response 76 of 393:

Jan 7 00:11 UTC 2004

Well, I thought that was part of the discussion: _Does_ the item author
have the right to remove their items?  I'd thought so.  So the author
removing the items does not strike me as an abuse of the tools available.

response 78 of 393:

Jan 7 01:23 UTC 2004

jp2's right. The fact that picospan was configured so that a user could not
delete an item he authored after someone had responded implies that such a
thing is not allowed. And why would one think that it was ok to delete posts
by other people, especially since it's common knowledge that fws are not
allowed to delete items ad hoc unless it contained material that was security
sensitive. If a fw does not pholosophically have this right, it's not hard
to see that a normal user definitely does not have such a right. 

I guess Valerie always thought of her baby diary as a "private" place on grex
and resented any comments in it that didn't match her philosophy. Since she
couldn't ban users from responding, she froze the item. Fair enough. But to
delete the complete items, instead of just her responses is definitely
stepping over the line.

response 80 of 393:

Jan 7 02:26 UTC 2004

You can extrapolate that to individual items you enter.

response 88 of 393:

Jan 7 03:49 UTC 2004

Quit talking to your right hand.

response 90 of 393:

Jan 7 04:00 UTC 2004

Neither has her husband.

response 94 of 393:

Jan 7 04:42 UTC 2004

re 93 Hey, some of us actually care if the staff members abuse the system and
their users.  But wait, since being an abusive staff member is the norm for
you, I guess you trying to push the matter off means that we're doing the
right thing.

response 96 of 393:

Jan 7 05:12 UTC 2004

Wow, you guys have too much time on your hands (all of you).  So do I.
Actually, I don't, but I'm slacking right now so it's all right.

My 2c: You can't unring a bell, and you shouldn't be able to unsay
something you've said.  People need to take responsibility for their
words, even if they're in a public forum.  People also need to realize
that *because* they're in a public forum, it's not only possible but
highly probable that someone with an ax to grind will say something
nasty about what they've written.  It's too bad, but that's the way
it is and the price we pay for our freedom of expression.  Therefore,
I don't think authors should be able to delete their items, even if no
one else has responded.

But, that's just my opinion.

I do fear that grex is stepping dangerously close to censorship in
its grossest form: deleting text of others because you don't like what
they say.  If that happens, I *really* _will_ quit staff and grex in
all its forms.  Freedom of speech is just too important to me; it's
the cornerstone of the country grex is hosted in, and it's under attack
constantly (including in the United States Senate and Congress), and the
first thing I learned in high school journalism class is that as soon as
you start down that slippery slope, no matter how good your intentions
are, you can't pull yourself back up.  It's also the thing that makes me
*want* to support grex.  If it goes by a formal vote of the membership,
then I'll consider grex's mission compromised, its commitment inauthentic,
and I'll go, too.

response 98 of 393:

Jan 7 06:21 UTC 2004

I don't think it's that you couldn't do it before, but that the text
still showed up in the censored log, and people objected to the idea of
being able to delete their text without it really disappearing.

The situation right now maybe isn't perfect, but it's workable.
People have the right to delete their own text.  Okay.  I'm not sure
I agree, but since the capability is there I've made use of it myself.
What I object to is extending that power to include the text of others.
In an ideal world, we probably wouldn't have that ability.  But in an
ideal world, no one's feelings would ever get hurt, so it'd be a moot
point as far as this is concerned.