Nexteritis – Opposition to FcNext

——————–
Copyright 2008 by Nexteritis.  All rights reserved.  For permission to use, contact:
nexteritis-owner@yahoogroups.com
———————

FcNext, The Lost Generation of Freecycling

Nothing exciting here (although some Nexters sure seem excited about us … too bad we don’t get paid for writing our stuff … that would be too “Freesharing-like”).  Just some typical nexterisms and yahooisms to talk about  …

1. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24702
Nexter No_blip can’t tell the difference between copyright fair use and the TOS violation involved in swiping a post from a group’s private, restricted archive for publication in a public archive.  That’s okay.  Yahoo! knows the difference, and executed their Notice of Infringement and FcNext post deletions accordingly.

We look forward to the Nexteritis blog being quoted, legally and responsibly in a fair use context, with proper attribution (just a valid hyperlink to the source will do … just to keep things simple enough for Nexters).

We also appreciate the publicity we’re getting through their posting a link to us, beginning with thanks to Andy for that, since FcNext censorship wouldn’t allow us to post our views in their so-called “unmoderated” group under their limited (and twisted) notion of “free speech,” complicated by their inability to cope with dissent from people willing to put serious effort into it.  But they ARE mostly students of TFN, where they learned some things about how to run discussion groups and deal with controversy, though apparently little or nothing about moderating a discussion.

2. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24703
Paul Hurteau (proudly hailing from Auburn, MA) thinks it’s wrong for anti-Nexters to publish their writing under a nom de plume, but doesn’t accuse comrade “no_blip” of any such thing.  Honor among blips and all that.  Apparently he also subscribes to that school of thought saying, “If I say it, it must be true.”  And conversely, “If I say it ain’t true, it can’t be true.”  Most folks of that type also tend to think that if they say it often enough and loud enough, that makes it true.  George W. Bush got most Americans and Congress to buy into an illegal and immoral war that way, so I guess if it’s good enough for him, it might work among Nexters.  George is also famous for a line in a speech to the United Nations:  “You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists.”  That kind of polarized thinking works for Nexters, too.  No gray areas, no middle ground, no alternatives.  You either swallow their propaganda hook, line and sinker, or you are evil.  Drink the kool-aid and go to Nexter Heaven.  For each TFN group you kill, you get seventeen virgins in the afterlife.

3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24704
Nexter moderator (only in word, not deed or skill) Judy is still harping on the silly notion of reporting something about Nexteritis to Yahoo!, presumably because she can’t decipher the TOS, or maybe she just thinks it’s fun to tell people to file unjustified and unsustainable complaints (or false ones).  I guess it does sting a little to know so many posts have been deleted from FcNext for TOS violations, and to dread the likelihood of it happening again.

4. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24705
“Kettle” No_blip, being the expert statistician, believes that a 14% random sample is insufficient to come to any reasonable conclusions in a survey of the type done on Freesharing.  Of course, the method of randomization was published, and anyone can verify that the report did contain a random sample, but no Nexter would do that much work about anything so intensive, even things they get so excited about.  It’s easier to just rant than do any serious investigation of facts.

Still, it is understandable that some folks of limited faculties might suspect that 14% isn’t a big enough random sample.  Some day we’ll double it by adding another 14% of the list to the survey.

Actually, we’ve already done that.  Some time ago, we surveyed about 300 of the entries in the Freesharing directory (more than a third of the directory size at the time), just starting at the top of the list and moving down through it.  The results were worse for Burke’s image.  But that’s outdated now, and it did not provide a proportionate cross-section of the entire country.

Following Andy’s psychology, criticizing Freesharing should be a positive thing, because criticism can help show the way to improvement.  He might be onto something there, but it takes someone capable of receiving and acting on constructive criticism in an honorable way.  We’re not expecting Burke to suddenly start applying anything like quality controls to his directory.  It would cut his link count in half, and maybe reduce his Google hit rating, and affect his income.  Money talks.

5.  King James English-speaking Statistician Kettle No-blip also writes about Nexteritis with a biblical twist, this matter being of religious-scale consequence to them.  Not surprising from a cult to invoke religious overtones on things.

6. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24707
Typical of Nexters, Hurteau reads words that are not there, referring to someone else having written the word “most” when they did not.  (The phrase he apparently refers to is, “the other 90% either ignoring it or long gone bouncing.”)  But it would be interesting to know how many FcNext member accounts are bouncing, if one could get an honest answer to such a question.  We hope it’s not many, because we do like our blog link being published to as many Nexters as possible.

Curious that serious dissidents and opponents to core Nexter attitudes and behaviors are not allowed to post in FcNext, but FcNext postings still give so much attention to the writings of those same dissidents and opponents, notwithstanding those vocal unmoderated Nexters’ lack of substance and cogency, as usual.

——————–
Copyright 2008 by Nexteritis.  All rights reserved.  For permission to use, contact:
nexteritis-owner@yahoogroups.com
——————–

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nexteritis/message/3

— In nexteritis@yahoogroups.com, nexteritis <no_reply@…> wrote:

Responding to Eric Burke’s post at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24528

Burke is the owner of
http://freesharing.org

Under their cult program of censorship FcNext mods rejected this post without explanation (Burke’s expletives modified):

[The following posted here by permission of the author.]
—–Original Message—–
From: Meg
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:51 AM
To: fcnext@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Personal Attacks – Get Real

I can sit still for abuse just so long.

Eric, I’m one of the cefgiving members you sent your foul-mouthed email to when I wrote politely and respectfully asking you to finally keep your promise (and to abide by your own website’s written policy) to remove the group from your sick website half full of garbage links (where you were also caught red-handed adding groups who never asked to be listed).

Dennis made a mistake asking you to list our group last summer.  He made amends for that mistake.  You obviously aren’t man enough to make amends for yours.  You need to be compelled by others, like a child.  But that’s the way of the world now … if you can get away with it, then it’s not wrong.  But it is wrong, even if “everybody does it.”

We waited patiently for three and a half months while you made excuses like a child.  Dennis never demanded immediate action and he never abused you in any way.  You, on the other hand, made excuses and lame rationalizations and reneged on your promises and your own website’s written policy.  Because you would not do what was right on your own initiative, when we were called upon to take action as a group, a couple dozen of us were more than happy to join the effort.  Your response was filthy foul-mouthed trash-talk in emails back to us, public harassment in this group (which got you slapped by Yahoo), and TOS violations which now have been slapped again by Yahoo.  Can’t take the slapping?  Stop the abusive behavior.

Maybe to you “getting real” (your revision to the subject line here) means posting more foul-mouthed insults and distortions of fact like your new post here.  Maybe that’s okay in your world.  Maybe you live in a ghetto and street-talk is all you know.  But in my world, for the past 76 years I’ve been treading earth and teaching adult school for 45 years, that’s uncivil behavior, and the moderators of this group should be ashamed of themselves for allowing it.  (I would toss you out of my group for it.)

I don’t belong to the school that says free speech means uncivil talk.  It demeans both speaker and hearer, and society in general, and this group.  You may have a right under law to your filthy mouth, but you shouldn’t be allowed to use it here, in a supposedly moderated group, one that purports to have a “no personal attacks” policy obviously not enforced (and I think foul language in a public forum is a TOS violation, too).

Ken makes the silly excuse that there are too many people unmoderated here to control it.  Nonsense.  I belong to groups with THOUSANDS of members and simple matters of civil decency are very well enforced.  Besides, most of the postings here come from only a couple dozen people, and the trash-tallkers are less than a dozen.  Is it so hard to control the posting activity of two or even three dozen people?  Nonsense, Ken.  Shame on you, calling yourself a pastor but not standing firmly and consistently against indecency in your own group every time it happens.

By the way, I won’t call you PK.  You’re just Ken.  In my church, pastor is a term of respect and endearment, and you’re not my pastor.  Dennis told me all about your past email and group involvement with him.  He’s not half as enamored of you as you say you are of him, knowing him so little as you do.

In my other groups they may get away with posting trash ONCE, being off moderation, but they won’t get a second chance, and their trash posts are deleted for breaking the group’s rules and common decency (and sometimes for TOS violation as harassment).

Don’t give me that nonsense about how much you believe in free speech.  I wasn’t born yesterday, and I’ve been involved with online groups since long before Yahoo was invented.  You can allow liberal use of CIVIL free speech without allowing UNCIVIL foul language and personal attacks, and TOS violations.  I belong to other groups where there’s abundant use of free speech on many topics (including politics and religion) but the mods don’t tolerate abusive speech and personal attacks.

> Let’s see, the US Government either reads or keyword flags
> every email and phone conversation on the planet,

Irrelevant, Eric.  YG has its own rules, and you and I signed an agreement to live by them (but you’ve already proved that you don’t believe in living up to your agreements, in freesharing.org and here).  One of those rules says you’re not allowed to steal stuff from a group and post it elsewhere.  Another one says you’re not allowed to harass people here or to post abusive things.  That’s what you did, on top of all your other offensive and neglectful, childish, trash-talking behavior, on which society always had its own rules that you plainly do not respect.

Yahoo enforced their TOS on you in THIS group in two ways:  they deleted a couple of of your harassment posts, and then they deleted all the posts where your stolen post from the cefgiving restricted archive appeared.

Don’t like Yahoo’s rules?  Don’t use their service.

I understand that those who top-posted their replies didn’t intend to go against the TOS, but the fact is they did, so Yahoo treated them the same.  Many people accidentally or unintentionally break rules.  Doesn’t mean they’re not accountable for it.  “Sorry, officer, I didn’t MEAN to run that stop sign.  I didn’t see it.”  Gets a ticket just the same.

Tim, it does not matter how long it was.  It was content taken from a restricted archive and reposted here.  That’s just simply a violation of YG Guideline 11, which Yahoo says is enforced under the TOS, so they enforced it.  Like it or not, it’s their rules, and we signed an agreement to live by their rules.

Debate the copyright law all you want, and maybe the law is wrong, but it is what it is.  Until you get Congress to change it, it’s the law.  And yes, different people, different copyright agents, different lawyers and even different judges will interpret and enforce the law in different ways.  You have every right (and a duty even) to press for your interpretation.

Meanwhile, we are subject to Yahoo’s interpretation, because they own this service, not us, and we agreed to follow their rules and their interpretations when using their service.  If you think Yahoo is wrong, then take it up with them, but trashing people here with filth like Eric’s and others is not a civil approach to one’s differences of opinion with Yahoo or the law, or the individuals here they disagree with.

Unlike Ken, who claims to “know” Dennis “for many years” … a lot of baloney — he “knows” him about as much as I know Thomas Jefferson — heck, Ken can’t even spell his name, this person alleging to know him so well, to know his “heart” for so “many” years … which is actually only email contact sporadically over a period of 42 months, according to Dennis, much of it uncomfortable and not so friendly email … I actually know him personally, in the flesh as a real neighbor and personal friend not just as an occasional email or online contact, and I live a stone’s throw from him.  I know him in a true personal relationship.  Ken has nothing of the sort with him.  Any statement by Ken otherwise is incorrect, according to Dennis, and only he would know who his real friends are, and how well they know him.

I know that when he filed his complaint about the stolen cefg post, he was annoyed that Yahoo didn’t provide a category on their form for simply “TOS violation” or “YG Guideline violation.”  So he picked the one closest from their silly short list of inadequate choices, I think it was something like “Inappropriate Content.”  Yahoo chose to refer the matter to their copyright agent who said that according to copyright law they would not follow through unless he provided a sworn statement of copyright infringement.  So he did that.  And it is copyright infringement.  Like it or not, that’s the law of this land.  You can fight it, and maybe you should, but that’s the law as Yahoo’s copyright agent understands it, and it’s also a TOS violation.  It’s a clear violation of YG Guideline 11, the original basis for the abuse report to Yahoo.  Yahoo chose to refer it to their copyright agent and refused to pursue it any other way.

OPINIONS about this obviously vary widely, but Yahoo obviously made clear their opinion, and they own this service and make the rules here, not you or me.

Those who repeated it in top-posted replies have no excuse.  It still violates YGG 11, and it’s still copyright infringement.  If I give you a photocopy of a poem that I did not write, and you make another photocopy and give it to somebody else, you infringed as much as I did.  Doesn’t matter how long it is or if it had a copyright notice on it.  The law grants copyright automatically to the author.  If you weren’t the author, you have a duty to get the author’s permission to reproduce and distribute.  Like or not, that’s the law.  (Yes it’s not always easily enforceable, and if somebody is really serious about protecting their copyright, they should apply a copyright notice and spend the thirty bucks or whatever it is these days to register it, and still they may have an expensive legal process to enforce an infringement claim.  But the law grants copyright automatically to the author without registration.)  Same thing with the repeated copies of that cefg post.  Each copy violated YGG 11 and copyright.  Don’t like the law?  Instead of whining about it here, write to your legislators, or write to Yahoo’s president with a convincing argument why they should change their application and interpretation of the law, or their TOS.  (But I understand it’s so much easier and for some people more fun to whine rather than pursue real civil action.)

Like most laws I think the copyright law is the way it is not because of the behaviors of civil, decent, honest people, but because of all the so-called adults walking around in adult bodies with adolescent or childish minds and because of morally corrupt people who don’t care about decency (but they declare war when someone offends THEM).

Actually the offense really did no particular harm to cefgiving, as the post was only information about how to contact Eric’s ISPs to report his foul-mouthed, abusive emails.  But Dennis was more concerned about the principle involved, that people in this group need to be held accountable for YGG and TOS violations (which I hear are common here) in the forms of harassment and reposting content from restricted group archives, among other abuses like foul language and personal attacks.

Now Freecycle can see that YGG 11 enforcement CAN be done when you post copies of OIDG and MS posts.  Yahoo apparently requires that it be done under copyright law instead of just YGG 11.  But the individual author of the stolen post must make a sworn statement to Yahoo that they did not authorize the copy.  And yeah, they have to be willing to identify themselves fully, with name, address and phone number.  That’s part of making a sworn statement under law in a civil society.

> and your getting your panties in a twist over pasting an
> email from one YGroup to another?

Yessir.  And so did Yahoo, when they deleted your violating posts and slapped you with a notice.  Maybe now that you have repeated your harassing, offensive behavior in this latest post, I hope you’ll get slapped with a second offense (oops … third offense) and lose your account and your groups.  I sure hope so, but Dennis won’t be able to file the abuse report this time.

Most people won’t follow-through on their commitments to the TOS (and to this group’s own “no personal attacks” so-called policy).  But I don’t mind stepping in to give you a bar of soap to wash your mouth, and maybe a talking-to your Mommy and Daddy needed to give you a long time ago about civil behavior, responsibility, decency and respect.

> Lets try and put this [expletive deleted] in perspective, ok.

Your perspective (and your language skill) is that of a street urchin, and similarly distorted.  And that’s not a personal attack on you.  No, it’s an accurate assessment of your obvious public and private behavior, from someone old enough to be your grandmother who would throw you out of her house for your foul mouth and would give you what-for about your unconscionable behavior regarding freesharing.org and some other things.

> I posted a forwarded email from his group that gave out my personal
> information (IP address, hosting company, etc)

That’s not your “personal information.”  It is information your ISP provided to us in your emails and group posting headers of your abusive, foul-mouthed messages, and for good reason, so that you could be tracked down and held accountable for your adolescent immoral behavior.

I see now on the headers of your latest post to this group that you’re posting by a different route to make it less easy to do that, but still does not hide you from abuse enforcement, and now everybody knows what a trash-mouth you are, and it is inexcusable, and you can still be held accountable.  I for one now yell FOUL and call you on this trash-talking adolescent behavior.  I’d say grow up boy, but it’s probably too late for you.  Your mold is cast.  I doubt you can break it.  But you can be held accountable by enforcement actions, as Yahoo has now proved twice on you, and I hope they kick you out for this third offense.

> as proof of the harassment that Denis was instigating on his
> group upon FreeSharing.org and myself.

It is not “harassment” for people to join together in a letter-writing campaign to get a vendor (in this case you, the vendor, with cefgiving, the client) to keep their promises and live up to their obligations after having neglected them so long, and having reneged on your repeated promises with childish excuses.  It is a civil way to get something done when so many prior polite and civil attempts in other ways had failed because of your childish obstinacy.  Plenty of companies have been compelled to change their behavior that way.  Freesharing.org (not really an org at all, but you call it one) is no special exception from that kind of civil action against its bad behavior and bad netizenship.

> The same person who forwarded me that email also sent a warning that
> Denis was planning on filing TOS violations against the folks on
> FCNext who also thought that Denis was acting like a little
> [expletive deleted].

This again shows that your idea of “getting real” has little to do with adult reality, and means only more character attacks and foul language and distortions of fact.  For people like you, that’s the only defense you can offer for your offensive behaviors.  But mature adults see right through it, and see you for what you are.

The truth is that at first he filed a harassment report against ONLY YOU ERIC because of your harassment postings here, which Yahoo apparently agreed was harassment.  The YGG 11 complaint about the copied cefg post came after that, when you started that business. And some cefgiving members who received your foul-mouthed abusive emails filed abuse reports with your ISP.  Apparently Yahoo agreed that your posts here were harassment, because they’re gone now.  Then they later deleted the cefg infringement posts, too.  Their house, their rules.

> Now we have another two letter name new poster defending
> Denis and again trying to stir the [expletive deleted] once again.

[see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/message/24491 ... the post Burke refers to]
If calling for an end to personal attacks is “stirring the [expletive deleted],” then it needs to be stirred.  Having a better vocabulary, I would call it an appeal for civil decency and common sense.  But you obviously aren’t familiar with that, proved repeatedly in the past and you continue proving it in your latest post.  Not just a matter of my opinion, but a matter of your obvious public behavior (and what I know to be your private behavior, too, in your abusive email to me and other cefgiving members).

> Maybe someone should check
> the IPs cuz I’d bet their all the same person.

Doesn’t matter who they are.  They took a stand for decency, something you obviously object to, and despise, as do so many people who have no other grounds for defending their wrong attitudes and behaviors.  The more you say, the more obvious it becomes who and what you really are.  You are known by your deeds.

If any civil-tongued, decent, respectable people want to discuss any of this further, if there is anyone out there who supports civil behavior in groups and websites, I might be interested in knowing you and might welcome your contact off-list … if the mods approve this post.  As for those of you who obviously don’t believe in such things, I’m ashamed of you, and you should be too.

Get real, indeed.  I don’t think you have much grasp on what is real, on what really matters, Eric.  And they call Dennis “unbalanced.”  Ha.  But your imbalance probably is not mental, just moral, as your post makes so plainly clear to any observer old enough to read.

Meg

— End forwarded message —

——————–
Copyright 2008 by Nexteritis.  All rights reserved.  For permission to use, contact:
nexteritis-owner@yahoogroups.com
——————–