MAD, Moderators and Mormondiscussions.com

[_Hades]

Joseph,

You are so quick to blame everyone around you of Mormon thinking. I say you are guilty of Nazi-Mormon thinking. Nazi-Mormons go after the smallest of infractions. Coffee flavored ice cream is of the devil. If your kid was caught watching football on Sunday, you would send him to see the bishop.

You Joseph, you are a Nazi-Mormon, when it comes to copyright law.

PS I personally know a Mormon woman who will not allow her children to watch Veggitales because it is evil. That is you.

[_Hades]

I have to commend Shades. Shades has the patience of Job. I've been with Shades in not wanting to ban anyone, but Joseph is making even my patience wear thin. I'm about two posts away from saying, "ban his sorry ass!"

If anyone knows any Danites, I will put up money for the contract. That's meant in a sarcastic tone, in case anyone is taking it too seriously.

[_beastie]

I don't remember ever calling for anyone to be banned. I don't think we should vote to ban people based on their popularity. But Joseph repeatedly threatens the existence of this board.

[_EAllusion]

I don't remember ever calling for anyone to be banned. I don't think we should vote to ban people based on their popularity. But Joseph repeatedly threatens the existence of this board.

I don't think I've seen Joseph make an actual threat to the existence of the board on the board. But he may or may not have made such threats to moderators in private, and if he did, I would advocate banning him on those grounds.

[_Joseph]

Noncommercial use is not invariably fair. A judge may take the profit motive or lack thereof into account. In L.A. Times v. Free Republic, the court found that the noncommercial use of L.A. Times content by the Free Republic Web site was in fact not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.

winghing, you better do a bit more checking with ASMP, APA, NPPA and other professional photographic organizations whose legal departments face this every day.

I am trying to keep shades and the site out of trouble, why are you trying to push them into it? We know why belmont is, he is a rabid moronicpriesthood type, what is your excuse?

[_zeezrom]

Joseph,

This board looks like North Korea now. Thanks man.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Noncommercial use is not invariably fair. A judge may take the profit motive or lack thereof into account. In L.A. Times v. Free Republic, the court found that the noncommercial use of L.A. Times content by the Free Republic Web site was in fact not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.

winghing, you better do a bit more checking with ASMP, APA, NPPA and other professional photographic organizations whose legal departments face this every day.

I am trying to keep shades and the site out of trouble, why are you trying to push them into it? We know why belmont is, he is a rabid moronicpriesthood type, what is your excuse?

Joseph, again this shows your complete and utter lack of understanding of copyright law. In the case you cite (LA Times v. Free Republic) the court was dealing with a major U.S. media corporation (LA Times) trying to prevent a website from cutting and pasting its entire paper on a daily basis.

This is in no way analogous to mormondiscussions.com as mormondiscussions.com is not cutting and pasting an entire commercial newspaper on a daily basis. Further, as the court pointed out, it is "Fair Use" to cut and paste articles (pictures included) as long as it is not the entire paper on a daily basis.

Joseph, please stop. You are embarrassing yourself and showing us all here how ignorant you really are when it comes to copyright law.

Ban Joseph and reinstate IMAGES.

[_Runtu]

I’ve been concerned of late, that this board is becoming more and more restrictive while the MAD Board seems to becoming much more liberal in terms of content. Over at MAD, Kevin Graham is back posting, Droopy has even made several appearances, and it seems that discussions which would have ended in banning or suspension are now being allowed.

They can't be truly free and open as long as I'm still banned. ;-)

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

I’ve been concerned of late, that this board is becoming more and more restrictive while the MAD Board seems to becoming much more liberal in terms of content. Over at MAD, Kevin Graham is back posting, Droopy has even made several appearances, and it seems that discussions which would have ended in banning or suspension are now being allowed.

They can't be truly free and open as long as I'm still banned. ;-)

True. Although, you were pretty rowdy over at MAD as I seem to recall. I remember way back you jumped all over me because I tried to point out that not all of the witnesses to the Greek Psalter incident were consistent. You have mellowed a lot through the years.

[_Dr. Shades]

I have to commend Shades. Shades has the patience of Job.

Thank you, my friend. :-)