We do, plus you can always use text and create a hyperlink using the url tags

It's bad form to reproduce another one's article in entirety on another website, so we discourage it.

We as in the admins and moderators.

(April 26, 2010 at 6:46 pm)Eilonnwy Wrote: We do, plus you can always use text and create a hyperlink using the url tags

You could if you wanted to... but why not just provide a link to the source and copy?

Quote:It's bad form to reproduce another one's article in entirety on another website, so we discourage it.

I don't see why this is bad form at all. Changing how many characters are in a quote doesn't change the fact that we do this with every quote, nor do I see why it should matter wether a quote from another be long or short, as you haven't changed the process undergone in either case.

Quote:We as in the admins and moderators.

All of them?

And even if so... would many of the members agree?

You want a strong reason? Copying someone's entire article is copyright infringement. Plain and simple. Quoting an article as a source and linking back is fair use.

These are fairly basic rules of using sources and plagiarism.

People seem to think that because it's on a website, it's free for all. That's not true. Revenue is produced through page hits because of Ads. That's how I make money on Examiner.com. I was trying to explain the direct result of that copyright infringement, since people seem to not quite get it.

Split because the other thread was veering horribly off topic.

I absolutely agree that every off-site source should be linked to, have a small section of the main article and then link the the rest.

If you absolutely have to post the whole thing (for example the source was an email) then ffs use the [/hide] tag.

Plus, I don't want pre-existing articles wasting space in the database. It slows down the loading of the thread in question, and as Eilonnwy and others have stated, it just looks messy.