File talk:Dean144k.jpg

Removed to debate page... by Mei

Debate:Can we make logical arguments instead of poisoning the well Debate:Are we inconsiderate pricks?

?? Or where?

20:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, Kels. 20:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Aside from privacy issues...
What about the copyright on this bad boy? 20:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

From the site it apparently comes from (although the link fails):

Copyright

All materials on the VirtualOffice sites (as well as the organization and layout of the InfoTrax Systems web site) are owned and copyrighted or licensed by InfoTrax Systems, its affiliates or its suppliers. All rights reserved. No reproduction, distribution, or transmission of the copyrighted materials of the VirtualOffice sites is permitted without the written permission of InfoTrax Systems. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved.

We respect the intellectual property rights of others and we ask our members to do the same.

I'm guessing we don't really have an excuse here. --Kels 20:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair use to illustrate the subject of the article seems pretty cut and dry to me. Fifth Horseman 20:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like this is the closest I can find to a working link. It's really not clear where FH got this version from. --Kels 20:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * http://mxi.myvoffice.com/users/620/1258620/Dean144k.jpg 20:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair use to illustrate what article? And, no, we can't really claim it since it is not necessary.  If we had an article on the nutri-choco business, a link to the site would be enough.  20:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you are talking about. What I am talking about is the article on DeanS. Fifth Horseman 20:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If you don't know what I'm talking about, you aren't paying attention to your own sources. Here's what I suggest: One, write DeanS at CP and ask if it is him.  Two, if he confirms, then ask if he minds if we use this photo that he owns.  20:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * (EC) Well, I don't really object to having an article about the business, but I don't think it would be appropriate to use this pic. Sure, he's connected, but he's not the public face of the company.  Having a pic of some random stooge salesman doesn't make sense when we have pictures of the people who actually run it available. --Kels 20:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And this picture is not being used on that said article. Fifth Horseman 20:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, as is mentioned elsewhere, this picture is a guy of that name who works for that company, which claims copyright. Sort of an iffy connection. The pics on the Flickr stream, on the other hand, have a much firmer connection and they're Creative Commons to boot.  If you're that desperate to have a picture, which I still haven't been convinced is necessary, then crop one of them and use that, with attribution.  --Kels 20:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Stalking and theft
This thing's still here? 20:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Uh, yeah since its still being discussed deletion would be more than a tad premature, hypocritical and TKish. Fifth Horseman 20:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Is accusing someone (preemptively) of being like TK our version of Poe's Law? --Kels 20:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Or a mini-Godwin? Totnesmartin 20:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Bah, I got the wrong law. I DON'T CARE FOR YOUR RULES! --Kels 20:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, pretty much. 20:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * So, FH, if someone uploads an unwanted pic they can keep it on the site by fillibustering? Totnesmartin 20:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds about right... 20:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * FTR I burned it. Mei 20:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait, we can filibuster?  20:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We like to call it CURring --Kels 20:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I still don't like. If CP put a picture of you up, what would you do?  Sterilewalkie-talkie 23:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Aside from driving the conservative ladies off with a stick?  23:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Either way
He looks nothing like what I'd pictured, assuming this is the same person. I thought he was one of the original homeschoolers, thus removing 30-odd years. 22:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)