On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 9:14 AM ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 07:21 AM, Valorie Zimmerman wrote:
> > Duane said "There are some group owners that would fight that idea tooth
> > and nail.? A few have already said that when they're gone, so is their
> > group - no succession.
As far as I can tell, nobody here contests their right to make that choice. However that choice needs to be clear somewhere
> > Groups are meant for group members
Many groups are, yes, and that should be clearly noted somewhere too.
Then again, I think that appointing a moderator, and not giving him/her the right to delete the group, pretty much implies that you want the group to live on after your own demise.
Of course, explicit is better.
Forcing groups to have 2 or 3 * owners* does not guarantee that they don't die together, and defeats the purpose of having moderators - as in administrators unable to kick out the owner.