X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,ba31c1eee468bb0 X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-11 20:46:44 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: catrinea2001@yahoo.com (Catherine) Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art Subject: Re: Patches... Date: 11 Sep 2001 20:46:44 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 177 Message-ID: <3586f7af.0109111946.6559c6d4@posting.google.com> References: <3B9A074C.62C5@hotmail.com> <3B9A229F.12B7@hotmail.com> <3B9BD5CC.DEA40E54@gtcom.net> <3B9CC2B2.255@hotmail.com> <3B9D0074.14CD3901@gtcom.net> <3B9D0AC5.59C1@hotmail.com> <42mrpts494u1gi1tjjabjirrf2vu8p178f@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.92.50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1000266404 9272 127.0.0.1 (12 Sep 2001 03:46:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Sep 2001 03:46:44 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com alt.ascii-art:7421 patches wrote in message news:<42mrpts494u1gi1tjjabjirrf2vu8p178f@4ax.com>... Patches ramblings: Maybe you should ask your local library to pick up a copy of the book, or head on down to the bookstore and check out the book itself... Brendas website is a simple site that promotes the book itself. One really should see the book and have a look at it, because Brenda has done an exceptional job of covering & supporting the ASCII art community. Instead, your on some binge about a "playing card" whose design you probably got off a deck of playing cards and she didn't get your permission to put it on the site, well who says she needs permission. Did you copyright a design that is probably already copyrighted? Or are you just trying to blow smoke up someones ass again? Did you ask the original playing card artist if you could redesign his/her card? My Opinion: >From what I read on the book's website, it is an in-depth study about irc, chatters and its various forms of communication. Ascii or EXTENDED ASCII used by irc were studied and examined surrounding the evolution of irc and its various communication tools. There was no in-depth study about the REAL ASCII COMMUNITY that I could see readily, so there is nothing benefiting the ascii community, elicited or not; its all ABOUT PATCHES. Who gives a shit about who started what chat and where? Certainly not Ascii artists - irc is not their community - ascii art in its true form originated elsewhere, not IRC; what you people play with did not originate with chatters - it was founded and used way before chatters discovered how to use it in their environment. Unfortunately, the study in chatters and their evolution failed to identify the inception of this new form of communication - oh, but thats in the NEXT book? appears to me and probably others, a bit backwards in describing this evolution??? The book concentrates on endless blah blah blah about chatters; but then again, blah blah is the point, isnt it? Not the ascii community. And, the continued mention of ascii art and mirc; how about EXTENDED ASCII and mirc. Extended characters is mentioned, but of course, its minimal; mirc-ers think Ascii art on mirc (little colored shapes with extended characters) is the real deal; ummm, it is not. It is easy to find, the chart, that lists true ascii characters, which makes it a unique form of art, considering there is a limitation of characters. Extended characters mixed with true ascii, is considered 'bogus' and cannot be termed "ascii art". Extended characters mixed with ascii is another breed. Let me point out some drawings that you claim are infringed upon by copyright and not considered original: mona lisa, jesus, cartoon characters, disney characters, ON AND ON AND ON. Wonder if all the ascii artists called up Disney and asked if their own ascii art renderings are infringing on copyright. Jeez, Joan's site pays extreme homage to well known characters created by someone else. So Joan is not an original artist either; go tell her as you just told Veronica. So a playing card, which originated tons of years ago and rendered in a million different renderings, in millions of card decks; well, Veronica's ascii drawing is no different; IT IS ORIGINAL based on a million year old drawing which carries no known copyright, but rather each deck is copyrighted for originality based on the game piece; namely a card. Patches, you are so misinformed and semi-conscience me thinks. What is more scary is that you propagate this trash to your blind followers. Blind leading the blind. Patches blah blah/blame shifting: You are making some kind of assumption that she got the pictures from me, and I never once sent Brenda Danet any pictures of any kind. She could easily have gotten them and it is my understanding that between #mIRC_Rainbow & #mIRC_Colors (now defunct) she captured images from what was played in the channel. (which is also documented and shown in the book) (ASCII artists themselves are certainly not in the channel 100% of the time, saying hey.. thats my art.. you can't use or color that) and what you put on a website for someone to look at, copy and use, is to my knowledge still game for the taking.... like it or not, if you don't want it stolen or used, don't put it on a website for people to do that to. Most people who in IRC color the ASCII art, leave the initials intact, but all of a sudden they need permission to do so? Since when? If you put it on your site, its there for people to do what they wish with, hopefully they are respectable enough to give credit, and keep the initials intact. Me again: Wonderful. I will make sure to copy a load of crap from your website for my own use and say I created it or designed it. Better yet, I think I will copy your whole layout and make it my own. EVEN better, Ill create a webpage about mirc and download ALL THE FILES YOU HAVE THERE and place on my site for download. Well, you said it, its there for the taking and I shall do what I please with it. Don't put it on the website if you don't want people to take it. Well, I am gonna take all your files (even though they are not yours personally) and put them on my website, perhaps call it the Mirc Crap-o-Ramma. Patches Mantra 1: "Most people who in IRC color the ASCII art, leave the initials intact, but all of a sudden they need permission to do so? Patches Mantra 2: "...and what you put on a website for someone to look at, copy and use, is to my knowledge still game for the taking...." Me: I will make sure I alter some of the files too because they are there for me to alter, I may choose to be disrespectful AND who says I need permission to take this file and alter it? You said it plain as day; who has to ask? *See Mantra 1 and 2* Joan Stark, the majority of your references to ascii art; go check her website. She reminds of copyright law and asks that her initials stay there, just like many other web sites. But, again, tell Joan, tough boogers, who cares what she wants. Its there and it is the mirc communities' prerogative to take it and ignore her request and the copyright laws. And, of course, Brenda DOES make mention as someone already pointed out, that she got permission from YOU for all the mirc images on behalf of the arteests. Veronica is not an artist? Patches saying, "hey, no problemo!": Brenda also has a cd image of my website, which I never sent or gave her, she must have downloaded it, or went thru and saved each page. Do I care? No, I do not. Oh wait, maybe I should sue her for downloading my site... oh no, invasion of the html.... hahaa... NOT!!! Me: Hmmm, a bunch of claims on your website about HOW ITS YOURS AND IN NO WAY IS ANYONE ALLOWED TO TAKE ANYTHING without your permission. HA HA HA-YEP. Depends on who is taking your stuff, eh????? Maybe I should download your site and do my own study in mirc and create a book without prior permission to copy everything on your website. Hey, is that ok with you? (Refer to Patches mantra 2 - its ok! :) Patches Still ShifTing: Neither here nor there, the only part I personally had in helping Brenda with her book was with trying to distinguish who colored what for mIRC art, and in no way, shape or form did I ever give her permission to use ASCII colored art work Me: One drawing by Veronica and, originally, you could not even provide an identity to Brenda, nor ask Veronica prior to? (Refer to Patches mantra 1). In closing, Joan, who you mention, is not an original artist if we were all to believe Patches. Again, tell Joan you do not believe her drawings are originals, tell all the other artists what they produce are bogus, copyright infringements. Lets all sing along with patches the praise of square colored boxes, triangles, etc. that repeat irc-ers names; after all, its ORIGINAL ascii! Or so YOU think. Patches, try taking some courses in good manners. That is about all I can recommend to you at this time because everything else you think and believe is skewed; start with the truth and some manners. A simple "oops" would have been in order, an apology for allowing that little bogus drawing, as you infer, to go uncredited. Instead, you chose to slander ascii artists, promote stealing and deny your involvement in the irc-ee book (when convenient). When in fact, you had voluminous input. Catherine (Lurker, but stepping out for a moment)