New Testingstan

Aaron:
probably the newspaper owners; i'm pretty sure all copyright infringement cases need to be the owner suing someone.

adr wrote:Aaron:
probably the newspaper owners; i'm pretty sure all copyright infringement cases need to be the owner suing someone.

hilariously a copyright troll called righthaven has been doing the 'sue messageboard owners for reposting articles' angle

they haven't been very successful at it

Yeah I can't imagine that it's even worth their time.

I just think it's hilarious that I'm apparently backseat modding for pointing out a rule and calling someone stupid for not following it. That Stofsk got butthurt about it is even funnier.

indeed.

Checking the board rules over there though, it doesn't actually require you to post the whole thing. Here's what it says:

Reference News Sources. If you create a thread about a news article, always provide a link or a text reference to the source. Also, provide enough text excerpts from the source to permit meaningful discussion even if readers don't visit the URL.

(which by my reading makes posting youtube things against the rule, since there's not enough text excerpts there! I wish sdn actually had a court system. I'd do all kinds of ridiculous lawsuits for fun.)


But if people just copied the parts that they specifically want to talk about, that's possibly fair use, so the official board rules aren't necessarily contradictory.


of course when someone says "posted without comment" that throws the whole "i copied it to criticize it" defense out the window, doesn't it :-P

adr wrote:indeed.

Checking the board rules over there though, it doesn't actually require you to post the whole thing. Here's what it says:

Reference News Sources. If you create a thread about a news article, always provide a link or a text reference to the source. Also, provide enough text excerpts from the source to permit meaningful discussion even if readers don't visit the URL.

(which by my reading makes posting youtube things against the rule, since there's not enough text excerpts there! I wish sdn actually had a court system. I'd do all kinds of ridiculous lawsuits for fun.)


But if people just copied the parts that they specifically want to talk about, that's possibly fair use, so the official board rules aren't necessarily contradictory.


of course when someone says "posted without comment" that throws the whole "i copied it to criticize it" defense out the window, doesn't it :-P

i think saying "posted without comment" is possibly even more worthless than simply, you know, not including any post at all beyond the article

Sometimes something is so stupid you have nothing to say beyond just posting the article for ridicule. In which case I'd just post "There are no words... Should.. Have sent... A poet..."

Flagg wrote:Sometimes something is so stupid you have nothing to say beyond just posting the article for ridicule. In which case I'd just post "There are no words... Should.. Have sent... A poet..."

that would still be better than "posted without comment"

the only thing stupider is to post in a thread to announce that you have no intention of participating

Zod wrote:

Flagg wrote:Sometimes something is so stupid you have nothing to say beyond just posting the article for ridicule. In which case I'd just post "There are no words... Should.. Have sent... A poet..."

that would still be better than "posted without comment"

the only thing stupider is to post in a thread to announce that you have no intention of participating

I tend to agree. Hell, I've refrained from posting shit I think would probably generate discussion because I had nothing to say on the subject.

Does someone want to test that rule in Internet Court?

I will provide an incompetent defence.

I <3 Stas for making my argument for me.

Dooey Jo wrote:we didn't have model un

or mock trials

but we had a mock debate

i was moderator

there were many losers in that debate

but only one winner

me

I've become convinced that 50% of what goes on in a collegiate debate is inside the judge's head. Judges, and judging, is such a weird experience.

Speaking of only one winner in a debate (best, segway, ever) one of my favorite debate videos of all time is one where a team says that the judge can't listen to the other team and then reads a quote from Mao which says that people who do not examine their own lives do not deserve to be heard and win with it. The other team flips a shit and the judge just says "Your arguments are fine arguments but I can't listen to what you're saying so you lose."

So it looks like Essbeee.com just got rid of their resident sociopath.

Which one?

oh wow i didn't expect chocula to have a breakdown in my music thread

it was hilarious

ps what is little-boy snark and how do i get some

Nietzslime wrote:oh wow i didn't expect chocula to have a breakdown in my music thread

Give me your email and I'll email you the Puscifer album "Conditions of My Parole" and some of their other tracks. No one knows about that band.

Knubfuck wrote:

Nietzslime wrote:oh wow i didn't expect chocula to have a breakdown in my music thread

Give me your email and I'll email you the Puscifer album "Conditions of My Parole" and some of their other tracks. No one knows about that band.

the band name is not encouraging but what the hell

walkswithworms at gmail

don't judge me on my e-mail address name okay i got it when i was like 16 okay

Aaron wrote:Which one?

Dayton.

Just in case here's some examples:
Seems to me though that the moment the U.S. starts shooting, swarms of media and leftists started whining about the poor, unfortunate people getting killed on the other side.
The US should deliberately kill civilians.
Alyeska is selfish for wanting to live.
New Deal caused Great Depression to last longer.

He's also advocated that the US should start a war with China now to keep his daughter (in the USAF) from having to fight them in the future and that we should declare war every five or six years to remind every country of their place.

Nietzslime wrote:oh wow i didn't expect chocula to have a breakdown in my music thread

Yeah that was some funny shit. I love how when I call him on it he's all "raaar you suck".

All sent, Nietz.

Flagg wrote:I just think it's hilarious that I'm apparently backseat modding for pointing out a rule and calling someone stupid for not following it. That Stofsk got butthurt about it is even funnier.

How am I the one that's butthurt when all I asked you was why you liked starting fights over nothing?

Going 'OH BUT THE RULES SAY...' is utterly meaningless because as Adam says, it's a dumb fucking rule in the first place and basically allows copyright infringement.

lol at Chocula and Bernstein. That's excellent stuff.

ps flagg derives validation from antagonism

Stofsk wrote:

Flagg wrote:I just think it's hilarious that I'm apparently backseat modding for pointing out a rule and calling someone stupid for not following it. That Stofsk got butthurt about it is even funnier.

How am I the one that's butthurt when all I asked you was why you liked starting fights over nothing?

Going 'OH BUT THE RULES SAY...' is utterly meaningless because as Adam says, it's a dumb fucking rule in the first place and basically allows copyright infringement.

It's fair use. And yes, if the rules say something, then the rules say something. I wasn't starting shit, I just called the guy a dimwit. If someone at SDN can't take being called "dimwit" then they deserve much, much worse than some razzing from me, butthurt boy.