I have a complaint and a request!

[greenban]

The COMPLAINT:

Yup I am HOPPING Mad! Not to mention DRIPPING WET!!!

I know there are egos everwhere, and as many of us know, from the-site-that-must-not-be-named, Big egos often come in smallish sized people, but.

On Feb 25th, 2008, our own Darring Dirk, Explorer of the Web's Recesses, known and loved by all as carolina_yankee. Did find and publish the most thorough group of BLT documents ever, INCLUDING THE MAXIMUM POINT ALLOCATION TABLE! as directed by WEBMISTRESS KIM, who found the original documents!

Why does this steam the frog? That this chart for the last week has been running around the web as the latest and greatest chart ever, proving BLT. And credit is not being given, it is being stolen and accepted by these POSERS (a.k.a Big Dummy Stoopid Heads!). Dirk/Kim are too mature and nice to let this bother them, or anger them.

Well as I have proven too many times to count, I am not too mature or nice!

This stinks!


THE REQUEST:

Please, if you are members of other sites (and there are many, just google blt maximum points reallocation table), PLEASE post a short message saying (similar to: ) Wow! This has been posted by Carolina_Yankee since 02/28/2008, you should see all the other BLT documents that he found!!!. Linkee thingee here=====> http://www.mouseowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13511&highlight=maximum+point+reallocation&page=6 List of documents on page 6!

Also where possible you sould mention www.mouseowners.com, as some established boards busy hemorrhaging loyal members, wish MOs wasn't here to stay!!!! (Please don't get banned or infraction points!!!)

Many TIAs (Non-Medical abbreviation please!)

-Tony

For the record it first appears at the DIS on April 17, 2008 by tjkraz (Owner/Operator of *******.com) and sadly died an 8 reply death. http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=24530581#post24530581&highlight=maximum+point+allocation See Post # 3

So to arms dear friends, to arms!

P.S. Please note that this is not done with the knowledge or blessing or even approval of the Mods and ADMINISTRATRIX, so if I'm wrong please correct me, but if I'm right, we have an injustice, and vast center wing*conspiracy to overcome!

* Cleaverly crafted MODly double entendre, tying both Politics and Ice Hockey (and maybe that psedo sport soccer) to my post. Remember to be a MOD, speak to a MOD!

[Grandbuddy]

The COMPLAINT:

Yup I am HOPPING Mad!

I know there are egos everwhere, and as many of us know, from the-site-that-must-not-be-named, Big egos often come in smallish sized people, but.

On Feb 25th, 2008, our own Darring Dirk, Explorer of the Web's Recesses, known and loved by all as carolina_yankee. Did find and publish the most thorough group of BLT documents ever, INCLUDING THE MAXIMUM POINT ALLOCATION TABLE!

Why does these steam the frog? That this chart for the last week has been running around the web as the latest and greatest chart ever, proving BLT. And credit is not being given, it is being stolen and accepted by these POSERS (a.k.a Big Dummy Stoopid Heads!). Dirk is too mature and nice to let this bother him, or anger him.

Well as I have proven too many times to count, I am not too mature or nice!

This stinks!


THE REQUEST:

Please, if you are members of other sites (and there are many, just google blt maximum points reallocation table), PLEASE post a short message saying (similar to: ) Wow! This has been posted by Carolina_Yankee since 02/28/2008, you should see all the other BLT documents that he found!!!. Linkee thingee here=====> http://www.mouseowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13511&highlight=maximum+point+reallocation&page=6 List of documents on page 6!

Also where possible you sould mention www.mouseowners.com, as some established boards busy hemorrhaging loyal members, wish MOs wasn't here to stay!!!!

Many TIAs (Non-Medical abbreviation please!)

-Tony

For the record it first appears at the DIS on April 17, 2008 by tjkraz (Owner/Operator of *******.com) and sadly died an 8 reply death. http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=24530581#post24530581&highlight=maximum+point+allocation See Post # 3

So to arms dear friends, to arms!

P.S. Please note that this is not done with the knowledge or blessing or even approval of the Mods and ADMINISTRATRIX, so if I'm wrong please correct me, but if I'm right, we have an injustice, and vast center wing conspiracy to overcome!

Steamed frog sounds like a dish from the far East (not New Jersey), and one which I would not care to sample. Nor am I sure I am anxious for hemmorhaging posters from the other boards to all locate our (see I quickly I have made myself at home) little corner of the web. They are welcome, however, as long as they are as easy to get along with as the folks tend to be over here. If not, I hope they stay on the boards more suited to Crankypants-types.

And of course, any reference to MO on the Dis would show up as ********, leading no one to the source of the wondrous info uncovered by said Yankee person.

[greenban]

Steamed frog sounds like a dish from the far East (not New Jersey), and one which I would not care to sample. Nor am I sure I am anxious for hemmorhaging posters from the other boards to all locate our (see I quickly I have made myself at home) little corner of the web. They are welcome, however, as long as they are as easy to get along with as the folks tend to be over here. If not, I hope they stay on the boards more suited to Crankypants-types.

And of course, any reference to MO on the Dis would show up as ********, leading no one to the source of the wondrous info uncovered by said Yankee person.

Ahhhhh...

But that begs the question, are we not MODs? (Devo soundtrack in the background).

Don't many of us route for the Eagles another never win/no win struggle?

We are MEN, We are STUBBORN, this is a MODly duty!!! (<====I said dooty on the web!!!) :wearenumb

So, of course we accept this unwinable challenger!!!!!

Who's with me?

-Tony

[tomandrobin]

Tony

You are right that recognition should be made and credit given when it is due. Certain website won't allow links to MO, their filters will edit the MO reference out.

Tom

[administrator]

Thanks for the support!

I'm just saying, and this is not something I've tried, but, you know, typing something like ratowners.com, and then suggesting that people substitute "mouse" for "rat" -- well, that might work....

Or you could use tinyurl.com, which completely changes the name of the url, so that MO wouldn't appear....

I'm just sayin'.....

Lol.

[tomandrobin]

Or you could use tinyurl.com, which completely changes the name of the url, so that MO wouldn't appear....

Very nice.....very nice indeed!!

[DVC Mike]

Tony, your "Deep Croaker speaks about BLT" was posted on the DIS without any mention of a frog, greenban, or DC.

[Grandbuddy]

Ahhhhh...

We are MEN, We are STUBBORN, this is a MODly duty!!! (<====I said dooty on the web!!!) :wearenumb

So, of course we accept this unwinnable challenge!!!!!

Who's with me?

-Tony

Well, I are, of course. As long as they don't serve steamed frog in the chow line.

[grumpy]

as the Queen of Hearts says

Off with their heads!!!

Not giving credit where credit is due is just plain wrong.

If I see it Iwill make it known

THE MODS HAVE SPOKEN:thumbsup:

[minniekissedme]

sorry I missed all the fun...my darn scanner acted up and I had to leave my pj's at home and go to the office. How goes the fight? I'm just catching up on the day...

[bababear]

Hi Tony

I posted on the Dis --probably get banned but felt it was the right thing to do--by the way the rat.owners.com--insert "mouse" got through--atleast until they pull my post,,,,,,:innocent::innocent::innocent::innocent: :slyasafox


HUGS Hon:grouphug:

Mel

[cheapmom]

bababear- you are going to get points for trying to outsmart the filter. :bowdown::tsktsk:bad bababear
I don't think tinyurl will work because people were trying to pose as budget treasure finders on the budget board and posting affiliate links via tinyurl - the Dis caught on pretty quick and blocked tinyurl

[cheapmom]

Guess what- you can't say frog over there- it gets ****

[greenban]

Hi Tony

I posted on the Dis --probably get banned but felt it was the right thing to do--by the way the rat.owners.com--insert "mouse" got through--atleast until they pull my post,,,,,,:innocent::innocent::innocent::innocent: :slyasafox


HUGS Hon:grouphug:

Mel

Mel, as usual you rock!

But don't get banned.......yet!

-Tony

[bababear]

Guess what- you can't say frog over there- it gets ****

Hmmm well that just makes me want to go over there and write about my class's little science talk about frogs we had today.
Yes yes I was the kid in school who could be dared to do anything--but I have grown up somewhat,,lol...

Hugs Mel

[greenban]

Guess what- you can't say frog over there- it gets ****

There's always TOAD and Deep Croaker, LOL.

So banned little greenban has required FROG to be ****'d out.

Or does Pete W hate what FROG means?

FROG = Fully Reliant On G-d.

But to be honest, I loved frogs since childhood, not because of the meaning of the word, which just makes froggies neater in my strange mind!

-Tony

To be fair, FROG *IS* a 4 letter word!

[cheapmom]

They don't actually **** it- but they want to. Months ago someone mentioned the mystery rooms at ssr's preview center and I said- "I know what those rooms are - it came straight from the frog."
It was like 3 seconds later I got 3 pms about -" you are not allowed to talk about the frog"... and they took the liberty of editing my post and changing the words "The frog" to "someone". So it then it said "I know what those rooms are- it came straight from someone."

Who would say that? "I heard a juicy rumor- and it was from a reliable source- Wanna know who I heard from??? Do ya, Well brace yourself, I'm gonna tell you now- I heard it from SOMEONE"

[minniekissedme]

wonder if MOD would get the ***? I get a kick out of their censorship. I got warned for talking about the "girl who can't be named" because I was attempting to circumvent the filters. Someone needs to laugh a bit more over there.

[tjkraz]

Tony,

I think you may be off a bit on your sequence of events regarding the Contemporary. To the best of my recollection, here is what occurred:

Morning 2/26: Sentinel publishes Contemporary story

Afternoon 2/26: I posted the a copy of the maximum allocation charts with commentary at my site

Morning 2/28: Dirk posts excerpts from public docs with commentary on MouseOwners

Afternoon 2/28: I posted the full documents in PDF format on my site

3/1: MouseOwners posted its own copies of the documents

I don’t believe that I ever posted a link to Dirk’s post on my site only because I felt it was a little too interpretative (as opposed to fact reporting), and I respectfully disagreed with some of his conclusions. I was also preparing to leave for my own Disney vacation (left the following day) and admittedly didn’t have time to properly comment on Dirk's post or dig into the documents as deeply as I would have liked. And obviously I didn’t take Dirk’s copies of the documents since mine were posted 2 days prior.

All of that said, I will share your frustrations regarding people who do not properly cite the original source of information they report. I’m pretty darn certain that it has happened to me on multiple occasions. :Paranoid:

I’ve linked to news and information on dozens of sites including MouseOwners, MousePlanet, WDWMagic, MiceAge and even the DIS. However, it is impossible to truly insure that no other site has previously posted similar information. Still I can honestly say that I have never knowingly posted any information gleaned from another site without citing the original source. If someone else posted the Maximum Allocation Chart before I did on 2/26 at 2:45pm, I didn’t know about it and certainly didn’t take it from him/her.

Oh, and all of the Contemporary docs were extensively discussed on the DIS well in advance of the April 17 post you cited. ;)

Be well,
Tim

[greenban]

Tony,

I think you may be off a bit on your sequence of events regarding the Contemporary. To the best of my recollection, here is what occurred:

Morning 2/26: Sentinel publishes Contemporary story

Afternoon 2/26: I posted the a copy of the maximum allocation charts with commentary at my site.

Morning 2/28: Dirk posts excerpts from public docs with commentary on MouseOwners

Afternoon 2/28: I posted the full documents in PDF format on my site.

3/1: MouseOwners posted its own copies of the documents

I don’t believe that I ever posted a link to Dirk’s post on my site only because I felt it was a little too interpretative (as opposed to fact reporting), and I respectfully disagreed with some of his conclusions. I was also preparing to leave for my own Disney vacation (left the following day) and admittedly didn’t have time to properly comment on Dirk's post or dig into the documents as deeply as I would have liked. And obviously I didn’t take Dirk’s copies of the documents since mine were posted 2 days prior.

All of that said, I will share your frustrations regarding people who do not properly cite the original source of information they report. I’m pretty darn certain that it has happened to me on multiple occasions. :Paranoid:

I’ve linked to news and information on dozens of sites including MouseOwners, MousePlanet, WDWMagic, MiceAge and even the DIS. However, it is impossible to truly insure that no other site has previously posted similar information. Still I can honestly say that I have never knowingly posted any information gleaned from another site without citing the original source. If someone else posted the Maximum Allocation Chart before I did on 2/26 at 2:45pm, I didn’t know about it and certainly didn’t take it from him/her.

Oh, and all of the Contemporary docs were extensively discussed on the DIS well in advance of the April 17 post you cited. ;)

Be well,
Tim

Hi Tim!

Thanks for the update/correction.

I don't know what happenned or if I misread the dates, but I first found the article on your website, yesterday on the NEWS page, near the bottom. I would have sworn the date said May 2008, not February 2008, as it does now, (I just popped over). Also, google search consistently shows MOs first, but I am not exactly how google ranks their searches. I always ASSuMEd date was a part of it.

Also, the limited searches I can do on the DIS, do not show Maximum Point Tables earlier than late May. If they still can't get search to function, heck, I am not too sorry for mistakenly calling them out.

I have *NEVER* known *YOU* to not give credit where credit was due, and I am *CERTAIN* that you have been 'scooped' many, many times on the web.

As to what is and isn't discussed on the DIS, it is hard for meto tell, sice my banning. Threads are very hard to follow without cookies........

Think I should ask WMD for reinstatement?

-Tony

ETA: Tim I re-read my orginal post here on MOs, and it answered my question wondering why you replied. My comment about it originally being posted by you on the Dis, was not meant to imply you stole it (we all know how hard you work on your site), but my frustration (amazement) that even a respected and well researched poster such as yourself, only got an 8 reply thread from that great data. It has since been reposted on the DIS and enjoyed a many page rennisance. However, that is not clear in my post, and I apologize if anyone felt that I was calling you out, I wasn't.

[tjkraz]

As to what is and isn't discussed on the DIS, it is hard for meto tell, sice my banning. Threads are very hard to follow without cookies........

Yeah, the search is still a complete mess. :mad:

Look for really long threads that started around 2/26. By noon on the day the Sentinel posted their story, there were probably 2 dozen different threads started (perhaps later merged.) The discussion was quite extensive and went on for days.


Think I should ask WMD for reinstatement?

Did I miss a wink-wink smiley somewhere? :P

If not, that's up to you. I don't know the circumstances surrounding the banning (and re-banning, and re-re-banning, and....) But will share these comments:

1. Moderating forums can be a very difficult job. Point-systems or no, we're all only human and it can be difficult to juggle hundreds of different personalities while still trying to maintain an environment comfortable for everyone.

2. At one time I thought I was on pretty poor terms with WMD and have since repaired that relationship. In fact, I found that it didn't even need repairing. Of course, I was never banned (but do have a few "infractions" to my name...one of which MIGHT actually be justified. :grouchodi )

Tim

[tjkraz]

ETA: Tim I re-read my orginal post here on MOs, and it answered my question wondering why you replied. My comment about it originally being posted by you on the Dis, was not meant to imply you stole it (we all know how hard you work on *******.com), but my frustration (amazement) that even a respected and well researched poster such as yourself, only got an 8 reply thread from that great data. It has since been reposted on the DIS and enjoyed a many page rennisance. However, that is not clear in my post, and I apologize if anyone felt that I was calling you out, I wasn't.

Actually your post only caught my eye because it came across one of my web search spiders when you mentioned the site name. :loveisint Sadly I don't get here much and that's the only reason I saw your post. Might have to start setting aside more time for ole' MO.

Anyway, I didn't take your post as a slight...just figured I would take advantage of the opportunity to clear the air. Don't need you getting all worked-up about a non-issue. :rant:

[Leftcoaster]

Also, the limited searches I can do on the DIS, do not show Maximum Point Tables earlier than late May. If they still can't get search to function, heck, I am not too sorry for mistakenly calling them out.



Tony, there might be a reason for that. When one is banned and they clear out their cookies so they can read, the default date is 30 days. One would have to reregister and adjust the settings. Ummmm, not that I hae any personal experience in that.

And again, when has the Dis been known for it's high level of integrity **cough** racistpodcast **uncough**

[greenban]

Tony, there might be a reason for that. When one is banned and they clear out their cookies so they can read, the default date is 30 days. One would have to reregister and adjust the settings. Ummmm, not that I hae any personal experience in that.

And again, when has the Dis been known for it's high level of integrity **cough** racistpodcast **uncough**

It is funny that my first ever podcast was a bunch (of seemingly) drunk good 'ole boys (and one trailer trash Momma) making fun of immigrants, special needs children and somehow tying that into WDW.

If anyone has not heard this (and I'll be frank here - for a change ;) ) Podcast, PM me and I'll get you the link. It, IMHO is rather disturbing and diasppointing, not to mention intolerant, xenophobic, crass and totally non Disney-esq.

Now to be fair, I am often rude, crude and have questionable taste, BUT, I don't wrap myself in an aura of maturity, authority and respectability either. Frankly if these comments were posted on the DISboards by a member, they would be banned for life!

-Tony

[tjkraz]

I don't know what happenned or if I misread the dates, but I first found the article on your website, yesterday on the NEWS page, near the bottom. I would have sworn the date said May 2008, not February 2008, as it does now, (I just popped over).

The article posting date is what it has always been.

In fact, in Dirk's post he even makes reference to "...the maximum points reallocation chart seen around the boards..."


Also, google search consistently shows MOs first, but I am not exactly how google ranks their searches. I always ASSuMEd date was a part of it.

Date plays a small role, if any, in Google rankings. The biggest factors are the amount of time the site has been up (with greater weight given to websites that have been in existence longer--MO has about 2 years on me in that regard) and the number of times an article has been linked by other sites.

[greenban]

The article posting date is what it has always been.

In fact, in Dirk's post he even makes reference to "...the maximum points reallocation chart seen around the boards..."




Date plays a small role, if any, in Google rankings. The biggest factors are the amount of time the site has been up (with greater weight given to websites that have been in existence longer--MO has about 2 years on me in that regard) and the number of times an article has been linked by other sites.

Then I stand OFFICIALLY corrected, and I apologize for my error!

But the thread was FUN while it lasted.

Also, *SUPRISE* the racist, xenophobic and making fun of the special needs population Podcast has been pulled from Utube at the request of Werner Technologies.......

Guess they ain't so proud after all.

Tim, any chance you'll run with this story?

-Tony

[administrator]

I don’t believe that I ever posted a link to Dirk’s post on my site only because I felt it was a little too interpretative (as opposed to fact reporting)

And developing an entire points chart based on the maximum reallocation chart isn't? ;)

[tjkraz]

Also, *SUPRISE* the racist, xenophobic and making fun of the special needs population Podcast has been pulled from Utube at the request of Werner Technologies.......

Guess they ain't so proud after all.

Tim, any chance you'll run with this story?


I'm assuming you are referring to something on the DIS podcast? :veryconfu If so, I've never even listened to the podcast, much less the episode in question.

If the content has been pulled, then I'm not sure I see any value in bringing further attention to it. Apparently clearer heads prevailed and the issue was rectified. I suspect any issues with their organizational staff will be addressed, and the people responsible will be properly dealt with.

Why bring attention to a situation that is now over and done?

I spent quite a bit of time on the inner circle at MouseOwners and could probably share some saucy stories of missteps made along the way. Similarly I'm sure others could come up with tales to embarrass me as well. :grouchodi

But what purpose would any of that serve? ("Personal amusement" doesn't rank real high on my list. ;) )

The important thing is that we learn from our mistakes and move forward. Based upon your comments, sounds like some folks with the DIS went thru a dandy learning experience recently. :tapedshut

[tjkraz]

And developing an entire points chart based on the maximum reallocation chart isn't? ;)

Who did that?

[greenban]

I'm assuming you are referring to something on the DIS podcast? :veryconfu If so, I've never even listened to the podcast, much less the episode in question.

If the content has been pulled, then I'm not sure I see any value in bringing further attention to it. Apparently clearer heads prevailed and the issue was rectified. I suspect any issues with their organizational staff will be addressed, and the people responsible will be properly dealt with.

Why bring attention to a situation that is now over and done?

I spent quite a bit of time on the inner circle at MouseOwners and could probably share some saucy stories of missteps made along the way. Similarly I'm sure others could come up with tales to embarrass me as well. :grouchodi

But what purpose would any of that serve? ("Personal amusement" doesn't rank real high on my list. ;) )

The important thing is that we learn from our mistakes and move forward. Based upon your comments, sounds like some folks with the DIS went thru a dandy learning experience recently. :tapedshut

Hi Tim:

When I posted the 'challenge' the podcast had not been pulled.

Since it was pulled, I happen to agree with your rational, mature and calm assessment 100%.

However, having heard it before it was pulled, it really went way beyond a misstep. With widespread distribution, IMHO, it was commercial suicide and/or political suicide if Pete W. has any political aspirations.

This was nasty, insensitive and cruel, actually bordering on evil.

-Tony

[carolina_yankee]

Who did that?

Take a look at what one of your moderators posted on page 2 of the thread in question in your forum. Now, she does publish a disclaimer that her efforts don't reflect on you - but she is a moderator speculating . . . .

At the end of the day, isn't that what all of us outside of the DVC inner circles do? And what's wrong with speculation? Your moderator may actually be very close to on target - but it's just educated guess work. If we just want to run DVC press releases, well we can - but that would be a pretty boring (and not very helpful) site. Besides, given DVC, the points charts are likely to be published after sales start anyway. ;)

Glad to see you back around here, Tim, but I think you're taking this whole who posted what thing way too seriously. Tony wasn't casting aspersions your way (he reserved that for short dentists, as you well know).

For everyone reading this - Tim's site and our site were both working with original information we had each collected through our own sources and efforts. We just happened to post our details before Tim posted his details. He chose to start with the Maximum Point Reallocation Chart. We chose to start with the more precise and comprehensive information of floor plans and make some of our own educated guesses at what might be next. We also chose to be a little provocative with some of the fine print because, hey, the fine print is there and raises questions. As we've seen, pointing out the possibility of Bay Lake Tower being a later name proved to be very prescient on our part!!


Dirk

[carolina_yankee]

To add to the who stole what conversation - the real theft occurred on Monday, March 3, when a thread appeared on the DIS quoting my entire post without attribution. Somewhere along the 20th post, I replied as the author of content that had been stolen from us and placed in the original post and suggested folks could learn more by following links provided by MousePlanet, since MP picked up on our story and put it in their weekly WDW update. Well, boy, did I catch heck from the minions of the Evil One who run the DIS for disclosing myself as author if information they hadn't published, and for referring people to another website on the off chance they might actually find MouseOwners! I'm not banned, but I did get severely spanked for that one.

Dirk

[greenban]

To add to the who stole what conversation - the real theft occurred on Monday, March 3, when a thread appeared on the DIS quoting my entire post without attribution. Somewhere along the 20th post, I replied as the author of content that had been stolen from us and placed in the original post and suggested folks could learn more by following links provided by MousePlanet, since MP picked up on our story and put it in their weekly WDW update. Well, boy, did I catch heck from the minions of the Evil One who run the DIS for disclosing myself as author if information they hadn't published, and for referring people to another website on the off chance they might actually find MouseOwners! I'm not banned, but I did get severely spanked for that one.

Dirk

Butt, (speaking of spanking), enquiring frogs want to know.

Did you enjoy it?

;)

-Tony

And they are Big Fat Stoopid Poopy Heads at-the-evil-place-that-can't-be-named anyhow!

[carolina_yankee]

Tony, let's just say I felt like I was in distinguished company. :) :fresh:

Dirk

[tjkraz]

Take a look at what one of your moderators posted on page 2 of the thread in question in your forum. Now, she does publish a disclaimer that her efforts don't reflect on you - but she is a moderator speculating . . . .

And therein lies the distinction, IMO. News stories are news stories--forum posts are the place for speculation. It shouldn't matter who is doing the speculating. I've been known to comment on my own "news", simply because I wanted to draw the line between fact and opinion.

Have I ever let editorial comments creep into my stories? Probably. But it's something that I consciously try to avoid. People can draw their own conclusions--either privately or on the forums.

If your post had instead stated "here are the floorplans....here are the dues...the POS says this....the POS says that...." I would have linked to it immediately. THAT is clearly newsworthy information. But being less than 24 hours away from departing for vacation and seeing several things in your forum post that made me say "I don't agree with that" prompted me to hold off.

We can continue to split hairs about why I did or did not feel justified in linking to any particular story. I've already done more than enough to justify my position. I shouldn't have to defend my editorial decisions any more than I expect you to explain why you choose not to link to stories on my site.

I've said my peace on this matter. My purpose was to address some of Tony's concerns regarding when, where and how certain information was made available to the public. I think that goal has been accomplished.

[administrator]

If your post had instead stated "here are the floorplans....here are the dues...the POS says this....the POS says that...." I would have linked to it immediately. THAT is clearly newsworthy information. But being less than 24 hours away from departing for vacation and seeing several things in your forum post that made me say "I don't agree with that" prompted me to hold off.

It seems to me that you are not giving readers (either yours or ours) enough credit for being able to discern between facts and speculation. (I happen to think Dirk made the distinction rather well in his article.)



I've said my peace on this matter. My purpose was to address some of Tony's concerns regarding when, where and how certain information was made available to the public. I think that goal has been accomplished.

Good enough. Have a good one!

[carolina_yankee]

I've said my peace on this matter. My purpose was to address some of Tony's concerns regarding when, where and how certain information was made available to the public. I think that goal has been accomplished.

Tim - glad you've popped in, addressed a comment that wasn't directed at you, and then did your bit to belittle us. Remember, we don't write for you. Neither do we work for you. I'm quite content to believe the world is big enough for all of us, but if you don't - well, that's why you started your site in the first place, isn't it?

Dirk

[tammymacb]

And they are Big Fat Stoopid Poopy Heads at-the-evil-place-that-can't-be-named anyhow!



I second that!

[tjkraz]

Tim - glad you've popped in, addressed a comment that wasn't directed at you...

It may not have been directed at me but I certainly played a role in the discussion. In Tony's original post he specifically mentioned the Maximum Allocation Table on no less than three occasions, and appealed to readers to give credit to MouseOwners for discovering that document.

I'm certainly not going to walk around holding a sign that reads "I was there first!!!", but Tony's post deserved to be addressed.

I do find it curious that you accused me of "...taking this whole who posted what thing way too seriously." Then in the next post you lamented someone stealing your own work. It's unfortunate that you were not able to properly defend yourself. I'm glad I was able to set the record straight myself.

Tony seems fine with my comments here, and I accept the fact that he was not pointing any fingers at me.

...and then did your bit to belittle us. Remember, we don't write for you. Neither do we work for you. I'm quite content to believe the world is big enough for all of us, but if you don't - well, that's why you started your site in the first place, isn't it?

No intent to belittle...just stating my position as I was being increasingly taken to task for it.

In retrospect, I shouldn't have even brought up the topic of not linking to your post in the first place. I brought it up because it was a subject I wrestled with at the time and felt that offering some explanation was the right thing to do. We've both made decisions regarding whether or not to link to another site and I shouldn't have had to explain myself.

The world certainly is big enough for both of us, but it seems pretty silly to pretend that we both exist in a vacuum. I know that you visit my site from time-to-time and I hope that you agree with Tony's original premise of giving credit where credit is due. :)

[carolina_yankee]

I do find it curious that you accused me of "...taking this whole who posted what thing way too seriously." Then in the next post you lamented someone stealing your own work. It's unfortunate that you were not able to properly defend yourself. I'm glad I was able to set the record straight myself.
Actually, I wasn't lamenting. I found the whole thing incredibly funny. I don't give a whit what the DIS thinks are does, but secretly, I think I was hoping they would have banned me rather than give me demerits so I could have been in more august company. ;)

Tony seems fine with my comments here, and I accept the fact that he was not pointing any fingers at me.

Cool - and I appreciate that you and he have good give and take.

No intent to belittle...just stating my position as I was being increasingly taken to task for it.
I think the problem was that you felt you had to defend yourself in the first place. I never for a second had your site in mind when Tony started this thread. In the process of defending yourself, you made it clear that you didn't like our approach and thus, didn't find it worthy of linkage. That's fine - but you're presenting that opinion in our turf, which is why I reminded you that you we don't write for your site but for MouseOwners - and I do think that's belittling, whether or not that was your intent. I'm content to chalk it up to your felling defensive and move on . . .

In retrospect, I shouldn't have even brought up the topic of not linking to your post in the first place. I brought it up because it was a subject I wrestled with at the time and felt that offering some explanation was the right thing to do. We've both made decisions regarding whether or not to link to another site and I shouldn't have had to explain myself.
I think that's true. You are the master of your domain (literally) and are free to do what you do over there. In fact, I think you're fairly respected for it - our two sites approach the same topic with different emphases - nothing wrong with that and our members really enjoy our respective offerings.

I do think it's important for everyone to understand, though, on this particular topic - that we each did our work on our own, bringing our own unique approaches to how to present the story. Other boards were the ones who took advantage of our efforts.

The world certainly is big enough for both of us, but it seems pretty silly to pretend that we both exist in a vacuum. I know that you visit my site from time-to-time and I hope that you agree with Tony's original premise of giving credit where credit is due. :)
We all visit many sites and offer varying levels of contributions based on our time and interests, and i know we share some active members in common. There's no assumption of a vacuum.

And I think we are both agreed that credit should be given where credit is due. To be honest, I'm still surprised this whole discussion called you out of the woodwork when most, if not all, of us had the DIS in mind . . .

At any rate, it's good to bump into one another on occasion . . .

Dirk

[administrator]

Holy Moly -- that's three -- count 'em -- three -- instances of pot-stirring here in one week! I don't think I can take it!

Honestly, things have been really pleasant and quiet around here for the past six months, and I kinda like it that way. You might even say I LOVE it that way! :woohoo:

To that end, and to avoid any potential site wars, I'm going to close this thread.

Thxkbye.