No. 5 Nebraska

[Saunders]

Why not just post a paragraph, and link to the article instead of copying the whole thing?

 

Hey thanks for your input saunders45. Next time I'll post a paragraph and link it since you're intimidated by long articles. I'll see if I can find some pictures to go with it too just to make it easy on you.

 

I'll ignore the childish insult (hurrrrr durrrr, yurrrr dumbbbb), and spell it out for you. It's not about the article "length" at all. But copy/pasting a whole article removes the need to visit the site, denying them of page hits and ad revenue.

But from a convenience standpoint, I would personally much rather have the entire article posted than only a paragraph and then a link.

 

It is, however, a copyright violation to post the whole article. Not that anyone would likely ever get in trouble over this one... Nevertheless, I vote for letting the people who did the work to write the article get the page hit. Plus, when they get big page hit numbers for Nebraska articles, all the more reason for them to cover the Huskers more...

 

/End hijack

Bingo.

[Enhance]

Why not just post a paragraph, and link to the article instead of copying the whole thing?

 

Hey thanks for your input saunders45. Next time I'll post a paragraph and link it since you're intimidated by long articles. I'll see if I can find some pictures to go with it too just to make it easy on you.

 

I'll ignore the childish insult (hurrrrr durrrr, yurrrr dumbbbb), and spell it out for you. It's not about the article "length" at all. But copy/pasting a whole article removes the need to visit the site, denying them of page hits and ad revenue.

But from a convenience standpoint, I would personally much rather have the entire article posted than only a paragraph and then a link.

 

So..... basically you don't care about the site then? Someone takes the time to research and write an article, and you can't be bothered to contribute to pageview/ad revenue because you can't be bothered to click a link? Isn't that basically stealing?

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

[Saunders]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

[sd'sker]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

[Saunders]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

[Skull&Bones]

Husker Football needs to start soon...There is a lot of built up testosterone on HB.

[sd'sker]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

i do not think you are wrong. i do look at message boards as being tantamount to verbal conversations, but it is very gray and a policy of visiting the source site would probably be better/more fair/more ethical/etc., unless it is to an article written by chip brown, then i think we can all agree that only one person should be sent on that mission to retrieve it, and no one else should have to be subjected to the site.

[Saunders]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

i do not think you are wrong. i do look at message boards as being tantamount to verbal conversations, but it is very gray and a policy of visiting the source site would probably be better/more fair/more ethical/etc., unless it is to an article written by chip brown, then i think we can all agree that only one person should be sent on that mission to retrieve it, and no one else should have to be subjected to the site.

 

Amen to that!!!

[TheCheshireCat]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

i do not think you are wrong. i do look at message boards as being tantamount to verbal conversations, but it is very gray and a policy of visiting the source site would probably be better/more fair/more ethical/etc., unless it is to an article written by chip brown, then i think we can all agree that only one person should be sent on that mission to retrieve it, and no one else should have to be subjected to the site.

 

Amen to that!!!

 

Your entire argument is pointless anyway because I DID post the link at the bottom in the original posts. If you didn't make it that far that's not my fault.

[Saunders]

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

i do not think you are wrong. i do look at message boards as being tantamount to verbal conversations, but it is very gray and a policy of visiting the source site would probably be better/more fair/more ethical/etc., unless it is to an article written by chip brown, then i think we can all agree that only one person should be sent on that mission to retrieve it, and no one else should have to be subjected to the site.

 

Amen to that!!!

 

Your entire argument is pointless anyway because I DID post the link at the bottom in the original posts. If you didn't make it that far that's not my fault.

It's not pointless at all. BFD if you post the link after posting the whole article. What's the point in posting a link if you copied the whole friggin' thing? I'm not dumb, even though you keep trying to say that. You obviously don't have respect for the work of others, so I'm not surprised.

[Enhance]

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

That's a movie. I'm talking about news and information.

 

If someone reads an article online, copies/prints it, and gives it to you to read, do you get upset about that? If a coworker tells you Roger Clemens gets indicted, and you didn't hear it from an official news organization, is that wrong?

 

I'm not trying to sound better than you when I say this, but I study journalism and broadcasting in Lincoln, so I'm all for news reporters getting the credit they deserve on stories. At the same time, you have to learn to accept the fact not everything is fair on the internet. You have to be realistic. It is futile to argue about a reporter getting credit when, no matter what you do, these types of things happen every day, thousands of times.

 

Besides, you are saying it's unfair because now no one will visit the site and bump the ad revenue or give the site pub. In reality, there could be a few people on this forum that have now saved that website and will continue to check it for Husker news or other sports news. Heck, a poster on here could have sent that link to 200 of his friends just now on facebook rather than copying the entire article into a post. You just never know.

 

 

You are taking an extremely mundane and trivial topic and trying to find someway to argue about it.

 

You yourself are guilty of this exact same thing all the time, I'm sure. Any time someone tells you anything they found out from the news, from the internet, etc. and you didn't see it for yourself, then you are taking a story and not bumping the source's ad revenue/giving them props for their article. You're going to sit there and tell me you get upset every time someone does this? It happens to me 10 times a day, so I'm sure it happens to you just as much.

 

It's the internet. It already drains revenue from more popular news mediums every single day.

 

So, stop being holier than thou about something so trivial as one article posted from one website.

 

You're right. I'm obviously in the wrong here. Someone copying and pasting an entire article from a site verbatim is exactly the same as someone summarizing a story when telling another person.

 

If someone asked me what Star Wars was about, telling them "it's about good vs evil in space" is identical to downloading bootlegged copies from the internet and burning copies for them. Exactly the same.

i've been watching this debate, and it does seem trivial, bu ti think he was saying that it is more like if you get the paper delivered to your home, and you take that newspaper to work and a co-worker grabs it off of your desk and reads it, would you stop him/her and make him/her go out and buy his/her own to read?

I understand what you are saying. But I also think that it's unfair to site creators/writers to not receive compensation for their work. I have dealt with these issues with my job numerous time, and having someone basically lift your work, without compensation is not cool at all. I find it extremely hypocritical for someone to say "I can't be bothered to click this link" due to convenience or whatever, when the article is over 3500 words...

i do not think you are wrong. i do look at message boards as being tantamount to verbal conversations, but it is very gray and a policy of visiting the source site would probably be better/more fair/more ethical/etc., unless it is to an article written by chip brown, then i think we can all agree that only one person should be sent on that mission to retrieve it, and no one else should have to be subjected to the site.

 

Amen to that!!!

 

Your entire argument is pointless anyway because I DID post the link at the bottom in the original posts. If you didn't make it that far that's not my fault.

I think his point is that you shouldn't have posted the entire article and instead just a snippet and the link. I'm with you though. The argument is futile and trivial and you should just post the entire article.

[Enhance]

You obviously don't have respect for the work of others, so I'm not surprised.

So, essentially, we are required by some misplaced sense of loyalty to travel to an art museum to view a painting and pay for admission rather than just google image it.

 

Like I said..I'm all for people receiving credit for their work. I think ripping music is wrong, but that doesn't mean it's going to stop. A line exists between being trivial and being realistic. What you are saying is trivial and an overstated representation of how things should be.

 

Last but not least, it was an article from a free website, and free websites subject themselves to the possibility of the very thing you are campaigning against. Is it right? No. So, at least we agree on something.

 

I think it's time this thread got back on track before this commentary forces a mod to lock the thread.

[Saunders]

You obviously don't have respect for the work of others, so I'm not surprised.

So, essentially, we are required by some misplaced sense of loyalty to travel to an art museum to view a painting and pay for admission rather than just google image it.

 

Like I said..I'm all for people receiving credit for their work. I think ripping music is wrong, but that doesn't mean it's going to stop. A line exists between being trivial and being realistic. What you are saying is trivial and an overstated representation of how things should be.

 

Last but not least, it was an article from a free website, and free websites subject themselves to the possibility of the very thing you are campaigning against. Is it right? No. So, at least we agree on something.

 

I think it's time this thread got back on track before this commentary forces a mod to lock the thread.

 

I love how people go to extreme examples to derail an argument. What you are saying is that basically, it's wrong, but you don't care. Good to know.

 

I find it odd that it's frowned upon when someone posts "premium" info from a site, but copying an entire page from a site that isn't "premium" is no big deal. It's not necessarily this particular site that I care about, being seeing it happen over and over again is just plain wrong.

[Enhance]

You obviously don't have respect for the work of others, so I'm not surprised.

So, essentially, we are required by some misplaced sense of loyalty to travel to an art museum to view a painting and pay for admission rather than just google image it.

 

Like I said..I'm all for people receiving credit for their work. I think ripping music is wrong, but that doesn't mean it's going to stop. A line exists between being trivial and being realistic. What you are saying is trivial and an overstated representation of how things should be.

 

Last but not least, it was an article from a free website, and free websites subject themselves to the possibility of the very thing you are campaigning against. Is it right? No. So, at least we agree on something.

 

I think it's time this thread got back on track before this commentary forces a mod to lock the thread.

 

I love how people go to extreme examples to derail an argument. What you are saying is that basically, it's wrong, but you don't care. Good to know.

 

I find it odd that it's frowned upon when someone posts "premium" info from a site, but copying an entire page from a site that isn't "premium" is no big deal. It's not necessarily this particular site that I care about, being seeing it happen over and over again is just plain wrong.

Sometimes an extreme is necessary when trying to prove a point to someone. It is exactly what you are talking about, just on a grander scale so that is more easily understandable to others. Tell me how it is different? Because all I see in your response is deflection from my argument.

 

Like I said I do know it is wrong, but that doesn't mean your commentary on life and respecting others' work is necessary. Because no matter what you or anybody else says, it's not going to change. It is just a part of how things work in this era of communication.

 

And of course premium site info is frowned upon, because you have to pay for it. The link he posted is from a free website that is fully aware of the possibility that someone will see the article indirectly from their website.

 

My point still stands that a) they are still getting pub in one way or another and b ) you have no idea whether or not this exact website was linked by someone here to maybe 200 of his friends. You just simply don't know. And because you don't know, you shouldn't have such a strong opinion on it.

 

If it was a problem, obviously the MODS would lock it. Since it's not, I vote we quit derailing this thread purely to fulfill some misplaced sense of entitlement you have.

[ADS]

I like husker football