I'm Spataro, I silently follow you since .. many years. It's great what you're doing. Thanks.
I'd suggest a thought. 1) everybody on his own website can delete its own contents 2) if allows other to write (posts or comments or other) it can also remove the authorization 3) the question is: does he reserve the right to authorize or remove accounts as he likes ? No problem, he has to say in advance at what condition. No conditions ? Very Bad. Free to do what he wants ? Bad Some generic conditions are listed ? Medium Conditions are strictly listed ? Good it's a service for free ? Better it's a service for money ? Worse Wikipedia explains in other documents their internal rules ? So i suggest:: "good" and "better". or "medium" and "better". So the answer could be "neutral". But if wikipedia shoudn't do what it says, it would lie and there would be a different problem. Bye, Valentino Spataro -- [!!] Please see https://edit.tosdr.org -- this is where new contributions should be submitted and discussed tosdr.org | twitter.com/tosdr | github.com/tosdr --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tosdr. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tosdr/4179bed1-6982-4dfe-be92-4a9f899be1d0%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
