• Anything ‘published’ on the web is viewed as intellectual property and, regardless of whether it displays a copyright symbol or not, is therefore copyrighted by the originator. The only exception to this is if there is a “free and unrestricted reuse” statement associated with the work.

    In order to protect our members and TFL from possible litigation, all members must abide by the following new rules:

    1. Copying and pasting entire articles from another site to TFL is strictly prohibited. The same applies to articles from print or other media, and to posting photographs taken of copyrighted pages or other media.

    2. Copyright law provides for “fair use” of portions of a copyrighted work. You can copy no more than a SINGLE paragraph from the article to your post (3 or 4 sentences at most).

    3. You must provide a link to the article along with the name of website. For example: ww.xxx.yyy/zzz (The Lower Thumbsuck Daily News).

    4. You must provide, in your own words, a brief summary of the article AND your reasons for believing it will be of interest to TFL members. Failure to do so may result in the thread being closed or your post being deleted as a “cut and paste drive by.”

    5. Photographs and other images are also copyrighted. "Hotlinking" of images (so that it appears in your message) from other sites is also prohibited unless you own rights to the image. If you wish to share an image, provide a clickable link to it.

    Posts that do not follow these new guidelines will be altered or deleted by staff. Members who continue to violate this policy may lose their posting privileges at TFL.

    Thank you for your cooperation and your participation in TFL, the leading online forum for firearms enthusiasts.

But if it's his video, is it still a drive by?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

g.willikers

New member
Wild Bill had his thread shut down, due to it being judged a drive by.
But it was his video.
And he had plenty to say in the video.
Not that anything was really lost, as the video is still there and available.
It's a good one, too, full of useful info.
But it seemed ironic to me, though.
 
Posting a link with no discussion in the text of the post is a driveby. A few comments at the beginning would probably have kept it alive. I'm betting it could be re-posted properly and not locked.
 
I thought a "drive by" was just spam= someone dropping links and trying to get traffic with no intention of being a part of a discussion.

I saw WildBill post, follow up and answer all questions on his other thread.
 
Posting a link with no discussion in the text of the post is a driveby. A few comments at the beginning would probably have kept it alive. I'm betting it could be re-posted properly and not locked.
Click to expand...

Have to agree. The content of the video is not enough. Even a short paragraph referring to it's content and it's purpose would have sufficed.

It's not personal when staff closes a thread, they are doing a job within a set of rules.

Keep in mind their time is donated to the forums and it's members, so it is precious. If they went through every video to see if it were interesting enough to let it ride they would be forced to give more time then we should ask of them.

Also if they did see one as interesting when another one wouldn't it would create chaos therefore the reason for the simple rule.
 
Wreck-n-Crew said:
The content of the video is not enough. Even a short paragraph referring to it's content and it's purpose would have sufficed.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

It's not a matter of whose video it is. From the Forum Rules' page on Drive-by Posts/Threads:
Do not simply post a link and expect anyone to know why you posted the link or why it is relevant to the thread. You leave it up to those that post any thoughts as to what direction the thread takes or what you meant by the post. Each person will necessarily have a different take on what they think the thread/post is about.

Remember, the Opening/Originating Post (OP) must contain a summary of what the link is about and should also contain some opinion by the OP in order to start a discussion in a specific direction.
<snip>
Expecting people to follow your link or read the article, without any remarks by you, and discussing the event, shows an utter lack of respect for the rest of the members here at TFL, who have come to expect intelligent conversation. In other words, it is rude.
Click to expand...
 
Back in June of 2008 (5 years ago), in the old Legal & Political (L&P) forum, we were being beset by folks posting full articles and links to articles and/or videos, without even bothering to write anything about why they posted such.

It became real confusing, as some folk thought the stuff was posted for one reason, when a few posts (and in some cases, a lot of posts) later, the person who dropped this stuff in the thread (or more often started the thread) came by and said many if us were wrong... We obviously were thinking X when he was posting Y!

Since the poster didn't bother to tell anyone about Y, what were the rest of us supposed to think? The bickering and back-biting continued until the Bluesman and I put our feetses down and created the Drive-By Posting Rule.

We carried that rule through the demise of the old L&P to the creation of the Law & Civil Rights (L&CR) forum. And we enforced it brutally.

Somewhere along the way, people somehow thought that it was cool to post this kind of stuff everywhere else on TFL, except the L&CR forum. After some lengthy discussions among the Staff, we made the rule a general rule, all across the TFL forums.

To put it bluntly: Expecting people to follow your link or read the article, without any remarks by you, and discussing the event, shows an utter lack of respect for the rest of the members here at TFL, who have come to expect intelligent conversation. In other words, it is rude.

And that, my friends, as Paul Harvey used to say, is the rest of the story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top