ALWAYS keep back-up copies of posts

[Dave Reitzes]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=7a4e4bee27387ce2a9135294e25a7bd2&showtopic=20969&page=2


<QUOTE ON>--------------------

David Von Pein
Super Member
Posted Today, 11:16 PM

[Vincent M. Palamara said
hey--where IS DVP these days?]

Here, there, and everywhere, Vince. :)

I'm spending a lot of time recently transferring many of my older articles
and forum posts to my own JFK Archives site/blog (so they'll be safe and
won't get "lost" or deleted).

<QUOTE OFF>-------------------


I learned a long time ago to keep a back-up copy of ANY post of mine that
I put any significant effort into, and to make copies of any forum
exchange that strikes me as notable for any reason, even if only to
preserve someone's loony rantings or insults -- no names mentioned. \:^)

The potential for technical problems alone makes it imperative to keep
back-ups. If you've never sent off a post, only to learn later that it
never reached its destination, you are fortunate indeed.

With Web forums, there's not just the possibility of what's been
surreptitiously going on at the Ed. Forum, but also cases where entire
forums get hacked or disappear due to technical or personal issues (like
the JFKresearch and Lancer forums).

That's unlikely to happen with Usenet groups, but you never know. When
Google obtained the Deja.com Usenet archive some years back, for example,
a lot of posts didn't survive the journey. Last I heard, there were also
ways for posters to keep their own Usenet posts from being archived. (I
know this was the case with Deja; I don't know if it's true with Google.)
It's also possible for posters to delete their own posts from Google's
archives, although I don't know about other newsreaders, since Google is
the only reader I've used since AOL dropped Usenet many moons ago.

On top of that, if you've ever spent time trying to track down an old
exchange, you know how convenient it can be to have back-ups. This is
especially true with the newest hot spot for discussions: Facebook
(shudder).

Dave

[David Von Pein]

DAVE REITZES SAID:

If you've ever spent time trying to track down an old exchange, you know

how convenient it can be to have back-ups. This is especially true with
the newest hot spot for discussions: Facebook (shudder).

DAVID VON PEIN SAYS:

Absolutely.

The Facebook design of tracking a long discussion can be a nightmare (and
the text for "comments" is so small, which is another annoyance). Which is
why I always copy anything I want to save to my own site.

And the awkward (IMO) Facebook layout is also the reason I keep
"unjoining" various JFK groups that people have invited me to join. After
a few days of the FB design, I've usually had enough of it. (Jack Duffy's
group to name one.)

There are permalinks for individual Facebook posts, but they're worthless
unless the person on the receiving end of the link is logged in to
Facebook at the time (and has a FB account to begin with, of course).

I appreciate the Usenet archiving service (which dates all the way back to
1981, per the info I've read about the archive). I've never had a saved
Usenet URL mysteriously disappear on me. Their archive must take up God
knows how many terabytes.

And (thankfully) the "new Google" design has made it so that all the "old"
links will redirect properly to the place within the thread where that
post resides (even though the old and new URLs are completely
different).

If the "redirect" thing hadn't occurred after the "new" Google Groups
became mandatory last year, I'd be screaming bloody murder--because I
would have had thousands of saved URLs go sliding down the toilet.

Hopefully, the Google URLs will always redirect to the proper place. But,
like Dave R. said, you never know. Hence, I'm relocating everything (one
post at a time) to my own sites. Been working on it for 2.5 years now. In
another 2 or 3 years, I might have it completed. :-)

http://assorted-jfk-assassination-arguments.blogspot.com