Avery 1
Nelson Avery
Mr. Leslie
Computer Science 103
19 October 2003
Gettysburg College’s Network Policies
Gettysburg College’s Network Use, Hardware-Software Use, and Web policies should
not be quickly passed over. There are a number of regulations and standards set in them that
most students would not expect to find. Some are important to note because they are more
restrictive than expected, while others are noticeably lenient. Between these, there are a few that
are especially surprising.
There are not many leniencies to be found in the college’s policies. For obvious reasons,
they can not afford to be too lenient with certain matters. The most noticeable is in the Web
Policy. It states that, “Gettysburg College…allows and encourages students, staff, and faculty to
develop personal WWW pages. However, the College does not accept any responsibility for the
content of those pages.” In short, this policy gives individuals freedom to post anything on their
internet sites, and disclaims any responsibility for the consequences. It would not be too harsh to
place some basic restrictions on what members of the college can post, since they are connected
to the web by the college. Another leniency in is in the Network Use Policy under Copyrights,
where it states, “Network community members must respect all copyrights and always provide
proper attributions of authorship.” While this is not a lenient policy per say, it does leave out any
indication of repercussions, which are present in the majority of such sections.
The college puts plenty of restrictions in its policies. This is understandable as it needs to
protect itself from harm from its constituents. One example is found under the Hardware Use
section of the Hardware-Software Use Policy. It says, “IT will bill departments for repairs
Avery 2
beyond normal wear and tear.” Obviously, the college should not be expected to cover expenses
every time a machine is abused. A more unexpected restriction comes under Software Use.
“Should the system fail to function after loading unsupported software, IT Technicians may
restore the system…if the machine is restored again…the user’s department will be billed $150.”
Considering system restoration does not require replacement of parts, a fee of $150 seems a bit
excessive, even though it is reserved for second offenses. If the fee were one-third of this, it
would still be large, but more reasonable.
There is also more than one policy that is simply surprising. Under Network Degradation
in the Network Use Policy, it says, “excessive recreational use of the network (is) prohibited.”
While this is rather vague, it seems to mean games are not to be played on the network. This is
surprising to the generation of students that grew up on Internet games. Another surprise comes
in the same policy under College Authority, and states, “By using the Gettysburg College
network, users are granting permission for authorized network administrators to monitor and/or
intercept electronic communications.” This seems to be a blatant violation of privacy, and it
continues, “electronic mail is neither secure nor protected by the laws that apply to the United
States Postal Service. Email sent from a machine on the Gettysburg College network is
considered College business and is not private property.” While Congressmen are fighting the
Patriot Act for the same privacy violations, the benefit of the doubt can be given to the college
that this is legal. However, many students don’t know that their personal correspondence can be
searched, as they were never required to read this document or sign any paper informing them of
it. Such invasive regulations should at least be made more widely known to the student body.
All in all, the college policies proved to be more informative and interesting than
expected. There are few lenient policies, and only the necessary restrictive ones. The more
surprising policies are better to be aware of, and should be made such to more students.