astro, I have nothing against you personally, but I would appreciate it if you would stop copying every interesting link you see on Fark directly to the SDMB. I would have thought it was merely a coincidence, that you had somehow came up with those links directly from other sources, if the last 10 out of 25 of your threads hadn’t been directly copied.
I don’t think this has anything to do with copyright issues, because you didn’t copy any of the content of the Fark site, just the links. However, it does show an extreme lack of originality on your part. Here are the last 10 links:
I know you like starting threads and all that, and you have started some original ones that I might have participated in, but I would like it if you would at least attribute WHERE you found the link when you start a new thread.
Since not everybody here also reads FARK, and clearly those threads had replies which showed that people here are interested in the subjects, what’s the problem?
I read both, and if I want to have a discussion about a link, I’d sure as shit rather discuss here than in the FARK forums.
The problem is, as I stated in my OP, the lack of creativity and the lack of attribution. I’ve never posted to FARK, even though I’ve got an account, and if I were to talk about one of the links I would certainly rather post here, like you. However, when two-fifths of a poster’s new threads are entirely only a link found on FARK, it makes me raise an eyebrow, thus: :dubious:
We don’t have to attribute where we get interesting links. I think this is a matter of degree. If a poster goes to a website that has a links page, and he or she takes a good portion of those links and start threads with them, does that seem excessive to you? Do you think that the poster should maybe say, “Oh yeah, and I got these links from such-and-such, because they did all the work in finding them, and not me”?
I don’t think it’s creative at all to post a link. I especially don’t think it’s creative to post a link in your OP and have that link be the entirety of your OP, as astro did in ALL of the above links. astro has posted two-fifths of his or her last 25 OPs as links, and ONLY links, no attribution or original content.
First, I agree that it’s not a rule…but if you’re not cruising the Intarweb yourself, it’s a bit deceptive and, yeah, rude (IMNPFHO).
Second, because a friend doesn’t email you a hundred new links a day, culled from the thousands that have been submitted by the thousands of people on your friend’s email list.
I have what I call my “Weblargh,” a LiveJournal where I post links I’ve found funny or interesting. In the user info, I state flat-out that a lot of the links come from Fark, Metafilter, and Snarky Malarkey. If someone SENDS me a link, I usually try to remember and credit them.
It feels more “proper” to me. Credit where it’s due, and all.
I’ve found that the Fark discussions are, on the whole, just as intelligent as the ones here*…and they aren’t always the same old names going around the same tired arguments I’ve seen here.
*when it comes to actual discussions. If you’re talking about the “boobies” links, etc…well, obviously NOT.
I have no problem with sharing links – he obviously, and correctly – thinks that SDMB would be interested in these things. However, (1) it would be polite to say where tey came from, to avoid confusion, and so people would know they might want to visit fark and (2) on SDMB it’s normal to have some content in a post, not just a link. Not that this is a rule or anything, but if it became common to just link, that would be annoying. So moderation is good.
No, I don’t care where the link comes from, and I fail to see why anybody does. It’s not like it’s plagiarizing somebody’s work. It’s just a URL.
I agree it’s not creative, but why does that matter? The purpose of posting a link is simply to let other people be amused by something that you found amusing or interesting. It’s not writing a poem or anything; nobody is claiming it’s creative, nor that every post on the board needs to be creative.
I happen to read FARK, so astro’s links aren’t usually news to me, but I’d hate it if people stopping posting links from other sources because they get accused of uncreativity. They’re providing interesting things to me, and should be rewarded, not pitted.
OK, the fact that showing where the link comes from so others can visit the source is a pretty good point, and I agree it would be good to attribute the URL for that reason.
But, what confusion can arise from not attributing the link?
So if you post a link without attribution, many times, when someone else has done all the work in finding it, submitting it to FARK, FARK mods review it and greenlight it, and it makes it to the front page, where advertisers pay FARK for putting up ads because of that work that goes into finding links, do you not think that’s skirting the skirts of plagiarism? When you have posted similar links many times with attribution?
The last few days I have seen astro posting so many links to MPSIMS directly from FARK that I felt like I was reading FARK. Okay, that might be hyperbole, but I think my annoyance with this overabundance of FARK linkage is warranted. I seriously don’t think astro should be rewarded for “profiting” from someone else’s work.
I don’t care is someone posts links from other sites. I care if they do it over and over again, without attribution, with no original content. Like Shade said, if everyone did it, it would be annoying. Moderation is good.
That’s bizarre, to think that a collection of links can be plagarism.
Is it a bit odd to copy so many and then trot over here and post them here? Well, yeah, a little odd, especially so many. And, sure, perhaps it would be better if he said, "I saw this on FARK and . . . " But other than that, I mean, get a grip. They’re links. It’s kind of like making a list of your favorite books or something, and then bitching because someone else liked your list of favorite books and used it themselves. Come on. It’s a freakin’ list of other people’s stuff—that’s all it is.
