Archives for Sale

April 2, 2003 6:49 PM

Would it be possible to offer for purchase the complete (and, if possible. updatable online) MetaFilter and MetaTalk archives? Would enough people buy it for it to be worthwhile for Matt, revenue-wise? How much would such a treasure cost? Could it be produced on demand, to minimize costs? I know I'd buy it.
posted by MiguelCardoso to feature requests at 6:49 PM (46 comments total)

I'm technically talking off the top of my hat here, but if it had a set of attractive search and sort functions, I think it could be a winner. Bonus features? Perhaps a complete archive of all the deleted threads and a comprehensive list of all usernames/numbers, dormant and tests included.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 6:57 PM on April 2, 2003

I have thought of doing this before, to allow people to build cool stuff like the mefi index and stats, but it seems prone to abuse, also it's kinda weird to sell stuff people wrote.

I dunno if a static version of the entire site is that useful on cd-rom.
posted by mathowie at 7:12 PM on April 2, 2003

All posts are © their original authors.

Wouldn't that be something of an impediment?
posted by dg at 7:16 PM on April 2, 2003

what dg said
posted by matteo at 7:23 PM on April 2, 2003

How legal is the copyright? Just because it says "All posts are..." doesn't necessarily make it so. Or does it?
posted by ashbury at 7:24 PM on April 2, 2003

Matt: it's precisely a static version that would be useful, imo.

Sg: perhaps unauthorized posts (by those silly or petty enough to deny inclusion/waive "copyright") could be substituted by an allusive symbol or image.

As with organ donors in Portugal (where you have to go to the trouble of applying for a card and carrying it with you if you don't want to donate your organs) - and as is standard practice in big anthologies - reluctant users would have to make it known their contributions couldn't be used.

If you had a form here, open for two or three months ["Please tick if you are against MeFi using your contributions in an Archive CD") that would surely be fair enough?
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:35 PM on April 2, 2003

As for the weirdness of selling people what they wrote, if only users could buy the Archive, what would be the problem? Almost everyone loves seeing their name in print. That's why vanity presses make a fortune.

A cool-looking, feature-full official MetaFilter CD, including X's comments, would be an attractive proposition for X. I think it's the other way round. :)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 7:38 PM on April 2, 2003

Finally I could go through and delete the comments that make me look bad, and spruce up the clever ones to make them cleverer, and perhaps ascribe some of the particularly good ColdChef ones to my name... ah, my own private mefi universe, where I am user 1....
posted by jonson at 7:43 PM on April 2, 2003

*thinks that if Matt agrees, Miguel's going to order 1,000 copies, give them (autographed) to all his friends, acquaintances, plus various editors, book reviewers, etc.*

ah, my own private mefi universe, where I am user 1....

Don't care about number 1. In my own private universe, I get to choose the username "fishfucker"
posted by matteo at 7:46 PM on April 2, 2003

If I "own" my comments, then I would like the ability to choose not to be included in such an archive. Not to say that I wouldn't be honored to be included, I would just like that opt-out opportunity.
posted by mkelley at 7:52 PM on April 2, 2003

I wouldn't want to waive copyright -- those rights are mine to control. (I would be happy to make anything I've posted here available on a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license, though.)

It seems like digging through the database to strike comments and posts by those who don't agree would be way more trouble than it's worth.
posted by Vidiot at 7:53 PM on April 2, 2003

I'm completely missing the point. What would this static version do that the online version doesn't? Other than become static I mean? What would you do with it? Go back and read old posts? You could do that with the online version.

Having it to seed a stats tool would be nice, but you'd only use it once and then it would be useless.

Why is static, non-working version of a discussion forum a treasure?

"it's precisely a static version that would be useful, imo."

You, sir, are drunk.
posted by y6y6y6 at 7:54 PM on April 2, 2003

1) It would be much faster;
2) You could do proper searchs;
3) It would be more convenient;
4) You could take it where there's no Internet access;
5) It's nice to own a MetaFilter memento;
6) It avoids bandwidth-sucking and server-hammering guilt;
6) MetaFilter is sometimes offline...

Oh wait, I was just going to outline all the advantages of a CD-Rom...

y6: I have the printed edition, a CD edition and access to the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary. I use the CD far more often than the others.

Plus, there would be the bonus features, as most CDs have.

You sir, are drunk - and I am full of envy. ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:05 PM on April 2, 2003

Miguel was so drunk that ...

        HOW DRUNK WAS HE?

...he had to call up Dean Martin to come over and drive him home.
posted by y2karl at 8:10 PM on April 2, 2003

*thinks that if Matt agrees, Miguel's going to order 1,000 copies, give them (autographed) to all his friends, acquaintances, plus various editors, book reviewers, etc.*

Give, Matteo? Are you mad? I'd sell them. That's how I earn my living. Apart from the rubbish I write here on MeFi, every little word that springs from this friendly fount of yours is reluctantly sprung and well paid for, thank you very much. :)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:10 PM on April 2, 2003

How legal is the copyright? Just because it says "All posts are..." doesn't necessarily make it so. Or does it?

Unfortunately, yes.

"We have gone from a regime where a tiny part of creative content was controlled to a regime where most of the most useful and valuable creative content is controlled for every significant use." - Lawrence Lessig, The Future of Ideas, 107.
posted by PrinceValium at 8:17 PM on April 2, 2003

Plus, there would be the bonus features, as most CDs have.

If you order now, you also get the steamy video MetaFilter: Too Hot for TV, featuring the wild MeFi meetup shenanigans caught on tape, totally uncensored. You'll get mathowie's drunken rant on "those damn filthy midgets", you'll see Steven Den Beste's last post in all its gory detail, and that one thread where everyone vowed to someday meet in the Nevada desert, naked and covered in honey. All this and more if you order now*


* we also have sneakerphones to give away to the first 50 callers.
posted by mathowie at 8:21 PM on April 2, 2003

Oh, alright then!

*fires up Offline Explorer, mixes up a pitcher of over-proof martinis, leaves the computer downloading the whole damn site at server-hammering speed and goes to bed, muttering something vile about what a dire omen it is when Matt goes all humorous all of a sudden* ;)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:29 PM on April 2, 2003

And another thing:

White man speak in different voice when Google-rich. :)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 8:34 PM on April 2, 2003

miguel: ...and access to the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary...

that you do, my friend. that you do.


oh, and: I think it's a good idea.
posted by Marquis at 8:41 PM on April 2, 2003

1,2 and 3 - It would only have this value for posts that were really old. How often do you need speedy access to 10 months old posts? And the searches would be incomplete. You'd still feel compelled to come to the site and search for the same thing. This is why the search page deosn't have a "only posts older than 6 months" option. No one would use it.

4 - You are so making this shit up.

5 - Hello??? Shirts???

6 - You need help. Seek professional help. I'm begging you.
posted by y6y6y6 at 9:07 PM on April 2, 2003

Can I say it was entirely thanks to you, Captain Marquis, without putting our particular enterprise and starship at risk? I suppose you know what an effort it is for me not to share the wonder? But, you know, with time, I have come to suspect these bastards don't deserve it. They really don't. X-refer is a wonderful little resource, perfectly adequate for their needs, is it not? :)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:08 PM on April 2, 2003

How big is the database these days? Could you spit out a mirror database in a nightly batch file, and an create an API for it?
posted by machaus at 9:10 PM on April 2, 2003

You need help. Seek professional help. I'm begging you.

If I do, do you think there's a chance of one day being like you? I'd so wish to make something of my life!
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:12 PM on April 2, 2003

How big is the database these days?

Looks like it's around 630Mb right now. It seems like building an api to allow requests to it would be more taxing. I could see a weekly RDF or XML dump being made available to programmers that want to build offsite quick searches or something, but it still seems like someone could abuse the info provided.
posted by mathowie at 9:47 PM on April 2, 2003

The whole idea feels creepy to me. Yes, most of what is written on the net is archived, but what if you found out the US government was keeping a permanent record of everything written here.
posted by Beholder at 10:09 PM on April 2, 2003

...but what if you found out the US government was keeping a permanent record of everything written here

Honestly? I'd be surprised that they actually found our little fortress of solitude, and understood enough of the big words to know it's worth making note of.
posted by padraigin at 10:18 PM on April 2, 2003

what if pamela walks in on me in the morning and its all been a dream ?
posted by sgt.serenity at 10:19 PM on April 2, 2003

Beg pardon, #1, but this'd be obsolete the moment you burned it or made an ISO available, and it'd be less useful everyday from there on out. Would it be a one-time treat, or would it be updated regularly? Quarterly, monthly, weekly? I totally understand anyone who doesn't want to hammer the server at the expense of others (and this sort of consideration is where I think this request comes from,) but if this is the only time you give or sell such access to the archives it won't do a great deal of good in the long run.


If you ever get sick of it all and decide to pull the plug, I think that would be the point at which to offer such a thing. I can guess that lots of members have invested much, in many different ways, in this site and would like to have something concrete to show for it. But as long as this place lives and breathes, it remains a work in progress.

If the interest is there, I'd suggest taking the server down long enough to make a snapshot of the db, then having the interested parties set up a server running some OSS db package and import it all. Let them set up a daily/weekly/monthly cronjob to append to the various tables, and send folks there to do the kind of mining they wish.


My .02.
posted by trondant at 10:32 PM on April 2, 2003

...this friendly fount of yours is reluctantly sprung and well paid for, thank you very much.

...this friendly fount of yours is retractably hung and well splayed for, thank you very much.

Sorry, sorry - EOT dementia...
posted by Opus Dark at 10:56 PM on April 2, 2003

but it still seems like someone could abuse the info provided.

Oh, and like we haven't already.
posted by y2karl at 11:31 PM on April 2, 2003

On the coopyright thing:

Because the whole archive is available for free d/l anyway (it would take a while, but I'm sure you could write a script that would do it), isn't the copyright sorta meaningless anyway? You wouldn't be getting paid for the words, per se, but for the service of putting them in a nice little package.

Right? (me are kinda ignerant of copyright law)
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 11:34 PM on April 2, 2003

And what about deleted threads? Are ones that predate having the little "post was deleted because" thing (and MeTa posts) gone for good? Or does Matt keep them all on the HD and laugh at them privately?*

*I only ask because I know that's what I'd do
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 11:39 PM on April 2, 2003

"I could see a weekly RDF or XML dump being made available to programmers"

That's more like it. If you did an XML dump and put it on an FTP site in zipped format it wouldn't be to big. And one week dumps wouldn't be too stale.
posted by y6y6y6 at 5:51 AM on April 3, 2003

what trondant said, i think.

also, there's always "save as" in your browser (at least mine has it), where you would do it a month at a time from the archive pages, if you really wanted to.
posted by amberglow at 6:58 AM on April 3, 2003

oops, never mind..i would only get the posts themselves that way....and not the comments
posted by amberglow at 7:03 AM on April 3, 2003

Because the whole archive is available for free d/l anyway (it would take a while, but I'm sure you could write a script that would do it), isn't the copyright sorta meaningless anyway? You wouldn't be getting paid for the words, per se, but for the service of putting them in a nice little package.

It's available for free download, but no other rights are specified. Theoretically, you can't do anything else with it without the specific permission of the comment owners. In practise, you can't sell it, or re-publish it. You can get away with almost anything for "personal use", so long as it's legal for consenting adults.
posted by walrus at 9:10 AM on April 3, 2003

Oops ... there are also some fair use rights implied by publication, I expect.
posted by walrus at 9:11 AM on April 3, 2003

I will sell my comments, cut and pasted into a nice MS Word document, for the unbelievably low price of $49.99!

I'm not familiar with Portuguese currency...is that the price of a small house there? ;)
posted by byort at 9:50 AM on April 3, 2003

We can't do this.... do you realize what would happen if something like this fell into the hands of the government?
posted by bradth27 at 9:51 AM on April 3, 2003

I'm with y6y6y6: this is dumb. And:

reluctant users would have to make it known their contributions couldn't be used.

This is MetaFilter. You could get a quorum here for any cockamamie proposition you can imagine. It's a dead certainty that a fair number of users will refuse permission just because they can, and others will refuse permission unless they get a cut of any proceeds, and you're going to wind up with a product full of holes and caveats.

To repeat the wise words of y6:
What would this static version do that the online version doesn't? Other than become static I mean?
posted by languagehat at 10:39 AM on April 3, 2003

cd-rom? no no no.

Metafilter: The Coffee Table Book.

nice recycled papers and plastics, aqueous coatings, cool design work....i'd pay $50 for one. Hell, the 9.11 thread could be its own book.
posted by th3ph17 at 10:41 AM on April 3, 2003

My question is: What value would the threads have without access to the original links? In a lot of cases, you'd be reading down the comments, wondering what everyone's so riled up about.

On the other hand, some threads are fascinating in their own right, and would be pretty interesting reading in, say, an annual "Best of Metafilter" print or electronic format. With a short summary of the original links at the top, and the FPP and comments following. If there were an editorial committee willing to put that together (I'd offer my services), that would kind of rock.
posted by padraigin at 10:44 AM on April 3, 2003

"To repeat the wise words of y6"

y6 is an idiot. Trust me on this one.

But it would be nice to have a data dump for stats purposes. Want to know what the distribution of user numbers is for users who comment but never post links? No problem. A graph of average comment length vs number of comments? Piece-o-cake.
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:33 PM on April 3, 2003

Personally, I have little to no interest in an archive of the site.

On the other hand, I have great interest in a wide variety of statistics that might be able to be generated regarding various users. Color me geek, but I can think of a couple dozen (incredibly expensive to compute) statistics that I'd find fascinating.
posted by mosch at 3:08 PM on April 3, 2003

Coffee table book? How about a coffee table in MeFi blue? Smooth lacquer finish with logo in one corner and a text ad for a webhost in the other, next big thing from CafePress...
posted by wendell at 4:04 PM on April 3, 2003