The webmaster of this board has received a letter via email from an attorney. That letter instructs us not to delete, alter, etc etc anything on this board.
However, sometime in the recent past, a different lawyer wrote and asked us to stop using someone's name. We complied with that request by editing out references to that name whenever possible, when they occurred subsequent to the request.
These two requests are mutually incompatible. If we can't delete anything, we can't perform our editing function as requested. In addition, we can't perform our normal editing functions of removing spam, or editing other posts which may have nothing to do with the matter these lawyers are dealing with.
The administration of this board is now in an impossible position, basically damned if we do and damned if we don't. I would appreciate an email or private message from any poster who has knowledge or experience of these issues. In the meantime, I implore posters to edit your own posts from here on out if you feel you have been intemperate. Please do not make my life any more miserable than it has just been made.
I will ban anyone who takes unfair advantage of this situation. In the meantime, I hope to contact ActiveBoard over the weekend to see if there is anyway to archive the board as requested by the attorney, and yet close it to further posting. I don't think that can be done, but I'll try to find out. If anyone knows, please contact me.
I hope everyone realizes this is probably the end of our board. There's a lot I could say at this point, but it's best not to go there.
I think I've found a way to restrict both access and posting. If you lose your ability to view or post, email the administrator at usmboard[at]gmail[dot]com.
I have set the board to be viewed by registered users only and have restricted new registrations. As I continue to research options, this may change again.
Lawyers often use bluster rather than rules of law in an attempt to control what others say or do. An order like this one may be issued by a judge, but certainly not by an attorney. The function of a board moderator is just that - to moderate the postings on the board. Were this attorney's request to be honored, there would be no "moderated" boards. If the deletion or editing of information on boards like this were to become the subject of litigation, our courts would be clogged with petty cases and the judicial system would grind to a halt. It would be full employment for the lawyers, but serve no other purpose.
Keep up the good work, moderator, and thanks for providing us with this venue.
WebMaster, you don't need to do ANYTHING an attorney asks you to do! You are free to do what you want unless this "attorney" gets an order from a judge. Don't let some blustering "attorney" make your life miserable...it's not worth the hassle. If you want, consult with your own counsel about this...I'm sure s/he will be able to help you.
Unless a lawsuit is filed, I would ignore any further ridiculous requests. Just my opinion.
Don't let some 2nd-rate attorney shut this board down! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Don't you spend one more minute worrying about how to comply with this stupid request.
All registrations now must be manually approved. I have just activated several registrations with recognizable and verifiable email addresses. With apologies to all, I am not going to activate anyone from now on without knowing who the person is. I'm sorry for people who are being blocked out. If you can get word to me who you are, I will activate your account.
I know you are unhappy with getting these Lawyer commands and the stress they bring with them.
I want to join the chorus in saying that a lawyer can "demand" absolutely anything, just like any average Joe on the street can demand anything. It doesn't mean jack until a court or judge does something more with it, if ever they do. That's possibly not comforting when you are under the stress of actually having demands made of you, I realize that. But lawyer demands, even lawsuits, are thrown around by the hundreds every single day and most of them are bogus fluff - part of a give and take, bluff game.
I'm not against the moves you are making for protection, but I hope that you don't feel danger is inevitable. I think these demands area a bunch of "hooey", personally.
I have set the board to be viewed by registered users only and have restricted new registrations. As I continue to research options, this may change again.
Restricting viewing to registered users defeats the communication function of the board. It is important that students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and community members be able to log on to read what is happening on campus. Such a change effectively muzzles faculty and staff because the broader audience can no longer view what is being written. I hope this policy will not be necessary for long. If it is necessary, the board will have been killed as an instrument of broad and open communication, and administrators will be less likely to be held accountable for their actions.
I herewith demand that the webmaster immediately alter, edit, or delete any post which depicts me as anything other than sophisticated, witty, and erudite. I do have a reputation to protect...
I also hope that the board will be opened to all again soon...but as the former webmaster, I understand why the current webmaster took these actions. You can never be too careful with the wackos we have running around this place!
I also hope that the board will be opened to all again soon...but as the former webmaster, I understand why the current webmaster took these actions. You can never be too careful with the wackos we have running around this place!
Truth
Indeed, though I share Incredulous's sentiments, I recall that the Webmaster is the one who stepped into the gap when no one else would. S/he has asked for someone else to take on the job but no one has come forward. If someone else who is trustworthy wants to pick up the board and make it more accessible, I am sure the Webmaster would be happy to pass it on. (Today seems to be my day for metaphors.)
Restricting viewing to registered users defeats the communication function of the board. It is important that students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and community members be able to log on to read what is happening on campus. Such a change effectively muzzles faculty and staff because the broader audience can no longer view what is being written. I hope this policy will not be necessary for long. If it is necessary, the board will have been killed as an instrument of broad and open communication, and administrators will be less likely to be held accountable for their actions.
I share your sentiments, but I also understand the Webmaster's predicament. It occurs to me that this is exactly the intent of those whose demands have led us to this point. I remain optimistic that matters may be resolved soon and the board is once again opened to public access.