Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

This question is an exact duplicate of:

As per §4.a of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license that all Stack Exchange posts are under,

upon notice from any Licensor [Stack Exchange] must, to the extent practicable, remove from the Collection any credit as required by Section 4(c), as requested.

The most obvious way for a contributor to do that is to flag their own post. This is what is mentioned by the Meta.SO post on the subject; I couldn't find any mention in the help center. This transmits the request to moderators, who have no way to honor it and must pass on the request to Stack Exchange staff.

It would be more direct if content disassociation requests went directly to Stack Exchange staff, via the contact form. Please mention content credit removal in the help center — possibly under What is the license for the content I post?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Monica Cellio, S.L. Barth, Gilles, Community Jul 26 '15 at 10:30

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

While I'm at it, moderators also get requests to delete a revision (e.g. containing private information), which they must transmit to Stack Exchange staff. This too would be better handled via the contact form. – Gilles Nov 30 '13 at 15:31
I'm inclined to agree on eliminating the middle folk here. – Tim Post Nov 30 '13 at 15:42
Another improvement in such cases would be a dev flag system that would allow us mods to flag such posts for SE attention without having to ping someone in chat or write an email – Mad Scientist Nov 30 '13 at 15:53
Couldn't this be made a fully automated process in the first place? Why not make it as easy to reach as the CW checkbox? – Pëkka Nov 30 '13 at 17:52
@probablyPekka the downside of that is that it lets abusive users cover their tracks. Furthermore disassociated posts don't count towards the bans since they are effectively removed from the account. – Mysticial Nov 30 '13 at 21:28
@Pëkka: Yep! There is no downside to it either if it is properly implemented and even if that is "too difficult", the users would be caught sooner or later. In my opinion, the best would be to make it automatic rather than handled by SE staff. I will post a feature request about that since otherwise you need be very careful about post disassociation requests. I got a one-month long ban without prior warning after about five such cases with gaps among them. I was even told, next time my account would be deleted. – lpapp Aug 20 '14 at 14:05

If you wanted to frame it as a legal obligation, StackExchange could be nasty and tell you that you already have a way to remove your name: deleting your account.

share|improve this answer
They could, but as far as I can tell they would be incorrect in so doing. The license allows, and SE currently permits, disassociation with any given content desired without prejudice to any other. – Nathan Tuggy Jul 25 '15 at 17:58
@NathanTuggy, where is "without prejudice to any other" written? – Nemo Jul 25 '15 at 18:21
"any" credit, not "all" credit, and "as requested", not "when a request is received". – Nathan Tuggy Jul 25 '15 at 18:22
@NathanTuggy, "A" doesn't mean "A and only A", plus it says "from the Collection" which according to the OP applies to the question hence it says nothing on the others, plus it says "to the extent practicable" and if there is no software feature to do it then it's arguably not practicable. – Nemo Jul 25 '15 at 18:27

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .