Ted Wolff
Rookie
So, the forum bodygoers have done another GR Awards Topic - for 2007! and it's been edited.
For those who weren't following: I, essentially, made a couple replies that were trolling, and malakian assisted for a couple replies as well. This was even after maca2kx said he'd like the topic to go into the Archive, essentially saying he wanted a nice, peachy-keen topic to show off, like a Van Gogh in a museum.
So maca went back a day, or so, in the posts, and edited out the "dirty" posts and archived the topic. What this essentially does, then, is misrepresent what exactly goes on in the topics at this forum. OK, big deal; it's not like someone misrepresented himself on his résumé and got hired at Wikipedia as a result, right? Right.
Yet, shouldn't we frown at all of the cockamamy posts just as we enjoy the fruitful posts? All of them are indicative and paint a picture of what these forums are, which is what an archive is, presumably, for. The Internet archive doesn't edit Web sites for being uncleanly. Truthfully, a lot of Web sites look atrocious from the mid-90s compared to the CSS-driven Web sites of today. Regardless, a full picture is painted.
What's more, the heralded Post Your Pics topic is also in the archive, yet the last couple pages consist largely of unrelated spam posts. It has not been cleaned up, nor should it be. Everyone knows the Post Your Pics topic devolve into nonsense, and that makes them enjoyable as the actual pictures.
The Archive, of course, is a place for lauded, worthy topics to go. Not just any tripe from Misc. or Sony is moved, but a significant topic that speaks to the volume of this forum. In the case of the GR Awards 2007 post, we have the celebration of forum goers voting for others, congratulating them, and also calling into question the results. The negatives are worthy and contribute just as the postive ones. The question is then whether the spam posts of the final page are necessary or contribute anything to what's being archived, and they do. They represent a shift in power at the forums: maca's coming-of as a co-administrator and being forthright in dealing with a problem. Yet we now have no record of his coming-of, an event that many delighted in because trust_no_one no longer ran the forums at his leisure. Not only this, but surely there's some worth to malakian's and my baiting of maca, giving him a sort of hazing as a co-admin, pushing him with senselessness to make him act â€â€
For those who weren't following: I, essentially, made a couple replies that were trolling, and malakian assisted for a couple replies as well. This was even after maca2kx said he'd like the topic to go into the Archive, essentially saying he wanted a nice, peachy-keen topic to show off, like a Van Gogh in a museum.
So maca went back a day, or so, in the posts, and edited out the "dirty" posts and archived the topic. What this essentially does, then, is misrepresent what exactly goes on in the topics at this forum. OK, big deal; it's not like someone misrepresented himself on his résumé and got hired at Wikipedia as a result, right? Right.
Yet, shouldn't we frown at all of the cockamamy posts just as we enjoy the fruitful posts? All of them are indicative and paint a picture of what these forums are, which is what an archive is, presumably, for. The Internet archive doesn't edit Web sites for being uncleanly. Truthfully, a lot of Web sites look atrocious from the mid-90s compared to the CSS-driven Web sites of today. Regardless, a full picture is painted.
What's more, the heralded Post Your Pics topic is also in the archive, yet the last couple pages consist largely of unrelated spam posts. It has not been cleaned up, nor should it be. Everyone knows the Post Your Pics topic devolve into nonsense, and that makes them enjoyable as the actual pictures.
The Archive, of course, is a place for lauded, worthy topics to go. Not just any tripe from Misc. or Sony is moved, but a significant topic that speaks to the volume of this forum. In the case of the GR Awards 2007 post, we have the celebration of forum goers voting for others, congratulating them, and also calling into question the results. The negatives are worthy and contribute just as the postive ones. The question is then whether the spam posts of the final page are necessary or contribute anything to what's being archived, and they do. They represent a shift in power at the forums: maca's coming-of as a co-administrator and being forthright in dealing with a problem. Yet we now have no record of his coming-of, an event that many delighted in because trust_no_one no longer ran the forums at his leisure. Not only this, but surely there's some worth to malakian's and my baiting of maca, giving him a sort of hazing as a co-admin, pushing him with senselessness to make him act â€â€
