Import of postings from previous forums

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Should we import postings from the two previous forum sites?

Poll ended at Thu Nov 28, 2002 3:57 pm

1. Only from Nat's site.
9
45%
2. From both previous sites.
11
55%
 
Total votes : 20

Import of postings from previous forums

Postby Norman Phillips » Sat Nov 23, 2002 3:57 pm

One might consider copying onto this system the postings that were made when it was on Nat's server, and when it was on the Town system.
I bring up the question of importing those postings onto our present site. I do so with no idea of the size of the files, nor of whether it is possible to do so. Any thoughts out there?
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Chuck Mower » Sat Nov 23, 2002 4:48 pm

I think the availability of known posters positions on issues that are still in flux is important. If we can, let's have and hear it all.
Chuck Mower
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:36 am

Postby Pat Heinrich » Sat Nov 23, 2002 5:13 pm

While I hestitate to suggest that we import everything, I think there is a lot of good and vital information that bears repeating.
Pat Heinrich
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:38 am

third option not in poll

Postby pnaber » Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:17 pm

How about not importing anything?
pnaber
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:53 pm

Postby Wayne » Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:53 pm

Since going forward we will have moderators, would moderators look at this previous material and clean it up? For example, I know there were some posts on the last day with references to Nazis, that were largely ignored, but which may introduce unnecessary controversy. Re-posting of these could defocus posters from what we really want to discuss here.

Am I suggesting censorship? I wouldn't call it that. It's no more than what the moderators will do from now on.
Wayne
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:47 am
Location: Merrimack

Postby Pat Heinrich » Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:02 pm

Wayne
You captured my concerns and suggested a solution I wasn't sure how to phrase. I, too, would like to see the moderators remove the nasty posts and import the valid questions and answers on the current topics of note. In fact, posts (questions, answers and comments) on the need for a replacement forum are probably not necessary at this point either.
Pat Heinrich
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:38 am

Postby Debra Huffman » Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:17 pm

If we imported from the town site, how would we decide how far back to go? The nature of the forum is that we generally discuss current topics for a few days, then move on. I think most of what we discussed would no longer be pertinent. Perhaps if someone wants something specific and pertinent, like the solid waste posts perhaps, we could fetch just those.

There was a good library discussion recently. That would probably be worth copying, but I can't think of anything else that would be worth the moderator's clean-up efforts.
Debra Huffman
 
Posts: 1990
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:41 am

No 'no' vote?

Postby Debra Huffman » Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:57 am

Pnaber made a good comment. There isn't a 'none of the above' option on the poll. How do we interpret the fact that only 8 people have voted? Have the others not yet made up their minds or do they want to vote 'no'?
Debra Huffman
 
Posts: 1990
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:41 am

Postby Chuck Mower » Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:03 am

Hi Debra,

It is only a poll not a referendum. Just something to get a sense of the crowd. All the previous postings are public domain and to repost them here for users adds no liability to this forum that I can ascertain. If they offend users sensibilities I think that would be useful to know in the conduct of this forum. If they were reposted here I,personaly, would find them useful but I have other access to them ultimatly
Chuck Mower
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:36 am

Postby Norman Phillips » Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:42 pm

As the originator of this poll, I plead guilty to the fact that there are only two alternatives. In fact, it was the poll mechanism that insisted on my supplying more than one alternative! ( I mistakenly assumed at first that if I asked for both previous forums to be emigrated to the present forum, that a no vote would mean that no previous forum would be migrated. Evidently, the mechanism wants a voter to be very specific. But I saw no opportunity for presenting three options. )


I guess I should have asked Shankle and the Town Counsel on how to phrase two options (i.e. " XX1" and "YY1") so that three possibilities would be considered!!! :D :D

It seems to me that there were only two sets of postings that need be eliminated in the Town forum, postings about the high school athletic coach, and the neighborhood argument. Those should be simple to delete en mass.

I think that while Duffman was frequently offensive in discussing residents of Lawrence Road, those postings did not merit censorship. His postings about Dean Shankle were another matter, one about which I oscillate back and forth. I would really have to review them again before coming to a firm conclusion.


A point about having to review these postings on the Town Forum, is that it would be a good training exercise for the moderators.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Tim Tenhave » Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:14 pm

Hi All,

While there is good data on the old Town forum, I personally feel it is best left there. It was a forum that was out of our control and is now in the past. This one is much better, let's move foward.

I do recognize the Solid Waste postings are still relevant and would not cherish being Mark (or another Ad-hoc SWAC member) having to re-phrase some of the postings...

But, we all learned from them and I believe many of us on this forum who were also members of the old could help out and may also say the same thing with a slightly different twist that makes the issue crystal clear for the new folks visiting here.

Mark, this does not mean your previous posts were not understandable :)

I certainly learned tremendously!

My 2p,

tim
Tim Tenhave
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:18 pm

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:21 pm

As an FYI to everyone interested in this topic, last Monday I submitted a formal request to Town Hall for the data within the old forum in electronic data format. As of Friday afternoon, I had not received a recognition of my request.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Re: Import of postings from previous forums

Postby Nat Fairbanks » Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:49 pm

Norman Phillips wrote:One might consider copying onto this system the postings that were made when it was on Nat's server, and when it was on the Town system.
I bring up the question of importing those postings onto our present site. I do so with no idea of the size of the files, nor of whether it is possible to do so. Any thoughts out there?


It should be technically possible to copy the posts from my old site to the current site, since they are stored in the same database program (mySQL), however from what I understand the old town forum was stored in a flat file instead, which would make importing data more difficult.

I think the best solution will be to import the 6 days of data from my old site (I'm working on making it happen, but it might take a week or two), and put the old town site online as a public archive. It seems like the town is already treading on thin ice with this material, since the old site clearly indicated the material was covered by RSA 91-A, thus they have a duty to respond to Mark's request for the material within 5 business days. We'll see what happens on Monday with that.

-Nat
Nat Fairbanks
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 1:05 am
Location: Merrimack NH

Postby bmb » Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:25 pm

While I do not believe we should import the old postings into this forum, I do believe we should retain our right to protected speech. Perhaps they can be made available in some other format.

Just in case someone decides they need to reclaim some hard drive space, you might want to remind them of RSA 91-A:9.

RSA 91-A:9 Destruction of Certain Information Prohibited.
A person is guilty of a misdemeanor who knowingly destroys any information with the purpose to prevent such information from being inspected or disclosed in response to a request under this chapter. If a request for inspection is denied on the grounds that the information is exempt under this chapter, the requested material shall be preserved for 90 days or while any lawsuit pursuant to RSA 91-A:7-8 is pending.
bmb
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:46 pm
Location: Naticook Road

Postby joe179 » Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:39 am

I feel that if the posts from the old Merrimack Town forum are imported, they should be in an archive for reference purposes.
User avatar
joe179
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:17 am
Location: Merrimack

Next

Return to General Town Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron