good questions Angel, and my reply is from my perspective as a records
manager (ie current business records only) not as an archivist, which I'm
not, although I do have a double major in History, so I do appreciate the
view from the other side of the fence.

You asked

"Don't the copies, say of a Harvard U. charter, invalidate any attempt to
apply a retention on the original document?  Or if there is no
retention, does that give carte blanche to wholesale destruction of
original vital records and any copies standing ready to be reborn as
default vital records."

Well, in my electronic and photocopied world you can't pick the original
from the copy, so the word 'original' has almost no meaning. Our way around
this is to say that someone has to put their hand up as being responsible
for A (not THE) master version, and all the other versions aren't records,
they are temporary working copies and can be killed off whenever you like,
as long as you are sure the master is in fact being properly kept. If the
master version goes astray we find another one and that becomes the record -
hopefully what we find is a backup version identical to the lost master - if
we had a good EDM it wouldn't be an issue, and we are getting there.

You asked:

"I can see how you might manage copies in an enterprise setting.  But in
the new web-wide world, how do you apply retentions to documents that
escape into the public?  Is it a case of trying to retain the Djinn
after you've rubbed the oil lamp?"

Well, if it escapes, I've lost control, so talk of retention and sentencing
is pretty meaningless. All I can manage is stuff under my control.

Look, I'm biased, I'm not an archivist. I manage documents, some of which
are records, and we keep them as long as we need to for business reasons -
and one of many business reasons is legal compliance. In my private life I
still read historical stuff and I can appreciate the significance of a 100
year old hand coloured plan, and weep inside even as we shred it because
State Records doesn't want it and we have no business need for it.
Hypothetical, but not far from the truth. C'est la vie. In my world terms
like 'original' are pretty meaningless, it is more a matter of the 'record'
versus other 'not records'. The paradigm is changing.

Oh, and I prefer Scruton and Grayling. We've learnt lots from
deconstructionism but it needs putting in its miserable narrow-minded place.
RM needs to be careful about jumping on a bandwagon most of the rest of the
world has jumped off long ago.

it's a good thing it's late Friday afternoon up here.

Glenn

Glenn Sanders
Australia
0407 187 333
These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked and
they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and Glenn".
Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]