Intellectual Property

[tripsis]

Tip.It already locks/removes threads at the request of the user, so why should it be any different?

Actually we don't :P We never lock/remove content on request, except for perhaps questions that have been answered (in Help & Advice / Tech & Computers).

[All_Is_Great]

So out of spite.

 

That's what I thought. meh

[Lose No Hope]

Tip.It already locks/removes threads at the request of the user, so why should it be any different?

Actually we don't :P We never lock/remove content on request, except for perhaps questions that have been answered (in Help & Advice / Tech & Computers).

My mistake. I remembered the ones from H&A and thought there were some guides/other discussions that were too.

[Bows]

Tip.It already locks/removes threads at the request of the user, so why should it be any different?

Actually we don't :P We never lock/remove content on request, except for perhaps questions that have been answered (in Help & Advice / Tech & Computers).

I recall content in BlogScape being locked upon request... Though I suppose that's only one or two boards.

[tripsis]

Tip.It already locks/removes threads at the request of the user, so why should it be any different?

Actually we don't :P We never lock/remove content on request, except for perhaps questions that have been answered (in Help & Advice / Tech & Computers).

I recall content in BlogScape being locked upon request... Though I suppose that's only one or two boards.

Yeah sometimes we do it in BlogScape if a user quits RuneScape or starts a new blog or something and doesn't want the old one being bumped.

[Jaffy1]

Okay, maybe I need to further clarify what I meant in my first reply: the amount of work required to comply with such a request must be taken into account. In the case of an AOW guide, the amount of work is trivial; in the case of a crew member asking for multitudes of tiny little data entries and various guides to be removed, the amount of work is staggering.

 

[...] This isn't an issue of legal rights - it's an issue of ethics.

I believe people write/add to guides to help the general public/community. So with that in mind, what would you think is right in the following cases?

 

Scenario 1:

A user gives a tip for something to be added to a guide, or points out a mistake. A Crewbie corrects/adds this and credits the user.

The user now believes this information should be removed. With regard to effort (depending on which page/guide/database) this would take little time.

 

Should the said page be rolled back, and why?

 

 

Scenario 2:

Let's, for the sake of argument, take myself as an example.

 

I was a regular poster of corrections in the Website Updates & Corrections forum, and at some point got invited to join the Website Crew. Since my intentions always were to help people out when I posted the corrections, I gladly accepted as it would enable me to be of more meaning to the community (and those that use the main site). Isn't that about the same reasoning that motivates anyone else to write a guide in the AoW?

 

Anyway, while on the Crew I noticed a severely outdated guide and give it a huge make-over. This guide, which was originally written by two others, now contains very little of the information from when it was originally created. Instead its content, subsections, screenshots and whatnot got shuffled, updated and removed as I saw fit. In addition I put several new subsections in it. Other Crew made smaller changes and corrections to it at times, but in this particular case the vast majority of the guide is "mine." With the notion of "what's been produced by person x belongs to person x" in mind, (ethically speaking) to whom does this guide belong? Is it mine now?

 

Did I commit "information theft" on the two original authors when I based the new guide on their layout and basic information?

 

..

So what if I got into a huge argument with another Crewbie or Admin and decided to leave the Crew. Is it justified if I demand that the guide is rolled back to before I first changed it?

 

Should the guide be rolled back, and why?

 

 

Bladewing, unlike you, was not crew. Pretty simple. As far as I'm concerned, you sold your soul to Tip.it whereas Bladewing was just a poster.

You speak of ethics but appear to be suggesting that it's morally acceptable to give a (random) poster more rights than a Crewbie.

How are we different in our intentions than a poster that writes a guide, and why does that justify denying us the right that you believe the poster should have?

 

 

For the record:

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. I'm just curious what you feel is right in this case.