FINAL EXAM
Key Questions About Computer Conferencing
by Art Kleiner


I taught a graduate-level course this summer called "Computer
Networking"--for the New York University Interactive
Telecommunications Program. To my knowledge, this is the only
class of its kind so far. 16 students met face-to-face for six
weeks, exploring different computer-based communication and
information systems, learning how to use them with
sophistication, and critiquing them with the same kind of
critical eye that a film critic would have for a movie.

Some students were full-time, others were taking the class on a
part-time, after-work basis. They had guest accounts on
CompuServe, the WELL, EIES, and (PARTI-based) UNISON, plus Dow
Jones News Service and DIALOG. (Also, the Source and GENIE, but
it was megalomaniacal on my part to think they could learn eight
systems in six weeks.) Students could use their own equipment,
or use IBM-PC's equipped with ProComm and PC-Write (two great
shareware programs) here at the School's computer lab, or they
could borrow those familiar thermal-paper printing terminals
that have helped so many of us get started.

I held my final exam as a computer conference on the WELL. It
worked surprisingly well. The exam did not take up class time,
and instead of writing competitive papers, students could
springboard off each others' comments. I would consider holding
the final exam this way for any face-to-face class, not just one
on computer networking.

The following five questions comprise that final exam. Lisa
Kimball (who helped write one of them) suggested that they would
be of interest to anyone who does much computer conferencing--
crystallizing points, perhaps, for thinking about the medium. If
not, maybe they'll help spark some ideas for similar questions
in others. If you were teaching such a course, what questions
would you pose in the final? If you were taking such a course,
how would you answer these?


Question 1: ElderForum Experience in Entrepreneurship
=====================================================

You are a computer-conferencing entrepreneur. Somehow, you
convince CompuServe that they should hire you to host and manage
a forum for the elderly (ElderForum). They agree. In exchange
for your time, you'll get 10% of the connect charges of all
participants for the time they're in the Forum, plus a free
CompuServe account.

You start up the Forum with high hopes. A month goes by. Four
people sign on. One of them leaves a public message. There are
no responses. After two months, CompuServe informs you that if
traffic doesn't pick up in two weeks, they will summarily drop
your Forum. Goodbye, computer conferencing entrepreneurship
career.

Does this prove that computer conferencing is of little value to
the elderly? If so, why? If not, what's your next move?


Question 2: The Online Heaven Opportunity
=========================================

You are hired as the designer of a new "Computer Information
Utility" called Online Heaven. "In two years, we want to have
the biggest membership of all of 'em," says Jules Spillman, the
principal investor and President of the Company. "We took you on
because you're NOT a techie. You know what the users want.
You've struggled through all those OTHER networks." Then he
puts you on the spot: "What do you think this utility should
look like? What kinds of commands should we have? What kind of
overall structure? What kind of help? What services?"

Here's your chance to brainstorm about the ideal computer
conferencing utility. What features should Online Heaven have?
What should the user see when they first log in? Feel free to
steal features from other networks, but give credit when you do.
Don't be general--don't say things like, "The system should be
easy to use." Instead, say, "Here's what the new user should see
when they first sign in."


Question 3: The Individually-Tailored Topic
===========================================

How would computer networks/conferencing/information systems be
of value to you in Your Real-Life Work? What would you use? How
would you use it? Why? (And, oh, yeah: be sure to tell us what
the work is that you would adapt computer conferencing for.)

This question could apply to your for-profit business; or to a
business for which you are consulting; or to a non-profit
project for which you are working; or for some enterprise in
which you are an employee. What I'm looking to find out is: Is
any of this technology useful? If so, what for?


Question 4: The Sludgebottom Conundrum
======================================

You are a small-town newspaper editor, writing a column on an
upcoming court case--the first case of Electronic Libel.

It seems that Congressman Horatio Sludgebottom (Republican,
Colorado) opened an account on the Carriage House computer
conferencing system in his home town of Colorado Springs.
Unfortunately, the congressman slyly signed in under the
pseudonym "David Jones". Then, in the Politics conference,
"David Jones" opened a topic asking how people thought
Congressman Sludgebottom was doing.

Some people said he was doing fine, others said otherwise, but
there were no real fireworks until local resident Suzie Ethan
Brown said that she had seen Congressman Sludgebottom sneaking
out of a gay pornographic movie theater in Denver. This was
particularly damaging to Sludgebottom because he is a
conservative Christian fundamentalist. He had recently proposed
a bill that would allow states to prohibit all pornographic
films within their borders.

Sludgebottom immediately sued. He didn't sue Suzie Ethan Brown--
he sued the Carriage House computer network. They are
responsible, his suit says, for any slander that appears on
their network. And, since his day in court has not yet come
about, he denies that the event ever happened. Meanwhile,
Carriage House is protesting that because Sludgebottom signed on
under a false name, his suit represents invasion of privacy.

As a newspaper columnist, you don't have to decide what's
legally correct. You have to opine on what is MORALLY correct.
Should Sludgebottom be awarded damages? If so, who should pay--
Suzie Ethan Brown or the Carriage House computer network? Should
the damages depend on whether Sludgebottom was actually visiting
the porn theatre or not? If Sludgebottom had signed on under his
own name, would he have a better moral case? Or does it make no
difference?

What's the ethical bottom line of this complicated situation?


Question 5: The Seven-Headed Monster
====================================

You are the chief of planning for a large multinational
thinktank organization called NUMCO (Nebulous Ubiquitous
Multinational Corporation). You are bringing your top seven
planners into a single conference where they are all supposed to
decide the direction of planning for NUMCO during the next six
months. They are scattered around the world.

The planner in London ("Equipment Failure") is wildly
enthusiastic. Unfortunately, she can't get her modem to work.
She doesn't know if the problem is in her modem, her terminal
software, or her transmission line. So she has yet to sign on.

The planner in New York ("Luddite Curmudgeon") doesn't
understand why he has to deal with computer conferencing and
wants to make his contributions by telephoning the other
participants--or, better yet, having his secretary telephone
them.

The planner in Tokyo ("Conceptual Artist") has contributed her
first tentative comment. Unfortunately, the upload didn't quite
work, and it is complete with missing characters, double
characters, paragraphs that end prematurely, and what seem to be
missing words. To make matters worse, you're not certain if the
problem is technical, or her lack of proficiency with English.
But she's essential to the project, and must not be allowed to
become discouraged.

The planner in Melbourne ("Uncle Irrelevant") has contributed
four items so far. Only one of them has to do with the topic at
hand. One is a boring, lengthy description of Australian
restaurants ("in case you ever make it down here, mates").
Another is a fascinating story about the first Australian
computer. And the third is hard to understand, but it appears to
be a digression on the nature of planning itself--something that
might be interesting, if it were written better.

The planner in Cleveland ("Insufficient Access") has only signed
on once, although she is enthusiastic. The reason is apparently
that she has to walk down three flights of stairs to someone
else's office to use their computer.

The planner in Montreal ("The Phantom Lurker") has apparently
signed on. You've seen her name online. But she has yet to
author any comment, or to respond offline to tell you that she
is paying attention.

The planner in San Francisco ("Captain Overload") is
enthusiastic, and has gotten his modem and software to work.
While waiting for everyone else, he has flooded the network with
20 comments. He is beginning to complain that no one else has
reacted to his brilliant ideas.

What are your ideas for solving any or all of these problems?
If you don't get them all communicating within the next six
weeks, the project will likely go down the tubes--or you'll have
to budget a lot of money for phone calls and Telexing.

-----

Author's note: For more information about the NYU Interactive
Telecommunications Program, call 212/598-3338. And if you're
interested in seeing my students' critical journals, I will be
editing a selection of comments into an article for LinkUp
Magazine. The students' journals currently are available in Data
Library 1 of the Whole Earth Forum on Compuserve (GO WEC).