145 replies to this topic

[Sweeney]

Both of you have already posted in this thread

[Noitidart]

Hahaha you two. Love that gif scot!

Oh it wont necessarily be locked because all that's happening is pointing out publicly posted material which we allowed. So closing this topic at this point would be a double standard I think. So don't freak out.

[Noitidart]

For comments about pictures, that's not a reason. I can't warn him for you sharing a picture and then sonic saying whether you are pretty or not. When you post something please think about the repercussions.

Oh net: when they shared the picture it didn't come with terms on what it can and cannot be used for.

I'm trying to be fair while not limiting the free speech of sonic or anyone else.

[Mr. Hobo]

small flaw in your logic 'bro.

The material was posted to codex, yes. But the consent was not given to use the photographs in a means to objectify women and to judge them based upon those views. The photographs are posted to share with one another a piece of ourselves and I think they help us grow closer by sharing intimacy, like IRL photo's.

Competitions, like this one and the men's one, actually cause us to grow divided. People are forced to conform to the image of the populace and so many women in this country have eating disorders for this reason. They don't feel they are beautiful enough. It's one thing to share photo's with one another, but it's quite different to post them of others and judge people based upon them.

I just think that it's a process of dividing our group and not uniting them.

Codex is like high school... we're both communities with a common purpose. Look at the people who feel alienated in high school because they don't match the societal norm. They are divided and their self confidence goes down. We shouldn't condone the demoralization of our community like that.

My $0.02.

=/

Also, it's one thing to say how you feel about someone else's looks in private... but to make a public showcasing of it is wrong. =/

Maybe only voting on/discussing people who've posted their own picture? Explicitly in one of these topics

[Noitidart]

Yeah bro point on that malicious intent but sonic isn't malicious. It's just the reason I'm getting is quite silly: People are telling me others are feeling hurt when sonic is commenting about their publicly shared words/actions/pic/whatever. I can understand comments can hurt but receiving comments on your publicly shared actions/material is and should be a given possibility.
That's the stuff going on in my mind here and trying to recall past moves.

[WakaWaka]

Yeah bro point on that malicious intent but sonic isn't malicious. It's just the reason I'm getting is quite silly: People are telling me others are feeling hurt when sonic is commenting about their publicly shared words/actions/pic/whatever. I can understand comments can hurt but receiving comments on your publicly shared actions/material is and should be a given possibility.
That's the stuff going on in my mind here and trying to recall past moves.

Didnt we learn anything about alexispro?
That dude got facefucked in every way possible, even if there is a reason.
Just saying that being okay to say shit as long as its not you shouldnt be an option.

On that note though, this thread is dealing with women's self esteem.
Its a touchy matter.

[Noitidart]

Didnt we learn anything about alexispro?
That dude got facefucked in every way possible, even if there is a reason.
Just saying that being okay to say shit as long as its not you shouldnt be an option.

Not what I'm saying.

On that note though, this thread is dealing with women's self esteem.
Its a touchy matter.

Hmm a women's self esteem shouldn't be a touchy matter, feel free to discuss anything on codex. Second, this topic should not be taken as its targeting a woman's self esteem.

What we recommended in past situations and what I recommend again. Some people just can't emotionally handle other people and that is why we have an ignore user function. Find it here:
http://www.neocodex....e&module=usercp

[Scot]

My second argument is on the pictures of others being used without permission. A picture of me is called my image. My image can not be used without my consent... Posting the picture in another part of the site does not mean that I consent to being in a contest, and more importantly, it does not mean I give consent for my image to be used on another part of this site. One could actually make a legal argument based upon that... You can not take someone's property (intellectual) and distribute it without their consent. (even if it is posted on a public domain, the limitations of the distribution amongst that public domain could be indicative of that public space. Without some sort of disclaimer waiving intellectual property rights, I don't see how you can allow someone to use someone else's image without their consent.)

No type of money is being exchanged here. This does not violate intellectual property laws. If anything it's protected under fair use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test.

[Noitidart]

Noit... the original post was malicious and you know it... that's why you edited it. (Although part of it is found in post 2's quote)

My second argument is on the pictures of others being used without permission. A picture of me is called my image. My image can not be used without my consent... Posting the picture in another part of the site does not mean that I consent to being in a contest, and more importantly, it does not mean I give consent for my image to be used on another part of this site. One could actually make a legal argument based upon that... You can not take someone's property (intellectual) and distribute it without their consent. (even if it is posted on a public domain, the limitations of the distribution amongst that public domain could be indicative of that public space. Without some sort of disclaimer waiving intellectual property rights, I don't see how you can allow someone to use someone else's image without their consent.)

Well I figured it would hurt someones feelings and I wanted to protect them from that. Not all people can feel anothers emotion. Hm this isn't a real contest is it? It's sonic guys. But I understand I'll talk to SL.

Thanks net and scot for helping me try to be fair to everyone.

[Scot]

A contest, as self described, would warrant a winner and, therefore, losers. Regardless of if the winner receives currency or simply a form of praise and commendation, there is still a reward as a contest would hold.

Although I agree fair use would protect the rights of criticism and commentary of copyrighted property, I think that would only be relevant if there wasn't some form of gain for someone without the consent of the parties involved.

Also, the contest IS generating currency because of Advertisements on neocodex. More pageviews is more advertising. Therefore, there is actually monetary gain based upon these images being used without consent.

I know you have good intentions but now you're grasping at straws. There is not a single ad within a hundred miles of this site.

[Scot]

This was suppose to be fun. The comment in the OP was uncalled for but the subsequent posts, I felt was suppose to celebrate the female members of this site. Ultimately you are right about the nature of this competition creating a schism of winners and losers and if some people are hurt by this topic, which was the opposite of what was intended then we need to stop.

[RealRacingFan]

Im getting reports from here that women are feeling hurt by the chat in this topic. Let's not do this. This topic may be closed soon.

Darn it, one day off! Well, at least I got the "Locked" part correctly.

[iargue]

Really?

There have been complaints over this topic?

Suck it up girls, if this hurts you, your not going to survive in the real world.

[luvsmyncis]

Suck it up girls, if this hurts you, your not going to survive in the real world.

I complained because I was neither nominated as being hot (which I am, regardless of appearance), nor was I addressed as an attention whore. What gives. This is totally me.

[Gee]

Really?

There have been complaints over this topic?

Suck it up girls, if this hurts you, your not going to survive in the real world.

I may not be considered a 'hot girl' in the codex boards, but iArgue has a good point.
If you can't handle critique from some strangers from the internet then you should toughen up a bit and come back, lol.

[Mr. Hobo]

where my attention at bitches ??????

I'd say post noodz but I don't want JCR sending his snake after me

[sonic]

I know I have been known to make a jab at someone from time to time. But my OP was neither malicious nor out of line.

And that line is being drawn with past the actions by staff members of codex.

The complaints of the Content of the OP were just. Action was taken. Problem solved. No one deemed it warn worthy. Infact not one warn was issued because of this topic. Hardly sounds like a situation were closure would be neither be just or practical.

end lawyer

[sonic]

I know I have been known to make a jab at someone from time to time. But my OP was neither malicious nor out of line.

And that line is being drawn with past the actions by staff members of codex.

The complaints of the Content of the OP were just. Action was taken. Problem solved. No one deemed it warn worthy. Infact not one warn was issued because of this topic. Hardly sounds like a situation were closure would be neither be just or practical.

end lawyer

[Gee]

I know I have been known to make a jab at someone from time to time. But my OP was neither malicious nor out of line.

And that line is being drawn with past the actions by staff members of codex.

The complaints of the Content of the OP were just. Action was taken. Problem solved. No one deemed it warn worthy. Infact not one warn was issued because of this topic. Hardly sounds like a situation were closure would be neither be just or practical.

end lawyer

That's fine but in your original post didn't you single out a member?
Isn't that kind of being malicious in itself? Correct me if I am wrong.

[Noitidart]

Topic to remain closed because as a team we don't overrule each other. However reasons given for the closing were hidden due to invalidity.

At codex we run the board to be fair. NOT to make the so called "trolls" happy nor to make the active members happy. Aside from one personal comment the topic was not an issue and was blown out of proportion. We think this closing is for the best for members and internally for staff.