[eDebate] Omri, etc.
Thu Apr 3 06:59:34 CDT 2008
I realize my statement "this is easy to fix" appears to be a tech
assessment rather than a norm assessment. Sorry about that - as
Omri, Michael and others accurately point out, I am not qualified to
talk about this particular area of tech. I meant that statement that
as a consideration of what we should try to do - and I absolutely
think whoever has to do it should be highly compensated for their
time. There's no reason Phil should have to suffer for our
collective mistakes - but probably Kacey shouldn't have to either,
given that she didn't write the post in question.
I was going to put that in my last post, but it seemed awkward given
the smaller point I was (trying to) make. Now I realize the absence
leaves me essentially demanding free labor (on behalf of Kacey, but
still free labor), which was certainly not my intent. I'm okay with
the paying for post-removal idea. I also think that if we get some
sort of system in place to remove posts, everyone who supported it
should donate to edebate even if they don't have a particular post
they want removed. I'm certainly happy to - it's a great service.
I'll leave the tech question to others, but Eber's post (and a few
notable others from edebate I searched for last night that have been
removed) seem to imply this is do-able. If the answer is "posts can
be removed, but once google has them it's all over," that would be
something I imagine would be useful for people to know.
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:12 AM, Omri Ceren wrote:
> And if you think law firms are obsessed with reputation, may I suggest
> that activists and lobbyists are also not insensitive to reputation?
> From what I can tell edebate is powered by GNU Mailman 2.1. The
> backend is managed through Pipermail. The thing about Pipermail is
> it sucks. It's clunky and slow and in need of a total rewrite. But
> - it shouldn't take Kerp more than 30 minutes to track down the
> nuke them, and then rebuild the archive.
> That wouldn't fix how those emails still stored on the mirrored
> archives. And it certainly wouldn't do anything about the copies on
> Google and Yahoo and Live caches. And he can't remove those because
> not the original author of the emails. So I have to disagree with
> Margaret about how "this is easy to fix."
> No one is even sure if a listowner *can* get Google to remove someone
> else's emails from a listserv cache. Companies like Google are
> notoriously bad about responding to user complaints. You can get away
> with that when you run a platform that people get to use for free.
> Because honestly - what kind of person has the surreal sense of
> entitlement that it would take to aggressively attack someone else who
> provides them with years and years of a free service.
> On that note - I haven't seen a particular rush to hit Kerp's tip jar
> lately. Server space and bandwidth cost money that come out of
> pocket, after all. To say nothing of the time and energy that it takes
> to do grunt work like cleaning out spam filters, getting in touch with
> the hosting company when the server hiccups, etc. Instead of tips,
> though, he gets personal attacks. And so I also have to disagree with
> Brent that "no one disputes" that Kerpen deserves thanks for literally
> years and years of totally voluntary contributions to the community.
> PhD Candidate, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> Email: ceren at usc.edu
> Mobile: 412-512-7256
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
Director of Debate
Lexington High School
maggiekb at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman