Re: [tlug] Open archives are bad?

["Uva Coder" <uva.coder@example.com>]

On 4/21/07, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@example.com> wrote:
> Sure, but to what end?

I thought sharing techical content for the greater good was the goal.
If so then vetting would be appropriate imho. (In this case, I see
trolling as litter [1].)

But if ensuring the social aspect is to remain intact (scope creep,
imo), I suppose unconditional release is the only allowed option. (In
this case, I see trolling not as litter, but only as not being part of
the original scope.)

So where did I get the original goal wrong? I don't know that I had.
Perhaps I mis-read the intent.

> I don't really see where you're coming from.  Do you want a TLUG that
> would attract wileyc back?  Me too, but it's unlikely, you know; he's
> kinda busy.  Or what?

I read that as "What do you want from TLUG?". Everything you want your
own child to accomplish. Not to repeat our mistakes. To grow and be
strong. Be respectful of others. Do no evil.

But unfortunately, the parable of the blind men and the elephant comes
to be more of a reality than a parable for us at times.

As for Wileyc, he knows he's always welcome. Unfortunately, TLUG can't
be all things to all people.

> IMO, the TLUG mailing list is not an encyclopedia; it's a series of
> conversations, some of which never should have been started, many of
> purely historical and/or social interest, and a few which stand the
> test of technical content and time.  Picking out the latter is not a
> matter of peer review (ie, weeding out real losers and fixing minor
> issues en passant), it requires a genuine editor.

Point taken.

> Actually, I think that's a reason to suggest to Google that they add 2
> year and 4 year options (and maybe date ranges) to their search
> options, not a reason to "start over".  Unless Google Groups offers
> substantial technical advantages over a mailing list archive
> searchable via Google?

It was a suggestion. Less administrative effort, less concern over
hardware failure and such come to mind. If the idea doesn't stick,
then let it fall to the floor.

> We have a wiki, there's nothing stopping you from starting a "VT
> Hacker's Best of TLUG" series of pages.  What's wrong with that?  (I'm
> serious; obviously that's not the way you want to go, but it seems to
> me that it fits your commentary pretty well.)

Interesting idea, but perhaps with a pseudonym. I think I come with
enough negative connotation to be deemed credible.

--Uva

[1] I'm sure I'm guilty of it as well.