response 11 of 393:

Jan 6 12:14 UTC 2004

#4: "It's longstanding Grex policy that the person who created an item
 can delete it."

Really?  I don't think so.

response 15 of 393:

Jan 6 14:57 UTC 2004

It's never been the case that one user could remove another person's 
posts.  No without root power.  Didn't you notice then when you 
first tried to remove the entire items while on as valerie?

Is it possible for you to put the items back (I assume you have them 
backed up somewhere) then delete only your responses?  I know that 
would be a job, but it's the right thing to do.  In my opinion.

response 19 of 393:

Jan 6 15:31 UTC 2004

Your demand has no force.  

If you are serious about it, make a specific proposal in Co-op, and 
if the majority of the membership agrees with you (which I seriously 
doubt will happen, especially if the removal of the posts by other 
users is undone), then Valerie's staff staus would be revoked.

response 21 of 393:

Jan 6 15:39 UTC 2004

Oh for Christ's sake, naftee, get a clue.  Nobody hid anything.

And this wasn't a malicious action.  I expect Valerie was very hurt by
what she found on M-net.  Why not talk about this in reasonable terms and
see if there is a less drastic "fix" before we bring out the stones. 

Maybe we should even see if folks care.  Lots of forums seem to function
pretty well with censorship the norm.  It's been a long long time since we
looked at how our fairly rigid censorship policy is working for Grex. 
I know how I feel about it, but I'd be curious how others see it. 

response 23 of 393:

Jan 6 16:20 UTC 2004

If you think the welcome line should be changed, make a proposal and 
if the majority of the membership agrees with you then it will be 
changed.

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!