The RedBootton Issue (All FFnet Users Please Read!) (120)

1 Name: YamiTenshi : 2010-08-29 19:13 ID:cIkQo5tE

I just received a PM from someone who was consulting me.

Has anyone else heard about this?

http://nothingsorrow.livejournal.com/5283.html#cutid1

http://civilinitiative.blogspot.com/2010/08/redbotton-issue-and-what-it-means-for.html

Thoughts, comments, questions?

71 Name: evie : 2010-09-10 18:54 ID:Ihm/0Qsh

@58: Redbootton Log post #82
'...It's getting bothersome to scroll through all of this to find my testing links. May have to delete most of these irrelevant posts in the days to come.'

The complain thread is initially created when a self-proclaimed troll visited the forum. I wasn't there, but I'm having a fun time reading all that. For more question, please visit the LU forum.

72 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-10 21:49 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>62 - Yeah... that sentence could have been better written. I was refering to the fact that "RB was tested alongside a real bot on security websites." There are laws against such programs on such sites, thus making the program illegal, yet they used it to help test/decide if the RB program was 'legal'.

>>63 - I don't think freedom of speach works the way you just said it does, but I can't put my finger on the problem. I get that it doesn't apply to individual people, but companies aren't completly innocent. For example, whistle blowers are protected by law.

>>65 - I get more what you were saying about your summary, even though I didn't question changing it in the first place. Do you by chance include the warning on the top of your first chapter?

I'm not comfortable with the laungage barrier thing either.

>>66 - Sorry, but what >>65 did wasn't plagerism. You are allowed to legally quote things, and I can see why that one paragraph was problematic in the first place, and was moved. It was meant to provoke. And in case you haven't noticed, Marth isn't a LU supporter. They themselved have problems with the system that they worry about.

>>70 - Uhh... the last time I heard someone calling someone out on not knowing a word, it was (...) on me and the word legal, not rabid.

>>71 - I think it is apt to appologize here about my comment about freedom of speach being infringed, because reading the quote Marth posted, I don't think they tried asking a question, or making a comment on something.

However, I'm not heading over to the forums, because I have tried going to the threads to dig through information, and have found it daunting... what, with thousands of threads.

73 Name: ... : 2010-09-10 22:19 ID:5Auj7t3X

@72- Only if by 'law', you mean 'protective measures', rather than ToS (otherwise all non-malicious bots would be 'illegal' on the sites, including Google, Yahoo, etc, as a whitelist principle would be thoroughly impractical (owing to the ever-changing nature of the internet)). I doubt that such sites have any sort of formal ToS pertaining to the presence of non-malicious bots, so they are not 'illegal' in any traditional sense of the word.

74 Name: rabid : 2010-09-10 23:57 ID:4VrWFviU

@70- In >>65 you did not credit me in any way whatsoever (putting the text in quotes does not count), and that makes it plagiarism. Also, going by your definition I could upload a whole book crediting its author and that would make it acceptable. That is utter nonsense. Copyright does not specify a minimum length in order to grant protection otherwise a haiku would automatically be considered public domain and the same would be true for most song lyrics. In other words even if you had credited me properly it would still technically have been a copyright violation. Finally, fair use allows you to quote part of a text, not the whole.

As for the differences in language, of course there are some differences, one post was meant for a general audience, the other for the creators of RB, besides I never said the posts were identical.

Anyway, this is getting a little too close to being OT so I will not post any additional replies. I'm thru feeding the LU trolls and, as I said back in >>64, it is up to the admins to enforce the 'no bots' rule, if they decide to allow the LU to gain control of the site there are other archives.

75 Name: ... : 2010-09-11 08:17 ID:5Auj7t3X

@74- Oh no, stay, please stay! You're brilliant! I want to put you in a jar and study you!

I am sorry to inform you that you clearly do not understand your precarious legal position in this matter.

As we are clearly not having an informal conversation on a thread on the internet, the law is applicable in exactly the same way as it is applicable for formal publications such as, say, newspapers, for example.

Perhaps you do not realise the danger you are in. Here are your several counts of libel:

"a pack of cowards who hide behind their screen-names and get their kicks out of hurting people"

"these bullies"

"the LU trolls"

There are also some instances where you have implied various unsavoury, unproven things, but let's not complicate our case.

Unless you can prove the truth of these defamatory, damaging statements, you will be tried in court and found guilty. There are no fixed damages; that is for the judge to decide. As judges are really clamping down on rampant lawbreakers such as yourself, you must expect these damges to be substantial, indeed, for who can put a price on another's reputation?

I urge you to flee the country, change your name, and purchase a large hat. They're coming for you.

76 Name: ... : 2010-09-11 08:28 ID:5Auj7t3X

Marth, even if we assume that you are a plagiarist in this scenario, you will be relieved to hear that plagiarism is not in itself a legal offense, and you will only have to pay damages for copyright infringement IF rabid has a registered copyright for his/her words.

77 Name: ... : 2010-09-11 11:31 ID:5Auj7t3X

So despair not.

78 Name: DuxAtrum : 2010-09-11 17:08 ID:mJGT2IW5

>>74: "@70- In >>65 you did not credit me in any way whatsoever (putting the text in quotes does not count), and that makes it plagiarism."

oh god I lol'd so hard

Quoting what someone else has said on a public forum (even if the forum where it was posted is different from the one where it was quoted) is not plagiarism, you numbskull. Plagiarism is when you reproduce somebody else's work, in whole or in part, with the intent of deceiving people into thinking it is your own.

The quotes Marth used obviously indicated s/he was quoting somebody else, so hilariously, that alone means it's not plagiarism, duh. (Guess putting it in quotes actually does count, huh?) And then there's the fact that Marth wasn't trying to deceive anyone; s/he was obviously replying to what she quoted. Duh. And if those two things didn't tip us off, there's also the fact that Marth would never write something so hopelessly dumb.

I mean what are you even trying to accomplish by crying plagiarism

do you honestly just want people to watch your temper-tantrum or what

79 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-11 17:37 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>74 - sigh No, your name was not mentioned with the quote, but context clues tell where the quote came from, and who made it. Plus, the person was specifically talking to you. Applogies if it seems like we're all ganging up on you, but... this is NOT plagerism, because of what I said.

80 Name: lauraac2110 : 2010-09-12 04:09 ID:rzwaD//0

Redbootton is, I believe, a rather dubious program. Normally, I'll support anything that reduces the number of eye-wateringly bad fics on ff.net especially if they're so badly written that you can't make sense of them.

On the other hand, though, I have heard from a fair few authors who've had well written fics that have been caught out by this program and had their stories deleted without warning. And it also breaks the TOS of ff.net too since it is quite clearly an illegal bot too.

So, I guess that I'm sort of in the middle camp about the program right now. I don't think it is entirely a good thing but I'm going to wait and see what happens on ff.net over the next few weeks in regards to Redbootton before I make up my mind about the program.

Then, I'll decide whether I'm going to stay on ff.net or permanently leave to join the newer site: archive of our own which seem to have an entirely better system of policing even if they're still a beta site and only allowing people to apply to be a member through invitations. (And seemingly hate RedBootton too).

Found here at: http://archiveofourown.org/ for anyone else who is interested jumping ship off to get away from ff.net.

FF.net has always been the easiest way for me to write and publish my stories, and I'll be sorry to leave it, but I'm not going to stay if they go draconian in their approach to their users or if I end up being affected by the Redbootton program and lose everything that I've worked hard on over the last year or so.

81 Name: DuxAtrum : 2010-09-12 04:28 ID:mJGT2IW5

>>80 Good lord woman, what are you doing?! Archive of Our Own was meant to be an escape from the horror of the Pit; now we'll be having droves of badfic writers flocking over there in order to escape RedBootton. Goddammit.

82 Name: ... : 2010-09-12 04:51 ID:5Auj7t3X

My condolences, Dux. While it does not affect me (I foresaw this sad circumstance and was too realistic/lazy (delete as appropriate) to make an AOO account for the sole purpose of escaping the horde), know that your plight touches my heart.

I cannot end your pain, but I can attempt to distract you from it. Therefore, I'll fetch thee somewhat to delight thy mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtTA4iyKtAY&feature=related

83 Name: lauraac2110 : 2010-09-12 05:30 ID:rzwaD//0

>>81 Hey, remember that getting onto Archive of Our Own is by invitation only. And, if the bad fanfic writers try to flock there, they won't be able to. After all, they'll still need to be invited by users in the first place since Archive of Our Own is still in beta phase.

I'm sure that most writers will not invite the bad writers in the first place DuxAtrum so, generally, Archive of Our Own should remain bad writer free as long as the current writers don't invite any bad writers to join them.

I put the link for Archive of Our Own here for the few good writers out there that wish to jump ship because of, or have been effected by, the RedBootton scandal so that they know that there's somewhere for them to go.

84 Name: ... : 2010-09-12 05:55 ID:5Auj7t3X

... And if you've been affected by any of the issues in today's scandal, you can call our helpline or visit our website. Calls are £5 a minute and the website's down.

85 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-12 15:49 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>80 - While I have problems with RB, I don't think it is big enough of an issue to jump ship and post on other sites. At least not for me.

86 Name: Drag : 2010-09-13 15:48 ID:rpX9EjGO

To me I think I'll follow the ToS and say to take down the RedBootton. Mainly since it is clearly stated that bots like that goes against the Terms and Agreement.

I had got a few of my law school friends to check over it and they agree with me on that. Although there is a loophole they talked about and didn't explain to me.

87 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-13 17:12 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>86 - I think the loophole applies to government watchdog bots, not things like RB. But the fact that a few people from law school, say that RB should be 'taken down', so to speak, says something.

88 Name: Drag : 2010-09-13 17:49 ID:M5yRnBsm

@87-Oh, well as I was saying we should just really bug the Fanfiction's administration to enforce their Term and Agreement (although that mean MA stories will have to be taken down) to stop RodBotton.

However, after watching how the program works I have to say it hard to stop the users of RodBotton if they decided to make another account to use that bot.

89 Name: Drag : 2010-09-13 18:14 ID:rpX9EjGO

I forgot to mention that bot tend to have errors in the programing. After all, most writers should have spell/grammar check on the writing programs and they do not catch the mistakes made by the writer so how will RedBootton over come that?

90 Name: Evie : 2010-09-13 18:44 ID:Ihm/0Qsh

@86: It is explained by Lord Kelvin that RB is not a bot due to its speed.

A quote from FFNet ToS (because I don't want anyone to call me a plagiarizer ^_^)

'in a given period of time than a human can reasonably produce in the same period by using a conventional on-line web browser. '

91 Name: Drag : 2010-09-13 19:00 ID:Uo1CdClr

@91-You can not say it not a bot because of the speed. I have seen one of my friends use a bot for a game (which he deleted because he doesn't like to cheat) that ran a high speed.

Also, base on the quote from Fanfiction's Term and Agreement it said, "human can reasonably produce" not a computer program that does it (source FFnet ToS and 91). My people have seen the video of how RedBootton works so they consider it a bot since it can check the stories while your away from your computer.

Also, if Lord Kelvin really wanted to help readers read the badfic that has potential (bad due to the spelling and grammar) he should have made a program that copies the story and rewrites it to normal English standard (with of course the basic english errors computer over look). This way both writers and readers will not have to suffer. About illegal stories he should just let readers decided if it doesn't belong in FFNet.

I actually agree with RedBootton about telling me which fic is illegal but to report bad spelling and grammar stories is not right. The computer's writing program and the writer is at fault here because human relay on computer to check for mistakes, not another human.

92 Name: Marth : 2010-09-13 19:40 ID:rjiD3DaX

>>92 I think you're confused about what Evie meant by "speed." RB doesn't qualify under FFN's bot rules because it runs reasonably slowly, not because it runs super-fast. And I don't understand your argument against what a "human could reasonably produce." Yes, RB works when a user isn't around, but my understanding is that if the user was on their computer, they could check stories at a similar pace. Basically, the bot rule is to avoid having the servers overtaxed with non-user-generated requests, and since RB doesn't send enough requests to do that, it's probably safe.

However, the best evidence for RB not being illegal is that the moderaters haven't banned it. It's highly unlikely that they don't know about it, and so far, they've deleted stories that it's reported without taking action against the program itself.

This is probably an obvious question, but do you have any idea how difficult it would be to make a program that takes a file and writes it into readable English? Hey, you know how translation sites tend to have pretty awful grammar? That's because it's really freaking difficult, and those sites are working from known languages. There're an infinite number of ways a fic can be crap, which would make standardizing the crap much more difficult.

Besides, let's say that such a program existed, just theoretically. What would its use be in this situation? The LU are not site mods; they have no control over what gets submitted. And "cleaning up" and resubmitting another user's work would get them kicked off the site for plagiarism.

And what the hell do you mean by "to report bad spelling and grammar stories is not right"? Um, yes, it's right. If a story violates the submission guidelines, it should be removed. Bad spelling, at least, is very easy to check for by machine, and to quote the submission guidelines, "Spell check all story and poetry. There is no excuse for not performing this duty."

Finally, I think that you (along with a lot of other anti-RB people) are ascribing too much credit to RB when it comes to getting stories removed. Yes, I assume it generates the occasional false positive. And yes, I imagine that the LU's "100% accuracy" claim is a bit inflated. But RB itself cannot delete stories. My understanding is that the reason it takes so long for reported stories to get deleted is because the mods check to make sure that the reports were accurate, which means that when RB reports a story that doesn't deserve it, the moderators won't delete that fic. If that's not true, and deletion is done automatically (which I highly doubt), that's a problem with the moderation of the site, not with RB. Humans, after all, make inaccurate reports too.

93 Name: Drag : 2010-09-13 20:06 ID:M5yRnBsm

@93- Well I believed, base on Evie statement and the video, that RB move at a high enough speed to be consider a bot so sorry if I didn't know about it possible true speed.

As for the "human could reasonably produce" (from 91 and FFNet ToS), I can say, as you (Marth) have said, "user was on their computer" is somewhat true but they have to be on the entire time for the checking to be in agreement with ToS. If they get off they are going against the ToS as they are no longer check with RB but allowing RB to do the work. Also, really? You think we human can check a possible long story with the amount of time I have seen the video give to each story?

On another note, you yourself said it is probably safe but not for sure safe.

As for the moderators (which I noticed you mis-spelled) may be in somewhat of agreement with the stories that have been reported should be deleted. Anyways they can not ban a program that is running off your computer (to the best of my knowledge) but they can band accounts.

As for the programing for the editing thing I talked about, heck yeah I know it would be difficult. However, it would be worth it at the end if it was created to near perfection.

Also I am not talking about modifying the story but copying the story onto the computer and fixing for the reader to read. The reader can then later delete that chapter or story and not re-submit it as their own work.

I agree with you on the statement about bad spelling and grammar. I meant bad grammar and typos. Really my first story had so many that my writing program didn't pick up that I had to start re-reading my chapter several time to make sure the editing was right. I though I did my duty but it turned out I didn't.

Also, when did I say RB deleted post? Really I said RB reports those stories not delete. I agree with you on Human error.

Also, once again I clearly stated that I actually like most of how RB works just not on the reporting other's stories part. That should be a human decision not a program.

94 Name: Marth : 2010-09-13 21:00 ID:rjiD3DaX

>>94 The main thing I think you're still in error about is what "a human being could reasonably produce" means. The key word there is COULD. It's not saying that a human being has to be present for the process, but that, if you theoretically had a human and RB looking for mistakes in the same fandom, they would check stories at roughly the same pace.

The way to "ban" RB would be to make its use illegal in the ToS, delete the account/block the IP of people who use it, and ignore or filter the reports it generates. It wouldn't be a clean ban like banning an individual user, but they could certainly make trouble for people using the program if they were so inclined.

As for bad grammar, I agree that it's a much more nebulous area than spelling (because grammar checkers suuuuck for the most part), and all the submission guidelines say is that a writer should proofread for grammar "to the best of his/her ability." However, there's no way to objectively measure if a writer was too lazy to proofread or if they're doing their best but suck. This is, again, where moderator power comes in. Reporting a fic for "disregard for proper language" (the official abuse-report category) is still perfectly legit, and if RB is sophisticated enough to catch fics with bad grammar, more power to it, reporting-wise. The moderators, again, have the final word on whether a story gets deleted or not, so RB can report all it wants, but if the mods don't feel a story violates the ToS, the reports don't mean anything. It's therefore meaningless to complain about fics that don't deserve it getting reported.

Oh, and also, if you're gonna be petty about misspellings, you should try spelling "misspelled" properly. Just sayin'.

95 Name: Evie : 2010-09-13 21:24 ID:Ihm/0Qsh

@90: May I ask exactly what you're trying to achieve by posting that information?

96 Name: Evie : 2010-09-13 21:46 ID:Ihm/0Qsh

@Drag: I personally think that the RedBootton program that is widely used at the moment is a search module, just like Google search and other search engines I could possibly mention. The differences are that the keywords have already been decided on RB and it only works for FF.Net.

About the grammar and spelling issue, you would have to write in a troll-level English to be caught by the RB. I hope that could assuage your worries about writers who do have potentials.

From RB log:
'In terms of English, aims at trollfics made bad on purpose and so forth.'

97 Name: Anonymous : 2010-09-14 05:12 ID:S0Jc8MuG

It seems that people are only talking about the version that was made public. Why has Lord Kelvin and Literate Union never answered a question about RB Prime...the version that was given out to only trusted members. What is the reason for this version not being allowed a public down load?

98 Name: Drag : 2010-09-14 05:24 ID:Uo1CdClr

@95-I notices that mistake as well. I should not have tried typing my post while half asleep. Also true again on the moderators' deleting power but you never know if they didn't mean to delete a reported story buy accidently did it anyways. After all, everyone is prone to mistakes and seeing a few hundred stories come flying in kind of give it a chance for such errors to happen.

@Evie-After checking RB a bit more, the current model doesn't report all bad grammars unlike the original. However, it still reports a story that has near perfect grammar every once in a while. Also I think that guy post that up for the more serious (AKA. crazy gun wielding writers) to go after Lord Kevin and kill him. I actually know a few writers who are serious enough to kill for their fics (having the ones I know being sent to away right now for their own good). Also the degrading part is a common tactic nearly everyone in the worlds uses.

Also, if there is any mistake in this post I just woke up to reply so I'm really sorry for any grammar or typos in my writing. It is my fault for not waiting to reply.

99 Name: Dreamer of a Thousand Memories : 2010-09-14 14:26 ID:KXKKhMRx

All right. I just got a message about this on FF this morning and I was all mad about it, but now I'm not so sure. People say it deletes stories that raise flags on the ToS and spelling and things, and others say it doesn't. I'm confused, but I don't think that this RB program is any cause to be insulting others for what they believe. Insults get you nowhere and do not help the situation any.

I can see why people would get annoyed by the grammar/spelling thing as I often make mistakes myself that word check doesn't catch. Sometimes it just happens, even to the best of us. A few mistakes probably won't get you in trouble...The annoying thing is when there are so many spelling mistakes you can hardly understand the story. Still, spelling/grammar should not get a story removed. From what I've read on the comments, I don't think RB removes them for that, though.

I also think that if we can't violate the ToS but the admins are, it's immoral and should be stopped.

Like I said, I don't know all the facts about RB or Lord Kelvin or LU or whatever since I just learned about it this morning.

But if it does prove to be true, I cannot say what will become of FF, my only writing site of now.

Well, that's my opinion. Do not be rude and insult me for speaking my mind.

100 Name: Marth : 2010-09-14 15:45 ID:rjiD3DaX

Once again: RB cannot delete anything. It sends abuse reports, just like regular people do when they find TOS-breaking stories, and then the moderators decide whether a reported story is worthy of deletion.

As for grammar, my impression is that your fic has to have seriously terrible grammar for it to get caught by RB. If every fic that had any sort of grammar mistake was flagged by the program, then there wouldn't be anything left unreported in the categories RB has gone through. Spelling too, though I wouldn't mind if the program was harsher on spelling, as running a spell check is explicitly part of the submission guidelines. I should disclaim that I don't know this for a fact, but the fact that the program ignores most fics (a tiny minority of which are grammatically pristine, even ignoring legit irregularities in dialogue) says to me that most of the people worrying about their fics getting reported are probably overreacting.

101 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-14 16:18 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>88 - I kind of figured that was it, but the words didn't exactly say it.

>>89 - All computer programs will have errors, as will bots.

>>90 - He's never as far as I've seen, used Christianity to support what he's done. The thing I wonder, is how much computer programing background he has, and the fact he says RB is not a bot because of it's speed, I find it to be dubious.

>>91 - Except Lord Kelvin is not measuring whether the RB is a bot, based on that quote you gave. He's measuring it against another bot, and said it was slower. He's said nothing about it being able to run at the same rate as an actual human, at least in the things I've been able to find.

...

I've only seen comments about the fact that it isn't as fast as a proven bot, not anything about how it fares compared to a human. And it was that it wasn't as fast as a known bot, that was the proof given.

Also, just because the moderaters haven't banned it, doesn't mean it is legal either. We don't know how much goes on behind the closed doors, and how much they really do know. Has ANYONE tried to contact the admins about this for one thing?

Plus, is there anything indicating to the mods, that a complaint is sent secifically by the RB system? I believe you can be anonymous and not even have an account, to send a report, so that actually may explain why the mods haven't been able to do anything, as of yet.

They could program in something new, to stop a program like RB, but that will take time to do so, and to come up with a stratigy.

I think it is right to report stories that break the rules, just not fare to use a program to do so.

102 Name: Drag : 2010-09-14 19:50 ID:rpX9EjGO

@102-Umm actually they can't ban programs they can only ban accounts and if you are right about being anonymous to report then there is no stopping RB unless moderators decide to block all anonymous reports.

I will have to say don't bash on someone for their religion. Be bias like me. I both hate and like RB based on what it does but it does not mean I lean on either side. I only look into what can not be done base of the ToS. The ToS is the main reason I speaking out against RB. If the ToS allow the use of programs to check stories then I would not have said anything about the prevention of RedBootton.

103 Name: Drag : 2010-09-14 20:15 ID:jG9ZxZGj

@102- Sorry misread that comment on Lord Kelvin religion. But I would say stories that have homosexual things in them have been reported by the truck load. Those stories though probably had MA or mentioning of MA in them.

104 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-15 10:32 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>103 - I just checked. You don't have to be logged in, to send a report. Anyone can do it. The only thing the site admins can do, is block particular computer ids, and there are ways around that. They could set up a system though, where if you are logged in, it registers you as a user, and they are more likely to look at the report.

You meant "Be unbiased like me." Bias means to lean towards one side,

>>104 - It's all right. I agree that they probabbly had MA in some form, but there isn't a garantee. Though, really, a good deal of the bad slash writers, tend to write MA, instead of M. I am talking really bad.

105 Name: Drag : 2010-09-15 11:21 ID:Uo1CdClr

@ 105-I notices that as well. Anyways I also know that trick people use to change the computer's id.

Also, half-asleep again when I typed that part sorry. College life is hard on giving me spare time.

106 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-15 15:01 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>106 - Which means too, that the arguement that the site can do something easily is a false assumption. They might not even know something is going on.

They don't want to illiminate the number of times someone can report a certain fanfic from a certain ID, because that is one way they get through, that there is a problem.

However, it wouldn't be a bad idea, to limit ONE report for each fanfic, from each computer. Why? I think that overloading the admins for one particular fanfic, makes it so that others that get reported LESS times, are LESS likely to be noticed.

107 Name: Anonymous : 2010-09-16 15:58 ID:d9oqnNta

See, I'm just very confused by the whole thing. I've been working on ff.net for three years and I'll tell everyone here something. I never knew MA material wasn't allowed. I probably just missed in in the rules and regulations. Or maybe I saw it but forgot since it was my first ever experience with Fanfiction.

However, if more than half of my fandom was not MA material then I may have caught on that it wasn't allowed. But honestly, all M ratings in my fandom are sexually explicit (not graphically so, but more than M) and so I never realised anything was wrong until now.

I don't think that's right. The rules are there for a reason and yet absolutely nobody is being told to stick to them, hence the reason why people like me come along and don't even realise the rules because nobody is following them.

But RedBooton is the wrong way to do this. Why? Because it breaks the rules too. And how hypocritical is that? If there is a problem, then don't fight it with the same problem. That will get Fanfiction.net nothing but a bad reputation and angry customers who will leave and they will loose out.

A far easier way to fix the problem of M/MA would probably be to introduce that internet signature, which is legally binding and therefore they can't get into trouble if people do the wrong thing. Because as I said, more than half of my fandom (about 68%) is rated 'M' and probably 95% of that is MA material.

I like the idea of RedBooton's job, but it's the hypocrisy of the situation that gets me. How can they justify reporting stories that go against guidelines, when they go against the guidelines themselves?

>>105 - I'm not sure about the fandoms you go on, but in my fandom it's the straight pairings that have far, far more MA content than the Slash. I'm not sure what you mean by bad slash writers? Are you talking about how explicitly they write or them just being bad writers? Because I find the stories I've read that are not M rated seem to be written more poorly than the adult stuff.

108 Name: SerialAuthor : 2010-09-18 22:12 ID:MiBz0YNW

I've been hearing about these "people" everywhere these days. Are they the LU, or something else? What are they both anyways? Honestly, I was just happily writing when these groups were brought to my attention. Can someone explain?

109 Name: SerialAuthor : 2010-09-18 22:13 ID:MiBz0YNW

I've been hearing about these "people" everywhere these days. Are they the LU, or something else? What are they both anyways? Honestly, I was just happily writing when these groups were brought to my attention. Can someone explain?

110 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-18 22:44 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>108 - I thought I replied to your post. It is in the guidelines, which also provides a form of electronic signature. I had someone actually once tell me that everyone else did it, to which I responded basically, be the role model for your peers.

>>109 - I just recently heard about them, but now that I think about it, I may have heard about the RB system back a year ago when it supposidly started up, but I am really not sure where.

111 Name: Anonymous : 2010-09-23 03:43 ID:a5m0QuqR

>111 - I have now gotten rid of the MA content from my stories. I agree that if it's in the guidelines then it should not be allowed. However, because there are simply so much of them, don't you think ff.net would be better off allowing it? I know my fandom would be a lot emptier without any authors of MA...even the non MA material is usually written by an author who writes MA as well.

Also the fact that I disagree with RedBooton, because it disobeys the guidelines as well. It's hypocritical.

But I don't understand why a lot of MA writers are complaining about ff.net doing nothing about RedBooton because it breaks the guidelines. They break the guidelines too -.- it’s all just a mess.

Nobody should break the guidelines, but neither should RedBooton if it's claiming all this fairness and helping. It's not helping and it's not cleaning up, it's making people angry and it's making people leave. That shouldn't be the result ff.net wants.

112 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-23 14:40 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>112 - I think that is the lovely thing about M vs. MA stories, versus T vs. M stories. I think it is much easier to change the first, rather then the second.

You're also right that is rather hypocritical, on both sides really. If you knowingly broke the rules, then the admins are in their complete rights to remove your fanfic. As for not knowing the rules, well... I am more likely to give a bit of leeway to someone who is new and simply glanced over the guidelines, or someone who missed one thing. But the ones who break rule after rule... that is another story.

113 Name: Anonymous : 2010-09-23 19:45 ID:7UOhpzwJ

>>113 - The thing is, that while I was in the wrong for not reading the guidelines correctly in the first place. If it weren't for the fact that over half my fandom(I don't know about any other fandoms) was MA material, then I would have noticed and changed things much sooner.

But I think a lot of people do not want to change their writing. Most people won't edit out the MA content. It's immature but it's the truth. And because of that, if the amount of people who write MA stories leave, then ff.net will be half as full as it is now. That's bad for business, but most of all, that's bad for readers =C

Which is why I think they should allow MA content under the electronic signature thing. It's the easiest way to do things.

Then again it seems the Mods don't really like doing anything to stop any rule breakers. And in all honesty I've found so many hypocrites these past few days. MA authors complain that RedBooton is not being taken down when it breaks the rules, when they break the rules as well and so should not be allowed to write MA content either, which is exactly the reason why they want RedBooton gone.

It's all just going round in circles. But in the end it will work out worst for the readers.

Xx..xX

114 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-24 14:45 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>114 - For your fandom perhaps, but not others. I can understand why that would be bad for the readers, but think of it as an opportunity for you the writer. With less fanfics in your fandom, you have less compitition to get your fanfics read and noticed.

But, I now get what you are saying about MA and signatures. I wish I could say it was that simple, but you have to understand that fanfiction.net had major problems with it in the past that could have led to legal action, and perhaps getting the site shut down. However, from what I understand about the situation, an electronic signature would have solved a good deal of the problems.

115 Name: Anonymous : 2010-09-24 16:05 ID:dTD4NpIj

>>115 - An electronic signature is backed by the government. If a person signs that then the site is then no longer responsible if they are indeed underage. They have that on AdultFanFiction.net for that reason and it works. It would really just clear everything up.

Like I said, I don't know about other fandoms so I can't say. I know that in mine though, all the M stories have sexual content in them, or at least over 90% do. And there's more M rated stories than all the rest put together. We'd loose a lot of our authors =(

I see what you mean about competition. But I like reading those stories too, I have so many favourites, favourite stories and favourite authors who might jut disappear now. It's really sad that things have come to this. They should be solved in a more effective way...

Xx..xX

116 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-09-25 20:17 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>117 - Simple put, it is a tricky issue all around.

117 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-10-07 14:20 ID:zMcJ1buS

IMPORTANT: There is an article on DA here. http://news.deviantart.com/article/131404/ A user named lordkelvinffn has accused the article writer of libel, meaning that he feels that they have slandered him. He went so far as in his first post there, to ask if anyone had any proof of the program existing.

118 Name: Gin : 2010-10-07 15:23 ID:jTNBEk2+

Reminds me of somebody trying to be a skillful orator, and falling flat on their face because, y'know, they can't actually use language in the appropriate fashion. "Completely Missing The Point", if you'll excuse the trope...

119 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-10-07 15:37 ID:zMcJ1buS

>>119 - And whoever that person is, basically has gone and made the rest of the LU look bad. I read furthur, and there are a few there, just like on this thread, who are rather decent people to talk to.

Seriously though, if Lord Kelvin gets banned by the site admins, what is going to happen to the LU forum. Talk about kaput...

120 Name: Yemi Hikari : 2010-11-27 14:07 ID:zMcJ1buS

IT IS OFFICIAL. Fanfiction.net has just declared RB a big no-no! As I've tried telling many people, they needed time to deal with the problem, and a couple of days is SO not enough. Of course, this just makes it much harder for those of us who were doing what we were supposed to do in the first place. To quote the site...

"November 25th, 2010 -- To deter any type of automated submission of abuse reports, we have added image verification to the reporting process. Please note all abuse reports are handled individually by our staff and the more information you can provide in the report, the more efficiently we can process them."

I also think this is why my reports have been overlooked by the staff. RB has been spamming them.

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...
Verification: