SDJ new policy

[dpitbull]

dpitbull,

With over 2,000 members subscribed to this site I hardly think 70 comments is to many pages of arguing, as you call it. Especially if there are members who didn't get it on page #1 and who will likely not get it if the debate made it to page #100.

We all have opinions you're entitled to yours as well as I am entitled to mine. I feel stating the same thing over and over is a waste of time. Even Jack said that he was done trying to reach Eneas.

And just in case you are unaware, the moderators are the only ones who make the decision to close a thread.

I don't mean close a thread literally. Obviously I am not a moderator so I can't close a thread. I was reiterating to Eneas he had made his point.

I think Jack has brought up many good points as to why changes are necessary to be not only successful in your plight, but to protect the work you have painstakingly put together.

I agree he has made his point about piracy. I clearly stated that

Yes, you get what you pay for, and if you are spending your hard earned dollar to the SDJ, and several knuckleheads are bootlegging it for 1/3 of the cost that should bother you as well.

I agree with this as well. I definitely don't want to pay for something that is being given out for free.

You would think any normal rational person would get that?

Again I don't see where I have argued against the points Jack or anyone else has made. So to state again I don't disagree with anyone on this threads ideas. So not sure I see the reasoning behind dissecting my post. You make it seem as if I had argued against Jack's responses to Eneas. I have not I made it abundantly clear I agree that piracy is wrong. I also made it clear that I think that the sdj has the right to change it's policies at any time.

S_B

Hope this clears up the misunderstanding My response is in bold red inside the quote box

[Officially Retired]

I agree with this as well. I definitely don't want to pay for something that is being given out for free.
Hope this clears up the misunderstanding My response is in bold red inside the quote box

No, there's no misunderstanding: you've very clearly announced that you're one of the lowlifes that would pay a thief less, and rob a creator of his just profit for all his work in making the creation to begin with ... because you'd buy the bootleg for cheap, and reward a thief for a right-click of a mouse, rather than pay the full price to the man who's rightfully-owed his profit for his real time + efforts.

Jack

[dpitbull]

No, there's no misunderstanding: you've very clearly announced that you're one of the lowlifes that would pay a thief less, and rob a creator of his just profit for all his work in making the creation to begin with ... because you'd buy the bootleg for cheap, and reward a thief for a right-click of a mouse, rather than pay the full price to the man who's rightfully-owed his profit for his real time + efforts.

Jack

Where did I announce this? If you don't mind post a quote where I said anything about buying a counterfeit copy of anything.

[Officially Retired]

Read what you wrote, in bold-italicized red, that I highlighted in my post.

[ragedog10]

I dont blame the Journal, he warned everyone he would take the steps to stop the piarcy and people continued to give away his work. To me its that simple he warned some did nt listen cut and dry. Yis Ole Man

[dpitbull]

"Yes, you get what you pay for, and if you are spending your hard earned dollar to the SDJ, and several knuckleheads are bootlegging it for 1/3 of the cost that should bother you as well."

"I agree with this as well. I definitely don't want to pay for something that is being given out for free."

That in no way shape or form says I would buy a counterfeit copy of anything.

[Officially Retired]

My mistake, then, and good for you.

Just understand that the way it was worded could be construed as "you don't want to pay for something" (the true author's price) "that is being given out for free" (by a bootlegger) ...

Jack

[dpitbull]

I agree it could be misconstrued. I was speaking in generality and when you do that it leaves things open for interpretation.

[Officially Retired]

Well, communication is everything, and from a linguistic and logical point of view (which is what I have my degree in) that is pretty much exactly what that sentence says.

Just so you know,

Jack

[S_B]

dpitbull,

Dissecting your post was not my intention, I merely wanted to get across the point that with so many members, a debate such as this is a healthy one. Even if it occupies 100 pages.

Everyone else:

Most people aren't going to realize the scope of what this discussion entails.

And this can be applied to more than just the Journal or work Jack has created.

Imagine a person who you trusted snuck into your yard while you were away, and backed their bitch up to your best stud, then peddled off those pups.

I can't even express how angry I would be without some colorful language, this is essentially the same thing....a thief is a thief is a thief PERIOD.