PlaneShift
Support => Forum and Website Discussions => Topic started by: bilbous on February 11, 2007, 09:26:54 pm
-
Is it considered appropriate forum behavior to use the quote function to attribute to another user words that they never said or is this considered an abuse of the forum rules? I think it should not be allowed as it fits fairly well the second definition of the word "libel." (http://m-w.com/dictionary/libel) If it is a perfectly acceptable rhetorical tactic I will be happy to precede all future posts with fake quotations of this sort. I do think this is the wrong way to go, however.
-
well, let's see. the best way to describe it....
it is about as acceptable as stomping on cute little kittens. we can't really stop you. but be prepared for the inevitable splash that such actions will cause.
-
I don't see a problem. It's not like the original post is any different.
-
In this age of global accessibility where employers do web searches of prospective employees but not always duly diligent it is completely possible for a search to find out of context things which will have adverse affects. While the practice here has not been greatly defamatory the principle is what this discussion is about and not particular instances.
-
In this age of global accessibility where employers do web searches of prospective employees but not always duly diligent it is completely possible for a search to find out of context things which will have adverse affects. While the practice here has not been greatly defamatory the principle is what this discussion is about and not particular instances.
heh I read an article on that the other day about employers googling employees names to see what they were up to on the net.
-
Indeed and one question they may ask of your personal references is: do you know any nicknames X frequently posts under? I do not think this topic is without merit.
-
When people use the quote feature and put in something that a person never said, I take care of it.
:)
-
I think that if people are inclined to use this technique there are better ways such as using a wrapper phrase like:
to paraphrase you ...;
what you said was ....
what I hear is ....;
or something along those lines.
It isn't very hard.
-
Is it considered appropriate forum behavior to use the quote function to attribute to another user words that they never said or is this considered an abuse of the forum rules? I think it should not be allowed as it fits fairly well the second definition of the word "libel." (http://m-w.com/dictionary/libel) If it is a perfectly acceptable rhetorical tactic I will be happy to precede all future posts with fake quotations of this sort. I do think this is the wrong way to go, however.
When it's incredibly obvious to any sane human being that the quoted text is not meant to be attributed to the person it is attributed to, then I don't see what the problem is. Here's an example.
Bilbous never actually said this. This was typed in by Zanzibar to demonstrate a point.
-
The point is that an internet search for bilbous might pull up the erroneous quote and the context will not be readily apparent on the search results page, so someone can come to the wrong conclusion from a cursory review. After all the internal search function for the forum is not the only search that can find the term.
For example If I start peppering the forum with erroneous quotes from you saying that you like to set fire to kittens and then your boss sees three pages of hits of "I want to burn kittens" he might think twice about giving you that promotion or even keeping you on the payroll and never look further than the summary. Obviously this is an extreme example but it illustrates the idea pretty well.
-
For example If I start peppering the forum with erroneous quotes from you saying that you like to set fire to kittens and then your boss sees three pages of hits of "I want to burn kittens" he might think twice about giving you that promotion or even keeping you on the payroll and never look further than the summary. Obviously this is an extreme example but it illustrates the idea pretty well.
I find it hard to believe that anyone could be as incredibly stupid as that, even if they do have a job in management.
-
It is a matter of optics, it doesn't matter what reality is most people take things at face value. How many times did the US administration and its sycophantic media proclaim WMD and how many were found? Why does the seal hunt get more attention than chicken factories? It is all about optics. I could just as easily used the example of painting you as a white supremacist. It is just a bad idea to allow it.
Is "I was just joking" a defense for yelling "Fire!" in a crowded room? Some things are just better to err on the side of caution.
-
It is a matter of optics...
I agree. It's a matter of sight. Any person who isn't an idiot can tell what's going on simply be looking at it. I think most idiots would be able to tell as well.
-
You are entitled to your opinion. I tell you this though most HR people are looking to find a reason to reject an applicant and to reduce the sheer volume they have to wade through so first appearances are VERY important. At the very least, finding a bunch of dubious hits next to your name is an indication that you may be annoying or lack judgment in when to get out of a bad situation. You may not get the opportunity to plead your case.
I have been using this nick for ten years or so and it is fairly unique, I do not want it associated with things I did not say. Some of the things I say are bad enough in their own way but at least I said them.
I do not like it when someone twists my word as happens on occasion but it is orders of magnitude worse when they flat out quote me as saying something I did not say. The way these forums work is that it is possible that your quote was actually something I said and then edited out so making up quotes defeats the whole purpose of the quote tag.
If you still don't get it, I will not be able to make you understand, perhaps someone else can try.
-
For example purposes, here is an evidence(I created this to demonstrate it) of how easy the quote system can be exploited using the right opportunities.
Stop whining about the changes on the combat system retarded kids! This is an alpha stage project and you're testers after all, don't expect that the current game systems will be kept unchanged and this game is about roleplay, not players skills based duel, so shut your mouths and keep these forums clean!
Karyuu posted on the thread where this fake message framed against zanzi supposedly existed:
In keeping with drah's intentions for this thread (I applaud you!) I will remove posts that are not serious suggestions. If you want to complain, you missed the boat.
So there would be no way to prove zanzibar did not post that for example(Unless the mods and admins of the forum keep backups from delete posts, etc.).
-
If that is indeed a fake quote, and it appears fairly likely it is, then yes it too should be dealt with (and you, perhaps, should have pm'd a moderator instead of repeating it.) I was at work when that thread went haywire but I do believe the rule should be enforced in all cases.
-
If that is indeed a fake quote, and it appears fairly likely it is, then yes it too should be dealt with (and you, perhaps, should have pm'd a moderator instead of repeating it.) I was at work when that thread went haywire but I do believe the rule should be enforced in all cases.
It was an self-made fake quote purely intended for example purposes, to show how easy this system can be exploited.
I created it as an example about this, so don't take it seriously.
-
You are entitled to your opinion. I tell you this though most HR people are looking to find a reason to reject an applicant and to reduce the sheer volume they have to wade through so first appearances are VERY important.
That's relevant for your resume, sure. But it's not relevant to your activities on an obscure message forum.
I have been using this nick for ten years or so and it is fairly unique, I do not want it associated with things I did not say. Some of the things I say are bad enough in their own way but at least I said them.
Then that's your bad. Don't use this moniker professionally and you'll be in the clear.
So there would be no way to prove zanzibar did not post that for example(Unless the mods and admins of the forum keep backups from delete posts, etc.).
Well, there is the idea of innocent until proven guilty...
-
If this is causing so much fuss, wouldn't it be easier to just avoid "misusing the quotes" and move on?
-
If this is causing so much fuss, wouldn't it be easier to just avoid "misusing the quotes" and move on?
Of course. Neko and I talked a day or two ago and I agreed to use a different format when I "fix" statements.
-
If this is causing so much fuss, wouldn't it be easier to just avoid "misusing the quotes" and move on?
But some people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) give a **** about that and will misuse the quotes intentionally for their greater goals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_war), so by changing it to block such framing tricks, future headaches for the moderators regarding fake quotes will be avoided.
-
Of course. Neko and I talked a day or two ago and I agreed to use a different format when I "fix" statements.
Cool beans, glad to hear the argument is just for the sake of arguing now.
-
It's not for the sake of arguing. I just find the whole thing silly and I disagree with the remarks bilbous made. Since they indirectly target me, I'm not completely out of line in responding to them.
-
I wasn't being entirely serious. Just a sort of "carry on" comment :]
-
Of course. Neko and I talked a day or two ago and I agreed to use a different format when I "fix" statements.
Cool beans, glad to hear the argument is just for the sake of arguing now.
Zanzi's favourite kind... :P
Anyway, I put in a search just for giggles. Most of what I got was poetry, several different profiles, one or two old threads on here, a bunch of people speaking French, and some guy who seemed to misspell 'bulbous' :P As far as I can tell, the most hits you'll get from a single site are like, 3, at least in the first 10 pages of results.
I figure if they're really interested in you enough to run much more in-depth searchs than that, then you've already got the job.
-
Interestingly, I actually agree to both sides.
On one hand, it definitely is to be strictly avoided to link your RL identity to any online pseudonym. It's OK for people you trust, but in general, just asking for trouble. By now, the governments aren't the ones spying on people most excessively. Corporations are, having have various reasons to do so, ranging from judging prospect employees over spam right to identity theft. Add to this that in any given country, there is only one government targetting you, while there are lots of corporations.
On the other hand, the act of making it appear as if someone said something that they did not say, even if you think that you can accurately deduce the "actual meaning", borders on lying (especially when, like in a heated discussion, the things that one reads may differ greatly from the things that were written). Therefore, this practice should not be employed, nor should it be allowed. Whtether or not it can actually be verified or prevented is sort of irrelevant; what is relelvant is the message that is sent, which is either "feel free" or "don't do that". I actually think that, if the intent truly is to represent some form of "I'm a psychic and know what you think" style stuff, it would make for a very poor effect. The crucial differences, which make up the point, may easily get missed, even if blatant, due to all sorts of circumstances.
The only thing for which this could be used to great effect is, as has been said, for producing false evidence, which is something that shouldn't be allowed in any decent forum, anyway, and naturally won't be employed by people who try to be decent forum members.
Therefore, while it shouldn't harm you outside the forum in question, it's bad, and inefficient, discussion practice.
-
Not to mention that it potentially opens the quoter up to litigation under libel laws. Zanzibar's defense that it is just an obscure forum is like saying I am free to blow up Dildo, Newfoundland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dildo,_Newfoundland_and_Labrador) because it is an obscure place.
-
It's not libel because I'm never actually attributing the quotes to you.
-
Lawyers love to argue niceties like that, especially if they think they can make you settle out of court. Then of course there is which jurisdiction will the case be heard, I suppose it might be California where the server is or it might be wherever the offended person lives, hard to say. Are you up for getting a California lawyer to avoid a default judgment? I'm just talking here of course. It isn't likely to be where you live and a default judgment could cause you problems if it is in a friendly country. Why would you want to risk it just for a cheap laugh?
Going to Newfoundland anytime soon?
-
If I'm never actually attributing the quotes to you, it's not libel.
-
I can say what I want about Sting as long as I don't badmouth Gordon Sumner is that what you mean? If you put my nickname in the "Author=" field you are attributing the quote to me. It does not matter that it is my penname or pseudonym if that is what you mean. I can correct anything I post if it is erroneous I cannot edit anything you post without a moderators assistance or your cooperation.
If you don't own a computer the RIAA can't sue you for downloading but it has happened. It America litigation is not about what is legal and what is not, it is about crippling financial punishment.
I think if you ask the real reason it is against forum policy is that while the forum may not be responsible for third party posts the cost of defending against frivolous lawsuits is prohibitive. If I were to sue you (hypothetically of course), I could just as easily name them in the suit as well on the principle the when suing you name everyone who could possibly be held culpable.
-
If you tried that in an Irish court, the judge would burst out laughing.
"Wai', wha's dis? Aww, da yankee's all in bad humour 'cause some gob's misquoted 'im on tha... 'Planeshift'... interne' forums, izee? Suing dem fer... libel, izee? Great craic, great craic, ye had me goin' there lad. Now get tha feck outta me court, we've got some terrorists who blew up a school bus comin' in at 9 o'."
-
I can say what I want about Sting as long as I don't badmouth Gordon Sumner is that what you mean? If you put my nickname in the "Author=" field you are attributing the quote to me. It does not matter that it is my penname or pseudonym if that is what you mean. I can correct anything I post if it is erroneous I cannot edit anything you post without a moderators assistance or your cooperation.
If you don't own a computer the RIAA can't sue you for downloading but it has happened. It America litigation is not about what is legal and what is not, it is about crippling financial punishment.
I think if you ask the real reason it is against forum policy is that while the forum may not be responsible for third party posts the cost of defending against frivolous lawsuits is prohibitive. If I were to sue you (hypothetically of course), I could just as easily name them in the suit as well on the principle the when suing you name everyone who could possibly be held culpable.
If your argument has come down to "It's not against the law but I could bring a lawsuit against you for doing it anyway", I think you're losing a bit of credibility. In my opinion you would have a very hard time getting a successful libel suit out of someone quoting something that you are then supposed to have said without mentioning even your internet pseudonym.
I think it's pretty clear ethically that "Changing what someone said and then responding to that" is NOT acceptable, as seytra has fleshed out.
-
Here is his example:
Here's an example.
Bilbous never actually said this. This was typed in by Zanzibar to demonstrate a point.
It certainly appears to me he has mentioned my nick. He has in fact attributed to me things I never said. Never mind what he has attributed to me in this case as the comment is not typical of how this technique is used.
I never said it was not against the law I said it did not matter if it was not against the law, the cost of defending yourself is prohibitive. I am not a lawyer and can not give a legal opinion about it especially as laws change with the jurisdiction.
On-line gambling is not against the law in England but that did not stop the US from arresting the CEO(?) of a British Gambling site based in Bermuda(?) when he set foot on American soil. I could look up these stories to provide citation but I don't think it would be too hard for someone else to find them if they do not believe me.
Belatedly addressing Seytra
As far as avoiding being associated with your on-line persona goes, I don't know about you but I had to submit a valid email address to make an account so theoretically it can be traced back to me.
Hmm was it Walmart that sacked a bunch of people for slagging the company on a website? Didn't the CEO of HP employ illegal tactics against her own board members to identify a leak?
Lets see now, IPs are logged for posts on this board so they can be supoenaed. There is little to no privacy on the internet, personally I have a static IP so it is pretty easy to identify me, but even dynamic IPs can be identified from the ISPs server logs.
Anyways this bit about litigation and whatnot was merely additional grapeshot for the cannon because Zanzibar was still exclaiming ... I'm not dead yet ... like some Pythonesque plague victim on the corpse cart. Getting bogged down in it is kind of pointless.
-
If you tried that in an Irish court, the judge would burst out laughing.
"Wai', wha's dis? Aww, da yankee's all in bad humour 'cause some gob's misquoted 'im on tha... 'Planeshift'... interne' forums, izee? Suing dem fer... libel, izee? Great craic, great craic, ye had me goin' there lad. Now get tha feck outta me court, we've got some terrorists who blew up a school bus comin' in at 9 o'."
Hey! The Brazilian court is even better !
"Your prosecution is on the line, please come back after 15 years to have the veredict"
15 years later
"This is unsuficient evidence for the accusation, therefore *name* is innocent, and you disrupted the more important things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primeiro_Comando_da_Capital) that should be judged"
The accused brings a lawsuit against the one that sent a prosecution against him(the accused was a worker that was fired out), claiming he was supporting organized crime and increasing even more the bureaucracy of the (in)justice system with this stupid prosecution. Also he launches a prosecution for violating his rights as a worker, as the one who tried to convict him was his previous employer that dismissed him "unjustly".
More 15 years later
After all the bureaucracy the guy who started the thing is forced to pay an Indemnity of $600,000 to his former employee, and the lawyer that moved the prosecution is happy as he got 10% from it: $60,000
-
I can say what I want about Sting as long as I don't badmouth Gordon Sumner is that what you mean?
No, that's not what I mean. If you choose to ignore the content of my posts then we have nothing more to discuss.
-
Well then I do not see how you are not attributing the quotes to me in your old format, if you are talking about your current format then we are not talking about the same thing. With your current format I think the quotes are out of place but it isn't too big a deal. I still think it is inappropriate, but not enough to officially complain about.
As far as ignoring the content of your posts this would be a much quieter place if it was possible for me to do so. Perhaps you need to express your thoughts more clearly if they frequently get misunderstood.
I suppose that just about everything constructive about this topic has been said and if there is more to this conversation that is about other things perhaps we should take it to the Plaza.
-
You're still doing it.
I'll give it another shot.
The next quote you see was never said by bilbous.
Purple monkey dishwasher in a jumpsuit.
Bilbous did not say that. I typed it in there. Even though the quote has his name, I am not attributing the quote to him. Do not think he said it because he did not say it.
Ok, do you see a problem with that?
-
Yes. By using the quote mechanism that identifies me as the person quoted you have attributed the text to me. In order to not attribute the text to me you must remove Author="bilbous" from the quote tag. Is that clear?
-
Yes. By using the quote mechanism that identifies me as the person quoted you have attributed the text to me. In order to not attribute the text to me you must remove Author="bilbous" from the quote tag. Is that clear?
What it is is ridiculous. Of course I'll respect it anyway, but how can you not see the sillyness in this?
-
It seems silly to me to think that the attribution field component of the quote tag could somehow be considered as doing anything but saying who said the thing that is being quoted. To turn around and deny the attribution does not work because the quote can be cut an pasted without the disavowal of the attribution. There is a reason for it being set off from the normal text. It is far from perfect as is the software being used. We must try to respect the conventions as best we can.
Some people put great store in their word and for someone to put words in their mouth in however obviously a light hearted way gives great offense. Do not mistake me for one of these people, my words are not always golden but I don't like people putting words in my mouth either.
-
Conventions are social, subjective, audience dependant, and evolving.
In my opinion, it is not putting words in anyone's mouth, and it is not attributing words to people who did not write them. Do you accept that that is my opinion? Even if you disagree with it, do you understand what my opinion is?
-
Certainly. It defies logic, but so do a lot of other things people believe. What do I know, I believe in grey blobs.......
-
Certainly. It defies logic, but so do a lot of other things people believe. What do I know, I believe in grey blobs.......
Since you understand my position, then you should stop accusing me of purposefully trying to mislead people. If you do not stop, the you prove yourself to be trolling.
-
Whatever you say, Bubby. All I accused you of in this thread was inappropriate attributions which is exactly what the problem has been whether you choose to believe it or not.
-
Sideways attacks followed by backwards denials... I love it! \\o//
-
I would discuss it with you over pms but you do not accept them from me so there is no point continuing this argument. If you like you can ask neko for copies of the complaints I made I do not mind if he shares them with you but unless you are willing to go to pms I don't really care to discuss it further.
-
Neko will share things as he feels is appropriate or needed, just like he always has.
Thread lock?
-
Yes sir :D