Discussion on the new INGO Rules (race/religion and copyright)

[eldirector]

FYI: Looks like the Prayer Chain stays:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/break_room/57922-ingo_prayer_chain-31.html#post1216514

 

[shooter521]

Guess I need to stop directing vets to look here for info. Like PTGB stated, sometimes links go to pages and pages of "blah blah blah"

So if you have new information to put up, as Fenway's original post suggests, you can provide a summary in your own words (or just let the members know what section of the document to look in) along with a link to the document itself.

As far as going back and editing old posts/threads, it's really not necessary for members to do so. Site staff doesn't plan to do it, either, although existing threads that would now be prohibited may be closed if they are revived with new discussion.

And both of those things are leaving aside that government documents are most likely in the public domain, as a previous poster suggested (of course, I'm no lawyer).

My

 

[Jay]

As I cannot say for sure that quotes I've made regarding VA benefits, or assistance may or may not be in the public domain, I've edited out those quotes that I could edit. Where my posts have been quoted, I could not edit.

Regards

 

[MadBomber]

Dude, I have a job, wife, kid and can't be debating things 1am. I need some beauty rest before I go work.

Before we hash out every little detail of this thing please see the forest here.

This is a Gun Board

1. Stop the religious and racial talk that always degenerates into a crap storm

2. Do not copy and paste entire articles that aren't yours. Post a link to the article and feel free to use your own words to summarize.

I've got no problem with the new rules. I highly value my INGO membership and the friends I've made on this site and the knowledge I've gained from it. If Fenway deems it prudent to take action to help protect INGO and to ensure that it remains open, then by all means, he should take those actions with our full support.
I would hope that now that we've passed the 10K member mark we can continue to grow and make INGO as positive an experience as possible for the membership. Fenway and the Mods have a near-impossible task in trying to keep this circus moving forward and in order to accomplish that task, if a few feathers have to be ruffled and a few egos bruised, then so be it.
Thanks Mike for the site and the leadership decisions that, while not always popular, are totally necessary for INGO's growth and viability.

Oh yeah....IBTL!

 

[DocGlock86]

See this link for more information. Opposing Views: "Armed Citizen" Closes, Site Named in Infringement Suit
[/URL]

This is scary! I run a site that 90% of the information is cross posting. We pull videos, quote articles, post pictures from other sites all the time.

 

[JetGirl]

 

[Scutter01]

This is scary! I run a site that 90% of the information is cross posting. We pull videos, quote articles, post pictures from other sites all the time.

Fair Use should be the rule (don't quote the full article, include attribution and links), but if the 80+ lawsuits currently pending against sites like Armed Citizen succeed, it will open the floodgates and many more law firms will see a cash cow and dollar signs. Hopefully those lawsuits will fail and we'll be able to go back to Fair Use. In the meantime, the costs involved in defending against a lawsuit would destroy INGO, whether the site won or lost.

 

[45calibre]

i didnt know that is the reason for the new rules.

we should have been told in the original post on why.

 

[MarkM]

After a good nights sleep and re-reading the new rules. I think they are a good idea. +1 for INGO

 

[45calibre]

edit

 

[Eddie]

From the link that Keith posted above it looks like the tactic is to sue and then look for a quick settlement of cost of defense or less. It said he was making $1,500 to $3,500 per settlement. That could add up quick if there are hundreds of infringements.

 

[JetGirl]

by the way is my sig ok?

Got a link?

 

[SavageEagle]

The article quoting thing, I kinda understand. It's still leaving me wonder what I can quote and what I can't. But that's not my concern.

My concern is the religious aspect of these rules. Roll your eyes all you want, but the rule is already being contradicted. We can't make religious posts, but the prayer chain thread is still open. I would like to respectfully request that the religious ban be dropped or 100% enforced. Preferably dropped, but if you're going to institute a rule, enforce it uniformly.

 

[spasmo]

SavageEagle. Let it go. The prayer chain as I have said is not specific to any religion nor does it promote any religion. It will remain. End of discussion on the prayer chain thread.

 

[45calibre]

Got a link?

it was a serious question but i think im good.

its not from a news articles, stuff from blogs or content from sites around the web

 

[groovatron]

I'm fine with the new rules. I never copy and paste articles. My views are not religious in the least.

I still think that these rules are super vague and need some explanation.

 

[Que]

Read it. Got it. I'm good

 

[varasha]

He said you are being incredibly difficult and you can feel free to leave INGO at any time.

+2 i been waiting for JBusch to leave for a long time..
tired of having to scroll past his messages cause he is on ignore...

 

[groovatron]

SavageEagle. Let it go. The prayer chain as I have said is not specific to any religion nor does it promote any religion. It will remain. End of discussion on the prayer chain thread.

This is where I am confused. So I can talk about God and religion, just not any specific God or religion?

This question is asked in all seriousness. I am not trying to stir the pot.

 

[JetGirl]

This is where I am confused. So I can talk about God and religion, just not any specific God or religion?

This question is asked in all seriousness. I am not trying to stir the pot.

I guess if you ask for generic prayers, that's fine.... but if you ask for prayers specifying "Buddha" instead of "Jesus" or vice verse, that's a bannin'.