Discussion of Forum Policy: Special Offers

[ixtab]

Originally Posted by Abradoks

If something can be abused, it will be abused.
This policy only shows your fear of Amazon and intent to use censorship whenever it serves your purpose.
Your efforts to 'make peace' with lab126 obviously failed. They continue to increase obfuscation and fix jailbreak vectors. Which is, by the way, completely expected, as they don't [care] about you, your work or your wishes.
On the other hand, the only attempt to compromise with Big Brother and restriction of discussed topics to what interests you personally is [an insult to] hacker community.

You're going to have to live with the fact that the people here prefer to wear white hats. You are welcome to state your mind, though.

[Abradoks]

Originally Posted by twobob

Offering personal opinion as fact.

I can elaborate on any sentence in that message. Please, tell me which one looks to you like speculation — maybe I'm missing something. So far, I see only a self-centric fantasy of Great Significance and Right Decisions emerging into groundless forum rules.

Originally Posted by ixtab

You're going to have to live with the fact that the people here prefer to wear white hats.

First, this policy has nothing to do with the hat color.
It's hilarious, how you are inventing a problem by deciding what is "actively undermining Amazon's business model" and then trying to bargain the "solution" in exchange for non-obfuscated code and tolerance towards jailbreak exploits. And all that without any direct communication with Amazon! You've never even received any complains (which are normally subject for public mocking, not for blind obedience) from them, did you?

Second, publication of exploits, instead of reporting them, hardly counts as 'white hat'.
Despite the original intent to 'free' the device and improve its functionality, I suppose, that custom modification, such as JBPatch, can be presented as breaking some laws. Especially in countries with software patents. I am not a lawyer though.

Third, you are talking in the name of 'the people' here. Yet the policy clearly implies censorship of those people. Why are you so eager to ban discussion on topics, that lie in the same 'grey' area as your hacks, but do not interest you personally?

Originally Posted by ixtab

You are welcome to state your mind, though.

Unexpected thing to hear, after my reply was silently deleted and thread closed yesterday.

[twobob]

Okay. you have stated your opinion and Ixtab defends your right to say it.

Honestly, there doesn't appear to be anyway to sway your, obviously heartfelt, opinion.

Presonally, for me, the "debate" such as it is, ends here. There is nothing to say. It's the policy.

I agree with it for what that is worth. Here endeth my involvement in this thread.

[ixtab]

The decision to formally state this policy was taken after quite some discussion between site administrators, site moderators, and leading developers.

It prohibits the discussion of exactly two topics, and the reasons are given in the first post. If you don't like the policy, you're welcome to find another forum where you can freely discuss them. But please stop complaining just for the sake of complaining.

[Abradoks]

Originally Posted by ixtab

But please stop complaining just for the sake of complaining.

Sure. I have no intention to waste anyone's time on pointless arguments, when you make it clear that the policy won't be changed despite being unreasonable from beginning and thus unavailing.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Abradoks

Sure. I have no intention to waste anyone's time on pointless arguments, when you make it clear that the policy won't be changed despite being unreasonable from beginning and thus unavailing.

Notice the lack of swarms of angry people insisting the policy is unfair and a form of censorship?

MR's always had a one-step-removed policy regarding evasion-of-TOS activities. There's an understanding that many people are going to do them, and they may or may not be legal depending on one's location and interpretation of relevant laws, but MR does not directly support or condone activities that involve breaking the terms of service of an ebook store or device seller. This means not encouraging, and sometimes not allowing, direct discussions of methods to do so.

Those of us who think a lot of those TOS are stupid, and possibly illegal in themselves, are welcome to say *that*, and offer specific advice in PMs. (Don't PM me for TOS-breaking advice. I don't buy DRM so I don't know how to crack it.) The fact that such topics are of interest to some MR members is acknowledged, and mentioning that interest isn't banned here; only specific details of "This Is How You Get Around That Agreement You Made" are not allowed.

Discussions of "This is how that agreement you made is not legally/morally binding" are welcome, and common. Those discussions often include hints of search terms or offers to give more specific information in private, and that, too, is allowed. Only the specifics themselves are not allowed in MR's public areas, for reasons of potential liability.

Nobody else seems to have any problem understanding the difference. Nobody else seems to think it's an oppressive decision.

As far as "but they couldn't possibly be sued!"... it's not my job (nor yours) to decide what legal risks someone else should take. I find it very unlikely that MR would be sued for allowing discussions explaining how to tether one's Kindle, but I'm certainly not volunteering to pay for the legal expenses if it turns out Amazon's lawyers go a little crazy with the C&Ds.

[JNT]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Notice the lack of swarms of angry people insisting the policy is unfair and a form of censorship?

... snip ...

Nobody else seems to have any problem understanding the difference. Nobody else seems to think it's an oppressive decision.

Well, I for one expressed my sadness over this self-imposed censorship, but the thread was removed... which in its own right is also sad, since it removes any evidence that there are in fact more people that feel quite strongly about this.

I always saw MR as a place to learn, but lately I'm not so sure anymore...

[JNT]

Why is discussion of the policy not allowed? (All the replies were just deleted...)

[pdurrant]

Mainly because that thread was for the announcement of the policy, rather than a discussion of the policy. It probably should have been closed from the start.

[JNT]

Are those comments now lost for ever? If so, seems kind of drastic to me...

[pdurrant]

Now restored, in this thread. Having read them again, I'm not sure it was worth it.