¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

  1. GroupManagersForum
  2. Topics

Editing and Deleting Posts

 

I had thought that, if I disabled Editing Posts, it would not allow members to delete their own posts.? This doesn't seem to the case.?? Am I missing something?? Is there a way to prevent people from deleting posts?? I'd like the mods to be able to do it in case of spam that comes through, but hadn't wanted members to be able to do this.?? Thanks.? Janet Smith
J_Catlady
 

No, there's no way to prevent them from deleting their posts. I have lobbied for this as well. Others argue that members are legally entitled to remove their own content. I think the legal argument actually goes the other way, because users grant non-exclusive license to display their content in any way, shape or form. The current TOU does not require to allow users to remove their posts, and I feel strongly that a group should be allowed to disable that ability. There are threads on beta about this. You might want to have a look.

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Janet Smith <desertminis@...> wrote:
I had thought that, if I disabled Editing Posts, it would not allow members to delete their own posts.? This doesn't seem to the case.?? Am I missing something?? Is there a way to prevent people from deleting posts?? I'd like the mods to be able to do it in case of spam that comes through, but hadn't wanted members to be able to do this.?? Thanks.? Janet Smith


 

A regulation in the EU grants its citizens a right to erase personal data. How that would apply to groups.io, I don¡¯t know, but personally, I rather wish it existed in the US. I¡¯ve shot my mouth off a number of times and I wish I could make the network forget.

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 11:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [GMF] Editing and Deleting Posts

?

No, there's no way to prevent them from deleting their posts. I have lobbied for this as well. Others argue that members are legally entitled to remove their own content. I think the legal argument actually goes the other way, because users grant non-exclusive license to display their content in any way, shape or form. The current TOU does not require to allow users to remove their posts, and I feel strongly that a group should be allowed to disable that ability. There are threads on beta about this. You might want to have a look.

?

[Excess quote trimmed by moderator]

?
J_Catlady
 

Not applicable in the slightest. Users explicitly grant rights to their content. I do understand wanting to remove one¡¯s posts. But if a group announces on the home page that removing is disallowed - just as, actually, the TOU makes it clear that users grant permanent rights - it seems fair enough.?

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 22, 2018, at 12:24 PM, Marv Waschke <marv@...> wrote:

A regulation in the EU grants its citizens a right to erase personal data. How that would apply to , I don¡¯t know, but personally, I rather wish it existed in the US. I¡¯ve shot my mouth off a number of times and I wish I could make the network forget.

?

[Excess quote trimmed by moderator]

 

Janet,

Is there a way to prevent people from deleting [their own] posts?
As J said, no.

I'm on the opposite camp though. I support users having the unfettered ability to remove their own contributions across the board. I'm not sure how Groups.io ended up with a mixed situation, granting the ability through the UI but not the contract right in the TOS.

I would prefer that the Groups.io Terms Of Service document be amended to make such removal a contract right. That is, I would replace the grant of a perpetual and irrevocable license with a limited one; a license which terminates when the member removes his/her content from the service.

I don't expect this to be a high priority issue for Groups.io right now. And it has been a recurring issue in Yahoo Groups over the years, but firmly settled in the members' favor by the Yahoo TOS (paragraph 9.1).

Shal
 

The TOS also state, "You are solely responsible for all code, video, images, information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs, graphics, messages or other materials (¡°content¡±) that you upload, post, publish or display (hereinafter, ¡°upload¡±) or email or otherwise use via the Service." In which case, I can delete it if I want.

Duane
J_Catlady
 

I disagree. That means that users promise not to infringe on someone else¡¯s copyright. It has nothing to do with this issue.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 22, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

The TOS also state, "You are solely responsible for all code, video, images, information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs, graphics, messages or other materials (¡°content¡±) that you upload, post, publish or display (hereinafter, ¡°upload¡±) or email or otherwise use via the Service." In which case, I can delete it if I want.

Duane
J_Catlady
 

I'm not going to argue about this any more. We'd just be rehashing the same argument as previously on beta. The legal issue is clear and IIRC, at last count Shal was suggesting *changing* the TOU to allow users to delete their content, because currently it does not. I'm done here.

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 1:20 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
I disagree. That means that users promise not to infringe on someone else¡¯s copyright. It has nothing to do with this issue.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 22, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
>
> The TOS also state, "You are solely responsible for all code, video, images, information, data, text, software, music, sound, photographs, graphics, messages or other materials (¡°content¡±) that you upload, post, publish or display (hereinafter, ¡°upload¡±) or email or otherwise use via the Service."? In which case, I can delete it if I want.
>
> Duane
>
>
>
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Thanks to all who replied.? I had searched the archives here, but not on the beta group, so I will remember to do that in the future.? I don't particularly care how this works, but am glad to now understand how it works so I can make sure my users are clear on it as well.? Thanks!?? Janet

._,_
 

I am not so sure. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) includes a provision that ¡°The data subject shall have the right to withdraw his or her consent at any time.¡± I¡¯m not sure how that would apply, but I gather that it is intended to protect people have granted permanent rights to certain data and later regret it.

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 12:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [GMF] Editing and Deleting Posts

?

Not applicable in the slightest. Users explicitly grant rights to their content. I do understand wanting to remove one¡¯s posts. But if a group announces on the home page that removing is disallowed - just as, actually, the TOU makes it clear that users grant permanent rights - it seems fair enough.?

Sent from my iPhone

?

[Excess quote trimmed by moderator]

?
J_Catlady
 

But (a) we're talking about a private contract, (b) we're talking about the U.S., and (c) consent to what, explicitly? In your other message you were referring to ?the right to request that data *about* one be removed - e.g., requesting that google remove some kind of info that someone else posted about me. I am firmly for that, an aware that other countries have this protection, and I, like you, wish the U.S. had something like it. But your comparison seems not to match on several counts....

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Marv Waschke <marv@...> wrote:

I am not so sure. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) includes a provision that ¡°The data subject shall have the right to withdraw his or her consent at any time.¡± I¡¯m not sure how that would apply, but I gather that it is intended to protect people have granted permanent rights to certain data and later regret it.


[Excess quote trimmed by moderator]
 

I too have recently come to the realisation that whilst users can be restricted from editing messages, users can delete posts. Which seems contradictory to some extent, ie. if a user is unable to edit a message, simply delete then re-post.

I'm no expert on the legalities, but it seems that a discussion thread within Groups.io can't be relied upon as an accurate and complete record of past discussion.
 

Why would a person post something knowing everyone is going to see the post only to delete that post later?

Don
 

Hi Don

Simply as some will post something in haste with either an error or post a comment they wished they hadn't made

I remember a particular post on a genealogical list where a man posted in haste saying he had to go as he thought his wife had found out about them , obviously to the wrong address ;-)

I can remember several more

So there are occasions when someone will want to retract a post

Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)

On 20/07/2020 16:17, Don Grass wrote:
Why would a person post something knowing everyone is going to see the post only to delete that post later?
Don
 

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 06:56 AM, Steven Knowles wrote:
I too have recently come to the realisation that whilst users can be restricted from editing messages, users can delete posts. Which seems contradictory to some extent, ie. if a user is unable to edit a message, simply delete then re-post.
My understanding is that this capability directly relates to the "right to be forgotten" in the GDPR and others (). In that sense the ability to delete one's own messages is distinctly different from the ability to edit them.

Mark has enlisted the help of to ensure that groups.io meets the requirements of global privacy regulations.

I'm no expert on the legalities...
Neither am I.

...but it seems that a discussion thread within Groups.io can't be relied upon as an accurate and complete record of past discussion.
An unfortunate side effect; but from where I'm standing, better that than have groups.io get shut down for non-compliance.

Regards,
Bruce
Check out the groups.io Help Center?and?groups.io Owners Manual

1 - 15 of 15