It’s probably very expensive and time-consuming for them to get legal advice on every suspect thread, hence the blanket ban on certain topics.
I would prefer to see a thread left open, then deleted from existence if/when it began to discuss illegal stuff. It strikes me that an open, community bulletin board is analogous to a talkback radio show, where the DJ doesn’t have control over what people say. In the UK the defamation law, in its last major overhaul, was amended to give a limited defence to such situations.
However I would guess board admins would be seen as “publishers” even though it’s an automated process. As there is possibly no clear legislation on this in the US - where the board is based - as well as internationally, where the board is accessible - this is why the mods here err on the side of caution, I guess.
But that’s the thing, Prima… while a lot of people (in fact, I’ll say the majority) use file-sharing to violate copyright, there are legitimate uses for it, as well. For instance, I have used file sharing to get game patches, mods, levels, movie clips (like Thumbwars, back when that was still a free download), and game music remixes (which, to the best of my knowledge, are generally legal).
To throw a blanket generalization over a certain topic of discussion because it might lead to discussion of illegal activities (or, worse yet, how to pull off those illegal activities) is folly, in my opinion. Wouldn’t it be best to give the Dopers the benefit of the doubt before pulling the plug? We’ve all seen Manny’s dislike about discussing how to score illegal drugs, for instance, and people have generally respected that decision.
It may be your first post on the subject, but it certainly isn’t the first. But you knew that already, because that’s why you were waiting for the comment. Grow up.
Emmy, you’re missing his point. Just because the owners of the SDMB make the rules - which I, and I’m sure Gary, follow - that doesn’t mean that we can’t express our thoughts on those rules. Whether or not Tuba, Lynn, or Ed want to take our thoughts into consideration is up to them… if they disagree with us, that’s just peachy keen… their decisions are final. But they’ve never asked that we have to agree with everything they do.
I was waiting for the comment, because I knew as soon as I posted something that argued against a board policy someone would pipe in with “if you don’t like it, just leave”.
Tell me, why should that be? You honestly think that this board would be a better place if everyone who didn’t agree fully with all of its policies just left?
If you do, may I suggest that it’s you who needs to grow up.
[sub]and in preview I see Spoofe has answered this better than I. Buggar[/sub]
With all due respect, no that was not his point ( no matter what he claimed after you posted this).
He did it because he knew someone would post the “if you don’t like it, truck it.” He said so himself in the very post after yours, even if he doesn’t admit it. People can read between the lines. If that is not a troll, it is very close to it.
Actually emmy, it would be a troll only if Gary made his post purely intended to garner that response. That is not the case - he wished to make a point and was merely anticipating one likely reply.
On the other hand, I could talk about certain other posters that enter a rather reasonable debate merely to sling mud and make accusations. We have a name for them too. But I shall rise above.
Because I’m rather hoping that maybe a mod can explain why it’s not nice to call someone a troll just because they post something you disagree with.
This is becoming tedious. If you have any further personal issues you wish to accuse me of, please email me (my email, unlike yours, is not hidden) Alternatively, if you really think that I’m trolling or commiting some other general breach of rule no 1 (no jerks) then contact a mod.
Failing either of the above, if you really would like a full and frank exchange of views, please do feel free to start a pit thread for the conversation, where I’ll happily join you.
I’m not going to start another thread on this subject. If you can’t deal with it in this thread, tough.
You posted a comment that you knew would attract flies, and you said so. You then try to backpedal at Mach 5 saying you didn’t really mean it.
I really don’t see any further need for discussion. I have wasted more time stating my take on this than I feel it is worth. Other people have stated the same feelings against others in the past, and you feel you have to get in your “me too.” Well, I just did that too, so I am done.
You seem to think I can’t “deal” with your rather asinine observations - this is not true. Dealing with you is rather akin to dealing with mildew - a task of little consequence or challenge, but great tedium.
My bigger concern is the boredom of others, which is why I asked you to email me or start another thread.
You’ve made a string of unfounded accusations, yet refused to comply with the forums guidelines for what you should do if you honestly believed them.
In short, you’re yet another example of a whining little loser. Kindly fuck off.
Sincerely
Gary
[sub]and why do I just no this will be another example of someone who fires a parting shot, adds “I’m done”, but inevitably breaks their own word and comes back?[/sub]
Well obviously our 66-post one-month wonder knows a troll when he sees one, especially when it comes in the guise of a much-loved poster that’s been around for a year and a half, debating on more issues than emmy has brain cells.
We should appoint emmy to be troll-hunter extraordinaire! Please, read between some more lines emmy. Show us how erudite you are, how perceptive, how perspecacious.
Oh, stop. I wasn’t the first one to say it. I was just the first one to waste my time to follow-up on it.
But at least you weren’t chicken enough to call a spade a spade, so I respect you for that.
Gary, allow me to clarify my position, just so there’s no misunderstanding. I’m down on folks who want to talk shit about the way the board is run but seem to have nowhere else to go. My first reading of the post in which you used the “j-word” led me to believe you fit into this category, especially with all your “if you’re going to enforce the rule this way, then you ought to enforce it that way, too” talk. That’s the way little kids argue against rules they don’t like. “Why do I have to go to bed at 9:00 if Claude and Newgene get to stay up until 10:00?!?!?” Hence my reply.
However, in what seems to be a growing inability among Dopers to understand the implications of an “if … then” statement, you misunderstood my proposed remedy as my suggesting that you should leave because you disagree.
If you will re-read my post, I said that if you can’t live within the rules, you should leave. You seem more than capapble of living within the rules, even if you have some grumblings about them. I’m all for that, and I think you have every right to grumble about what you want to grumble about.
However, my take on your argument that rules enforced one way require the mods to enforce other rules the same way stands, because they make the rules. If you want to argue about the internal consistency with which this rule is enforced, do so. But you can’t rightly compare apples and oranges, unless the rule makers say you can. Grumble all you want about it, it’s still their rules.
