response 154 of 235:

Feb 28 04:04 UTC 2004

I'm going to try again:

        An item's author, the person who originally enters an item,
        may remove that item from the system, in its entirety,
        at any time before someone responds to it using a different
        login ID.  After another person has responded, an item may be
        removed only if it violates the general policies of grex or
        of the conference it was entered in, or if it clearly abets
        criminal activity.  Examples of the former include a very
        large item that attempts to fill all available disk space,
        items posted more than once or in several conferences at
        once, repetitive items and items that contain terminal
        escape sequences.  Examples of the latter include items
        that contain social security numbers or credit card numbers.
        These examples are not exhaustive; fair-witnesses and staff
        have discretion to act in the best interests of grex and
        its users in accordance with general policies.

Specific changes, for those tired of close readings:

        1)  specified that the discussion is of removing the item from
            the system.

        2)  Used "violates the general policies . . . " instead of "clear
            and present danger."

I don't have an easy way to test killing linked items, but that's an
implementation issue, not a policy issue. :)

response 156 of 235:

Mar 1 17:05 UTC 2004

Ok, I'm much more comfortable with that.
I can support this.

response 158 of 235:

Mar 3 13:25 UTC 2004

HUH?!?! The remedy was clear last time and the right thing was not done.

response 162 of 235:

Mar 3 22:28 UTC 2004

It's clear that you guys don't get along, but I've never seen anything
that would indicate to me that Valerie had the right to do what she did.

response 164 of 235:

Mar 4 01:42 UTC 2004

Joe G. has asked that this be moved to a vote, so the vote is scheduled
to start at midnight tonight.  Voting will end at midnight ten days
later.

Since there's another vote already in progress, frequent voters will
notice that the two-choice menu is back.  If you try to vote on Joe's
proposal before midnight tonight though, you'll see a message that
the polls haven't opened yet.

response 166 of 235:

Mar 4 03:08 UTC 2004

Thank you, jp2. :)

response 168 of 235:

Mar 4 13:59 UTC 2004

I'm trying to understand the amount of latitude this would give for
individual conferences to set their own policies.

For example, would it be consistent with this proposal for the Classified
Conference to have the policy that an item advertising something for sale
can be removed when the item is sold, or if the seller decides not to sell
it?

Would it be consistent for a fairwitness to set the policy that items more
than one year old could be deleted without notice, provided that the policy
is adequately publicized to the conference participants?  Or could be
deleted on the request of the person who posted the item, again presuming
that the policy was adequately publicized?

I guess I'm unclear on the intent of the part that says "...an item may
be removed only if it violates the general policies of Grex or the 
conference it was entered in," relative to these examples.

response 170 of 235:

Mar 4 22:56 UTC 2004

Stop being idiots.  None of you are better than jp2.

response 172 of 235:

Mar 5 00:19 UTC 2004

This is absurdly obscure for something that's public.

response 174 of 235:

Mar 10 00:44 UTC 2004

I read someone say that they voted "No" on this proposal because they don't
feel it solves any real problem.  I disagree; *IF* this proposal is approved,
then we will have a better idea of when items can be removed.  

This will do nothing about the current controversy, but nor is it intended
to.  It won't _prevent_ a future occurrence, but it will make plainer what
to do, since that which should not be removed should be restored.

response 176 of 235:

Mar 10 01:05 UTC 2004

There was not agreement that the material should not have been removed.