 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
ataraxia
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2003
Total Posts : 67
| Posted 12/18/2003 7:05 PM (GMT -6) |   | Greetings gang-
Some of our members cut and paste whole news stories taken from news sites, often with no comment of their own. Since such the wholesale copying of news stories from commercial sites without their express written permission is illegal, we’re asking that this practice be discontinued. To help you break free from this habit, I’ll be removing such posts beginning 12 midnight EST Friday, Dec. 19th.
Since I have other things going on in my life as well  , it might take me a day or two to lock onto such posts and detonate them, so it would make things much easier for me if those of you (and you know who you two are ) accustomed to this cut-and-paste style of social intercourse discontinue it immediately so I don’t have to remove such posts by hand. I’d appreciate that.
Limited quoting from a source to support a point you are making is fine. Posting the URL of an article you find interesting is fine, especially if you are supporting a point you are actually arguing for. However, simply posting link after link of articles unrelated to an existing discussion of some related issue is little more than advertising and will no longer be permitted. Sorry.
Thanks for understanding and cooperating.
ataraxia | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Mayflower
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 445
| Posted 12/18/2003 8:57 PM (GMT -6) | |
Greetings, Ataraxia:
I am pleased to meet you.
Thank you for the much-needed "balance" that you have added to this (increasingly grim) discussion thread.
I agree with your guidance; as, I hope, will Laika.
As he stated in one or two of his posts; he, (like most other board members), has posted "photographs" and/or other internet materials -- which would likely infringe upon copyright laws.
It's clear that none of us are as savvy as we need to be regarding what is proper (and, legal) to post on message boards, and what isn't.
In regard to Laika's 3-step approach to this issue, I would suggest that three "alternative" steps could and should have taken that would have resulted in a more positive, and productive outcome,
for all involved:
1) Laika needs to recall, with humility -- that he is a participant of this discussion board -- as are the rest of the members. And, we are brothers and sisters in Christ.
"Come, let us reason together" should dictate our attitude toward conflict resolution.
Forgive the analogy, but his "policing" felt like 'a preemptive strike'. (It was uncalled for, and totally unexpected).
IF Laika had genuine concerns, he should have posted a (non-threatening) "general" notice, ADDRESSED TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE DISCUSSION BOARD -- alerting everyone that we, as an internet discussion group, need to be cognizant of any and all potential copyright issues when posting to public message boards.
POINT: As a large portion of us post (internet accessed) photographs and other material on this board, it's seems clear that the majority of us may simply be oblivious to the fact that a photograph, drawing, and/or news article, posted on a message board (i.e., as opposed to being "sold") could indeed constitute a copyright problem.
Outlining and clarifying such basic information,
in a "GENERAL" post entitled "COPYRIGHT INFORMATION FOR ALL BOARD MEMBERS," would have been helpful, and non-confrontational.
NOTE: Singling individuals out should be avoided, for the obvious reasons.
2) Laika might ask himself, "How would I want to be approached in a similar situation?"
The answer to this question would then (positively, one would hope) shape the approach, and the attitude.
If, after a generic "Copyright Alert" notice had been posted for all board members to read and/or research, and Laika's concerns remained unresolved -- "private" correspondence with the specific parties would have been appropriate.
NOTE: Public ultimatums are akin to being bullied on the playground.
3) If concerns remained after privately "reasoning together" in a mature manner, Laika could, and should, have "also privately" deferred action to the board administrator -- as it is his/her role to continue to navigate through possibly "choppy" waters, in a grace-filled way.
Alas, Laika somehow missed the majority of these steps.
Instead, we felt "broadsided" by a power play - of intimidation.
Why? I still struggle to understand. What was the point??
Was it because we had assertively laid foundation for our stance, by posting current news articles supporting our position --regarding THE LACK of Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Perhaps, (using Lakia's words), his "cup ran over."
And, he lost control.
We became the unsuspecting target for the "copyright" diatribe -- even though countless others on this board (including Laika!) had apparently made identical "errors."
It was a like a whirlwind.
Could it be, that less than one day has passed, from beginning to the end of this bizarre exchange??
In fairness to Laika, I would like to say that I have never observed him to react in this manner before. This gives me hope.
We all have areas in which we have room to grow.
I extend my hand to Lakia in a spirit of healing and reconcilation, for I am a peacemaker.
AMEN.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ataraxia, attached below is an excerpt from an earlier (more lighthearted) email that I drafted to you earlier.
Let us go forward from here --->
'Tis true, we're sinners one & all. (Well, some of us, anyway)...
During this long season of passionate discord,
Tomes of furious pro-war articles were a catalyst for "equal" reams of (very heated!) "Weapons of Mass Destruction" & anti-war protests.
I think it snowballed. I guess a number of us got caught up in our own worldviews & beliefs.
Laika...
I'd post a "photograph" of an Olive Branch (extended toward your name!); however, I don't want to take any undue risks regarding the copyright laws on internet photographs.
Hey Brother, are you here with us?
Join the ranks, and
REPENT.
Whew, this is truly a relief.
Confession is always good for the soul.
Together, we shall stand strong -- and, support one another with "gentle reminders" when (or, if) one might stumble.
We pledge:
NO MORE ...
"Re-posted" writs, diatribes, or professional papers; no more verbatim newspaper articles; no more internet photographs, artwork, or cartoons that were accessed without written copyright permission; no more journal articles, or "forwarded" material that (in retrospect), probably shouldn't have been forwarded yet again; no more magazine articles, chapters from "tempting" books that might be protected by copyrights, (etc., etc., etc.).
Peace and blessings,
(especially to Laika)
<><
====================================================
ataraxia wrote:
quote:
Greetings gang-
Some of our members cut and paste whole news stories taken from news sites, often with no comment of their own. Since such the wholesale copying of news stories from commercial sites without their express written permission is illegal, we’re asking that this practice be discontinued. To help you break free from this habit, I’ll be removing such posts beginning 12 midnight EST Friday, Dec. 19th.
Since I have other things going on in my life as well , it might take me a day or two to lock onto such posts and detonate them, so it would make things much easier for me if those of you (and you know who you two are ) accustomed to this cut-and-paste style of social intercourse discontinue it immediately so I don’t have to remove such posts by hand. I’d appreciate that.
Limited quoting from a source to support a point you are making is fine. Posting the URL of an article you find interesting is fine, especially if you are supporting a point you are actually arguing for. However, simply posting link after link of articles unrelated to an existing discussion of some related issue is little more than advertising and will no longer be permitted. Sorry.
Thanks for understanding and cooperating.
ataraxia
DLW wrote:
quote:
I can write to the NYTIMES and see if I can get their ex-post blessing on the articles I posted, with a promise to go and sin no more...
. | | Back to Top | | |
|
ataraxia
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2003
Total Posts : 67
| Posted 12/18/2003 11:45 PM (GMT -6) | | Mayflower-
That all websites which make cartoons and pictures available also have strict copyright laws is doubtful. Usually such sites make their pictures available with no restrictions whatsoever. It’s “information” or “intellectual property” that’s the issue here. I think limited quoting from books and journals is permissible provided you provide source information (just as you would do were you writing a research paper). But again, the real issue in my mind is, What’s best for healthy discussion? Are we cut-and-pasting other peoples’ material word for word or engaging in a discussion of our own ideas (distilling the ideas of others in our own words when necessary)? I don’t think we need to make this an issue or call for others to “repent.” Let’s just make the needed adjustments if they apply to us and go on enjoying the discussion.
Always,
ataraxia | | Back to Top | | |
|
ataraxia
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2003
Total Posts : 67
| Posted 12/19/2003 1:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Mayflower-
In quoting from your last post I inadvertantly erased it! How's that for administration? I'm very sorry. Still trying to figure out which button does what. All I have left from your post are the quotes below. I hope you have a copy of the original and can repost it. Again, my apologies.
quote:
Thank you for your assurances. However, I wonder if any of us will now truly feel "at ease" -- if we make an error.
I'm very concerned to know whether or not our policies ever hamper good discussion. Is there anyone besides Mayflower who feels "uneasy" or fearful about posting now that we no longer permit the wholesale reproduction of articles or copyrighted material? Anybody?
If nobody steps forward, Mayflower, then I hope you'll conclude that your concerns are taken care of.
quote:
Indeed, in doing a bit of research last night, I learned that many photographs, cartoons, paintings, artwork, etc., etc., may have specific copyrights, depending the preference of who created the work. Therefore, "ownership/copyright" laws appear to reference far more than "newspaper articles," etc.
I'm sure they often are copyrighted. I'm going to leave it up to the poster to check into whether or not the material she intends to post is copyrighted. If it's a cartoon of Daffy Duck or a picture of Yule Brenner, I'll assume it's OK and will not check the source site . But if it's a full article, then even if the poster provides proof that she has written permission from the holder of the copyright to post it on our site, I'll remove the post because we'd much rather hear the poster summarize the article in her own words.
Like any rule of this kind, I'm sure there may be times when an exception is warranted. If anybody thinks the article they want to post warrants such consideration, they're free to write me explaining why their article should be posted in its entirety.
Always,
ataraxia | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:28 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|