AVID:Requests for Comment/Abolish the rule "No Stealing Content": Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:55, 2 November 2022

Withdrawn. I was unaware of a similar RfC going on. Blad (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

First, this rule is way too difficult to enforce on a practical level. Quoting myself from here, "This wiki is licensed by CC BY-SA. With proper attribution I don't see how cloning is a problem. Don't like clones? Change the license. Plus, clones on Miraheze wikis would automatically be forbidden by the current content policy. Hell, even if a clone was hosted on another site, I'd doubt that the copycat(s) would comply and remove said content."

Second, this rule massively blew up in the aformentioned RfC we just had. Many issues brought up revolved around the rule itself, not necessarily the change. For these reasons I think it should be removed. Blad (talk) 19:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

Just reminding you this: there is already a proposal for this. Camenati (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate metadata discussion-archived" style="background-color: #F2F4FC; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #aaa">
+Withdrawn. I was unaware of a similar RfC going on. [[User:Blad|Blad]] ([[User talk:Blad|talk]]) 19:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
+----
 First, this rule is way too difficult to enforce on a practical level. Quoting myself from [[AVID:Requests_for_Comment/Rules_reform|here]], "This wiki is licensed by CC BY-SA. With proper attribution I don't see how cloning is a problem. Don't like clones? Change the license. Plus, clones on Miraheze wikis would automatically be forbidden by the current content policy. Hell, even if a clone was hosted on another site, I'd doubt that the copycat(s) would comply and remove said content."
@@ Line 6: / Line 9: @@
 [[Category:Requests for Comment]]
+</div>