Re^4: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) by Argel (Prior) on Sep 08, 2008 at 19:22 UTC
Interesting point. The most obvious weak spot is that someone has to nominate the node for Consideration. So I guess to minimize legal risk no one directly affiliated with PerlMonks should be allowed to nominate a node for Consideration (or should avoid nominating these types of nodes at least). Of course, the other answer is that it's up to the courts to decide that one. Update: And the users have to have accounts to moderate, so they're not really anonymous. Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks	[reply]
Re^6: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) by tye (Sage) on Sep 08, 2008 at 20:45 UTC
Update: And the users have to have accounts to moderate, so they're not really anonymous. And all 5 of the people had Ohio driver's licenses... but that doesn't make them not anonymous. That is, unless you are aware of some place that voting on reaping of nodes is persistently tracked that I'm not aware of. - tye	[reply]
Re^7: Editing pirated content links in reaped nodes (no) by Argel (Prior) on Sep 08, 2008 at 21:37 UTC
So what you really meant is that reaping is automated and PerlMonks is not storing info on who voted for the moderation. Is the person who Considered the node stored? Regardless, it is still up to a court to decide. Even if the info is not tracked you still have to have an account and be of high enough rank to Consider a node and vote on the Consideration. That combination might still be enough to cause problems (probably not, but it might be worth investigating further). Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks	[reply]


more useful options
	PerlMonks