Rocketry Planet Weblinks Database Purge List - 12/04/06

Below is the list of web links items that were flagged as inoperable. If you know the status of any of these listings, please let me know so that I won't delete the entry just to have to add it back again. Thanks.
Commonwealth Displays URL: http://www.commonwealth.net /
Kingston Aerospace URL: http://www.kingstonaerospace.com /
Puget Sound Propulsion URL: http://pugetsoundpropulsion.com /
SkyHy Sports URL: http://www.skyhysports.net /
Empire Rockets URL: http://www.empirerockets.com /
Maximum Thrust Rocketry URL: http://www.maximumthrust.com /
TRAXA Rocket Location Beacons URL: http://www.traxa.co.uk /
Wolfstar Designs URL: http://home.flash.net/~wolfstar /
Rocketforge URL: http://www.rocketforge.org /
Blast Off for Britian (UK) URL: http://www.palimpsest.co.uk/blastoff /
Nevada AeroSpace Science Associates URL: http://www.rimworld.com/nassa /
Paul Esterle's Rocket Stuff URL: http://pages.preferred.com/~pesterle/rocket.htm

Darrell D. Mobley wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
(Big Snip for brevity's sake)
Wow,
Didn't even see an announcement that Commonwealth was going OOP. Use to get good service from them in the past.

Kurt wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
They're up, live, and running when I access them this morning. Don't you think that publishing this type of list when there may have been intermittent ISP problems is making the problem worse?
David Erbas-White

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:25:22 -0800, David Erbas-White
  Quoted Text Here  
Now you've made me click on their link - to help them test their system
Phil

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:25:22 -0800, David Erbas-White
  Quoted Text Here  
It works but it sure is lame. Maybe Darrell can do a news release - Commonwealth Displays declared lame by ....

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I suppose you'd rather read posts by Min?

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 19:47:10 -0500, "Darrell D. Mobley"
  Quoted Text Here  
Here's a news flash - I've never read more than a few lines of any of his posts - or the replies.

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, December 4th, 2006
UseNET Newsgroups -- Today, on the newsgroup 'rec.models.rockets,' Phil Stein declared posts by Dr M1N PhD to be lame. Stein went on to say that he had never read "more than a few lines of any of his posts - or the replies."

Darrell D. Mobley wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
ROTFLMAO!
David Erbas-White

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 20:26:55 -0500, "Darrell D. Mobley"
  Quoted Text Here  
You messed up - I said Commonwealth's site is lame. Do like my wife does - bitch about the editors messing up your stories. If I had a motor for everytime that has happened. 8-)
Phil

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I know, I was demoing my recently expired artistic license.

David Erbas-White wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
You're right Dave. I just checked the site and it's up. Darell might have jumped the gun on that one.
Kurt

The URL that needs to be purged (recursively) is at the very bottom of the list, http://www.rocketryplanet.com The site has recently been infected with a strain of the snap, an electronic version of VD (ED, or electronic disease.) Like the clap, this scourge will spread to all the other rocket sites if it is not quickly cleansed.
Kurt wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

Is that you Jerry?? (:-) Xca & Xus..(:-)
Calrocket wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

Calrocket wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Imitation is accepted as the sincerest form of flattery.

SnapCrap can be killed by using Firefox, install the extension "adblock" and add an entry to block all of Snap's popups. Works like a charm.
Kevin OClassen

  Quoted Text Here  
SnapCrap can also be blocked by not reading that web site. Sort of like kill files on usenet.
I used to use galeon, which had a way to killfile web sites (even entire domains). Killfiling doubleclick.net made life much better.
Glen Overby

David Erbas-White wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
But they weren't when the list was generated. I checked, manually, many times. If causing an ISP to address a problem is making matters worse then so be it. What good is a web site if you have to ask your clients not to use it because your ISP is flaky?
Kurt wrote:
> You're right Dave. I just checked the site and it's up. Darell might > have jumped the gun on that one.
Jumped the gun on what? It was a list of unreachable sites, a request to see if others were experiencing the same unavailability. I suppose I could have just deleted them and said who cares.
How to mitigate?
People complained in the past because ROL's web links database became stale, meaning there were a lot of dead links in there. In an effort to eliminate that from happening on Rocketry Planet, an active effort is made to check them regularly.
When a dead link is encountered, the decision has to be made to terminate the link's entry in the database. I could just delete it without regard. Then people might complain that the site was just unavailable for "_" (insert any of a million reasons), and that I acted in haste.
On the other hand, I could post the link in question to commonly used public forums and ask "Is this dead?" We have seen how that was received.
So:
1. People bitch if there is a dead link. 2. People bitch if the dead link is removed. 3. People bitch if you ask if the dead link should be removed.
What is the solution?
There is none.
Answer: People bitch.
People bitch when they are un-informed. People bitch when they are under-informed. People bitch when they are informed. I can't change human nature. You can't please all the people all the time. It's a no-win situation where you find yourself asking why in the hell are you doing this? You're damned if you do, damned if you don't, and damned if you ask. One friend, however, summed it up very succinctly:
"Stay away from those f_ing forums. Only piss-ants are on those."

Darrell D. Mobley wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
(and I would say that your response to folks having APCP on hand falls into the above...)
Your original post, coming as it does from one who has a history of being one of the main focal points for rocketry news, raises more concerns than most. On Yahoo groups, for example, there is a 'bounce status' that can tell moderators when, and how often, a certain person was unreachable.
The same information proves far more helpful than the information you posted, again, because of your specific background. The stated inference was that if others couldn't 'prove' that those links were active, that you would delete them. This can be problematic if you jump the gun on them, particularly as you're one of those who has been predicting the demise of vendors.
Solution? Post the date they were last checked next to the links. If they go dead, post a note to that effect. If they go dead for a longer period of time, leave them for historical reference, and post a note that as of xx/xx/xx, the link appears dead, and asking for further information from those who may know.
But given the current environment, I would think that would all be better off by trying to keep as much information as possible, including links, out there. I can think of several vendors who have 'disappeared' for brief intervals, and then come back (as well as several who didn't come back). But it would seem to me that the above provides the solution with the 'best' impact, and the least likelihood about folks 'bitching' about the links.
David Erbas-White

David Erbas-White wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Whatever, David. There are many workable solutions to sleeping with APCP under your pillow.
  Quoted Text Here  
Really? "Below is the list of web links items that were flagged as inoperable. If you know the status of any of these listings, please let me know..." Don't forget, I was the one who let the web links list go stale originally, so don't confuse me with someone who is in a rush to purge the database just to prove my precognitive abilities.
  Quoted Text Here  
You mean like "Below is the list of web links items that were flagged as inoperable. If you know the status of any of these listings, please let me know..."?
  Quoted Text Here  
Are you suggesting padding the Internet with out-of-date data to make it appear the hobby is more robust than it really is? Odd.
My intent wasn't to provide the best "impact." Impact was the furthest thing from my mind. "Accurate data" is a better description. I can't weigh every concern when trying to determine the accuracy of the web links database. I guess I would have to remind those who are concerned about that, that "this is just a hobby" and that if they want better results, they'll probably have to pay for them.