Would it be too much to ask, for all work uploaded to this site, that we members can safely assume:
a) the person uploading is the author of the work uploaded; &
b) the person in question is still alive [no, honestly] and therefore capable of responding to any comment and criticism, and also capable of amending or redrafting any work thus commented upon.
c) that if either or neither of the above is true, that it is CLEARLY STATED.
Can we take this as a future given for ALL members, and not just a select few?

I don't know what's brought that on Paul, but I think that's a fair enough request. Personally, I'm happy to report I am not dead and all my work is my own. Has a dead person been uploading work on WW? Spooky!

JB

There's work in the archive by people who aren't around any more, whether dead or wandered off or captured by aliens, who's to know. I'm not sure there's much to be done about that, except for readers to check the date of the upload and the most recent comments before bothering to read or comment themselves.

Certainly people ought to be absolutely honest if it isn't their own work; that issue came up recently à propos CharlieW, I recall.

Emma

<Added>

If you have any doubts, you can always WWmail the author first...

Ah ok, I understand now. Maybe there should be a time limit like there is on other sites - if you don't respond in say a few months, and haven't announced an absence, then maybe membership should lapse and the WW could somehow indicate that? That is pretty standard in business, and well, it would save people time, perhaps from giving an in depth crit to someone who is never going to read it. That's happened to me a couple of times, and it is annoying.

JB

Can’t agree with the lapsing membership idea, JB. If they’ve paid for a year, then that’s what they should get. And I don’t think anyone should be obliged to account for themselves if they’re going to be offsite for a while – although it’s nice when people do.

I do agree, though, that we have to watch out for old stuff left by members who've long since gone. Perhaps we should have an archive for dormant work? If the author is no longer active – whether they’re still a member or not – their work could be shifted into the dormant file. That way, we can still have access to the work and the feedback, but we’d be aware that any new feedback would be unlikely to get a response from the writer.

Dee

Hmm, I didn't actually think about the money side of things at all. You're right - but I don't condone kicking them off, I just mean a signposted lapse in activity Dee.

People don't have to announce anything, that's true, and can contribute what they want. Just thinking out loud really!

JB

Interesting thread, but I didn't post about lapsed activity - or even think about it.

I had someone uploading work of a dead friend to get reaction/recognition. Nothing much wrong with that, except no one was told, and the person was passing HERSELF off as the author, thus also as the dead person still alive - though not altering redrafting the work as that would have meant a seance.

When I found she was entering discussion threads under this disguise as well it all got a tad bizarre. She let slip her real ID in a comment reply [her being ANOTHER WW member] and I challenged her over it.

I think there's a good novel in this somewhere. You really couldn't make it up.

O ok I get it now. Yes, that is a bit bizarre.

JB

Paul, I thought we dealt with this yesterday. It was a misunderstanding for which I take full responsibility. The member in question has now added a comment at the top of each and every work, so there's no more to be done really. Can we move on?