Sharing information sources, what do you think?

[dakine]

When I post here I am usually sharing one of two things: information I found elsewhere (and a possible comment about it) or my opinion. Opinions are fine as they are; we all know where they came from, and usually are best kept to ourselves though the desire to share them runs deep, so we share.

When posting information I find elsewhere I try to always quote the relevant line or two from my source, and then include a link to that source for those that are interested so they can read it for themselves. Recently there has been a practice by some posters to combine real information they gleam from elsewhere and intersperse their own comments, and post the entirety without reference to their source(s) or any effort to distinction between source material and their own words and opinions.

I find this type of posting misleading. I know it is seductive to make them; to be excited by some fact and throw it in with your excitement and post before you ever slow down enough to consider that your readers are intelligent people that would be much better served if you were to share your sources and opinions in such a way as to show the differences clearly, rather that mislead us though a lack of clarity.

Further, when I consider how well established this format of clearly showing sources when sharing information is in all professional endeavors, I am left to conclude that to not do so warrants suspicion of the credibility of the poster. Whether through youth or immaturity, lack of education or down right maliciousness, it's often hard to tell.

So, for the sake of continuity here on punaweb I would like to request that some effort be made to clarify sources and make clear distinctions between them and opinions.

Mahalo

[hikatz]

Here we go again, another jab at harryd.

dakine, your threads are interesting and informative, I like that you include sources and links in your topics. But others have posted in the past, in different topics they dislike and ignore links. Not everyone is as precise as you, it doesn't bother us if a post is not perfect.
We really are quite capable of reading and forming our own opinions, and if I need more information, I will do my own research.

harryd updates on Ana, or the lava flow I find very helpful, what a timesaver having all the information on one page, I don't have to wade through the news/weather links just trying to find the latest updates.

http://harrysserver.com/ana/

harryd is criticized for not quoting enough links or sources[]
KathyH is criticized for posting to many links and sources[?]

[Carey]

ANY TIME you use someone else's words or artwork (anything you did not create) as your own it is plagiarism...

However it is becoming more of an odd duck in todays world, teachers and professors often "borrow" text and graphics, as do their students..

I even had full paragraphs of a grant I co-wrote lifted & published in a masters paper by a student at the local university... when brought to light, the university stance is that the "paper has serious flaws" but they decided not to withdraw the paper...

It is not so much what we are taught, but what we model ourselves after...some chose to not acknowledge the work of others...

[DanielP]

For crying out loud, this is a bulletin board, lighten up dakine

[Obie]

Wow,I thought he was talking about Whalesong !!

[missydog1]

I don't have a dog in the harryd thing at all and am not taking sides.

But yes, the truth is that message board or not there are laws against copyright infringement and using other people's intellectual property. You're allowed to post part of it as fair use, but you must credit the source.

I post links for three reasons:
1) the above legal requirement of fair use.

2) so that if anyone feels I have unfairly taken a snippet out of context and tried to use it in a way not intended by the author, I have presented the original and anyone can see it and use any part of it to challenge me if they so wish.

3) I link for people who want to read more, read the source, and even follow other references listed in the source.

If I don't do that, everyone only has the bit I picked out to go by and it's no help in learning more.

Only on Punaweb do I ever post a whole article and I shouldn't. But people complain about links because they're on dial up and slow internet. If all of Puna had fast internet I would not, and actually I think I won't do that again.

It's a basic of any college work and I'm guessing starts earlier now that quotes must be exact and must be credited, and your own thoughts must be clearly separated.

The truth is that Rob Tucker could get sued for allowing copyright infringement on his site, although one hopes he won't attract that kind of ire. I also post at Tripadvisor, and the mods there quickly delete any post that copies a newspaper article or any other copyrighted work past what Fair Use allows. They delete it because Expedia could get sued.

So the whole "just a message board" rationale does not hold up at all. Copyright and intellectual property must be handled carefully in any public medium.

Aside from that, purely as a poster in a community, it's the right thing to do to be clear about this is that guy's work and this is my own thought. That's not being stuffy. It's simply being honest.


Kathy

[missydog1]

PS. A government informational publication can generally be reprinted in full, as can a "media release" aka press release. This is because those things are created with the purpose of disseminating the information to the max rather than as intellectual property.

But run a search on Fair Use and read it yourself. I'm not giving legal advice in it for anyone else to follow, for sure.

Kathy

[pahoated]

This is a non-profit forum, thereby the org domain. There is no financial transaction going on. Links aren't copyrighted, they may or may not point to material that is copyrighted. If it isn't copyrighted, it is public domain.

This is real Missy Manners Interwebz n00b trying to become net nazi stuff. If material is copied in its entirety and posted in a not-for-money forum, the current netiquitte is to enclose the entire body in quotes with the source identified and given credit, as well as a link. In some forums, the standard phrase is "not real without a link". If it is objectionable, most places send a cease and desist. Seriously, nobody but some people glued to their monitors are going to send the NSA to take down a gossip-and-opinion forum.



"Mahalo nui Pele, 'ae noho ia moku 'aina" - kakahiaka oli

[DanielP]

"OMG"

[missydog1]

pahoated, you're over-reacting.
I was only explaining why I use links.
I didn't say anyone WOULD get sued, and wasn't trying to scare anyone. Could, yes.

This topic isn't about copyright, but is more about credibility, so I'm not going to go on a whole side tangent explaining why, but everything you said about copyright in your post is incorrect. Copyright is automatic, no notice required since 1089. Public domain is not a simple idea. The netiquette you mentioned is not a safe way. A noncommercial website does not have nonprofit status, and it's certainly not an educational institution or a library, the two arenas that get a lot of latitude. For more understanding:

http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/us-gov...works.html
http://www.publiccounsel.org/tools/publi...airuse.pdf

I was in academia for some of my professional life and had friends/colleagues who published educational works who got sued for using quotes from "great books" in order to discuss and critique. They should not have been but yet it happened. My one friend was a professor at Stanford, without question a reputable educator, and still ... sued. You would be surprised I guess how complicated it really is.

But anyway, I only mentioned copyright as one of three reasons why I include a link, and only to be complete, so let's get back to what dakine was talking about.

I take dakine's point that whenever someone is trained in a profession where writing and/or sharing research is key, the correct format is absolutely drummed in and that's just the way you go about writing and sharing information after that.

I guess if you are self-taught it is different, and you might get into what professionals in the field would consider seriously bad habits.

It's interesting how professional writers are called nitpickers for following their training, but you don't call a carpenter a retentive nitpicker for correcting details that are crooked or shoddy. Maybe we could show some respect for other professions and allow for "codes" that we might not fully understand.


Kathy