According to Fred Morris,
>
>           It should not matter to what use information is to be put,
>           either respond with the information requested or delete the
>           request, there is no need for any debate of the subject. I
>           find it odd for those with so much knowledge to withhold it
>           upon request.
>
>           I personally find withholding such information shameless on
>           the part of the withholding party.  This is my opinion only
>           and hope those skilled and knowledgeable will continue to
>           enlighten the rest of us.
>
>           FM......................
 
Although an admirable sentiment, this bespeaks a certain naivet/e in basic
terms of the process of providing information in a formal setting such as a
library or even, I would suggest, the internet.
 
Who on the list would provide me information on how to make a fertilizer bomb
if they knew that I espoused the Spiro school of prehistoric mound excavation?
[I'll leave a comparable Historic Archaeology analogy to your imagination.]
 
Knowing <why> a person wants certain information is frequently very much
necessary to determine what information they want or, if you'll excuse the
expression, <need.>  Determining this is often part of what librarians have
somewhat grandiosely termed "the reference interview."
 
Setting aside ethical considerations of providing specific knowledge intended
for illegal purposes or subverting the educational process, there remains the
question of efficiency, and I continue to maintain that an undergraduate
spamming the internet for information obtainable in an encyclopedia or
introductory text is no more efficient than it is ethical.
 
Familiarizing students with the internet is fine but it is not (yet) a
substitute for teaching them how to use their own library, and cribbing an
Anthro 101 paper from the internet remains as self-defeating as cribbing from
the printed page-- just somewhat harder to detect.
 
Jim Murphy
[log in to unmask]
 
that