response 25 of 393:

Jan 6 16:41 UTC 2004

It's not childish to be hurt.  Adults get hurt.

response 33 of 393:

Jan 6 18:06 UTC 2004

I've long thought the general practice here on the deletion of text to be
too strict.

The "ownership" of a collaborative work is always murky.  In the case of a
conferencing item, the responses often are worthless without the text of the
item that led to those responses.  To remove large pieces of an item is to
destroy its coherence.  It makes no sense to me to leave anything behind.

An item that is largely about one person's experience, and the reactions to
that experience, seems to me to belong more to the person being described than
to the person doing the describing.

Prose, despite the poetry, is rarely deathless.  Sooner or later, the medium
it is recorded on disintegrates.  Often, the disintegration is none too 
soon.

Let it go.

response 35 of 393:

Jan 6 18:19 UTC 2004

Yes, Valerie did something the rest of us can't do.  Yes, Grex has had a long
standing policy that once you've posted something, youo can never change your
mind about having it online.  Fortunately, Grex members changed the policy
a few years ago to allow you to scribble things you've changed your mind about
so that they aren't publically available any more.  

Frankly, the things in her baby diary were things I'd m never put on the
Web/Internet in the first place.  And they involve personal informationo ab
out people too young to have an opinon about what was being done/said.

I wish we -all- had the authority to kill items we started.  Let me mull that
over, because it may be time for a member vote on a well-crafted version of
that.  The whining about free-speech is ludicrous.  As has been explained,
on a word for word percentage the content of those items was about 95% Valerie

This whole bit has me thinking we should move toward MORE ability to censor
items on Grex, not less!

response 41 of 393:

Jan 6 18:58 UTC 2004

On what basis is it "wrong," jp2?  I don't see it.

response 43 of 393:

Jan 6 19:06 UTC 2004

"Arbitrarily"?  No.  For good reason?  Yes.

response 47 of 393:

Jan 6 19:22 UTC 2004

(So I guess I agree with jp2 to the extent that I feel this was wrong,
and that valerie should, at very least, get a stern "don't do that
again."  I'm not willing to call for her resignation; I see this as an
isolated incident and not a pattern of abuse of staff powers.)

response 49 of 393:

Jan 6 19:23 UTC 2004

I actually doubt that.  But it would probably depend on what staff
member you asked.