Trolling and flaming in the Green Room

Quit crying about being trolled. You've done the same thing to others in the last 4 years.

You reap what you sew.

It's the rest of us that have to suffer.

Everyone, knock it off.

I suppose if you don't like it, you can always leave.

Twice outside the Red Room, neither time deliberately. Once because I got carried away, that was my bad. Once through a neg-rep comment because I failed to notice before I pulled the trigger on it that it wasn't in the proper forum. And never, ever, have I followed someone from subforum to subforum to subforum making them a target, definitely never broadcast board-wide via profile. That's dirty pool, and it does happen to be against the rules, since the profile visible board-wide is visible outside the Red Room -- if there's trolling material embedded in the profile, then it seems clear and obvious that would constitute trolling in non-trolling forums.

It doesn't matter if it's in the red room or not. It's someone's personal information.

I take it you're not enthusiastic about this "getting new blood into Wordforge" idea, then?

I was thinking about changing my avatar in the next day or two, and here comes visionrazer dredging up the same old shit. Hardly anybody has copyright for the avatars they use. Everybody just uses things we find on the Internet. Chup and I aren't using images posted by a current board member. They are no different from any of the other avatars. This is just silly.

I had a big old thing here about the rules being fairly enforced, but forget it; they won't be, and that's just Wordforge for ya.

About time you give up. Now get lost.

Obviously my avatar isn't copyrighted.

Jim Davis isn't complaining about you using that one.

Why do you imagine your behavior would attract new members?

gul's avatar is definitely derivative of some photos that were posted by another user here in Wordforge. Clearly, the avatar is also parody and definitely makes a commentary on the original work. gul's avatar, therefore, is protected under 17 U.S.C. § 107.

Q.E.D.

Oh, and F.U.

No.

I'm sure this is really cutting into visionrazor's profits.

"I know new members are important to a lot of the board, so I'm going to post a lot of threads warning them about how terrible this place is in the guise of 'helping' them, but actually in the hopes of making my complaints prominent enough that people give in to me just to get me to shut up.'"

I'm not a fan of using people's own likenesses to troll them in avatars -- whether it's garamet, JC or anyone else -- but this is kind of transparent.

While I'm dealing with this? I don't. When I'm not? I'm entertaining. 100% of the time? No. Is anybody here an insightful, entertaining poster 100% of the time? And is that the yardstick by which the staff should determine who benefits from the board's rules and who doesn't?

Gul's and Chup's avatars, and Chup's sig, constitute trolling. What other purpose could they possibly serve? They appear with every single post those two make, from their first posts to the present. All over the board.

Hey, you know what would put a solid stop to this whole thing? For gul and El Chup to take images I created out of their avatars and signatures. Novel idea, right?

Let's see...

Grounds for copyright infringement would likely fail on account of (1) gul's avatar is for non-commercial use; (2) the nature of the original work was an internet avatar; and (4) clearly the original work has no value.

So the only grounds with a chance of success would be (3) a substantial portion of the original work was used in gul's avatar.

By my count, that's three strikes against any claim of copyright infringement.

:failedsodie:

So, then, maybe gul and El Chup should just quit playing lawyerball and take my imagery out of their WF profiles already.

Yet you persist anyway...at precisely the time when efforts are being made toward recruitment.

No.

Banning him might. I never would have registered if the boards were filled butthurt postings.by one individual. Its not as if he contributed positively to the board and has had a sudden breakdown. Granted, the Flaming Lesbian Shoe of Doom was funny, but in the "Star Wars kid" way, and not the "Don Rickles professional put downer" way. Ban him so that everyone can get on with things.

Then maybe those efforts should fail, at least until the rules are adjusted so that this can't be done to other posters. Right now it's me -- what happens when this becomes "something they got away with"? Think I'll be the last poster this is done to if it's allowed to go on?

Wait... you want me banned, not for breaking board rules, but for complaining about two posters who are?

If John Castle's fail were any more epic, he'd have to change his name to Homer.

(I meant the Greek poet, not the Simpsons character.)

An anonymous person posts a picture and claims it's theirs.

There is no proof that picture is really yours. There is no proof of who took the picture. No proof of who the subject is.

I am supposed to believe any internet handle who claims something is true? Especially when said handle previously claimed the opposite? Especially when I know said internet handle has used other handles elsewhere that claims to be female and used a female picture and claimed those to be her? *japanese snikerlaff*

Especially from a person who practically has a career of vindictive lawyerballing lies in order to mess with BBS' or people he has grudges against.

So...I won't believe this is serious until Lanzman gets a cease and desist letter and evidence that random internet name's claims are actual fact.

And in fact he himself has claimed it's some guy named Neil.

You're not paying attention.

If you want to see people show up here, see threads like this one, and stay rather than leave, yes, you are. Enforce the board's rules.

Here's the easiest question. Pure underhand toss softball of a question:

What do gul and El Chup get for trolling outside the Red Room?

Assuming this is your own photo...how are you so trolled by a picture of your face?