On Jul 6, 2018, at 9:56 AM, D R Stinson <dano@...> wrote:
Something that has not been mentioned is Copyright Law. Like you, Shal, I believe a person has the right to their own creations (writing, artistic, etc.) by copyright law. To prevent a member from deleting their own content may be an illegal 'taking' by removing control from the author/creator, and retaining it by the group owner.
I don¡¯t think email falls under ¡°creation¡± but under letters. And letters do belong to the person to whom they are written aren¡¯t they?
Having said that, the question of a person replying to such a post and quoting part of the material originally posted would seem to fall into a gray area. Is such quotation allowed under the shared commons allowances as a reasonable use for educational discussions and common discourse?
I haven¡¯t checked the current version but the law used to say "500 words or less" for educational, etc, purposes, and without the intention of replacing the original.
I have one group in which users are not allowed to edit or delete their messages because contentious discussions often involve what a person said or didn¡¯t say. Erasing the record makes things even more difficult.
On another list where the archives are often searched for documents and dates, users can edit or delete the posts because we don¡¯t want false information going into history.
The other reasons for at least the moderator being able to edit or delete is for things that were posted accidentally or in ignorance ¡ª phone numbers, addresses, personal vacation dates, etc. And possibly slanderous statements, particularly political candidates whose supporters get irate.
Sharon
