Jeff Dorgay & TONEAudio Declare War on CA

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, phototristan said:

 

So you really don't have the ability to edit the post on CA? I doubt that's true. 

 

Doubt all you want, keep digging all you want. 

 

 

[church_mouse]

4 minutes ago, phototristan said:

 

You stated in one of your replies to Jeff that you actually prefer to just post a summary of articles. If that is the case, why did you not just edit it to be a summary?  Boom - problem solved. 

Does this mean that you accept the full articles have been made available via the RRS feed?

[phototristan]

1 minute ago, plissken said:

 

You're a fucking idiot. 

 

If Chris is so bent out of shape over this, I'm sure he could edit or even remove the post. It's clear he likes the attention he's getting about it though. 

[plissken]

Just now, phototristan said:

 

If Chris is so bent out of shape over this, I'm sure he could edit or even remove the post. It's clear he likes the attention he's getting about it though. 

 

Duh.... It's good for CA, bad for TA. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, phototristan said:

 

If Chris is so bent out of shape over this, I'm sure he could edit or even remove the post. It's clear he likes the attention he's getting about it though. 

 

Huh?

[beetlemania]

I know nothing of this "RSS" other than what's is described in this thread. Heck, I can't even see anywhere on this site how/where to access content from other websites.

 

But it seems easy to comply with Jeff Dorgay's request, even if the real "problem" is his ignorance of how RSS works.

[plissken]

Just now, beetlemania said:

I know nothing of this "RSS" other than what's is described in this thread. Heck, I can't even see anywhere on this site how/where to access content from other websites.

 

But it seems easy to comply with Jeff Dorgay's request, even if the real "problem" is his ignorance of how RSS works.

 

Jeff has one reasonable option: Stop syndication via RSS. 

[jtwrace]

1 minute ago, beetlemania said:

But it seems easy to comply with Jeff Dorgay's request, even if the real "problem" is his ignorance of how RSS works.

That's not how business works though.  

[Allan F]

10 minutes ago, phototristan said:

 

So you really don't have the ability to edit the post on CA? I doubt that's true. 

 

You just don't get it. Why would Chris even consider editing the RSS content? The feed is syndicated, i.e. published to all subscribers, with the content consisting of what the publisher chooses to include, i.e. what the publisher intends subscribers to receive.

[mav52]

2 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You just don't get it. Why would Chris even consider editing the RSS content? The feed is syndicated, i.e. published to all subscribers, with the content consisting of what the publisher chooses to include, i.e. what the publisher intends subscribers to receive.

So correct. Jeff controls the content and he is letting all the content to be published.

[plissken]

3 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You just don't get it. Why would Chris even consider editing the RSS content? The feed is syndicated, i.e. published to all subscribers, with the content consisting of what the publisher chooses to include, i.e. what the publisher intends subscribers to receive.

Oh he gets it but that's not the way sycophants work. 

[jabbr]

Oh dear!

 

My old friend Aaron Swartz who was a developer of RSS when he was 13 would have choice words for Toneaudio ? ?

 

Duh!!!

 

 

[phototristan]

7 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

You just don't get it. Why would Chris even consider editing the RSS content? 

 

Because he himself stated he prefers a summary (versus full article), and the content creator complained to him about it. If he actually prefers it the way the content creator does, why not fix it? Boom - problem solved. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, phototristan said:

 

Because he himself stated he prefers a summary (versus full article), and the content creator complained to him about it. If he actually prefers it the way the content creator does, why not fix it? Boom - problem solved. 

 

Keep digging Tristan.

 

You're doubling-down on the extremely backwards way of putting a band-aide on this one. 

 

Did you see the single button Jeff needs to click on his site to resolve the issue he created?

[beetlemania]

11 minutes ago, jtwrace said:

That's not how business works though.  

Where's the rule book? Even if there *is* a rule book, maybe don't follow it when it doesn't seem "right".

[phototristan]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Keep digging Tristan.

 

You're doubling-down on the extremely backwards way of putting a band-aide on this one. 

 

Did you see the single button Jeff needs to click on his site to resolve the issue he created?

 

He's not complaining about his site, he's complaining about yours, as are you too. Since you BOTH don't like how YOUR site is displaying it, why not just fix it? Again, boom - problem solved for both of you. 

 

Further, even if Jeff changes a setting on his site, you still have the full article on your site, which is now indexed on search engines, etc. So that still doesn't resolve the issue for you. 

[mansr]

Just now, phototristan said:

He's not complaining about his site, he's complaining about yours, as are you too. Since you BOTH don't like how YOUR site is displaying it, why not just fix it? Again, boom - problem solved for both of you. 

You really like saying "boom," don't you?

[wgscott]

58 minutes ago, mansr said:

It absolutely has the full articles.

 

 

 

Thank you very much for posting that, and more generally, for telling the truth, and exposing lies.

 

 

[plissken]

3 minutes ago, phototristan said:

 

Because he himself stated he prefers a summary (versus full article), and the content creator complained to him about it. If he actually prefers it the way the content creator does, why not fix it? Boom - problem solved. 

 

Chris prefers that people that choose to setup their content for RSS distribution use the summary method. 

[jtwrace]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

You really like saying "boom," don't you?

BOOM!

 

 

 

[jabbr]

16 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Jeff has one reasonable option: Stop syndication via RSS. 

 

Yeah that's how it should work ... however IANAL but my understanding is that publishing RSS does not automatically renounce copyright ... easiest to just remove the feed entirely

[phototristan]

2 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

 

Thank you very much for posting that, and more generally, for telling the truth, and exposing lies.

 

 

 

This is not even the article in question...

[plissken]

Just now, jabbr said:

 

Yeah that's how it should work ... however IANAL but my understanding is that publishing RSS does not automatically renounce copyright ... easiest to just remove the feed entirely

 

Chris isn't infringing however. 

[jabbr]

1 minute ago, plissken said:

 

Chris isn't infringing however. 

 

A court would decide. He could be considered to after the publisher demands he take down. Again IANAL but my understanding is that without an explicit copyright notice its a gray area -- note that Aaron Swartz went on to participate in the Creative Commons effort designed to license internet content. I knew all the folks at the time and participated in discussions so know these issues exist.

 

[Allan F]

14 minutes ago, phototristan said:

 

He's not complaining about his site, he's complaining about yours, as are you too. Since you BOTH don't like how YOUR site is displaying it, why not just fix it? Again, boom - problem solved for both of you. 

 

Further, even if Jeff changes a setting on his site, you still have the full article on your site, which is now indexed on search engines, etc. So that still doesn't resolve the issue for you. 

 

Have you ever noticed how difficult it is to see an object clearly when you look through a telescope from the wrong end?