"MERCY FOR TANGO- TAKE II" Topic

OK, I may not know nuthin 'bot nuthin, but it seems to me that this is actually an important discussion.I understand Bill is trying to make a buck for his time and effort in providing this forum. And he is trying to prevent TMP from being overrun by trolls and spammers(as is the case with a great many other boards, see most yahoo groups). And I am really grateful for his effort in that regard.

Perhaps if it were possible, a moderator(Bill or one of the editors) could send an offending poster a warning and automatically delete the offending post. Make it a one-strike rule with a warning the first time and DH the second. Because we all make mistakes now and then.

The other unfortunate result of this and other threads is that I have lost respect for many of the posters, as there seems to be a lot of hostility being vented here. Tango either has a very thick skin or a great sense of humor to tolerate some of the abuse that is thrown at him here and in other threads.

But, in the end as I have said before "Bill's House, Bill's Rules".

Dave

I've never heard any attorney say either of those things – except for the obvious crackpots. Just like I've never heard any tax lawyer say paying federal income tax is optional – once again except for the crackpots.

"Fair Use" is a legal term that applies to a minimal portion of a work used under very specific conditions: for explicit educational purposes, or as part of a review or summary, and attribution is expected and required. It doesn't mean that you can use a large chunk of anything anyway you want. The exception is parody.

Thank you for understanding this… and educational purposes has limits too…. if we were to take it to the extent of the law, my understanding is what you use:
- cannot be the majority of a work
- cannot be incorporated into the syllabus or distributed material of the class
- cannot be used repeatedly from one semester to the next

The simple fact that something is on the Internet does NOT make it "public domain."

For what it is worth, I was being sarcastic above.

No, I am not the "victim.
In fact, there isn't any "victim" here at all.

Tell me. What makes more sense?
A. Bill and/or his editors have it in for Tango01, the most prolific poster here. If his ad revenue depends on page hits, that's shooting himself in the foot.
B. Tango01 got careless, posting his usual massive paragraphs, without permission, without a link, without attribution.

I read some enlightening stuff just lately, and "without Permission" is the biggest offense. If the owner of the site doesn't want the fruits of his labor scattered all over the Net, that is his prerogative and right to withhold permission, Otto's legal experts notwithstanding.

Do I LIKE defending Bill? Hell no!
I just get annoyed at all of these "Free Attila the Hun" threads when they are DHed for repeat offenses.

I guess I deserved that shot from Otto. I basically said that all he does is hang around the Boobies Board and give us the benefit of his expertise on female anatomy.
So, I'm good with his shot at me.

BY THE WAY, EVERYONE …

This is the article that Tango01 supposedly "plagiarized" from, by not providing sufficient quotations or mentioning the source links enough time to someone's liking:

link

So … knock yourselves out talking about copyrights and other speculative topics to your heart's desire. Or you could always "go get yourselves a room" and discuss it over there. But, once again this has been another fantastic example of how some people really wishing there to be cause for punishment when it hardly calls for it.

It speaks more about the trigger happy haters here than it does about Tango. And THAT is really the subject here.

Dan
PS. John, seeing as how my last post has now gotten deleted, I don't think it's really worth my time to discuss the content of those posts. Who knows, I might end up not getting all the quotes exactly right and get myself DHd for it. Lol.

Oh, what the heck.
FREE OTTO!

Like I just said, I have no problem.

And I'm not a "hater".
Tango01 and I are fellow Game of Thrones nerds. I like him. I just wish he would be more careful.

Oh, wonderful! So now Otto got DHd for calling John jealous but somehow Nevinsdrip calling a fellow member "the blizzard of crap" is still perfectly ok with the handful of influential apologists and haters and their supporter(s) on the inside?

So, boys and girls, what's the grand lesson to be learned from the DH this time?

Dan

It may be illegal as all get out but it's impossible to prosecute it.

Almost correct. My understanding is that it is impossible in most cases to prosecute for plagiarism because in most instances it is not a crime. Only crimes are prosecuted. Notice that I say "in most" because some state statutes define some instances of plagiarism as a crime, in which case it is most often described as a misdemeanor. In some cases where the plagiariser has reaped a certain amount of profit, it can be treated as a felony.

Plagiarism is illegal, but the usual and much more common remedy is relief in civil court in the form of a lawsuit… which is not prosecution.

I miss nycjadie. He hasn't been around in a while
He IS a copyright attorney and could set us all straight on this.
Steve???
In fact, I believe John Holly is one too, but he doesn't hang around either.

As usual, the biggest pontificating on the subject is done by "It seems to me that…" types. Including me, but I did pay attention when Steve or John wrote.

Yes … FREE OTTO !!!!!!

BY THE WAY, EVERYONE …

This is the article that Tango01 supposedly "plagiarized" from, by not providing sufficient quotations or mentioning the source links enough time to someone's liking:

And if Tango01 had done what you have done – posted a LINK and a few words of introduction of his own then he wouldn't be in the DH.

^ This.

Only two points,Dan:

--The "blizzard" remark was clearly directed toward Tango's posts,not Tango himself.

--And I really, really doubt anyone here will ever be DH'd for not answering somebody's questions.

MajorB: "And if Tango01 had done what you have done – posted a LINK and a few words of introduction of his own then he wouldn't be in the DH."

Well, he is very adamant that he did. Plus the other people (at least 2) who actually saw and even posted on that thread say that he did do those things.

And Tango says he has yet to hear back from the Editor on this. Hmmmmm.

Yet the torches and pitchforks continue their march, right?

Dan
PS. In the real world (which I'm not claiming this is) that is usually more than enough to dismiss a case, specially when the prosecution hasn't presented any evidence.

YouTube link

Manley,

Just so you know, Winston doesn't like to look at links without a word or two about the content first. :)

Dan

Whatever your surname is

"Let it go"

DM

Hafen

I'm not understanding this completely:

"--The 'blizzard' remark was clearly directed toward Tango's posts,not Tango himself."

So Otto gets sent to the DH for implying that Winston/OFM/whatever doesn't contribute much, but Nevidrip is fine even after he says that Tango produces a "blizzard of crap"? I'm not necessarily calling for Nevidrip to be DHd, but I am calling for things to be applied equally or not at all.

"--And I really, really doubt anyone here will ever be DH'd for not answering somebody's questions."

The point I was trying to make is the opposite … getting DHd for trying to be helpful or trying to contribute, and that leading to people being less inclined to help with questions you might have.

Dan
PS. Every time these issues come up, someone who wasn't affect will say "let it go". A couple of weeks or months later, because no solution was found or implemented, it happens again, but this time one of those in the "let it go" group is affected. Would you be temped to tell them "let it go"? :)

Dan--the first one's pretty easy,I think--one would be a personal attack, one wouldn't (although kind of iffy--up to Da Judge,I guess).

On the second one--now you've got me even more confused than I was.

Oh,yes--If you're looking for yet another thing to be worried about, I believe there's a rule about making fun of a member's username;IIRC, someone got taken to task some time ago for writing "Lesion 4"--although I'm pretty sure that was a typo.

Feel free with mine,though--it was designed for it.

DM--Good idea!

Since we're OT--and I'm not sure what exactly the T is,anymore--I'll say the version that brings me to tears is this one. Remember little Connie Talbot, from Britain's Got Talent?

Here she is,a few "eye-blinks" later,with her version:

youtu.be/M22mFvZVJbQ

*Sob*

Personally I'd try not to get that worked up about what happens on a wargaming website and thus the need to "let it go" wouldn't arise. I sometimes wonder whether people get far too wrapped around the axle over the strangest things on a site thats meant to be supporting a hobby activity. I'm sure there are things that are actually important in life where ones angst, ire and energy could be applied

PS that said, it does provide a certain degree of comedy value so if you (and I'm not aiming this at anyone specific) then please feel free to carry on :)

Hafen

Okay. Now I'm confused. Is it about my reply to David Manley?

There are plenty of Davids here and I was trying to be specific. Is there a new rule that I can't use half of the username? Do I have to start my comment with the full "David Manley" username?

Wait, and if such a rule exists and we are all supposed to be looking for ways to enforce it, should I then feel offended by his "Whatever your surname is" bit? Or would that be wrong of me because the enforcement of the rule varies from person to person?

You know, whatever. This reply on the username etiquette thing is starting to spiral down to the pointless.

Dan

Ah. No--I was referring to "Nevidrip".

Maybe another typo?

I think my spellchecker only helps out with "real" names, and even then only the most common ones.

Dan

Oh gawd,let's not get started on Auto-Dolt:

TMP link

Heh. My Auto-Dolt now knows to always insert "Auto-Dolt"!

You gotta show 'em who's boss.

Ummm…
You gentlemen do realize that making fun of a user name is also a DH offense?

That's why I mentioned it.

But,as said, if anyone gets DH'd for doing it to me, I'll gladly PM Bill to let them out. Probably.

That's another new 'thing' here,too.

So is talking about the "rule" also a DH offense?

Just asking, you know. We do seem to live in very "fluid" times.

Dan

Just out of curiosity I looked at the TMP rules, and the only restriction stated on copy/pasting from elsewhere is that you quote no more than 3 paragraphs. There doesn't seem to be a requirement for a Link or attribution to be mentioned.

I have no idea what happens if the original is in 4 paragraphs and you edit it down to 3 though!

TimboW: "I have no idea what happens if the original is in 4 paragraphs and you edit it down to 3 though!"

Who knows? Perhaps in that case, depending on who you might be and who is looking for a chance to hit the complain button on you, you might find yourself DHd for altering the original text. :)

Dan

Now Otto… Geez! This is going from bad to worst. Someone here has a serious problem of thin skin. And the editors policy on DHing people is, well, how to put it? Incongruous? Incoherent? Unjust? Unfair? Maybe all of them at the same time.

Basileus66,

And of course, for several hours no one could build up the nerve to post here for fear of the same thing:

TMP link

Dan

Well, he is very adamant that he did. Plus the other people (at least 2) who actually saw and even posted on that thread say that he did do those things.

Except that he didn't. I too saw that thread and posted, asking Tango for a link. Had there been a link I obviously wouldn't have bothered asking for one. Maybe he added a link later, I didn't bother going back to check.

I tuned in to this discussion a little late, so I'll try not to stoke it again. Copyright laws are to the written or recorded word that patents are to inventions. They protect the originator from having his invention or intellectual property used by someone else without permission. Parzival provides a much more thorough discussion in his post.

Winston and I have a history of lively opinion differences, but on this topic I think he's right on target. He is explaining the rules. And what he has posted is pretty much how I have understood them for forever.

Further, this isn't the first time that Tango has been DH'd, and I would bet he knows the rules as well as anyone here. I'm guessing that he had a brain fart, didn't realize that he was speeding and tripped Bill's traffic camera. Websites can be publicly shamed and even shutdown for posting information without permission.

Look, it's Bill's site. He has established a set of rules and guidelines for all who visit here to follow. If we don't, we suffer the consequences that he determines to be appropriate.

And as Winston, suggested, it's not as though Tango is doing hard time, or even been banned. He's just been gagged for a few days.

Mandt2: "And as Winston, suggested, it's not as though Tango is doing hard time, or even been banned. He's just been gagged for a few days."

Which begs the question … if putting fellow TMP members in limbo isn't anything to worry about, and not worth trying to overturn, then why this act now?

TMP link

Is it just to give the old frothy brothers walking among us some more free entertainment?

TMP link

Dan

Guys

Seems Otto is fine and doesn't want any help. He is ok serving the rest of his sentence alongside Tango.

Dan

You know, it just occurred to me that nobody gets a warning if they are DHed for "politics", profanity, etc.
Why should "plagiarism" be any different?

Mercy please