site_removal

[Roger Oberholtzer]

On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 16:31 -0400, Kurt Wall wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:53:58PM +0100, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Net Llama! wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > If people want the content to remain, then it won't get removed.  The big
> > > issue/concern is that there's been virtually no new submissions in quite a
> > > long time, nor very many updates to pre-existing content, and alot of the
> > > content is suffering from bit-rot.
> > >
> > Now what? Do we get to vote, or something?
> 
> "Something" -- we wanted to solicit input on whether to keep the content
> or not. So far, opinion seems to be that we should keep it. I'm fine with
> that. We didn't know if the content was still being used.

(I'm late to the thread. Fun in Lithuania.)

I still see many entries in the rsync log for sites making mirrors. I
have no trouble keeping that going as long as it is interesting. But I
confess that I do not use the material myself. Mainly for the reason
that it it often out of date. Or at least could be.

--
Roger Oberholtzer