Greebo said:
You are not in a position to make this assumption.
Ok. I suppose not being in on the private discussions that cause the rulings would mean that there could have been some ground breaking discussion about copyright law that lawyers and judges that have dealt with similar issues in the past were not aware of, and my assumption is unfounded as such. I hold that it is not likely, but possible.
While we try to overlook comments directed at us, this is twice now in this thread where you have been downright insulting towards the MC. I remind you that the Rules of Conduct continue to apply even in this thread.
I have not once attacked anyone in the MC individually, or the MC as a whole, but instead the decisions made by the MC. Like I said, aside from a few decisions (removal of the reputation system that was proven as being something the majority of members preferred keeping, the decision to disallow revealing of contents of email and pms, the protection of the unnamed terrorist) I understand completely where the MC comes from, even when I disagree. I moderate a few forums myself, one of which constantly deals with unpopular decisions, and it is a tough, thankless job, I know that and respect that. I would never call you or any other moderator retarded, and my use of the term itself was poor, but I couldn't think of a better term at the time, for that I apologize.
You are not privy to our discussions and deliberations. You do not know what is behind our decisions, or what our internal positions are. It is the height of foolishness to insult something as stupid when you do not understand what is behind it.
I suppose. But you could also say that a debate about the legality of something which has clear examples of the outcomes of very similar cases on record follows the same suit.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. There is no "original post" that caused the problem. We deal with 3 or 4 copyright issues a day, most of them media related. Before you posted copyrighted material, the copyright enforcement discussion had been going on for weeks. You are not special. The only thing different about you is you posted pictures of clearly copyrighted material without permission from the material's owners and we received a request by the owners to delete that material, which we did.
I am not special. I never said I was special, but the point is that the post that started this whole debate was the post about the unnamed terrorist and his decision to open shop at a specific location. A picture was included that came from his site. After this, the lockdown began. Soon after I pointed out that you were actually violating copyright law with news articles, that was banned as well. I am not special, but I can see where my words may have caused outcomes that certainly weren't their goal.
I'm going to drop this. It is clear that we disagree on the very basis of this entire debate, and I suspect that it will continue this way. I don't mean to cause undue stress or annoyance to the membership of this forum, that would make me a terrorist in a way myself.