Skip

Hey Internet, We Can Do This!
June 16, 2011 10:24 AM   Subscribe

The US government is hoping to save millions by deleting half of its websites, including this one for the endangered desert tortoise that costs about $125/year plus eight hours of staff time. If the internet can raise money to build a statue of robocop in Detroit, surely we can save this website? Is it worth it? Do enough people use it? What other websites are going down that we should save?
posted by treeshar (83 comments total) 16 users marked this as a favorite

 
meanwhile the DoJ can't account for billions of dollars, large portions of which are widely rumored to have been flown into the desert on pallettes.
posted by radiosilents at 10:25 AM on June 16, 2011 [32 favorites]


Seriously, though, there is a lot of stuff that needs to be deleted. I do a lot of interacting with the executive branch and tons of the material is old and needs to be cut.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:27 AM on June 16, 2011 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I mean, it's not like we'd save any money by deciding to no longer wage undeclared war on brown people or anything. It's obviously the turtle sites that are holding us back.
posted by elizardbits at 10:28 AM on June 16, 2011 [46 favorites]


I'd pay for the turtle site, but I don't think it's a matter of saving it. The Federal Government doesn't have a long history of just giving things away they don't want anymore.
posted by Malice at 10:29 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


meanwhile the DoJ can't account for billions of dollars, large portions of which are widely rumored to have been flown into the desert on pallettes.

You think the tortoises took it?
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:31 AM on June 16, 2011 [55 favorites]


Certainly we must have spent more than $125 already just deciding whether or not to keep this turtle site. That said, some trimming and tidying up of the government's websites would be well in order whether or not it turns out to be of any cost savings.
posted by JauntyFedora at 10:31 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


You know how you save millions with government websites? Have your government people work with the web contractors and write out some clear, concise requirements and design documents. AND THEN DO NOT CHANGE THEM MID-CONTRACT. /vent
posted by specialagentwebb at 10:32 AM on June 16, 2011 [12 favorites]


fraud and waste=defense contractors
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:33 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


False dichotomies aside, what makes this website worth saving? The tortoise isn't being removed from the endangered list, and there's no evidence that other, more real efforts to protect it are being cut. This is the strangest call to arms I've ever seen.
posted by rocket88 at 10:35 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


Is this the post where we just bitch in general about government spending, while opposing these particular cuts?
posted by smackfu at 10:35 AM on June 16, 2011 [3 favorites]


When I was a subcontractor at NASA they had an interesting system for preserving websites.

Essentially you inherit a bunch of legacy sites on each new project, and keeping them going is built into your budget.

This worked out really well because mostly the sites were small and self contained. The ones we got were mostly little educational things. They got maybe 100 hits a month, but it was neat to keep 'em going.

I can see how you might eventually get crushed under the weight of these sites, but I never had that experience.

Mostly this feels like Republican bluster.
posted by poe at 10:36 AM on June 16, 2011 [8 favorites]


(And I wonder how much 8 hours of staff time is... $1000?)
posted by smackfu at 10:36 AM on June 16, 2011


Maybe they should just delete all the unused accounts to save server space.
posted by Curious Artificer at 10:37 AM on June 16, 2011 [4 favorites]


Watching various levels of government in the U.S. cut back on stuff like roads and websites while defense spending rolls along untouched is like watching someone try to bail out a canoe carrying a cast-iron safe.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:38 AM on June 16, 2011 [34 favorites]


I wonder. If there were a mechanism for U.S. taxpayers to pay the Federal government additional sums with their tax return each year and for the taxpayer to earmark those additional, non-tax payments for specific categories of spending, how much additional revenue would that system generate? And what would people voluntarily pay extra in order to fund?
posted by The World Famous at 10:39 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


Deserttortoise.org is an information portal! Look, is there a tortoise researcher out there? Maybe someone from Redlands (which has a link on the page)? I bet 300 seven year olds write reports based off this website every year.
posted by treeshar at 10:39 AM on June 16, 2011 [5 favorites]


In the Tea Party America, those tortoises need to maintain their own site. They can't expect the government to do it for them.

Also, I heard some of them were illegal immigrants.
posted by klangklangston at 10:39 AM on June 16, 2011 [11 favorites]


I also think this tortoise is adorable.
posted by treeshar at 10:41 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


Services like this need to pay for themselves, like the police, fire and military do.
posted by DU at 10:42 AM on June 16, 2011 [7 favorites]


I'm still stuck on the fact that tortoises live in the desert.
posted by Capt. Renault at 10:42 AM on June 16, 2011


Soon, all .gov sites will be managed by a single federal agency. Every change to any State website will have to pass through a singular authority. The future includes redactions coupled with memos that will read, "This information is not authorized for release, Minnesota."
posted by TwelveTwo at 10:42 AM on June 16, 2011


Maybe if we fire a few more teachers, we can save the tortoise site?
posted by kaseijin at 10:42 AM on June 16, 2011


"What's A Tortoise?"
posted by rokusan at 10:43 AM on June 16, 2011 [8 favorites]


is there a more salient example of "penny wise, pound foolish" than the US government?
posted by supermedusa at 10:43 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


AND THEN DO NOT CHANGE THEM MID-CONTRACT

BUT WE HAVE THIS THING CALLED PEACEFUL EXCHANGE OF POWERS.
posted by Ardiril at 10:43 AM on June 16, 2011


Seriously, though, there is a lot of stuff that needs to be deleted. I do a lot of interacting with the executive branch and tons of the material is old and needs to be cut.

This old material is extremely useful for archival and research purposes however, so I hope these older sites stay, at least in archived form. E.g., at one time Treasury had a comprehensive org chart up. This is what they have now. Some offices have mini org charts up at their sub-sites on Treasury.gov, but not all, e.g., OFAC. I e-mailed the Open.gov initiative contact at Treasury and asked him if a new comprehensive chart was in the works. Nope.
posted by longdaysjourney at 10:44 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


Desert Tortoise at the Wayback Machine
posted by stbalbach at 10:46 AM on June 16, 2011


You people aren't even TRYING. Sigh.

Lets throw some adwords up on it, surely tortoises can help sell acai.
posted by treeshar at 10:46 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


Mostly this feels like Republican bluster.

More like Biden bluster. There isn't any particular reason to save this site, the reason the discussion is shifting to spending in general is that it's a joke because the savings are completely insignificant and yet politicians are going around bragging about it.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:47 AM on June 16, 2011 [5 favorites]


meanwhile the DoJ can't account for billions of dollars, large portions of which are widely rumored to have been flown into the desert on pallettes.

You think the tortoises took it?


I'm pretty sure they could have sprung for a much fancier web site if they had.

It would have, like, animated icons and lots more fonts and a little tortoise song that plays automatically, and you could Like it on Facebook and stuff.
posted by Naberius at 10:49 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


There was this website very into oral sex. Every time you reloaded a page it was munching another penis. Obsessively I hit command R. This website had to have gone through hundreds of genitalia an hour. Cocks, vaginas, occasionally the Star Report (like the honey badger it don't give a shit). It just likes oral sex! Once, I thought this website would like a break for a bedtime story and made the mistake of telling it about Jesus. From there on it still liked oral sex, but now it felt bad about it afterward. Sometimes on a reload you got nothing but a look of shame. It was now fickle. So I'd trade stories of salvation for the hope of seeing yet another cock or vagina getting blown. Eventually, no matter how much I preached the word, I couldn't get this website to display any oral sex at all!

The moral or this story? If you have a website that goes down don't save it!
posted by cjorgensen at 10:49 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


ucanthaztortis
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 10:54 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


Somehow I too cannot get excited about saving the 4,725,685 most visted website on the Internet.

However, if you want this sort of thing saved, what you really need is a new cold war. One where we cannot afford to get behind in the desert tortoise website race.
posted by Muddler at 10:55 AM on June 16, 2011


According to Alexa, deserttortoise.gov (um, better make that www.deserttortoise.gov) has 11 sites that link to it. The link in this post increases that number by 8.3%, which seems like a huge contribution already.
posted by twoleftfeet at 10:56 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


I bet 300 seven year olds write reports based off this website every year.

No way, it's the seventh hit on Google for "desert tortoise."
posted by smackfu at 10:56 AM on June 16, 2011 [4 favorites]


meanwhile the DoJ can't account for billions of dollars, large portions of which are widely rumored to have been flown into the desert on pallettes.

The 10th Regiment of Foot: You think the tortoises took it?

Slow and steady wins the race is the best way to steal pallettes of money.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:57 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


Just don't cut the CIA games page, because what would the CIA website be like without games for the kids?
posted by twoleftfeet at 11:00 AM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


The internet is like a really big, really old University library. More than half the books haven't been touched in years and years and years. Some of the others are outdated and not really meaningful other than in the, 'look at what those old coots used to think was real'.

In the end, its all useful to someone at some point in the future. Well, maybe not /b/ and the attendant tail of strife and inanity that follows its fiery path through the virtual world, but the other stuff...
posted by Slackermagee at 11:01 AM on June 16, 2011


Id rather see money go towards this than a stupid robocop statue (speaking as a metro detroiter)
Just shows you how fucked up peoples priorities can be.
posted by handbanana at 11:01 AM on June 16, 2011


Capt. Renault: I'm still stuck on the fact that tortoises live in the desert.

Where else do you think it would live, in the water? That's a turtle. Similar, but different.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:03 AM on June 16, 2011


Desert tortoises, another group that just doesn't get it. Their business model is slowly eroding, and they are doing fuck all to keep up with the times.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:03 AM on June 16, 2011 [7 favorites]


And it looks like Archive.org wins the day again. Next up: Archive.org fixes US healthcare!
posted by filthy light thief at 11:03 AM on June 16, 2011


If you want to keep this website, Republicans will insist on giving another trillion-dollar tax cut to the wealthiest 400 Americans just to maintain balance.
posted by briank at 11:04 AM on June 16, 2011 [8 favorites]


I hate seeing URLs die. After all, Cool URIs don't change. Of course it's easier not to kill URLs when you don't make a new domain name for every damn thing.

Most works created by the federal government are not under copyright, so there's nothing stopping people from making their own Desert Tortoise mirror.
posted by grouse at 11:08 AM on June 16, 2011


So we'll have a committee to decide what needs to go, some sort of appeal process and a bunch of agencies creating new websites to cover their assess now that they can't point to the old websites as examples of their vital productivity. As usual, the internal friction between the various parts of the federal machine is so high it's hard to believe it moves at all (except for in reverse, where it can move faster than you can grab your wallet).
posted by doctor_negative at 11:11 AM on June 16, 2011


Holden: You look down and see a tortoise, Leon. It's crawling toward you...maintaining a website...
Leon: Tortoise? What's that?
Holden: [irritated by Leon's interruptions] You know what a turtle is?
Leon: Of course!
Holden: Same thing.
Leon: I've never seen a turtle... But I understand what you mean.
Holden: You reach down and you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon. You reach out and revoke the domain name registration for the tortoise's website, Leon.
Leon: Do you make up these questions, Mr. Holden? Or do they write 'em down for you?
Holden: The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't.The tortoise stares at its monitor, its code not updating, beating on the keyboard trying to ftp, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.
Leon: [angry at the suggestion] What do you mean, I'm not helping?
Holden: I mean: you're not helping! Why is that, Leon?

posted by never used baby shoes at 11:12 AM on June 16, 2011 [15 favorites]


Well, maybe not /b/ and the attendant tail of strife and inanity that follows its fiery path through the virtual world, but the other stuff...

I would actually bet that their nonsense would be the most valuable. It is a culturally rich soup of extremely contemporary references.
posted by TwelveTwo at 11:13 AM on June 16, 2011


Is this another public-private opportunity for Google?

Like the other quagmires at the Post Office, Google could assume maintenance of thousands of Federal websites, simply by maintaining cached versions of these sites and updating them only as necessary.

/just an idea...
posted by vhsiv at 11:17 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


"Saving" it doesn't really present the real problem here - I just personally archived it with about 30 seconds of effort and the magic of wget.

But do you want to pay to host it somewhere, to keep it updated, to make it relevant on an ongoing basis?


The World Famous : I wonder. If there were a mechanism for U.S. taxpayers to pay the Federal government additional sums with their tax return each year

You can indeed pay extra taxes voluntarily. You can even allocate them to certain categories of use (for example, you can explicitly contribute to the national debt). In general, though, extra taxes just go into the general pool of funds and broken out proportional to the budget as a whole.


for the taxpayer to earmark those additional, non-tax payments for specific categories of spending, how much additional revenue would that system generate? And what would people voluntarily pay extra in order to fund?

I would personally pay extra for a small number of purposes. I suspect many people would; That leads to a messy situation, however, when we see massive support (particularly from "interested" wealthy individuals) for certain niche hot-button programs (immigration enforcement, faith-based initiatives, abstinence-only education, the war on drugs, etc).
posted by pla at 11:17 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


I'm a gov docs librarian these days, and we've spent a good bit of time talking about this on a govdocs listserv.

First: the original source of the story GOT IT WRONG. The number to be cut is apparently 1000 of 24,000 (not 1000 of 2000 .gov TLDs). See here for a slightly complicated explanation.

This is the White House's reaction. Many gov docs librarians disagree; there are too many government websites but the ones up for cutting shouldn't just be thrown out willy nilly as seems likely to happen. Some thought about the future and input from current users (including gov docs librarians!) would be nice and transparent.

Second, there exists a lovely website from University of North Texas called CyberCemetery which is (in their own words) "an archive of government websites that have ceased operation (usually websites of defunct government agencies and commissions that have issued a final report). So this stuff may get preserved anyway.

I graduated from U of Redlands (a co-sponsor of that Desert Tortoise page), so little bit of a jolt to see that logo on the site. It's been suggested that U of R adopt the site themselves; given the Redlands Institute's funding (they're a GIS institute and ESRI, the major GIS company, is located in the city of Redlands), I can see that happening.

Finally, in my professional opinion, the number of gov docs websites could certainly be winnowed down but it makes more sense to do so by collapsing currently independent sites back under their home agencies and archiving old sites that haven't been updated in years (of which there are MANY MANY thousands; the US government is notoriously poor at dealing with link rot and regular updating).
posted by librarylis at 11:27 AM on June 16, 2011 [9 favorites]


Maybe it would help if we put together a "Save the 'Save the Tortoise' Website" website?

/obvious
posted by FatherDagon at 11:30 AM on June 16, 2011 [4 favorites]


Just don't cut the CIA games page, because what would the CIA website be like without games for the kids?

You've got a CIA coloring book
And you color really well
But don't color outside the lines
Or God will send you to hell you'll be in Gitmo in a cell
posted by Ogre Lawless at 11:38 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


When I was a subcontractor at NASA they had an interesting system for preserving websites.

NASA.gov used to have tons of archival material about the Shuttle program. I was given to understand, in some sci.space.* discussion somewhere, that NASA conducted a major winnowing about a decade ago because too many of their engineers were using obsolete material -- found on NASA.gov via Google! -- as a reference. /facepalm (either way).

Anyway, it's certainly a bit much to have an actual single website for one species with its own domain name and everything. But in days of yore, the USG had a shit ton of paper brochures that you could get by writing to a particular office in, memorably, Pueblo, CO. I suppose they had the same sort of problem then. Hey, waddaya know, it's still around.
posted by dhartung at 11:53 AM on June 16, 2011


I'd pay for the turtle site, but I don't think it's a matter of saving it. The Federal Government doesn't have a long history of just giving things away they don't want anymore.
No, but they have a long history of giving their pals "the wink". Then their pals charge them an arm and a leg for something which would cost 5 times as less if they had an artisan make it.

Then after about 7 years in storage, they decide its not worth the space it takes up so they sell it for 10 times less than they bought it for.

And people buy that because they are buying old shoes for half price...and thats just a tad less than current market value.

And then those people make friends with the government...and then the winks start again.

I just don't understand why the government just doesn't make its own everything to save us all money.

Oh yeah...communism. I'd much prefer being bent over financially, than being labeled a red.
posted by hal_c_on at 11:57 AM on June 16, 2011


Just don't cut the CIA games page, because what would the CIA website be like without games for the kids?

Those aren't innocuous games. It just animates what you're doing with a drone. They got their idea from Ender's Game.

Also, there is a 6 year old that feels REALLY bad about killing Osama Bin Laden...and well...the rest of the stories aren't as good as the first.
posted by hal_c_on at 11:59 AM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


The ATF had a website for kids. It was pretty horrible. I wrote them a letter and said it sucked and they took it down. True story. I'm guessing my letter had nothing to do with it, but I did point out that the ATF(E) seemed like the one website on the internet that really didn't need a kids' section.
posted by cjorgensen at 12:01 PM on June 16, 2011


They will also save the salary of the CIO of data.gov, he just quit after his budget was cut from 35m to 8m.
posted by Ad hominem at 12:02 PM on June 16, 2011


It seems like everyone's sort of missing the political purpose of all this, which is to appear to be doing something about "government waste," while simultaneously implying that "government waste" has been pared down to the level of a $125/year website about tortoises, rather than, as mentioned above, $9 billion that's gone poof somewhere in Iraq. "...as President Obama also said in the video, 'No amount of waste is acceptable. Not when it's your money, not at a time when so many families are already cutting back.'" Hear that folks? No amount of waste is acceptable. I feel better now. Don't you? I hardly feel at all like the administration has complete contempt for all of us.

This doesn't rise to the level of something we should be taking seriously, at the level of actual website archiving issues.
posted by rusty at 12:04 PM on June 16, 2011 [7 favorites]


One candidate for deletion or keeping around, depending on your level of perversion: FEMA for Kids.

It used to have an absolutely terrifying story on there about a woman who almost died in Hurricane Camille (devastating storm that hit the Miss. Gulf Coast in 1969), floated away on a mattress, was found bloodied and bruised out the wazoo afterward, was barely alive. (Pause.) Wait, the woman's story is still there.

". As the building began to fall apart, Mary Ann floated out of the window and grabbed onto a sofa pillow that came by. She became tangled in wires and debris. It was dark, but Mary Ann saw the building come down all around her. The wind was awful. It reached 234 miles per hour during Hurricane Camille. Mary Ann continued to hold onto anything she could-furniture, tree limbs and parts of houses and buildings. The winds and waves were so strong that every time Mary Ann grabbed hold of something it would be ripped from her hands. She kept getting hit by the wreckage and was bloody from head to toe from the nails in the boards. This went on for 12 hours before Mary Ann was found 4 ½ miles from her house. She was taken to a hospital where she stayed for three weeks."

Moral of the story: Evacuate, kids! Steal the vehicle of your parent or legal guardian if you can't get through to them! Driving isn't that hard, even if you're six years old!

"FEMA for Kids" also has a great page, with kid-friendly, dense text of smallish typeface, on which the role of the agency is explained, as is its place in the Dept. of Homeland Security, and so forth.
posted by raysmj at 12:10 PM on June 16, 2011


I'm still stuck on the fact that tortoises live in the desert.

Not for long - they're endangered, you know.
posted by atbash at 12:12 PM on June 16, 2011


This doesn't rise to the level of something we should be taking seriously, at the level of actual website archiving issues.

We should take seriously the continuing evidence that the people who run our country are contemptuous assholes who treat us like imbecilic children
posted by crayz at 12:23 PM on June 16, 2011 [3 favorites]


Tortoises, aka Desert Turtles.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:24 PM on June 16, 2011


Meanwhile somewhere around 30% of US corn production is going to ethanol production due to subsidies, despite being a terrible way of generating energy.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost around $500,000 A MINUTE. That's equal to 67 tortoise websites / second (tps).
posted by benzenedream at 12:25 PM on June 16, 2011 [7 favorites]


If we're going to cover our defense budget, soldiers seriously need to do a better job of looting, stealing, and holding people hostage. It's the only responsible way forward.
posted by swift at 12:32 PM on June 16, 2011


False dichotomies aside, what makes this website worth saving? The tortoise isn't being removed from the endangered list, and there's no evidence that other, more real efforts to protect it are being cut. This is the strangest call to arms I've ever seen.

No, it isn't.

Information matters, and this may be the only way that some people ever learn about a number of subjects.
posted by mecran01 at 12:58 PM on June 16, 2011


The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost around $500,000 A MINUTE. That's equal to 67 tortoise websites / second (tps).

Joe Biden Loves $125,000,000,000 Lost War, Mocks $125 Tortoise Website
posted by homunculus at 1:02 PM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


I'd be happy to volunteer web space for the desert tortoise -- leave mefimail if you are a sovereign entity .
posted by 3mendo at 1:23 PM on June 16, 2011


What seems to be the real cost here is hosting after the website is developed. Perhaps just consolidating all this information to one place might be a good start? Or is consolidation a dirty word in big government?
posted by samsara at 1:49 PM on June 16, 2011


I'd like to suggest that desert tortoises are endangered because they are being harvested by the DOD to be used as helmets.

That's what i'd like to suggest.
posted by orme at 1:53 PM on June 16, 2011 [3 favorites]


Information matters, and this may be the only way that some people ever learn about a number of subjects.

I don't care. If you can't find it on a departmental site using a search engine then you're not any more likely to find it in its own domain. It's a trivial expense, which makes it a trivial fix; the main point is symbolism, specifically the symbolism of the administration taking the initiative to reduce waste instead of ceding that issue to the GOP. If you don't get this, then you're severely lacking a clue.

Yes, wars in the Middle East cost a lot more. Guess what: we elected the candidate that promised to do an orderly, controlled disengagement that he warned would require several years. So far that has turned out pretty much as claimed during the campaign. That's disappointing for everyone who wanted an immediate withdrawal, but there were not enough such people to support a stronger anti-war platform at the last election. One reason for this is that advocates of withdrawal had no longer-term plan besides 'hope that the region magically fixes itself without further intervention.'
posted by anigbrowl at 2:01 PM on June 16, 2011 [3 favorites]


Symbolically cutting spending can backfire if you turn yourself into a punchline, look at what happened to Jindal and his volcanoes. If I was writing an attack ad on this I would make fun of the Democratic idea of cutting spending being saving $125 when we are trillions in debt.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:04 PM on June 16, 2011


Does this mean they're trying to break even?
posted by simms2k at 3:46 PM on June 16, 2011


Though the information on this specific site is pretty sparse, it's there. This is exactly the kind of thing government should be doing. Making information easily accessible.

I can't tell you how much the internet has changed the way I, a consultant, do business with local, state and federal agencies. It is so much easier to get the information I need, when I need it, than it was twenty years ago - many, many orders of magnitude easier. Easier, as in slam-dunk easy, versus im-freaking-possible.

And it saves the government huge amounts of money. The handful of phone calls or correspondence they get about the Desert Tortoise would cost them tens or hundreds of times what this website cost. Yes, I know the this particular thing is just "illustrative bluster", but goddammit, I am sick of this smoke and mirrors charade, and I am disappointed that Biden engaged in it.

I don't mind if they consolidate sites and streamline they way they do business. As long as they don't move backwards, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, in the process.
posted by Xoebe at 3:48 PM on June 16, 2011 [2 favorites]


Oh, good, the old "but the defense department is spending blah-blah-blillions every day", do you people not understand that the stuff the US govt. presently has doesn't explode shit well enough?
posted by tumid dahlia at 4:40 PM on June 16, 2011


leave mefimail if you are a sovereign entity

WE ARE TOP OFFICIAL OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL WHO ARE INTERESTED IN IMPORTATION OF GOODS INTO OUR COUNTRY WITH FUNDS WHICH ARE PRESENTLY TRAPPED IN NIGERIA.
posted by Trurl at 4:44 PM on June 16, 2011


NIGERIA HAS THE WORST BANKING POLICIES
posted by TwelveTwo at 5:52 PM on June 16, 2011


American bankers are way better at running scams.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:54 PM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


Americans are the best at everything you don't want people to be the best at.
posted by TwelveTwo at 6:37 PM on June 16, 2011


I'm not a Tea Partier, and I agree that the US needs to cut defense spending. But if you're going to cut anything else, WEBSITES ABOUT ENDANGERED ANIMALS are a good place to go. If I wanted to look at animals I'd look at, I dunno, Wikipedia. Or Cute Overload. Or something. I actually would rather the money go to things like DARPA, which might have civilian applications. Or awesome mech applications.
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 7:03 PM on June 16, 2011


You guys, that turtle hasn't turned a profit in like three years. Time to trim the fat.
posted by dixiecupdrinking at 9:09 PM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


A new Sheriff is in town! Sheriff Joe! His posse is going to corral the outlaws that are looting your money. C'mon boys, daylight's a'wastin'! Giddyup!

What are we, eight years old?
posted by salvia at 9:41 PM on June 16, 2011 [1 favorite]


Lovecraft In Brooklyn: "I'm not a Tea Partier, and I agree that the US needs to cut defense spending. But if you're going to cut anything else, WEBSITES ABOUT ENDANGERED ANIMALS are a good place to go. "

I bet that websites like this are much like the bottom 50% of taxpayers. There's not enough money there to matter. Personally, I prefer that all the departments, divisions, and offices have a website of some sort outlining their mission and providing other relevant information. If they're the sort that gathers data, I want that data published for all to see.

Obviously, the smaller the office, the smaller the website should be in most cases, possibly even just a single page.

This is valuable information, if you ask me.
posted by wierdo at 8:23 AM on June 17, 2011


The desert tortoise is a research portal, while wikipedia is more general information. They serve different purposes.
posted by treeshar at 8:38 AM on June 17, 2011


« Older Barbet Schroeder's "General Idi Amin Dada: A Self...   |   ScriptSource: Pretty much... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post