Recent comments in /f/nottheonion

[deleted] t1_ja0l78k wrote

Reply to comment by BoneDogtheWonderBoy in Man charged after eating stolen chips dropped by thief, police say by jab116

Go through and attack? It takes no going through. It’s all you do. As far as attack, you have a funny definition. I point out that you do it, you claim that me noticing offends you.

Just like me pointing out that you completely mischaracterized my comment but instead of owning it, you pivot to being shocked that I pointed these things out.

The truth is right in this discussion. I said a thing that you don’t agree with. Maybe you think my comment or opinion is wrong, and so you decided to call me names and insult me.

There is no rewriting history. This is what happened.

1

[deleted] t1_ja0d33w wrote

Reply to comment by BoneDogtheWonderBoy in Man charged after eating stolen chips dropped by thief, police say by jab116

That’s not what my post was at all. I said people were attacking the cops (calling them racist and idiots) rather than acknowledging that taking the chips is still stealing if he knew that they had been dropped in the act of theft. I was suggesting that it’s still unlawful and the right thing would have been for him to return them. I didn’t call for his life to be ruined. I’ve even said multiple times that I don’t think he should be prosecuted. I’ve said he needs psychiatric help and assistance. The police have ways of getting people assessments and help. I said that him getting picked up can lead to him getting the help he needs. No straw man. No attacking the post or people. My post wasn’t at all what you are pretending it was. You came looking for a fight which is why you attacked and bullied me right away. You weren’t trying to have a conversation. I can look through your past posts and see that this is what you do. You look for comments that reflect alternative ideas and then you lash out at those people. This is no exception. This is what you do regularly. Your post history is full flog arguments with strangers. The proof is right there

1

nsnyder t1_ja0d27i wrote

Reply to comment by tman37 in Roald Dahl threatened publisher with ‘enormous crocodile’ if they changed his words by Mighty_L_LORT

If I had my way, then Dahl's books would be in the public domain by now and anyone could publish any version they wanted. But if we're going to have copyright extend for decades after the author's death then the copyright holders are going to be the ones deciding whether to make edits. Maybe they make good decisions, or maybe they make dumb ones (I think some of the edits here are pretty clumsy and pointless, and it seems likely if Dahl were alive he'd object to at least some of them), but since Dahl is dead the people who he left the rights to are going to have to make these calls much as Dahl did when he was alive. It's totally fine to criticize them, but the idea that books never get changed or that Dahl's books never got changed when he was alive is just not true.

−8

sithelephant t1_ja0bf6e wrote

Reply to Roald Dahl threatened publisher with ‘enormous crocodile’ if they changed his words by Mighty_L_LORT

Dahl had the option, when writing his will, or signing the initial contracts, to put in various conditions as to what could be done with his work.

He chose not to. Amongst other things, this would have reduced those works value.

The recent controversy might be better written as '$30B company gets massive free advertising for their product on which they have a monopoly for 30 years'.

It's nothing to do with the author any more. The only people that benefit meaningfully after the death of the author are the lawyers and the corporate system.

−1