4 ms·

Again, you seem to be under some misapprehension that we are a company or are “bidding” on a project. Please educate yourself about state Freedom of Information

Again, you seem to be under some misapprehension that we are a company or are “bidding” on a project. Please educate yourself about state Freedom of Information Laws or Sunshine Laws. We appreciate hearing that our work is “impossible” from people like you, especially since we’ve been doing it very successfully for four years now, and have so far put over 25,000,000 records online for totally free public use. This includes acquiring and publishing millions of records in New York City alone: marriage license indices from two different agencies, voter lists, and so on... And we did it at a very reasonable $35 or $37 per microfilm roll. Because that’s what the law requires. And thanks to the generosity of the Internet Archive, we don’t even have any server storage bills.

privateSFacct 8y ago
If you are telling a government agency what it will cost them to do the work, you are "bidding" the project. Does that not make sense? I don't understand why you want them to do the work. How is it more cost effective to have the government do the work then to just do it yourself? I'll answer this question, it is not. I 100% guarantee that ancestry, if they brought in their own staff or standard partner to do this, paid a LOT less then whatever the goverment would have charged you. And then you got things for free. And are suing over this. Let me make a suggestion. Follow the ancestry model. Offer a free service to agencies, backed with some quality, and if you then give them even a hard drive with the images you will make them very very happy. Seriously. On the other hand, if you tell them to do something they don't know how to do, and then sue them when they don't do it the way you want, you will be helping to make the world worse off. I did look at the fiche count, I will say, that's a very small job. That's where you will most likely see the biggest cost difference between doing it yourself and having them do a one off.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  > Let me make a suggestion. Follow the ancestry model. Offer a free service to agencies, backed with some quality, and if you then give them even a hard drive with the images you will make them very very happy. Seriously. This advice is terrible, and Asparagirl has every right to hold government to the standard the law demands, as well as ensuring certain requestors are not receiving preferential treatment.
  - privateSFacct 8y ago
    Have you done a lot of public records work? The government will generally give you access (reasonable non disruptive access). If you think you can do something for free / cheap - you can then simply do it yourself. This tends to work out well. In fact, entire businesses are based on this approach around govt public records - some very lucrative. This is because a lot of govt records are valuable and even just indexing them better (ie, by block and lot vs name) is valuable. Very few of these businesses even try to get the govt to do their work for them. Even if you can talk the government into doing a bid for an outside professional (wasting lots of government time) and even if that outside professional comes in at the price you demand (less likely), you will still be paying that same amount, now with a much much longer process then if you paid for the professional directly yourself. I realize if your goal is to be pissed at getting something for free, with public access, at no cost to the public, because you are offended that the group doing it for free got ahead of you while you argued how much it would cost to make the govt do your work for you - then yes, my advice is not relevant.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - dannyw 8y ago
      I’m really not sure why you’ve changed the topic, because the lawsuit here is over the government not following FOIL. Everything you have bought up is completely irrelevant to the legal arguments in this case.
      - SpelingBeeChamp 8y ago
        I think the reason for the changed topic is that privateSFacct is trying to be a pain in your ass. I have no idea what his motivations are, but shifting goalposts is one of the techniques he is using. It's obviously working. Asparagirl keeps saying things like "you seem to be under some misapprehension that we are a company or are “bidding” on a project. Please educate yourself about state Freedom of Information Laws or Sunshine Laws." privateSFacct seems intelligent and informed. I suspect that he knows that he is making absurd arguments. I recommend you stop engaging. My full-time job is entirely based upon requesting, obtaining, and disseminating otherwise-unavailable public records. Good luck with your lawsuit. Who is representing you?

privateSFacct 8y ago

If you are telling a government agency what it will cost them to do the work, you are "bidding" the project. Does that not make sense? I don't understand why you want them to do the work. How is it more cost effective to have the government do the work then to just do it yourself? I'll answer this question, it is not. I 100% guarantee that ancestry, if they brought in their own staff or standard partner to do this, paid a LOT less then whatever the goverment would have charged you. And then you got things for free. And are suing over this. Let me make a suggestion. Follow the ancestry model. Offer a free service to agencies, backed with some quality, and if you then give them even a hard drive with the images you will make them very very happy. Seriously. On the other hand, if you tell them to do something they don't know how to do, and then sue them when they don't do it the way you want, you will be helping to make the world worse off. I did look at the fiche count, I will say, that's a very small job. That's where you will most likely see the biggest cost difference between doing it yourself and having them do a one off.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
> Let me make a suggestion. Follow the ancestry model. Offer a free service to agencies, backed with some quality, and if you then give them even a hard drive with the images you will make them very very happy. Seriously. This advice is terrible, and Asparagirl has every right to hold government to the standard the law demands, as well as ensuring certain requestors are not receiving preferential treatment.
- privateSFacct 8y ago
  Have you done a lot of public records work? The government will generally give you access (reasonable non disruptive access). If you think you can do something for free / cheap - you can then simply do it yourself. This tends to work out well. In fact, entire businesses are based on this approach around govt public records - some very lucrative. This is because a lot of govt records are valuable and even just indexing them better (ie, by block and lot vs name) is valuable. Very few of these businesses even try to get the govt to do their work for them. Even if you can talk the government into doing a bid for an outside professional (wasting lots of government time) and even if that outside professional comes in at the price you demand (less likely), you will still be paying that same amount, now with a much much longer process then if you paid for the professional directly yourself. I realize if your goal is to be pissed at getting something for free, with public access, at no cost to the public, because you are offended that the group doing it for free got ahead of you while you argued how much it would cost to make the govt do your work for you - then yes, my advice is not relevant.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - dannyw 8y ago
    I’m really not sure why you’ve changed the topic, because the lawsuit here is over the government not following FOIL. Everything you have bought up is completely irrelevant to the legal arguments in this case.
    - SpelingBeeChamp 8y ago
      I think the reason for the changed topic is that privateSFacct is trying to be a pain in your ass. I have no idea what his motivations are, but shifting goalposts is one of the techniques he is using. It's obviously working. Asparagirl keeps saying things like "you seem to be under some misapprehension that we are a company or are “bidding” on a project. Please educate yourself about state Freedom of Information Laws or Sunshine Laws." privateSFacct seems intelligent and informed. I suspect that he knows that he is making absurd arguments. I recommend you stop engaging. My full-time job is entirely based upon requesting, obtaining, and disseminating otherwise-unavailable public records. Good luck with your lawsuit. Who is representing you?