ADMIN: Possible Changes to the Main List Settings

[elfundeb2]

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Thomas Wall <thomasmwall at y...> 
wrote:

> I am not insulting, attacking, or criticizing
> individuals in this post. No ad hominems to be found
> here. But I will candidly discuss list policy, which,
> as far as I understand, is not only allowed on 
> -Feedback, but is actually the reason why this list
> was created in the first place. 
> 
Agreed.
> 
> Kelley, quoting the *new* hbfile, wrote:
> Further, in so posting, you also grant the HPFGU LIst
> Administrators the license to use, distribute,
> reproduce, modify, adapt and publicly display such
> post(s) for the purposes of providing and promoting
> the various HP4GU groups and sites."
> 
> Tom replies:
> Just so we're all on the same page, here: I downloaded
> a copy of the hbfile on 03-December-2003... about six
> weeks ago. According to *that* version of the
> document, the file had last been updated on
> 20-November-2003.
> 
> The clause that Kelley is citing is *not* in the copy
> of the hbfile that I have from this past December,
> which means that this clause was not in existence when
> I, and most of my peers here signed up for HPfGU. (For
> the record, I signed up last January, under the terms
> of the old hbfile.) 
> 
Actually, the clause *was* in existence when you joined HPFGU.  It 
was inadvertently deleted from the revised HBfile and then reinserted 
after it was noticed that it was missing (probably just after your 
last download), which is why members were not notified.  

If you look at the old version of the HBfile (which is still in the 
Files section of the main list here: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/ ) 
under section 1.5, you'll find the language.  So the rule has always 
been here in one version or another.

 
> On the topic of "Fantastic Posts and Where to Find
> Them," Erinelli wrote:
> But Fantastic Posts doesn't have the whole of each
> post up on the website. What they do is provide a link
> to it. And, I may be wrong, but I think that in order
> to actually view the post, you'd have to be
> a member of HPfGU.
> 
> However, Hypothetic Alley, at least, does have direct
> quotes from posts that were placed on the list. There
> are quite a few quotes from members' material,
> actually.

True, but there are no names attached, and the quotes are short and 
correctly attributed via links, so I think (with a HUGE disclaimer 
that I am not an intellectual property lawyer and do not purport to 
be giving legal advice) they are like any short quotation from a 
copyrighted work.
> 
> And at least one of the FP essays directly cites
> members' real names, Yahoo ID's, and/or pseudonyms,
> and makes those names - as well as the canon positions
> ascribed to them - accessible to the public. Are we
> sure that those people want everyone who accesses that
> site to know what their canon positions are; for
> instance, do you think that an individual would like
> the internet-going public to know that he or she
> believes that Snape could be described as the "Hebrew
> Satan?"
> 
This is a good point.  I'm currently writing an FP and have been 
going back and forth on whether to cite people by the names they use 
on the list.  I think this has persuaded me to go the anonymous 
route, or to make sure that only first names are used, if they can be 
googled. It would probably be a good idea to delete any last names 
from the Snape update.  

Debbie
speaking for myself