Data preservation is integral to society, now more so than ever considering the vast amount of data that's created and lost with each passing day.
I believe that (public) online communications channels are no different than (indie) publications, reflecting the thoughts, actions and beliefs held by the individuals belonging to that group or that time period and are just as deserving of the same preservation efforts as their dead tree counterparts. There shouldn't be an expiry date on a book, newspaper, or journal, neither should a public statement no longer be viewable due to external effects. I'd even argue for the preservation of legally ambiguous or even outright illegal data, I'd delve deeper into that but I have neither the time nor desire to do so.
I'd make the claim that any and all publically accessible data is to be considered fair game and Jason Scott phrased this sentiment in as straightforward a manner as possible, and I quote :-
>If you don't want people storing your shit, don't put it up on the internet.I apologise if I treaded off-topic, the concepts of internet archiving and archiving at large are very intertwined and one cannot discuss the former without the latter.
>>6303636>It's archival for archival's sake.There's absolutely nothing wrong with that for one can never know when data is going to become relevant in the future or fade away into the ether. Depending on the amount of data being dealt with, it is often times much more sensible to err on the side of caution in this regard. (see : Marion Strokes Philadelphia TV News archive)
