If anyone's interested in contributing, email me, and I'll set it up for editing and give you an account.

wget -pkrN -l1 -A.pdf,.css,.png,merkeylaw http://www.ip-wars.net/special/merkeylaw
...
wget -pkrN -l1 -A.pdf,.css,.png,merkey_v_yahooscox,2005* http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/merkey_v_yahooscox

(Ignore any linewrap.  They don't wrap in my script.)

The first wget works as expected.  An file with html content called merkeylaw is created even though on the IPW server, merkeylaw is a directory, and the file returned is merkeylaw/index.php

However the second wget creates a directory called merkey_v_yahooscox, and index.php, not being in the accept list, isn't in it.  Nor do I want to add index.php to the accept list (or any pattern which matches it) because I would then get every other index.php linked to on the first page.

The only reason I can think of for the difference in behaviour, is that if you put "http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/merkey_v_yahooscox" into a browser, a trailing / is appended, presumably by EFF's server, while IPW's server doesn't do this.

Groklaw, SCOFACTS.ORG, LWN.NET, and Yahoo, Inc. are and have violated a Federal Court Order sealing sensitive Court documents. Al Petrofsky, Groklaw, Yahoo, and LWN.net have participated in transporting and trafficking in sealed court documents and have transported these documents out of the United States and into the hands of Foreign Nationals and the enemies of the United States.

Assume, for the sake of argument that the factual allegations are true.

Does a sealing order (i.e., ordering court officials not to publish a file) imply a protective order (ordering other people not to publish a file)?

Is it relevant that the documents have been transported "out of the United States" (hence beyond the jurisdiction of the court)?

I want to create a small website with static content only.  As usual, I want to separate the layout from the actual content, so a CMS would seem to be what I want.  Unfortunately, those I've looked at seem to be geared up for dynamic sites, and generally are rather more hefty affairs than I really want.

I envisage a development model as follows:

• create/modify the layout templates.
  
• create/modify the content.
  
• generate and view the static webpages.
  
• rinse and repeat.
  
• when satisfied, upload to the target webserver.
  

Looking at this, I see no reason for having a webserver on the development machine, yet every CMS I've looked at requires one.

0 - Link-spam, incitement and threats of violence, duplicate posts, and posts which the poster has requested be deleted.

1 - Abusive/Offensive.

2 - A very wide category, ranging from non-abusive content-free trolling to posts which just miss the point.

3 - On-topic to the matter at hand, but nothing special.

4 - A post with a little extra:  It makes me laugh, provides me with new information or insight, is very well-written, or for some other reason is the type of post which makes IPW worth the subscription.

5 - A post which really hits the spot.  Either because it is like a 4, only more so, or it has multiple 4-ish characteristics.

I've been dissatisfied with these criteria for some time, though I've persisted with it, in the interest of consistency.  I've been particularly unhappy with the 2 rating for worthless, non-abusive posts. I do not wish to hide these posts, but I don't feel inclined to mod them up to visibility either, therefore a 1 rating would seem more appropriate.  So now I am changing my criteria.  From now on, I will rate according to these revised criteria:-

0 - As above.  In addition, any troll post which asks to be zero-rated will be a candidate.

1 - Abusive/Offensive, trolls, content-free and otherwise worthless posts.  I shall take a Homer Simpson view of trolling - it takes two, one to troll, and one to be trolled.  Therefore if you are contributing to a crapflood by responding mindlessly to a troll, then I will give a 1 rating.  Mojoed members beware.

2 - A post with some value, but not enough to rate it a 3.