This site archives many different message boards, and the Straight Dope is one of them. I prefer their archive to some others because they actually take you to the original board so that hits can be registered.
I like it because it lets me search for posts, sometimes by the same person, across several different boards at once.
I don’t know how often it’s updated.
I ran a search to see whether the archive-site has already been discussed, but…well, YOU try searching for “Board” and “Reader” on a messageboard run by the Chicago Reader…
There is even some of the “lost” content still stored on their system somehow - if you click a link to a thread from the period where all our info was lost, you get a reformatted version of the thread!
I can’t speak for them (it’s their call), but certainly anything that gets us out there is a good thing, I would think. And anything from “The Winter of Our Missed Content” that can be retrieved is a bonus.
My big concern is that this site appears to be a commercial enterprise, unlike the other archive site (www.archive.org, The Wayback Machine guys). The Reader may not appreciate having their content potentially packaged and sold without their approval . . . or participation.
Omygosh omygosh omygosh! The Geneva Convention debates that I thought were lost forever! I am so happy that I can use them next time pjen brings up the same darned issue!
I imagine the Reader won’t be too happy about the copyright violation, though. If you guys hold any water with the Powers That Be, see if you can get them to not go nuclear on these BoardReader people. They should be willing to post the Reader’s copyright notice rather than lose the content altogether, and it would certainly reduce server demand if Dopers could direct some of their searches for old threads that way instead of taking it out on Cecil’s hamster.
It also looks like they link you directly to the thread on the actual SDMB server if it’s still in the archives. That ought to be okay with the suits.
On the other hand, I can’t tell for sure, but their archive of the Lost Months might be a little less than comprehensive. A lot better than losing it completely, though.
Thank you Soul Frost! I thought my “doper vacation” thread was no more than a cyber memory.
(BTW, TubaDiva, is there any reason I can’t repost it? I don’t think there should be a reason, but I just want to make sure with the management first…)
zut - My first impression is that pulling the data back from another site would require extensive programming. In other words, probably not going to happen.
zev_steinhardt - I’m sure it wouldn’t be a problem, but TubaDiva will probably come by and give you her imprimatur.
Only is scripts are turned on for your browser. I waited 10 minutes for the search engine to kick in, then I quit and looked at the source code. It uses javascript, and as soon as I turned that on for that site, the sarch engine was almost instantaneous.
Oh cool! I didn’t even stop to think that it might have some of the lost content on it…wow!
Arnold / Tuba…instead of pulling the posts back from boardreader, would it be ok if individual posters simply copy/pasted some of the lost content? I’d be happy to whip up a quickie VB text editor for changing their format into ours, just to relieve some of the tedium.
The only snag I can see from the non-admin viewpoint is that one person would have to post an entire thread, which may make searching a bit harder…but at least the content would be here.
Why would anyone want to ‘re-post’ anything; most of these issues are not all that important anyway. If a re-reading is necessary, just post a link to the other site.
My first thought is to agree with Philo Vance, is it really necessary to repost what was said? A link to the other site can be provided if you want to refer to one of the threads that was lost.
I sure hope the Chicago Reader[sup]TM[/sup] doesn’t “cut off its nose to spite its face” by suing the archive site without careful consideration.
Please, Kind Suit Sirs, [sub][sup]{chocolate enclosed}[/sup][/sub] consider if the advantages of allowing such a site to exist might outweigh the disadvantages.
Here’s a pro/con list I whipped up.
Reasons to allow it:[list=“1”][li]It’s a free backup. Wow, a free backup![/li][li]Searching someone else’s site takes a load off the primary one.[/li][li]It may introduce new users to the real site.[/list][/li]Now, reasons to prohibit it (if possible):[list=“1”][li]It is a copyright violation/dilution.[/li][li]Any profit made on the archive site doesn’t flow to the copyright owners. Solution: negotiate; you’ve got something they want, they’ve got something you could use. Maybe this could be a good thing for everyone. In other words, don’t eat that chocolate just yet.[/li]Hi, Opal![/list]
Two questions: First, does anyone know how to get that site to return its version, rather than trying to forward folks here? I, too, lost a few things in the Bad Times, and BoardReader knows they exist, but just points me to our very own error page when I try to go to them.
Secondly, another possible con: Does anyone know how much of a strain their spider would put on our server? It’s great if our hamsters don’t have to turn the “search” wheel anymore, but now they’re also running to get the info to this archiver.
