270 pages and counting!

weinbeck · Post by **weinbeck** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:45 pm

It's probably been asked before, but is there honestly any reason to store 270 back pages of threads - I mean, glance back to check up on something a few pages back, yes, but who the Hell wants to read a thread that goes back to August, 2004?! May I venture a suggestion to the moderator: wipe everything off the board over 100 pages.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:52 pm

Cast my vote to leave it the way it is.

woppy71 · Post by **woppy71** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:56 pm

It's history and nostalgia.

I like it the way it is

weinbeck · Post by **weinbeck** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:06 pm

woppy71;448172 wrote: It's history and nostalgia.

I like it the way it is

outvoted 2:1 so far. Hmmm... interesting. Is there a poll thread on FG? How many people actually glance back through the pages?:yh_eyebro :yh_eyebro

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:18 pm

weinbeck;448179 wrote: outvoted 2:1 so far. Hmmm... interesting. Is there a poll thread on FG? How many people actually glance back through the pages?:yh_eyebro :yh_eyebro

Every once in a while I do... but I think more importantly, it's really

fun to see a newbie come along and bump something.

Or, in some cases, you remember something from far back to use as

a reference, etc.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:41 pm

valerie;448195 wrote:

Or, in some cases, you remember something from far back to use as

a reference, etc.

I do this occasionally too.

Carl44 · Post by **Carl44** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:45 pm

or if your a newbie and you dont want to bore the pants of every one you could go back and check that your thread your thinking of posting has not been done before

i said could i cant be bothered i bore every one any way but you could if you wanted to:o

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:48 pm

weinbeck;448161 wrote: May I venture a suggestion to the moderator: wipe everything off the board over 100 pages.

"Moderator"?

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:48 pm

valerie;448166 wrote: Cast my vote to leave it the way it is.

*Mee Too!*

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:53 pm

jimbo;448235 wrote: or if your a newbie and you dont want to bore the pants of every one you could go back and check that your thread your thinking of posting has not been done before

99.9% of it has all been done before. If one wanted to check that a posting hasn't been done before, there are on-line resources that may be examined.

Google, for instance, as well as far less public resources, keep articles "for

ever". Even edited FG articles may be found "out there" from before the edits

were applied!

It gets a bit boring saying "look at (whicheverarchive) your post has been

done before".

Marie5656 · Post by **Marie5656** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:11 pm

Gee..where would the place be if we could not ressurect the refrigerate butter and eggs threads every once in a while??

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:24 pm

good grief, if anyone edited pages out of bothwell's pub, the whole damn forum would become victim of a heinous riot. starting with me.

Post by **spot** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:34 pm

The suggestion of trimming the database is akin to prescribing a lobotomy. In what way does the backlist impinge on users? Does it lead to inefficiency on the server? Does it intrude on visitors or posters? I think not. It's a resource as it stands, and the back messages undoubtedly bring new people in through the search engines. Trimming back would be folly.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:54 pm

I like it as it is too.

Sometimes going back through old threads allows me a chance to get to "know" a member better, see opinions I hadn't before. Plus it's fun. And I think it's good to bump topics now and then for newer people to chime in on.