ADMIN: Possible Changes to the Main List Settings

[Tom Wall]

Replies to both Debbie and Kelley are in this post, but I didn't 
categorize by author or anything, so it's all jumbled together. Er, 
sorry 'bout that.


Kelley asked:
Your post is fine, Tom; has someone accused you of doing otherwise??

I (Tom) reply:
Nah, not *this* time. ;-) But I have been accused of stuff before, so 
I'm just covering my bases.


Debbie wrote:
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. /END QUOTE

And Kelley added:
Incorrect, Tom, sorry. It is *not* a new clause, and it is *not*
a "very recent addition". I've also uploaded copies of the 29 May 03
HBF which is still available on the main list,
titled "oldhbfile.html". These can be found in the Files section, in
the Admin Files folder.

Tom, blushing profusely, replies:
You know, I compared three copies of the hbfile to each other (the 
August one, the one I got on 03-December, and the latest version), 
and not *once* did it cross my mind to check out the very oldest 
one... Since the clause wasn't in my August or December 3rd copies, I 
just assumed - and we all know what happens when one does that - that 
it was a new addition. 

<Tom bows his head and genuflects.>

Apologies to all for my inept research. ;-)


I (Tom) wrote previously:
> 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.

Debbie replied:
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.

Tom:
I'm not sure that that's the case... I *think* that permission may 
still be needed, particularly in certain cases - like the banned 
member, whose work appears all over the place. I plan to bring this 
up in another post later on, but as I don't have all of the details 
at present, I'll hold off. Oh, and I'm not a lawyer either, so I 
can't be sure.


Kelley wrote:
According to main list memberships, you joined on 20 Jan 03 (happy
anniversary!)

Tom:
Thanks! I didn't realize that it'd already come. A whole year... 
that's kind of weird, now that I think about it. ;-)


I (Tom) wrote previously:
> 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.

Debbie responded:
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.

Tom adds:
Yeah, I went through the same dilemma on my FP, and came to the same 
conclusion, as well. Maybe we want to look into making this a policy 
thing, just to be safe...

-Tom