case studies

III · Post by **III** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:09 pm

does the following post count as impersonating another eplayan, even if he can't quite spell the name right?

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 758#115758

i wouldn't mind so much except that "go go nation" sounds like something that would negatively affect my carefully crafted reputation.

technopatra · Post by **technopatra** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:47 pm

Bob wrote:
technopatra wrote:...It is a violation of the impersonation terms to use, as your nom de plume, a non de plume that someone else has used in real life?...
So you'd be blissfully woo-woo if someone logged on as "tèchnopaträ"?

Good question, but that's a different case...I use that name here as well, and since I have admin duties, that would be tantamount impersonating an admin, which we couldn't let slide.

Tancorix · Post by **Tancorix** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:55 am

I wanted to make sure DVD's suspension was lifted. According to this post it was implemented on Dec 2nd, 2004.

Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 7:55 pm Post subject: violation of terms of service : temporary account suspension

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DVD Burner's accounts (including Lilly Flower) have been suspended for one month as a result of a threat he made against another eplaya member.

I still feel the suspension was excessively harsh, 30 days have done nothing to change that opinion, and if the suspension isn't already lifted it certainly needs to be.

Thanks
Tancorix / Kinetic

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:51 pm

Thanks Tanc, I had it in my calendar to do today, as i was away for the weekend.

The DVD Burner ID and associated sock puppets have been reactivated.

Happy New Year!

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:53 pm

This reads as an advertisement to me, especially since it wasn't in response to the flow of conversation on the forum:
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... ht=#125041
If it doesn't run afoul of the guidelines, it certainly skirts the edge. Any thoughts?

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:33 pm

Definitely a fence walking post.

Tancorix · Post by **Tancorix** » Sun Jan 09, 2005 10:17 pm

I have Bonefire on one of my BM supply links from 2002. My take on it is they offer a product that was built from lessons learned on the playa. It seems to be a good company and I hate to see their product info be blocked. For a future burner it could be an item of interest.

That being said, this post clearly is an ad and as such runs afoul of the Eplaya TOS. Here's the section spelling it out:

Non Commercial Use by Members. The Eplaya is for the personal use of individual Members only and may not be used in connection with any commercial endeavors. Organizations, companies, and/or businesses may not become Members and may not use the Eplaya for any purpose.

It is quite clear that various members of the community have identified this post as an commercial advertisement. It clearly violates the commercial endeavor rule posted above. With that in mind I hope the admins look at the user's prior history and offer a warning, a post deletion, and proceed accordingly.

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:05 am

The user has no post history. This ad was his second post. And his first post was in a similar vein, although it was in response to a question from another poster, so is a bit more acceptable.

It's one thing for users to talk about products they like, or to give links to resources about building or buying flame cannons, it's another thing for someone who builds and sells them to come into a forum, and apparently without reading it, post an infomercial uninvited.

I don't care how good the product is, or how well suited it is for burning man, and how burner-friendly the company is. DON"T TRY TO SELL IT TO ME ON THE PLAYA, OR THE E-PLAYA. Not only do you guarantee that I won't buy it, you run the risk of me poking you in the eye. Really hard.

Can we get an official word on this, maybe some action?

III · Post by **III** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:25 pm

>how well suited it is for burning man, and how burner-friendly the company is. DON"T TRY TO SELL IT TO ME ON THE PLAYA, OR THE E-PLAYA

sheesh - you must be a real danger at the cafe and camp arctica...

Cardinal · Post by **Cardinal** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 3:06 pm

sheesh - you must be a real danger at the cafe and camp arctica...

And what does a personal attack have to do with case studies?

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 3:26 pm

On January 11, I emailed flamebrain to invite him to respond to the claims of commerce that have been raised against him in this thread.

Because this was a borderline case, the admins decided to offer the user the opportunity to respond publicly within 2 days to your complaints. After two days (ok, it was three!) he has not responded, so I have deleted the offending post and administered a warning to the user.

buckethead alien · Post by **buckethead alien** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:40 am

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 190#129190

Admin needs to get a LIBEL ATTORNEY to take a look at claims made in this thread. Seriously, I deal with this issue on a daily basis as the editor of a weekly newspaper, and this needs to be vetted.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:30 pm

Please make it go away.

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:50 am

gang,

the admins are happy to take a look at the issue you're seeing, but frankly, i don't have the gumption to weed through the he said she said on the threads to figure out what you feel is in violation of the terms of service or community guidelines.

can you quote me the posts and the TOS/CG sections you feel are being directly violated here? the more information you give, the better.

from what i read, it's a lot of mudslinging, but not so different from anything else on this board. perhaps i'm missing something.

thanks.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:41 am

Starts on this page:

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... ent#125570

Accusations re: a particular person couched in language like this:

I have heard from friends and on the NY list that Cory was one of the people in SEAL who kept a lot of cash from past Decoms for themselves.

I thought that it was crying out for comment that she was putting up on this forum that she was a founding member of SEAL, an organization that I have only heard spoken about in disparaging terms.

This accusation has been made many times on the NY list. Cory and SEAL have never defended themselves. If someone had stepped forward on the NY list to explain the other side of this story, then I probably would not have posted my doubts.

Many people are now stepping forward to say that it isn't true. I'd like to hear it from the candidate herself. I still don't know her side of this story.

Also, if there was no embezzlement, then why do so many people think that there was?

And going downhill from there, with a few new eplaya characters posting similar accusations to that discussion anonymously for the first time.

Up to you if that's the kind of "discussion board" you want to administrate.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:43 am

If it wasn't clear, what makes it different is that it involves accusing someone of a crime.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:48 am

The only accusation I saw was possibly one of sloppy record keeping of some money given freely to get a project done. There does seem to be a lot of sour grapes in that thread, though, but I didn't see any direct accusation of criminal activity. What I read was someone posting that questions had been raised in another forum ( NYC burners list ) and she was wanting some feedback on it. After that it seems people got very defensive but still no direct accusation of criminal activity.

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:10 am

Cory was one of the people in SEAL who kept a lot of cash from past Decoms for themselves.

Just because you don't use the word "embezzlement" doesn't mean you aren't accusing someone of it.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:33 am

I think the crime would be in deleting this thread. It does wonders in educating us about the players in this drama.

GuinivereElise · Post by **GuinivereElise** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:17 pm

stuart wrote:I think the crime would be in deleting this thread. It does wonders in educating us about the players in this drama.

I agree.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:30 pm

The problem that remains aftrwards though is the fact that someone's name remains in place who may have very well been falsely accused or slandered. Seems to me that the default decision should be geared towards correcting any wrong towards the individual regardless of any value others might get out of leaving the accusations up for all to see.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:52 pm

Badger wrote:The problem that remains aftrwards though is the fact that someone's name remains in place who may have very well been falsely accused or slandered.

Some people have all the nerve.

This all sounds like another day in the eplaya drama club.

That whole thread is basic nonsense of people that need to grow up and quick.

I'm with Stuart:

stuart wrote:I think the crime would be in deleting this thread. It does wonders in educating us about the players in this drama.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 2:14 pm

I think my position is getting a bit mischaracterized here.

I think a legitimate question was initially asked. I think peoples responses, on both sides of the issue, were very telling. I think Cory's defenders never addressed the issue directly. I think one of Amy's supporters got way out of hand. I think it a shame that it got as out of hand as it did. It clouds the legitimate issue. The thread reinforced some of my original hunches. I would like the elements of this thread that do not clearly cross a legal line to remain as I think it a valuable reference.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 2:21 pm

Some people have all the nerve.

And some people have none whatsoever.

Were it me I'd ask the person accused the following: 1) do you feel you've been mis-characterized by the accusations that have been levied against you? 2) do you feel you've been libeled or has the writer just over-stated his/her case 3) Based on the tone so far and the suggestions that you've been unfairly accused what's your opinion (or wish) as to how to proceed with this thread?

Simplistic perhaps but I think before a decision is made on how to follow up.

Tancorix · Post by **Tancorix** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:20 pm

Welcome to the slippery slope. If that thread gets deleted the precedent is set. The next time a controversial topic or discussion comes up the cries will go out to delete, censor, etc.

If I recall correctly the eplaya admins were taking a hands off approach and only stepping in if the CG's or TOS were violated. Nobody has stepped forward to conclusively show that this mess has violated either one. So....with that in mind we're stuck. And if you don't like the fact that the admins are stuck then step forward and issue the call for the CG's and TOS to be revised. Give the admins some tools to work with and make the CG's really reflect the will of the users who post here. After all that's what they're for.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:22 pm

Maybe some people are looking foward to creating the "mommy Police".

Jeeeeezzzzz......

any progress on the ignore plonker?

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm

If you -- the admins & owners of the BBS -- want this discussion board to be an open forum for accusing individuals who aren't public/political figures of crime, leave it as-is. I didn't bring it up to defend anyone or anything except Burning Man.

Tancorix · Post by **Tancorix** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 7:13 pm

Jiminy Christmas and Holy Conspiracy Theory.

All I see is a bunch of hot air and nothing actionable by the admins IMHO, but they'll look at it in due time and make their own decision. There have been accusations traded before such as artists getting grant money and not showing up, now this, and eventually it will be something else. I reread that mess and I don't see anything that really spikes up and warrants anything more than a "cool it" statement.

Anyway here's the TOS item that I think everyone's thinking about...I'll post it again and that way everyone can form their own opinion and weigh in on this:

The following is a partial list of the kind of Content that is illegal or prohibited on the Eplaya. Burning Man reserves the right to investigate and take appropriate legal action in its sole discretion against anyone who violates this provision, including without limitation, removing the offending post from the Service and terminating the membership of such violators, in connection with all available civil, criminal, and injunctive remedies. You agree not to use the Service to:

post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;

Again, if the admins enforce this aggressively here it could come back and haunt us in the future. All I'm going to ask is to be careful and think about what results we're asking for here. The results we get may have unexpected consequences in the future.....

emily sparkle · Post by **emily sparkle** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 7:29 pm

Just confirming, the admins are considering the issue.

Continue the discusion, though. It's interesting.

Thanks.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:41 pm

Fuck... I take back what I said...

K/T's going hysterical again...

BVD Burner obviously still wants to take me in an alley...

Stu's so cute when he's bitter...

and I just embezzled too much eplaya time making an issue of decorum on a BBS that has none.

case studies

Reactivated

Borderline Commerce

Legal issue

be specific please.