Lines and Splines Archives Missing

From my conversations with him he feels the archives aren’t useful enough to keep online. Perhaps he’ll want to comment on that here himself.

Yuk. For those interested, and assuming Andy doesn't object, I ripped an archive of the site a few weeks ago I'd be willing to share. It includes all on-site images and whatnot, preserving the original site structure, so it can be viewed locally.

i would like to hear andy's thoughts, if he has a moment. i'd be willing to host the archives myself. in a craft notorious for terrible documentation of its history, such a loss would be fairly monumental IMHO.

I whole-heartedly agree! the site really was a wealth

of information. the few text files I've collected of various

posts are horridly inadequate. I suppose I should have

made my own copy of the site in all its glory while I still

had the chance.

I understood when he stopped the site,

but removing the archives is puzzling.

On the other hand, Su, it wouldn't be

correct for you to go guerilla on him

like that.

hhp

No, it wouldn't, which is why I intended to wait a bit and see if he had any concerns. He's already contacted me, actually, and requested I not send the archive out. Done.

On the other(1..2..3?) hand, a large part, though not all, of the site is already archived in at least one public place that I know of; it's just a question of footwork. I figured if it had to happen, at least let the archive be complete.

Um yeah, wouldn't it still be in the google cache? I don't see anything unethical or untoward in giving a link to it there or at the wayback machine.

if necessary i can host it on the uni's servers here.

I don't think it is in the Google cache or in the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine.

archive.org:

"We're sorry, access to http://www.linesandsplines.com/ has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt"

...which is a shame, really.

So what obligation does the creator of a widely-read site have towards that site's audience, if any?

Carole Guevin, via fathom5.org:

"I would tend to ask the question the other way around: What obligation does a site audience have towards the creator(s)/publisher(s)?

"Emphasis - hence - responsibility is always pushed on the head with a not too subtle message - YOU started this and now YOU got me hook - so YOU make sure YOU deliver. Reliable, inspiring and empowering content requires a resource which is the most important of all resources: TIME!

"So basically, the TIME of the creator is pretty much taken for granted and underlying, an immense stress to continue to deliver or else. "

Which is, I am sure, at least a small part of why Andy bowed out. And we can't blame him for that; I am just thankful he gave so much without asking anything in return. If he hadn't started L&S and then taken it down, we wouldn't be here, either, would we?

Dave, great line of discussion.

hhp

Andy, if you're reading these comments, I'd gladly pay at least $100 for a CD-ROM with the archives on it. Name your price!

The Morning News still has an interview.

Apart from bandwidth, it takes no effort whatsoever to leave archives up. It's not like he's manually photocopying old essays one at a time on demand.

> it takes no effort whatsoever to leave archives up

No, but if the domain has expired (and he has no other suitable place to move the archives to - or maybe not the time/inclination to move the stuff) then it does take *money*.

BTW, check out the expiration date: July 5, 2002.

(Hmmm, ominous patriotism... ;-)

hhp

*sigh*

No, it doesn't take any effort to leave the archives available. He'd been pretty thorough about removing the (Wayback, etc)archives of them, and made corrections to that when I pointed out to him the other day that some were still out there. While I can't claim to know the specific reasons, it's pretty clear to me he doesn't want to leave them up.

I'm really quite confused as to why this is such an alien concept. He made the site. It's his material. He can do whatever he wants with it, and nobody else gets much of a say in the matter. Public access does not equate to public domain.

And incidentally, it is more like he's manually photocopying, since he's taking the time to answer questions about material in the archive for those who contact him and ask.

> He made the site. It's his material.

> He can do whatever he wants with it,

> and nobody else gets much of a say

> in the matter. Public access does not

> equate to public domain.

. . . SU scolded, having already ripped an archive of the site.

I guess this should be a lesson to anyone who cares about erstwhile sites like Lines & Splines: start ripping your own archives while you can.

This is a bit of a late comment but similar ground was covered when brent Gustafson took down his mighty DHTML playground, Assembler (.org). There was much talk about how he should leave it up as an archive, etc, as it was a good resource and so on. In the end he did put them back up though a a word of mouth secret location, http://xlat.assembler.org

Not quite sure what my point is, but I am glad he did put the the site back up, archived as it is.

. . . SU scolded, having already ripped an archive of the site.

I guess this should be a lesson to anyone who cares about erstwhile sites like Lines & Splines: start ripping your own archives while you can.

---endquote

I'm not sure if the first part of that was meant to be a stab, but actually, you're correct. You *should* grab a copy of anything you want to keep, the same way it's your responsibility to buy a copy of any book or magazine because it will eventually go out of print, and the publisher doesn't particularly have any responsibility to you to continue production. The fact we're discussing a website here doesn't change the conditions.

Publishers don't request that you destroy your books once they decide to stop printing them, and Andy didn't ask me to delete my archive, just not redistribute it.

LOL. Your patronizing smugness is not only fresh, but refreshing.