|
Grex > Coop13 > #82: Member proposal restricting staff's ability to delete conference items. |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 9 new of 108 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 100 of 108:
| 
Feb 8 22:13 UTC 2004 |
Staff member turnover isn't always a bad thing.
|
mary
|
|
response 101 of 108:
|
Feb 8 22:14 UTC 2004 |
My 2 cents, David. Don't. What happened here with Valerie was an
isolated, rogue event. I suspect we could go on for a very long
time before the personalities and events would come together in
such a way as to provoke a similiar episode.
Staff doesn't need more rules. I'd vote any such motion down.
|
naftee
|
|
response 102 of 108:
|
Feb 8 22:58 UTC 2004 |
mary:
valerie was not "freaking out" when she deleted those baby diary items. Or
at least, all the evidence points to the contrary of that being true
|
aruba
|
|
response 103 of 108:
|
Feb 8 23:29 UTC 2004 |
I agree with what Mary said.
|
boltwitz
|
|
response 104 of 108:
|
Feb 8 23:41 UTC 2004 |
I agree with what aruba said, but disagree with what Mary said.
|
keesan
|
|
response 105 of 108:
|
Feb 8 23:42 UTC 2004 |
Would anyone want to give authors of items the option to delete the item IF
they stated in 0 that they might do so? In other words, people could post
items that might be deleted later, but only if they gave notice to start with.
|
gull
|
|
response 106 of 108:
|
Feb 9 00:13 UTC 2004 |
It just bothers me that valerie apparently broke no rules by doing what
she did. I don't really like the fact that staff can do things like
that on a whim. I guess it's "there oughtta be a law" syndrome.
|
mary
|
|
response 107 of 108:
|
Feb 9 00:20 UTC 2004 |
Not quite, David. More, it's unclear as to whether rules would have
made a difference in Valerie's actions.
I think Grex needs to move on. Joe is looking for a way users can
make system policy, giving item authors guidance on what they can
and can't do. This makes more sense to me than putting handcuffs on
staff.
|
gull
|
|
response 108 of 108:
|
Feb 9 01:06 UTC 2004 |
I'm withdrawing this proposal. gelinas has entered one in item:111 that
would accomplish basically the same thing, and has the following
advantages:
- It's more elegantly worded, and clearer, thanks to approaching the
problem from a slightly different angle.
- It doesn't explicitly put limits on staff, and gelinas himself is a
staff member. This avoids the appearance of ordinary members dictating
restrictions on staff, something that was a source of strong opposition
to my proposal. Politically, it's more carefully crafted.
Further discussion should probably shift to item:111.
|