[Chtechcomm] UNC Listserv Archive
aerimer at email.unc.edu
Tue Aug 30 19:33:45 EDT 2005
For what it's worth, I am am a compulsive saver of emails and I may
actually have most of the emails that I was part of. Not a list serve,
and not threaded, but there you are.
Steve Irving wrote:
> Terri and all,
> I spent the weekend contemplating whether it would be productive to
> respond to your latest salvo (Fri 8/26/2005 10:32 AM) in support of
> deleting the supposedly non-existent UNC message archive dating back
> to 2001. Although I’m still not convinced this will be productive by
> any conceivable measure, the tipping point came when I went back to
> the UNC listserv site and found that ch-tech-advisory no longer exists.
> You stated (Fri 8/26/2005 10:32 AM):
> According to the UNC technician assigned to the data recovery
> question, "The ch-tech-advisory list is set to keep archives for only
> one day. Since messages older than one day would automatically be
> purged each night, there are no messages past that one day archive
> we'd have."
> This report is consistent with my own investigation of the UNC list
> archiving capabilities ...
> First, is this anonymous technician willing to come forward and
> discuss the issue? I would like to know the basis for the “one day”
> comment, and how this squares with the actual existence of an archive
> which far exceeded one day. I would also like to know whether there is
> any likelihood that the recovery will succeed and whether the recent
> disappearance of our forum is a part of the recovery process or an
> indication that the towel has been thrown in.
> Second, your own investigation of the UNC List archiving capabilities
> does not appear to have been terribly thorough, or included the simple
> steps provided in my earlier message (Thu 8/25/2005 8:36 PM), or made
> use of your resources – such as the Anonymous Technician – at UNC.
> You go on to state (Fri 8/26/2005 10:32 AM):
> If Steve found a full archive of the UNC list, I applaud his technical
> skills and feel sure the UNC staff would be interested in knowing
> where their archiving process is faulty.
> No special technical skills were required (although I appreciate you
> compliment and its thinly-veiled sarcasm), and I have not alleged any
> fault in their archiving process, which seems to me to have worked
> just fine until immediately after the messages were deleted.
> Last Wednesday evening, before the messages were deleted from the UNC
> listserv, I took a snapshot of the cover page of the message archive.
> This can now be viewed at
> http://www.morgancreek.net/tc_unc_listserv/Messages.htm, and I hope it
> will be useful in clearing up the misconceptions you and the Anonymous
> Technician hold.
> My thanks to all for your forbearance, and apologies to any who find
> this to be an unproductive rant.
>Chtechcomm mailing list
>Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the Chtechcomm