Listowners-L Archives

Archiver > Listowners > 2000-04 > 0956983063


From: "Tom & Joyce Pfeifer" <>
Subject: Re: Question Regarding Archived Messages
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 21:37:43 -0700
References: <a7.3653351.263b905c@aol.com>


I just did a search of this list (for 2000) using the term "red-faced" and
did, in fact, get an off topic post (actually 2), because it included the
original post in the reply. So much for being "buried in the archives".
True, a new post that is off-topic would have little chance of surfacing
again, but just let it hang on the coattails of a legitimate post and it'll
come up everytime.
Now the trash builds forever and eventually researchers won't bother with
the tainted archives, because of the garbage they have to contend with, and
nobody wins.
Strangely enough, on the GenConnect list today, staff advised board
administrators to delete messages on their boards which are the equivilent
of archives. Double standard?
I'd certainly be concerned about the mountain of spam (defined as "of no
genealogical value") that is growing in the archives. IMHO archives should
contain valuable information, not just be a dumping ground for every word
that's written. As an example: An obituary archive saves the obituary
article, not the whole newspaper. It's not a matter of capability, but one
of responsibility. For the future of the archives it simply IS important.
Regards,
Tom Pfeifer



----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: Question Regarding Archived Messages


> It simply isn't important that these off-topic message be deleted from the
> archives of the list since no one is ever going to search on them in the
> archives. If any damage happened, short of wearing out the deleted key on
> your keyboard, it happened at the time the messages went to the list--now
> they are buried in the archives.
>
> Joan
>
>

This thread: