PDA

View Full Version : Its against the rules to question the legality of something?



Kilz
February 20th, 2008, 06:02 PM
I have just received a warning because I posted the possibility that what the person was trying to do might violate copyright law?

Post in question
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=4368310#post4368310

Post moved to here.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=702393

The original poster in the thread said the split files were in a torrent.

Exactly how does this even rate a warning?

KiwiNZ
February 20th, 2008, 07:51 PM
I will look at this

question what is the thread that the post is from?

Thanks

frodon
February 20th, 2008, 08:36 PM
The thread Kilz is refering to and from where the post was moved is the following :
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=702200

KiwiNZ
February 21st, 2008, 03:39 AM
I have pondered over this one for a long time.
I can see where the staff are coming from in this one,but I can also see where Kilz is coming from also.

The warning was for taking the thread "Off topic" and your post was half off topic.

If you felt the OP was doing or posting something that is wrong then you should have reported the post and let the staff take care of it.

I am going to reverse the warning in this case in the interest of fairness. This decision in no means relfects on the staff action , they did the right thing as they saw it.

Kilz please note a repeat will not be tolerated and an infraction not warning will be issued next time

Kilz
February 21st, 2008, 01:58 PM
I have pondered over this one for a long time.
I can see where the staff are coming from in this one,but I can also see where Kilz is coming from also.

The warning was for taking the thread "Off topic" and your post was half off topic.

If you felt the OP was doing or posting something that is wrong then you should have reported the post and let the staff take care of it.

I am going to reverse the warning in this case in the interest of fairness. This decision in no means relfects on the staff action , they did the right thing as they saw it.

Kilz please note a repeat will not be tolerated and an infraction not warning will be issued next time


Are you suggesting that all parts of any post need to be 100% on topic? If so how many other warnings/infractions are you handing out or will you hand out?

KiwiNZ
February 21st, 2008, 07:43 PM
Are you suggesting that all parts of any post need to be 100% on topic? If so how many other warnings/infractions are you handing out or will you hand out?

Ummm I reversed the warning.

Was that a mistatke:mad:

Kilz
February 21st, 2008, 08:06 PM
Ummm I reversed the warning.

Was that a mistatke:mad:

I see you dont want to answer questions about why things are done. Why the heavy hand? Perhaps you mods are just to overworked.
You are acting like someone was attacked. This section, as I understand it is to discuss things. Yet when questions are asked, it isnt answers that are given.
Why question reversing the warning? It isnt like you removed it like it never happened. I still have the threat like it was still in effect, my post is still in the jail.

KiwiNZ
February 21st, 2008, 08:15 PM
Are you suggesting that all parts of any post need to be 100% on topic? If so how many other warnings/infractions are you handing out or will you hand out?

That is like saying Only half of the killers body commited the murder.

You were taking the thread off topic and accusing the member off something that you had no evidence of.

Also you could try a more polite way of stating your requests and questions

Kilz
February 21st, 2008, 08:29 PM
That is like saying Only half of the killers body commited the murder.

You were taking the thread off topic and accusing the member off something that you had no evidence of.

Also you could try a more polite way of stating your requests and questions

The question could have been framed better I guess. Perhaps it should have been said like this. Are you sure you have the staff and time to warn and infarct all the half off topic posts that come on the forums? Like I said above , it looks very heavy handed.
I never said or accused in that post that the person was committing copyright infringement, but said that 99.9% of the torrents that contain split rars are. Then questioning why no one waited to find out, even though the question was asked.

KiwiNZ
February 21st, 2008, 08:40 PM
Heavy handed would have been to issue infraction points or to ban.
A warning was issued. That is not heavy handed.

The warning was reversed, what more do you want ? I ask this as I am confused here ,a decision was madein your favor and you seem to reject thatdecision

Kilz
February 21st, 2008, 10:03 PM
Heavy handed would have been to issue infraction points or to ban.
A warning was issued. That is not heavy handed.

The warning was reversed, what more do you want ? I ask this as I am confused here ,a decision was madein your favor and you seem to reject thatdecision

No, I am not rejecting the decision. But questioning this



Kilz please note a repeat will not be tolerated and an infraction not warning will be issued next time

As I read that statement in relation to this.


I have pondered over this one for a long time.
I can see where the staff are coming from in this one,but I can also see where Kilz is coming from also.

The warning was for taking the thread "Off topic" and your post was half off topic.

To me it says the next half off topic post will be an infraction. When did the staff start handing out infractions based in part? Am I singled out in this or are you going to start applying it to all the thousands of posts that come in daily? Because , after all if half was off topic, half was ON topic.

KiwiNZ
February 21st, 2008, 10:46 PM
It is semantics as to if it is half the post or all the post .
If it is off topic ,it is off topic

Kilz
February 22nd, 2008, 11:45 AM
It is semantics as to if it is half the post or all the post .
If it is off topic ,it is off topic

To me that sounds like glass half empty thinking. It is still on topic, and I would defend and appeal that. Because that would be heavy handed, and imho not something that goes along with Ubuntu.

KiwiNZ
February 22nd, 2008, 08:21 PM
We are going in circles with this one.
A decision was made in your favor and I have stated the Forums position.

Can we put the to sleep please.

Kilz
February 22nd, 2008, 11:28 PM
We are going in circles with this one.
A decision was made in your favor and I have stated the Forums position.

Can we put the to sleep please.

Sure thanks for discussing it.