Simon Belmont wrote:Nonsense. There are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of other Internet boards which allow images with no problem.
They don't have a Joseph.
Are you anticipating sending money in to the Save the Board fund, then?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Simon Belmont wrote:Why do you need money? Just enable images and don't worry about it.
*I* don't need money. *I* am not the one who may need a lawyer. *YOU* are remarkably sanguine about someone else's potential lawsuit.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
by the way, I think that calling for Joseph's banning is completely different than calling for the banning of others, like Simon, based on unpopularity.
I want Joseph to be banned not because he's unpopular, but because he has repeatedly threatened this board.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
I'm sure they do. If 4chan gets a Joseph, they just laugh at him. I'm not sure how much of a hassle it is to deal with false DCMA claims - they have a chilling effect for a reason - but Joseph's threats aren't credible in the end. The use of images here is non-commercial fair use. It just is.
Simon Belmont wrote: Why do you need money? Just enable images and don't worry about it.
I think the webhost doesn't want to deal with the issue and will shut down the board rather than bother. We'd need a new webhost, I think. That's the pickle Shades is in.
EAllusion wrote:Why do you need money? Just enable images and don't worry about it.
I think the webhost doesn't want to deal with the issue and will shut down the board rather than bother. We'd need a new webhost, I think. That's the pickle Shades is in.[/quote]