Seeking appeal against infraction given.

[crimsontactics]

Yes, and on that note, I was advising him to be aware or if he is aware of it.
This issue is not if TS's images are copyrighted or not. His pictures imo and supported by the video link he provided were suggestive - which if I was the infraction issuing moderator, would be my justification for issuing points.

We should be aware that pictures are subjected to copyright claims. So while the copyright holders are not claiming, it does not mean they will not.

Just a clarification.

You can't link my video and my photos together as I didn't post the links of the video in the thread containing the pictures.

I've screenshot the pictures in such a way that it meets the decency standards of EDMW.

I posted the link to the video in response to your copyrights query.

So I would like you to judge the decency of those pictures by themselves, and not with the video, which tbh isn't really that indecent at all. Even Forrest Gump has more nudity than the video in question.

 

[grahf23]

Any pictures/video not taken by u are all subjected to copyright claims, even the links from newspaper and screenshots of mediacorp shows. So what make this special?

If you are worried abt copyright laws, please get everyone to remove their avatars and/or signatures if they can't provide written consent from the authors.

Sent from 221B Baker Street using GAGT

 

[Intrinion]

Just a clarification.

You can't link my video and my photos together as I didn't post the links of the video in the thread containing the pictures.

I've screenshot the pictures in such a way that it meets the decency standards of EDMW.

I posted the link to the video in response to your copyrights query.

So I would like you to judge the decency of those pictures by themselves, and not with the video, which tbh isn't really that indecent at all. Even Forrest Gump has more nudity than the video in question.

I judge, based on the photos.
Based on the video, it confirms my judgement.

Hope it clarifies

 

[Windborn79]

Yes, and on that note, I was advising him to be aware or if he is aware of it.
This issue is not if TS's images are copyrighted or not. His pictures imo and supported by the video link he provided were suggestive - which if I was the infraction issuing moderator, would be my justification for issuing points.

We should be aware that pictures are subjected to copyright claims. So while the copyright holders are not claiming, it does not mean they will not.

I'm kinda puzzled what you're trying to achieve here by bringing in the copyright issue, especially when you yourself agree that this current infraction is not about copyrights at all.

Read through the thread and it seems like your purpose is to detract from the purpose of this thread, no offense meant.

I would suggest that a senior mod or admin or perhaps even Vijay himself step in to defray this situation. If an infraction really is warranted, then give us the reason why.

Then again, of course all of you can just sit on your high horses and refuse to provide an adequate answer. This is your forum and nothing we can do.

 

[singupingu]

I judge, based on the photos.
Based on the video, it confirms my judgement.

Hope it clarifies

Video seems suggestive but it's not provided in the thread.

Photos are not even close to suggestive as compared to some other bikini photos posted in edmw or some even have a hint of exposing nipple in translucent clothing.

It does not justify.

Sent from Overpowered Phone Mark III using GAGT

 

[bosssaizo]

A few things boss would like to point out in case the crowd missed out the main pointers of crimsontactics' s case.

1) FYI folks, the infraction points that Crimsontactics received isn't under Posting/Sharing Indecent/Pornographic or related materials
but Thread Digging or Rubbish/Nuisance Thread/Post.

Hence it is not about showing a lot of skin or not...

2) When boss asked for the intent, it is for you to explain your stand then boss will decide based on that reasoning.

3) Intrinion is just providing another point that members need to keep in mind that the copyright law does come into play when you mentioned the word content provider.

4) Agreed that boss's junior mod maybe missing the point of this whole appeal but that doesn't mean that you can go into EDMW to create a big hooha and the next moment PM the mods to apologize to them for alleging that the junior mods have marked you.

5) Also agreed that Intrinion could have handled the whole issue a little bit better but bear in mind that in Intrinion's PM to you (crimsontactics) is that he just doesn't agree with the reason that you have posted and righteously believe that women should not be treated as commodities.

6) Boss apologize on behalf since that a simple appeal has been made so much more complicated in the process because folks kept missing out the key reason of this infraction.

FYI When you write directly to boss, in the feedback section, more than half the time, boss is the one dealing with it.

In this case, boss does agree that it does not fall under Thread Digging or Rubbish/Nuisance Thread/Post. As such, the infractions have been reversed.