Difference between revisions of "Talk:Spectator website takedown 2009"
(→Notable Bwog Comments Section) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Google cache of Bwog comments from "No, It's Not Another Redesign" [http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:ZsNuLjCiGdsJ:www.bwog.net/articles/no_it_s_not_another_redesign+redesign+site:bwog.net&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a] | Google cache of Bwog comments from "No, It's Not Another Redesign" [http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:ZsNuLjCiGdsJ:www.bwog.net/articles/no_it_s_not_another_redesign+redesign+site:bwog.net&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a] | ||
| − | The issue is that Bwog, if they wanted to get purgy on us, could conceivably take down Google cache. Just as long as there's a record of the old page stored somewhere. | + | The issue is that Bwog, if they wanted to get purgy on us, could conceivably take down Google cache. Just as long as there's a record of the old page stored somewhere. -- Anon |
Revision as of 10:39, 20 October 2009
Notable Bwog Comments Section
It might be cool if we could put a "Notable Bwog Comments" section in the main article. However, for the entire list of comments I think just a link will suffice. Nateoxford 04:58, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
Google cache of Bwog comments from "Columbia Daily Spectacle" [1]
Google cache of Bwog comments from "No, It's Not Another Redesign" [2]
The issue is that Bwog, if they wanted to get purgy on us, could conceivably take down Google cache. Just as long as there's a record of the old page stored somewhere. -- Anon
