David Gerard wrote:
2008/7/30 <WJhonson(a)aol.com>om>:
In a message dated 7/30/2008 1:58:41 PM Pacific
Daylight Time,
gmaxwell(a)gmail.com writes:
> Live mirrors are forbidden... but I think
almost all of the bad
> behaving mirror sites that I've seen are live mirrors.>>
>
Fact ?
That live mirrors are forbidden?
Yup. They're blocked with an article header that looks like [[Leech
(computing)]] and an explanatory message.
- d.
Though to be clear, this because of the load it causes,
not because of any metaphysical reason it would be
forbidden to be as up to date as wikipedia itself is
(and party to all the good and evil that entails), as far
as content is involved. Us being a "live" site rather
than one where content is "published" after a central
editorial process, is one of the cornerstones that
allows us to operate. Or has at least been. We will
duly enter uncharted waters, once we progressively
tighten the definition of what us being a "live" site
means...
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen.