I suppose I should also mention to Shades if he remembers the last time someone "promised" to be good after having a board meltdown that threatened poster's security. That person avoided banning and has their behavior changed?
I know the topic of this thread is about images but I think as is clear from the additional commentary others have already added to the discussion the issue of suspensions and banning needs to re-examined.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07
MASH quotes I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it. I avoid church religiously. This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.
I rarely included images in my posts, but I have enjoyed viewing those that others have put in their postings. I loved the original art thread, the dueling postings of Stak and Blixa in their nightly Chat invite threads, and Dr. Cam's vast array of bovine images. I think images in posts are an important part of the culture and richness of MDB, one of the things I am attracted to.
As for the matter of whether to ban Joseph, I do not like the officious meddling by him, but I find as equally anathemic the notion of banning him. To both Joseph and those calling for his banning, I simply say 'live and let live'.
The old, clichéd addage "One picture is worth a thousand words" is still true. Please allow them. The legalities on linking to images is still a little fuzzy to me.
Maybe, if the image included a visual url of it's original post, it would be more acceptable to the "owners". Essentially giving credit.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
How does Joseph figure out which images have a copyright? Isn't it from some metadata included in the image file? If so, can't the board software be programmed to catch copyrighted images and disallow them? I know it's not foolproof, but it should make it harder for narcs.
Shades, as you have expressed concern for the amount of work, perhaps you could find some other solution that would minimize overall work? For example, repeat offenders might be punished in some manner--perhaps by disabling images for them.
Last edited by Analytics on Thu Jun 16, 2011 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
But, I won't notify any poster of anything if they have posted a 'ban Joseph' or 'ignore' or similar thing on here.
My brother is the one who would visit the Mormon Curtain site. He posted on there a number of times. Now he can't even get on it thanks to a permanent ban there because I ANSWERED a request to address a post directed to me.
As for 'radar on the side of the road to catch speeders'. When I was town marshall of a burg, you bet your ass I did. Also nailed others for illegal activities in my area. I helped pick up and document too many dead people to ignore those who would contribute to the problems.
On images, why don't those who want to post get permission to do so from the copyright owner? Is it so damned difficult for many of you to ASK for permission rather than stealing the intellectual property of others? Or do you believe this kind of thing should not apply to your taking cars from others and items from the store?
A good study of Fair Use will go a long way to learning what one can and can't do in using images from other sources.
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."