45th President of the United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 12)

[Eric Mc]

silentbrown said:

Isn't "entire quotes" an oxymoron?

I don't recall anything more than snippets being posted, although some could have been trimmed further. Links to the source were also there (although you can probably find a few cases where they're missing)

The thread's been running long enough (and been well moderated for most of that time) that any issues with his quoting style could have been flagged much earlier.

A quote from a a larger article can be "entire" in itself. It's the quote that's entire, not the article. Byker did this excessively on occasion and was cruising for a showdown with the mods, in my view.
Just because I might have agreed with his overall view on Trump does not mean that I might agree with the way he was conducting himself on PH - two different things.

[silentbrown]

Eric Mc said:

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

We could always just post the links with explaining the content? http://bitly.ws/3Vy7

As mentioned previously, there are specific "fair use" clauses in UK copyright law for reporting current events.

There's been no guidelines on what is acceptable here in terms of quoting. Can I copy/paste an entire article? A paragraph? A sentence? A word? A single letter? Can I screenshot an image of the page and upload it to thumbsnap? Can I link directly to an image on another site?

[HM-2]

silentbrown said:

There's been no guidelines on what is acceptable here in terms of quoting. Can I copy/paste an entire article? A paragraph? A sentence? A word? A single letter? Can I screenshot an image of the page and upload it to thumbsnap? Can I link directly to an image on another site?

I've requested a clarification on this and been told I should expect one in due course. FWIW quoting whole articles is also acceptable under fair use for the purposes of criticism or commentary too, so the size of what's quoted shouldn't really matter as long as that's the intent.

[silentbrown]

HM-2 said:

I've requested a clarification on this and been told I should expect one in due course. FWIW quoting whole articles is also acceptable under fair use for the purposes of criticism or commentary too, so the size of what's quoted shouldn't really matter as long as that's the intent.

Yes. PH can of course make their own rules, but the "because copyright" thing really isn't helpful or accurate. Copying (correctly attributed) content from, say, Wikinews or wikipedia does not breach their copyright.

Rule16 said:

Do not copy and paste content from newspapers, news sites or other websites. This is a breach of their copyright and any such threads will be deleted.

[FunkyNige]

Eric Mc said:

rscott said:

He's been doing it for over 5 years though without any comment from mods, even though several posted in the threads. Then he received a complete ban from the thread, without any warnings at all.

If they're suddenly changing how rules are enforced, it's only fair to give a warning first.

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

[anonymoususer]

Aside from any opinion on Bykers postings.

I really find it surprising that 6 months on from him going his thread (Trumps) is still going.
Personally I wish he would completely go away so The States can move on from that odd period.

[eharding]

FunkyNige said:

Eric Mc said:

rscott said:

He's been doing it for over 5 years though without any comment from mods, even though several posted in the threads. Then he received a complete ban from the thread, without any warnings at all.

If they're suddenly changing how rules are enforced, it's only fair to give a warning first.

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

...and yet moderators have been happy for the Trump threads to continue in this style for years, and have at times joined in the discussions prompted by content that Byker had published. Even if the policy had changed, the guidelines laid down for the moderators regarding quoted content - as detailed by a mod in the Website Feedback section, call for a warning to be given - no such warning was delivered - just an abrupt and arbitrary ban.

The fact that this matter has been kicked upstairs to the commercial management of the site is indicative that there is a significant degree of concern amongst a number of the moderators as to the way this affair has been handled.

[Double Fault]

FunkyNige said:

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

It might have died a death but I'm glad it didn't. The rise and fall of Trump, and the predicament the GOP are in, are fascinating. Byker posted several in a row typically early in the UK day and it's clear a lot of people were avid readers.

He was banned without warning and I'm sure would have been happy to post to whatever guidance he received from the mods.

[paulguitar]

Not-The-Messiah said:

Can I ask how did the Russians use this so called control in Trump's presidency?

One example was how long it took to impose sanctions after the Salisbury poisonings. It eventually got done after many months of pressure on trump from congress, and a call just ahead of the sanctions being imposed with his handler Putin.

Of course, trump concealed the details of at least one meeting with Putin by taking the interpreter's notes, so there is a lot we don't know.

[PRTVR]

FunkyNige said:

Eric Mc said:

rscott said:

He's been doing it for over 5 years though without any comment from mods, even though several posted in the threads. Then he received a complete ban from the thread, without any warnings at all.

If they're suddenly changing how rules are enforced, it's only fair to give a warning first.

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

Maybe that's the point, instead of being a discussion it turned into a soapbox for Byker28i.

[rscott]

PRTVR said:

FunkyNige said:

Eric Mc said:

rscott said:

He's been doing it for over 5 years though without any comment from mods, even though several posted in the threads. Then he received a complete ban from the thread, without any warnings at all.

If they're suddenly changing how rules are enforced, it's only fair to give a warning first.

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

Maybe that's the point, instead of being a discussion it turned into a soapbox for Byker28i.

The Trump thread didn't turn into a soapbox for Byker though, there is active discussion in here.

The Biden thread (the one he got banned from a while back) was always fairly quiet, mainly because Biden is acting like a normal US president so there's simply less to talk about in it.

[Double Fault]

PRTVR said:

Maybe that's the point, instead of being a discussion it turned into a soapbox for Byker28i.

Plenty was discussed, but any defence of Trump seemed out to be based on highly skewed sources and/or dubious personal opinions.

Suspect pro-Trump/GOP folks weren't so keen on that, and suspect that's something to do with where we've landed.

[Al Gorithum]

Bad times for Truth, and for PistonHeads IMO.

[HM-2]

rscott said:

PRTVR said:

FunkyNige said:

Eric Mc said:

rscott said:

He's been doing it for over 5 years though without any comment from mods, even though several posted in the threads. Then he received a complete ban from the thread, without any warnings at all.

If they're suddenly changing how rules are enforced, it's only fair to give a warning first.

I always felt it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised they let him get away with it for so long.

I am always extremely careful if using some other website to back up something I am saying. I certainly don't copy and paste whole tracts of material, as Byker was wont to do.

Same here. I've got a lot of sympathy for the mods on this thread as it would've completely died a death if it wasn't for Byker28i repeatedly posting news stories (I honestly thought he had a bot doing it); if you go back to the middle of June before he got banned you can see 90% of the posts are by him and often you get him posting 10 posts in a row without anyone else saying anything.

Maybe that's the point, instead of being a discussion it turned into a soapbox for Byker28i.

The Trump thread didn't turn into a soapbox for Byker though, there is active discussion in here.

The Biden thread (the one he got banned from a while back) was always fairly quiet, mainly because Biden is acting like a normal US president so there's simply less to talk about in it.

A few pages ago someone posted a breakdown of what proportion of posts on this thread were from Byker. It wasn't particularly high, about 10% IIRC.
I wouldn't be surprised if I'd made over 120 posts (so about 5% of the total) in this thread and I've not been in it since the start. Does that mean I'm also using it as my "soapbox"?

[eharding]

HM-2 said:

A few pages ago someone posted a breakdown of what proportion of posts on this thread were from Byker. It wasn't particularly high, about 10% IIRC.

273 of 5476, so just under 5%. It was just over 5% before the weekend.

[Tycho]

silentbrown said:

HM-2 said:

I've requested a clarification on this and been told I should expect one in due course. FWIW quoting whole articles is also acceptable under fair use for the purposes of criticism or commentary too, so the size of what's quoted shouldn't really matter as long as that's the intent.

Yes. PH can of course make their own rules, but the "because copyright" thing really isn't helpful or accurate. Copying (correctly attributed) content from, say, Wikinews or wikipedia does not breach their copyright.

Rule16 said:

Do not copy and paste content from newspapers, news sites or other websites. This is a breach of their copyright and any such threads will be deleted.

I'm sorry but this rule 16 is just an excuse. If it was the issue then the content would have been removed and not left up if a copywrite notice had been received.

[APontus]

It might be that Byker had had prior warning when he was banned from the Biden thread.

[HM-2]

eharding said:

HM-2 said:

A few pages ago someone posted a breakdown of what proportion of posts on this thread were from Byker. It wasn't particularly high, about 10% IIRC.

273 of 5476, so just under 5%. It was just over 5% before the weekend.

Even lower than I thought then. A thread which is composed of over 95% posts by other members is hardly a "soapbox".

[Double Fault]

APontus said:

It might be that Byker had had prior warning when he was banned from the Biden thread.

Might be, might not be the case.

I'd be surprised if he ignored a warning but only he/the mods could confirm.

[FunkyNige]

eharding said:

HM-2 said:

A few pages ago someone posted a breakdown of what proportion of posts on this thread were from Byker. It wasn't particularly high, about 10% IIRC.

273 of 5476, so just under 5%. It was just over 5% before the weekend.

The last full page before he was banned (I'm set to 40 posts per page so it was p129) it was 25/40, the page before it was 24/40.
His posts were fantastic back when Trump was in power were fantastic and were a real reminder of the extent of the craziness because he was finding news that wasn't in the mainstream media, but it became constant CNN/Twitter/Huffpost that anyone could find easily if they were interested.