[Foundation-l] The reality of printing a poster

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Two answers and a PS,

   - first you do not have to actively discourage the narcissists from
   contributing. But playing to their egocentric notions of copyright, notions
   where the two licenses are largely the same is damaging to our objective.
   The information needs to spread out, by hook or by crook.
   - When I TELL you that something spoils a picture for me, you can ignore
   this, or you accept this. When I have a framed picture I do not want the
   license printed with it, I do not want a list of authors. I want a clean
   picture just as it would be when I have it printed at my local copy shop.

PS forget your crusade re top posting and use a more modern approach to
e-mail or get over it.

Thanks,
     GerardM



2009/2/1 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>

>
> I Wrote:
> >>> I completely agree with your point, but I think you have grasped
> >>> the wrong end of the stick. It is precisely the pride people feel
> >>> about contributing and being acknowledged as contributing to
> >>> our great charitable work, that is laying the golden eggs.
> >>> Attribution is not a killer, it is what gives our projects life.
> >>>
> And in reply Gerrard mejsen top-posted:
>
> >>> Hoi,
> >>> I could not disagree more with you. People who work on Wikipedia do
> this
> >>> because they make a difference. This making a difference is what I
> think is
> >>> of paramount importance, what makes people proud of this endeavour.
> When
> >>> people use my pictures and my ,it makes a difference how they use it.
> But
> >>> essentially I do not really care as long as my ideal of more and better
> >>> information or more people is realised.
> >>>
>
> I in fact agree with this. It can even be proven by the success of
> such sites as Distributed Proofreaders, where people do not
> edit as editors at all, but are merely faithfully reproducing works
> to which they have no copyright (or even copyleft) that there is
> no shortage of people willing to work without their contribution
> being acknowledged in the finished product ; and yes, I count
> myself among those who do that kind of work, and really will
> never be credited for participating in  creating an as faithful
> reproduction as possible of for instance an early printing of William
> Tyndale's translation of Genesis, in any lasting form.
>
> No-one can deny that we would not lack in contributors if we
> turned away everybody who wanted to see their name with the
> work.
>
> But human nature is such, that lots of good work can be had
> from people who *do* work from completely selfish motives of
> pride. Not all such work is of course of good quality. To this
> effect too, proofs can be had from Distributed Proofreaders.
> Some there do the work hastily, and without care, just because
> they want their name to shine on the list of people who do
> much work.
>
> I do disagree that those people should be actively discouraged
> from helping us.
>
> >>> Obviously I like it that my picture of a wild boar is used on a Russian
> >>> website. They asked, nice. But I take more pride in KNOWING this than
> in
> >>> having my name on their website.
> >>>
> >>> When I print a poster, and the license and the contributors have to be
> >>> printed on it as well, the image of the picture is spoiled for me. This
> >>> would be a reason for me to return the printed poster. So let us be
> >>> practical, WHERE do you want to have all the information that is so
> dear to
> >>> you? What are the costs and is this feasible.. Are you not killing the
> goose
> >>> that lays the golden eggs ?
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
>
> Now this though, I cannot understand at all. How is the image
> spoiled, if we know who created it?
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>