.
Click on the New User Form BACK button in your browser to return to the previous TESS screen

Seems to me they need a better lawyer. On what legal basis are they threatening staff and students?

Waiting for a cease-and-desist... (1)

a-zarkon! (1030790) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877971)

I think I'm going to spend 10 minutes and set up a couple of new free-email accounts on Yahoo, MSN, Gmail with SRJC in the name just to see if they contact me. Maybe even use one to send an inquiry about how one goes about enrolling in their school to their admissions department. They must be doing something really right if they are able to hassle tuition-paying students in these tough economic times over something so ridiculous.

People are not that bright or they are dicks (1)

mzs (595629) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877985)

I used to sign my emails:

"mzs"

At one point I had to add a signature like this to the end of my emails:

"mzs - place of employment"

The reason, a vendor I contacted for a quote complained that he was unsure if I was really from where I was from. I guess the From: line was not enough.

Then I had to add under that:

"The ideas and opinions expressed ... are mine and not those of my employer"

This was after I emailed an the assistant principal at my son's school and instead of addressing my concern about the teacher he got into a tizzy that I emailed him from work and were these things the opinion of my employer.

Then I just went back to mzs and used my personal email when he kept being a jerk. He never did address my concerns, just kept looking for ways to avoid the issue. The school year is almost over, so water under the bridge.

I think some people just are sort of clueless about email and others like to cause trouble. I am not sure about the fellow in this article but certainly one of those are the explanation.

by their logic... (1)

EkriirkE (1075937) | more than 4 years ago | (#27878009)

If My email was jesus@, i would have many christian slaves to do my bidding because they assume I'm the 3rd come.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...