On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > On Tuesday 26 May 2009 00:56:22 Matthew Toseland wrote: >> On one prior occasion (this year), we have authorised a mailing list archive >> site to remove messages posted by somebody. I have now had another mail >> asking for us to remove somebody's name from two archives which we don't run >> - which generally requires him asking them and getting authorisation from us >> - and from our own archives. >> >> If this is to be a regular occurrence, we need to formulate some policy, and >> IMHO the best way to do this is to discuss it here. Does anyone have an >> opinion on this? I doubt very much that we have any legal obligation to >> remove somebody's posts, especially as at least one of the other archive >> sites will only remove messages with our say so, but I guess we could get >> legal advice on it... Any opinions on the principle? IMHO rewriting history >> to make yourself look good to employers is dubious, but at the same time we >> clearly don't want to pick fights and unnecessarily annoy people. >> > > Suggested solution: Authorise removal from the external sites, and obscure > the name on our archives. > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl >
I concur. IMHO other sites should operate as they choose... if they're willing to remove people, then I think we should authorize it. I think it is important to retain all messages, but for archives the name is less important than the content. I would recommend obscuring it as [removed name #n] or similar, so that it's obvious whether it's the same removed name as some other message. Given Freenet's pro-anonymity stance, I think if someone has a desire to be made more anonymous, especially as regards potentially illegal software usage, that we should support them. Evan Daniel
