(no subject)
Jul. 12th, 2003 11:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
turpsI've been catching up on mail and one thing that I've read is what happened in the P/K group about that guy who used unaccredited posts, stories and pictures in his paper.
The listmom contacted him, her first mail was a little angry, as well it should be and threatened to report him to his university, ISP etc. They swapped mails and he agreed to resub to the group to answer any points that people wanted to make. Which I though was a decent thing to do, god did I change my opinion later of him.
I wish I could show you the things he's been writing, but unlike him I'd never reproduce posts. So I'll just condense what he said as best I can. His points were (1) We as a group didn't understand things from an academic viewpoint. That we were looking at things as fans and he was an academic, not a fan (2) That the group stole from Paramount so it's hypercritical to protest when he steals from a mailing list (3) That the paper he did was sympathetic to slash so we should be grateful for that (4)That he didn't need any permission, implying that no one understood how an academic paper was done.
There's some kick ass people on that list. The pricks found out that not only are they fans, there's people on there that are academic too, and blew every one of his points out of the water. What it boils down to is him counteracting every argument with 'well you steal from Trek'. Jerk! He just can't get into his little head that what he did was *rude* That by not attributing quotes etc he was being disrespectful and not playing by the rules of his precious academia. But he justifies this by saying he cited, not copied and reproduced ( that was emphasised) from a public source. Even though it's a closed list.
Of course after being argued with by people who he discovered can not only talk about Tom and Harry having sex but also research practices he decided to leave the list again.
What gets me is that he does apologise for some of his practices, yet then goes on to say if he'd been approached in a less hostile manner negotiations would have started on a better footing. And that people have been referring to him in the worst possible terms so they can take the moral high ground. Then goes on to say he was trying to make a point that fannish norms hold no legal ground, and the idea that we can stay hidden and private as a group needs to be reconsidered. As in this time of scaremongering and child abuse the fact that stories are not protected by Net Nanny is a concern. WTF! Yeah, drop that into the conversation as a distraction.
I do agree with him that privacy is impossible online, but the way he used it to detract attention from himself annoys me so much.
So, end result he's pulling the paper and running away. Which he deserves, because as one sib said, she supports anything that deals with slash in a positive way and would have agreed to be included. But he never asked, and just stole what he needed, but he still doesn't get that.
The listmom contacted him, her first mail was a little angry, as well it should be and threatened to report him to his university, ISP etc. They swapped mails and he agreed to resub to the group to answer any points that people wanted to make. Which I though was a decent thing to do, god did I change my opinion later of him.
I wish I could show you the things he's been writing, but unlike him I'd never reproduce posts. So I'll just condense what he said as best I can. His points were (1) We as a group didn't understand things from an academic viewpoint. That we were looking at things as fans and he was an academic, not a fan (2) That the group stole from Paramount so it's hypercritical to protest when he steals from a mailing list (3) That the paper he did was sympathetic to slash so we should be grateful for that (4)That he didn't need any permission, implying that no one understood how an academic paper was done.
There's some kick ass people on that list. The pricks found out that not only are they fans, there's people on there that are academic too, and blew every one of his points out of the water. What it boils down to is him counteracting every argument with 'well you steal from Trek'. Jerk! He just can't get into his little head that what he did was *rude* That by not attributing quotes etc he was being disrespectful and not playing by the rules of his precious academia. But he justifies this by saying he cited, not copied and reproduced ( that was emphasised) from a public source. Even though it's a closed list.
Of course after being argued with by people who he discovered can not only talk about Tom and Harry having sex but also research practices he decided to leave the list again.
What gets me is that he does apologise for some of his practices, yet then goes on to say if he'd been approached in a less hostile manner negotiations would have started on a better footing. And that people have been referring to him in the worst possible terms so they can take the moral high ground. Then goes on to say he was trying to make a point that fannish norms hold no legal ground, and the idea that we can stay hidden and private as a group needs to be reconsidered. As in this time of scaremongering and child abuse the fact that stories are not protected by Net Nanny is a concern. WTF! Yeah, drop that into the conversation as a distraction.
I do agree with him that privacy is impossible online, but the way he used it to detract attention from himself annoys me so much.
So, end result he's pulling the paper and running away. Which he deserves, because as one sib said, she supports anything that deals with slash in a positive way and would have agreed to be included. But he never asked, and just stole what he needed, but he still doesn't get that.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-07-12 05:20 am (UTC)