Ok, lets all understand what an "archive" is.  It is a repository,
providing access to the material stored to qualified researchers.  To be
of value to the researcher all the material must be preserved, to the best
of your ability and resources available.  The list archives form a
historical database, a library, a peek into the past.  If you modify
the records you have destroyed the value of the archive as a research
tool.  One modifies only at direst need, then feels very guilty about it.
Don't laugh.  More than once I have been asked for help in searching our
archives by people doing studies on Net behavior and patterns. If you
edit the archives at will you have no archives, you have a lot of random
unrelated items: garbage.

Now,
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, David W. James wrote:
>         Oh?  I can think of at least three good reasons to remove a posting
> from an archive:
>         1. The message is defames someone.
The "defamation" has already occured, everyone has a copy already, and it
ain't defamation unless there is a law suit and the court agrees that
whatever it is constitutes such.  It stays in the archives until I get
a court order telling me to take it out.

>         2. The message includes something illegal (copyright violation or
>                 kiddy-porn or...)
As I said in reply to Eric, if I saw clear copyright violation, of an
actionable nature, I would probably take care of it before anyone asked
me to do so (I would leave the record that there had been a posting
and replace the text with a note that the text had been deleted due to
copyright violation).  As to "kiddy-porn," well, um, I've never had a
list which attracted such things so I can't say how prevelant they may
be on other lists.  Perhaps "front end" management is the answer, don't
allow the stuff to be distributed on your list and then you wou't have
to worry about legal liability and removing the garbage from your files.

I am the final "filter" for two large "professional discussion" lists
and no "spam" of that sort (or any other sort) gets through to the lists.
If any subscriber cleared for direct posting to the list sent anything
of the sort to the list he would be immediately deleted and permanently
banned from resubscribing. That sort of junk you prevent from ever getting
to the list so you don't have to worry about it (no, I don't mean full
moderation, we're talking semi-moderation). Keep the barn door closed
and you won't feel foolish closing it after the horse has escaped.

>         3. The message includes a lot of garbage; be it MIME encoded graphics
> (or, worse, Microsoft Word...) that slipped in under your line limit (you
> *do* limit the length of postings to your list, right?)

For line limits, one list yes, the other no (professional discussion, they
are free to wax philosophical at as great a length as they wish, but
"please, folks no HTML, base64 attachments, better, NO attachments).
However, no, that material is NOT to be edited from the archives.
One begs, pleads, cajoles the subscribers not to quote excessivelly,
not to send the attachments, not to forward, repost items already
posted (hey, its in the archives), then lives with the junk people
send anyway (actually, for both lists, the s/n ratio is quite good,
but I can always find something to gripe about).

The archives are a historical record of the list, all its activity.
Every time you modify it you decrease its value.  Either you accept
all the junk, and preserve, modifying only at most dire need and THEN
leaving a note that you have done so, so that you truly have archives
worthy of the name, or forget it.

> It boils down to how customer oriented a list owner you want to be.  And

Well, we don't have "customers" but we have many thousands of subscribers.
And one of the things they like about the lists is that the archives
ARE archives.  So I guess you could say we are "customer oriented."

Douglas