On Reviving Very Old Topics, AKA Necro-posting #adminnotice
|
Louise Pfau
Hi. I think I just figured out how to create clickthrough links with the title as the text using the groups.io web interface with NVDA, in case someone is reading topics through E-mail. I won't attempt it until I have occasion to necropost in order to avoid cluttering the list.
Thanks, Louise |
|
|
|
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 03:08 PM, Louise Pfau wrote:
When I come across some very old topics that are relevant to my current situation through searching the web interface, I reply to the posted topic so the original information is always there.- Louise, Which is fine, but you have to remember that the "information is always there" if and only if you are using the web interface, which was my point. I, too, use the web interface so if someone happens to post to an ancient topic that's relevant to their current situation, I, too, can see that history and try to determine how "then and now" relate to each other. But most of the membership here does not use the web interface (and more's the pity, but that's a personal choice) and, as a result, if something is posted to a topic that was last active 2 years ago, they have none of that information at their fingertips. Thats why I suggest that if you (any you) are adding on to a long dormant topic that you've found in the archive, regardless of how you're adding to it, that you include a link to that topic so that it's very, very easy for anyone who wants to review the history to do so by activating that link. One of the reasons, among many, that I prefer web forum interfaces is that they do keep topics "neatly packaged" and if someone happens to revive an old one the old information is right there at your fingertips. But when I'm dealing with either an old topic, or making references to other topics, I make a point of including a link [usually in click-through text format using the topic(s) title(s)] so that the necessary context is communicated. Brian -- It used to be understood that if you published and profited from a mass media platform you should also be responsible for its content. That idea is nowadays considered quaintly archaic. There is no real accountability, and almost limitless ability to post any kind of ridiculous and scurrilous nonsense. God help us. ~ Ross Goldbaum, Letter to the New York Times, Regulating Media: It’s Now Seen as a Quaint Idea, November 13, 2022 |
|
|
|
Louise Pfau
When I come across some very old topics that are relevant to my current situation through searching the web interface, I reply to the posted topic so the original information is always there. Ihaven't accessed lists like this through E-mail for a while, precisely because of the number of E-mails I received. I know there are ways to control what messages appear, but I choose to use the web interface. I hope this helps.
Thanks, Louise |
|
|
|
Yep, I had stuff dating back to 2006 at one point, that is all gone now. That’s about how long I’ve had this gmail btw. I think it’s now from 2017 if I recall. I just save it.
From: nvda@nvda.groups.io <nvda@nvda.groups.io> On Behalf Of tim
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2022 11:16 AM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] On Reviving Very Old Topics, AKA Necro-posting #adminnotice
You would be surprized how many blind people save there emails. I know one that has drives filled with email from at least the 25 years I known him. Even I have some that can go back 20 years or more depending on content.
On 11/20/2022 10:56 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 02:16 PM, tim wrote:
You would be surprized how many blind people save there emails.- Actually, I wouldn't. There are a couple of regulars here who are email pack rats that delete nothing, including what is, for all practical intents and purposes, junk mail. But they are, without doubt, the exception, not the rule. I cannot count how many posts of the form, "I know that {insert topic here} was just talked about in the last several days, but I've deleted those messages, could someone send me . . .," there have been. In any case, what I requested, and it was a request, is nothing more than a simple courtesy. If someone stumbles upon an ancient topic in the archive that they wish to revive, I beg you to include the link to "the old part" as part of your revival post. That covers all bases. -- It used to be understood that if you published and profited from a mass media platform you should also be responsible for its content. That idea is nowadays considered quaintly archaic. There is no real accountability, and almost limitless ability to post any kind of ridiculous and scurrilous nonsense. God help us. ~ Ross Goldbaum, Letter to the New York Times, Regulating Media: It’s Now Seen as a Quaint Idea, November 13, 2022 |
|
|
|
tim
You would be surprized how many blind people save there emails. I know one that has drives filled with email from at least the 25 years I known him. Even I have some that can go back 20 years or more depending on content.
On 11/20/2022 10:56 AM, Brian Vogel
wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 06:47 AM, Brian's Mail list account wrote: |
|
|
|
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 06:47 AM, Brian's Mail list account wrote:
If you just see it in an email, though, would you know its an old thread and how would you realise to look for it.- Brian, If you see a link in any message on a group such as this one, that's a big hint that you should follow it. People don't offer links for their health. Hence the reason I said if someone is reviving an ancient topic, they should give a link to what was already there on the archive. A new member revived two very old topics last night, and the only way they could have known what was said on either of them was to have reviewed them first in the archive. But most members are not going to have those topics still in their mail boxes nor are most going to rush out to do an archive search to find the old material. At least the courtesy of providing a link to it makes it easy if someone wishes to do so. Hence, my recommendation. |
|
|
|
Brian's Mail list account
If you just see it in an email, though, would you know its an old thread and how would you realise to look for it.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Brian -- bglists@... Sent via blueyonder.(Virgin media) Please address personal E-mail to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Vogel" <britechguy@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2022 12:30 AM Subject: [nvda] On Reviving Very Old Topics, AKA Necro-posting #adminnotice Since most of our membership participates via email, and most do not retain topics in their inboxes or dedicated mailboxes after they've originally died out, it's generally not a good idea to revive them because all context is lost for those participating by email. If you do wish to revive an old topic because it applies to you, and you've found it via a web search or archives search, please include the link to that topic in your message that revives it. This way, those who need to look at the background story that preceded the revival can do so. -- It used to be understood that if you published and profited from a mass media platform you should also be responsible for its content. That idea is nowadays considered quaintly archaic. There is no real accountability, and almost limitless ability to post any kind of ridiculous and scurrilous nonsense. God help us. ~ Ross Goldbaum, Letter to the New York Times , *Regulating Media* : It’s Now Seen as a Quaint Idea ( https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/13/opinion/letters/lgbt-gay-queer.html?unlocked_article_code=Cl2WWm1HQ_zCiKdsJsYVPe7BCcvGmpAR4XYhXOT65_klpe4W5ZE5yKLwxjjj5FOKbJvCqJRyAkEe4CyWWBKaPbA8VD56UGKLnRTzuR2OMPQNRAG48gD9LEWkg70cspvjFJTxkmAQwp0LD5oGQy1QAuaclTYVJQg8lbv0oFv67C5YQe-Xu2OEExFOsgMn262oX4rGs3e9a0qcNAXXDOGe7yCfqduZpjuGX5SvdUcsdzbvl0ywgXPDNtu7-kLwGhfXM62S_dC5i4IcdI79tVQADle0d4bV1XR4O75HB-knCzhBZt7-VnT2bDGpjvbNqiaGla9kEdBPpWoe0jmJE0kF&smid=share-url ) , November 13, 2022 |
|
|
|
Since most of our membership participates via email, and most do not retain topics in their inboxes or dedicated mailboxes after they've originally died out, it's generally not a good idea to revive them because all context is lost for those participating by email.
If you do wish to revive an old topic because it applies to you, and you've found it via a web search or archives search, please include the link to that topic in your message that revives it. This way, those who need to look at the background story that preceded the revival can do so. -- It used to be understood that if you published and profited from a mass media platform you should also be responsible for its content. That idea is nowadays considered quaintly archaic. There is no real accountability, and almost limitless ability to post any kind of ridiculous and scurrilous nonsense. God help us. ~ Ross Goldbaum, Letter to the New York Times, Regulating Media: It’s Now Seen as a Quaint Idea, November 13, 2022 |
|
|