How many people have actually read the TOS for one?
Do you feel that the TOS is accurate in its purpose and being followed?
Do you feel that TOS needs to be revisited rewritten to cover the issues that seem to be occurring now.
And
Would you want TOS to be enforced to its entirety as written by the moderators of this forum?
This isn't your chance to flame the moderators so please don't do that. I am interested in what JBO as a general feels in regards to TOS. See who has read it and see if you would actually want it enforced.
mw10bvh wrote:
Do you feel that the TOS is accurate in its purpose and being followed?
Do you feel that TOS needs to be revisited rewritten to cover the issues that seem to be occurring now.
This isn't your chance to flame the moderators so please don't do that.
isnt that what your kinda doing right there? basically saying the mods arent doing their jobs because not all the rules are being inforced
No not entirely. There is this thing called responisbility and we as members are supposed to know what is right and what is wrong as far as what we post. I am more looking into how its written and what you think is right or wrong. Things like harassing threatening and or racially motivated posts arent allowed. Yet some have racially derogatory statements in their screen names that some may object to, harassing happens in almost everythread. The TOS about
Quote:
intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state, national or international law;
does that mean that posts shall not do that or that posts shall not tell a person how to do that. If so then a lot of the posts on this site are in direct violation of this TOS because most states have laws restricting the types of modifications that can be done to a car.
I'll say that most Mods do their job well, and err on the side of allowing a discussion to take place, and let whomever is discussing discuss what they will because either the thread is interesting, or too damned long to read through.
I find disturbing that there is a lack of a consistent rule to which we can discuss, and that it's up to the individual mod as to what is lockable and what is bannable.
It's interesting that we can discuss drugs, illegal motor modifications, street racing (and have a forum designed for that, well, and legal drag racing), and fights, but the moment the door to the digital realm is darkened, the thread gets locked.
You trust a person to be able to Just say No, decide whether or not to run an open exhaust or gutted cats, decline to watch/participate in a street race or generally drive like an idiot, or not get into fisticuffs, but when we start talking about programs that
might be used for illegal purposes but actually have a
legitimate purpose, we're all of a sudden relegated to being free-loading criminals?
I also find it interesting that the TOS has a hold-harmless clause, and revocation of responsibility clause (basically, the Site takes no responsibility for any content posted, and you agree that you are personally responsible for any infractions that come to light as a result of your posting), yet still a few mods are getting uptight enough to start locking and banning when there is a whiff of the possibility of impropriety.
If the letter of the TOS and The Rules (which parenthetically, has no mention of these topics other than the Racist mention, nothing on other subjects) was followed, and posted for each ban/lock (ie, copy and paste), we'd at least know that the Mods have read the rules/TOS and understand it enough to justify the locking of a thread and banning of a person.
There have been multiple instances where not justifying a lock, or a ban has led to some litte hate wars... and that's the last thing I think anyone comes here for.
Thanks for creating this thread, mw10bvh, I was about to, but I was formulating what to say so I didn't get anyone's knickers in a twist
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Gam
I think including the TOS that was violated as to why a thread was locked would be a great educational asset to the members of this board. I think there are a few questions that are raised in regards to legal issues being discussed on the boards. I know for fact in NYS it is illegal to make any changes to your stock exhaust system. I dont want to bring up and particulars as to specific threads to keep this from being locked. To me I would rather see posts revolving around the use of illegal drugs locked. I have used file sharing programs in the past to share a file I created with someone else over a filesharing program because the file was to large to email or post on a file sharing website. If I knew about FTP and the such that would be much easier I guess but I am not sure. We shall see what other think in regards to this as well. I dont want this to get locked however I do see the possibility of it. I am hopeing to keep this at the ingelligent discussion level. I think that everyone posting in this thread and on this board could learn something from this post if it works the way I hope.
My thoughts precisely.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I disagree with complaining about the forum owner (and moderators) and how they choose to run this website. We are users of their website, they are not obligated to be fair, equal or allow content which they feel is inappropriate. It's not our entitlement to post here, it's a privlege.
I support my family as a webmaster. (check my profile for which websites) If the moderators feel that a specific topic or thread may lead to legal problems and decide to lock it, or completely delete it, I feel they are completely within their rights. It won't be US sitting in a court room if the government decides to prosecute, so we have to abide by the moderators decisions, however unfair or inconsistant we think they may be.
If you disagree with how this website is being run, please feel free to start your own website. If you feel it's worth risking jail time or fines, or at the very least the cost of hiring a lawyer for discussing limewire or kazaa, then by all means do it.
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
this isn't a democracy, kids...frankly, if you don't like the way a site is run, leave. don't whine, bitch, or moan - you don't have to be here if you don't like it. furthermore, if you're someone who's barely been here a month, you haven't even had a chance to see the good side of the forum. it's apparent you're complaining(no matter how veiled, this is still a public complaint)...deal with it or leave.
that's the way i've always seen it, and i will continue to do so.
John: I understand completely, I've been in a legal tangle with a site that's had to deal with the RIAA, and was one of the first to come into trouble with the MPAA.
I understand there is liability, but, the TOS is plausible deniability card, it's a legal document that you have to agree to.
Also, something that has to be mentioned is that the programs themselves are, in fact, legal. The programmers, and anyone discussing the use of the programs is not liable for the misuse of the program.
Back on track though, there wouldn't be a problem with this if the TOS was followed to the letter. Implication alone is not enough to substantiate liability, and never has been... that goes with modifications, sharing, drugs... etc.
Discussion of a topic does not imply agreement of it, otherwise this site and most others with anything approaching a VS. forum would have been shut down handily, along with other forums like performance. Simply speaking (or posting) about a subject, irrespective of the topic is not a crime, and even if it was, the site is not responsible for the Content provided... it says so in the TOS...
Quote:
CONTENT SUBMITTED TO THE SERVICE
GME does not claim ownership of Content you submit or make available for inclusion on the Service. However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service, you grant GME the following world-wide, royalty free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:
With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of GME, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. "Publicly accessible" areas of the Service are those areas of GME that are intended by GME to be available to the general public.
INDEMNITY
You agree to indemnify and hold GME, and its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, or other partners, harmless from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys' fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of Content you submit, post, transmit or make available through the Service, your use of the Service, your connection to the Service, your violation of the TOS, or your violation of any rights of another.
Those two passages revoke the site from responsibility, and the fact that the moderators are directed to shut down posts that violate the TOS (while acknowledging that there may be some things that slip through the cracks) constitutes due diligence and reasonable means.
The TOS may need periodic re-vamping, but as long as it is followed reasonably, and consistently (ie, follow the letter of what is said without inference and weigh it against the TOS and The Rules), I don't see why it shouldn't stand. For JBO, the two pretty much cover 99% of the situations that arise.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
