Comments on: They had the web in 2004?

They had the web in 2004?

Chrysostom — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:22:07 -0800

Is there a statue of limitations for something being a double post?

This post was deleted as a double. I'm not questioning the deletion, it certainly was a repeat. But the previous post was eight years ago. Is there some point at which we can assume that very few MeFites would remember the original, and it might be a valuable thing to revisit? What if there was some new content at the linked site, as hippybear noted there was in this case? It has not escaped my attention that this MeTa is sort of a double itself.

By: desjardins

desjardins — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:25:54 -0800

statue of limitations

By: vegartanipla

vegartanipla — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:28:26 -0800

It's also a book.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:29:04 -0800

Speaking for me, if it's more than 4-5 years I tend to not care. When the OP says "Hey it's a double" sometimes I'd go in and delete without peeking too closely at the dates. Might be a while before taz is up but that's usually how I look at them. Doesn't come up too often.

By: Dumsnill

Dumsnill — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:42:13 -0800

I hadn't heard of this before, and it's a fun and interesting little piece of internet thing that happened and is totally harmless. No need to delete it.

By: the man of twists and turns

the man of twists and turns — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:57:48 -0800

Ehn.

Also, "Deus Meus! Securis in capite meo est." Man, that takes me back, to a 2400 baud modem.

By: Chrysostom

Chrysostom — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:59:25 -0800

desjardins: "statue of limitations"

Well, hell. And it's spelled right in the tags, too.

By: alms

alms — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:39:16 -0800

I don't think this post should have been deleted. Eight years is ~~an eternity~~ a very long time in the history of Metafilter. Plus, there is new content on the page.

It's probably too late to undo the deletion, but I'd encourage Taz to encourage Hippybear to repost it. I think people would enjoy it.

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:39:27 -0800

Looks more like the statue of eliminations to me.

By: bongo_x

bongo_x — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:42:22 -0800

Is there a statue of limitations

It's 30 or so foot high and sits in the courtyard of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It has the "Twist" symbol on it.

By: Egg Shen

Egg Shen — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:42:38 -0800

The key is to cite the previous post and emphasize the amount of new content. To wit.

By: smirkette

smirkette — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:43:25 -0800

Now, how does one say "Oh my FSM, my post got the axe!" in a bunch of different languages?

(Also, that was an awesome post. I enjoyed it immensely. I love little nuggets of Internet history. Makes me wonder if we'll all get nostalgic about lolcats and other memes in 40 years.)

By: carsonb

carsonb — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:44:23 -0800

Zombie posts have happened before, I think that since this page has been continuously updated over the past 8 years, in addition to featuring more information about the meme, also since it's at a new home, it should be brought back to life...

To slurp up that little bit of a brain bleed you've got going on there.

By: hippybear

hippybear — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:47:52 -0800

If Team Mod say it's okay, I'll repost without the stuff that set off an early derail and with reference to the earlier thread, once I pass my 24-hour point.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 18:56:12 -0800

I think that would be a good idea and a great compromise. Thanks hippybear.

By: zarq

zarq — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 21:18:15 -0800

I've a couple of posts kindly saved from deletion as doubles by Jessamyn over the years. It has made me quite grateful that the mods assess each post on its individual merits.

Especially since I spent so much time compiling this one. ;)

By: taz

taz — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 22:01:27 -0800

Yeah, I was not going to delete initially because it had been so long and because the post indicated there was also new/updated material, but in checking out the site, it seems they moved the site but have not actually updated since 2004. But it was a fun thing, and I'm fine with it being reposted... maybe the attention will even encourage the site archivists to add the newer stuff.

By: hippybear

hippybear — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 22:35:06 -0800

Done and done.

By: John Cohen

John Cohen — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:29:20 -0800

Statute of limitations. It's not a statue.

By: Chrysostom

Chrysostom — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:56:26 -0800

I know! It was just a typo, I spelled it correctly in the tags!

By: philipy

philipy — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:59:13 -0800

Instead of deleting doubles in these cases, maybe it would be enough just to change the title or opening text to let anyone that cares know they might have seen it already, years ago.

Maybe add some tag like SLYT that warns those people who might not like it, without having the rest of us miss out on something we'd have appreciated seeing.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:11:13 -0800

We've got a very longstanding "We never edit posts except for small fixit stuff" policy that's unlikely to change for small-stakes stuff like this.

By: Maisie

Maisie — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:46:13 -0800

I think a reasonable statute of limitations for doubles would be however long a post stays open for comments. What is that, a year?

By: zarq

zarq — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:21:46 -0800

30 days.

By: cjorgensen

cjorgensen — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:26:00 -0800

Sometimes it feels like a year.

By: Ritchie

Ritchie — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:09:56 -0800

When I am a multi-millionaire ('Bring me cake! And fine wine!') I will commission an artist to make a statue of limitations. And it won't be some abstract cluster of bulges and angles. It will be a thing that everyone can agree is indubitably about limitations.

It may have my face on it.

By: IndigoRain

IndigoRain — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:24:43 -0800

AskMes stay open for a year. Not FPPs.

By: terrapin

terrapin — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 05:34:51 -0800

30 days in the hole

By: philipy

philipy — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 07:24:09 -0800

"We never edit posts except for small fixit stuff" policy

If that was a reply to me, deleting things is a pretty big "edit". So adding a simple markup would be a much smaller edit if you were otherwise going to delete.

Personally I'm quite happy for the things of this sort to stand as they are, neither deleted nor marked up. In my case, chances are I never saw the original in the first place, and even if I did, it's no big deal to see it again.

i.e. I'm relaxed about doubles, the suggestion was by way of encouraging more of them to be allowed.

By: Lexica

Lexica — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:41:24 -0800

deleting things is a pretty big "edit"

No, deleting things is deleting things. Editing something to change it from what was originally written is editing. They're not the same.

As much as it might sting to have something deleted, that's better than winding up in an argument where one party's position would be "THAT IS NOT WHAT I WROTE DAMMIT" and everybody else's position would be "that's sure what it looks like you wrote" and then things devolve into bickering that would probably last even longer than the arguing about deletions does.

By: philipy

philipy — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:43:02 -0800

Since we're talking about adding a tag, to indicate "this is a double, in case anyone cares", a short acronym like SLYT, I can't see why it would provoke argument. It's not as it is changing the meaning of what someone wrote, any more than fixing a broken link.

But, hey... it was meant to be a constructive suggestion so people who would like to allow doubles and people who get upset by them could all be happy.

Anyway, my interest in discussing the topic has been exhausted.