[Beowulf] Admin action request

Andrew Holway andrew.holway at gmail.com
Fri Nov 22 12:45:10 PST 2013

+1 for Option 1.

On 22 November 2013 20:42, Joe Landman <landman at scalableinformatics.com> wrote:
> Folks:
>    We are seeing a return to the posting of multiple full articles
> again.  We've asked several times that this not occur.  It appears to be
> a strong consensus from many I spoke with at SC13 this year, that there
> is little (actually no) support for the full article postings.  As we
> had noted in the case of HPCwire, InsideHPC, etc. posting the full
> article deprives the authors and publishers of clicks, which deprives
> them of potential revenue.
>    Since our requests have again been ignored, we are generally faced
> with a few options on what to do if anything.
>    Option 1: Do nothing.  Nothing will change, and we will have someone
> continue to abuse the resources, the authors and the publications.
>    Option 2: Personal filtering.  This particular individual actually
> threatened me in another group, and I generally simply ignore anything
> he posts.  I haven't gone as far as active filters for him, but have for
> some of the more egregious tin foil hat wearers of that other group.
>    Option 3: Enforce some of our basic etiquette.  If you aren't willing
> to abide by the house rules, you won't be allowed into the house to
> violate the rules.  In this case, I see more than two strikes, so I am
> not all that inclined to be terribly forgiving of these breaches.
>    It is obvious option 1 will do nothing.  Option 2 is unsatisfactory,
> as the behavior will continue, and be in the permanent list archive.
> Option 3 seems to be the right approach.
>    I am not a lawyer, though its not hard to note that reproduction of
> work without permission could wind someone up in court ... this has been
> the basis for the file sharing lawsuits when content owners get pissed
> off enough.  It doesn't matter if the owner of the list or the hardware
> the list is on didn't put it there.  What matters is that they didn't
> remove it.
>    Rather than have to deal with the battle above, I'd ask the powers
> that be to decide whether or not they wish to continue to tolerate the
> astounding breach of etiquette, and the risks that it opens up
> (copyright and redistribution of copyrighted work).
>    Note that we've had this conversation before, and been assured by the
> poster that it wouldn't happen again.  As I see it, I've got a number of
> his longer posts going into my SPAM filter, which means I have to
> actively clean it lest google start categorizing all mail from Beowulf
> as spam.
>    I am just not seeing an upside to option 1 or option 2, though option
> 2 provides local filtration.
>    Anyone else have an opinion?
> --
> Joseph Landman, Ph.D
> Founder and CEO
> Scalable Informatics, Inc.
> email: landman at scalableinformatics.com
> web  : http://scalableinformatics.com
> twtr : @scalableinfo
> phone: +1 734 786 8423 x121
> cell : +1 734 612 4615
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

More information about the Beowulf mailing list