On 10/10/05, John H. Robinson, IV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> m ike wrote:
> > > The basis is the camel's nose. Once you let the nose into the tent, the
> > > rest of the camel is soon to follow and pretty soon your archive is
> > > going to be meaningless.
> >
> > That statement makes me laugh so hard, that it is hard to believe you
> > were not being sarcastic.  You really believe that just because some
> > people do something, that everyone will?  Do you really mean
> > meaningless?
>
> Yes. I do. And it need not be _everyone_ for it to turn useless.
>
> Person A: ``Can you remove that message? I did not mean to send that to
>   the list.''
> Operator: ``No. We don't do that.''
> Person A: ``But I was insulting someone, and seeing that is a constant
>   reminder, and a potential employer might run across it''
> Operator: ``Oh, you make a good argument. Let me remove it.''
>
> Person B: ``Could you remove this message from the archive?''
> Operator: ``No. We don't do that''
> Person B: ``You did it for Person A. Why the favouritism''
> Operator: ``Damn. You got me there. I'll remove it.''
>
> Person C: ``Can you remove this message? It contains wrong information
>   about a problem, and the correct information is later.''
> Operator: ``No. We don't do that.''
> Person C: ``Why not? You did it for Person A and Person B. Besides, the
>   correct information is still in the archive.''
> Operator: ``Fine. I'll remove it.''
>
> Person D: ``Hi. Can you remove this message? It is no longer topical,
>   and refers to a product that is no longer supported or even made by
>   the vendor.''
> Operator: ``No. We don't do that.''
> Person D: ``You have done it at least three times in the past, once for
>   Person A, once for Person B, and once for Person C. You cannot tell me
>   that you do not have a policy for removing messages.''
> Operator: ''Fine. I'll remove it.''
>
>
> Wow. That is one useless archive. We have one insulting message removed
> (which could be made an argument for), one presumably innocuous message
> removed, a message with technical merit albeit wrong information, and
> one with presumably correct yet outdated information removed.
>
> Let's hope that I never have a need to research that old product.


laughing even harder now! still unable to believe that you really
believe yourself.

Best,
Mike


--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to