Daily Mail thread 5

[madameDefarge]

and a sticky? pretty please?

sorry, wrt the data, i'd be interested in seeing how much of the archive is in use. so if you could find out how often the archive (say beyond a year ago) is utilised that would be of use i think.

Disagree with you about editing too - can see why it would work in a chat room - not on a board that folks visit not in real time - I see 10 posts about a sentence that's been edited - would make no sense to anyone. It's been discussed many times before on here and there's always been a clear no-vote iirr.

oh yes, i search too. but i'm looking for recent posts - stuff from a year back might be out of date in terms of govt advice, research etc so has the potential to do more harm than good.

I'm very happy for newbies to start new threads on old subjects now since makes a stronger case for the redundancy of the archives. I really don't see the point of a lot of the archives - advice on mortgages 3 years ago must surely be pointless, for example?

Anyway, for the record, I think MN's collaboration with DM stinks; the Dont Knows are not yeses; I am a namechanger but after a bottle of red cannot possibly be expected to change back just for this thread; I will not be posting about stuff I would genuinely like advice on (have a few current issues that I need advice on but just won't now = sad)

I would never have known that little box was there Justine, are you not going to sticky the poll? I can't be the only person who is looking for it?

i'm not clear on the distinction you're making between chat room and forum. you think people don't visit here in real time? are you sure that you're not thinking of MN a few years ago, tbh? it's very real time on here now, esp aibu, your most combustible area.

let's discuss editing again, i've never seen a big debate about it that i can recall and i've been here three years.

No actual stats on the archive to hand but 75% come to MN via google - they are searching for something - usually information about a specific thing (smelly washing machines are common).

Isn't this getting a bit hysterical now? There have been a couple of very dull articles in the DM. No personal stories. They will surely drop it soon through sheer lack of interest.

I would have guessed 'smelly slow cookers...'

Who's hysterical? I think the DM suggesting that someone from MN could write a column does at least suggestthat Leah Hardy may be embarrassed about how crap it is?

okay, so if i type smelly washing machine into google MN is in the top ten twice, two threads, one from 2004 and one from 2006.

so are you really keeping the archive so that you keep your high google ranking? are you assuming that you won't be so highly indexed without an archive?

i'm not sure how google works, we need whomoved here, she's the google expert.

What a timely headed thread to post here

No there's never been a big debate about editing because every time it's discussed it's been dismissed as a poor idea pretty quickly by almost everyone - not very often admittedly - in my memory about 5-6 times but then I've been here 10 years .

Now am off - sorry - but up v late last night on thread 4 and dh getting antsy.

I'm conscious I've said nothing on DM - and some will be thinking we should - but we are thinking about it and reading all your posts. And, of course, the poll's still open.

Portofino, nobody is hysterical. Most people who are concerned are concerned for very valid reasons. At least do us the favour of reading the threads, the development of the debate before wading in with all knee jerk contempt for those who actually give a damn about what this all means.

i bet most of the people who dismissed it as a poor idea have fucked off to moldies, justine. it's worth discussing again, i think. it does work absolutely fine on other forums.

even if you don't like the idea of people deleting what they've said (although it is irritating that you won't allow us to change what are after all Our Own Words, it seems very grabby of MN to claim ownership of them the minute they're posted) you could certainly have a facility to add more explanation to OPs at least.

"very grabby of MN to claim ownership of them the minute they're posted" and then not look after that ownership? The Guardian talkboard must be bigger than MN - allows editing of posts up to 30 mins after post and threads just fade away after about 5(?) days of inactivity.

Ok so well good-oh now I've got grabby to add to our description - along with lying, cheating, sell-outs that is.

Night guys - off to sob quietly into my pillow.

I read the fecking threads! The DM has published some very dull articles about lunchboxes etc. If you are bothered then don;t post! This is the world wide web! Anyone can read what you post at any time! I think that people suddenly demanding that all their past posts are deleted is hysterical behaviour.

then clearly portofino you missed the DM on Mumsnet this week which lifted a thread about a woman who had been sacked while pregnant. That week.

And also portofino, the fact that you don't care about things like business probity, copyright etc doesn't actually invalidate those concerns. It just means your sphere of interest in smaller than others.

No, didn't miss that actually.

Well there ya go. You think any concern is hysterical, I think your lack of concern is sheep like. We are equal.

I don't think any concern is hysterical. I think posting any personal info on the www, then just because the dm MIGHT be interested in it, demanding that all you have ever posted to the www is all deleted is over the top! Nothing sheep like about me.

how very empathetic of you.