I agree wholeheartedly. It would also prevent any disenchanted transcribers taking their files away along with their bats! I have always thought this was a ridiculous system. Probably sensible in the beginning with few transcribes but now after growth and so many "dormant" members it has become outdated and in my opinion extremely insecure. Jos ----- Original Message ----- From: Ian Brooke To: [email protected] Sent: 02 October 2001 22:31 Subject: File Owning Hi All, I've been trying to mould my brain around this concept of File Ownership and I am truly stumped. Why is it that a file of data, originating from FreeBMD, transcribed by a volunteer to FreeBMD, Uploaded to FreeBMD is considered to be the 'property' and responsibility of that transcriber? I see little sense and little advantage in it at all and it seems to create far more problems than solutions. I would have thought that most transcribers would be quite happy to finish a page, upload it and forget about it - FreeBMD could then move it from their upload area to a centralised repository. If changes were needed to that file it wouldn't be too difficult to find a responsible, experienced transcriber(s) willing to take on the task on behalf of the project as a whole. We immediately loose the problems of AWOL transcribers with files that 'no-one' can get at easily when they need changing. We can forget about our (imagined) problems of security of files ("I can't touch 'his' f! iles"), we don't have complaints from ex (and even current) transcribers when they receive emails pointing out mistakes in 'their' files and life generally seems to become simpler. What's the problem with this? I can't see one. Regards Ian ______________________________