> Lets end this now. I believe you made your point. I'm talking with the LbNA > team to work out a partnership between the two sites.
Look, you are the one who took the explicitly copyrighted material of others, modified it to remove such warnings as --
"There is some extremely steep terrain in the area. No unattended children!",
republished it on your own web site with your _own_ copyright, without even the courtesy of asking permission, and threw banner ads for a competitor of a big part of letterboxing up with it. And now you are the one trolling with a 'tude? I don't get it. If you wanted to "end it", it was in your court to do so. You got my feedback. Evidently you did not like it, but that seems no reason to start trolling.
I was as polite as possible under the circumstances, and remain so, and suggested to the "LbNA team", whoever that may be, that they work with you. If I think banner advertising is "crap", I'm gonna say it. If that causes anyone to troll, so be it. You asked this list for opinions on what you were doing. You got one, polite and well reasoned. I think its a reasonable goal to attempt to keep letterboxing as free from banner ads as possible.
On the matter of consistency ...
You say, while copyrighting your site: "I personally believe [copyrights] detract from the game". Now who is being inconsistent? (In case you have not noticed, you have a copyright on your site too; its at the bottom, even on the clues written by others). Why? Why do you need it? Why do you have it?
> As a rebuttal to your advertising "crap" comment, I'm assuming LbNA will be > moving their mailing list off eGroups to maintain the integrity of the game?
Its always possible. You'll have to ask them. Since they are not adding the ad copy to the works of others and pocketing the revenue for themselves, its a wholly different, and completely irrelevant, question. Moreover, since the talk list is separate from the clue copy, one can letterbox without dealing with banner ads. (A friend of mine does exactly this). And the _goal_ is to be free of them. Again, the difference is choice, who is sponging the cash, and what is having ad copy attached to it, and who is deciding where banner ads go. (FWIW, the LbNA team _has_ discussed alternatives to egroups. The ad at the top is a recent development and the LbNA team has not had time to address the issue. The ads at the bottom were non-intrusive. But again, its obviously a different question).
> If you haven't noticed, there's an ad at the top of every e-mail. Even > yours.
More snide, unconstructive words ...
Actually, you are wrong, but that doesn't matter (I use procmail). And, like I said, I never put an ad on anyone else's work and pocketed the change for myself. And I never will. At least in the past, an individual who wanted to do this asked the letterboxing community, and he respected the NO he received.
> It would make more sense if your argument was not flawed.
I'm content with my argument, it stands on its merits and speaks for itself. It would make more sense if you would kill the 'tude if your goal is to work together. Like Thom said, its only a game.
Again, I would suggest before modifying and republishing the work of others, that you ask their permission first. They may say sure, I don't care. Its not a big request, its basic common and ethical courtesy, and it could save alot of animosity down the road. I would also suggest learning some of the history of letterboxing, and getting to know some of the people before doing something like this, then trolling with a 'tude when they object to something that is obviously objectionable that you asked for feedback on!
Cheers, -- randy "the mapsurfer" http://www.mapsurfer.com