Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
penguins wrote:My thread on the head of the FAA helping to suppress whistleblowers when he worked at Delta no longer appears to be up. Why was it removed?
atcsundevil wrote:Rule 2b. Use of Paywalled Content
1. It is always preferred that users post sources that are not behind paywalls. Since this is not always possible, users posting content from paywalled sources must provide detailed summaries of the article contents. Users should be able to get a proper understanding of the article without being forced to pay for the content to participate.
2. Posts or threads linked to a paywalled source lacking an adequate or accurate summary are subject to deletion.
3. Users attempting to utilize paywalled content to create a misleading or flamebait topic may be warned or banned.
Our recommendation is to link to free sources wherever possible. If that's not possible, then please just be sure to include a complete set of facts for users to discuss.
This is not an attempt to prevent the discussion from occurring. It is an important story that should be discussed, it's just important that all the facts be available for users to draw their own conclusions.
✈️ atcsundevil
dtw2hyd wrote:Interesting rule, posting verbatim is copyright violation and writing own summary could be construed as fudging facts.
atcsundevil wrote:dtw2hyd wrote:Interesting rule, posting verbatim is copyright violation and writing own summary could be construed as fudging facts.
It's only fudging the facts if you fudge the facts. Any reasonably intelligent person can read a sentence and formulate it into their own words coveying the same information.
Just use an open source and none of this will matter.
dtw2hyd wrote:atcsundevil wrote:dtw2hyd wrote:Interesting rule, posting verbatim is copyright violation and writing own summary could be construed as fudging facts.
It's only fudging the facts if you fudge the facts. Any reasonably intelligent person can read a sentence and formulate it into their own words coveying the same information.
Just use an open source and none of this will matter.
Sounds like write-in-your-own-words high school history assignment. Alexander the Great, Enlightened Leader (or) Brutal Warrior. Both interpretations from the same primary source are considered acceptable.
Barr's summary of Mueller's report, some see as fudging, others may believe it as factual representation.
Open source articles are hard to come by as many moving towards subscription service.
I hope this is not another rule enabling astroturfers' rule shopping to report posts they don't like.
N328KF wrote:This happened to me today (I assume) - except I included a fair use excerpt - which is allowed by copyright law in most areas (certainly the US.) I think moderation on this site has gone downhill as, when they perform moderation tasks, they now seem to do so without the courtesy of informing you as to the reason. I don't actually know why my thread was deleted, but seeing this I think I have an idea.