Amend The "Personal Information" Spam Forum Rule

Fair use is a defence for copyright infringement, so it's a separate offence to harassment (which I think is the main reason for the rule). So even if someone takes a picture and posts it on Sythe saying (or implying) you can only post it on this thread. That license wouldn't exclude the fair use provisions against a claim against copyright infringement. It would still however be relevant for a harassment claim.

In any event, the relevant clause is:

1. Posting user photo's that were not intended to be used in the spam forum without user's permission

The penalty being: Infraction, thread lock or forumban offences at staff discretion

So if a user quotes someones post from the Faces of Sythe, they can be punished, at the discretion of Staff, with an infraction all the way to a forum ban. That seems perfectly reasonable to me unless you have trigger-happy staff which would be a separate issue from the rule itself. How many times have people been excessively punished?

 

Can we make it so that we assume that people are ok with x-posting the images unless they specifically state they are not and to first remove them from the spam forum without punishment when asked and only do any sort of punishment if they ignore the person's request?

 

I mean I'm not sure how reasonable it is to assume that when someone posts their picture on a Faces of Sythe thread, that they therefore are ok with it being copied onto a place where it can be viciously attacked.

I don't think it's just the mere reproduction of an image that was posted elsewhere. By reproducing the image in the spam forum, you open it up for vicious comments. If I posted someone else's image in the spam forum, and someone comments on it saying the person looks like a failed abortion, that comment is not something that we would reasonably expect from any other sub-forum on this site.

Ultimately I think it should be a discretionary punishment by the staff, and that the community should keep the staff in check by saying wtf when they cross the line. I also don't think the punishment should be anymore than an infraction (even just deleting it and messaging them not to do it would be fine), unless multiple people are piling on to one person, in which case, pouring gasoline onto an unwanted fire should result in a larger punishment.

 

Should be able to repost as we please. If you dont want to get ripped on, dont share it.

Theres a warning already over the SF. Dont go there if your jimmies are so easily rustled. Im not for doxxing individuals or anything of the sort but if your dumbass gives us ammunition (publicly) we ought to be able to utilize it. I dont know much about this latest drama but ive seen similar shit go down all to many times, myself being banned 2-3 times for reposts (s/o @Tyler @Bleuskittle @KELDEO ).

I should also add I was unbanned each time because the rule is fucking stupid.

 

But I am very much so worried about being too strict in the spam forum because it's one of the places where the community can have so much fun. There used to be massive TinyChat parties and people would post screenshots of a dozen members on cam at once in the spam forum and it was a huge amount of fun which would now we entirely off limits. Cracking down on posting images is just killing the spam forum even more just in case someone is easily triggered. I really do not like allowing a very small handful of people that are super sensitive to kill the fun of everyone else.

 

How many times has the rule been applied excessively?

 

I don't even think that's the issue. To allow people to do what they've always done they would need to have selective enforcement of the rules and I don't like that.

 

Gun we all know this is about Chloe. The spam forum's had a hard on for her ever since they realized she really had a vagina. Stop acting like a 25 year old virgin who aint never had pussy before. Stop posting her fucking personal pictures and it wont be a issue. She even gave a warning. I would of banned him right on the spot.

 

She gave a warning and someone else came and just banned him so the warning really doesn't count.

 

It does count because she didnt actually ban him. This is all centered around the forums dislike for chloe. I agree the rule needs to be changed but to sugarcoat this and say it's not about chloe is a down right lie.

 

How does that make any sense, he didn't even receive the warning since he was banned immediately after (if it was done through PM), therefore that warning means nothing. This thread wasn't even about Chloe's actions, she acted perfectly fine (deleting and warning), it's trigger-happy whiteknight mods that would immediately ban which are the problem.

 

It does not count if he got banned for the same thing that he was warned for, which he was. I also don't think there is any general dislike for Chloe.

 

Don't think there is any dislike for Chloe. The rules are clear, and admin did punish rightly in that case.

Since then there's been a update to the rule; what @malakadang updated seems perfectly understandable to me. You might be ok with posting your pictures in SF, not everyone else is. I don't see any issue with that rule and also don't see any need for it to be amended any further. It is clear cut. There is only minimal rules in the SF, if you can't abide by it then it shows you can't follow the rules, and the 1 month bans/6 months are justified as a result in my honest opinion.

Examples of legality in pictures is under-aged individuals. You don't own any rights over those pictures to repost at your will, considering for what SF is, if you was to repost those pictures there .. you know.. that could lead to multiple things. Who knows what everyone on this forum has saved etc.