MobileRead Guideline Refinements

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by Nyssa

In regard to the prohibition of anything sexually explicit, if the main issue is authors wanting to advertise erotica, maybe there can be another opt in area similar to P&R which would be adults only?

This would be an option, if there was sufficient demand. I am afraid though most authors wouldn't be interested in promoting their works in an opt-in, closed section with a strictly limited audience.

Originally Posted by crich70

Does the sexual content rule apply to older PD books like Fanny Hill or just to newer book titles that would be in the bargain/deal forums? And is it retroactive in some way? I'd hate to be getting yelled at for example for something that wasn't a stated rule (that I was aware of) til the 3rd of this month. Certainly there are a few PD books that do have some sexual content (the aformentioned Fanny Hill, Lady Chatterly, etc).

Fair question. Discussing literary classics is excluded from the rule when those classics could also be taught in school. Posting sexually explicit content doesn't fall under the exception.

It is retroactive in a way that in the next days we'll be going through some problematic threads, in particular in the self-promo section.

Help is always appreciated - feel free to report a post or thread if you think it should have a second look.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

This would be an option, if there was sufficient demand. I am afraid though most authors wouldn't be interested in promoting their works in an opt-in, closed section with a strictly limited audience.

True. I see your point. Okay.

[Greg Anos]

Alex,

I am concerned about the move into a US server. That makes the library subject to US copyright laws, unless I'm gravely mistaken, and US copyright laws do not follow life + 70 rules, but its own bizarre set of copyright rules. Check with Greg Weeks at Project Gutenberg US....

RSE

[Lynx-lynx]

Something that's been puzzling me about the servers being moved to the US is that it would seem that MR is now under US law, is that right?

If that is the case then it makes it very easy for US security agencies to 'officially' 'break into' MR data. That is, account holders email address, PM's - anything that isn't posted on the public side of the Forum .....

Oh, and all without asking of course. In fact we the individuals wouldn't be informed that our private data had been observed/taken, and neither would the 'owner' of the site be informed of their impending action/s. All in the name of 'security' of course.

Or am I mistaken in my thinking?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by crich70

Does the sexual content rule apply to older PD books like Fanny Hill or just to newer book titles that would be in the bargain/deal forums? And is it retroactive in some way? I'd hate to be getting yelled at for example for something that wasn't a stated rule (that I was aware of) til the 3rd of this month. Certainly there are a few PD books that do have some sexual content (the aformentioned Fanny Hill, Lady Chatterly, etc).

I would also think that Lolita would also qualify as explicit. That would mean that the discussion thread, the thread where it was nominated, and the thread where it was voted on would have to be moved if there was such an opt in forum.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Something that's been puzzling me about the servers being moved to the US is that it would seem that MR is now under US law, is that right?

If that is the case then it makes it very easy for US security agencies to 'officially' 'break into' MR data. That is, account holders email address, PM's - anything that isn't posted on the public side of the Forum .....

Oh, and all without asking of course. In fact we the individuals wouldn't be informed that our private data had been observed/taken, and neither would the 'owner' of the site be informed of their impending action/s. All in the name of 'security' of course.

Or am I mistaken in my thinking?

If you are thinking NSA, then no, you are not mistaken.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Something that's been puzzling me about the servers being moved to the US is that it would seem that MR is now under US law, is that right?

If that is the case then it makes it very easy for US security agencies to 'officially' 'break into' MR data. That is, account holders email address, PM's - anything that isn't posted on the public side of the Forum .....

Oh, and all without asking of course. In fact we the individuals wouldn't be informed that our private data had been observed/taken, and neither would the 'owner' of the site be informed of their impending action/s. All in the name of 'security' of course.

Or am I mistaken in my thinking?

As they said in The Prisoner..."Be seeing ya'!"

(But don't worry about the NSA, they look everywhere (not just the US)...

[issybird]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I would also think that Lolita would also qualify as explicit. That would mean that the discussion thread, the thread where it was nominated, and the thread where it was voted on would have to be moved if there was such an opt in forum.

Surely Lolita, as a great literary work, falls under the following rubric? Moreover, the discussion was not at all salacious.

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

Discussing literary classics is excluded from the rule when those classics could also be taught in school.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Something that's been puzzling me about the servers being moved to the US is that it would seem that MR is now under US law, is that right?

If that is the case then it makes it very easy for US security agencies to 'officially' 'break into' MR data. That is, account holders email address, PM's - anything that isn't posted on the public side of the Forum .....

Oh, and all without asking of course. In fact we the individuals wouldn't be informed that our private data had been observed/taken, and neither would the 'owner' of the site be informed of their impending action/s. All in the name of 'security' of course.

Or am I mistaken in my thinking?

There is nothing in US law that allows this but that doesn't mean they are not doing it. Of course they might have been doing it in Canada as well. Actually this site is not likely a target of the NSA. They have better fish to fry.

[murg]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

There is nothing in US law that allows this but that doesn't mean they are not doing it. Of course they might have been doing it in Canada as well. Actually this site is not likely a target of the NSA. They have better fish to fry.

They fry ALL fish...

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by murg

They fry ALL fish...

and batter ....

[PeterT]

Fish Friar or Chip Monk?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

Surely Lolita, as a great literary work, falls under the following rubric? Moreover, the discussion was not at all salacious.

But the book is perverted and thus, should not be allowed on the sexually explicit guidelines of MR. As for it being a great literary work, that's way off kilter. It's crap.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But the book is perverted and thus, should not be allowed on the sexually explicit guidelines of MR.

Is the discussion thread perverted? That is the question...

As for it being a great literary work, that's way off kilter. It's crap.

Ooooh! Opinion alert!!!

I wouldn't know/care, but apparently it is considered a classic, by the majority of people, so unless you mean to say that your opinions are obligatory and binding upon all literary minds of the century, I would offer you the friendly advice: quit while you are only somewhat behind.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Ooooh! Opinion alert!!!

I wouldn't know/care, but apparently it is considered a classic, by the majority of people, so unless you mean to say that your opinions are obligatory and binding upon all literary minds of the century, I would offer you the friendly advice: quit while you are only somewhat behind.

Well, I don't find anything redeeming about a book about pedophilia. With that said, unless there's something else to say pertaining to the new guidelines, that's it for this awful book.