I think both sides of this argument have valid points (and I apologize if I'm reviving an older discussion -
haven't been on in a few days). Yes, people here have been out of hand. I completely agree with that statement. But
it also shows that they sincerely do not wish their wallpapers distributed - the other side of the argument.
There's got to be a middle line, right? That's what I've been trying to achieve, in my negotions as
'distro mod'.
I have been irritated by the irrational responses of some members here, (not naming names - it's more of a group
hysteria than anything) because honestly - being rude will get you nowhere in this world. If you can't treat the
admin of a distro site respectfully, why should they treat you respectfully?
That being said, I think the strongest argument for MT's anti-distro policy, to some extent, is the very visible
fact that members' agitation, however uncourteous, demonstrates that they sincerely do not wish their wallpapers to
be redistributed. Whether or not that is wholly feasible, I can't say. But as a mod, I feel it is my duty to act in
the interest of benefitting the members - if that requires me to try to get wallpapers taken down from distro sites, so
be it. I don't necessarily believe that it is the most realistic goal in the world, but if it is making people so
upset, why not try. If your argument proves effective, and the majority of wallers OK distribution, then I will cease
efforts.
What I'm trying to say is that there's a middle ground. Treat distro sites with respect, politely request for
removal, and if that doesn't work then live with it. Does it work in the long term? I'll have to wait and
see.
And a post-script about legality: I think that's neither here nor there. This has never been tested on a legal
scale, and Lord willing never will be. I don't feel that debating the legality of artbook scans has much bearing on
this situation.
- Biri out.
