Editing and deleting posts

[Bob Connor]

I have changed the way that posts are edited and deleted.

You will have 5 minutes after you post to fix any typos or change your minds about posting.

I did this as a result of people deleting or editing their own posts without stating that they had done it themselves, which led to assumptions being made by others that it had been done by this forums admin in censorship.

[1st Bass]

Guess I will have to look at things very carefully-- I tend to keep finding typos and improved grammar, etc. for days.

Any chance you could just make it "flag" that it has been edited, by the author, each time (and include the date and time), so instead of cutting off idiots like me, it simply notifies the world of our incompetence?

If not, I'll just have to be very cautious, I guess. Thanks. You are doing a lot of work, and I'm sure it seems a thankless task at times.

Sincerely,

Chet

[matthew]

You will have 5 minutes after you post to fix any typos or change your minds about posting.
I did this as a result of people deleting or editing their own posts without stating that they had done it themselves, which led to assumptions being made by others that it had been done by this forums admin in censorship.

Considered and polite response:

That is hardly fair Bob. There is no precedent and nowhere was there any instruction to state that "claiming" a deletion was a requirement. Seriously, if a moderator wants to "censor" a thread then surely they will delete the whole post! Just like someone did when they posted a mocking comment aimed at me and then had second thoughts and deleted it completely with no trace other than the screen shot on my computer

This is not even a "good manners" issue that we should have guessed. It was requested after the fact, and after the thread was locked. By the time I went back to "correct" this, the thread had been locked.

And it was only Padma and I who did this in the "offending" thread, trying to clean the thing up after it went off the rails. As it seemed to me a few people got hot under the collar too quickly on both sides of the equation, I had requested politely that the thread be cleaned up so we could all start over ... a reasonable and fair approach I would have thought. But for some reason the whole mess was left intact and locked down with no explanation why. Personally, I think its not a good look, but hey.

And it's not really great to impose something like that on all the members, like Chet, when it was only an isolated incident. We were not given the opportunity of redress.

[Bob Connor]

I have seen it work fine elsewhere.

[Dominic]

No letting people edit their own posts is a form of censorship. I agree with 1st Bass, I would like to be able to correct myself when I see an error. This is more than just about politeness, it about the credibility of all posters and the usefulness of posts for all those who read them seeking good (correct) information. 5 minutes to correct a post that will last for ever is not really adequate. But it is your forum Bob so you can do as you please.
Dom

[Bob Connor]

No letting people edit their own posts is a form of censorship

No it's not.

[kiwigeo]

One option is to compose and edit on Notepad or Word and then when happy with your post cut and paste into the forum. I do this with long posts already.

[DarwinStrings]

I like the new rule, it makes it a little more like a verbal conversation to me as you can not un-say something you have said and also, like a verbal conversation, if you say something you don't like or regret saying or you use a wrong word then you can always start a new sentence in the form of a new post.

There is a preview function that you can use before you submit a post that I find handy as, unlike the format in which you type replies, it is the same as it will appear once posted and I find it easier to detect typo's and and poor granma.

No letting people edit their own posts is a form of censorship.

I don't see how you come to this conclusion Dom, how do you see the lack of ability to edit a post as censorship?

Jim

Are we writing the great Australia novel here? Do we really need a edit function at all?

[matthew]

I suppose it depends whether you consider that you should have any right of control over the words and images you post on a forum, or whether that material becomes the property of the forum owner as soon as you have posted it.

[kiwigeo]

I suppose it depends whether you consider that you should have any right of control over the words and images you post on a forum, or whether that material becomes the property of the forum owner as soon as you have posted it.

If you're that concerned about the security of your posts and images then maybe you should consider posting on your own server.

[kiwigeo]

The subject of who owns your posts and pics once theyre loaded onto a forum is an interesting one.

Im no lawyer but after a bit trawling around the net my understanding is thus:

1. copyright law in most countries in relation to intellectual property posted to internet forums is very hazy.
2. there's a general acceptance amongst those that post on forums that material is posted with acceptance that what is done with the material once posted is up to the owner and moderators of the forum.
3. it's also generally accepted that by posting up your material you accept that others may quote your material freely. You also accept that members on multiple forums may post up links to your material on another forum and you have little control over same.

I post to numerous forums as a member (not a Moderator) accepting the above and accept that the forum owner/mods may edit or delete my material as they chose. If my photos however are used for commercial purposes then I would probably have issues.

Of course we could generate a set of rules regarding all this but were not going to and I think most members accept this.

Regards Martin

[DarwinStrings]

Good point Matthew. What happens to your post in the Google cache, if you edit here is it edited in their cache or does there become two versions in the Google collection? I guess I have never considered this sort of stuff as I feel everything I put on the net somehow stays on the net or can be copied to another hard drive making it impossible for me to remove from the net.

Jim

If you listen to me you can hear the cogs ticking over, it is slow but you can hear it.

EDIT. I guess I am protected by libel laws on the net too but that may not be the case, hmmmmmm

[matthew]

Im no lawyer but after a bit trawling around the net my understanding is thus:

1. copyright law in most countries in relation to intellectual property posted to internet forums is very hazy.
2. there's a general acceptance amongst those that post on forums that material is posted with acceptance that what is done with the material once posted is up to the owner and moderators of the forum.
3. it's also generally accepted that by posting up your material you accept that others may quote your material freely. You also accept that members on multiple forums may post up links to your material on another forum and you have little control over same.

Interested to see what evidence you based your understanding on.

I like to have a bit of control over what I write. If I want to update something, an image, a description, even an opinion, I like to think I'm free to do it, at least at the place it was originally posted and for the purpose it was originally posted. If someone chooses to misquote me or quote me out of context or attribute things to me that i did not write (it happens :-/) or otherwise use my pictures by downloading or embedding, I fully realise I have not much control over this.

HOWEVER I don't accept that (2) once posted on a forum my words and pictures are owned by the forum owner, unless I signed an agreement when i signed up to that effect.

I post my pictures on Flickr and I have not yet released them under any form of creative commons license. They are still my images and i retain all rights to them. This right should extend to where they are embedded or displayed. I chose to display my 2011 build on this forum, where my post and edit rights seemed clear, and on facebook where I can choose to whom my images are displayed. By removing my right to edit them here, is it not reasonable to then say my rights have been removed, without my permission? There is a word for that ... can't think what it is right now .

Your point (3) is dealt with under creative commons licensing to a degree. And I don't think anyone would consider it reasonable that others may quote my material freely, especially without attribution. I may not have control over this, but i would certainly consider it theft.

[kiwigeo]

Interested to see what evidence you based your understanding on.

This forum discussion is of relevance: http://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/forum/topic27-15.htm

[Kim]

Considering that it appears none of us are equipped to provide a 'qualified' opinion, any general consensus that could be reached in relation to what should and should not be in terms of copyright and ownership has no real bearing on what the reality is. I am not suggesting that the matter should not be discussed here, I am just wondering what will be achieved? As I see it, until you have qualified opinion from a mouth piece who specialists in copyright law, both domestic AND international, and even then it could not be 'conclusive' simply because of the right of challenge to test that advise in the courts, I would advise anyone posting on 'any' internet forum to take a leaf from Jim's book and assume that once a post authored by you, has been made freely available by you to be displayed upon a public forum...you have effectively relinquished control of that content, and the only rights you will have in regards to editing or deleting that content, will be limited to those made available to you by the operators of the forum to which you chose to freely post your material in the clear knowledge it was to be displayed by them openly upon the World Wide Web...The only exception I could see where a breech could occur of your rights to intellectual property, would be if the forum owners then 'on sold' your work and did not cut you a portion of their gain in royalties...but once again...no one here is really qualified to give conclusive advice on that matter and that most certainly includes myself.

EDIT: I will add this because it is relevant to topic...

This matter was raised at the TLC when it first started up. All of the founding members of that forum had once belonged to the commercially focused sprucetonewoods.com web site that is run by mario decostya. There had been a falling out with some key long standing members having their accountants deleted because decostya had requested those who sell back and side sets from time to time on his forum pay him $2000USD if they wanted to maintain the privilege to continue to doing so. When some members were banned by decostya for voicing outrage that he would allow his greed to dismiss the value to his forum of the input made by those whom he was now demanding cash from...(I was among those banned).... many, or should I say the majority of decostya's forum members, including decostya's former head admin guy, Eben Attwater (Sludge is a really nice bloke), resigned in disgust. Eben, along with Grant Goltz, Dennis Leahy and Randy Baker, then formed what is today "The Luthiers Community": rl]http://www.luthiercom.org/phpBB3/index.php[/url]

The question for those guys then became, do those who had posted their own material and images at decostya's forum over a good number of years, material which had including some quite innovative and unique design ideas for an adjustable neck joint and such and some comprehensive build journals, have the right to request that decostya "unlock" their material, (which he had done as soon as he deleted their memberships as they were banned or had resigned), so they would be able to retrieve it for display on their own forum, the TLC?

After much debate and consultation with those who proclaim to understand these things, I believe the answer turned out to be no...decostya maintains ownership of all of their build logs and tutorials even though he has never actually build and instrument himself, and as far as I am aware, to this day he displays them as if the original author is still attached to his forum and gives them the occasional bump to keep the interest of the unknowing at his forum and there is nothing the original authors can do about it.

Cheers

Kim

[kiwigeo]

This is lifted from an Aussie forum:

"The owner, administrators and moderators of this Forums reserve the right to delete any message or members for any or no reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold blameless these Forums, ******** the administrators, moderators, and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s)."

**** company name removed to prevent identification of the name of the forum which is irrelevant to the discussion.

[matthew]

This forum discussion is of relevance: http://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/forum/topic27-15.htm

Thanks . Yes there is a range of (unqualified) opinions there.

Under Australian, British and US Law, I automatically own copyright to any works I publish. Anywhere. I consider a blog post a "work".

The only exception I could see where a breech could occur ...

Whether or not I can protect my work against a "breech" is not really the issue.

I think it is a matter of intent, and what is right.

By posting on a forum I think it's reasonable to consider that am entering to a partnership with the owner of the forum. I am providing my content that the owner cannot provide, which draws traffic to the site and in turn benefits me because it provides my work with exposure that I would not otherwise have. I am providing expertise at no charge via the forum that the forum owner may not be able to provide, for the same mutual benefit. The owner is facilitating and, yes, exercising leadership over a community that develops around the forum. I started to write a little about what leadership means to me in another post, but my post was removed.

In his recent sticky post Bob has made it clear some of his views on how this forum is run, and I can quite happily agree with most of what he wrote, especially the bit about good manners which I read as implying that good manners is something that is expected from ALL members of the forum. I do appreciate this forum enormously and there are some terrific contributions ad contributors here. And contrary to what some may claim, I have no expectation that it be run as a democracy.

But as an active member of this community, who has - I think - put in as much as I have taken from the forum, I do feel that to suddenly lose the right to publish/edit/update/revise my IP as and when I wish, somehow tips the scales a bit in the "mutual benefit" arrangement. I didn't know that when I entered into the unwritten agreement. I still own copyright in the "work" and take responsibility for it's accuracy, not the forum owner. I take responsibility for any advice I give, not the forum owner. I should be able to "maintain" my work.

Personally I think that is what is right. It might not be common practice, but it is what is right.

"The owner, administrators and moderators of this Forums reserve the right to delete any message or members for any or no reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold blameless these Forums, ******** the administrators, moderators, and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s)."

Well that's not the case here though, is it? By removing my control over what I post, the administrator is taking control, and must thenceforth be responsible for it! The forum admin can change the material i posted without my permission. I cannot. How therefore can I remain responsible for it if I don't control it? A disclaimer like that is all very well, like any disclaimer clause, but in a court of Law, if it came to it, I'll bet the judge would determine in my favour

[matthew]

The question for those guys then became, do those who had posted their own material and images at decostya's forum over a number of years, material which had including some quite innovative and unique design ideas for an adjustable neck joint and such, have the right to request that decostya "unlock" their material, (which he had done as soon as he deleted their memberships as they were banned or resigned), so they could retrieve it for display on their own forum the TLC?

After much debate and consultation with those who proclaim to understand these things, I believe the answer turned out to be no...decostya maintains ownership of all of their build logs and tutorials even though he has never actually build and instrument himself, and as far as I am aware, to this day he displays them as if the original author is still attached to his forum and gives them the occasional bump to keep the interest of the unknowing at his forum and there is nothing the original authors can do about it.

So how do you feel about that, Kim? You don't post many pictures at all here so i don't know if you did THERE, but the other posters you mentioned evidently did. So how did they feel about it? Aggrieved, just a little? Was it right? No I don't think anyone posting there would think it was. Is that then a reason to justify "If Decosta can do it, so can we at ANZLF" when you KNOW the disappointment it caused you? Surely not?

Am i missing something here or is the logic really on its head?

[kiwigeo]

By posting on a forum I think it's reasonable to consider that am entering to a partnership with the owner of the forum.

The way I see it, It's more of an informal arrangement than a partnership isnt it? IMHO the guidelines covering same are part of generally accepted "Netiquette" rather than a set of hard and fast laws that can be argued in a court of law.

[DarwinStrings]

I wanted to change my ANZLF user name, there is or was no function to do so. I asked Bob if he would change it for me and he promptly did. I get the feeling if I put something in a thread that I really want to remove later then all I would have to do is ask and it will be removed even if there is no legal obligation to remove it. Again though, once it is removed from here, is it still on the net or on someone's hard drive?

Jim

[Kim]

So how do you feel about that, Kim? You don't post many pictures at all here so i don't know if you did THERE, but the other posters you mentioned evidently did. So how did they feel about it? Aggrieved, just a little? Was it right? No I don't think anyone posting there would think it was. Is that then a reason to justify "If Decosta can do it, so can we at ANZLF" when you KNOW the disappointment it caused you? Surely not?

Am i missing something here or is the logic really on its head?

In your habitual rush to waggle the accusing finger at the administration of this forum Matthew, you have one again missed something ...or should that be 'added' something which is simply not there....put on your glasses fella and re-read 'all' of what I had to say in my above post a bit more carefully, don't add anything that is not there , have a think, and then come back and point out where I have indicated that this forum intends to use what happened at decosya's forum to justify 'anything'? Or for that matter, were it suggests that I feel personally feel what happened there was fair and just

The point was that this did indeed happen, and it happened just as I have recorded it here and it was posted to demonstrate that what 'we' may collectively consider to be the 'right' thing, is not necessarily going materialise before the eyes of the law and therefore it would take a very brave, or very foolish man but more than likely both, to walked into any court room, anywhere in the world and expecting an outcome based upon the way they think it 'should' be. Quite simply it does not work that way and it never has, hence my opening statement that it does not matter what consensus we reach in this discussions because none of us are equipped to give considered professional advise.

So yes, re-read what I have posted Matthew, particularly the bit where I suggest that those with concern should take a leaf from Jim's book....and please, don't approach me with a level of aggression that would suggest I were the one to make these things the way they are, the law really is an ass and it has bugger all to do with me or the ANZLF sport.

[Kim]

I wanted to change my ANZLF user name, there is or was no function to do so. I asked Bob if he would change it for me and he promptly did. I get the feeling if I put something in a thread that I really want to remove later then all I would have to do is ask and it will be removed even if there is no legal obligation to remove it. Again though, once it is removed from here, is it still on the net or on someone's hard drive?

Jim

Thanks Jim,

Nice to know some trust remains in the conspiratorial cartel that is the ANZLF admin team

Cheers

Kim

[Chalks]

You know what? I don't get it. Isn't this whole argument about being able to take back what I have said in a post just the same as if I said it in person???? Maybe we should just take responsibility and think before submitting a post.

Before you click the Submit button click Preview. Read what you have said. Try experiencing what you have said from the other side of the argument. And when you have, then click submit. Surely at that stage you have allowed yourself all the chances you need to cool off and maybe change a few words. At the point of submitting your post I would have thought a person has clearly made a decision to allow their words, emotions, IP, whatever, to be seen on a public domain.

Besides, if I wanted to EDIT my recently submitted posts wording, after the five minutes of cooling off period, because I didn't realise I was insulting someone I could quote my lines and submit the correction in a new post.

This type of discussion makes me afraid for the forum. Lets not drag it down with mistrust and beauocracy. If I don't trust someone with my intelectual property, I WILL NOT give it to them. So I would say lets hold the debate for something that value adds instument building and the luthiery community. Rather than debating something that is going to stymie the creative mind of the forum members.

My dad says "If you want to know how to run a marathon, ask a marathon runner not a plumber". It's a saying, nothing more than a metaphor. Unless there is a lawyer here to correct us we are blowing air around and upsetting things probaly for no positive end except to win an argument that wasn't necessary.

Chalks

[kiwinoz62]

Chalks,
I could'nt have said it better, opps, I meant - you could'nt have said it better. . .

Now back to talking luthiery stuff guys. . .

[matthew]

... please, don't approach me with a level of aggression that would suggest I were the one to make these things the way they are, the law really is an ass and it has bugger all to do with me or the ANZLF sport.

Sorry, where is my aggression? I am merely trying to discuss a matter that I feel strongly about. You indicated it was OK to do so here, even if you think there is no point.

I did not intend to criticize or accusing anyone. I was enquiring about whether you felt that a forum owner who prevented the forum members from accessing and modifying and deleting their own content ( you said decosta did this) was doing the right thing. You have confirmed in your follow up post that you didn't think it was the right thing to do, but that it happened and there was nothing anyone could do about it.

My point was that just because someone does something that is not right and gets away with it, it doesn't mean that others doing it is any better.