IP Discussion in May 2010

IP Discussion

Discussion w/ Giga Gal

Wouldn't this mean we couldn't even use screenshots from the game, Champions Online itself? I've cited where the profile picture came from. I'm certainly not trying to be difficult but it was removed once and I provided the criteria for it to be, as I understood it, safe. This was long after October when it was first under scrutiny. I don't think it's going to cause you any problems and while I understand your policy's are for your own protection.. I see a ton of things similar to mine that are overlooked including hundreds of celebrity photo's. Myself and my friends have poured a lot of effort into this project, the picture included.

With all due respect, I am not claiming any ownership of the file, this isn't a for profit website. The picture has been credited. I would very much like to keep it. I'm sorry if that sounds difficult, I just want to keep the contributions that me and others have done intact. --Giga Gal 02:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion w/Giga Gal continued

I don't really know how to find the original image in a public domain or prove anything that would be satisfactory to your requirements. I'm also sorry for any personal attacks you're suffering as a result of my making this and another issue public. That was not my intention. I'm not happy with the changes, or the reasons behind them, but I'm not a petty person. The profile image has been changed. --Giga Gal 19:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

So who do we complain to

Because me and a lot of people are rather fed up with what you've been doing. The fact that you've been specifically targeting people in a certain social circle, or at least coincidentally doing so. Moderation that no REASONABLE person I've spoken with agree's with. We'd like an outlet to see some change done in policy and moderation, to complain about what we see as unfair. Are there any of the people around who appointed you in the first place or are you just acting on whatever accord is left. --Giga Gal 07:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

You can leave a message on U4dandy's page User talk:U4dandy. He has been in contact recently, and I have emailed regarding this situation, including linking the volcano thread. I will ask him to check his talk page with the next email exchamge if you like.Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, the other thing the group of you have in common is having started new pages. Basically the starting point for checking entries is the list of new entries report the wiki generates. That is the first thing I check. I'm sorry if you feel singled put, but it's hardly the case. Mangle Paw 02:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Commentary from Unhearted

I am removing my comment based on the fact I don't want it to negatively reflect on players/Primus page creators who frequent this site far more than I. I will say I'm not sure I agree with what you're doing and/or attempting to do. -Unhearted 20:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

That is certainly your right and thank you for letting me know. I will be in touch you about your other commentary, which I do appreciate and have since addressed.Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Commentary from Mr. Bits

Instead of going off trying to tear down any little thing that could cause a smidge of trouble for the site, why not focus on getting the Wiki to adhere to American copyright law (assuming it doesn't already?) Pretty sure the United States' Fair Use Act would let people use material and references in a strictly and obviously not-for-profit way with basically no problem. --Mrbits 07:46, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

That is exactly what this about. Getting this in line with copyright law and not some fictious power of Fair Use. The problem here is the general misunderstanding that Fair Use is a right. It is not. It is a code of law that creates a defense. That means that PDB can still have legal papers issued against it's conent. The a Lawyer can try and claim fair use. Unfortunatly unlike most wiki's which focus on being an encyclopia of information surrounding an IP we facilitate creative expression. That means we cannot fall back on educational material as our Fair Use is not educational but derivitave which is the problem. There are 4 parts to Fair Use that the courts consider.

1.the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2.the nature of the copyrighted work;

3.the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

4.the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

There is a very nice article on Fair Use on Wikipedia. A real rough explanation of this is. We are not educational, we are creative, that strikes the 1st point. The second point is relevant in that we are not talking facts, were talking fictions, so there is no shield there. Substance now basically refers to the percentage of borrowed conent, as City of Heroes is a trademarked phrase, thats gonna count as 100% so we can't get aid from part three. Part 4 is also in bad shape because not because PDB is not making mone, but because when PBD hosts an image not owned by the poster, the owner has lost the right to sell even a one off use of the image. If I can strike all four sections in four sentences, then we have an issue. Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Oak's points

While I personally understand the fear of the web site getting shut down due to a lawsuit based on intellectual property or copyright infringement, I personally feel it to be a most irrational fear. Though I am not certain of your nationality, American law dictates through the FAIR USE Act that so long as copyrighted material, such as the images you've begun a crusade against, are available for use so long as the user/organization using the material is not drawing any money from its use. As this is a wiki, I certainly hope that is not the case. Even though some people may not like their pictures being posted, this is not solved with legal action, but a polite letter asking it to be taken down, at which time it will promptly be taken down quietly and without hassle. The most one can expect generally from such a problem is a cease and desist letter. All that aside, I and a few others have noticed violations of the rules you yourself are trying to enforce on your own character pages. Namely Shaft, the name in itself a reference to someone else's intellectual property. On his very page, not only are the Avengers mentioned, but Hawkeye himself. On other pages there are other such mentions. Arkham Asylum, Batman, Toxic Avenger, Unknown Soldier, and Forrest Gump all have stood out in your character pages. I understand the fact you are one of few if not the only mod presently active, but when a community ceases to voice their concerns, opinions, and complaints, they cease to be a community. --Oak 07:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)2:53 May 26, 2010 (CST)

First, thank you for catching my own mistakes. I'll be the first to admit that they are all to easy make. At this time I beleive that I have corrected them all. But I haven't and you should take the time to look through my own offerings, then please let me know. I'm not a hypocryte. But there is a difference between thinking creatively and thinking as an editor. Sometimes I blow it, but I am more than willing to fix it. Additionally I encourage and invite anyone that wants to needs to speak on this to do so. As a long time memeber of volunteer organizations I understand that people vote with their feet as often as they vote with their hand or their voice. If it takes some time to respond, I regret that, but my working and family life come first. Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

As to your statement about drawing money, that is simply put a fallacy. American Law makes no specific mention of non-profits getting free usage, only that Fair Use may be called by a non profit EDUCATIONAL organization. We are a non profit CREATIVE organization, but if we impede anothers ability to make a profit then we are at fault under part 4 (see Mr Bits). Images at CanStockPhoto cost minimum $2.00 to $4.00. So any image can be argued to be worth that much. In the case of art purchased from comic illustrators, I've seen them priced out as high as $50.00 for a detailed line drawning at comic shows. That is why we want to shoot for only images that have been marked for reuse.Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

As to taking a wait and see approach, that would be organizationally bad in that it would REQUIRE someone to spend the time pulling each image a letter gets generated for. Because that poor person is going to have spend hours doing it. Rule one of volunteer labor is NEVER create a situation where you have to rely upon the unpaid to perform a task that must be finished in a set amount of time with a short deadline. Volunteers can and do vote with thier feet.Mangle Paw 20:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Angelight's Turn

With due respect, Mangle Paw, but I believe everything you have stated is not needed nor do you have to go this far to crack down on it.

I would like to refer to you to this wikipedia page, feel free to remove the link when you are finished reading it: http://www.slmidgar.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

This is a wikipedia page my friends and I have ran for over two years now. Copyrighted images have been used to advertise Final Fantasy. The actual company of Square Enix has come into Second Life at one point and took a tour between the sims. They have even seen our webpage, forums and our wikipedia page. As it stands, they have not taken any legal action against us. From what I've spoke to the administrators about this, they were impressed and we've been working to keep it that way.

With this example in mind, I have a lot of doubt that Cryptic Studios, Marvel, or DC Comics will sue us over images as long as it is properly credited to the owner. The reason I say this is because these companies are from the United States. Fan material is okay here.

Square Enix is in Japan. Japan would sue in a heart beat over any fan material due to the laws they go by in Japan. In fact, it is the grace of god that they HAVEN'T given us a cease and desist order.

This is not Japan. This is America.

Please take into consideration of what everyone is trying to tell you, because I really believe you are wrong where you stand on the issue even though you are doing it with the best of intentions. Please think this over.

I agree, this is America. It is the same America where Major Spoilers has been forced by Marvel to remove images (about 3 years ago), and where Wikia Marvel Database currently reserves the right to remove copyrighted material. They are both far more capable of declaring Fair Use than PDB can because they are designed to either critique or educate. Due to the history of Marvel's erratic enforcement policies, which have definitely waxed and waned over the history of internet, I think predicting Marvels response, is irresponsible. The same really applies to all holders of copyright that PDB users infringe upon. Mangle Paw 06:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

But, you see? Thats Marvel. That was a wikipedia page that was to show off official heroes. This is a wikipedia page of role players that show off fan created material based off of an MMO that was based off a desk top role playing game. The last time I had checked, Marvel did not create Champions Online nor did did they have any assistance in the creation of this MMO.

The problem with your argument is your saying Marvel or Cryptic Studios will come down here with a war hammer simply because we mention another hero or even, god help us all, if we refer to another MMO such as City of Heroes.

I can understand certain images, and wanting to monitor them. However, the fact you are editing profiles to be politically correct is not only unnecessary but infringing the right of free speech. If anything, your user name page has a lot of pictures that are considered questionable. Did you make them yourself? Did you borrow them from another website? If so, where are your references? How come they haven't shut us down?

I stand by my statements. You need to lighten up because this is a wikipedia to express the fan characters of a bunch of role players. Not the government. - Angelight

I’m not entirely clear on the 1st point. You showed me a wiki that hasn’t had problems; I showed one that mirrors the stance of PDB. I do understand that PDB is a creative outlet, but I also understand that in being one, Fair Use provides us less coverage. Unlike PDB, the Marvel database has a strong claim to education on the basis of Fair Use. I understand that Marvel did not and does not have anything to do with Cryptic. I also understand that mixing the two’s IP’s for creative purposes represent a challenge to both IP’s.

As to “the hammer” you mention, I too would doubt that Cryptic would consider doing anything legal over PDB. We are good advertising, and if they did I would bet U4Dandy would pull the plug immediately just on the WTF of the whole idea. Marvel is a different case. They have a litigious past that others in the comic community prefer to safe guard against. Hence we safeguard as well. As to City of Heroes, we have no idea what NC Soft will do, as they have no track record one way or another.

The editing you mention is COMPLETELY fair game. At the bottom of every text entry box the following disclaimer appears on the screen.

“Please note that all contributions to PRIMUS Database may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.

You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see PRIMUS Database:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!”

You mention “Politically Correct” in regards to the editing. It is not. It is “Legally Correct” (to coin a phrase if it hasn’t been coined before). I do not own the phrase Hawkeye as a trademark; therefore I had no business using it. I did, I was called on it, and it is removed now. Mixing copyrights and trademarks of others on a creative level is something that can be challenged in court (and to a certain extent the holders of TM and CW are legally required to challenge as proof of continued protection/use). PDB does not want to go to court, therefore it is not allowed.

As to my own created pictures, they are all sourced in one of two ways. Both of which I would deem acceptable. The first is the suggested notation in the commentary, the second is providing the search tool and name that yields the creators original image. The only thing that isn’t sourced is Cryptic Screens, and PDB does not require them to be sourced.

Now let’s talk about free speech. There’s a beefy topic that has little or no meaning here. PDB provides an outlet for creativity that has established rules, not only to restrict the type of content to what is legal, but to restrict the content as to what PDB is willing to defend. That is PDB’s right as the operator of this site. Your (generalized for group that have an issue here) Free Speech rights are not being harmed in any way. In no way do I have the authority to prevent you from posting whatever you want. Nor do I have the power to prevent you from posting whatever you want. Provided it is on a site that YOU control. I did not remove Giga Gal’s link to VirtueVerse because that IS allowed. In the case of anyone porting a hero from COX to CO, I would encourage them to do so. In this case, your right to free speech costs as little $3.33 American for a very generous amount of space, less space if you need free hosting. If the creative muse of any user here requires them to work outside the parameters set by PDB, I encourage them to do so and have their bliss.

You discuss this in terms of ‘my argument’. It would be better to state the ‘the argument’ is one where a party of Users disagrees with the PDB and it’s strong belief in responsibly upholding the IP rights of others. This small but vocal group of Users wants a lax stance and is willing to adopt an attitude of theft till caught. PDB’s desire is to do nothing that places PDB in court in the first place. This exchange can go on ad nasuem, but it isn’t likely to change either side’s stance because the exchange at its core is more about ethics and less about creativity. If you want to post what you want, then by all means go get space and do so. PDB is very much about building community and would be happy to let you use a namespace here to link to content on a server you control (with all the provisos that go along with disambiguation pages, content that is about CO, and provided the content isn’t utterly graphically obscene). Really it seems that this is the only way for you (generalized you that is) are going to happy.

Mangle Paw 01:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

If you want to post what you want, then by all means go get space and do so. PDB is very much about building community and would be happy to let you use a namespace here to link to content on a server you control (with all the provisos that go along with disambiguation pages, content that is about CO, and provided the content isn’t utterly graphically obscene). Really it seems that this is the only way for you (generalized you that is) are going to happy.

So from what I am quoting what you just wrote, you clearly just told the community that disagrees with you, bluntly, 'These are my rules. I don't care if you disagree with them. You could be right but it doesn't matter. I'm an administrator, whatever I say goes. Don't like it? Go elsewhere'. Thats not being a good administrator on your part and I ask that you apologize to me for that statement. I am trying to debate with you on something I feel you are wrong in. Instead, you mock me and spit in my face with this.

I don't appreciate it.

I also don't appreciate you going to other people's user page and ask them to get into the debate, then call it a 'debate' as if it means absolutely nothing to you. I refer to this I found in the history: http://www.primusdatabase.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Sintohate

While I don't care if you'd like to get others into a debate or not, its best to do it off the wikipedia page. The way you quote, 'debate,' makes me feel as if you don't care what people say or think and that what people complain to you is meaningless. Also, I don't want to make a new wikipedia page. I don't feel that we should have to. I feel that if we believe something is being done wrong, it should be addressed and then it should be corrected. Be it finding a new administrator or least the current one being a little more compassionate about what everyone else is feeling.

I'm not stepping down on this. I believe you are wrong on this, and your mockery of this whole thing is only making me want to argue the case more in something I believe in fighting for. We have a right to write as we wish, and we should be allowed to express how our characters came to be. This is our right, we deserve it as a community. -Angelight

Lets set some stuff straight here. One, this space is under U4dandy’s control, and it is to be used as HE wishes because it is HIS space to share, or not to share, as he designates. Metaphorically this is NOT a public playground, and is NOT required to change at the communities’ behest; it is a private beach that has been established to serve residents in the MMO community that specifically play CO. PDB wants to allow all of the CO community access to ‘the beach’ but if members of the community cannot or will not use ‘the beach’ in the ways its owner intends, they can have their membership revoked. I have been in touch with U4dandy this weekend, and he supports my choices on content, and I am his representative here.

I have every right, and even possibility a responsibility, to draw others into the debate as you call it. There are people in this community that agree with the PDB policy as it stands. Sintohate is memorable and has the potential to be enlightening because he (she, sorry I don’t know Sin’s rl gender) paraphrasing, “had three classes last quarter where to IP law was rammed down his throat”. Additionally the offer was made with the instruction to speak (write) as he wished on either side of the argument. Additionally stating that you don’t appreciate my enlisting others (for the permanent record he is not the only one that asked to take a look) and then saying you don’t care is disingenuous at best an manipulative at worst. Either you care or you don’t. Additionally if you really do care to protect the right of expression, why are you nicking me for draw others expressions in? Or is protecting your own selfish interest really at the heart of your concern? I will not go as far to accuse you such, but I must admit it makes for interesting speculation.

If you feel I’m mocking you, I’m sorry you feel that way, and it is not my intention to cause you to feel that way. I’m doing my best to give a forum for the community and listen to the community, even if I disagree. As to your statement that my offering is essentially My Way Or the Highway, you are correct. I tried to phrase such as politely as possible so if you’re expecting an apology on that count, you’re not going to receive one. If your feelings are hurt over how I used quotes on “debate” I am sorry. I did so because I can see that it isn’t a debate. It is one group making demands of another that run directly against their intentions. A debate is discourse with point and counter point on both parts meant to persuade. To date the group desiring change has shown very little counterpoint. The most useful bit of evidence so far has been the slmidgar wiki, which maybe you should approach an alternate hosting site for the group of you that want to be either net trademark activists or thieves (at this point I’m not sure which). As to the location of the conversation, this place is a good as any, and may be better because the knowledge that nothing can really be deleted here and that should discourage emotionally enflamed posts that would later be edited.

“I'm not stepping down on this. I believe you are wrong on this, and your mockery of this whole thing is only making me want to argue the case more in something I believe in fighting for. We have a right to write as we wish, and we should be allowed to express how our characters came to be. This is our right, we deserve it as a community. “ Angelight

We have a difference of opinion on how to use this space. It is likely unsolvable because no matter how much you insist you have a right to declare how this space is used, you don’t. The right to grant use of this space and the right pattern it’s format belongs solely to the sites OWNER. That is the guy who set it up and receives the physical mail and sends the checks tha pay for it. As an administrator, my first responsibility is to the owner, and second responsibility is to whole of the users. The users fall into three camps on this, agree, disagree, and “don’tcareletmeplaymygame”. You do not represent a majority and worse you are proceeding on the thought that this is a democracy. It is not. At the end of the day, all the ‘rights’ are granted to those that share in the ‘responsibilities’ of the sites longevity. If that makes me the apologist sycophant of a dictatorial regime, then so be it. I have had that role in the past with another fan group and helped lead it from a local club hosting parties in back yards and basements to a national organization in the Midwest that lists over 400 members and has the respect of both Paramount and GAMA that regularly hosts weekend long hotel parties and events for over 1000 people. I can’t say that the same results will happen here, but I can say it works very well. In that group we refer it as a ‘Benign Dictatorship’ and it is just as valid a governing form as Democracy, Republic and Anarchy. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Benign Dictatorship is very useful for fan based organizations, be they dedicated to online gaming, the science fiction genre or the comic genre, because the fans (not you in particular Angelight, just to be clear) in those genres are often very idealistic and have just enough knowledge to cause a great deal of trouble.

Someone will inevitably toss the word arrogance at the point above. It isn’t, it is a bald statement of the facts as they stand.

The tone of your post may imply that your intentions may be to heckle me into leaving or changing the nature of the sites stance on IP. Particularly when making the statement of ‘finding a new administrator’. I will not go as far as to claim certainly that is your intent. But I will warn you that if the dialogue that amounts to nothing more substantial than “No You Are Wrong, You Are A Bad Dog For Not Making Me Feel Good, Do It My Way” continues, you are going reinforce the thought in my mind and cause me to act accordingly. If you really want a debate, present logic and evidence as opposed to feelings if only because the policy in place currently was made on the basis of logic and evidence.

If you want to infer that I don’t care, that’s hardly case, I do care. If I didn’t care I’d have done a Deadborder on the whole lot of you (subjective) a long time ago. I care enough to provide space, time, and response to each of the demands the group of you have made and invested over 40 hours into this discussion. If that isn’t proof enough that I care, then I suspect your standards of caring will never be able to be met by myself or PDB. However. The line of discourse is coming to an end here shortly. Especially if all you (particularly and subjectively) have to offer is inference on my writing and arrogant demands that you be allowed to act unethically until such a time as you are caught (and we have to clean your mess up).

My goal is to build community and community resources. I have a responsibility to you, but I also have a responsibility to U4Dandy (which includes the ethical use of IP material for the purpose of preventing litigation), and to the rest of the community that either disagrees with you or doesn’t give a darn.

To address your comments made in Sintohate’s Point, the same points made two points up is proof enough that I have been listening. As to the size of the problem as you put it, the group of you make up approximately one percent of the population. By some standards in modern American politics I could claim a 99% approval rating. It is not a big problem. It is an issue with how the organizers of this site intend for it to be used and how a minority of its users want to use it. The only reason there is a problem is due to that difference of opinion. The organizers have reasons that they find compelling for the IP policy as it is now, and while they are not required to do so in any way, have offered you (again subjective) the opportunity to change their minds. As to the accusation of being disrespectful, I’d say that giving you (again subjective) over 40 hours of my time to read and evaluate your (and again) opinions is the highest level of respect that one human being can afford another. And as to what an Administrator should be doing, simply put, you (in particular) are mistaken. An Administrator should be following the guidance behind the policy that the organizers intended, and not changing policy when a vocal minority demands the right to break the law. On your point of my stance of telling people to follow the rules or leave, that is exactly what I’m trying to get across to the group that supports IP theft. I have tried to explain that the organizers do not support that for a whole host of reasons. If you feel it’s over protective and paranoid then strike out on your own, and should a mess occur, it will be your problem to deal with, not ours. You make a point of having new administrators installed; I would not plan on that occurring anytime soon. I mentioned above that I have been in contact with U4dandy and I have his support, additionally he is quite content with policy as it stands, and he admires the fact that I have given so much time letting the group of you (subjective) rail against the perceived unfairness of the IP policy. I’m dropping these bits not because I want to rub your nose in them, but because I want you to understand that he sees this issue in the same manner as I.

Lastly, it is quite offensive to infer that I need fixing when all I have done is listen to your grievances and not been moved by them.Mangle Paw 07:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

-Not Over Yet-

Unfortunately, I will not let it go because Mangle Paw says so.

I have a friend who is also a lawyer that knows both USA and Europe Law. He said it is complicated due to it being an MMO. However, as long as its listed of where a picture's source is from, it should be fine. He is researching it and will be posting on this topic when he gets the verdict. I would advise waiting until he comes in to solve it once and for all. Then again, the actual law was posted and you blatantly ignore it so I guess we know the true Anarchy, and its one person.

But, until then...

Who wants to create a wiki called the UNTIL Database? - Angelight

• Amazingly, rofl - I've been looking into it. :D I was/am waiting to hear back from a friend about a few details! -Pretty Pretty Princess

As I have said elsewhere today, all formats of structured debate (see http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/debformats.html ) have a time limit imposed because some things simply cannot be solved by debate. This case looks like one of them to me. The group of you have given your reasons, and they have not changed PDB's position, I have given you PDB's reasons and the group of you are not moved. I am a least willing to agree to disagree and wait and revist in six months, you in particular are not willing to let go at all. This is devolving into a contest of who can say 'stop or I'll stop again'. If that has occured then the sensible approach is to drop it and see what time reveals.

As I have said elewhere today, I'd love to hear from him, just remember, it is PDBs goal to NEVER be served papers, if he or she is willing to assure that (which I don't beleive he really can), Fair Use is a Defense, not an inalienalbe right)

That falls into the thought of finding your own space in my mind and all the provisions for cross linking would still apply. If you want to do an UNTIL Database, go for it I wish you all the best.Mangle Paw 01:47, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

However, I ask of one more thing.

I ask that you apologize to the "Anarchy" group and apologize for your insults. we're not an Anarchy, we just think your wrong. Calling someone names just because they don't think as you do is not the best and you owe us, and the community, an apology for your words.

I am sure it would not have escalated the way it has if you were respectful and considerate. You owe us an apology. -Angelight

An appology was covered, a while ago, under the heading Anarchy Really But again, it was never my intent for that to be insulting, as I cited the closing discussion heading, it is meant in the most neutral meaning of the wordMangle Paw 01:47, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it takes common sense to know that using Anarchy in a sentence to refer a group of people would be more insulting then it would be nuetral. That is why you should avoid using it, or any other word to refer people, and you still don't get it. I'm not asking you to apologize just for sayiung Anarchy, I want you to apologize for everything as well as to me. You never gave me one yet. Angelight

Sintohate's Point

Point being it is better to safe then sorry. Even in game. If you might be crossing the line and you don't think you are someone else might see it the other way round. --Sintohate 11:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Too bad there is a difference in being safe then sorry, then being overprotective and paranoid. And when people are complaining, and he's refusing to listen as well as being very disrespectful about it -- Then there's a BIG problem, and a problem that really needs to be corrected, very quickly. He's not being a very good administrator, and its becoming more then just "write what we want" and more of what kind of job he's doing.

Right now, Mangle Paw represents the wikipedia. He's the face of it until there are different administrators put in. He has been very disrespectful not only to me but people who have argued their case against him. He will not listen to anyone, and telling people(read above post as an example) to leave and make their own if they don't like it. Thats not what an Administrator should be doing. He isn't doing his job, and why I seriously think he needs to fix himself up or step down and give it to someone else. - Angelight

See response above dated same.Mangle Paw 07:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Only reason I see you pulling Mangle Paw into this is because he is the man with the trigger. He is the final say. We cannot delete others' images or pages because we see that it is crossing the line. We have to go through him at the moment.

If We see someone's page is crossing a line and we go and mess it up we pay for it ourselves. To do it right we have to go through him after letting that person know that They are crossing the line, nicely.

For My two cent I Think Mangle Paw Is doing right by all of us and doing what his job is. --Sintohate 15:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't going to bother with a reply here as you don't seem to understand, either, but... why not?

If I wanted to go after the man with the trigger, I'd go after U4dandy. However, I have not commented nor made a reference to him. By the way, Mangle Paw crossed the line. Plenty of times. Also, I am sure you would not have been part of this argument because I highly suspect you are a friend of Mangle Paw's, thus, your opinion could be slightly biased. After all, he DID ask you to come into this debate and him clearly showing he didn't care at all for the debate.

Also, before you accuse me of the same - I don't know Giga Gal or the others very well. The closest that comes to a friend is Oak and thats because I've known him for years. I came on my own accord, with something I felt he did wrong and wanted to express my own opinion as well as telling him straight I felt he was wrong and why. He could have explained it nicely but instead, became insulting, mocking and very dictatorship.

Thats what I have a problem with, now. It doesn't have to do with what we write on the wiki now. Unfortunately, nothing will happen because U4Dandy is supporting dictatorship. Angelight

To Be frank I only know Mangle Paw from here, and ontop of that I hardly know him. My opinion is based solely on what I have seen in writing and in his actions. --Sintohate 14:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Where's the N-E-G-O-T-I-A-T-I-O-N?

(I find it sad that this is going to be the most unprofessional post in the history of wikis.)

Is this really what it's going to come down to?

"You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you."

You're an Admin, Mangle. An A...D...M...I...N--LEADER. You're supposed to listen to people then talk it out with reasons explanations. If that doesn't work (Which it hasn't, in case you didn't know!), you're supposed to work it out. I haven't seen that. All I've seen was 'Too bad! If it doesn't work for you... heheheh... Go make your own and GTFO!' And we all know THAT isn't a good sign for leadership at all.

What I'm saying is, HELP US, YOURSELF, AND THE WEBSITE! MAKE IT WORK WITH EVERYONE, NOT JUST YOURSELF! PLEASE, WITH A CHERRY ON TOP OF THE GREATEST SUNDAE IN THE WORLD, MARS, AND BEYOND!!! If this stuff keeps up, I see no hope for this site. Just saying. Note that I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just putting out my 2 cents here, and explaining how I see this going. -Nyak

Wow, Nyak, I’ll bet after reading the above response you’re about ready to pitch a fit. I wonder how U4dandy feels about being cast in the role of the watery tart.

The interesting thing about leadership is that anybody that takes the time to respond to commentary, be it here, in the volcano, or elsewhere, is exerting leadership to an extent. I would make that statement about everyone who has posted above. It also includes you Nyak. You say I’m a poor leader for not negotiating, maybe so. But your demand for negotiation, forwarded without a thought of what middle ground there may be to work toward is equally poor leadership.

As I have stated before, this is more about ethics than anything else. Ethical discussion in my experience never really gets anywhere, but I have been more than willing to participate in discourse regardless of that. Personal ethos is made of factors ranging from time and place, to personal beliefs and culture. I didn’t expect to ever convert anyone with the “anarchy” position over to the way of thinking that this site has adopted. I did hope to clarify why that thinking is in the policy that PDB wants to adhere to (which in my opinion I have). Both groups in this discourse have adopted the ‘my way or the highway’ stance. Because this is really about ethics that was pretty much to be expected. I can at least say that the “paranoid / proactive protection” group has tried to express an alternative method for the alternate group to meet its needs and the ‘anarchy” group has not. In complete candor I did not and do not expect many of the people that have posted on this topic to stay with PDB because negotiation requires a middle ground to work toward and there simply is no middle ground. Either PDB takes a stance against IP theft, or it allows IP theft. PDB's stance on that was set long before I took an active hand here.Mangle Paw 07:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hunters Points cont.

But you're not willing to exercise debate, you're shutting down the debate before it's found a conclusion. -Hunter

Some debates never find conclusion, that why formats for debate have time limits, See http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/debformats.html. I have provided ample time here for all parties and provided a warning that the discussion will close UNLESS A NEW TACK IS TAKEN UP. Should something that is NOT a rehash of what another has already written be posted it will not close.

Fair use, once and for all. Hunter cont.

Taken from the US Gov't website on it.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, ((We would likely fall under comment. None of use claim to own these proterties, instead, we have claimed an inspiration.) News reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

        1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes (Including, but NOT LIMITED TO.)
        2. The nature of the copyrighted work (Is comic books. How come all the Youtube clips, fan-sites and such don't get sued?)
        3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole (Normally, a quick mention, maybe a link to the company. Free press. Again, nobody is claiming to own the property. 
        4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work. (Which is none. This sight will not lower Marvel or DC's Bottom line. As for CoH? People are here FROM there, so it's very exsitance cuts in on their bottom line.)

THIS is the wording of the Fair use. Now, it says, "When in doubt, do not use copywritten information unless it is clearly protected under the fair use act."

I've just argued it is. Anybody here have a law degree and can give a more authoritative comment? -Hunter

Hunter I posted a list of the same above in Mr. Bits's section with mention on how this site is sacked on all four points.

To reiteate:

• We are NOT educational, we are CREATIVE, Wikia Marvel Database can claim educational because it educates about Marvel's properties. As soon as you take a Cryptic/Hero system character and add elements of another IP to it you loose educational.
• The second part is relevant to reporting facts, we report on fictions.
• City of Heroes is a trademarked phrase, as is Pargon City, Rogue Islands, Arachnos, etc. The more that gets used the more substanstive the use is, and the less protection can be declared.
• PDB is not making money, but because when PBD hosts an image not owned by the poster, the owner has lost the ability to sell even a one off use of the image.

I’ve already spoken to my clubs attorneys regarding fair use, but I invite any attorney willing to comment to do so, particularly if they keep in mind that it is PDB’s goal to never be served papers. What she said was pretty simple. Paraphrasing, "If the goal is to NEVER get papers, then don't give a reason for papers to be served".

Valid points, but, the wording is OR. It doesn't need to be both on the first part of the creative use act, so, your argument doesn't really counter mine. Also, I don't think the Marvel Wiki functions on the Education base, just going on the fact that most schools don't teach Marvel comics as part of their state standards.

Second, The point is the nature of the works, facts are not part of the wording here whatsoever, why do you bring them up?

Third, It's also giving them free press. How difficult would it be to shoot an e-mail? Or, make a certification at the bottom of pages linking it, saying in clear terms, "City of Heroes, City of Villians, Statesman, Paragon City et Al. Are owmned by NCsoft."

I mean, let's get to the real HEART of the argument here.

The core argument.

One one side, we have people who want to reference the copywritten works of others. This isn't stealing, this is most often praise. Mangle, you had several pages where you did just that. This is a comic-book genre, we're bound to reference the greats that came before.

On the other side, the fear of a lawsuit. However miniscule it gets, any chance is still far too much for Mangle and the other Admin whose name escapes me. Reasonable enough.

Here's the million-dollar question, how do other wiki's go about? Many fansites rely on fair use for their existance, but they don't sell shirts with copywritten charecters. Then, there's the "Person does not own this" Copywrite addendum. Check this out. http://www.nuklearpower.com/8-bit-theater/ A sprite comic (Before that last page.) Made more or less entirely from old Square-enix games. Made to entertain, and he gets money off the site. Check the bottom of the page, he refrences how some images are owned by Square-Enix.

How's that for a compromise? As I don't think anybody has a problem with properly cited works. Nobody here is claiming they own it, and having a cited footnote is the work of a few seconds, rather then the rage of having to re-do the page.-Hunter

I wish it were compromise Hunter. You did a fair job at summing the core up understanding the PDB's position on court.

That is the real nut to crack as it where.

PDB desires to NEVER cause legal paperwork to be generated. Simply put, no one involved is willing to deal with hassle, and no one involved wants to create a situation where ANYONE has to deal with it, so the goal is to never give way to a situation that causes it.

On images in general, I’ll use Giga Gal's head pic as an example (It’s the one that partly started this discussion and I’m not sure that is valid by the standard you discuss, please let me know either way). It was credited to the artist and modified by a second artist. Crediting the artist MAY provide coverage if it goes to court, but it will not prevent the initial papers from being served so it’s automatically problematic. Additionally, the derivative use of that image by altering hues and adding a glow effect to the eyes can cause additional problems because she has is no right to modify consent. This can lead directly to the hassle we do not want.

Now as to the site you post, which I do appreciate. Nuklear Power is using TM, and has citation about it, that citation may or may not provide protection in court. On the US Copyright page you pointed us to ( I'm looking at http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html and I wondering if your looking at the same, mind sharing if not?) it outright states “Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.” Which also means what it doesn’t do is keep the site out of court or being served papers.

Now it may be your (subjective, as is every your following unless specifically stating otherwise) consideration that PDB is being a pack of pansies (my words) about court. To some extent you may be right. But regardless of the status of PDB’s manhood, the point remains that we don’t want the hassle of letters to desist and the only way to assure that happens to restrict the use of images to those that come from game screens, and those that have granted right to reuse and modify.

U4dandy created this site and then ended up in a rl situation where he doesn’t even have time to play. Let alone screw around much with PDB. So I can see how he would not want the hassle. If he were to offer to send them to me, I would kindly refuse, because I don’t want the hassle as I have my own full plate. If that makes us bad leaders then fine, you can label us that way, because we don’t mind.

I’m a very creative guy, and I can see no solution to this. I really wish there was one as my preference is to build community. So please, keep trying as I do appreciate the effort, just remember that part of the blueprint for it to getting a green lightis that it has to account for our pansy factor.

As to the commentary on Fair Use

• Creative is an important distinction as it leads to causing a need for concluding if the work is transformative or derivitive transformative works are covered, derivitive are not. In the example above (Giga Gal's head pic) would likely be called derivite as it doesn't pass the 10 differences test that is taught in graphic arts schools, that test also reminds the artist that ten differences will not keep you out of court, it will give you a chance should you go to court.
• Part two is concerned with trying to explain how Free Use relates to Free Speach and patents. For instance, you can't copyright Newton's Law of gravity, it's protected by Fair Use as a fact, our fictional creations are not covered by it.

If free advertising were a part of Fair Use, we'd have some cover there, unfortunately it is not. Mangle Paw 01:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Ashlaylay

• Wow, VirtueVerse never had these problems, haha. High school debate clubs have time limits, discussions over something people don't like on a website will most likely go on. As an admin you need to find a solution that appeals to both parties (especially when it involves quite a few active people of the site). Saying the that discussion is closed and can be brought up in six months, IMO, isn't the best choice. Allow people to let their anger stir and grow for six months, but hope that they just get over it? Doesn't sound wise to me. And you certainly aren't building bridges by refering to them as the Anarchy group. You might be saying it trying to remain neutral, but in my eyes its a negative word and these people who are coming to you about an issue certainly aren't trying to be lawless. Now, I see that you said something about some changes and that things relevant to the potential change will be allowed? What are these changes specifically, might I ask? ---Ashlaylay 19:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

When this page was founded It was discused wether or not to be reactive like VV or proactive as PDB is now. As I've said elsewhen, if a new tack is brought up I will keep it open till it's discussed to it's limits.

Anger is a possible result of declaring a moritorium, and it may well cause people move on. I'm okay with that. I have listened and responded to each, which I am not obligated to do, and should a relevant unexpressed point come up I will hold off the moritorium. Without declaring it, all that is going to happen is a continuing rehashing of the same points again and again. All that can come from that is me posting snipets that read see pt X above. That is a waste of everyones time. As to what they do with that anger. They do with it as they please because I'm not the one making them angery, they are making themselves angery. Theres a great self help book that discuss that idea in depth called When Anger Hurts by McKay. I accept that I'm doing what I supposed to and going above and beyond that llevel of expectation in my opinon and the opinion of U4Dandy. If someone else cannot accept that on the basis of being frustrated because the effort they have given has not yielded the result that they want, that is not my problem to deal with. I don't have any right to tell them what to do (about thier anger, or their choice to demand that tool function a way it was not intended too.

I have a responsibility to see to running the site as it was intended. You mention VV and that makes me kind of smile. On VV's Terms of service page, third sentence in says "If you do not accept and abide by this agreement, you may not use VirtueVerse. If you do not wish to follow VirtueVerse's policies, you may not edit these wikis." We don't have a Terms of Service page yet, hopefully we will soon. Additionally, what we are discussing here is a term of service. PDB doesnt want to mess with IP infringement at all. Thats why the statement "Do not submit copyrighted work without permission is at the bottom of every input dialoge". One my goals is to get PDB's templates set up as clear and concisely VV has. As to this segment of people and the use they intend, some of the intent is lawless, or illegal, some of it is only debatably so. Posting copyrighted material without permission is outside the law. That's why it can be forced by law to be taken down. Fair Use only protects if you intend to fight in court. PDB is not set up to fight in court, and doesn't intend to position itself in that way. That is why we have a proactive policy.

As to whats being considered, first, thank you for asking, by doing so you make it obvious that that hasn't gotten to be TDLR for some people. What is being considered is a provision to use Trademarked Text, only on User Pages, and only in a trivial format that describes the feelings, motivations, etc, of the User. I doubt that will satisfy many (if any) of the complaints listed here. But discussion here, in the CORP volcano, on other pages, and with people that I know personally have caused a reconsideration on User pages in particular.Mangle Paw 03:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Anarchy group, really?

Fine, how do you feel about being called nazi admin. --Giga Gal 14:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As much as I feel this is all going too far, putting that label on the group that is rightfully irritated with what is happening isn't the mature way of doing it. I get it, you don't want any legal issues with the site, and I know someone was gracious enough to even put this site up for us, and I give them a big thank you. I honestly think this needs to wind down a bit, the rudeness and disrespect needs to leave, so this can be a true civil conversation, not a "debate" or "arguement." Most of us came from Virtue Verse, where things like this never became an issue, I may be one of the people who has a problem with the way admin is going about this, but can we please stop the attacks? I don't see anything getting solved if issues like this just get brushed aside. And it's getting brushed aside because this whole topic just seemed to EXPLODE. So, as a proud member of the Anarchy group, my last words are: IMA FIRIN' MAH LAZER.--Kel

To anyone that is offended by the phrase Anarchy group, it was not my intetion to offend. It was my intention that it be taken in it's most neutral form (as is declared in the section regarding closing discussion below), and placed beside "paranoid/protection" group in describing PBDs stance as an attempt to balance the statement. That failed. Again, I appologize. Mangle Paw 20:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh and Kel, PEW PEW PEW back atcha and PLEAAAAAAASE get you works cited right, they are far to skilled and gorgeous too get pulled over policy

An apology given afterwards really is closing the door after the horse has left the stable. Not accepting the apology would be petty, however, so for my end, I accept it. Could stand to make that apology a little larger so that people won't miss it though.(?)

point taken on the larger bit, is now bold

But, we're not the bad guys here, neither are you. We want to make this wiki great, and when our voices are dissmissed like that with hurtful comments, we're not really inclined to work together like we should be doing from the start. -Hunter

The statement doesn't offend me. The inference that your perception of us is a certain way leads me to frustrated anger. Thank you for the apology. --Giga Gal 01:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Not Over Yet: More from Angelight

All content moved to Angelight's section above including Unhearteds comment

Space Available

Oak has decided that PDB’s rules are too harsh, and feels that a moratorium on discussion is unfair. So he has moved his profile to Templar Wiki. While I disagree with him on the second part (the moritorium) I wish him all the best in his new home. He welcomes anyone and everyone to join him. The link to that site is http://templar.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page . Should anyone else wish to strike out on their own, I wish them the best.

Sincerly Mangle Paw 00:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

This is an example as to why people are angry at you.

Oak has decided that PDB’s rules are too harsh, and feels that a moratorium on discussion is unfair. So he has moved his profile to Templar Wiki. Yes, because apparently by advertising here and going, "Yes Oak decided it was unfair so he went elsewhere. Go here, wannabes" is what your saying. Did you mean that? I can't say but thats what it reads as. In other words, it labels you as a douche.

"While I disagree with him on the second part (the moritorium) I wish him all the best in his new home." Yes and you decide to advertise it on this page, which clearly shows much sarcasm.

"He welcomes anyone and everyone to join him. The link to that site is http://templar.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page . Should anyone else wish to strike out on their own, I wish them the best." More sarcasm from you.

It... its sad. It is seriously sad. You cannot see ANYTHING you are doing wrong. You label all of us as part of an Anarchy and when pointed out as offending, you don't even take it back. You keep going and going. You need to just... just stop. If your going to advertise it, do it properly. Its clear you don't like it or else you wouldn't advertise it HERE.

For the love of pete, just stop. Your making yourself look worse as an administrator and will make it difficult to advertise for yourself. Just stop, and apologize for everything already. Its not that difficult. And not what YOU feel like apologizing to, but for everything. You've done too much damage and you need to do damage control(Which you seem to refuse to do.) - Angelight

Your suppositions on my intentions are completely off base. I whole heartedly wish Oak and anyone that wants to follow to Templar the best. I presume their set up will be much less aggravating for the needs of the people who are looking for a more free form environment. This site does not want to incur the possible hassles that their method of expression require. Many involved in this discourse have been of the opinion that they have the right to dictate to the policies of a site that u4dandy pays for. That is completely incorrect. Now there is a haven for those likeminded individuals. They will be happier there and that’s a good thing.

That’s the second or third time that you have resorted to real name calling. I am formally making the request that you post politely for here on out.

Infer all you want, but there was nothing sarcastic about my response.Mangle Paw 01:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Unhearted

And what about your character Shaft, who in itself is a copyrighted comic, character, and movie? -User:Unhearted

I would say any name Cryptic is okay with PDB will be okay with. If anyone were to come after us they'd be going after Cryptic first and with much bigger guns. To be perfectly frank, the game let me pick the name, and I never read Youngbloods, so I had no clue about the comics characters now when I just searched it. I may buy a name change for it down the road cause my preference is to shoot for novel names.Mangle Paw 05:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Possibly, but you're still imposing copyright infringement on THIS site by creating a page for him with his name. You're being quite hypocritical. Also, take a look at what you just said: "If anyone were to come after us they'd be going after Cryptic first and with much bigger guns." So long as Marvel or DC or any other creative common is mentioned - do you honestly believe they'd come after a wikia who's sole purpose is to hold information for characters people have created, especially when nonprofit? No, they'd go after video games. Case being Marvel going after City of Heroes for characters that could be named or created in the game's engine to closely resemble Marvel icons. --User:Unhearted

End of Discourse (please keep this as the last heading for easy reference)

This has been discussed for the better part of a week and totaling over 40 hours on my end alone, with no compelling logical reason for PDB to drastically alter its position on IP. Unless a new tack of debate is taken up by the ‘Anarchy’ group (and the use of that phrase here and above is meant with nothing but a neutral attitude towards them) of this conversation, in twenty four hours I am going to call it closed for a period approximately of six months. If the conversation needs to be continued as of November first 2010 (or somewhere near that date) then it will be taken back up again at that time. A page for complaints specifically about IP policy will be made available immediately upon the discussions closure but not commented on until that time. As a result of discussions that have taken place outside of this page, within the Volcano, and this page, one very small change is being considered. Based on the nature of the discussion I do not expect the ‘Anarchy’ side to feel fully vindicated, but relevant points were made and an idea expressed that provides for the export of particular personal facts with minimal threat to PDB that would be covered under Fair Use. Until such a time as the change is adopted, the previous rules are still in force and enforceable, but items relevant to the potential change will be ignored.Mangle Paw 07:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

• Oh nice, so you also get to decide when the discussion begins or ends? No, I don't think so. You can powertrip in the privacy of your bedroom or pull that crap with your mother, but not with me. If I've got something further to say on this topic - I will say it. -Unhearted

• Agreed. Saying it's over because you SAY it's over is abuse of power. Power some of us doubt you should still wield. Furthermore, you have not addressed many concerns, offering dismissive arguments, and your counter-points have flaws. With this many active contributors of the Wiki upset at you and your policy, it is your duty to see this through to an end that satisfies both them and you. If you CANNOT do this duty, you must step down so somebody else can. -Hunter

The provision that needs to filled to keep it going is a new tack of debate, should that present itself then it will continue. Bringing my bedroom and mother into this is rude, tacky, and unnecessary. It also confirms the idea that needs to put to rest for a bit in my mind.

About the equivalent as to being called anarchy. Pot, meet Kettle. (Hunter?)

At least I can said to be not intended to be insulting, see Anarchy above.Mangle Paw 00:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

What you call an abuse of power is also a responsibility of power. When a discussion gets to the point of the same items being declared repeatedly, the discussion has ceased to function.

What we are discussing isn't MY policy, it is THE policy of the site. Declaring it as mine alone is misleading becuase it implies that I have the right to change it as I wish, whenever I wish. I have evolved the inital policy to the current policy (with U4dandys consent given later) to be more coherent and conscise but when I did so I did it willing to risk U4dandy's displeasure and suffer any consequences that would occur. The group of you that appear to arguing for the right to what ever you want with this site is NOT a change that that I am willing to deal with the consequences of. Hence I will not change it.

As to "you must step down so somebody else can." That is the equivliant of my telling you, "I feel like a joy ride, you must step aside so I can steal your car". You wouldn't do it and neither will I, because just as I have no right to steal your car, you have no right to declare what this website or any other website that is not in your control will do.Mangle Paw 22:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As to that, I'm not sure if that's correct. As people who contribute to the content of the site, don't we have a voice? Otherwise, what's the point in there being a wiki as opposed to a regular closed website?-Hunter

The wiki is in this case a format for like minded people to express. The likemindedness has nothing to do with the content, and everything to do with the approach to content. Wikipedia is a group of people that want to see an expansive online encycolpedia who agree to do so within the bounds established by Wikipedia's organizers. In our case there is a serious disconnect that may be unresovable between the users and the organizers. Your voice, is your right to post content about CO within the guidelines created by the organizers. A wiki only facilitates things that would happen on a regular website with instant feedback (in regard to content posting). If this were a regular website, instead of trusting that the users create accordingly, the sites organizers could vet every submission before inclusion.Mangle Paw 00:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Let me make this absolutely clear. We do not want a free ticket to do whatever the fuck we want. We want there to be a REASONABLE level of restriction, someone posts up a page and steals superman's wiki word for word? Go to town. Someone mentions that their character was inspired by or even has similarities TO superman? To say that it's a threat to the safety of the website is excessive. To say that a character has the same name as another from City of Heroes is not a threat to the wiki. Do you understand yet? Or are you still clinging to the notion that we're looking to bring our axes and pitchforks and just raise hell until it gets shut down. --Giga Gal 01:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Theres information under Ashlaylay's heading regarding a possible change in how User pages handle trademarks and the ability show inspirations, so I'd say yes I have been listining. Mixing IPs is just cause for a suit, every character here by the nature of being a cryptic game is already settinig firmly on one IP.Mangle Paw 01:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, I'm not making myself angry but thank you for that subtle barb. Explain then, the change in policy you've implemented. Provide an example if possible. --Giga Gal 01:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

One that wasn't meant as a barb, the book is great and it honestly helped me a great deal several years back. I can understand why you might think it is, the book does a far better job than I can at explaining the personal nature of anger, and that concept is so outlandish in Western Culture that it typically requires one.

Two, let me preface this with the note that it still needs approval, that said, the change is a single item that allows for the use of TM phrases only on a user page and only for relating trivia about the thinking of the user. This would allow a User to list characters and the inpiration for them. For example, I could say on my User page, Caliber is a character that was inspired by Nick Fury and Ms Marvel. It's not much of a change, but it does allow more information to be transmitted and even in my paranoid opinion, isn't going to cause papers.Mangle Paw 02:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)