[sf-lug] SF-LUG Linux Discussion Group at Noisebridge

[Michael Paoli]

Naw.  I'm fine with *not* posting and repeatedly posting stuff that doesn't
or no longer exists.  What I'm not cool with is wiping out most or every
trace that it ever existed - e.g. list archives.

What was suggested was "permanently REMOVED from
sf-lug mail list(s)" - that's quite different than merely not
repeatedly reposting something which no longer exists or is no longer
active.  Quite a distinction.

> From: "Daniel Gimpelevich" <daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us>
> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] SF-LUG Linux Discussion Group at Noisebridge
> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:22:04 -0800

> On 01/27/2016 06:12 PM, Michael Paoli wrote:
>> Uhm,
>>
>> I beg to differ.  I don't think because some meeting is no longer happening
>> is a particularly good reason go go about rewriting (list) history.  It
>> ought suffice to have it said/noted on the list (if) that such-and-such
>> meeting isn't happening anymore - folks ought be able to figure out from
>> list(s) and web page(s), etc., if a meeting is still active or not ... and
>> if that's still ambiguous, inquire on relevant list(s) or with relevant
>> contact(s) and find out more definitively.
>>
>> Would be kind'a like removing all records of an extinct culture or species
>> from history merely because it was no longer alive and ongoing - seems to
>> me not the optimal approach.
>>
>> And hopefully (most) folks are smart enough to realize that just because
>> someone once said something once-upon-a-time, doesn't mean it's true
>> forever (e.g. just because someone said "always meets at such and such
>> location, high noon 'till 1pm local time on leap days" - doesn't mean that
>> event still goes on or will do so in perpetuity).
>
> So, I suppose you also want recurring new notifications of meetings  
> of the Homebrew Computer Club just because it existed back in the  
> '70s, since "folks are smart enough to realize" it no longer meets?