[BW-dev-discussion] Fwd: Re: Re: Group bug

[lemon head]

Would be interesting if the group owner could "retire" from his position,  
if he no longer wants to be held responsible for what people are writing  
in the group. Question would be, who can take over..

On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 21:04:07 +0200, <peter.e.lind at gmail.com> wrote:

> The group owner will be blocked from deleting a group with members in -  
> but
> he can of course kick out all members first. (this block is not working
> atm, but I'll put it in place soon). This should take care of that
> situation - a good point to make, btw.
>
> On Jun 7, 2009 7:59pm, Kasper Souren <kasper.souren at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 1:07 PM, peter.e.lind at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > The reason I don't want to introduce multiple ownership is because  
>> it's
>
>> > possible to delete groups - and this should not fall to anyone but the
>
>> > person that started the group and then bw group volunteers. So, in  
>> that
>
>> > sense it is an ownership. The group admins I will introduce have all  
>> the
>
>> > rights of the group owner, minus the right to delete the group.
>
>
>
>> I think deletion is even too big a right to give to a group creator -
>
>> especially once a group has reached 100s of members and discussions.
>
>> (There's currently an interesting case related to group founder power
>
>> at the notorious CouchSurfing Brainstorm group, where Marcus Eder
>
>> solely decided to block anyone from posting.) Maybe it's okay to
>
>> delete a group as long as it's small, but as soon as others have
>
>> invested in it, and are using it as place it would be weird if the
>
>> person who started it can send everything to /dev/null. (Of course BW
>
>> volunteers should be able to delete groups.)
>
>
>
>> cheers,
>
>> Kasper
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> bw-dev-discussion mailing list
>
>> bw-dev-discussion at bewelcome.org
>
>> http://bewelcome.org/mailman/listinfo/bw-dev-discussion
>