5 ms·

Just for the record, we are an archive, just one with some policies (that I myself have been working to have tuned) that you might not like. I understand that y

Just for the record, we are an archive, just one with some policies (that I myself have been working to have tuned) that you might not like. I understand that you don't like the policy.

chroma 12y ago
Wow, the Jason Scott! While you're here, can you please answer two questions: Does the Wayback Machine retain data excluded by new robots.txt rules? (In other words: If you change your policy in the future, can the change be retroactive?) Why does archive.org keep this policy? It drastically limits what The Wayback Machine could be. I've searched quite a bit, but I haven't found a satisfying answer.[1] 1. https://archive.org/post/1019415/retroactive-robotstxt-removal-of-past-crawls-aka-oakland-archive-policy https://archive.org/post/1019415/retroactive-robotstxt-remov... contains links to previous discussion on archive.org.
- textfiles 12y ago
  Answer One: Archive.org does the right thing. Answer Two: Long ago agreed to this policy: http://web.archive.org/web/20130628205733/http://www2.sims.berkeley.edu/research/conferences/aps/removal-policy.html http://web.archive.org/web/20130628205733/http://www2.sims.b... The irony that the policy can only be viewed through the wayback machine is not lost on me.
dingaling 12y ago
> Just for the record, we are an archive I don't think you can claim that when second-parties dictate your retention of existent data[0]. An archive is a place to which I can confidently go to retrieve a document in line with the retainer's retention and access policy. If the retainer doesn't control the retention of existing documents then... it's not really an archive. It's just an ephemeral store which may or may not still have the document in which I'm interested. [0] in terms of raw etymology you are correct, in that arkheia just meant 'public records'. But having to regress to the Greek origin is a bit of a stretch.
- gojomo 12y ago
  Your definition of archive is somewhat eccentric. Lots of archives limit access, or remain entirely "dark", or cull their holdings when legal or budgetary limits are hit. They're still 'archives'.

Just for the record, we are an archive, just one with some policies (that I myself have been working to have tuned) that you might not like. I understand that you don't like the policy.

chroma 12y ago

Wow, the Jason Scott! While you're here, can you please answer two questions: Does the Wayback Machine retain data excluded by new robots.txt rules? (In other words: If you change your policy in the future, can the change be retroactive?) Why does archive.org keep this policy? It drastically limits what The Wayback Machine could be. I've searched quite a bit, but I haven't found a satisfying answer.[1] 1. https://archive.org/post/1019415/retroactive-robotstxt-removal-of-past-crawls-aka-oakland-archive-policy https://archive.org/post/1019415/retroactive-robotstxt-remov... contains links to previous discussion on archive.org.

textfiles 12y ago
Answer One: Archive.org does the right thing. Answer Two: Long ago agreed to this policy: http://web.archive.org/web/20130628205733/http://www2.sims.berkeley.edu/research/conferences/aps/removal-policy.html http://web.archive.org/web/20130628205733/http://www2.sims.b... The irony that the policy can only be viewed through the wayback machine is not lost on me.

dingaling 12y ago

> Just for the record, we are an archive I don't think you can claim that when second-parties dictate your retention of existent data[0]. An archive is a place to which I can confidently go to retrieve a document in line with the retainer's retention and access policy. If the retainer doesn't control the retention of existing documents then... it's not really an archive. It's just an ephemeral store which may or may not still have the document in which I'm interested. [0] in terms of raw etymology you are correct, in that arkheia just meant 'public records'. But having to regress to the Greek origin is a bit of a stretch.

gojomo 12y ago
Your definition of archive is somewhat eccentric. Lots of archives limit access, or remain entirely "dark", or cull their holdings when legal or budgetary limits are hit. They're still 'archives'.