*Seems like we haven't adapted to the "documentation is a process, not aone time task" mindset at large yet.*
:) Maybe making a list of accidental offenders and then asking them to take down their old info would be useful? I haven't tried this before, though; maybe it's difficult to track them down. Kate Krauss On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Patrick Schleizer <[email protected]>wrote: > Kate Krauss: > > I do see a lot of obsolete sites > > Seems like we haven't adapted to the "documentation is a process, not a > one time task" mindset at large yet. > > There is also little motivation in creating new content. There is so > much obsolete content with with good spots in engine, who will read your > updated content? For example I recently created an article "Air Gapped > OpenPGP Key" [1]. But when someone searches for "offline gpg key" or > "air gap gpg key" the article isn't in the result. > > How search engines dominate what we find, read and think nowadays is a > problem, also that the internet doesn't forget and we're not good at > cleaning outdated content. > > I think all that leads to the many obsolete sites you're talking about. > > [1] https://www.whonix.org/wiki/Air_Gapped_OpenPGP_Key > > -- > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations > of list guidelines will get you moderated: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at > [email protected]. >
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
