An open letter to the chaos.taylored.com mailing lists
bl...@dtc.net
I, too, apologize for posting this on your forum. I will also post it to
the alt.tv.x-files.creative newsgroup.
In response to Gil's posting, I wish to announce that, although I have
long 0since unsubscribed from the chaos.taylored.com mailing lists, I
will not choose, despite suggestions to do so, resubscribe on any
occasion. What appears to be occuring here is censorship based on an
administrator's discomfort with disagreement. I also feel strongly that
Chael Hall, along with others of the archiving group, has instituted new
guidelines without feedback from most of the writers who post here on
a.t.x.c and seems primarily interesting in maintaining his sense of power
and authority. Disagreement, clearly, is not allowed. I do not say this
based solely on Gil's posting, but on other things that have come to amy
attention. I will not quote those items because I do not have permission
from the parties in question.
I will no longer post to a.t.x.c, in part because of this kind of
behavior. I will happily no longer be archived by the Gossamer group.
My writing is archived in other areas and if someone wishes to read my
work, I'm sure they can find it. I cannot accept the kind of behavior
which choose to stifle disagreement, which choose control over others,
rather than power with, and which clearly indicates that the parties in
question believe they are smarter and stronger than the rest of this. If
any of you have ever read T.H. White, he has Merlin discussing Right
equals Might versus Might equal Right. Think about it.
Chael, I don't know you, we haven't had any personal disagreements or
discussions, but more and more what I have been receiving is the
indication that you and only you are the arbiter of what goes on with the
mailing lists and the archives. I find that anti-democratic, to say the
least, and your behavior strikes me as high handed and unfair. I don't
like high handed behavior anyway, and outright unfairness and dictatorial
policies make me furious. I don't know you enough to say if this is
standard or something unusual, but I will say that you may remove my
stories from your archive, should you choose to, because I have publicly
disagreed with you. I regret taking this action, and making a pucblic
statement on this matter, but as I've said before, if I see something
that I cannot ethically remain about, I have to answer, no matter how
unpopular it makes me.
bliss
In article <33b51616...@news.mindspring.com>,
furry...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> I have been banned from subscribing to all chaos.taylored.com mailing
> lists for "subverting the authority" of the list administration. Last
> Sunday, I was unsubscribed without notice and against my will. Only
> last night was I told why. This action was decided by Chael Hall, and
> has the full support of Monica Vallejo.
>
> This action here makes a mockery of all that. The policy of not
> allowing any speech which would "subvert the authority" of the list
> administration goes against everything I ever stood for as list
> administrator. NO ONE WAS EVER UNSUBSCRIBED FROM LISTS UNDER MY
> ADMINISTRATION FOR SPEECH THAT SUBVERTED MY AUTHORITY. I only
> unsubscribed people for plagiarism and for flaming, and even there, I
> left the door open for those who were willing to cease such activity.
> I made it plain to Chael and Monica what I wanted: simply, to read,
> write, and discuss fanfic. They were unwilling to let me do that.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Gil Trevizo
jud...@aol.com (JUDYTXS) wrote:
>Come on, guys -- Gil, Bliss, Chael. I don't know any of you, but how
>'bout
>calling a truce? And let's just concentrate on reading and writing fanfic
>and
>talking about The X-Files.
The following is the complete text of my last email to Chael Hall
before I posted this announcement:
----------------------
Chael, I'm going to say this for the last and final time.
I just want to read, write, and discuss fanfic.
Please let me do that.
----------------------
His response was no. I asked Monica Vallejo and Scinut if they would
allow this to happen. Their response was yes.
I am still unsubscribed. The anti-subversive clause in the list policy
is still in effect.
This is just information. Do with it what you will.
Gil
Canny409
Gil Trevizo wrote:
> This action here makes a mockery of all that. The policy of not
> allowing any speech which would "subvert the authority" of the list
********
I looked at this bullshit on the lists this morning.
You know, the words *subverting authority* have the horrifying and nasty
ring of an Orwell novel about them, for a very good reason. Perhaps it
was a poor choice of words, but the totalitarian implications are still
clear.
I'm hearing the sound of marching boots...
CiCi
Gil Trevizo
sph...@xtrabox.com (Nat) wrote:
>I agree with Judy. ;-) I announced my retirement several months ago
>and I was lucky to find these suckers-- er, volunteers <g> to work
>with Adam. He is a full-time college student and I worried myself
>sick that he would be overwhelmed with the forty hours a week it would
>take to maintain the archives by himself. If *any* story has been
>removed or censored for any reason other than the author's request or
>plagiarism I'd like to know about it. If that happens, I'll be
>screaming bloody murder myself. To the best of my knowledge that
>isn't happening and won't be happening down the road. If anyone knows
>of a specific case, please announce it here and let us all know. If
>not, let the folks go back to work and please don't sully the gossamer
>name with these vague accusations.
I am not out to sully the name of the Gossamer archive. If my
accusation is vague, it is because I do not feel I can specific with
certain parts of what has been done here. I have heard some very
disturbing things about what was being planned with Gossamer. I know
that archivists were being duplicitous, not just with the community
but even among themselves. But none of that is important in this
context. I was not ever an archivist of the Gossamer system.
However, I was the administrator of the x-files-fanfic, fictalk, and
millennium mailing lists. I built a public trust on those lists that
plagiarism, flaming, and censorship would not be allowed. Now, by the
public admittal of a new list policy that bans all speech that this
"subversive to the authority of the list administration", and the
private actions taken against me as a subscriber, that public trust
has been violated. The administration was unwilling to make that fact
know to the subscribers, so that they could make their own choice on
what course of action they which to proceed with. Therefore, I was
faced with the dilemma of allowing a fraud or "making trouble".
None of that is vague. I have been quite specific in what happened
there. I want to read, write, and discuss X-Files fanfic. That's all.
I am not allowed to do so on the chaos mailing lists because my
presence -- not my words, my actions, but simply my presence -- has
been deemed subversive to their authority and therefore punishable by
banishment.
As to the Gossamer archives, there is an issue. I accidentally replied
to an email this morning that included xff and fictalk in the cc
field, to which I recieved an immediate reply from Chael Hall that if
I attempted such a thing again, he would notify my ISP and take legal
action against me.
Now, I submitted my last fanfic to Gossamer because I did not want it
broken up or spliced together -- I wanted it as a complete file. How
can I do that now that every single correspondence with Gossamer goes
through a chaos.taylored.com email address, when i might suffer legal
action against me for doing so?
Gil
SciNut
Everything said here was already said to Gil, more than once. He chooses
to view this as censorship and an ego/power play. It is not any of those
things. This was an action taken in regards to regulation violations.
If something said here isn't clear, please ask me to clarify it and I will
as
best I can.
Monica and I had just taken over the two lists when we were hit, somewhat
unexpectedly with a case of plagiarism. I am refering to Greenfish's
plagiarism of Lisa and Cookie. We've said it before on Fictalk and we're
saying it
again here... we could have dealt with this better. There was no policy
for cases
like this(there is now) and we were both very inexperienced in these
matters. We had read the two stories and weren't really sure about it one
way or the other and discussing it between us. Lisa and Cookie were
models of patience through this and we can't thank them enough... it was
an unpleasent situation and this had a lot to do with the policy we came
up with so it wouldn't happen to anyone else again.
During this period, Monica email Gil for advice on how to proceed. He gave
it
and Monica, after careful thought and discussion with me decided to follow
another route. Gil didn't agree so he emailed Greenfish himself. This is
where the problems began as I am aware of them. He involved himself,
without
telling us, by using his former position as an administrator for leverage
in
a matter being handled by us already. This is not a matter of who was
right
or who was wrong, but that the action had been done, subverting our
administrative position in the matter, without our knowledge.
We had verbal understandings and promises that Gil would *not* involve
himself in this way. That he would allow us, whether right or wrong, to
deal
with situations of an administrative nature, which this clearly was, in
our
own manner. We were concerned that this type of behavior would show a
lack
of trust in both of our abilities to handle these matters on our own as
the
administrators we are thus damaging the status of our extremely new
positions.
We spoke to him about it.. we were realistically a bit upset by his
actions.
But, this is the spark, that I am aware of, that ignited the following
fire
and not, as he claims, a "suggestion... about the maximum size of posts".
During this conversation, we agained asked for him to give us the space we
needed to get comfortable as administrators in order to become familar
with
list environment. To make our mistakes and rectify them... it's the only
way
to learn, it's the only way to be sure what works and what doesn't.
He agreed, stating that he would unsub from both lists and give us space
which he promptly complied. A few weeks later he resubscribed.
At this point several events occured closely together: the NC17/SLASH
thread
was underway, there was quite a large amount of traffic for the Gossamer
archives with the announcement that Natasha was stepping down and Gil
began
his conversations with Chael about post lengths and bouncing messages. I'm
a
bit vague on the matters here as some did not directly involve me(Monica
or
Chael can step in here with further details) and the techy stuff tends to
fly
right over my head. (Which is why Monica handles all that <g>).
At no time was Gil told to "shut up", he was told that it was being worked
on
and it wasn't a problem he should worry about... He took this to mean that
we
no longer valued his opinion which is completely false... just that ..
well..
it wasn't something he needed to worry about it was being fixed. He
claimed
no interest in administration but began questioning why we haven't been
posting the advertisment messages about the lists to the newsgroup.
Again,
this was not a detail as a list member he should have concerned himself
with.
We were in the process of changing information on those documents to
reflect
the administration changes.
This dialouge ended with Gil unsubscribing again for good, at least that's
what he said, and Chael asking him to not sign off only to return in 2
weeks
acting like nothing was wrong.
The Gossamer at gossamer.x-philes.com was started and Natasha was replaced
after her "retirement". Chael went on vacation. Gil resubbed to Fictalk
and
posted a message about concerns that Gossamer Project was the only xfiles
archive and maybe there should be another. This message was done with the
knowledge that Chael was on vacation and would not be able to reply until
his
return.
There have been complaints by several members that Gil has been flaming
and/or harrassing them via private email, a direct violation of list
regulations.
He involved himself in administrative matters, the plagiarism case to name
one, when he knew we were dealing with it already.. without notifying us
before doing so... because he did not agree with our course of action up
to
that time and before we were able to work out the matter satisfactorally.
He violated the terms of the sanctions taken against him for those
matters:
1. warning - He *was* warned on several occasions, by several
administrators.
2. revoked posting privileges - He unsubscribed in the agreement that
he
would stay off the lists and not post.
3. expulsion from the mailing list - In violating the revokement, he
resubbed to Fictalk and posted with the knowledge that Chael was on
vacation
and unavalible for direct comment.
Gil was unsubbed from Chaos for violations of the Fair Use and other list
policies. This is not about egos nor power. This is not about stifling
freedom of speech or censorship in any way shape or form.
This is about breeching list regulations.
SciNut(O'tay!)
host EMXC
"If the Truth is copyrighted... E-mail it!"
co-admin. Fictalk
"I was just here. Where did I go?"
F.Mulder "Small Potatoes"
Lisa Reeves
On 29 Jun 1997 04:36:33 GMT, jud...@aol.com (JUDYTXS) wrote:
Taking a small opportunity to clarify some of this. ;-)
>What's going on here?!
>
>Has someone taken over and kicked Adam off his own archive?
Not hardly. <gryn> Gossamer Australia is open for business.
>Is someone picking and choosing which stories posted to atxc get
>archived at Gossamer?
Absolutely NOT. As soon as a story is complete, it's included for
archiving. That policy has NOT and will NOT change. <gryn>
>In the new Gossamer Mission Statement, it says:
> "Adam Lee will be the archivist for Gossamer. All story additions
>will be
>performed by him or a backup archivist..."
> "Lisa Reeves will collect new stories for the archive from the
>X-Files-Fanfic
>mailing list, alt.tv.x-files.creative, XAngst, other sources of X-Files
>fan fiction,
>and individuals. She will...hand them to Adam for archiving."
<snip>
>
>I admit I don't understand any of this. Is Adam the archivist, or isn't
>he?
>Are the people at Chaos going to determine what gets archived? Is Adam's
>archive going to be just a mirror now? If I send an e-mail to Adam,
>is it going to get forwarded to Chael Hall for a reply?
NO ONE is making any determination over what will, or will not be
archived.
Adam's mail will still go to Adam. However, after a truly amusing
Sunday when 4-5 of us answered the same question simultaneously,
Chael answers general questions addressed to goss...@x-philes.com.
By the same token, I answer questions that come to
submi...@x-philes.com, and so on. <gryn>
Bit of perspective, here. Natasha did ALL of the archiving with Adam's
assistance, and burned out in less than a year. She did a wonderful,
wonderful job, and I hope we can keep her demanding standards.
All the above means is that in an effort NOT burn anyone out, the load is
being divided a bit. I'm gathering stories from all of the forums that Nat
used to gather them from. Other folks are adding them to the database, and
performing all of the behind the scenes "magic" that Nat did SO well.
>Personally, I don't give a damn who runs the archives -- as long as they
>keep doing as good a job as Adam and Natasha have. As long as there's
>no politics involved in what gets archived. As long as nobody's stories
>get
>removed from the archives without their consent.
Nope. Not going to happen...the ONLY stories that have been removed are
with the author's specific request. ;-)
>But, as far as I know, none of these people are getting paid for their
>work.
>(And I understand it's a LOT of work.) I'm just glad they volunteered to
>do it!
There is that!! <gryn> But it's a labor of love.
Either that, or we're all insane. <okay, so maybe that, too....>
Lisa Reeves
On Sun, 29 Jun 1997 18:57:46 GMT, furry...@mindspring.com (Gil Trevizo)
wrote:
>As to the Gossamer archives, there is an issue. I accidentally replied
>to an email this morning that included xff and fictalk in the cc
>field, to which I recieved an immediate reply from Chael Hall that if
>I attempted such a thing again, he would notify my ISP and take legal
>action against me.
>
>Now, I submitted my last fanfic to Gossamer because I did not want it
>broken up or spliced together -- I wanted it as a complete file. How
>can I do that now that every single correspondence with Gossamer goes
>through a chaos.taylored.com email address, when i might suffer legal
>action against me for doing so?
Gil -
If you wish to submit a story to the archives, and are not comfortable
with submitting to submi...@x-philes.com, please feel free to submit to
any of my personal e-mail addresses:
ree...@pilot.msu.edu
ad...@detroit.freenet.org
goss...@birdfeeder.com
li...@birdfeeder.com
The Detroit Freenet address accepts e-mails only; it will EAT file
attachments. <gryn> All of the others will accept file attachments to a
half meg in size.
bl...@dtc.net
SciNut, I'm not responding only or directly to you, I'm just hitting the tail
end of this, so please don't feel that I'm taking issue or being inflammatory at
all with you.
First of all, I want to say that Chael and I have been engaging in a very civl
discussion in which we ultimately have agreed to disagree. Chael has been very
forthright in providing information to me, which I appreciate a great deal, as
well as appreciating the civil nature of our discussion. I am not badmouthing
Chael, despite my comments in my original posting. I was voicing my
disagreement with several items.
He brought up a valid point in which he--if in any way, I misinterpret you
Chael, please feel free to chide me unmercifully--pointed out that these lists
are privately administrated. Thus, people have a choice to subscribe or
unsubscribe at their desire or disagreement with the list administrators. This
is quite true.
However, as I have said to Chael, I disagree vehemently with the action taken
and the stated reasons for it. I do appreciate his point on the fact that the
lists are privately administered, but I feel that any list providing what is
essentially a public service via the Net must either deal with the essentially
anarchistic nature of cyberspace or choose to institute rules that I disagree
with. That is certainly my right, as a private citizen, just as it is my right
to choose not to subscribe to such lists. Please remember, I came of age in the
seventies and we elder folk tend to act on our ideals in ways that seem
incomprehensible to others.
As EMXC is also now a chaos.taylored.com list--as I just discovered, since I've
been out of the loop for awhile--I suppose that means that I must stop posting
through EMXC, however regretfully, despite the splendid service provided.
As to the archives--the information I have received is neither vague and
appears, after my discussions with Chael, to be essentially correct. Chael was
kind enough to correct one misapprehension of mine, so I'm clear on that.
My disagreement on that particular issue was exactly as stated in my earlier
post. I felt strongly, and still am not convinced otherwise, that the
archivists were making decisions without taking into serious consideration the
needs, desires, or lifestyles of the writers. I expressed my concern to Chael
on this issue and was quite blunt about it. He responded helpfully on that
particular matter, but I confess, I still have concerns about that issue.
Again, to make it very clear, Chael has communicated clearly with me and we have
agreed to disagree on what we find both desirable or necessary with regard to
the rules of the mailing lists. I will not subscribe, which is my choice,
because I disagree with policy and would rather pass on the discussions
generated on any of the lists or to post via XFF because I do. I am not
personally attacking either the list administrators or the members of the list
or even the archivists. I used Chael's name because it appeared to me that he
was, in fact, the main contact and administrator. I am, however, taking
exception to certain of the list rules. And will probably continue to take
exception to certain of the list rules.
And one small statement about the plagiarism issue, which I have also made to
Chael in the course of our discussion. Rules aside, I do feel that we all have
an obligation to deal with plagiarists in our community. I understand that Gil
stepped on toes, but I find I cannot fault him for directly approaching the
plagiarist. If I am plagiarized at some point--although I'm so wordy, I can't
imagine anyone wanting to do so--I would want whoever came across it to act and
act swiftly. I expressed my concern for a stronger policy and procedure against
plagiarism to Chael and he was also kind enough to inform me that a policy is
being established and put into play. We also disagreed civilly about my
viewpoint that we all must police ourselves, and if that means approaching the
plagiarist directly, so be it.
As to flames, I can neither deny nor confirm any flames from Gil, frankly.
Gil's arguments are frequently impassioned and it may be that these appeared to
be flames. Or they may have been flames, I take no stand on either side of that
fence.
I simply state my point that I do not agree with the list rules, I am
disappointed in them, and choose, therefore not to participate.
I hope that clarifies things for those who appeared to believe that I was either
attacking Chael personally or that I'm waging a private little war.
bliss
J. Ackerson
I am also sorry for putting this here, but I feel everyone should know
what is going on.
This was mailed to the Chaos lists today -
To All:
I had hoped to avoid this, but I can see that there is no way out.
If I don't speak up now, who will be here to speak up for me when the
policies being changed and amended force me to second guess or
reconsider what and how I post here?
Most of you don't know me. I'm a writer and only subscribe and post on
the X-Files mailing list. I've been here just under a year, but I have
found a great sense of fulfillment in writing and posting stories to a
group of people who like the same thing I do.
But now I have to make a decision. To stay here, and keep quiet about
the changes in policy that I see taking place that are troubling to me;
or to speak up, knowing that this will be my last post - for with my
words and post, I will be committing an act of "subversion" against the
administrator of this list.
And I do mean administrator.
At this time, I feel it necessary to announce that my knowledge of the
list admin., Chael Hall is one of personally meeting the man, and seeing
how he had worked over the last year. I also feel it necessary to say
that I also know the former list admin, Gil Trevizo personally, and have
seen how he dealt with the lists.
It has been my utter misfortune to have believed that everyone here
could work for the betterment of the X-Files community.
Rules like the ones in the new Fair Use document were put there for a
reason. One reason was because Gil and Chael were disagreeing on the
administration of the lists after Gil left these lists, to many people's
pleasure.
Another was because of me. I was a target of the "aiding and abetting"
part of that new policy. For I was planning on being a volunteer to
bring the truth to the lists. The case-by-case plan of "disciplining"
list members is just a way to excuse the banning of people that the list
administrator does not want on these forums. People that could subvert
his authority. Trouble-makers and rebel rousers with their own agenda,
as I am certain we will be branded as.
An agenda that promotes and upholds these lists as free forums of
democratic speech.
Isn't that what this passage from the new policy means?: "Although we
strive to provide our list members with as free and public a forum as
possible..."
But is this really a free forum when one person can make a decision like
this? As to who stays and who goes?
Now, the Chaos server is owned by Chael Hall. He can decide what he does
with it, and ultimately the lists as well. But the people on these
lists, the community and the *ability* to stand together in peace to
read, write and discuss fanfic shouldn't be dependant on *one* person.
It shouldn't be a privilege of someone's whim.
*This* is the true danger of the new policies. And I for one cannot be
silent.
This is my last post here. If I am not unsubbed, I will do it myself.
I will continue to write X-Files stories, and post them wherever I can,
and have them archived where I can.
But I cannot be a party to lies and segregation and out and out
political maneuvering that is going on here.
I can't be a sheep.
Can you?
Jeannine "The Writing Machine" Ackerson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of it,
then you do it for a few friends, and finally you do it for the money."
-- French playwright Moliere
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
pat herring
> However, I was the administrator of the x-files-fanfic, fictalk, and
> millennium mailing lists. I built a public trust on those lists that
> plagiarism, flaming, and censorship would not be allowed. Now, by the
> public admittal of a new list policy that bans all speech that this
> "subversive to the authority of the list administration", and the
> private actions taken against me as a subscriber, that public trust
> has been violated. The administration was unwilling to make that fact
> know to the subscribers, so that they could make their own choice on
> what course of action they which to proceed with. Therefore, I was
> faced with the dilemma of allowing a fraud or "making trouble".
I am curious about that one quote: "subversive to the authority of the
list administration" was the term "subversive" ever defined? (eg.
flaming the admin)
or is it arbitrarily decided by the administration?
another thing that bothers me is that as the former administrator, you
would know what would be acceptable under the current (or previous)
guidelines for posting.
> None of that is vague. I have been quite specific in what happened
> there. I want to read, write, and discuss X-Files fanfic. That's all.
> I am not allowed to do so on the chaos mailing lists because my
> presence -- not my words, my actions, but simply my presence -- has
> been deemed subversive to their authority and therefore punishable by
> banishment.
Another question: was there any action that you took, or any text that
you posted which deemed you as "subversive"?
> As to the Gossamer archives, there is an issue. I accidentally replied
> to an email this morning that included xff and fictalk in the cc
> field, to which I recieved an immediate reply from Chael Hall that if
> I attempted such a thing again, he would notify my ISP and take legal
> action against me.
? What did that e-mail reply contian? (critizism, angry words, etc.)
> Now, I submitted my last fanfic to Gossamer because I did not want it
> broken up or spliced together -- I wanted it as a complete file. How
> can I do that now that every single correspondence with Gossamer goes
> through a chaos.taylored.com email address, when i might suffer legal
> action against me for doing so?
Wait. What exactly do you mean by "every single correspondence with
Gossamer goes through a chaos.taylored.com email address"? Are you
saying that every e-mail (wether a story being submitted to a e-mail
about info, voulenteering, broken links, etc)
goes through this email addy?
will the other people involved please state their sides? I would like a
full picture of what is going on.
if that is true, I am perfectly willing to post any rejected story (if
their are rejections-that has not been clarified yet) on my webpage.
this entire subject brings up feelings of sensorship, politics, and
personal vedettas/disputes. *sigh* Nothing could stay perfect and
peaceful forever.
allie.
SciNut
J. Ackerson writes:
<< If I don't speak up now, who will be here to speak up for me when the
policies being changed and amended force me to second guess or
reconsider what and how I post here? >>
All the policies are open for discussion. We are still doing that. The
original message regarding that could have been both worded and timed
better. It's in discussion and will continue to be so until we can reach
a satisfactory point.
<<Most of you don't know me. I'm a writer and only subscribe and post on
the X-Files mailing list. I've been here just under a year, but I have
found a great sense of fulfillment in writing and posting stories to a
group of people who like the same thing I do.
But now I have to make a decision. To stay here, and keep quiet about
the changes in policy that I see taking place that are troubling to me;
or to speak up, knowing that this will be my last post - for with my
words and post, I will be committing an act of "subversion" against the
administrator of this list.
And I do mean administrator.
At this time, I feel it necessary to announce that my knowledge of the
list admin., Chael Hall is one of personally meeting the man, and seeing
how he had worked over the last year. I also feel it necessary to say
that I also know the former list admin, Gil Trevizo personally, and have
seen how he dealt with the lists. >>
Chael has never stepped into or stopped Monica or myself in how we are
managing the lists. He has allowed us to admin them as we see fit to do
so. The administration changed in April so there's still a lot of
adjusting going on by everyone especially by Monica and myself.
<<It has been my utter misfortune to have believed that everyone here
could work for the betterment of the X-Files community. >>
Well.. we're trying. Not everything has been splendid but we're still
learning here and we're trying very hard.
<<Rules like the ones in the new Fair Use document were put there for a
reason. One reason was because Gil and Chael were disagreeing on the
administration of the lists after Gil left these lists, to many people's
pleasure.>>
The policy in the Fair Use document are still in discussion. Gil was not
banned for "disagreeing on the administration" of the lists. I believe I
have pointed that out.
<<Another was because of me. I was a target of the "aiding and abetting"
part of that new policy. For I was planning on being a volunteer to
bring the truth to the lists. The case-by-case plan of "disciplining"
list members is just a way to excuse the banning of people that the list
administrator does not want on these forums. People that could subvert
his authority. Trouble-makers and rebel rousers with their own agenda,
as I am certain we will be branded as.>>
We have been straight forward and as honest as possible without breeching
privacy. I have stated the conditions under which Gil was banned. Monica
and I have listened and replied to everyone who has written us since the
change in April... We are still adjusting to our new positions and
responsibilities.. some actions have not been the best.. we know that and
have been relying on the list members to point these instances out to us.
They have been invalueable in giving us advise and directing our courses.
They continue to do so.
<< An agenda that promotes and upholds these lists as free forums of
democratic speech.
Isn't that what this passage from the new policy means?: "Although we
strive to provide our list members with as free and public a forum as
possible..."
But is this really a free forum when one person can make a decision like
this? As to who stays and who goes? >>
One person did not make this desicion. It is an unfortunate occurance but
there are regulations on the Chaos lists that had been violated. We're
not forcing anyone to stay subscribed if they find fault or disagreement
with those rules.
<< Now, the Chaos server is owned by Chael Hall. He can decide what he
does
with it, and ultimately the lists as well. But the people on these
lists, the community and the *ability* to stand together in peace to
read, write and discuss fanfic shouldn't be dependant on *one* person.
It shouldn't be a privilege of someone's whim.
*This* is the true danger of the new policies. And I for one cannot be
silent. >>
And we are discussing this policy. We have not enforced this yet until a
mutual arrangment can be reached that the list subscribers approve. We
have not acted on a "whim".
<< This is my last post here. If I am not unsubbed, I will do it myself.
I will continue to write X-Files stories, and post them wherever I can,
and have them archived where I can. >>
I look forward to reading them.
<< But I cannot be a party to lies and segregation and out and out
political maneuvering that is going on here.
I can't be a sheep.
Can you? >>
I think I've addressed this already.
SciNut(O'tay!)
co-admin Fictalk
Gil Trevizo
bl...@dtc.net wrote:
>As to flames, I can neither deny nor confirm any flames from Gil, frankly.
>Gil's arguments are frequently impassioned and it may be that these appeared >to be flames. Or they may have been flames, I take no stand on either side >of that fence.
I do. It was my policy as list admin to not tolerate flames of any
kind, a policy for which I defended vigorously those who were not
otherwise defended in similar circumstances elsewhere. You, of all
people, Bliss, should be aware of that.
But here I am, defended of the crime I fought so hard against, and
worked so hard to settle without authority but with understanding
while I was list admin. And it is being taken for granted that those
who have accused me of this crime have neither presented evidence, nor
named those who accused me, nor have even allowed me the benefit to
defend myself on the forum of which they make these accusations.
By God! I have swallowed my pride again and again in the face of
baseless condemnation, and in the last final betrayal, must I again
walk away with what honor I have left in tatters?
Gil
Stef Davies
Lisa writes from the heart:-
>Gil may have stepped over the line. Maybe taken too much upon himself. I
>just don't see this as subverting anyone's authority. I have to agree
>with Bliss that plagiarism is everybody's business. Had he not
>intervened, Greenfish would have gotten away with stealing our story.
>And in a way, she did since she is still posting directly to the
>archive. A fact which I find appalling.
I agree with this, I have to say. I have been very surprised to see her
stories still appearing there with regularity. One would have thought a
period of discreet and modest silence would have been more appropriate,
even if the archives weren't going to support whatever plagiarism policy
there is - or isn't.
Stef
--
________________________________________________________
Stef Davies
Scinut writes re plagiarism:-
>We do have a policy for XFF that is currently being discussed for
>feedback. We also came up with a suggestion(based on the XFF policy) for
>the newsgroup that I was eventually going to post here for all of your
>comments as soon as a few other details are worked out. You can decide if
>it's something you want to adopt or not or if there are changes you all
>want made first.
I don't see how something as anarchic and diffuse as ATXC can adopt a
policy on anything, really, since it's not moderated. Individuals could
certainly adopt the XFF model for themselves if they wanted to - but, for
instance, you can't stop someone posting on ATXC like you can on XFF.
There's no sanction to threaten the plagiarist with, unlike on XFF and
regarding the archives - but plagiarists works are still archived - maybe
not the actual story, but other stories.
There is no "all" on ATXC to either adopt a policy or change it, IMO. Only
individuals who may have coincidental beliefs and wish to apply
pressure of humilation - or not. Hopefully we all would do so, with
determination.
Nor do I particularly like the idea of having a group of people who have
set themselves up as arbiters of *anything* on ATXC. JMO.
Stef
--
________________________________________________________
Loch Ness
PixieXF wrote:
>
> I have always found it amusing to read the disclaimers
> attached to fanfic. On one side you have the author stating
> that the characters therein do not belong to them and that it
> would be pointless for FOX to sue. Why would FOX sue
> unless the author were plagiarizing material.
I have very mixed feelings about this - on the one hand, I've said
publicly before that I'm uncomfortable about authors attempting to
copyright their fanfic. And my attitude about whether anybody wants to
"borrow" one of my characters or whatever is: Go for it. However, an
important point here is that although fanfic writers are using
characters and a kind of universe created by someone else - and we
generally acknowledge that fact right up front - we also add a good
measure of our own creativity to the mix.
It's not lost on me that there's irony in an author using someone else's
material to create an original story - and then trying to copyright
*both* in his/her own name, or scream plagiarim if someone else writes
the essentially the same story. However, copying *word for word* large
sections of someone else's story is a whole other matter - that clearly
is cheating. That'd be like my writing a fanfic using all the dialogue
from the *X Files* pilot and claiming it was mine. Not much doubt that
one would be a no-no.
> So how many of you who have been so critical of administrators,
> archivists, other authors, and list subscribers in general that
> you haven't taken the time to look, take off the blinders, and
> see fanfiction for what it really is.
Sorry, but I think you're overlooking the fine legal line between fair
use under the copyright law and plagiarism.
I've never worried much about somebody plagiarizing my stuff - my work
has had such wide distribution with my name prominently displayed on
them, thank the Internet gods, that for somebody to copy it would just
make the copier look pathetic. But of course, now that I'm not posting
to the Chaos lists anymore, a good bit of that wide distribution has
been lost to me. So much for protection.
--
InverNessie
That deep water only *looks* still.
Stef Davies
>I get the idea that whatever has been done "wrong", if anything,
>is trying to be corrected
I can't see that it can be corrected until Gil Treviso's ability to
subscribe to the fanfic list, fictalk and any other of the chaos lists on
equal terms with everybody else is reinstated.
Stef
______________________________________________________
daybreaq
Frankly, I see absolutely nothing wrong with a victim upon seeing
him/herself plagiarized on ATXC immediately sending out a post:
Sample post:
Hey that's my story! It was archived {list archives} under {list
title} on {list date}. Check it out everyone, please. I wrote it first
and {list plagiarizer} stole it from me!!
It's mine!!!
Sorry but it just seems like a no brainer to me.
Stef Davies <stephani...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in article
<181245819...@ukonline.co.uk>...
Hindy Bradley
Stef Davies wrote:
>
> I agree with this, I have to say. I have been very surprised to see her
> stories still appearing there with regularity. One would have thought a
> period of discreet and modest silence would have been more appropriate,
> even if the archives weren't going to support whatever plagiarism policy
> there is - or isn't.
>
I didn't want to enter this public fray, but Gil did mention me in one
of his posts and I do have a slightly different angle on the actions
that led to GreenFish's acknowledgement of plagiarism.
Agree with me or not, I consider Nora just a kid. (I'm 42, she's 16.
She could be my kid.) She transgressed and was caught. With my help
and Gil's, who pushed her into my line of fire, she found it in herself
to acknowledge her plagiarism. She very sincerely apologized and took
her punishment.
Nora respects us and our rules. We never said she couldn't continue to
write and archive fanfic. She is obediently taking her punishment.
And yet, her name has been dragged around all weekend with a scarlet 'P'
appended to it. I understand that some people's feelings about the
incident still run high. But enough already. We're supposed to be the
adults here.
This is not why Gil was banned from the list. There are other trumped
up charges, too.
I'm sorry that people are unzubbing from fictalk. It's only been a
couple of days of debate. People are just now understanding the
ramifications of the banning. If the list is to be a community forum,
then I wish the passionate, articulate writers who have left, would go
back a fight for changes.
Hindy
sheare...@brite.com
Despite my comprehension of Chael's argument that these are private
mailing lists, I would agree with Stef.
If you provide a public service, I fail to see how banning someone
permanently is acceptable. Chael and I disagree on this point, of
course, he sees it as a private service.
And frankly, deep in my heart of hearts, I think it's a damned shame that
Gil can no longer participate in lists after he participated heavily in
their formation.
In article <181553319...@ukonline.co.uk>,
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
Lisa Dee
PixieXF wrote:
>
> While I don't condone what GreenFish did, did I just hear
> someone say that her work shouldn't be posted to the
> archives? That can't be right? That would be censorship.
> That would be a select few deciding what gets read and
> what doesn't. Which stories get archived and which don't.
> The screw turns. How easy it is to twist the truth to
> suit one needs when necessary.
Yeah, I said it. It has nothing to do with censorship. She stole from me
and Cookie. She is a confessed plagiarist. She should not be allowed to
post on Gossamer. Frankly, I'm surprised that more writers aren't
outraged that she is continuing to post there, despite her confession.
And the archivist should be concerned as well, since it makes them look
as if they are condoning plagiarism.
To SUe:
I agree with you, SUe, this should not be happening here. I'm sorry for
my contribution to it. I didn't want to get into this discussion,
however, the fact that my name was brought up in connection with the
whole sordid mess, I had little choice.
--
Lisa @---->-----
I Love My X-Files Addiction!
When life hands you lemons, break out the tequila and salt.
Lisa Dee
The SUe wrote:
>
> Well, thank you, Pix. FINALLY! I was waiting to see how long it
> would take for someone to notice this. Plagarism, smagarism. I was
> laughing myself silly the first time I saw the subject brought up in
> relation to fanfic. My first thought was how utterly ridiculous the
> whole idea is when you consider the source of our material that fanfic
> writers appropriated and which wasn't ours to begin with. Who are any
> of us to talk?
>
> SUe, the generally fed up
I'll talk because while the characters of Mulder, Scully, et.al. were
borrowed, Cookie and I created two original characters along with the
situations and the words. GreenFish STOLE those characters, situations
and words. It thoroughly amazes me that some folks do not see that as
wrong. It makes me wonder at the ethics or, lack there of, this
so-called community.
Lisa who is fed up with being told I shouldn't be angry when someone
steals from me.
The SUe
Loch Ness <loch...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Having been invited, along with many others, by The Sue to "not let the
>door hit me," I believe I'll do just that.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't direct that reply to
you, but to LadyJane. But I'm just sick and tired of having everyone
point to this newsgroup as the place where all the flaming and wars
are. It's not. Or at least it =wasn't=...until now.
>On my out, while the door's still swinging, let me make something clear.
>As I said when I unsubbed from Fictalk/XFF, I do not plan to post my
>stories either to any mailing list or to any archive but my own from now
>on. If you care about reading my stuff and have a crummy newsfeed,
>e-mail me and I'll deal with it.
>
>That means the following: I do not recognize anyone's authority to tell
>me what I can post, where I can post it, in what format it must be
>posted, or how long the post can be - I will police the readability of
>my posts myself. I do not recognize any classification, summarization or
>other archive requirements. I do not recognize anyone's authority to
>post for me or forward my posts to anyone else without specific
>permission. I do not recognize the authority of any self-appointed
>watchdog to judge whether my work plagiarizes someone else's (like I
>have a need to copy somebody, or even the free time to read enough of
>this stuff to copy it anyway). Above all, I do not recognize anyone
>else's authority to protect me from anyone else who may choose to copy
>my work.
That's all certainly your perogative.
>The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse couldn't make me post any further
>discussion of fanfic, anywhere. I've said this before, too, but it's
>never been more appropriate: If this is a community, it's a community of
>people who rarely drop by for any purpose but to hurt each other.
It's not, but it =does= seem to be the place where everyone else
comes to air their dirty laundry.
>You folks have a nice war - I'm outta here.
Sorry to lose you, but if that's how you feel....
SUe
*********************************************
The SUe
the...@pobox.com
http://pobox.com/~the.sue
*********************************************
See my home page for the a.t.x.c FAQ!
(Also available by email request; put
"a.t.x.c FAQ Request" in the subject header)
*********************************************
The SUe
Lisa Dee <lda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
My apologies if I misunderstood. I am not familiar with the
incident in question, and wasn't making a statement specifically
toward anyone in particular.
Obviously it was wrong of Greenfish to steal characters of your own
creation. But it doesn't mean we need a "policy" to deal with this
stuff. If she did do what you say she did (and from the posts of
others I gather that she admitted to as much), then go after her. Let
everyone =know=, let them see for themselves, and then if they decide
to no longer read her stuff because of it, fine. =I= certainly
wouldn't want to read anything of hers after finding this out. But to
have some Admin start making policy.... She exercised her freedom of
speech in posting stolen stuff, and you should simply exercise yours
to point this out to everyone. If it had happened to me, certainly
I'd be angry, but first I'd email her--after all, sometimes this is
done unintentionally (as I said, I don't know the particulars
here)--but really, what is some panel or committee going to do by way
of punishment? She can't be prevented from posting, at least not on
a.t.x.c. Unfortunately I don' t see any real solution here, committee
or no. And it has never even been an issue on a.t.x.c that I am aware
of. We're all on our honor here.
Unknown
Yes, Pix, you did hear someone say that. Plagiarism is theft. Pure and simple.
It isn't a naughty prank. If you plagiarize in college, you can be thrown out.
If you plagiarize in the real world, you will be sued. I don't want to get into
the old debate about copyright, but if we were posting fiction that did not
infringe on Fox's copyright, the authors of the plagiarized piece could
justifiably have sued the plagiarist, the list admins and the archives.
Further, I believe that there is a valid reason to wonder if any of the other
stories by the plagiarist are also copied from elsewhere.
I don't want my stories stored by people who don't respect my creative work
enough to protect it. I don't want my stories posted by mailing lists who do
not act promptly if someone were to copy one of my stories in toto or in part
and post it through them. Pure and simple. And plagiarism IS theft. If you
stole someone's bicycle, that is theft. If you steal someone's creative work,
it is likewise theft.
Laura, I appreciate your point. I have a fair amount of factual knowledge on
the situation because I've been communicating with various people involved,
including Chael Hall. I think my earlier posts reflect that.
To state my point categorically without further misinterpretation: I understand
Chael's reasoning and disagree with it. I understand that he has reworked some
of his policies and will doubtless post them to the mailing lists, of which I am
no longer a member, for the edification of members. I agreed to disagree with
Chael's major points: i.e., whether or not his banning of Gil was appropriate,
the policies, and how much policing was necessary among adults. I agreed that
people certainly have a choice to join lists or not join them and may choose not
to on the basis of whether or not they find that the policies are fair and
democratic. We ended our "conversation" civilly enough, and I expressed my very
real concerns about the plagiarism incident and the broader issue of plagiarism
as a whole. Chael has a right to his opinions as well. My concerns about them
reflect my view of the lists as privately run as a public service. Public
service requires that sometimes private policies be modified. This, clearly, is
not going to happen, and I, for one, am sorry to hear that. I had planned to
rejoin fictalk, but will not. A small statement of my own, and one that surely
does not put anyone else out.
Emotions have run very high during this discussion and I understand why. These
kinds of issues tend to provoke strong feelings. Added to this is the personal
issue of Gil's banning from lists he initially was instrumental in creating. I
have been told that Gil was flaming, and have yet to see substantive proof. Gil
is certainly impassioned in his statements, and I suspect that someone
interpreted his arguments as harassment or flames. I do find that the personal
attacks levied against Gil, such as not to let the door hit him in the ass, such
as calling him a little man, are enormously offensive to me and does reflect the
childishness that Laura alludes to in her comparison to high school.
It merely shows the worst elements of the community's behavior as a whole and
justifies Chael's contention that the democratic approach doesn't work for this
community.
bliss
pix...@aol.com (PixieXF) wrote:
>While I don't condone what GreenFish did, did I just hear
>someone say that her work shouldn't be posted to the
>archives? That can't be right? That would be censorship.
>That would be a select few deciding what gets read and
>what doesn't. Which stories get archived and which don't.
>The screw turns. How easy it is to twist the truth to
>suit one needs when necessary.
>
>Pix
PixieXF
Okay, my volley.
Plagiarize: To take and use as one's own the
ideas or writings of another.
I have always found it amusing to read the disclaimers
attached to fanfic. On one side you have the author stating
that the characters therein do not belong to them and that it
would be pointless for FOX to sue. Why would FOX sue
unless the author were plagiarizing material.
And let's face, be damned author egos and disclaimers to the
contrary, that's what's happening. When you read a story off
on ATXC or XXF, it has been plagiarized to varying degrees, pure
and simple. But it doesn't stop there, an author will continue
a disclaimer claiming that the characters created by that
author are their's to own and that those characters may not
be used without the sole permission of said author. Wow.
Talk about irony.
So how many of you who have been so critical of administrators,
archivists, other authors, and list subscribers in general that
you haven't taken the time to look, take off the blinders, and
see fanfiction for what it really is. Enjoyable as it might be,
I know I wouldn't give up reading it for anything, each and every
piece of fanfic on these lists and in personal archives IS
plagiarized material. And everyone can pontificate and
judge and set themselves above the rest but sorry,
that's reality folks.
Pix.
WestShore
PixieXF wrote:
>
> Okay, my volley.
>
> Plagiarize: To take and use as one's own the
> ideas or writings of another.
>
impersonal. They lack any moral stance. They teach only words not the
nuances of being human...
WHAT?????????????
I have been reading -- with undiguised horror -- this whole fiasco and
was about to add my 2-cents worth to the authors' side of this debate...
THEN I stumble across this "philosopher"...
Is this Pixie person a WRITER? Is she/he a priest? A rabbi? A student of
moral and legal ethics??? Or is she/he just another product of "Oh Well,
Nobody has to be responsible for anything" -- the swan song of
civilazation?
Author's EGOS? Pontification? Reality?
Authors KNOW whose "toys" they are playing with, Pixie-person. And in
the FanFic world, we acknowledge that we use Chris Carter's creations in
situations that are VERY MUCH from our own imaginations in stories that
are made of our own blood, sweat and tears... (you may put THAT in your
ego-philosophizing)
Chris Carter could swoop in tomorrow with a legion of lawyers and shut
our playground down. But it does not change the fact that authors CREATE
and ENTERTAIN and DO NOT DESERVE or EXPECT to have the products of their
work stolen and glorified by some other morally-bereft (and LAZY)
person.
I can not understate the horrific feeling it is for an author to be
plaigarized -- and it BOTHERS me that the XFIC List administrators are
not sensitive to the destructiveness of this kind of thinking. And your
: "Oh Well, it happens..." attitude is insensitive and WHOLLY
UNINFORMED, not to mention, morally weak.
Is that EGO? Or is that passion? I, for one, am tired of a generation of
slackers and humans without morals and passion. And if you think I
overstate the case on a seemingly "playful" matter like fanfic, maybe
you should go OFF-LINE for a while and pick up a newspaper, watch
television or even sit on a park bench and people-watch to see how far
this "Oh well, it happens..." thinking has permeated our society.
If Gil Trevizio took all this upon himself because administration failed
to act in a timely manner, then there is A BIG PROBLEM.
If this "Greenfish" person did willfully plagiarize a story and yet
continues to be "published", then there is A BIG PROBLEM.
If mailing list administration feels they have to answer ONLY to
"readers" and NOT protect the authors' special interests, then there is
A BIG PROBLEM.
As in all human institutions, we "evolve" toward a kind of structure
amid our chaos. FanFic has been around a while -- long enough to
establish certain "Sacred Cows" -- and an author's right to publish
without fear of being stolen from is one of them.
I should think that the readers would RESENT anyone who tried to pull a
fast one over on them, such as presenting someone else's work as their
own! I mean -- TALK ABOUT EGO! How would you like it if I re-published
"Hamlet" or... or "The Holy Bible" and claimed it as my own? Does the
plaigarist have an ego that is to be lauded and PROTECTED when the
originator is to be ignored and accused of "ego-ism"?
I'm with Bliss on this one. And I am sure there are a few OTHER serious
writers out there that understand the gravity of this arguement.
I am sorry that this lesson has to be so harsh on people I know have
personally worked VERY HARD -- without pay -- to help us as readers
enjoy X Fic. But it is a lesson, nonetheless --- Gil should NOT have
been censured. It would NOT have been necessary had the lesson (i.e.,
plaigarism is grievous) been taken seriously in the beginning of this
particular problem.
I, too, will have to keep my works elsewhere until this situation is
resolved. In a perfect world, Gil would be re-instated and all this
"aggravating" discussion would be in private between list and archive
administrators AND the offending person (Greenfish - whomever that may
be).
BTW, for what it is worth: I also agree with Bliss in this regard: If a
person is shown to have plaigiarized once, it makes the REST of their
stories suspect. Until it can be proven otherwise, I don't see why -- or
how -- that person's work can be accepted on the archive/lists. What if
he/she is stealing from Star Wars lists? Star Trek lists? Due South
lists? Highlander lists?
And out here in cyber-space, with only our personal morals and good-will
to work with as our "watch force", I think it is doubly important to
take a stand against this kind of behavior and thinking.
A BIG PROBLEM, indeed...
WestShore
bl...@dtc.net
I believe we were actually talking about the archives. And if using the
characters created by Carter is plagiarism, then I suggest we are all
thieves.
I disagree with that viewpoint, I'm afraid.
I'm not sure now if the Kevin Faux incidents took place on atxc or a
mailing list. Does anyone else have a clearer memory of those?
And as far as the somewhat impassioned posts regarding whether or not
atxc is a den of thieves or flamers, I'd like to point out that my
personal experience is that I've seen other people bullied and flamed
anonymously, and I've been bullied. Which is why I no longer post
sweetness and light, or stories. I post when I have an opinion about
statements made on the newsgroup. This doesn't mean I suppose everyone
who posts here to be a bully or thug. It means that my experience has
left me unwilling to rub shoulders with those who are. Except, as I've
said, to defend others against them, or to post an opinion. Let me
rephrase that, what I consider a serious opinion, as opposed to whether
or not Duchovny's marriage will last or Gillian Andersen's divorce is her
fault.
bliss
PixieXF
Well, now I have gone and done it. Forced off
track by those who wish to cloud the issue with
things other than what's happening here.
Whew, and it was easy for them to do. I myself
have become a victim of the same muddled,
convoluted thread which originated from one --
ONE, disgruntled subscriber.
I do believe that Gil is coming close to what he
originally intended and unwittingly I have played
along. Gil has again become the center of a
controversy, his favorite place to be.
Whether Gil was right or wrong. He should
never sucked us into to this. Because, think
about it, how unhappy were you with the list
before this. One incident out of hundreds of
posts. In the real world, those statistics are
pretty good.
And don't worry, if history repeats itself,
and it has many times, I'm not so sure that
Gil won't be back.
Pix
Canny409
Westshore wrote:
>Is this Pixie person a WRITER?
Highly doubtful. But if she ever does write something, I'll have fun
cutting, pasting and putting my name on it.
And I better not hear a peep.
>If Gil Trevizio took all this upon himself because administration failed
>to act in a timely manner, then there is A BIG PROBLEM.
A very big problem.
>If this "Greenfish" person did willfully plagiarize a story and yet
>continues to be "published", then there is A BIG PROBLEM.
A HUGE PROBLEM.
>How would you like it if I re-published "Hamlet" or... or "The Holy
Bible" and >claimed it as my own?
I just finished *MacBeth* myself. (TAS/NC-17 for violence, character
deaths)
>BTW, for what it is worth: I also agree with Bliss in this regard: If a
>person is shown to have plaigiarized once, it makes the REST of their
>stories suspect. Until it can be proven otherwise, I don't see why -- or
>how -- that person's work can be accepted on the archive/lists. What if
>he/she is stealing from Star Wars lists? Star Trek lists? Due South
>lists? Highlander lists?
Extremely suspect. A plaugarist is a criminal, a thief and once you lose
the moral certainity that theft is wrong, you will do it over, and over
and over again.
>A BIG PROBLEM, indeed...
Thank you, Westshore.
CiCi Lean
"Silly authors!!"
Portia
On Tue, 01 Jul 1997 12:32:43 -0400, Lisa Dee <lda...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>PixieXF wrote:
>>
>> While I don't condone what GreenFish did, did I just hear
>> someone say that her work shouldn't be posted to the
>> archives? That can't be right? That would be censorship.
>> That would be a select few deciding what gets read and
>> what doesn't. Which stories get archived and which don't.
>> The screw turns. How easy it is to twist the truth to
>> suit one needs when necessary.
>
>Yeah, I said it. It has nothing to do with censorship. She stole from me
>and Cookie. She is a confessed plagiarist. She should not be allowed to
>post on Gossamer. Frankly, I'm surprised that more writers aren't
>outraged that she is continuing to post there, despite her confession.
>
>And the archivist should be concerned as well, since it makes them look
>as if they are condoning plagiarism.
I think it's more than justifiable to cease archiving Greenfish, but I
also understand that this is a thorny decision to thrust upon the new
administrators of an archive with a long history as a totally
nonjudgmental catalog of anything and everything posted or submitted,
no matter how controversial, offensive, or incredibly badly written.
Already some who are unfamiliar with Greenfish's complete confession
and complete lack of remorse have suggested that maybe it was an
"accident" or maybe she just used characters or themes, when it is my
understanding that she copied a story, or portions of it, word for
word. (To make her audacity complete, she reportedly turned it in for
a high school english assignment.) But even she will probably have
defenders attacking the administrator(s) who would ban her as
dictators, censors and a conspiratorial cabal. Some are already up in
arms at false rumors that *any* editorial discretion might be used on
Gossamer.
Given all of this and the chaos controversy too, I think Gossamer is
damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't know how many
fronts they can defend from rumor attack simultaneously without
spontaneously combusting. Maybe the right decision should have been
obvious immediately, but at this point maybe they *should* table the
question for a later date. I don't think this is a good time for
anyone to be making decisions or forming policy.
Portia
The SUe
>Given all of this and the chaos controversy too, I think Gossamer is
>damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't know how many
>fronts they can defend from rumor attack simultaneously without
>spontaneously combusting. Maybe the right decision should have been
>obvious immediately, but at this point maybe they *should* table the
>question for a later date. I don't think this is a good time for
>anyone to be making decisions or forming policy.
>
>Portia
Portia, it is my belief that a great deal of the current flame war
here is due to the rumours you refer to.
In future, it's my opinion that matters such as TGP policies, which
affect the fanfic community =as a whole=, and not =just= the Lists, be
brought up for discussion =here on a.t.x.c= as well, and not =just= on
the Lists. Because this non-inclusion of those of us on a.t.x.c and
who are not subbed to any of the Lists is certainly one of the things
that set =me= off.
IOW, what we have here is a failure to communicate.
Lisa Dee
Portia wrote:
> Already some who are unfamiliar with Greenfish's complete confession
> and complete lack of remorse have suggested that maybe it was an
> "accident" or maybe she just used characters or themes, when it is my
> understanding that she copied a story, or portions of it, word for
> word. (To make her audacity complete, she reportedly turned it in for
> a high school english assignment.)>>
Just to let anyone who thinks that know: GreenFish confessed to
deliberately stealing our entire story. It wasn't an accident and it
wasn't just the characters or the theme. And yes, she did turn it in for
an English assignment. And that tidbit came straight from her.
Teddi wrote:
> Ironically, I tend to feel it might have been better for the victims had
> "Greenfish's" version (I believe the girl made a few minor changes here and
> there perhaps to justify somehow that she actually wrote something
> original.) of their story been left on the archives.
Ironically, I think you may be right and for the reasons you stated
below. When I first saw the story, within an hour of it's hitting the
list, my first thought was to stop it dead in it's tracks. That may have
been the wrong decision. But Cookie and I wanted to do this the right
way. We never wanted to be accused of bullying GreenFish in any way.
And, of course, we were accused of seeking revenge against her and of
intimidating her anyway. We made the wrong decision.
> I remember when it was announced the plagiarism occurred,
> Greenfish's "version" of Lisa and Cookie's story as well as it's "sequel"
> had already been removed from all archives. (I don't believe they had ever
> been forwarded here.)
Her first story was archived briefly on Adam's site accidently. It was
later pulled. The "sequel" never made it to any archive that I'm aware
of. And neither story was ever posted here. Our mistake. I now wish it
had been.
> In her introduction, she bragged about praise she received
> for the "original" story and I believe, she expressed pride in the two
> "original" characters!
Absolutely correct.
It is my suspicion that these characters may have
> been based in some degree on Lisa and Cookie themselves and I surmise it
> must have felt not only their story but a piece of themselves had been
> stolen in this crime.
The secret is out. Yes, the characters are based on us. The whole Apt.
42 series started out as a joke. I wondered what Mulder's neighbors must
think about him bouncing that basketball on the floor in the middle of
the night. From there the idea was born. It was intended to be a
one-shot thing, but people seemed to like it so much, we wrote more. I
guess one person liked it a little too much.
It is truly a sad thing that happened, but honestly,
> the only recourse you have if it happens to you in a public forum without
> rules is to publicly reclaim your story... i.e. shout it to the rooftops;
> you have every right!
I agree totally. I wish this is what we had done. But we were trying to
be fair, partly because GreenFish is so young. Trust me, if this ever
happens to me again, I will not give the plagiarizer one single ounce of
consideration. I will smear that person's name all over the Internet.
MD1016
Portia writes: <<Maybe the right decision should have been
obvious immediately, but at this point maybe they *should* table the
question for a later date. I don't think this is a good time for
anyone to be making decisions or forming policy.>>
Gotta disagree.
I, too, have run up against someone copying my work and passing it off -
word for word - as theirs. Now, I confronted this person, and was fed a
list of excuses and apologies and the story was rewritten without the
offending passages and rearchived (as was promised) without much
attention. My main concern was getting my work back, even though the
story had gone out to several mailing lists and received hundreds of hits
at the USA Gossamer over several weeks.
I didn't want to cause a fuse because I thought, basically that I'd "won"
and that it was more or less an isolated incident; and besides, the person
*did* seem genuinely sincere in the apologies.
Apparently this isn't an isolated incident, and rolling over and playing
dead isn't going to keep this from happening in the future. TRUE,
however, that this subject - because of the nature of the stories (we're
writing about copywrited characters and situations - and really, how MANY
ways can one describe Mulder and Scully's first kiss?) - shouldn't be
dumped into a rash, lump decision because of the flared tempers.
Most of us are adults. We should've at this stage in our lives developed
at least some objective insights, right? We ARE capable of acting through
moral reason rather than heated tempers, right?
The problem is, that regardless of what I initially thought (before I had
my own taste of it), plagerism is a very real and personal violation. It
effects the writer more than, say, a purse snatching or a pick-pocketing,
because these are *thoughts* that are being stolen. It's not like in
highschool when someone copied off your history exam and got a better
grade than you. No, plagerism is like someone coming into your art studio
and stealing a canvas and writing their name over yours. And then one day
you're walking down the street and you see YOUR WORK hanging in a shop
window. It hits hard.
Even as I'm writing this next piece (no, I haven't let the incident deter
me), I wonder how I can protect it and myself.
Since this *ISN'T* an isolated occurance (obviously), something should be
done. Whether it's at the archives with the archivists, or whether the
individual writers act, SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE. Believe me, I've come
up with all sorts of insideous punishments for plagerists. It CAN be
handled without adding to the duties of the all ready over worked
archivists. But, in all honesty, I think we stand taller when we work
together.
The problems will come in trying to decide who gets to say, "Yes, this is
a plagerist," versus, "No, this is someone who unintentionally copied
three words in a row that they've read in something else because it stuck
with them." Who get's do make the decisions? For that, it would be easy
to say the archivists, since they're running the show. I, for one, am not
putting anything on *my* site that I don't wholly endorse 100%. But then
I'm not running an open archive.
As to the question of censorship, I believe that once someone has
committed a crime (and yes, this is a crime in most countires in the
world, I believe) they forfit many of the rights they once took for
granted. If you're sentenced for anything in the USA (as I understand)
you loose the right to EVER carry arms again. So, a plagerist losing the
right to have their work archived doesn't seem over radicle. It's really
not so much censorship as it is protecting the community. Censorship is
about trying to control creative input, what we're talking about is trying
to preserve it.
The above is my PERSONAL opinion. Not a doctrine. Feel free to disagree
and flame, but I feel strongly about this subject, or I wouldn't have
bothered to stick my neck out and made a statement.
Yours in 'Philes...
MD
The SUe
sph...@xtrabox.com (Nat) wrote:
>On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 19:57:11 +0000, "Stef Davies"
><stephani...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I agree with this, I have to say. I have been very surprised to see her
>>stories still appearing there with regularity. One would have thought a
>>period of discreet and modest silence would have been more appropriate,
>>even if the archives weren't going to support whatever plagiarism policy
>>there is - or isn't.
>
>Stef, I strongly supported the effort to come up with a general
>plagiarism policy and still do.... I wasn't comfortable making that
>decision about whether or not to ban an author from the archives for
>life and to this day I'm not sure I did the right thing. I wished all
>along that there *were* some guidelines so that the entire decision
>hadn't fallen on my shoulders.
>
>Natasha
>new addy--> sph...@xtrabox.com
Well, I know at least a few authors are up in arms over this, and
have accused me of being unconcerned or just blowing it off, and even
not caring about the writers. Just to set the record straight
here...I'm a writer myself--not just the little piece I recently
posted, but I write my own stuff...scripts, screenplays...even have a
novel on the back burner. So I'm =not= not looking at it from a
writer's POV...there's no way I could do that.
But I am also looking at it from the POV of someone who has studied
Communication Law, as well as been around the 'Net and this ng for
quite a long time.
What I thought was funny about the whole thing was that, what we do
here by definition is on shakey legal ground to begin with. We may
not try to pass off Mulder and Scully as our own, but we are still
only able to do this because of the good graces of CC and Co. Yes,
you still own copyright on any =story= you write that's original, even
if you don't have permission to use the characters (IOW, if you took
the story and reworked it with your own characters, it'd be =yours=),
but trying to win a court case on that basis...well, let's put it this
way: I wouldn't bet the family fortune on it. Then to go into
=plagarism= of one of those stories...legally, I doubt there'd be much
you could actually do. So the only sanctions against the perpetrator
would be those imposed by this community.
And since no one has control over what is posted to this ng--I may
do the FAQ, and I may act generally as spokesperson, but the only
"control" I have is that which people give me when they allow me to
speak on the behalf of the ng and what I believe to be in its best
interests. No one =has= to listen to me; they do so voluntarily,
probably because they realize I've been here a long time and I pretty
much know what I'm doing as far as posting and proper netiquette.
What this comes down to is that there really isn't anything that can
be done about plagarism on the newsgroup. I've never heard of it
occurring here, and I am under the impression that the Greenfish
Incident was the first, and was never brought to the ng.
The only thing I can say about this is that, if you think you've
been plagarized on the ng...well, if =I= were in that position, I'd
take my story and the other person's, send them both to some people I
thought I could trust to be honest with me, and if they saw it too,
I'd then probably first confront the other writer, and if that didn't
work, post a note to the ng telling everyone what I suspected. Then
they could get both stories and decide for themselves. Folks here
aren't stupid; if it's plagarism, they'll probably come to that
conclusion on their own after reading the stories. Then it's up to
each of them to let the plagarist know that they've been found out and
that this behaviour is unacceptable, that they won't read any more of
their stories or whatever. I'd suspect that if enough people did
that, the plagarist would finally figure out that it's A Bad Thing to
do.
Now, if the Archives or Lists want to make up their own policies,
that's their perogative. But they need to do it ahead of time and be
consistent in its enforcement.
We also have to keep in mind that there =are= people who just like
to accuse others because they feel like it (not that this has been the
case...as I said I know nothing about the Greenfish Incident that I
didn't find out here in the past couple of days), and also that it
=is= quite possible for someone to come up with a story very similar
to someone else's without stealing it. (This from the woman who came
to the conclusion that she and Darin Morgan are somehow psychically
linked..."Clyde Bruckman" was so close to my script that friends who
had read it long beforehand called me immediately after it first
aired.) So it's important to try and keep an open mind...don't assume
someone's a plagarist just because someone else =says= so. Read the
stories and =then= decide.
munchkyn@*%best.com
In article <33B6D4...@slip.net>, "J. Ackerson" <taka...@slip.net> wrote:
> I am also sorry for putting this here, but I feel everyone should know
> what is going on.
Unfortunately, Jeanine, you never explained exactly *what* is going on,
for those of us not on those lists. So I am confused. What is the nature
of your complaint about Chael Hall and the list?
Sarah
wondering
--
Sarah Stegall www.munchkyn.com munchkyn@*%best.com
Strip *% from email address to reply.
I AM PENTIUM OF BORG. DIVISION IS FUTILE. YOU WILL BE APPROXIMATED.
munchkyn@*%best.com
I'm a writer myself--not just the little piece I recently
> posted, but I write my own stuff...scripts, screenplays...even have a
> novel on the back burner. ... what we do
> here by definition is on shakey legal ground to begin with. We may
> not try to pass off Mulder and Scully as our own, but we are still
> only able to do this because of the good graces of CC and Co. Yes,
> you still own copyright on any =story= you write that's original, even
> if you don't have permission to use the characters (IOW, if you took
> the story and reworked it with your own characters, it'd be =yours=),
> but trying to win a court case on that basis...well, let's put it this
> way: I wouldn't bet the family fortune on it.
With respect, if you are writing screenplays then no doubt you are either
registering them with the WGA, or registering them with the Copyright
Office, or both. And if, for example, you wrote an X-Files script (which
of us has not?), you would presumably register it with one of these
bodies. Why? Why, to protect your script from PLAGIARISM. Of course you
don't own Mulder and Scully, but the situations you put them in, and the
words you use to describe them, you DO own, and have every right to own
and profit by. The fear of plagiarism is so rife in Hollywood that NO ONE
will read an unregistered script--unless they intend to steal it. The
copyright law that applies to scripts applies to fanfic; while we cannot
copyright the characters used, whether used with permission or not, we CAN
copyright the rest of the story.
The SUe
munchkyn@*%best.com wrote:
>In article <33c09a88...@nntp.loop.com>, su...@pobox.com (The SUe) wrote:
>
>I'm a writer myself--not just the little piece I recently
>> posted, but I write my own stuff...scripts, screenplays...even have a
>> novel on the back burner. ... what we do
>> here by definition is on shakey legal ground to begin with. We may
>> not try to pass off Mulder and Scully as our own, but we are still
>> only able to do this because of the good graces of CC and Co. Yes,
>> you still own copyright on any =story= you write that's original, even
>> if you don't have permission to use the characters (IOW, if you took
>> the story and reworked it with your own characters, it'd be =yours=),
>> but trying to win a court case on that basis...well, let's put it this
>> way: I wouldn't bet the family fortune on it.
>
>With respect, if you are writing screenplays then no doubt you are either
>registering them with the WGA, or registering them with the Copyright
>Office, or both. And if, for example, you wrote an X-Files script (which
>of us has not?), you would presumably register it with one of these
>bodies. Why? Why, to protect your script from PLAGIARISM. Of course you
>don't own Mulder and Scully, but the situations you put them in, and the
>words you use to describe them, you DO own, and have every right to own
>and profit by. The fear of plagiarism is so rife in Hollywood that NO ONE
>will read an unregistered script--unless they intend to steal it. The
>copyright law that applies to scripts applies to fanfic; while we cannot
>copyright the characters used, whether used with permission or not, we CAN
>copyright the rest of the story.
Actually, the reason for the fear of unregistered scripts or of
reading a script without a signed release form isn't fear of
plagarism, but of being =accused= of plagarism. If it's registered
and/or has a release form this will prevent legal problems later and
is mostly for the benefit of the people doing the =reading=, not the
writer.
And this all may be well and good, but I don't see what it is you
want me (as Keeper of the FAQ) or the citizens of this ng as a whole
to do about this anyway. Neither I nor you nor anyone has the ability
to ban =anyone= from posting here, whether something is plagarized or
not. That's something we can't control, and that's the price of
having a totally unregulated forum such as this. If the archivists
take it out of the archives or the Lists reject it from circulation,
that's up to them and their respective administrators. But there's
nothing much to be done here, except someone seeing it happening
posting a note to the rest of us to alert us to what they suspect is
going on. I also don't think it's a big problem anyway, but that's
beside the point. There's simply nothing in my power to do about it.
But hey, if you figure something better out, feel free to post your
thoughts on it....