You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 221-245   246-255         
 
Author Message
10 new of 255 responses total.
mwg
response 246 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 00:55 UTC 2000

I am of the opinion that the closest thing to an ethical position in this
question won.  A forum like this should only remove text for two major
reasons, the avoidance of destructive litigation, and technical issues
like responses containing terminal control codes, raw HTML, or similar
destructive goop.  The former would obviously have to vanish completely,
the latter could be stored elsewhere so as not to leap on the
unsuspecting.

I find the mere existance of the censor and scribble commands ethically
dubious, but as they don't actually erase anything, I see it as not worth
arguing over.

Warning people that they have to live with what they say is simply
reminding them of one of the fundamental principles by which life
operates.

As some people here can tell you, I have posted some incredibly stupid
things in my day, barring drive failures, it is all still here somewhere.
No doubt the hot coffee crowd will class this response and my position on
this matter as stupid, so be it.

While I would not leave Grex if such a vote were to go the other way, I
would take such a vote as a sign that the system was taking a destructive
heading in the long term.

I could go on, but I suspect that it would be pointless to do so.
jmsaul
response 247 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 01:01 UTC 2000

Sure would.  For starters, nobody's suggesting that the "forum" should remove
anything -- just that the people who posted the text should be allowed to do
so if they choose.  But if I explain everything else that's wrong with your
position (again), Scott will get pissed at me because it would take a while.
carson
response 248 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 04:06 UTC 2000

(Scott would get over it, too.)
russ
response 249 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 04:07 UTC 2000

Very interesting.  After the M-Net decision to de-permit /usr/bbs/censored,
and after a certain board member who had voted for that policy re-entered
a response of mine that I had scribbled (perhaps 5 minutes after it was
entered), I cannot recall that Joe Saul had ANYTHING to say about that
board member's act (fairness, ethics or otherwise).  Yet he pretends to
stand in judgement of Grex on that very issue.

The "ethics" do seem to depend whose ox is (potentially) gored.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out, Joe.
jmsaul
response 250 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 04:10 UTC 2000

Russ, my opinions change over time.  It's called learning.  Has it ever
happened to you?
remmers
response 251 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 13:04 UTC 2000

 Okay, I've gotten the update I needed from Greg.  Here are the
 results:

    33 members voted.  The totals are

        yes    14
        no     19

 The motion failed.

 (On a personal note, I'm somewhat surprised by this.  I had expected
 the motion to pass.  So much for my ability to gauge the sentiments
 of the body politic.)

 The unofficial non-member vote went the other way:  57 yes, 33 no.
 This was less of a surprise to me.
void
response 252 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jun 29 14:56 UTC 2000

   grex does not own my text and does not have the right to force me to
continue publishing it.  period.
janc
response 253 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jul 19 14:19 UTC 2000

An E-mail message from Joe Saul, with some new information:
========================================================================
From: "Joseph M. Saul"
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 10:05:34
To: janc@grex.cyberspace.org
Subject: User Control of Posts

One of the arguments raised against allowing Grex users to delete their
own posts has been that other big online services (I think Deja News
and Slashdot were cited) don't permit it, so it obviously isn't an
issue.  Well, guess what...

Deja News *does* allow users to remove news posts from their archive,
and all they insist on is that you be able to receive email messages at
the address from which you posted the messages in question.  No
notarized letters, no other anal-retentive bullshit.  Yes, you do have
to go to their staff, but since you didn't enter the post from a "Deja
News account" in the same way that Grexers enter their posts from their
Grex accounts, they don't have an alternative.  Here's the URL to their
form:

  http://www.deja.com/forms/nuke.shtml

In other words, Grex is not following "current trends," wouldn't drag
the big guys in if a user sues because the big guys *do* provide a
convenient means for deleting posts, and in fact respects the rights of
its posters less than Deja News does.  Which is saying something.

Feel free to post this in the appropriate location.

  -- Joe
gull
response 254 of 255: Mark Unseen   Jul 19 15:34 UTC 2000

I noticed that, too.  They do make you jump through some hoops -- if you no
longer own the email address the messsage was posted from, you can't remove
it, and you need to submit a seperate request for each message you want
removed.
mooncat
response 255 of 255: Mark Unseen   Aug 1 20:48 UTC 2000

Well, that makes sense. Kind of similar to if you lose your password 
here, and have another e-mail address listed in your .plan and write 
from it requesting staff reset your password, after perhaps some more 
verification it will be done.  Or that's how it used to work, they may 
have changed it in the last few years.
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   150-174   175-199   200-224 
 221-245   246-255         
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss