response 25 of 168:

Nov 1 04:44 UTC 2001

I've seen a few instances of "accidental self-censorship" on Backtalk systems.
Backtalk puts a "erase" button next to most of your postings.  I've seen some
users who seemed to have triggered some rather poorly designed program that
tries to download an entire website while reading backtalk.  The program
happily explored all links, including all the "erase" links on all the items
in the conference.  I've only seen this twice, and never on Grex, but it could
theoretically still happen.  This is one of many cases where it would be nice
to have a non-publically readable backup copy of any censored text.

Grex staff's handling of such non-public log files would be pretty similar
to it's handling of other non-public information.  See
http://www.grex.org/staffnote/privacy.html for some discussion of this.

I approve of this proposal.

response 27 of 168:

Nov 1 09:44 UTC 2001

My first preference would be to remove the option in the software which 
allows removal of text previously posted.

If that is too blatantly illegal (which I believe it *could* be in some 
cases but is not universally so), then my second preference would be to 
continue to allow removal of previously posted text exactly as now 
implemented, with the sole exception being that the log of removed text 
be readable only by staff.  

I absolutely will not support, and do vehemently oppose, any proposal 
which allows previously posted text to be removed permanently and 
absolutely, as I believe that it is essential to Grex's legal defense to 
maintain a complete record, in some form, of what has been posted on it.


Given this position, I believe the best solution is as follows (submitted 
as amendment to the standing proposal):

        The option of removing previously posted content from the Grex 
conferences shall be completely disabled in the Agora and Coop 
conferences, and for any item linked to either one.  In all other 
conferences, the option shall be maintained, and the log of such removals 
be made readable only to Grex staff.

        In the event that a user wishes to remove text posted to either 
Agora, Coop or any item linked thereto, said user may request staff to 
remove the text in question so long as the request is made from the 
account which posted the text, and, to the best of the ability of the 
staff to determine, so long as the person using that account is the same 
person who was using it when the text was posted.  Upon such request, if 
at least three staff members agree to the removal, then the text in 
question may be removed, with the removed text being entered in the log 
file to which only the staff have read access.

        The board of directors may at any time, by majority vote of a quorum 
or more held in person, or either online or by email but within a 72 hour 
period, vote to remove any text from Agora or Coop or any item linked 
thereto, even if such text has not been approved for removal by at least 
three staff members.  In all cases the removed text shall be entered into 
the aforementioned log.

response 29 of 168:

Nov 1 12:28 UTC 2001

I doubt Ken will accept those friendly amendments, Eric.  I could
be wrong but I doubt it. ;-)

What I'd like to see happen is for Ken's motion to go forward.  It would
stipulate users be able to edit and/or remove their posted text.  If that
*fails* then I'll foster a second vote, one stipulating the removal of the
scribble command and essentially not giving users the ability to change
the record  (after being clearly advised of this policy).

Of course, anyone could take the initiative here.  It's just that I'm
promising to do so if Ken's motion fails.

response 31 of 168:

Nov 1 14:32 UTC 2001

Meg and Eric sound like they want to be endorsing the proposal 
Mary made in item:55.

response 33 of 168:

Nov 1 15:51 UTC 2001

Sounds like a variation on "If I don't get my way, I'll take my ball and go
home".  More like "If I don't get my way, I'll punch a hole in the ball so
nobody else can play."

response 35 of 168:

Nov 1 16:44 UTC 2001

Jamie, do you see yourself as administering a kind of vigilante justice
toward Grex?

response 37 of 168:

Nov 1 17:22 UTC 2001

(Translation from M-Net language:  "I don't want to commit to an actual
answer".)

response 43 of 168:

Nov 1 21:09 UTC 2001

I think Grex has functioned with it's current policies for over ten years
without doing anyone any substantial harm.  I think the policies could bear
improvement, but if one wishes to build one's reputation as a superhero,
there are other issues on the planet that more urgently need to be addressed.

I think the rule suggested in this motion would be an improvement.

response 45 of 168:

Nov 1 23:24 UTC 2001

I'm against the bar to removing text.  I would _like_ to be able to edit
responses, but I can live without that ability.  I _really_ want the censored
log linked to /dev/null, but I can live with it being permitted only to staff
(with the definition of "staff" left open).

I intend to vote for Ken's original proposal.  Whether it passes or fails,
I will vote against Mary's, should it be put to a vote.

My arguments have not changed since last summer.  Feel free to go read them
as referenced above. :)

response 49 of 168:

Nov 2 18:18 UTC 2001

Re #45: I think having staff able to read the log is probably a 
necessary evil.