The new Terms of Use & Posting Guidelines have been out for weeks now, but I haven't gotten around to actually talking about them. Since they're important to know about, I reckon everyone should've read them by now.
1-5 make a lot of sense, and are what I would expect to see on any web forum. No warez, no illegal stuff. OK. The legal bits at the very end are also important for preventing lawsuits and etc. That's all Good.
And at #6 are the posting guidelines, which determines what we-all do on these boards.
And what does that even mean. "Public or private"? No "links to such content"? Public is public. When you post something online, it's there. Especially on Facebook and Twitter. Here's is John Cleese's Twitter. And the twitter of some guy who's not famous. Is one or both of those not OK?
And is that even bad? A while ago on Conan O'Brien's facebook fan page, someone posted Conan's brother's Twitter. Luke is not a celebrity. Did anything bad happen? No, lots of people started following him because he's funny, and he replies to fans occasionally. We also found and followed Rob Ashe, a video editor on Conan's show. None of this is out of the ordinary.
On the usenet, you post with your email. Here's a 1998 post with someone trying and failing to get the Overseer DVD to run (I'm wondering, did it ever work?). But now those email addresses are shown. But that's just how Usenet works. So we can't post old Tex usenet stuff?
I don't want to be a troublemaker, but I'm not looking forward to the idea of getting banned for doing something which would be normal on any other website.
This is the way the internet works now.
Anyways... what else can we say about the TOU and posting guidelines?
1-5 make a lot of sense, and are what I would expect to see on any web forum. No warez, no illegal stuff. OK. The legal bits at the very end are also important for preventing lawsuits and etc. That's all Good.
And at #6 are the posting guidelines, which determines what we-all do on these boards.
6.1-5, okey doke. That makes sense to me. But 6.6... I have a feeling that rule 6.6 was made for me specifically, or perhaps I'm having delusions of grandeur. If that's so, I've never intended to harm or bother anyone by posting anything.James LeMosy wrote: 6. POSTING GUIDELINES
As pertains to the Website, a "Post" refers to any content added to the Website in any format, including use of the Website's private messaging system. The Posting Guidelines are rules meant to provide everyone with a level playing field and reasonable expectations for open and frank engagement. Confirmed violations of the Posting Guidelines will result in Warnings. An accumulation of three (3) Warnings will result in account deactivation ("Banning"), which may be temporary or permanent, depending on the level of offense and taking into account the specific circumstances surrounding the Ban. The one exception for this is spamming, which will result in an immediate Ban. Any activity considered to be a violation of the Posting Guidelines, and the administration of any Warnings and/or Bans, are at the full discretion of the Webmaster.
The Posting Guidelines are as follows:
1. Posts will not violate the Website's Terms of Use
2. Posts will not include "NSFW (Not Safe For Work)" content, including (but not limited to) the following:
3. Posts will not contain ad hominem or personal attacks against other users, including (but not limited to) the following:
- Nudity, partial nudity, or adult content
- Graphic image content
- Graphic text content
- Illegal content of any kind
4. Posts will not contain content generally accepted as intentionally inflammatory (i.e. "trolling")
- Hate speech
- Verbal abuse or harassment
- Sexual abuse or harassment
- Suggestion or implication of illegal acts
5. Posts will not include excessive use of words or terms generally accepted as offensive and/or profane
6. Posts will not contain public or private contact information not belonging to the user, or links to such content, no matter how easily obtained
And what does that even mean. "Public or private"? No "links to such content"? Public is public. When you post something online, it's there. Especially on Facebook and Twitter. Here's is John Cleese's Twitter. And the twitter of some guy who's not famous. Is one or both of those not OK?
And is that even bad? A while ago on Conan O'Brien's facebook fan page, someone posted Conan's brother's Twitter. Luke is not a celebrity. Did anything bad happen? No, lots of people started following him because he's funny, and he replies to fans occasionally. We also found and followed Rob Ashe, a video editor on Conan's show. None of this is out of the ordinary.
On the usenet, you post with your email. Here's a 1998 post with someone trying and failing to get the Overseer DVD to run (I'm wondering, did it ever work?). But now those email addresses are shown. But that's just how Usenet works. So we can't post old Tex usenet stuff?
I don't want to be a troublemaker, but I'm not looking forward to the idea of getting banned for doing something which would be normal on any other website.
This is the way the internet works now.Anyways... what else can we say about the TOU and posting guidelines?
I suspect that these have been largely taken from another site that has had to do the same rather than James shelling out hundreds if not thousands for an attorney to draft them up.
6.6 deals with copyright infringement, and its no doubt to cover UTM in the event that anyone decides to sue UTM for having their picture on the site.
In reality most people who want to raise an issue about their product/picture being on a site ask the webmaster first (sometimes politely) and its removed.
I wouldn't take 6.6 as personally aimed at you, it just seems to be there to avoid James getting into trouble for your misdemeanours!
6.6 deals with copyright infringement, and its no doubt to cover UTM in the event that anyone decides to sue UTM for having their picture on the site.
In reality most people who want to raise an issue about their product/picture being on a site ask the webmaster first (sometimes politely) and its removed.
I wouldn't take 6.6 as personally aimed at you, it just seems to be there to avoid James getting into trouble for your misdemeanours!
David
6.6 looks like it's aimed squarely at preventing publisher liability per the DMCA provisions. I imagine that DL is right and James took it from another site. This provision is just trying to fall within the scope of the DMCA to avoid liability on James's part for any copyright infringement by posters. James will probably also have to adhere to any take-down notices received under the provisions of the DMCA.
However, I don't think there are a lot of rights holders clamoring for posts to be removed from UOTM right now.
However, I don't think there are a lot of rights holders clamoring for posts to be removed from UOTM right now.
The way I see this is that there are to be no postings of people's Phone Numbers or home addresses and such... Even if you can just go right to the Yellow Pages and find it, it is not to be posted on the boards... And for good reason I think...6. Posts will not contain public or private contact information not belonging to the user, or links to such content, no matter how easily obtained
As for feeling that this is directed solely at you Jane, I fail to see that... You posted something about Mr. Jones when you first joined the forum, but I seriously doubt that James dug all the way back to that post to put this piece in the Guidelines specifically for you... James is not the type of person to single people out when dealing with something like this... If that were the case James would have just given a lecture to the people who he felt caused the need for the Guidelines in the first place instead of posting the Guidelines...
No offense intended, but I think you are just being paranoid here... I don't really see any reason for the Guidelines to be discussed... They are what they are and there are people in place to make sure they are policed... Everyone has read them, and if they haven't well then they get what they deserve if they violate them...
If you go to just about any Forum on the web you'll find extremely similar if not identical Rules and Guidelines in place...
Sadly I feel partially responsible for James's feeling the need that they needed to be posted at all... This community has run for such a long time without the need to force regulations upon its members... And for that I Apologize to Everyone for my actions involved in leading to all of this...
The Paved Straight Road, Won't Always Get You Farther Than The Winding Dirt Road...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...
It was, IIRC, the address to TruGolf. But by now, most of us know where it is. It's on their website. I Pmed some other info to people that I felt nervous about. I think, I'm neither evil nor stupid enough to post sensitive info about others online.You posted something about Mr. Jones when you first joined the forum, but I seriously doubt that James dug all the way back to that post to put this piece in the Guidelines specifically for you...
Well, I'm glad you think so.No offense intended, but I think you are just being paranoid here...
Paranoia, I can live with.It's news. They are new. They were just posted this month. I and we as a group may discuss anything we want to. And I'm just speculating as to how they are to be interpreted. Also, there's the issue of preparing for a new wave of Tex fans (I hope!).I don't really see any reason for the Guidelines to be discussed... They are what they are and there are people in place to make sure they are policed... Everyone has read them, and if they haven't well then they get what they deserve if they violate them...
It's not necessarily what is deserved if the meaning is unclear.Everyone has read them, and if they haven't well then they get what they deserve if they violate them...
This is bound to happen as a user community grows. Pretty much the reason why it's been so conflict free around here is that it's been the same people for over a decade, with a few additions here and there. It makes it difficult for the vets to be flexible and for the newbies to fall into line.Sadly I feel partially responsible for James's feeling the need that they needed to be posted at all... This community has run for such a long time without the need to force regulations upon its members... And for that I Apologize to Everyone for my actions involved in leading to all of this...
Speaking of that, did my voice just get banned or is he just taking a break now that all the Kickstarter excitement is over? I haven't seen him in a while. He probably deserved a ban, but I do miss that jerk. He was fun. Ah, well.
