I don't understand your concern. Isn't steemit supposed to be equivalent of reddit? Why do you not appreciate that I found an interesting video and shared it with others? You discourage me to add more interesting findings.
There's nothing wrong with sharing youtube videos. If you share a video made by another steemit user it is polite to ask first and at least give credit to the creator.
We are a bit different from Reddit in that a lot of us value original content. Here's a post I wrote that may help Adding Value to Steemit through Sharing if you decide to share articles and other works besides videos.
When was this added to the rules?! I thought YouTube was fair game last time I checked in steemit abuse channel on steemit.chat. That's why I never complained when multiple users used my videos. Can you not see @patrice that the stuff coming from that channel has become destructive? The rules need to be set if people are to be expected to follow them.
Is the author of the video another steemit user, as you claim? How can I know that? I do not see how valuing original content would make you (not you personally but I am talking about all of you, and particularly those of you who downvoted or not upvoted this interesting finding) downvote non original one, even if it is really interesting. As I said you discourage me to share with you interesting stuff. If you do not want them you may not see them from me anymore, if that is what you really want. Your loss. However, I believe that sharing interesting information has value in its own, and that is why reddit is so popular. It does not have to be original to be interesting. You say "we", who are we? Am I not the part of "we"? Who decides what should be added and what should not to steemit? I think that you see it upside down. It is posters of original work who should mention that it is original, and not vice-versa. That is so, because original is always rarer than non-original (or at least should be in a service similar to reddit). I do believe that exactly like in reddit non-original should not be copied and pasted, but instead only a link to the original should be provided. And that is how I have always being sharing stuff on steemit, I only provided links to the originals, I have never copied and pasted here anything (like falsely claims @logic ). I believe that you are destroying steemit by downvoting or not upvoting interesting non-original findings. There is only so much original posts that one can create. If you want to compete with sites like reddit you must allow manual posting of links to non-original interesting findings and upvote them if they are interesting.
You copy-pasted video from YT. There is nothing else in this post besides this YT video. Steemit values original content nto copy-pasted content.
On top of that, you have not even provided who is the author of the video and where it is coming from. https://steemit.com/steemcleaners/@steemcleaners/plagiarism-guide
I did not copy and pasted video. I copied a link to the video. So please stop accusing me of something I did not do. How else I should copy a link to the video here, if not in the way I did it? Please explain. I am part of the steemit and I value interesting content regardless of wheter it is original or not. Of course nobody should make plagiarism. But I am not doing one. I only provided a link to the original. So what do you want from me? Why do you want me to provide data, which is available at the original link (at the source of video). It does not make sense. You make things complicated without a reason. Make reddit - a succesful site - your example regarding non orignal findings. What's wrong with posting links like in reddit? Nothing! What have you not understood from what I have already wrote above in my previous message? If you disagree with my thoughts wrote in the last message please explain why and not just force me to your point o view, which I believe is harmful to steemit community, and I already explained why in my previous message.
Also @patrice in her article wrote: "Whether you're sharing a new article, blog post, youtube video, or any other content that wasn't created by you -- add your own thoughts and comments to it".
From the beginning there was my comment to the video that cesium is more precious than gold and yet a lot of it was wasted in these experiments, so even according to @patrice guidelines it was correctly posted finding. Thus I do not see why you attack me. Please stop your malicious actions against me, please do not envy me that I can find interesting findings, instead try to find ones yourself.
"We" as in a large part of the community that has invested time and money into steemit.
I wasn't saying that this video was from another user. I just wanted to caution you that if you do post one from another user that it is considered polite to ask or at least give credit to.
As I said:
There's nothing wrong with sharing youtube videos.
My reason for not upvoting really has nothing to do with this being a youtube video. I didn't upvote it because the topic doesn't interest me and I don't see much community interaction by you in the form of upvoting other users posts since you upvoted noisy 20 something days ago. That's also why I didn't follow you.
I do not see any disagreement or rebuttal regarding what I said above. So can we, please, agree that non original links can be added here like in reddit? That would be beneficial to everyone and would allow steemit to compete with reddit, thus making it grow even more.
considered polite to ask or at least give credit to
No, that is unreasonable in services simillar to reddit. There is no time for it. Link is provided to the original and all the data are there, and it is assumed that the author would be happy that link to his/her work would be distributed widelly, becasue that makes his work more broadly known. Because people are generally happy to distribute broadly links to their work, there is no need to ask them about that - please remember that only a link is not copyrighted.
I didn't upvote it because the topic doesn't interest
That's ok.
I don't see much community interaction by you in the form of upvoting other users posts since you upvoted noisy 20 something days ago. That's also why I didn't follow you.
And what it has to do with whether you upvote finding or not? Do you upvote considering who posted finding and not the value of finding? How that can be considered fair and reasonable?
I am just starting, so give me some time (which I do not have enough right now to read most of other findings, hence no upvoting).
However, if you all would be discouraging me by attacking me with no good reason, I would stop interacting altogether. I have not come here to fight, but to share with others links to interesting findings, and occasionally to write an article myself. Please people be reasonable. Live and let other live.
I flagged @logic because of his malicious actions and lying about my finding, so this was correctly flagged. While you and logic flagged me maliciously, because there was no reason to flag my findings. They are interesting and other people like them. But as a gesture of good will I can withdraw flagging, if you both do the same first.
"While you and logic flagged me maliciously, because there was no reason to flag my findings"
You flaggedboth my comment above and my recent post so I flagged you back on this post. I have the same right ot flag as you do. You started flagging so got it back.
Keep your flag on my post, I enjoy my flag on yours...
@walden there was no reason to write this comment, btw.
"his malicious actions and lying about my finding"
I have no clue what you are talking about.
copypasta of YT video - check
lack of original content added - check
lack of providing the title of the video - check
lack of stating who is the author of the video - check
@logic Why is there no reply buton where is that sentence: "The reward should go the the author of YT video..."?
No, because he has not posted a link to his video here. It is his choice. He will have his reward by having increased viewing of his video, because of the post, which I posted here.
However, I do not care much about rewards, you can make a system rewarding posts with links to other articles with less rewards than the original ones.
@steemcleaners
@blocktrades, why are you upvoting copypasta of video?
I don't understand your concern. Isn't steemit supposed to be equivalent of reddit? Why do you not appreciate that I found an interesting video and shared it with others? You discourage me to add more interesting findings.
There's nothing wrong with sharing youtube videos. If you share a video made by another steemit user it is polite to ask first and at least give credit to the creator.
We are a bit different from Reddit in that a lot of us value original content. Here's a post I wrote that may help Adding Value to Steemit through Sharing if you decide to share articles and other works besides videos.
When was this added to the rules?! I thought YouTube was fair game last time I checked in steemit abuse channel on steemit.chat. That's why I never complained when multiple users used my videos. Can you not see @patrice that the stuff coming from that channel has become destructive? The rules need to be set if people are to be expected to follow them.
Is the author of the video another steemit user, as you claim? How can I know that? I do not see how valuing original content would make you (not you personally but I am talking about all of you, and particularly those of you who downvoted or not upvoted this interesting finding) downvote non original one, even if it is really interesting. As I said you discourage me to share with you interesting stuff. If you do not want them you may not see them from me anymore, if that is what you really want. Your loss. However, I believe that sharing interesting information has value in its own, and that is why reddit is so popular. It does not have to be original to be interesting. You say "we", who are we? Am I not the part of "we"? Who decides what should be added and what should not to steemit? I think that you see it upside down. It is posters of original work who should mention that it is original, and not vice-versa. That is so, because original is always rarer than non-original (or at least should be in a service similar to reddit). I do believe that exactly like in reddit non-original should not be copied and pasted, but instead only a link to the original should be provided. And that is how I have always being sharing stuff on steemit, I only provided links to the originals, I have never copied and pasted here anything (like falsely claims @logic ). I believe that you are destroying steemit by downvoting or not upvoting interesting non-original findings. There is only so much original posts that one can create. If you want to compete with sites like reddit you must allow manual posting of links to non-original interesting findings and upvote them if they are interesting.
You copy-pasted video from YT. There is nothing else in this post besides this YT video. Steemit values original content nto copy-pasted content.
On top of that, you have not even provided who is the author of the video and where it is coming from.
https://steemit.com/steemcleaners/@steemcleaners/plagiarism-guide
I did not copy and pasted video. I copied a link to the video. So please stop accusing me of something I did not do. How else I should copy a link to the video here, if not in the way I did it? Please explain. I am part of the steemit and I value interesting content regardless of wheter it is original or not. Of course nobody should make plagiarism. But I am not doing one. I only provided a link to the original. So what do you want from me? Why do you want me to provide data, which is available at the original link (at the source of video). It does not make sense. You make things complicated without a reason. Make reddit - a succesful site - your example regarding non orignal findings. What's wrong with posting links like in reddit? Nothing! What have you not understood from what I have already wrote above in my previous message? If you disagree with my thoughts wrote in the last message please explain why and not just force me to your point o view, which I believe is harmful to steemit community, and I already explained why in my previous message.
Also @patrice in her article wrote: "Whether you're sharing a new article, blog post, youtube video, or any other content that wasn't created by you -- add your own thoughts and comments to it".
From the beginning there was my comment to the video that cesium is more precious than gold and yet a lot of it was wasted in these experiments, so even according to @patrice guidelines it was correctly posted finding. Thus I do not see why you attack me. Please stop your malicious actions against me, please do not envy me that I can find interesting findings, instead try to find ones yourself.
"We" as in a large part of the community that has invested time and money into steemit.
I wasn't saying that this video was from another user. I just wanted to caution you that if you do post one from another user that it is considered polite to ask or at least give credit to.
As I said:
My reason for not upvoting really has nothing to do with this being a youtube video. I didn't upvote it because the topic doesn't interest me and I don't see much community interaction by you in the form of upvoting other users posts since you upvoted noisy 20 something days ago. That's also why I didn't follow you.
The reward should go the the author of YT video...
I do not see any disagreement or rebuttal regarding what I said above. So can we, please, agree that non original links can be added here like in reddit? That would be beneficial to everyone and would allow steemit to compete with reddit, thus making it grow even more.
No, that is unreasonable in services simillar to reddit. There is no time for it. Link is provided to the original and all the data are there, and it is assumed that the author would be happy that link to his/her work would be distributed widelly, becasue that makes his work more broadly known. Because people are generally happy to distribute broadly links to their work, there is no need to ask them about that - please remember that only a link is not copyrighted.
Also as you can see @logic did not ask others for permision and did not state who are the authors of the films he posted:
https://steemit.com/film/@logic/selection-of-20-most-interesting-documentaries-of-last-15-years-part-2-titles-i-to-z
That's ok.
And what it has to do with whether you upvote finding or not? Do you upvote considering who posted finding and not the value of finding? How that can be considered fair and reasonable?
I am just starting, so give me some time (which I do not have enough right now to read most of other findings, hence no upvoting).
However, if you all would be discouraging me by attacking me with no good reason, I would stop interacting altogether. I have not come here to fight, but to share with others links to interesting findings, and occasionally to write an article myself. Please people be reasonable. Live and let other live.
SteemIt is really divided on the issue of copypasta vs. value-added posts.
Weigh in here: https://steemit.com/steemit/@rubellitefae/a-discussion-on-the-nature-of-posts-which-have-no-value-added-you-decide
Be careful who you flag, please remove your flags from logics posts
I flagged @logic because of his malicious actions and lying about my finding, so this was correctly flagged. While you and logic flagged me maliciously, because there was no reason to flag my findings. They are interesting and other people like them. But as a gesture of good will I can withdraw flagging, if you both do the same first.
"While you and logic flagged me maliciously, because there was no reason to flag my findings"
You flaggedboth my comment above and my recent post so I flagged you back on this post. I have the same right ot flag as you do. You started flagging so got it back.
Keep your flag on my post, I enjoy my flag on yours...
@walden there was no reason to write this comment, btw.
"his malicious actions and lying about my finding"
I have no clue what you are talking about.
@logic Why is there no reply buton where is that sentence: "The reward should go the the author of YT video..."?
No, because he has not posted a link to his video here. It is his choice. He will have his reward by having increased viewing of his video, because of the post, which I posted here.
However, I do not care much about rewards, you can make a system rewarding posts with links to other articles with less rewards than the original ones.
@walden Please explain why you flagged all of my postings.
Because he is a flag monkey he loves following others and if you flag one of his people he will just flag you, no reason given just a flag monkey. :)
Why are you continuing to flag my posts for no reason? Are you trying to start a flag war?
Sounds a lot like you.
:)
I love you too
relax, I will remove them tomorrow
@walden Fine words butter no parsnips
Sorry, the system wont allow me to remove them now
Then why did you want to wait?