|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2016 20:48:29 GMT
basicly after reading some of the posts on here recently, I'm wondering if I have the right to demand Dan removes all the posts I made on cwdf?
|
|
|
Post by geo on Oct 19, 2016 20:52:54 GMT
Nothing in his rules that say you agree he can keep your posts
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2016 21:31:54 GMT
That's what I thought from what I read of your postings on the other thread. So I havent given him any rights over my postings? So basicly if I demanded he stopped publishing them and he didn't he would be infringing my copyright.
|
|
|
Post by canaldweller on Oct 19, 2016 21:50:20 GMT
basicly after reading some of the posts on here recently, I'm wondering if I have the right to demand Dan removes all the posts I made on cwdf? I don't want to sound dismissive but why would you want to? If you have contributed something that has helped, or will help someone, why would you then want to take that help away? To name just a few. ..Nigel Moore, Tony Dunkley,Nick Norman, Mi ... Ah maybe not, and many more. What if they all did the same. In my opinion it would be akin to burning books, only your own books. I would be gutted if all that expertise and knowledge were deleted forever. Having said all that I do think that you have raised a very interesting question.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Oct 19, 2016 21:57:25 GMT
I don't think I ever posted anything as helpful as the people you mention. But I think it might make Dan realise he has nothing without the contributions of the members, if a few people did the same. What does he own a few lines of code running on a server somewhere. The intellectual property is the members.
|
|
|
Post by PaulG2 on Oct 20, 2016 0:36:44 GMT
I don't think I ever posted anything as helpful as the people you mention. But I think it might make Dan realise he has nothing without the contributions of the members, if a few people did the same. What does he own a few lines of code running on a server somewhere. The intellectual property is the members. There was some talk of similar nature on the CWDF "Sheep" thread within the last ten pages there. Someone quoted from the cwdf user agreement a clause to the effect that posts are the copyrighted property of the author. You would need to look at the entire cwdf User Agreement to be sure, but it would appear that you are correct in your contention. This sounded like a cool revenge idea until canaldweller brought up the book burning aspect, and he's kinda right about that. Just think, someday your great grandkids can search archives and virtually participate with your life during your long breakdown saga. I don't think you really want to destroy that, to deny them that opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by geo on Oct 20, 2016 8:39:36 GMT
basicly after reading some of the posts on here recently, I'm wondering if I have the right to demand Dan removes all the posts I made on cwdf? I don't want to sound dismissive but why would you want to? If you have contributed something that has helped, or will help someone, why would you then want to take that help away? To name just a few. ..Nigel Moore, Tony Dunkley,Nick Norman, Mi ... Ah maybe not, and many more. What if they all did the same. In my opinion it would be akin to burning books, only your own books. I would be gutted if all that expertise and knowledge were deleted forever. Having said all that I do think that you have raised a very interesting question. If someone has been banned they have no control over any information that they have posted, but they still have the responsibility for it. What may not be understood if someone uses information from someone who should have known the about the subject and something goes wrong then they can be sued for damages. Thus I would suggest a Ban plus copyright of posts could equal problems years down the road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 9:19:53 GMT
I don't want to sound dismissive but why would you want to? If you have contributed something that has helped, or will help someone, why would you then want to take that help away? To name just a few. ..Nigel Moore, Tony Dunkley,Nick Norman, Mi ... Ah maybe not, and many more. What if they all did the same. In my opinion it would be akin to burning books, only your own books. I would be gutted if all that expertise and knowledge were deleted forever. Having said all that I do think that you have raised a very interesting question. If someone has been banned they have no control over any information that they have posted, but they still have the responsibility for it. What may not be understood if someone uses information from someone who should have known the about the subject and something goes wrong then they can be sued for damages. Thus I would suggest a Ban plus copyright of posts could equal problems years down the road. I think the loss of trust over there is a huge issue though. If they can edit and delete our posts, there is nothing stopping it being done maliciously by a wayward mod. I don't personally have any issues with my content being left there (and told Dan as such) but now they have declared that they have been seeking police action on individuals (?!), I think all banned members should be allowed the option to fully remove their account along with their posts. On another matter, now it seems that Dan is starting to see some sense, I also believe he should give some recently banned members the opportunity to reinstate their account. I suspect a lot of us were targeted unfairly by one particular mod as well as 'the hit list'. Whether anyone would go back is another thing but at least it would be a nice gesture and probably stop all the 'us and them' stuff. If anyone is able to copy my post onto CWF sheep thread as a suggestion please feel free to do so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 9:29:23 GMT
If someone has been banned they have no control over any information that they have posted, but they still have the responsibility for it. What may not be understood if someone uses information from someone who should have known the about the subject and something goes wrong then they can be sued for damages. Thus I would suggest a Ban plus copyright of posts could equal problems years down the road. I think the loss of trust over there is a huge issue though. If they can edit and delete our posts, there is nothing stopping it being done maliciously by a wayward mod. I don't personally have any issues with my content being left there (and told Dan as such) but now they have declared that they have been seeking police action on individuals (?!), I think all banned members should be allowed the option to fully remove their account along with their posts. On another matter, now it seems that Dan is starting to see some sense, I also believe he should give some recently banned members the opportunity to reinstate their account. I suspect a lot of us were targeted unfairly by one particular mod as well as 'the hit list'. Whether anyone would go back is another thing but at least it would be a nice gesture and probably stop all the 'us and them' stuff. If anyone is able to copy my post onto CWF sheep thread as a suggestion please feel free to do so. I don't think he is seeing sense, I think he's temporarily looking for an escape from the corner he has jammed himself into. It's simple really, he's not trustworthy, given the fact he does not even know what his mods are doing. He should hand the site over to someone else, let them breathe some fresh air back into it, along with some younger members. Dan and his mates could always start a new forum if they don't like where cwdf needs to be. Personally, I wouldn't want to go back in there, but I would like to see some returned, and most importantly, I'd like to see Nigel and Tony's threads reinstated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 9:36:22 GMT
The level of cronyism between mods and some members is unacceptable. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that some members use tactics, and play games to get posts removed, or the poster banned, and I am pretty certain that some of the mods are influential in helping that come about.
The place stinks, is full of cobwebs, and needs a bloody good clean out. Dan does not have the time, interest or ability to do any of this in my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 9:48:22 GMT
I think the loss of trust over there is a huge issue though. If they can edit and delete our posts, there is nothing stopping it being done maliciously by a wayward mod. I don't personally have any issues with my content being left there (and told Dan as such) but now they have declared that they have been seeking police action on individuals (?!), I think all banned members should be allowed the option to fully remove their account along with their posts. On another matter, now it seems that Dan is starting to see some sense, I also believe he should give some recently banned members the opportunity to reinstate their account. I suspect a lot of us were targeted unfairly by one particular mod as well as 'the hit list'. Whether anyone would go back is another thing but at least it would be a nice gesture and probably stop all the 'us and them' stuff. If anyone is able to copy my post onto CWF sheep thread as a suggestion please feel free to do so. I don't think he is seeing sense, I think he's temporarily looking for an escape from the corner he has jammed himself into. It's simple really, he's not trustworthy, given the fact he does not even know what his mods are doing. He should hand the site over to someone else, let them breathe some fresh air back into it, along with some younger members. Dan and his mates could always start a new forum if they don't like where cwdf needs to be. Personally, I wouldn't want to go back in there, but I would like to see some returned, and most importantly, I'd like to see Nigel and Tony's threads reinstated. You may be right but I think everone deserves a chance to dig themselves out of a hole. It's about looking at the cause rather than the symptom. Some got quite angry about the loss of free speech over there and the excessive moderation. For others it was getting baited by a particular member then being banned for standing their ground. These are all things which could get sorted if Dan wants.
|
|
|
Post by geo on Oct 20, 2016 10:37:57 GMT
I'd like to see Nigel and Tony's threads reinstated. With what DH has said about legal advise and recommending removal, because to be effective that in my opinion must have been the case, although I cannot see any reason and having been refused sight of the advice I doubt its existence, what position is that going to put DH in. Well it it would mean in my opinion that statements he made were shall we say incorrect. Now where would that leave the reputation etc.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 20, 2016 10:39:26 GMT
|
|
alan
Junior Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by alan on Oct 21, 2016 8:10:03 GMT
According to the CWDF R&Gs the copyright of a 'member' remains his property, and it should not be used by anyone else without the copyright holders permission (unlike another forum I use where membership assigns 'free use' of copyright in perpetuity.
I am no 'expert' on the subject but having asked a patent lawyer, I believe that anyone can ask for CWDF to delete every post they have ever made, every picture / photo and any message they have sent.
The 'member' (or maybe ex-member') must then get a communication - in writing - that everything they have 'produced' has been deleted. This is a legal document and can be used as evidence in court if the need arises.
I guess it depends on how vindictive towards CWDF you wish to be - if everyone had all of their 'stuff' deleted the threads would be a total shambles and unusable. I would suggest that, that would lead to the final demise of the forum as any useful place 'of reference'.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Oct 21, 2016 8:30:57 GMT
Removal of post is I believe a right, however it depends on how hard you wish to fight. Anyone who wants his addresses drop me a PM with your email address and I will let you have them.
ETA Also you could advise him from the date of ban that a copyright fee of say £1 per post per month will be charged. Send that by special delivery and keep a copy of the rules and the signature strip on delivery
|
|