|
Grex > Coop12 > #57: Proposal: Users shall be able to withdraw their text | |
|
| Author |
Message |
krj
|
|
Proposal: Users shall be able to withdraw their text
| 
Oct 31 15:58 UTC 2001 |
This item is entered to start moving towards a member vote.
The proposal is:
Grex conference users shall be able to withdraw their text
from further public view.
This proposal will be implemented by closing the scribble log.
-----
Discussion starts today, a vote could start on November 14 and
be over before the board elections on December 1.
There could, however, be a simultaneous vote on the competing
proposal to delete the scribble command altogether, which is item:55
in this conference.
Grex users voted on a similar proposal in June 2000; the final
vote was 14 yes (to close the scribble log), 19 no. That discussion
is in item:coop11,173 (oldcoop/coop11 conf, item 173).
I am moving for a new vote because I have heard from enough members who
either did not vote last time, or are new to Grex, to think there is
a good chance of passage this time.
|
| 168 responses total. |
eeyore
|
|
response 1 of 168:
|
Oct 31 16:06 UTC 2001 |
I am deffinately in favor of closing the scribble log...don't see much of a
use for it in the first place.
I'm still deffinately against being able to edit or remove your text once it's
posted.
|
jp2
|
|
response 2 of 168:
|
Oct 31 16:23 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
polygon
|
|
response 3 of 168:
|
Oct 31 16:26 UTC 2001 |
I support this proposal.
|
jp2
|
|
response 4 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:31 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 5 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:33 UTC 2001 |
staff must allow users to outright delete their posts, because it is
the consideration of staff that posters own their posts. that no
copyrights exist which share or supercede the copyrights of the individual
poster. Therefore the poster, by posting, gives grex the permission
to display/transmit his/her words. And the poster has the explicit right
to withdraw that permission.
|
richard
|
|
response 6 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:36 UTC 2001 |
also the censor log cannot be considered "closed" in any legal sense so
long as staff or anyone else with root has access to it. there should
be no censor log. it should be discontinued. the owners of the posts,
who own the copyrights, have not given their permission for their
copyrighted words to be copied anywhere else. they havent given
permission for their words to be copied off site then they also hvaent
given permission for anything to be copied into a censor log.
|
jp2
|
|
response 7 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:41 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 8 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:49 UTC 2001 |
I dont think its fair use. I don't think fair use is even defined really.
If I own the copyright on my post, I should be allowed to decide whether
to let grex keep a copy in a censored log. I should be able to delete
a post, and be prompted:
"the staff of grex would like to keep a copy of deleted/removed material
in a censor log for purpose of record-keeping. Is this okay? 9y/n??
if they do not claim shared copyright of a poster's words, they shoiuld
get permission before copying it anywher
|
richard
|
|
response 9 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:57 UTC 2001 |
for instance, I scribbled response #0 in agora #111. I did so becuase
Marcus chose to edit that response instead of outright deleting it-- in
doing so my name was left on the response and it was showing his words
and not mine. That was not his right. So I scribbled it. But I should
have been able to outright delete that response because it had my
name on it and was no longer containing my words. I do not wish that
post to remain in the censor log or anywhere else. He protects the
copyrights of the posters in the item I copied, but he abused mine. If
there is no censor log, there is no issue, because I could just outright
delete that post myself. I believe that unless grex claims a shared
copyright on my post, I had that right
|
jp2
|
|
response 10 of 168:
|
Oct 31 17:59 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 11 of 168:
|
Oct 31 19:14 UTC 2001 |
look you dont understand me, I stated flatly I *do* think grex has shared
copyright and I have no problem under that principle with the censored
log. But staff seems to now be saying that their opinion is that they do
not have shared copyright. If there is no shared copyright, then things
like the censor log become legally untenable. a user either has all the
rights to his post or he doesnt. if staff wants to imply shared
copyright in some cases but not others, thats like having your cake and
eating it to. if they are going to remove item 111, #0, then they should
also remove item #106, response #0 and remove any other post that any user
who wants to revoke his copyright permission requests. or better yet,
just give posters the right to delete, outright with no logging, any post
of theirs that they wish to remove.
|
jp2
|
|
response 12 of 168:
|
Oct 31 19:25 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
mary
|
|
response 13 of 168:
|
Oct 31 19:42 UTC 2001 |
Meg, I'm confused as to what you mean in #1. If you close the scribble
log you are allowing folks to remove posted text.
|
richard
|
|
response 14 of 168:
|
Oct 31 19:45 UTC 2001 |
but not entirely remove posted text, anyone with root could still read
a closed log right? if you are going to close the log, why have it all
|
polygon
|
|
response 15 of 168:
|
Oct 31 20:14 UTC 2001 |
I'm in favor of removal, but not of editing. If you want to modify what
you wrote, you can post a new version as a new response.
Richard, I can't take your argument seriously. There are going to be times
when it will be necessary for staff to know what happened. It is not the
same as having the censored log open to the public.
|
styles
|
|
response 16 of 168:
|
Oct 31 21:46 UTC 2001 |
um, "closing" the censor log, if it is at all like yapp's scribbling, writes
data over top of the data that was there first, thus making it closed to
anyone, even roots.
|
richard
|
|
response 17 of 168:
|
Oct 31 21:58 UTC 2001 |
#16..very interesting, if that is the case it serves the same purpose
but are censor logs backed up regularly?
|