Almost a month ago we asked to interview The Union's new editor, Pat Butler. We're still waiting for a yes or no. Asked again two days ago, still no response.
We can't say we blame him - talk about being between a rock and a hard place - but still, we'd like an answer.
We also hope he knew what he was in for, before he took the job.
And there's still no "incomplete results"* warning posted on The Union's Search page; plus the older (pre-2002) archive search page seems to be missing altogether. Knowing that you share our avid curiosity about this state of affairs, we hereby reprint our Monday email to The Union's webmaster, Dayna Amboy, and the response:
[Subject: Re: 8+ month problems with Archive Search from website]
I visited the Search page just now and noticed two things:
As promised, dear reader, here are Dayna Amboy's answers:I visited the Search page just now and noticed two things:
- First, it's still returning incomplete results.
- Second, it still provides no warning to the user that the results returned are incomplete.
- Is it still your understanding that omissions from the Search results are inadvertent?
- Could you explain why there's still no warning to the user on the Search page, that the results are incomplete?
We are currently trying to make sure that our archive returns the most accurate results. It is an on-going process. Please bear with us while we improve our archive system.
If you want newsprint copies of past articles [... (*)]
We appreciate your readership.
----------If you want newsprint copies of past articles [... (*)]
We appreciate your readership.
Imminent addition to the "blog policies" page:
As a general rule, when we're complaining, our beef is with the institution and not with the person employed there. So, to protect them from Google, we try to refer to them by title, rather than by name. But we do feel free to name those who don't give us answers...
But - would this policy be fair, to an employee who can't answer completely and honestly without endangering his/her job?
Answer: no. So please keep this possibility in mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Welcome, and thanks for caring enough to donate your time and thoughts toward greater collective wisdom...
Terms of engagement:
* Please be civil.
* * * * Please do not post anonymously * * * (I'd remove this choice if I could, and I may remove your comment if you do) - instead, do this:
Click on the 'Name/URL' radiobutton, then enter your real name (if you're brave) or a pseudonym (if you're not). (You can leave the "URL" field blank.)
Or go ahead and click "Anonymous", but put your name in your comment.
* The Management reserves the right to delete comments (Moderation Certificate can be found here). You can always post it on a blog of your own.
If you run into technical difficulties, please a) accept my apologies, then b) email your comment to aherror2011 at gmail.com with "Comment for [name of this blog]" in the Subject line.
New policy re climate contrarianism comments as of 11/11/2009:
Comments questioning the climate science community's understanding of climate change (97% of active climatologists now believe that the earth is currently warming and that it's human-caused - link) will be deleted unless the commenter:
a) is local
b) uses his real name
c) provides link(s) to substantiate his claim(s)/inference(s)
d) is willing to collaborate on constructing an argument tree, to get us past the usual sterile point-counterpoint-countercounterpoint.
(For people who can't read the above, a summary:
1) Be civil;
2) Don't post w/o giving at least a pseudonym;
3) Don't espouse climate-denial crankery unless you're local and willing to stand behind it.)
Caveats:
1. Comments could be delayed: they are being moderated, and I'm sometimes away from the computer for a day or more.
2. : Perfectly legitimate comments are sometimes miscategorized (by the blogging platform) as spam, & not published. If this happens to yours, please notify me, else I might not notice for a day or two.