trog besides making a remarkable product and thank you by the way, you could not have been more profound by your last comment, it is real real stuff here, to some real people
the rest of us are just, well whatever
thanks again
Someone knows how to make friends.
- Thread starter Kate
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
trog besides making a remarkable product and thank you by the way, you could not have been more profound by your last comment, it is real real stuff here, to some real people
the rest of us are just, well whatever
thanks again
Can we agree that all the rights and wrongs of this situation have now been discussed in full on this and other threads? It might be time to move on now.
The person you're talking about dealt directly with Joe and for the most part remained silent against the fake person and their groupies lop sided atacks
Trogg knows what it's like to get swarmed by the groupies it's a loosing battle so why bother fighting?
Go in, get your point across, and move on
Nothing dirty about that
Can we agree that all the rights and wrongs of this situation have now been discussed in full on this and other threads? It's time to move on now.
No matter where you go, there are rules. You walk down the street or go in a store and start screaming out obscenities, you will be asked to leave (or maybe arrested!). You go to work......your boss sets the rules. You go to the library, and you have to speak quietly. Rules...everywhere.
This is SJ's forum....he sets the rules. When he told Kate he was going to ban her, she called him a liar because he hadn't....and then added (paraphrased) "go ahead, ban me Joe". What was he supposed to do? Back down? He's the owner! If your boss threatens to fire you or the police threaten to arrest you, do you say "go ahead!" If so, then you get what you deserve.
Kate dug in her heels and SJ responded. She could have easily chosen a different route. She is an adult and she made a choice. She is not a victim here. But who knows....maybe I would have done the same if in her position. I don't know...but I actually try to avoid such scenes. Kate chose not to. But I do know if I were SJ and this was my forum, I would have taken the same action he did.
I like Kate....and she definitely was an asset to this forum. But she made a choice and consequences followed. Hopefully she will have the opportunity to come back, and she will accept. In any event, the forum will go on, with or without her.
And people choose to leave because of this...well, this forum is growing every day. You make that choice for yourself. This isn't pre-school.
Kate did what she felt she had to do...and SJ did what he had to do....and this is the way it ended. Let's hope something was learned from it.
Lu (speaking as another member...not a moderator)
This is SJ's forum....he sets the rules. When he told Kate he was going to ban her, she called him a liar because he hadn't....and then added (paraphrased) "go ahead, ban me Joe". What was he supposed to do? Back down? He's the owner! If your boss threatens to fire you or the police threaten to arrest you, do you say "go ahead!" If so, then you get what you deserve.
Kate dug in her heels and SJ responded. She could have easily chosen a different route. She is an adult and she made a choice. She is not a victim here. But who knows....maybe I would have done the same if in her position. I don't know...but I actually try to avoid such scenes. Kate chose not to. But I do know if I were SJ and this was my forum, I would have taken the same action he did.
I like Kate....and she definitely was an asset to this forum. But she made a choice and consequences followed. Hopefully she will have the opportunity to come back, and she will accept. In any event, the forum will go on, with or without her.
And people choose to leave because of this...well, this forum is growing every day. You make that choice for yourself. This isn't pre-school.
Kate did what she felt she had to do...and SJ did what he had to do....and this is the way it ended. Let's hope something was learned from it.
Lu (speaking as another member...not a moderator)
This forum needs Kate and this forum needs SJ. The ban makes us aware of that. Sj's decision is correct, Kate's arguments are correct.
We will see Kate again, she is needed here.
SJ is doing a great job, respect man!
We will see Kate again, she is needed here.
SJ is doing a great job, respect man!
just a quickie here..
for anyone that didnt get the gist of what trog was saying (he did a kinda clumsy job this time)..
i've seen trog on multiple occasions trying to point out that the attacks on him on this and any forum have turned VERY bad at times.. he has complained about threats.. recieveing emails stating threats of PHYSICAL harm...
on forums we all get these at times.. people use thier anonymity to stand taller than they are and make idle puffings all the time...the difference??
being a supplier or manufacturer means peeople have an ACTUAL REALTIME address to find you at.. thusly.. any overt attacks are to be considered real...
i'm not defending/attacking anyone.. was just clarifying as when i read trog's post it took me a few moments to get the "in between the lines" part of it
for anyone that didnt get the gist of what trog was saying (he did a kinda clumsy job this time)..
i've seen trog on multiple occasions trying to point out that the attacks on him on this and any forum have turned VERY bad at times.. he has complained about threats.. recieveing emails stating threats of PHYSICAL harm...
on forums we all get these at times.. people use thier anonymity to stand taller than they are and make idle puffings all the time...the difference??
being a supplier or manufacturer means peeople have an ACTUAL REALTIME address to find you at.. thusly.. any overt attacks are to be considered real...
i'm not defending/attacking anyone.. was just clarifying as when i read trog's post it took me a few moments to get the "in between the lines" part of it
You make a really good point Trog....it's easy to forget there are some dangerous people around.
What a complete of load of bulls*it for people to actually threaten someone on here, not to mention a highly respected man such as Trog who has been here since merely the start of it all. Who works his .... off to make solid device. (Conspiracy's now Go!)
Surely the internet adds tons of kohanos to the little silent real life geek though there is a small percentage of people that are pretty twisted.
Surely the internet adds tons of kohanos to the little silent real life geek though there is a small percentage of people that are pretty twisted.
With real person you know who you are dealing with. The person is accountable. With an anonymous slanderer the only thing you get is the image the fake person builds. You do not who the slanderer works for, where the motivation came from... Nothing. Many forums deal with this problem by strictly banning any revealings of the virtual people´s real identities - let them hit each other with virtual sticks&stones only. This is impossible here because of the business, but, well if an anonymous avatar accuses a real person of being a criminal ......., the anonym should either reveal her own identity to stand her position with equal accountability as the accused or shut up/bugger off.
Attempting to do real-life damage from the shelter of Internet anonymity is one of the lowest actions one can do in virtual world. Period.
Last edited:
O.K. a mod stated that enough had been said on this point and I agreed; however this does not seem to apply to everyone!
Yes, Parked did indeed have real life interests invested in this and Kate did not; however everyrhing she said and did was for the members on this forum; I understood from SJ's point of view as the forum owner that he did what he had to do; however, I cannot and will not accept that Kate was in the wrong with her feelings because I don't believe for a minute that she was!
I will not post anymore for the sake of establishing some kind of status quo on this subject but right is right and the way parked conducted himself was, IMO wrong.
IMO being the operative word, no libel or slur on character intended.
Yes, Parked did indeed have real life interests invested in this and Kate did not; however everyrhing she said and did was for the members on this forum; I understood from SJ's point of view as the forum owner that he did what he had to do; however, I cannot and will not accept that Kate was in the wrong with her feelings because I don't believe for a minute that she was!
I will not post anymore for the sake of establishing some kind of status quo on this subject but right is right and the way parked conducted himself was, IMO wrong.
IMO being the operative word, no libel or slur on character intended.
the last attack aimed at me was started by a newcomer with commercial interests aided and abetted by forum members who should have known better but like having a go at me..
it caused me to pm joe and ask for all traces of me and my past posts to be removed from this forum.. if my request (to joe) had have been gone along with i would have been gone along with all traces of me weeks ago..
i consider my past posts on this place before i started flogging e cigs to be dangerous.. and ever since i became "real" i have been pretty much defenseless and struck dumb..
for fear of attack by certain forum members that can threaten my business and commercial interests.. this is just my case.. i feel i have the right to state it..
the attacks dont have to be based on valid reasons.. the issue is.. its just "fun" to those who make them and they can be totally fictitious and made up... just like the people who make them are...
my request to have all comments made by me removed from this place was a genuine one..
i respected joes reasons for not doing this but it does open up an interesting question..
this can be done by the way.. its built in the forum software..
the question... should i have the right to ask for all traces of me to me removed or should i not.. its an interesting one.. both from ethical and legal points of view..
does the writer own whats written on a forum or does the forum owner.. ????
its not one i can readily answer..
trog
it caused me to pm joe and ask for all traces of me and my past posts to be removed from this forum.. if my request (to joe) had have been gone along with i would have been gone along with all traces of me weeks ago..
i consider my past posts on this place before i started flogging e cigs to be dangerous.. and ever since i became "real" i have been pretty much defenseless and struck dumb..
for fear of attack by certain forum members that can threaten my business and commercial interests.. this is just my case.. i feel i have the right to state it..
the attacks dont have to be based on valid reasons.. the issue is.. its just "fun" to those who make them and they can be totally fictitious and made up... just like the people who make them are...
my request to have all comments made by me removed from this place was a genuine one..
i respected joes reasons for not doing this but it does open up an interesting question..
this can be done by the way.. its built in the forum software..
the question... should i have the right to ask for all traces of me to me removed or should i not.. its an interesting one.. both from ethical and legal points of view..
does the writer own whats written on a forum or does the forum owner.. ????
its not one i can readily answer..
trog
Last edited:
By posting on a forum, you give the owner the right to publish your text. So indeed you own it but grant rights to the forum owner to publish.
However in a court, it would come down to individual circumstances. If you can show damages caused by continued publication, you may be granted your application to have the text removed.
However in a court, it would come down to individual circumstances. If you can show damages caused by continued publication, you may be granted your application to have the text removed.
Hi Trog,
The point you raise is an interesting one. My understanding is that, when work is submitted for publication (print or web) then unless an agreement has been made to the contrary the copyright to the resulting published material belongs to the publication rather than the writer.
Let's say you write something in Word. When you have written it then the copyright is yours. You then submit that to a publication. Unless that publication states that copyright rests with the author then it becomes the "property" of the publication.
The point you raise is an interesting one. My understanding is that, when work is submitted for publication (print or web) then unless an agreement has been made to the contrary the copyright to the resulting published material belongs to the publication rather than the writer.
Let's say you write something in Word. When you have written it then the copyright is yours. You then submit that to a publication. Unless that publication states that copyright rests with the author then it becomes the "property" of the publication.
- Status
Similar threads
