Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:06:06 +0100
|
For what it's worth, I edit logs only under two scenarios:
1. If copyrighted material has been posted without permission and not
editing the logs could put the host at fault (by allowing continued
retrieval of this information). This is a case where lawyers call you
unless you do something and where not cooperating means helping
software pirates who WILL use your site to download the software.
2. If messages were posted that create a major technical inconvenience to
the users of the service. Typically this means someone who posted a
huge message, or cleaning up after a mailing loop that made it to the
archives (not that I've seen any of it recently).
I never edit logs because someone slept over something he said and
decided it was best to take it back, or even because someone didn't pay
attention when replying and said something embarrassing in public. I
think this would convey the wrong message - "there's no need to think
before you post, you can always waste someone's time later to take back
what you said". It also leads to a big mess as I have witnessed a number
of times on BBS systems where people can edit or delete their postings.
Some people did get the "offensive" message and start discussing it.
People who logged on afterwards have no idea what all these people are
talking about and ask what is going on. The people who got the message
have no idea what THESE people are talking about, since the author seldom
says he deleted his message from the archive. In the end people start
asking each other for a copy of the evil message, others suggest that the
issue should be put to rest since the author wanted it deleted, and a
very interesting discussion about freedom of speech begins where people
point out that just because Joe wanted to withdrawn his posting doesn't
mean the entire topic has to be closed or the issues he raised shouldn't
continue to be discussed. It looks very much like what happened to a
mailing list after a spam, back when spam was still new.
Eric
|
|
|