Subject:
|
Re: losing access (was Re: Enough already)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:10:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
211 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Dec 1999 23:10:52 GMT, "Nephilim" <jthompson@esker.com>
wrote:
> I seem to recall that there's a legal liability reason at the root
> of the self-imposed rule that forbids Todd from deleting a post. But
> seeing Todd briefly flirt with the idea of shutting down LUGNET
> altogether rather than allow it to be used to stage leaks of LEGO
> information made my blood run cold. If we had to pick one or the
> other, I'd rather see a post get deleted than watch the server
> be shut down.
I think it was something along the lines of, if you take it upon
yourself to delete posts, you also could be considered repsonsible if
you _don't_ delete one that should have been. Which leads top lugnet
shutting down, worst case, or even Todd personally going bankrupt
completely.
> And I'd also rather see a post deleted rather than a person banned.
> If I made a colossol boo-boo, I'd rather have the post be whacked
> than to have my account whacked.
I seriously doubt Todd's going to revoke posting privileges
permanently on any single message. He may revoke them temporarily
while he asks you to cancel an article, but even that I doubt.
In essence, we have to trust Todd. That's what being on a private
newsserver means.
>
> Where can I to reread why administrator-based deletions or post
> edits are a bad idea?
Edits are a lot worse than deletions, for a multitude of reasons. For
one, editing means that there is something out there with all the
appearance of coming from you, possibly up to legal force, which _you
didn't write_.
I could live with deletions, but if there were ever admin-based edits
of posts, that's so Evil that I'd leave. Not that I really think
there's a chance in hell of that happening. Unless Todd gets asked
that by TLG, and then it's still rather remote.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: losing access (was Re: Enough already)
|
| (...) The kind of edit I'm thinking about is another form of deletion - excising a passage from a post, with a clear comment from the administrator that it was editedl. I see this as being better than a straight administrator deletion, because it (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | losing access (was Re: Enough already)
|
| (...) to (...) our (...) While I do completely support the right of the owner or administrator of a site to control access to it ... for what it's worth, I'd rather that LUGNET hosts take the power upon themselves to delete posts, rather than to ban (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
