case studies

[Tancorix]

Sheesh, the AD is back:
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic.php?t=3061

1988 Chevy Metro delivery van in concord. Very good shape with rebuilt automatic transmission, new radiator, 6 good wheels and tires. rebuilt brake system rebuilt diesel motor. roll up rear door. aluminum body good paint and glass. I don't have time to make it a playa ready art car. maybe you can.....It will carry everything ..I would like $3750.00 but will consider a utility trailer (6 x and/or a golf cart for part trade. some improvements needed for the playa but ready to roll as is...

Michael

925-686-2677
www.michaelslighttoys.com

When I brought this up before here was the admin response: (See page 2 of this thread)

Tancorix wrote:
How about this one that just showed up in the Newbie thread, a van for sale that could be made into an art vehicle? It's listed as either a trade or for sale for $3750.

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... a8d5#39776

And now from the TOS under the Expected Behaviors section:
The ePlaya is a no-commerce zone. Recommending a good deal you found is acceptable, gifting is always encouraged. Advertising items or services for sale or trade will not be tolerated.

I'm not making a formal complaint as this one doesn't really mean diddly to me...but with the rollout of the new rules I am curious how this one will be handled?


Someone else alerted me to this, and I just contacted the poster, letting him know I was going to delete this post. Which I've done. It was very clearly an ad, so there was no need to delay action.

Ok, so now we get the same behavior twice. How does the community / admins want to handle this? Would this warrant another admin warning or does it need a stronger response?

[technopatra]

i received a response from mikeylightsit before I saw the second posting. I replied to him with a link to the community guidelines and an explanation that they exist because community wants them to, to help shape the kind of experience they want to have here. I invited him, as a member of this community, to discuss it further in the eplaya feedback forum and that if popular sentiment changes, we'll adjust the rules.

When I saw the 2nd one, I repeated these statements and locked the thread to remain an example of what not to do. Then sent him another PM expressed my hope that the previous message was clear about the policy, then gave him a warnign that if he did it again, his posting privileges would be temporarily suspended.

[III]

does "burner to burner sales" also apply to tickets?

it seems this is a (slightly) stricter standard than we had before, though it is definitely within the parameters of the debate about those (lack of?) standards.

[precipitate]

I thought tickets were going to be a general exception to the rule, to try to
avoid ticket price inflation and shit.

In past years, selling on the eplaya was the only officially sanctioned way
to dispose of physical tickets. Will call ticket exchanges have to happen
via the tickets.burningman.com site anyway.

[technopatra]

I thought tickets were going to be a general exception to the rule, to try to avoid ticket price inflation and shit.

Interesting.. this didn't come up in the commerce discussions we had, either here or in the office.

There is a perverse side of me that would love to do this again, if only to have an exception to a rule...I'll bring it up with the web team and ticketign folks and get their take on it.

[precipitate]

This is totally an assumption on my part.

Last year, there was an explicit mandate that ticket resales be done on the
eplaya. That need not be the case this year, but I think it's a decent
model to follow, and something that should be discussed.

[Ivy]

Last year, there was an explicit mandate that ticket resales be done on the
eplaya.

I seem to recall reading a request of just that just this weekend while buying my ticket. Under the FAQ, about reselling tix and changing names for will call pick-up and what not.
But it was late.

[technopatra]

Thanks for the tips guys. I'll start asking questions at the web team meeting tonight.

[technopatra]

Discussing a crime is one thing. Discussing the best ways to commit a crime with the intent to commit that crime is a whooooole'nother thang.

Thanks for the great contextual example, Rodent. The missing component is that if you were discussing and plannig the best way to rob a bank, the cops would not only come after you, but we could lose our permits for the event, too.

[technopatra]

>>inexperienced and wide-eyed

there is indeed a difference, and has been pointed out, the initial responses were informative and non inflammatory.

the question is what happens when those initial responses are ignored/derided/blown off. at that point, it's no longer innocent and wide eyed, but willfully ignorant.

i'm trying to figure out how much i contributed to the escalation (and i'm willing to accept both stuarts and tp's comments that i was a part of it). i'm now trying to figure out how much of that was my personal ego, either bridling at the direct barbs, or more likely at the indirect ones that implied my answers were worth nothing, and how much was an effort to clarify for a potential larger readership my exact position, since it was clear that the origional questioner was not interested in hearing what i had to say.

i'm also not sure how i would respond differently if i could do it all over again, though it's something i'm going to go think about now.

This willingness to introspect is what I hoped to encourage with Aq.Girl, but to no avail. I suggested that she consider that she cast the first stone and come and join this discussion. She was not responsive to the idea of examining her role and instead responded with counter-complaints to what was written about her here.

As I told Aq.Girl, I will contact those folks as proscribed by the complaint process. I find that the willingness of people to discuss their actions and motivations here to be the best possible solution, and see no need for any further admin action on either the compaint made against Aq.Girl or the complaints she has made.

[stuart]

Hi, I'm planning to come to San Francisco because I heard it was an expressive place to visit. I wish to get the full experience of SF and I like to rob banks, it's the way I express myself. I just wanted to know what the security systems in SF banks where like. A friend of mine said that there may be hidden cameras, do you know how to spot them? What are the best getaway routes? Is there a best way to outrun police?

I believe making these type of comments is also not agianst the law (although it may get them to put the evil eye on ya). I may be misstaken, but I beilieve discussing the planning of a crime only gets you jailed if it deals with harming the president. Also, if I respond with comments like 'mission is a bitch to cross, don't try it if you are in a hurry. Seems like the guards at BofA downtown are pretty fuckin slow.' I am in no hot water unless I am on parole.

there is also a bit of a disanalogy here. If I discuss my future bank robbing plans in SF and then a bank in SF gets knocked it makes me a prime suspect perhaps due to the uniqueness of the crime and the uniqueness of the discussion. Discussions about drugs at burning man as well as the doing of them at burning man are not quite as unique.

anyway, I know I am just being a prick here.

[ronski]

Interesting discussion.

I believe that these examples could indeed be prosecuted as a crime, specifically "conspiracy to commit a felony". There doesn't have to be any actual physical crime committed as long as it can be be demonstrated that real intent to do it is there.

Conspiracy is a nice catch-all.

Perhaps one of the lawyer burners would provide a professional opinion about this.

[III]

>>professional opinion

i believe was represented by the terms of service, which explicitly dissallows any discussion of intent to violate the law.

[Panther]

In misinterpreting the TOS, I have read Section 6 and have come to imagine this scenario-

Three Eplayans post to a thread- Burning Idol

Playan One: I am publishing my original poem in this post.
Playan Two: Lovely poem, may I set it to Music? Here's the sheet music-
Playan Tre: I'll record this and send out demos. We'll split the credit/profit three ways.

Players One, Two and Three all agree to Three's plan. It becomes a beautiful product.

* * *
Question: Who owns the rights to perform the song?

Answer: Playan One owns the poem, Playan Two owns the sheet music and Playan Three owns the audio tape/disk. But the salable right to perform the song at concerts world wide goes to Burning Man.

Panther

[Ivy]

Perhaps, if they were a tad smarter, it would have gone like this:

Playan One: I am publishing my original poem in this post.
Playan Two: Lovely poem, may I set it to Music? I'll email you the sheet music-
Playan Tre: If it works out for you guys, drop me a line, I'm interested in recording it.

Any arrangement of demos/marketing/selling is now done privately.

My motto: 5 more minutes of thought.

[Panther]

Ivy,
Yes, your rendition of what cardboard Playan Tre might have said is much more appropriate given your untold Recording Industry knowledge which specifies that "Any arrangement of [music] in now [modern day] done privately." You're very clever.

But let's return to the implicit question: Under the rules in Section 6 of the Eplaya TOS, given that a product was produced via communications through Eplaya between Eplaya members, does Burning Man own the salable rights to the end product? Yes or No?

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 0160#40160
ePlaya Forum Index -> ePlaya Feedback -> Policies & Our Community -> case studies

Panther

[juanicoheal]

Similar situation:

Participant A is a 'surfaces' photographer. Snaps shots of woodchips in the playground, concrete sidewalks, brick walls etc. Same participant takes photos of the playa surface, sides of dusty vehicles, silver tarps while at BM. Later, participant produces long striven for gallery show of collected photos. Who owns rights to the 'collected images' taken at BM. Even though they have no true BM relevence other than time of photography?

[Ivy]

Five more minutes of thought:

If you don't want someone (BM, or some other individual or group) to sell/repost/use your poem/song/diatribe/whatever, don't put it out there.

Regardless of whether or not they have the right.

[Panther]

Five more minutes of thought: If you don't want someone (BM, or some other individual or group) to sell/repost/use your poem/song/diatribe/whatever, don't put it out there. Regardless of whether or not they have the right.

Ivy,
Yes, you've offered a choice solution-

Paraphrase: "Don't put out there, if you don't want someone to sell/repost/use your [material]".

This is the choice solution for many other people using the Internet, not just Eplayans. As it is, there are most likely people who feel nervous about posting on Eplaya. At a glance, by the publicly available numbers, the ratio of lurkers to posters is currently large. I imagine it could be a fear most dreadful to them that they may be summarily ostracised from Eplaya or Burning Man for making a social blunder. For other reasons, many people are following your very same choice solution of "Just Don't Post."

With regards to the TOS Section 6, perhaps I can approach my question in another way? Currently there are many ideas in the ThemeCamps section- ideas for Camps and Projects. If I post my own ThemeCamp idea there and it becomes discussed by others, does Burning Man own my ThemeCamp idea? Yes or No?

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewforum.php?f=16
ePlaya Forum Index -> Burning Man 2003 -> Themecamps & Art Installations -> New Camp Ideas


Panther
---------------------
This thread Subject: "TOS and Content" begins here, one page back-
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 0160#40160
ePlaya Forum Index -> ePlaya Feedback -> Policies & Our Community -> case studies

[Ivy]

I may be mistaken, but I seem to recall that no one can own an idea--you hae to make something tangible of the idea to copyright/patent it and therefore own it. So I'd have to say no, BM doesn't own your idea. But then, neither do you.

BTW, this is not a case study, but a hypothetical situation. I'd respectually suggest perhaps starting a new topic for it since we seem to have denegrated this far about it, but the last time I did that I was ripped a new asshole and had it handed to me on a silver platter, so I'll just say until there's something concrete to cover, I'm done with this "case study."

[Panther]

I may be mistaken, but I seem to recall that no one can own an idea--you hae to make something tangible of the idea to copyright/patent it and therefore own it. So I'd have to say no, BM doesn't own your idea. But then, neither do you.

BTW, this is not a case study, but a hypothetical situation. I'd respectually suggest perhaps starting a new topic for it since we seem to have denegrated this far about it, but the last time I did that I was ripped a new asshole and had it handed to me on a silver platter, so I'll just say until there's something concrete to cover, I'm done with this "case study."

Ivy,
Yes, you stated, and I paraphrase- "[You]'d respectfully suggest perhaps starting a new topic....but the last time [you] did that [you were] [upbraided for this suggestion in a severe and painful manner.]" This is truely unfortunate! I am really sorry to hear this! Who scolded you? Why do you believe they did this? Do you think this was fair? This is discouraging to the rest of us. Perhaps we can start a sub-thread within Case Studies about your unfortunate situation. Topic: What should the guidelines be for starting a new topic?

Regarding the TOS Section 6,
The case study called TOS Section 6 and Content is currently seven (7) messages total. Panther, Juanicoheal, and Ivy are the only respondents so far. I believe that TOS section 6 is a concrete subject to discuss. It is my fault to have chosen the word "idea" when a more appropriate word should have been "plan". To make the discussion more concrete, I alter the question to be-

If I post my own ThemeCamp PLAN on Eplaya and it becomes discussed by others, does Burning Man own my ThemeCamp PLAN? Yes or No?

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewforum.php?f=16
ePlaya Forum Index -> Burning Man 2003 -> Themecamps & Art Installations -> New Camp Ideas


Panther
---------------------
This thread Subject: "TOS and Content" begins here, one page back-
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 0160#40160
ePlaya Forum Index -> ePlaya Feedback -> Policies & Our Community -> case studies

[Tancorix]

Slight Thread Drift: To the admins, thank you for curbing the WSPR posts. This was an example where the TOS worked!

[admin]

Multiple reports of crossposts and direct attacks heralded WSPR's reutrn to the boards.

I've deactivated WSPR's account and frozen his latest hate threads, per the TOS and CG.

I sent him an email informing him of the action ...surprise, surprise, it bounced.

~technopatra~

[Badger]

Seems to me half the shit stirred up is in the topic title. Why not just delete the thing rather than just locking it out.

Just my .02.

[technopatra]

Good question, Badger.

I wanted to leave them as examples of what not to do, and of what will happen when folks cross those lines. I think that a lot of people were bothered that no action was taken last time around, and I wanted them to know that now that our rules are in effect, we will enforce them for the betterment of our community. By freezing them, they will eventually fall off the page as other conversation ensue.

I put this in case studies both to notify you and because I do want to hear your opinions about it. What does everyone think? Should we just delete those kinds of threads? Delete but keep a log of the action? Freeze as is? Is there a better way of communicating admin actions? In Announcements?

What level of detail do you need to see to feel satisfied? I can't promise to be able to give it to you, but if I can, I will.

[DVD Burner]

Seems to me half the shit stirred up is in the topic title. Why not just delete the thing rather than just locking it out.

Just my .02.

Just a suggestion. I think they should be saved either on this board or somewhere if need be for legal matters later. After all it does seem that they (WRSP) are not smart enough to realize that they are posting slander on a public message board hosted by the owner that ownes the server the messageboard is hosted on, viewed by the hosts users.

BTW Ms. T. Very wittingly done.

Thank you.

[precipitate]

> I sent him an email informing him of the action ...surprise, surprise, it
> bounced.

I wonder if setting the board to User Activation of accounts rather than
Admin Activation of accounts might help in situations like that. It requires
the user to respond to an email sent to the registered address. As far as
I can tell, the admin option doesn't do that. It requires the admin to take
the extra step to check the mail address.

Then again, admin activation may provide other benefits of which I'm not
aware.

[Chai Guy]

I think that in regards to posts such as WSPR, those posts should be deleted. They are simply personal attacks nothing more or less. By freezing them you are giving me them a permanent place here, and even though they will eventually fall to the bottom (and off the page) they will remain to clutter the boards for future searches of pertinent information.

I also think that any commerce posts should be immediately deleted for the same reason.


Some other posts though might have a purpose served by being frozen, such as cross posts, with a link to the initial post. Or an incredibly similar post in a seperate area (for example someone posting a question about tents in the newbie questions section when there is already a discussion on tents in the Structures section).

[technopatra]

> I sent him an email informing him of the action ...surprise, surprise, it
> bounced.

I wonder if setting the board to User Activation of accounts rather than
Admin Activation of accounts might help in situations like that. It requires
the user to respond to an email sent to the registered address. As far as
I can tell, the admin option doesn't do that. It requires the admin to take
the extra step to check the mail address.

Then again, admin activation may provide other benefits of which I'm not
aware.

We did that so we could monitor the folks coming in, make sure they weren't creating new obvious and hateful sockpuppets like WSPR. It's our plan to move it back to user admin now that the TOS/CG are in place, with Emily monitoring the memberlist once a week or more to check for userIDs that violate the TOS/CG. There are way too many user accountst o keep up with manually, anyway. Offhand I'd say we get between 5 and 20 persya, depending on the day.

[technopatra]

persya, depending on the day.

er..people.