hmtcastle Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:00 AM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:00 AM Since the old message board only retained a few months' worth of messages, I'm not sure it's worth preserving the final three months of more than 75,000 posts over half a dozen years. Unless you plan on resurrecting everything from thread #1. Which would be fun but, I think, unlikely.In other words, three months from now all those old posts would have disappeared. Why import them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:43 AM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:43 AM (Everyone together:) "Awwwwwwwwwwwwww". Out of 12 years, only one-fourth of a year is archived?So, access to (say) 2008 and older cannot be done?Then I say, "It's spinach, and . . ." (Look up "James Thurber" and The New Yorker to finish that sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted May 20, 2010 at 10:48 AM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 10:48 AM I think even the last few months' worth of messages, combined with improved search capability, should be useful to new visitors/posters looking for information. From a selfish p.o.v., there are a few messages I would still like to be able to refer back to. There were also ongoing threads cut off in mid-discussion when the forum moved yesterday.We can air our opinions, but I suspect no vote will be entertained on this issue anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted May 20, 2010 at 12:26 PM Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 12:26 PM 99% of the visitors to the Q&A Forum (or "Discussion Forum") don't even bother to check the FAQa, let alone search the old messages. And those who do, and find an appropriate "topic", are castigated for not starting a new one!I agree that the decision has already been made. I'm just saying that preserving an arbitrary (the most recent) and relatively small fraction of previous messages doesn't make much practical sense. I guess what I'm saying is that if was my job to transfer them, and it required anything harder than pressing a button. it would be way, way down on my "to do" list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest F.R.Pond Posted May 20, 2010 at 12:36 PM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 12:36 PM Then I say, "It's spinach, and . . ." (Look up "James Thurber" and The New Yorker to finish that sentence. Parliamentary Inquiry....With all due respect to Mr. Goldsworthy, shouldn't that be "Carl Rose" and and The New Yorker...?Although, admittedly, using "James Thurber" does find the completion of the quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:26 PM Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 01:26 PM shouldn't that be Carl Rose and The New Yorker"?Although, admittedly, using "James Thurber" does find the completion of the quote.Actually, according to Thurber (in The Years With Ross), Rose drew the cartoon and E.B. "Andy" White wrote the caption. As Thurber tells it, neither he nor White thought much of the caption at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:39 PM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:39 PM 99% of the visitors to the Q&A Forum (or "Discussion Forum") don't even bother to check the FAQa, let alone search the old messages.I spent a LOT of time searching and reading old threads when I first started hanging around the forum. It was a way to learn quietly, without putting my foot in my mouth constantly with dumb questions and comments. I'll admit that I'm weird, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:54 PM Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:54 PM I spent a LOT of time searching and reading old threads when I first started hanging around the forum. It was a way to learn quietly, without putting my foot in my mouth constantly with dumb questions and comments. I'll admit that I'm weird, though You weren't the only one that did that. It does seems that we have a lot of recurring themes here. I would bet that if you were to read a months worth of posts that 95% of them are things that have been asked each and every month back to when the forum was started (and the circumstances don't affect our answers any). But it would be wild to read the first thread that the RONR forum had. Probably someone making sure the thing was actually working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:59 PM Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2010 at 02:59 PM I spent a LOT of time searching and reading old threads when I first started hanging around the forum. It was a way to learn quietly, without putting my foot in my mouth constantly with dumb questions and comments. I'll admit that I'm weird, though You want weird? I wasn't present at the creation but I discovered this site when it was still possible to go back and read every post from the beginning (i.e. #1), And that's what I did!(At least that's how I remember it, years later.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted May 21, 2010 at 04:16 PM Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2010 at 04:16 PM Unless I'm missing something, it looks like the imported messages omitted the first post in each topic,. In other words, the original question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.