My spelling and grammar are pretty bad...I just write like a speak if it annoys anyone sorry.

Satya,
I've gone back and forth on this a good bit with Tyler and I do undstand that even though we own our words, by putting them on this forum we have released them to the public domain and the truth is, anyone can link, copy, or do whatever they want with them without our knowledge or futher permission.  This may not be right but it is a fact. 

The other issue that I can sympathize with is keeping the integrity and continuity of the information intact so that posts and their repsones make sense.  I should not be allowed to make a statement that someone disagrees with and then I go back and remove or alter the orginal statement such that the following responses don't make sense or make the responder look bad.  I should be held accountable for the content I post.

I really would like to see at least a one week window to allow editing for clarification, but the truth is that I seldom do this and then only in my Journal.  The only time I would need longer than a week would be the annual update of my lab work in the fist entry of my journal.  Most of my edits for spelling and syntax are done within 24 hours or less.

An option that I've proposed to Tyler is to open the editing window to say 24 hours to allow next day review and correction of spelling and syntax errors.  Then for annual chart and lab updates, or where I determine that rewording of a post would trully be helpful, I could submit the new or updated information along with the Thread Name and Message Number to a Global Moderator who would review the request to assure it is appropriate and doesn't violate the spirit of the original post and the Moderator would then make the update.

This model would provide plenty of time for immedate corrections as well as a controlled formal process for those rare occasions where the updating of a post who's editing privlidges has expired would be helpful, all the while assuring continuity and integrity of the thread.

For me it is more a psychological thing where I can have the illusion that I do have some ability to modify my work as I see fit rather than one that I would actually use very much.

Lex

I think the thing is that if you have, for example, a music video, and someone puts it on youtube, that is your property and you can have it taken off. But if you voluntarily post something on someone else's site, like this one, then that isn't your property. If you were posting things on your own website you paid for and someone copy and pasted it somewhere else to use for whatever reason, I could see the legal ground, but putting words on someone else's bandwidth does not seem like legal footing to me. I'm no lawyer but it seems to me there is a distinction there.

Yes yes!  That is the key.  That mayo video I had copyright notice on, yet some people think that since it is LINKED TO on the forum it is fair play.  Also, if I use an image tag instead of attaching a picture, then said image is never on this forum to begin with!!! Hello???  Just because someone "sees it here" does not mean it is part of this site. 

WOW!  Guess I hit a nerve.  Certainly didn't mean to offend you Satya.  I've been ripped off many times over the years - both patents and copyrights.  I followed all the rules naively believing that I was protected.  It really hurt when my lawyer told me it would cost many tens of thousands of dollars and several years to defend a patent and then there was no assurance I would win.  I found out that like padlocks, patents and copyrights only keep honest people honest.  Those that want to rip you off will do so regardless, and then you have to pay to defend yourself.  And even if you win, you won't get your legal fees back so most of us can't afford to fight.  The system sucks but it is the best we have. 

After years of frustration I finally found that the best place to hide my work was in plain sight by putting it in the public domain.  The big boys wouldn't touch it because of the "not invented here" syndrome and they found it difficult to pretend that their "team" came up with it independently. With the work in the public domain their competitors had access to the same information so it gave them no advantage.  Any fights would be between to deep pocket companies and I could choose sides and throw a wrench in the works by showing prior art - kinda cool actually.

Now I just let people copy and don't worry about it.  I'm the one with the creativity and I'll always be one step ahead with my next new idea while all the "copy cats" are doing last year's "best practices".  What I sold my clients was my creativity and my ability to be in front of the curve.  I made it clear that "Best Practice", by definition means "Mediocre".  The truth is that no one can steal what you do Satya.  Your value isn't in your style sheets, it's your creative ability to visualize and execute a total package that exceeds your clients expectations.  People can copy your code but they can't duplicate what sets you apart - your vision.

You may be right about Charles legal bent, but he may also understand that exceptional people are drawn to an open and free environment.  My guess is that he'd rather risk having to deal with the occasional problem child by governing with few rules, in an effort to attract the cream of the crop in creative talent full of excitement and new ideas.  When you lock things down with excessive control you drive the movers and shakers away and are left with nothing but an empty shell.

Our forum used to be active and exciting like Charles' forum, with many active and creative members and lots of visitors.  Sadly, we've driven many of them away.  But not to worry, we're locked down tight and secure against trolls!

Lex