// Folks, we've had a lot of discussion about the Archives and their
// availability to folks who are not members of this community. I am
// somewhat surprised at some of the concern -- I would have assumed
// that all of us knew that whatever we posted on the Internet was
// pretty much public domain.
// I would tend to vote for the status quo, and I think we all owe
// Shelly a great deal of gratitude for her work with the archives
// through the years. [BP]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 13:45:51 -0500
    From: Shelly Brisbin (shelly@brisbin.net>

NanciNetters and Googlers,

I come late to this discussion because I've been on vacation for a
couple or weeks.

Indeed, the archives are a fertile source of material for those who
would read what they (or others) have had to say in years past. The Web
logs for the archives show that all sorts of search engines know about
and collect information from them, going back to (gasp) 1994. Even I
have found posts of mine that I would not have preserved forever, but
most people seem to feel that the benefits of having the archives
online outweighs any fear and loathing their existence might cause. And
there is always this: how many of your fellow Internet citizens do you
really think have taken the time to google you?

-shelly
Keeper of the Archives

PS.
Hey, what does wi-fi have to do with vanity surfing? We wireless types
spend most of our time searching for wireless access in grocery stores,
movie theaters, gas stations, laundromats, ex-boyfriends' driveways and
locally owned coffee houses. Geeky, yes, but it leaves very little time
for self-centered googling.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:12:15 -0400
    From: DvBGardner@genelogic.com

Point well taken, Shelly, but I still wish the archives weren't 
accessible
to the whole world. While I don't have anything to hide, it still makes 
me
greatly uncomfortable that certain individuals out there can learn more
about me and my personal convictions than I would otherwise have been
willing to share.

With the archives looming over my head going forward, I doubt that I 
will
continue posting my comments about life and politics, etc. with the same
honesty and passion I used to feel comfortable sharing with the rest of 
this
group.  It once felt like a safe haven of kindred spirits, sipping 
coffee
around the fireplace and sharing "deep thoughts"...now it means 
considering
those thoughts in a whole different light, having to watch what we say
because it might one day be discovered and misconstrued  by someone -- 
and
that, to me, doesn't seem worth it anymore.

I am grateful for the work of everyone who has kept this list alive and
well-functioning and hope you won't misunderstand my gripe about the
accessibility to the archives.  Mea culpa for not having informed myself
enough before signing on to this venture.  I should have read the fine 
print
after all. :)

Donate "Paranoia you say?  Not if you've been to the places i've been 
to"
v.B.-G.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 16:07:50 EDT
    From: ConorMG@aol.com

DvBGardner writes:

"   It once felt like a safe haven of kindred spirits, sipping coffee 
around
the fireplace..."

I entirely agree.  It shocked me utterly to realise my daftest ramblings
were almost permanently tattooed on the ether via this archive.  
Usually I
read Nancinet emails late at night when mellow, alone, pixillated, and
listening to the sort of music that makes you risk opening your softest 
self
to others.  Now,  however, I find myself at the mercy of any cynic who 
wants
to abuse my sharing my feelings with all you nice guys, thanks to this
archived nightmare of unintended immortality.  Now I can no longer run 
for
Prime Minister.  No longer can I enjoy the sentimentalities of sharp 
lawyers
from Washington or even sharper types from the west, the sort who read 
the
smallprint and know their words are noted.  Now I only muse with those 
who
calculate their words or who don't care who hears them.  Great people, 
I'm
sure, but I miss the others too.
Oh how I long for those prelapsarian days before I was googled, when my
pretty nothings were smiled at and then ignored by all the 
Nancinetters, and
all the world was careless holiday without the everlasting return of 
all my
internetted sins.

Is there anyone else out there who thinks like this and believes that 
what
we write should not be permanently recorded for all the world to walk 
over?

Conor
now watching 'The Beach' and loving it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
    From: Julie (julie_anne_101@yahoo.com>

I agree Conor.  I'd like to see the archives
accessible only by members of NNet.  I don't think all
this private sharing among the group, really unlimited
public display of mail, should be googleable (a
word?).

The unfettered musings are the best.  But, then, where
would that leave the true extroverts, the show-offs,
the I'll-show-you-mine-if-you-show-me-yours types?

You know you're out there . . .

Julie

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:37:21 EDT
    From: Poetmuse@aol.com


Aren't you guys sort of... I don't know, letting this get to you a bit 
much?
I mean no disrespect for your feelings, but honestly, as someone else
already said, how many people are going to go out and google you anyway?
I've never googled anyone on this list. I've never googled anyone I 
know.
Before this topic ever came up I never even googled myself. (gee, that
sounds..odd) Is this the type of world we've come to that now we must
suspect everyone and trust no one?  Do you guys honestly think this 
list is
that above the radar that people are googling for it every chance they 
get?
Half the people I know don't even know who Nanci Griffith is, let alone 
what
Nanci Net is. If it bothers you as much as it does, why not post under a
pseudonym? Get a new email, a new nickname and post away under its 
cover....
it seems a better alternative then cutting  your self-expression off.

-Christina


  ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 03:18:53 EDT
    From: ConorMG@aol.com

Poetmuse writes:


"   Do you guys honestly think this list is that above the radar that 
people

    are googling for it every chance they get? "



That's a very amusing parody  of what I've said, but no, I don't think 
that.
The point is that some of us have suddenly realised that future 
employers,
clients, partners, inlaws, advertisers, bank managers, insurance claim
assessors, private detectives, professional information gatherers,
McCarthyites, paedophiles and lawyers have now got a permanent hold on 
us
that we don't want.
It's there at the press of a button, it's available to anyone, and it 
could
haunt us until the end of our lives.  We don't all choose our words as
carefully as you, or have as few enemies, or worry as little about 
things,
but we find this new development in our lives frankly scary.  Or at 
least I
do!

("And now we come to August 28, 2003, Mr Conormg, and what you wrote to 
a
mysterious group of American anti-U S military ordinance activists 
posing as
holistic folkabilly revivalist fanatics.   How long had you been having
these paranoid fantasies?"
"We have matched the murderer's use of language to yours, ref Google 
Search
#99666fbiXY/82803. Your particular noun-adjective ratio, your 
preference for
tautly periodic sentences studded with asyndetic polypremodified noun
clusters, your highly unusual lexical collocations, all match the death
threat letter's style closely....")

So yes, I'd vote for a password as a first step, though I still don't 
think
it's going to stop the incubuses and succubuses....

The archive is a wonderful thing, and I am appreciative of all the work 
that

goes into maintaining it.  I wonder if it would be a good idea to 
archive
only the mails which contain well written reviews, and not all the 
trivia?

Conor


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NN: The archives
    Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 16:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
    From: "David E. Mahaffey" (musemaker@oddpost.com>

I've been on this list a long time, and it saddens me to think that so 
many
of you now feel inhibited when posting messages here, though of course 
I do
understand why you feel that way. I would hate for so many guiding 
lights to
wink out or fade.

I believe it would be possible to password protect the list archives,
thereby blocking casual entry by those who aren't on the list. How's 
that
for a compromise?

David

P.S. I use Oddpost, recipient of PC World's 2003 World Class Award for 
best
web-based email program. Also, I enjoy eating eggs.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: The archives
    Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
    From: Shawn Kimbro (shawn@mountainsoul.net>

Hey --

As one of the more frequent posters in recent years, I
have no problem with the archives being public.  In my
opinion it merely adds incentive to think carefully
before voicing an opinion.  On the downside, it's
becoming common to "google" potential dates, business
partners, etc. and there have been a couple of
occasions when I've had the uncomfortable feeling that
a recent acquaintance knew more about me than I
thought they should.  Ah, life in the information age.
  Actually, I think Shelly should do whatever she dern
well pleases since she's obviously worked her butt off
for years making sure our drivel is saved - with very
little thanks!

-Shawn

// indeed...[BP]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NN: The archives
    Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 08:55:37 -0400
    From: DvBGardner@genelogic.com

<<<...In my opinion it merely adds incentive to think carefully before
voicing an opinion...>>>>>>


yeah, well, NOW you tell me...... :):):)

P.S.:   Is there a way to password protect the archives, like someone
suggested this morning, so Shelly's efforts are not compromised?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NN: Concert in Nevada
    Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:17:09 -0400
    From: "Molly & John Prive" (prive@charter.net>


I see on Pollstar.com that Nanci has a concert scheduled
for Sparks, NV next month. I was hoping to see a little
more West Coast activity, but her website is not updated.

So close, but yet so far...
Molly in Oregon


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: NN: Googlin' on the NNet
    From: Poetmuse@aol.com
    Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 05:25:07 EDT

ConorMG writes:

> That's a very amusing parody  of what I've said, but no,
> I don't think that.
> The point is that some of us have suddenly realised that
> future employers, clients, partners, inlaws, advertisers,
> bank managers, insurance claim assessors, private detectives,
> professional information gatherers, McCarthyites,
> paedophiles and lawyers have now got a permanent hold
> on us that we don't want.
> It's there at the press of a button, it's available to anyone,
> and it could haunt us until the end of our lives.
> We don't all choose our words as carefully as you, or have as
> few enemies, or worry as little about things, but we find this
> new development in our lives frankly scary.  Or at least I do!

Actually, I wrote my post before yours, but thanks to the wonder that 
is AOL
it did not show up until after, so please, lose the atitude.

As I said, I did not mean to disrespect anyone's feelings. Judging by 
how
you've responded though, I can see why you're worried.

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Questions about NanciNet?  Send e-mail to bpage3@yahoo.com