Conference 7.286::dcu

    
    Unfortunately, I believe it may be different for different locations.
    
    From TTB, this is what I do:
    
    1. type  VTX <return>
    2. enter 2 <return>     (Live Wire for New Hampshire)
    3. enter 1 <return>     (Corporate Maynard Live Wire)
    4. enter 3 <return>     (Greater Maynard area news)
    5. enter 1 <return>     (news briefs, notice of Prez visits)
    	or  (4 <return>     (services)
    	then 2 <return>     (Digital Credit Union)
    
    
    Gee, I wonder why you had a hard time finding it?  :-)

    I guess they don't bury things as deep in HLO.
    
    $ VTX LIVEWIRE
    
    Option 3 on Main Menu (GMA News)
    Select the Services option from this menu
    DCU will be one of your choices on the Services Menu

    Re: .2
    
    After $ VTX LIVEWIRE, on my "Main Menu" option 3 is
    
    	"How to submit an article to LIVE WIRE"
    
    There is no mention of GMA News.

    
    RE: .3
    
    What are options 1 & 2?
    
    

    $ vtx livewire
    
             Main Menu
    
       1    Worldwide News
       2    U.S. News
       3    How to submit an article to LIVE WIRE
       4    How to print or save an article
    
    I am in CXO, Colorado Springs.  Does that make a difference?

    
    Yes, being in Colorado might have something to do with it.  I'm no VTX
    expert but I believe these menus and access to different things is
    controlled locally.  Maybe if you select option 3 and send mail to the
    person responsible out there, they can set it up?
    

    re: LiveWire
    
    Yes, the LiveWire content changes according to geography. The menu
    avilable at CXO is the "normal" menu for field access (same here in
    Maryland).
    
    If someone would be kind enough to post the value of VTX$SERVER: on a
    GMA node, other people could define a process logical which would bring
    up a GMA menu.  Of course, we don't want to flood one particular VTX
    server, but I doubt that the added traffic would be significant.
    
    Anyone in Greater Maynard care to post the value of their VTX$SERVER
    logical here?
    
    -- Russ Pavlicek

$ SHOW LOGICAL VTX$SERVER

   "VTX$SERVER" = "SHARE::"43="" (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)

    re: .8
    
    Thank you!
    
    So, to access GMA LiveWire from any VMS node on the net, use the
    following commands:
    
$ DEFINE/USER VTX$SERVER SHARE::"""43="""
$ VTX
    
    Specifying the "/USER" will cause the logical to vaporize after the
    next image executes (in this case, VTX).
    
    Please don't hog the server, though.  The "network police" might have a
    bird if traffic skyrockets on that node.
    
    -- Russ Pavlicek

    I dont see how to get to LiveWire from that VTX entry.

    You can either navigate through one of the entries (e.g., try option #7
    Employee Benefits; you'll find the LiveWire entry on the second page of
    that menu) or just press PF1 followed by KP7 (keypad 7) and enter:
    
    	LIVEWIRE
    
    It'll put you right on the LiveWire screen.
    
    -- Russ

    Thanks...

    I see that typing at the DCL prompt

    $ vtx livewire

    will also get me right in....its still a bit of wandering
    to get to DCU

    I am astounded that DCU information isn't on the corporate-wide
    LiveWire.  I went through the procedure of defining an alternate
    VTX$SERVER to get at the GMA LiveWire, and was surprized to see the DCU
    menu, including such timely information as weekly investment rates.
    
    Is there ANY reason that DCU information shouldn't be put on either the
    US or WORLDWIDE LiveWire menus?  Contrary to the heading in the GMA
    LiveWire, DCU is more than just the "GMA Credit Union"!
    
    Steve in Dallas

    I would agree with -.1
    
    I am sitting here in Munich but am a DCU member.  I would like to
    have more info available (though I admit I don't look in VTX that
    often)
    
    Chad
    

    Do we have any more information on whether or not the special
    meeting notice will be reported in Live Wire?
    
    Has Mark Steinkrauss removed his opposition?

    
    The person who promised to get back to me by today has a little under 2
    hours left.  I think I will give him a call anyways.

    Has anyone submitted the announcement to VNS.  It would be nice
    if the meeting were announced in Livewire but I hardly ever read
    Livewire and I don't think I'm atypical.  An announcement in VNS
    would reach more people.
    
    Regards,
    
    Gwen
    

    FYI:
    
    The article has been placed in the NEWVAX NEWS (SPECIAL catagory).
    
    Unfortunately, NEWS doesn't have the readership of either LIVEWIRE or
    VNS.
    
    -- Russ Pavlicek
       NEWVAX NEWS Editor
    
    PS/ Instructions on accessing NEWVAX NEWS will follow the form feed.
    
    
    If you have a VMS system, copy the following file into your account:
    
    	NEWVAX::NEWS_LOC:NEWS_REMOTE.COM
    
    When you execute this command file for the first time, it will copy the
    files needed to access NEWVAX NEWS (about 100 blocks worth total).  It
    will then put you into the main menu.
    
    If you wish to allow system-wide access, change the NEWS_CODE logical in the
    command file according to the instructions in the command file.
    
    To find the DCU articles, enter "2" for General Topics followed by "6"
    for Special News.  You'll find 3 or 4 DCU-related articles currently in
    that section.
    
    If you don't have access to a VMS system, send me mail and I can put
    you on the nightly distribution.  If you have access to a VMS system,
    I don't encourage the mail route as you might end up with lots of
    information that you're not interested in.  The online route is
    definitely better, IMHO.
    
    -- Russ

    
    I have been contacted by the LiveWire folks and they will be posting
    the special meeting announcement as soon as it is FAXed to them.  And
    that is happening as I type...
    
    A victory for the unwashed, incompetent masses...  Or is it the small
    band of troublemakers...  I just can't keep up with the latest BoD name
    de jour.

    Another small step, glimmer of light.
    
    Thanks Phil, DECU-decision-person (if involved), and LiveWire!
    
    Jack

Under the "Greater Maynard Area" news, which I guess is where DCU news
items are usuall put.  The meeting notice is most recently published item
in the GMA menu, immediately following another DCU item (a nice-sounding
announcement about reduced vehicle loan rates).

    Re: .-?
    
    A moral victory only, unfortunately.
    
    Do we now have a Live Wire policy on what what relating to the DCU gets
    posted and what doesn't?

    
    RE: .22
    
    Please give the LiveWire people some time to react to this and
    formulate their policies.  They were caught a bit unaware of the
    situation.  It is indeed encouraging that they have "done the right
    thing".  It is important in that it re-establishes their independence
    (and credibility) as a communications vehicle vs. being a mouthpiece 
    of DCU.
    
    I have also requested LiveWire post the "Information Protection Policy"
    that DCU has implemented.  Since it is DCU policy that is applicable to
    all DCU members requesting information from the credit union, I felt it
    appropriate to post on LiveWire.  They are still reviewing that
    request.  
    

              Greater Maynard Area News                LIVE WIRE


  When the Digital Federal Employees Credit Union (DCU) was formed, Digital
  made the policy decision to encourage the formation and management of an
  independent, financially strong institution to serve Digital employees.
  While the DCU is a separate entity which is owned entirely by its members,
  it is treasury's standard procedure to review the viability of financial
  institutions with whom Digital does business.  Digital has a strong interest
  in the well being of the DCU as an important employee benefit.

  In light of recent events, the company wants to reassure Digital employees
  that the DCU is financially sound with assets of approximately $375 million
  and a membership of over 88,000.  As a federal credit union, member deposits
  are insured up to $100,000 per account by the National Credit Union
  Insurance Fund, the most financially secure of all the federal insurance
  funds.

  There have been many challenges affecting the DCU in the last year.  The
  company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors, management,
  regulatory agencies and independent professionals have worked together
  effectively.

    
    RE: .24
    
    Why has Digital's Treasurer chosen to take a position on all this 
    at this point in time?  This is the second message from a high level
    manager in this company that I have seen which endorses the DCU BoD. 
    Nice to have friends in such high places that can just send a personal
    note to LiveWire and get it posted.  While others must wait over a week
    for an event to be posted.  I have formally requested that the
    personal note be removed or that access to LiveWire be granted for
    opposing viewpoints.  I am sorry to say that LiveWire's credibility as
    a "news posting" has been severely compromised with this posting.
    I guess my statements of them "doing the right thing" were a tad
    premature.  But when the Corporate Treasurer comes calling, maybe they
    don't have any alternative.
    
    These two communications from Digital management are blatant attempts
    to interfere with the issues between the DCU membership and the DCU
    BoD.  So much for the "seperate entity" model.  When somebody's senior
    manager says to join him at the meeting and support the BoD, many would
    not consider bucking that kind of suggestion, especially these days. 
    All along Digital has stated they are "hands off".  Now in the 11th
    hour when the BoD senses a real threat to their continued hold on the
    credit union, they roll out the big endorsements.  
    
    I urge all DCU members to reject such interference in this matter and 
    base their decisions on the facts and issues.  Come to the special 
    meeting and base your decisions on what has happened and the facts of 
    the matter, not blind endorsements from high level management.  

    re: .25
    Hey Phil, I think you're getting a little carried away here.  My
    reading of .24 is that it is pretty much a hands-off statement
    to reassure members that the credit union is not in danger of
    collapse and specifically tries not take sides.  The last paragraph 
    might be construed as taking sides, but "working together effectively"
    is a pretty neutral statement and hardly a drum-beating endorsement; 
    it doesn't say the BoD has done a good job, for example.

    Re: .25
    
    I wouldn't get too upset about the note from Ilene Jacobs.
    
    You can read it many ways, for example:
    
  >In light of recent events, the company wants to reassure Digital employees
  >that the DCU is financially sound with assets of approximately $375 million
  >and a membership of over 88,000.  As a federal credit union, member deposits
  >are insured up to $100,000 per account by the National Credit Union
  >Insurance Fund, the most financially secure of all the federal insurance
  >funds.

    You could read this to be saying that in spite of the mess at the DCU,
    it is in sound financial shape and is seaworthy i.e. it could weather
    a storm like the removal of the board.
    
    Or:
    
  >There have been many challenges affecting the DCU in the last year.  The
  >company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors, management,
  >regulatory agencies and independent professionals have worked together
  >effectively.
    
    I don't see this as an endorsement of the BoD or of any of the other
    parties mentioned, but just a statement saying that "given the makeup
    of this group, Digital believes that they've done as well as you could
    expect."  That *doesn't* mean that the note is saying that the current
    makeup is the best possible makeup and will yield a better result for
    the DCU than any other will.
    
    I think if it were intended to be a clear endorsement of the current
    BoD that it would single that point out and make it plain.  Frankly,
    I think that not doing that is more telling.
    
    fwiw,
    Steve
    
    

    
    RE: .26 & .27
    
    Sorry, I have to disagree.  Why was this note posted in LiveWire?  It has
    no news aspect whatsoever associated with it.  It is a personal note
    and the last paragraph is clearly an endorsement of the DCU BoD.  While
    you may not think it is glowing, it is nonetheless still an
    endorsement.  This along with the other communication from a very high
    manager are unmistakeable in their intent in my eyes.  
    
    And the timing of the "news" which Ilene Jacobs reports is of particular 
    interest.  Where was this back in April when the fraud was disclosed?  
    Where was it in August when DCU's checking changes had people running up 
    there to close accounts?  I guess this just another coincidence in that
    it is a week before the special meeting.  Sorry, but everything in this
    whole mess has been one "coincidence" after another.  Just too many of
    them to call them "coincidences" IMO.
    
    And again, suddenly this "seperate entity" has become of primary
    concern to Digital senior management.  Why is that?  Guess we have just
    justified all of our efforts as work related since Ilene Jacobs describes 
    it as "an important employee benefit".  I do thank her for that
    statement.
    

    Seems to me that a careful reading of the LiveWire's last paragraph
    shows that it is not really an endorsement.  After all, the current prez has
    not been in place long enough to be "effective", it could be argued.
    And, the term "effective" is not measureable.  A similar memo might have
    been written a year or two ago.  But, to the casual observer it looks like
    an endorsement because "effective" sounds like a good attribute.  This 
    memo applies it to the BoD as the implied conclusion of its review of the
    "viability" of this institution.
    
    
    Steve

    
    RE: .29
    
    So do you think it's an endorsement?  You seem to first state it isn't
    then that it is.  Please clarify.  Also, the "casual observer"
    (which is probably everybody that reads it) will probably not stop to
    dissect each and every word of the message and will be left with the
    last paragraph's statement, of BoD effectiveness.  Since they are the
    issue in all this, references to the other groups probably won't evewn
    be remembered.
    
    Any comments about the timing or "news worthy" aspects of such a
    posting?  My request for the posting of the BoD-PP has still not been
    granted BTW.  It's been over 10 days.  Guess nobody ever said this was
    going to be easy.  But I'm just amazed at all the little twists and
    turns along the way.  It'll make an interesting chapter (or ten) in my
    memoirs... 8-)
    
    

    re: .30
    
    Ah!  This is why they are upper-managers!  Part of the key to success
    is making no sound like yes and yes sound like no.  It's NOT an
    endorsement.  But, it looks like one.  Just my humble opinion, of
    course.
    
    Steve

    I think that Digital would like *not* to see the BoD go - for very good 
    reasons, I might add.  And I don't think it was anyone's original goal.

    But we have several people in here who have taken time to uncover facts and 
    have constructed interesting questions from those facts.  Answers to these
    questions may sway us to be "convinced" of the same things Digital appears 
    to be "convinced" of, yet we are denied these answers.  I feel
    genuinely blind about my credit union.  I respect that Digital would
    like a strife-free credit union.  I hope they respect my need for 
    answers.
    
    - Sean

    Several people have characterized Ilene Jacobs' comments (.24) as
    personal remarks.  It seems to me that she's speaking on behalf of
    Digital management:

        Digital has a strong interest in the well being of the DCU ...

        the company wants to reassure Digital employees ...

        The company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors, ...

    FWIW, this posting in LiveWire does seem like an endorsement of the
    whole DCU management team, including the BoD.

    -- Ward

    
    RE: .33
    
    Very good points.  I guess it would not be in Digital's best interest
    to have their Director of Investor Relations and a very public figure 
    removed from the DCU BoD.  If that weren't enough, a VP or two added to
    the removal and we have something that Digital would rather not talk
    about.  
    
    But can we afford to leave them where they are given what has transpired?  
    This blatant attempt to affect the DCU Special Meeting by uninvolved 
    Digital senior management flys in the face of everything we have been told 
    to date, namely that Digital was "hands off" in these matters.  They have
    now entered on behalf of the status quo, and should be prepared to
    defend their positions when presented with the facts of the matter. 
    Business is business.  If Digital endorses the current BoD then I
    expect Digital to put their money where their mouth is should DCU
    members suffer any further monetary loss due to the BoD that they
    endorse.  If they aren't prepared to do this, then quite frankly they
    should butt out and leave the decision to the membership without this
    type of interference.
    
    I must admit that I am very shocked that a company that professes 
    "Do the right thing." would do something like this at this point in time.
    If this statement had come from KO, would people consider it an
    endorsement?  I think so.
    

    I'll split a pizza with anyone that can get a statement from the powers
    that be that this release is an official endorsement of the Board or of
    the DCU folks mentioned.  A pizza says that this will be denied as
    being an endorsement.
    
    Steve

   I'm sure  anybody  would deny that the statement was an endorsement, but
   that  doesn't  alter the author's original intent no matter how much she
   might deny it by clever interpretation of the wording.

   An interesting  sideline, I called Ilene to discuss her endorsement with
   her.   As  soon  as  I told her secretary my name (which was at the very
   start  of our conversation), she said that Ilene "does not wish to speak
   with  you."  I asked her if she had a list of people to say that to, and
   she  wouldn't  answer.   So, I left a message that I was disappointed to
   see her make an endorsement without ascertaining the facts first.

    
    Re: endorsement or not.
    
    I would concede is that it is perhaps a conciliatory statement
    made by a senior Digital manager on behalf of Digital after probably
    intense pressure to "help out the DCU BoD in some way."  Expecting
    NO comment from Digital of any kind is not realistic.
    
    If that's an example of what Digital would say to "endorse" the
    DCU BoD, I'd be shaking in my boots if I was one of the BoD.  I'd
    sure as hell read that as "Here's our obligatory professional
    courtesy.  You got yourself into this; you'll have to get yourself
    out of it."
    
    fwiw,
    Steve
    

	I agree with Steve in .37 -- if the DCU BoD actively persued a Digital
endorsement, they certainly didn't receive a strong one.  The mere fact that
we're debating whether or not it was an endorsement shows to me that Digital's
upper management isn't clearly backing the DCU BoD.

	When I read the LiveWire article, I took a different slant on what
it was trying to get at.  I suspect that a lot of people are jittery at this
point about DCU's strength and Digital felt a need to remind people about the
credit union's insurance backing.  (Lets face it, if the Digital stockholders
were holding a special meeting to potentially throw out Digital's BoD, wouldn't
shareholders who didn't intimitely know what was going on be concerned that
something big-time was wrong and that Digital might collapse?  In the same way,
perhaps Digital's upper management is sensing that people are concerned about
the ability of DCU to survive and want to reassure the employees.)

							-craig

   I agree  that  the first paragraph was good to publicize.  I'm glad they
   did.   It was fairly neutral as far as supporting the BoD.  My issue was
   with the 2nd   paragraph. They could have left that out.

    The Livewire article was placed in a geographic specific file. 
    As it is not available to Livewire file outside of GMA, the treasurer
    was not interested to allaying DCU member fears about the stability
    of the institution.  It looks to me as if the article is written
    to have an effect on the special meeting since only members from
    the GMA will be attending the meeting.
    
    Gwen
    

    re: .40
    
    I think that the LiveWire people made the call to place the statement
    in the GMA menu.  I doubt that the Treasurer even knows.
    
    It looks like "equal time" to me.  The special meeting announcement
    (that was lobbied-for by folks that participate in this conference) was
    also placed in GMA.
    
    Mark

    
    I also interpreted it initially as did .38; however, the frosty reponse
    to Paul K's inquirey causes me to reconsider the motive...
    

    I've decided to render the benefit of the doubt to Ilene here.  That
    is, I'm going to assume that she doesn't know Paul from Adam and that
    she generally only speaks with a few people that she knows.  Paul wasn't 
    on the list of people she knows.  High up in the corporation, I gather that
    this is normal practice.  Even with ODP, you have to be in the
    hierarchy below somewhere and I know Paul doesn't work for the
    treasury.
    
    Steve

    
    Well, let's settle this once and for all with an extract from Mark
    Steinkrauss' request for meeting support dated Nov. 4th:
    
"Earlier today, Ilene Jacobs and Rob Ayres, Digital's liaisons to the 
credit union, issued a vote of support over Livewire.  You might 
consider taking a look at it."
    
    Nice thing about asking people to forward messages.  They always get
    forwarded far and wide....

    If Rob or Ilene will document that what was posted has theirs and is an 
    endorsement of the BoD, I'll split that pizza with someone ...  I was
    pretty sure that Board members would feel it was an endorsement.
    
    I heard an article on NPR radio today about Japanese politicians.  They
    have had lots of corruption involving their most prominent pols.  The
    people keep electing them because they feel they can't do anything
    about them.  These pols are announcing that they must be okay since
    people keep re-electing them.  Not saying this has anything to do with
    the current topic, of course.
    
    Steve

    
    RE: .35 & .45 (pizza)
    
    Hey, hey, hey!  No re-defining the bet after the proof has been
    supplied Steve.  I'll have it with the works please.  Next Tuesday
    after the Special Meeting we can enjoy it over a beer.  8-)

    Mark Steinkraus can call it an endorsement all he wants; that
    doesn't *make* it one, unless one chooses to accept his word
    for it.  You've questioned his word about everything else Phil;
    why suddenly believe him now?

.44>      Well, let's settle this once and for all with an extract from Mark
.44>      Steinkrauss' request for meeting support dated Nov. 4th:
    
.44>  "Earlier today, Ilene Jacobs and Rob Ayres, Digital's liaisons to the 
.44>  credit union, issued a vote of support over Livewire.  You might 
.44>  consider taking a look at it."



How interesting!

Of whom was Mark Steinkrauss requesting "meeting support"?

Are we going to see battle lines drawn between the working class and
the VPs?

(Why doesn't the Board request "meeting support" from the membership?  It
would be easy enough to do -- they could start by being open.)

Tell us more about this Nov. 4th memo, Phil...

    No fair, Phil!  I naturally assumed that Board members calling this an
    endorsement was out.  But, I'll be happy to split a pizza with you
    anyway.  You deserve it!
    
    Steve

    
    Re: Steinkrauss' comment on Ilene Jacob's note
    
    What else would anyone expect him to call it?  If that comment
    were made by some well-known and perhaps influential DEC manager
    not connected with the DCU then perhaps I'd take it more
    seriously.
    
    Steve
    

    
    RE: .47
    
    >You've questioned his word about everything else Phil;
    >why suddenly believe him now?

    Because there is a pizza in it for me, of course! 
    

    
    RE: .48
    
>Are we going to see battle lines drawn between the working class and
>the VPs?

    Seems pretty obvious by now IMO.
    
>(Why doesn't the Board request "meeting support" from the membership?  It
>would be easy enough to do -- they could start by being open.)

    It too easy and obvious.  Besides, it would be treating us as equals
    and we all know that isn't true.
    
>Tell us more about this Nov. 4th memo, Phil...

    Sure.  What do you want to know?  It does contain some interesting
    comments.  And a certain tone of desperation.  And all because of such a
    small group of "dissidents".  Just doesn't make sense... ;-)
    
    Anybody that hasn't already gotten a copy via forwarding,
    drop me a mail message and I'll send it.  I believe it is against P&P
    to post it without his permission.  And since the BoD hasn't responded
    to any of the 3 mail I have sent them, I don't expect them to start
    communicating at this point.

    
    RE: .53
    
    No problem.  Permission to forward is granted in the mail.

        If I were in Boston instead of Chicago, I'd take the LiveWire
        issue straight to the top DEC maangement at tomorrows stockholders
        meeting.

    Re: .-1
    
    Not if you are smart, you wouldn't.  I asked a question in an annual
    meeting 20+ years ago, and the results are almost legend inside
    Digital.  Several months ago I posted the story somewhere in
    HUMANE::Digital.  You can go look there if you are interested in what
    resulted.

    
    RE: .56
    
    Got a pointer?  Humane::Digital is a fairly huge conference.

In looking through LiveWire just now for the times of Chuck Cockburn's visits
I saw Ilene Jacobs's posting again.  Much of the discussion in this topic
has centered around what motivation might have been behind its posting, so
much so that we haven't analyzed it for actual content.

  >There have been many challenges affecting the DCU in the last year.  The
  >company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors, management,
  >regulatory agencies and independent professionals have worked together
  >effectively.

It's striking how this seems to have been crafted to say something people
would be eager to hear official words about, but manages to avoid doing
anything of the kind.

It does NOT say

  >The company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors, management,
  >regulatory agencies and independent professionals have done their jobs.

Nor does it say even

  >The company is convinced that the DCU's Board of Directors (et al)
  >have worked sincerely in the best interests of [...].


"Worked together effectively" means nothing in the absence of some further
definitions.  I have no idea what the company IS convinced of.  But for a
person at Vice-Presidential level to issue a widely-visible statement on a
potentially very important situation and allow it to fail with

  >The company is convinced that <content-free statement here>

is either a disappointment in the mastery of language -- or an invitation to
conjecture that the company is convinced of things inappropriate to reveal.

    Please take this in humor and don't read a lot in it.  I'm in ZKO for a 
    three day confernce.   I note in livewire that Chuck is coming on
    thursday, the 8th.  a conflict, so I ask the teller.  she gives me the
    slip saying the 8th is the date.  I tell her about livewire.
    She says DCU has no control over livewire and there is an attempt
    at misinformation by a certain group and this misinformation is
    probably due to them  [I'm assuming the infamous commettee]!
    
    So guys, stop putting this misinformation in livewire, won't ya?
    

    
    RE: .59
    
    Ed, did a teller actually tell you that or are you pulling our
    collective legs???
    
    
    
    And unbeknownest to DCU members, the secret committee acquired DCU's
    mailing list, sent out the meeting notices and once we have get
    everybody in the Ballroom we will lock the doors and reveal our secret
    agenda....
    
    
    
    
    
    		We're having a Tupperware party.  8-)
    
    
    
    Sorry, just keeping my sense of humor intact.
    

    The teller told me it!  I nearly busted gut trying to hold back the
    laughter.
    
    see you Friday the 13th, Phil?  Yes folks, the secret commettee has
    changed the day following the 7th to be the 13th.  The power of this
    group!
    
    I wonder if Chuck will notice the meeting notice posters?
    

    re .59
    
    I know you said to not read anything into your experience, but I have
    to wonder what the DCU employees have been told?  Seems to me they
    are getting at most only 1/2 the story.
    
    Don

    Well, it's Friday, and I've not seen anything in Livewire yet
    about the results of the meeting on Tuesday. You'd think the
    results would be interesting to anyone who read the announcement
    wouldn't you? Wonder why Mark S hasn't written anything up.
    

	Anyone can submit an article for LIVEWIRE:

>                        How to submit an article to LIVE WIRE
>
>  Content/Format/Style Guidelines:
>    o Newsy, short and concise
>    o General employee audience (specify WW, US or GMA)
>    o No "advertisements" or strong marketing angle
>>    o 1-2 screens in length (max. 18 lines/page, from title to last text line)
>    o Limit the use of abbreviations; interpret all acronyms
>
>  Submission Process: Potential articles may be submitted at any time to
>  GRIMLY::LW or LIVE WIRE @MSO.  All will be reviewed by the LIVE WIRE admin.,
>  edited, and if necessary, returned to the sender for approval.  It is
>  assumed the sender has already obtained necessary organizational approvals.

	The DCU stuff falls under "GMA" at least the way I access it.
	Precedent has already been established for persons other than
	the DCU management to post articles about the DCU. Perhaps
	one of the persons who wrote a summary of the meeting can
	edit it suitably, and submit it as a LIVEWIRE article.

						Tom_K

    
    RE: .64
    
    Instead I would suggest forwarding one of the many articles from the
    newspapers.  I wouldn't want to abuse LiveWire as others have done in
    the past.  A news article written by a third party will at least be
    impartial and somewhat factual.
    

    Well, submitting the one that tells about Mary Madden snatching back
    the prepared press release sounds like a good one for LiveWire.

I doubt if LiveWire will carry any re-posting from a newspaper.  There would
be copyright issues and necessity for publisher's approval, and even then
there would be a mess about an official Digital organ choosing to quote any
specific commercial newspaper -- even if the issue were not inflammatory.

While there is precedent for DCU news being posted to GMA, it is also
clearly a mistake, as comments from elsewhere in the country have
indicated.  Any submissions should be designated for US, together with a
suggestion that the entire DCU topic be so moved.

	Paul

    According to an article in LIVEWIRE, the DCU information will move from
    the Greater Maynard Area (GMA) menu to the US menu within the next
    couple of weeks.

)0lqwqwqwqwqwqwqkTMqqrrsssrrqq 
xdxixgxixtxaxlxU.S. News                         LIVE WIRE
mqvqvqvqvqvqvqjqqppoooppqq 

            Transfer of LIVE WIRE's DCU menu to U.S. menu - update 

  There has been a delay in the transfer of LIVE WIRE's Digital Credit Union 
  (DCU) menu from the Greater Maynard Area menu to the U.S. menu.  Efforts 
  are being made to complete the process by the end of January/beginning of 
  February.

  The transfer is being made in recognition of the DCU's availability in an 
  increasing number of U.S. locations.  
  To return to the previous menu, press  PF3 

    

U.S. News                         LIVE WIRE

                 LIVE WIRE's DCU menu has been moved to U.S. menu

  LIVE WIRE's DCU menu has been moved to the U.S. menu from the Greater 
  Maynard Area menu.  This transfer was made in recognition of DCU's growth to
  U.S. areas outside the Greater Maynard Area.

  Option numbers for some choices in LIVE WIRE's U.S. menu were changed to 
  accomodate the DCU menu.  Below is an example of the revised section of the 
  U.S. menu.


    94 SAVE Funds       96 OA Course Schedule      98  DCU
    95 VolunteerNet     97 Holiday Schedule        99  DVN Sites
 To return to the previous menu, press  PF3 

Now, can we get LiveWire to carry candidate statements longer than 150
words?

	Paul

If people have access to LiveWire, don't they have access to notes also?

I suspect it'd be a tough battle to get LiveWire to post all the statements.

But they might post a pointer to the notes file.

In fact, the moderator could post a note in 1.x a list of notes for the
candidates statements so that new folks could find them easily. Or else
mark them with a keyword.

>If people have access to LiveWire, don't they have access to notes also?

	In theory that's true. However many people find notes much harder
	to use. Also there are groups where using VTX is more socially 
	acceptable than notes.

	Lastly while I suspect that most candidates will welcome the one way
	communication of VTX there may be some who do not like the two-way
	concept of notes.

			Alfred

I contacted GRIMLY::LW and posed the hypothetical question of whether they
would carry statements from candidates, with appropriate safeguards of
neutrality.  I received a negative answer from Leslie Johnson.  I presume
that isn't necessarily the end of the matter, but it will at least take
some work to use that path.

Another possibility is to get the DCU to post longer statements in all
their branches, and mention this in one of their mailings.  However I am
sufficiently cynical to assume they wouldn't be favorably inclined.

I think the candidates had better start honing their 150 words.  Perhaps
this notes file can act as a review body for those statements before they
go out with the ballots.

	Paul

    	Why don't they put in the mortgage rates? They seem to have all the
    other loan rates listed.

  You sure haven't been keeping track of the rate changes reciently!
  The interest rates for checking change weekly.

    RE: .73 by PLOUGH::KINZELMAN 
    
    >If people have access to LiveWire, don't they have access to notes also?
    
    I could imagine some people who are not/no longer employees having
    access to VTX through lobby terminals adjacent to DCU locations.
    

    I wonder why no information about the election appears in the DCU
    LIVEWIRE section. There is only the announcement of the annual meeting.

    		Alfred

I was also going through the Livewire section.  Besides the fact that
information is missing (i.e. there is no information about current mortgage
and/or refinancing programs),  it seems to me that the branch listing is a bit
out of date.

I'll double check.

Elaine

    
    re: .81
    
    I have just recently developed connections with VTX Livewire.  I gave
    them the Supervisory Comm. posting (but haven't been able to find it).
    I also have an updated branch listing for them.  I believe the person
    is coming back from vacation this week.
    
    As for current mortgage and refinancing programs, I don't know why DCU
    isn't giving them the information.  I believe they are passing them
    other rate info.  Obviosuly, mortgage rates change daily and that info
    would have to be excluded.

It's there - under "Greater Maynard Area News".

Apparently a lot of the data was partially updated during March.  I'm still
pretty annoyed that it is only partially updated.  If I see some things that I
know are wrong, I tend to question the rest of the information.

On the savings rates page, the heading says the rates are effective Feb 7 - Feb
11.  The date on the page is Mar 28, and the rates are different from those
posted on Feb 11.  Also the minimum CD is still listed as $100.  I learned that
his minimum was changed to $1000, as of January 1st.

The Hudson branch is still listed as being in HLO1.  It's been a couple of years
since that changed to HLO2.

There has to be someone who knows how to write VTX applications that can help
these people.

Elaine

    Well, they fixed it.  I noticed today that the DCU "page" is completely
    gone from Livewire.  It probably makes sense to just have the
    information in one place (the Info line, 1-800-DCU_TRYS).  The fact
    that the Digital Credit Union no longer exists under "Employee
    Services/Activities" on a Digital communications media is probably
    significant from Digital's point of view.  I think they could have left
    the page, but replaced the information which changes with a page that
    describes the 800 number.  There is a statement being made here.
    
    Elaine

    
    Does this mean that certain DEC VP's will no longer be exhorting
    DEFCU members to vote in DEFCU elections, or otherwise be telling
    DEFCU members what to do and how to think?
    
    My, what a marvelous idea.
    
    It will be interesting to hear what IBM tells its employees when the
    Hudson Valley CU holds its next elections...
    

>    It will be interesting to hear what IBM tells its employees when the
>    Hudson Valley CU holds its next elections...
    
The phrase, "Don't blame us - we didn't hire him", springs to mind.

    I think .85 and .86 are attributing more consistency to the whole
    process than is really warranted.  I wouldn't read anything into
    the removal from LiveWire, either way.  I do think it's a good idea
    to replace the changable information with a reference to the 800 number.
    
    	Regards,
    	Larry

    Pardon my obvious bias towards Internet access, but I think the
    membership (and the future!) would be better served were DCU to invest
    in a Web Server than if it were to continue to accept free LiveWire
    access from its "sponsoring Corporation."  The number of ex-Digits who
    continue or resume their DCU accounts might be expected to rise if DCU
    were to contract with some Internet Service Provider outside the
    FireWall.  Why?  
    
    (a) It would be seen as a loosening of the bonds between DCU and
        DIGITAL, which (given recent imho improper performance of those
        bonds) would, I believe, be considered positively; 
    
    (b) Anyone outside as well as inside the FireWall could connect to that
        service, whereas VTX LiveWire is an internal-only service; 
    
    (c) It's a well-documented fact that ANY web browser, even Lynx for
        24x80 terminals, is easier for new users to learn than is VTX; and
        finally, 
    
    (d) Trends in banking and technology indicate to me that the Web is
        evolving strongly towards becoming a medium for all forms of
        banking.  If DCU hops on that wave now, it will be well positioned
        to join the emerging leaders in Web-oriented finance.  Surely its
        geographical proximity to the second-most-active geographic region
        of the Internet could be used to some advantage to the
        membership...?
        
    I say nothing against the value of an 800-number that folks can access
    to hear spoken news items... but online access will be increasingly
    important, and a forward-looking financial institution with some
    moderate-term advanced development resources should imho be getting its
    feet wet in the CyberSurf.  I was glad to read that DCU is looking into
    this!
    
Cheers,

Dan Kalikow, Consultant, Internet Business Group - Inside DIGITAL, DTN 226-2116
+=============================================================================+
| Pentium: INTEL's "Blew-Chip Special"  |-{:-)  UNISYS: "Beware .GIFt horses!"|
| Phone: 508/486-2116  DECnet: DRDAN::KALIKOW   Internet: kalikow@ljo.dec.com |
+=============================================================================+

If and when secure version of browsers and servers are available, then I'd
agree but not until then.

    Certainly true, but such security is well underway, and DIGITAL is part
    of the consortia pushing the standards.  Until that time, I contend
    that DCU should *still* be investing in growing its own expertise on
    the Web, or investing in some consulting services offering such
    expertise -- doing information dissemination ("What's New at DCU"
    "FLASH: Joe Mangone apprehended!" "FLASH: Relationship Member program
    terminated!"  "GOOD NEWS:  Interest rates for depositors rise; car loan
    rates fall to x.y%") to build the CyberClientele against the day when
    servers and clients are upgraded to permit secure transactions over the
    Web.
    
    It's coming, for good and certain.  Will DCU be ready?
    

As long as it's the same kind of info that was available on VTX, then
what's the security issue?

Chris