Peter Shute writes:
Ron Webb wrote:
I will also wish to add some type of disclaimer that no one will probably give it much thought, but it will state that statements made are the of the sole responsibility of the author of the statement and they are not the official opinion of the corporation nor the union and the maintainer of the list does not archive messages. I'm sure I'll come up with much better wording than that but I'm sure you get the gist.
This part could be tricky. Most list members will "save" (i.e. forget to delete) at least some if not most of the messages they receive. Lots of them will contain quoted material written by other list members. In other words, none of you will have much control over how much of what you say on the list will be available to others later if they get access to list members' mailboxes.
That's certainly true, but I suppose Ron is mostly worried here about his *personal* liability as list admin, both legal and ethically to the members whose posts are supposed to be off-the-record. Compare http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html. Centralized list archives are an obvious target, and I suspect that subpoena'ing everyone in the company would be less likely to convince a judge.
Are these corporate mailboxes you'll be using, or private ones? I've never used it, but you can have regular expression in ban_list to prevent people subscribing with their work addresses.
That's a good idea for dealing with corporate policy toward mailbox use, but as Jamie points out, if there's a court involved, anything can be subpoena'ed.
Of course all of the above is based on US law, your venue may vary.