smithpock wrote: > > I agree wholeheartedly. It would also prevent any disenchanted transcribers taking their files away along with their bats! ???? And how would they do that? Although it might appear that a transcriber can remove all their files in a fit of pique, assuming that this is the case without knowing exactly how the system works can lead you to a false conclusion. FreeBMD has been written to protect against mistakes being made, so deleting a file does NOT actually delete the data, merely moves it to a deleted files area. A disgruntled user could easily TRY to delete their files, but we could very easily restore them again. > 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sensible in the beginning with few transcribes but now after growth and so many "dormant" members it has become outdated and in my opinion extremely insecure. In what way is it insecure?? On the contrary, it is very secure, particularly against rogue additions. Consider a scenario where somebody sought to damage FreeBMD by deliberately loading incorrect data. In our model, it is trivially easy to expunge the data. Without file ownership it would represent a monumental task. I appreciate that the model may seem slightly odd, BUT it has been chosen for a reason, and we are ensuring that the problems (dormant subscribers) can be addressed. -- Dave Mayall