<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#FFFFFF" bgcolor="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-12-31 18:06, Nate Bezanson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b1cae0c4-9930-d73f-25d5-a5c652a2894d@telcodata.us">
<br>
<br>
On 2018-12-31 10:20 a.m., Aljaž Srebrnič wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
On 31 Dec 2018, at 15:35, "<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org">aimee@ecohackerfarm.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org"><mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org></a>"
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org">aimee@ecohackerfarm.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org"><mailto:aimee@ecohackerfarm.org></a>> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">d. working with me on the harder cases
ie where this is no contact info and only deadlinks to update
profiles to identify whether the space is truly still active
somehow before amending them to inactive
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
I can assist, we should probably have a Category for these
special cases, or a list on the wiki.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
We already have a category for that. I think these spaces should
be categorized as "inactive" just like the ones which deliberately
set themselves to that status, but perhaps with an additional
"reason for inactive status = all links broken and the last edit
was eons ago" sort of tag, so someone sifting through the dregs
can understand what happened.
<br>
</blockquote>
agreed for cases with dead contact info and dead links<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b1cae0c4-9930-d73f-25d5-a5c652a2894d@telcodata.us">
<br>
The task becomes clearer if we first remind ourselves of one
fundamental fact: *Inclusion on the list is voluntary* -- I don't
think hs.o has any obligation to list a space against their will.
And if they haven't provided working links that point to an active
space, in a data-quality sense that's equivalent to linking to an
inactive space.
<br>
<br>
There are a *lot* of "aspirational" entries created years ago with
a single edit, no working contact info, and Googling for their
name results in nothing more recent than that year. Chasing these
ghosts and saying it's hs.o's job to chase them will just wear out
volunteers and lead to a feeling of a sisyphean task. Simply
remembering that ghosts aren't alive, makes the problem space much
more practical.
<br>
<br>
That being said, sleuthing out the people behind those years-old
inactive entries might be an interesting way to connect with
locals who lost the vision in one way or another. I would still
encourage people to track down their local ghosts and learn their
stories just for fun. Maybe write down those stories into their
pages, even as those pages sit in Category:Inactive. But I think
that's a separate problem from encouraging the spaces that
actually exist and want to be on the list and have shown it by
creating a useful page which then went stale, to come brush the
cobwebs off their page.
<br>
<br>
(Side note -- in many cases, the member who last edited a space's
entry will be long gone, so someone new will be creating a user
account and performing the update. Checking the user signup
process and captcha and stuff, *before* blasting out an email
that'll make several hundred new people come bang on the signup
page and beat their heads against the captcha, would be prudent.)
<br>
<br>
Incidentally, I think this is precisely equivalent to the problem
that many new spaces struggle with, of unknown stuff cluttering up
their physical space. Finite physical space makes that a more
obvious problem, but a map or list cluttered with stale entries is
just as hard to work with. Most established spaces I'm familiar
with have arrived at a pretty strong "abandoned stuff" policy --
the onus is on the owner to label their stuff. The job of the
community should be limited to providing the tools to make
labeling easy, but it's still up to the individual to do something
useful with those tools.
<br>
<br>
Also, bear in mind that mass edits will upset the "merit of
freshness" that makes the 500 most-recently-updated spaces appear
on the map. If every page gets an update, the map will show a view
that's very different from what it's been showing. This may
eventually settle back down as the updates fade into history, but
if there's ongoing automatic or semi-automatic editing, it'll
continue to make the map weird. This shouldn't be seen as an
argument against doing mass edits, but for a renewed push to
improve the map generation. We used to say that exceeding the map
limit of 500 active spaces would be a "a good problem to have",
and it certainly is, but it's high time to find volunteers with
skills to solve it!
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>are there any volunteers for this map generation issue? <br>
</p>
<p>also... wouldn't the map already exclude places that have been
marked from active to inactive?<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b1cae0c4-9930-d73f-25d5-a5c652a2894d@telcodata.us">
<br>
-Nate B-
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Discuss mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Discuss@lists.hackerspaces.org">Discuss@lists.hackerspaces.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>