7 Responses to Two-Filter Document Culling – Part One

  1. Ethan A says:

    ~ para. 21 – typo, or elegant writing?
    “digital mug”
    for when you want 01 bit of coffee?

    (thanks for wading well into subjective search – which really does pay for itself many times over if used correctly

  2. Hoping to meet you at LTNY. Love to read all your posts and find out just how you keep up on everything. Like to learn a trick or two from you. Thanks for all you contribute to this crazy world of eDiscovery.
    Gayle O’Connor

  3. […] Document Culling – Part One and Part […]

  4. Matthew Golab says:

    Excellent as always Ralph. Something that I thought I’d mention that has been troubling for a while is clarity in identifying custodians when email archive systems are used, in that my observation is that from the email archive systems that clients have used they tend to have a big bucket approach to storage and so the only way of retrieving materials for a custodian is to search the email recipient fields for the custodian.

    My point being that you’re not being provided with the custodian’s mailbox, instead a system wide search for anyone involving the custodian.

    I make the point as most times we conduct a search for a custodian as a data repository and then other parameters.

    Thought I’d pass on this thought.

%d bloggers like this: