Subject:
|
Re: Brickmania withdraws from Brickshelf
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Sun, 7 Jul 2002 09:32:43 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1843 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi. Been out of town the last few days, but now that I'm back, I just
wanted to chime in on this thread since The Brick Testament was being talked
about.
In my opinion, BrickShelf has been nothing short of wonderful for the online
LEGO community, and it would be sad to think where we'd be without it. Free
on-topic image hosting is something very special, and I think we've all been
very fortunate to have it. No, of course BrickShelf isn't perfect, but it's
pretty darn amazing for a free service run by one guy.
It's Kevin's site. He sets the rules. You then either choose to be a part
of BrickShelf or choose not to. If the new moderation bothers you enough,
you host your photos elsewhere like Daniel has chosen to do. If you're
really bothered and driven, go make your own image-hosting service according
to your own utopian standards. But complaining about a free service is lame
and rude to the provider of that service. That's not to say you shouldn't
make suggestions, offer constructive criticism, or make known your wishes,
but don't get your heart set on them coming to pass.
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> LOL! It's simple, he broke (or pushed) the rules in the past,
> so I want to carefully review everything he's uploaded.
This is true. My breaking or pushing the rules has been due to not having
them clearly enough spelled-out. When it became clear that images of
minifigs in sexual positions was considered for whatever reasons
"inappropriate for minors", I stopped hosting any such images on BrickShelf,
and hosted them elsewhere instead. Fine by me.
In fact, I myself would consider many, many of the non-sexual images from
The Brick Testament "vulgar", "obscene", and "otherwise objectionable" which
would make them in violation of BrickShelf Term of Service 7(a). But so
long as Kevin doesn't see them that way, I'm happy to have them hosted on
BrickShelf.
I would, as others have already, suggest that at some point Kevin be a
little more clear about what exactly is considered "inappropriate for
minors" or "vulgar", etc., and have that information more easily available
*on BrickShelf*. But it's just a suggestion. It's not going to break my
heart if he doesn't act on it.
I appreciate people's concern that images from The Brick Testament and my
other LEGO creations have become temporarily inaccessible at BrickShelf.
You can still see them through my websites, bricktestament.com and
thereverend.com/lego.
I must say that I was very pleasantly surprised to find that all the images
I deep link to from The Brick Testament and my regular LEGO site have been
available right through this moderation period. Heck, I still haven't
gotten over the initial surprise that Kevin lets people deep link images at all!
In summation: Hats off to Kevin for his great contribution to the online
LEGO community. If changes at BrickShelf bother you so much that its free
service is no longer of value to you, host your images elsewhere.
-The Rev. Brendan Powell Smith
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Brickmania withdraws from Brickshelf
|
| (...) LOL! It's simple, he broke (or pushed) the rules in the past, so I want to carefully review everything he's uploaded. Why haven't the easy ones been moderated ok yet? That's a matter of mechanics and priorities. I took them out of the general (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jul-02, to lugnet.publish)
|
70 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
