It should be noted that the act of deleting internet content does not remove its availability. Sites like http://archive.org claim to record the entire internet history and provide free access and comparisons of content changes. I've occasionally explored the evolution of content using archive.org (I've no association other than an occasional user). My interest has mostly been how business and government sites change but the possibility of looking at revisionist blogs is a fascinating research opportunity. I've also written software that allows me to "scrape" or aggregate public information when the owners would not or could not provide the database for analysis. I've not published the information collected from my scrapes for a variety of reasons. Mostly because I'm lazy and the value of self-selected responses to surveys are very questionable. Then again, I suspect I could find "serious flaws" in almost *any* research design. I continue to be amazed that research provides useful results despite how easy it is to find errors in the research process. As a bottom line, if you post it on the net, it is public. The publisher might regret their post but that does not make it private. Yes, additional exposure might bring some greater harm to the poster but the poster has brought it upon themselves. IRBs should focus on research where an *intervention* might cause the participant harm. Charlie Balch Me.D, MBA, Ph.D yada yada professor of Computer Information Systems Arizona Western College http://charlie.balch.org