Hey Trop

[rjl]

Not being a big Twitter guy....can I get a simple explanation here?


Is Matt REALLY trolling Trop's twitter account trying to check his references?

What am I missing?

Here is Matty's side of the conversation:

http://twitter.com/sportstalkmatt

There's no real "stalkering" going on here. Twitter is meant to be viewed by one and all. Matty is just being a total and complete idiot.

Here's my take: Matty P knows his argument is untenable, or at least became aware it was somewhere in the middle of the conversation, but he's just being the colossal dickcheese that he is.

The real irony here is that, if there's anything anyone's liable for here, is Matty and his defamatory statements.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

If it was information available for free in a Rivals article, then the right way to do it is to repost only limited info and link back to the original article/post.

It's really no different than any media article. You can quote a small excerpt and link to the original. But you can't repost it it's entirety or majority without permission. That's why the ShockerNet policy is the way it is.

I'm not sure that saying someone else reposted it first gets you around the issue, especially if you know it came from a copyrighted article.

I didn't read the article. I didn't know there was an article until @sportstalkmatt said something to Trop. I found a couple mentions of the info w/o reference (as much twitter info is as it is limited to 140 characters so it almost impossible to have info about a link and a link in same tweet) but it didn't seem out of place.

I think, and I'm only assuming based on my interactions with Trop, had @sportstalkmatt been a "Reasonable" (I know, Creighton fan, but there are a few good apples in that bunch) said "Hey, that was supposed to be a premium board article and was wrongly placed, will you please remove" Trop probably says No Problem and removes it.

[Wuzee]

I can see why MP is upset, actually.

Whether the article is viewable for free or not isn't the issue.

Somebody took the time to interview somebody, or they came across a tip from a source somewhere and wrote an article. They own that content, whether it's free or pay, and should receive credit if it is reused.

The problem here is that trop isn't linking out to the source article in any of his posts. He's just stating the gist of the article. That could be construed as attempting to make readers think that he, trop, reported the information. That's a little shady, in my view.

A best practices approach would be to summarize, then include a link to the source article, using a short URL service like quu.nu or tr.im.

[Maggie]

I can see why MP is upset, actually.

Whether the article is viewable for free or not isn't the issue.

Somebody took the time to interview somebody, or they came across a tip from a source somewhere and wrote an article. They own that content, whether it's free or pay, and should receive credit if it is reused.

The problem here is that trop isn't linking out to the source article in any of his posts. He's just stating the gist of the article. That could be construed as attempting to make readers think that he, trop, reported the information. That's a little shady, in my view.

A best practices approach would be to summarize, then include a link to the source article, using a short URL service like quu.nu or tr.im.

You might have missed Trop’s response. The information did not come from one of Matilda’s (hat-tip to Royal) articles.

[martymoose]

I can see why MP is upset, actually.

Whether the article is viewable for free or not isn't the issue.

Somebody took the time to interview somebody, or they came across a tip from a source somewhere and wrote an article. They own that content, whether it's free or pay, and should receive credit if it is reused.

The problem here is that trop isn't linking out to the source article in any of his posts. He's just stating the gist of the article. That could be construed as attempting to make readers think that he, trop, reported the information. That's a little shady, in my view.

A best practices approach would be to summarize, then include a link to the source article, using a short URL service like quu.nu or tr.im.

It came from a post on a message board....When you read a post on Shockernet, do you cite who posted the info..? Of course not. Even if he cited anything, it wouldn't have been Matt.

[rjl]

I can see why MP is upset, actually.

Whether the article is viewable for free or not isn't the issue.

Somebody took the time to interview somebody, or they came across a tip from a source somewhere and wrote an article. They own that content, whether it's free or pay, and should receive credit if it is reused.

The problem here is that trop isn't linking out to the source article in any of his posts. He's just stating the gist of the article. That could be construed as attempting to make readers think that he, trop, reported the information. That's a little shady, in my view.

A best practices approach would be to summarize, then include a link to the source article, using a short URL service like quu.nu or tr.im.

You might have missed Trop’s response. The information did not come from one of Matilda’s (hat-tip to Royal) articles.

Yeah. It was posted on an open, free message board. The info was the names of recruits who will be attending a Creighton game. I don't think there's any IP there.

[WuDrWu]

All Trop did was state a fact. I don't think it could even qualify as a summary, and it certainly wasn't in any detail.

Do I have to link when I say I had a good dinner?

I PRAY this loser saves his paper route money and comes to Wichita this year.....I am going to make a fool out of myself and completely light him up.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

It was from a message board, free to access to everyone like the following:

http://creighton.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=2688&tid=128791555&mid=128791555&sid=1209&style=2

But Wuzee, you're referring to something like this:

According to a semi-anonymous post on a message board available to anyone who has a membership or not, Creighton .... (info edited out for legal purposed) ..... on Saturday. LINK LINK LINK.com

[HockeyShock]

Apropos of nothing, but has anyone noticed that MTXE hasn't been on in a couple of days? :whistle:

Trop, I hope I've said this before, but thanks for all the quality info!

:clap: :wsu_posters: :yahoo: :clap:

[newshock1234]

Apropos of nothing, but has anyone noticed that MTXE hasn't been on in a couple of days? :whistle:

Trop, I hope I've said this before, but thanks for all the quality info!

:clap: :wsu_posters: :yahoo: :clap:

I agree with this :yes:

[martymoose]

For those who don't want to visit Twitter and try and follow the timeline.

tropicalshox: Creighton recruits who will attend Bluejay-Nebraksa game on Sunday: Josh Oglesby, Jarod Utoff, Seth Tuttle, all in 2011 class from Iowa.

sportstalkmatt: Yeah, nice that came from me....ridiculous

tropicalshox: Then put it on your precious pay board LOL.

sportstalkmatt: it was...that's the point..been there for 3 days

tropicalshox: It was on the recruiting board. I subscribe to Rivals through another team. Never been to "on the hilltop."

sportstalkmatt: You are not suppose to be able to read that board...plus - I would think you would source it as you admit to stealing it

tropicalshox: As I told you it was on the free recruiting board. Or can't you read. For the 2nd time, I can't get on the paid board...and I don't subscribe because of the way you act. I subscribe to many Rivals site, but until you leave, never to BJC.

sportstalkmatt: No you just pointed out a mistake on Rivals - you should not have been able to read that - that's premium board you read

tropicalshox: If that's what happened, I didn't notice. Complain to Rivals and stop call me a thief.

sportstalkmatt: I did...it's fixed...it won't happen again but you did steal it from us without referencing where you got it

tropicalshox: Matt, it's still on your free message board, available to not only myself, but non-Rival subscribers.

tropicalshox: Now just how many people site a reference from a free message board. Get real.

sportstalkmatt: glad see you have no ethics ....typical from a Shocker fan. Stay off our board

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

tell Matt if he doesnt like it then I got two words for him!

[pogo]

Mathilda is not only ignorant he's stooopid too. ;-)

[newshock1234]

tell Matt if he doesnt like it then I got two words for him!

I actually have three words for him

Two and Four

[SubGod22]

I don't have any details on this situation.

But I will say that if someone was getting information that is only available from a subscription-only site and republishing it without permission, that would at a minimum be a violation of the site's Terms of Service (at least, I can't imagine a subscription content provider not having that in it's ToS). I suppose it could additionally be a violation of copyright.

I will clarify that I had no idea what the situation was but did know that the Hack up North gets upset over the most trivial things. I figured it was just about something like we usually see on our recruiting board. A lot of the players have articles written on them and it's easy to find a nugget or two but it's usually kept basic with a link to the article.

And for the record, I think Trop has broken some CU news before Hack did. That I find hilarious.