To Porteplume: the carper thing - The TrekEarth Forums

Forums


Go Back   The TrekEarth Forums >

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

  Porteplume 2011-12-31 5:54

Hi Costantino,

Your note looks long enough but is not sufficient enough to cover the TOS rules about notes.
Please write a significant note in the next 48 hours, otherwise this photo will be inactivated again and you will have to re-send a Review Reply to get it back.

TE Moderation Team - Viviane

  #1  
Old 12-31-2011, 01:11 PM
leo61 leo61 is offline
TE Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 760
Default To Porteplume: the carper thing

The "Carper" thing again?????
Some members get 48 hours,some not....
Great job you moderators,you do it very consequent,HAHAHA!!!!!
And what about this:
copyright
copyright
copyright
Last year my photograh of the Bangkok post newspaer was deleted for this copyrightreason.
You can read long christmas or happy new year note but you don`t see ,looking at thumbnails that there is a violation of the TOS and copyright! Well done,moderators!!!
Leo

Last edited by leo61; 12-31-2011 at 01:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-31-2011, 02:06 PM
Porteplume's Avatar
Porteplume Porteplume is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tholen - Holland
Posts: 6,905
Default Yes?

Leo,
You should not speak about "things" you don't know everything about...
This photo has been inactivated first, then Constantino has sent a Review Reply, so I re-activated his picture - read well what I wrote here - and now he can change his note.
Jaap never sent the Review Reply and it's impossible to re-activate when there is no such request sent.

Viviane
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-31-2011, 03:47 PM
carper carper is offline
TE Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 786
Default Nu kan het dus wel.

Dat is duidelijk, het kan dus wel even een berichtje te sturen als een note niet goed is en iemand de tijd te geven om het te veranderen.
gr. jaap
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-31-2011, 05:50 PM
leo61 leo61 is offline
TE Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 760
Default

Leo,
You should not speak about "things" you don't know everything about...

How can you know what I know and what I don`t know about what happened here?????
I can interact with members without the controll of TE.


And what about the three linked photos
Violation of the TOS,copyright?
please explain!
The TE photographers are definite not the copyright holders,of what they photographed here.
What is the differrence of photographing and uploading text and photo of a newspaper and photographing and uploading photos,photographed by somebody else??????
can you please explain why these three mentioned photos are still there.And there are so many more.
Have a nice Sylvester party,
Leo
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-31-2011, 08:04 PM
Porteplume's Avatar
Porteplume Porteplume is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tholen - Holland
Posts: 6,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carper View Post
Dat is duidelijk, het kan dus wel even een berichtje te sturen als een note niet goed is en iemand de tijd te geven om het te veranderen.
gr. jaap
Ja Jaap,
Maar het kan pas worden gedaan NA dat er een Review Request verzonden wordt...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-02-2012, 01:12 AM
macondo macondo is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,483
Default Leo's misleading links

Quote:
Originally Posted by leo61 View Post
The "Carper" thing again?????
Some members get 48 hours,some not....
Great job you moderators,you do it very consequent,HAHAHA!!!!!
And what about this:
copyright
copyright
copyright
Last year my photograh of the Bangkok post newspaer was deleted for this copyrightreason.
You can read long christmas or happy new year note but you don`t see ,looking at thumbnails that there is a violation of the TOS and copyright! Well done,moderators!!!
Leo
I've had a look at the linked 'copyright' photos and I think Leo's possibly chosen poor examples. Two of them are close shots of assembled photos of victims of Pol Pot. There are so many of these on the walls (I've seen lots of other photos of these photos) that it would be hard to provide the 'context'. Second, they are most probably not subject to copyright as they were taken by the Kmer Rouge. Third, the notes are informative and in one case almost encyclopedic. I don't think these photos break the TOS.

Wolfgang's photo is obviously of a poster placed on a pole or column, and shows defacement by a graffiti vandal, defacement which turns out to be almost 'appropriate', given the subject. It's this which caught Wolfgang's eye and makes the photo legitimate, I think. Apart from the issue of copyright being highly dubious in this case, the pole and graffiti provide context.

But I haven't seen Leo's shot which was removed, so I won't comment about the possibility of inconsistency.

Last edited by macondo; 01-02-2012 at 01:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:06 AM.



Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.
explore TREKEARTH