# Has any one noticed the terms of service for KB lately? (MERGED)



## jswww

> You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a non exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, create derivative works of, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM or which you provide by email or any other means to KBOARDS.COM and in any media now known or hereafter developed. Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.


I normally don't think of stuff like this as bothersome, but I know some of you use your author names as your usernames, and you could find your words used to promote this site on other vertical scope websites.

Unless I'm reading this wrong.

Anyway, not sure it's a problem, but you know how it goes. Someone's nice today and a bear tomorrow.


----------



## Trioxin 245

So your author name/book covers can be used by them without your permission?


----------



## Nicholas Erik

Well, as someone who's rarely bothered by boilerplate legalese, I must say that's pretty damn concerning. 

Nick


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Wow, that's very concerning. 

Did someone make an alternative to Kboards recently? It might be time to start thinking about that. We're authors, the idea that we're signing over all rights of any words to someone else in such a broad fashion isn't making me feel warm and fuzzy.


----------



## unkownwriter

Um. I don't like those terms at all we should have been notified there was going to be this sort of language in the TOS.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot

Hell no. This is not cool. Between this and the skeevy ads, this whole new ownership thing feels dirty, and not in a good way.


----------



## 101569

she-la-ti-da said:


> Um. I don't like those terms at all we should have been notified there was going to be this sort of language in the TOS.


We definitely should have been notified!



WasAnn said:


> Wow, that's very concerning.
> 
> Did someone make an alternative to Kboards recently? It might be time to start thinking about that. We're authors, the idea that we're signing over all rights of any words to someone else in such a broad fashion isn't making me feel warm and fuzzy.


Especially private messages. Some of us share parts of our books in these pm. I am not giving them rights to my words. 
Switching forums might be a very good idea

So many places have been adding interesting things into their TOS without really notifying people. I have noticed apps and games putting in there that they can record and sell everything you say as well as access and sell all your content on your phone including pictures. My mother had an app start taking random pictures without her consent or knowledge.


----------



## unkownwriter

Changed my profile, got rid of stuff. My stuff is mine, and I never gave anyone permission to potentially use any of it. I'd given this board six months. Now I wonder if it has that long.


----------



## Ellie L

Changing my profile as well. I don't like it either.


----------



## Guest

No, I do not agree to that. Wonder how many of us they will ban for refusing to accept those terms?


----------



## ImaWriter

WasAnn said:


> Did someone make an alternative to Kboards recently? It might be time to start thinking about that. We're authors, the idea that we're signing over all rights of any words to someone else in such a broad fashion isn't making me feel warm and fuzzy.


Yes.

https://indieauthorhaven.freeforums.net/


----------



## Trioxin 245

The company that now owns kboards had six websites hacked and users information including passwords/messages stolen. In fairness, there were a lot of hits like that happening awhile back, it was not just them. But it is a reminder than anything you post online is never private or yours.


----------



## Nicholas Erik

penpapernovel said:


> I would love to find a message board for writers that is NOT indexed by Google and has "can't read until you register" forums (as in you can see the forums exist but can't read the posts unless you're a registered member). I hate that so many are open and indexed by search engines. It's one reason I never posted much on Kboards even though I would have liked to.
> 
> These new TOS and the changes made since the sale are saying this community is heading for an ugly end if things continue this way.
> 
> If anyone has recs for a forum like I described, please post!


Dirty Discourse. It's $5/mo and has all of those features.

Nick


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Seriously...anyone know of a board we can migrate to that isn't erotica and doesn't have TOS that says they own what you write? Even if it's paid.


----------



## Alan Petersen

I believe all forums have that. It's boilerplate default that comes installed when you set up a forum. I would be surprised if that verbiage hasn't been there since the beginning especially since this forum uses Simple Machines software. Go to any forum out there and click on their terms and search for "perpetual" dollars to donuts you'll find that in there too. Not saying it's not freaky but I don't think it's something the new owners are slipping in there recently.


----------



## Nicholas Erik

Alan Petersen said:


> I believe all forums have that. It's boilerplate default that comes installed when you set up a forum. I would be surprised if that verbiage hasn't been there since the beginning especially since this forum uses Simple Machines software. Go to any forum out there and click on their terms and search for "perpetual" dollars to donuts you'll find that in there too. Not saying it's not freaky but I don't think it's something the new owners are slipping in there recently.


Yeah, I looked at bodybuilding.com's TOS (not running Simple Machines, from what I can tell), and YouTube's TOS, and they have language in there about being granted various rights to use content that's being posted (obvious disclaimer: not a lawyer, there may be nuances I'm not seeing). Seems standard.

Crisis averted, IMO. Carry on.

Also, for those interested, Dirty Discourse isn't really an erotica forum. It's more business-oriented and there are a number of authors who write standard genre fiction. They just don't have the swear/topic filters that exist on KBoards. It's worth registering for a month to check out, at the very least (I'm not currently a member, just because the number of sub-forums makes browsing and finding information a pain, IMO).

Nick


----------



## nomas

Terms like these are the reason I stopped using Blogger--it can use whatever you post as it pleases. Sad to see them here. Guess I'll be leaving.


----------



## ShayneRutherford

WasAnn said:


> I just went and looked at their TOS as well. Seems like what we post there can be used too. Yikes.


Which part of the TOS, WasAnn? I looked, but couldn't see it.


----------



## 77071

I withhold my consent. If I am banned for that I expect all data on me to be deleted.

Everything I've posted.  Anything that's been harvested from me.

I've shared advice and experience through the years here, in the spirit of sharing openly with other indies.  Sometimes I've shared things I regret, such as when sharing what a hungry market I wrote to soon led to a bunch of "marketers" (and botters) hitting the genre hard.  I'm not so naive lately.  (Of course that could have been a total coincidence, as a lot of genres were hit hard around the same time.)

I certainly do NOT consent to have anything about my profile, writing here, or anything else about me/ my writing/ my books harvested by VerticalScope for any use: advertising, monetary, or other.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

ShayneRutherford said:


> Which part of the TOS, WasAnn? I looked, but couldn't see it.


When you register, right at the end when you click the "agree to terms of service" if you click the link, it opens up the expected page of war and peace level verbiage. Keep going and you'll see it. Or just search on the page for some of the keywords and you'll get to it. And that's BEFORE you get to the privacy terms, which is a whole other page.


----------



## going going gone

HSh said:


> I withhold my consent. If I am banned for that I expect all data on me to be deleted.
> 
> Everything I've posted. Anything that's been harvested from me.
> 
> I've shared advice and experience through the years here, in the spirit of sharing openly with other indies. Sometimes I've shared things I regret, such as when sharing what a hungry market I wrote to soon led to a bunch of "marketers" (and botters) hitting the genre hard. I'm not so naive lately. (Of course that could have been a total coincidence, as a lot of genres were hit hard around the same time.)
> 
> I certainly do NOT consent to have anything about my profile, writing here, or anything else about me/ my writing/ my books harvested by VerticalScope for any use: advertising, monetary, or other.


sounds smart.


----------



## Avis Black

None of my forum posts are sellable or monetizable, in the sense of actually persuading someone to cough up good money to read my posts, which are publicly available anyway.  It's not worth monetizing anything if you can't get someone to pay.  I've put up a few book reviews of stuff I've read, some of which are cross-posted to Goodreads, but those reviews have already done all the 'selling' for those books that any reviews can manage to get.  

I'm inclined to wait and see if they do anything bad. If they do, I'd delete everything I could and my account as well.


----------



## Alan Petersen

Not sure if just declaring an objection does anything.






We all checked the little tick-box agreeing to the terms when we registered. I think the only way to get scrubbed is to ask the tech people that run the site to delete your account and all your posts from the database. But as I've mentioned above I would suspect just about every forum out there has that type of verbiage in their terms which we agree to when registering for the forum.

That other forum Indie Author Haven is hosted on a free ProBoards forum which has the same exact verbiage (see #4):
https://www.proboards.com/tos

And there you giving it to a third-party, ProBoards.

I'm not a lawyer or anything so this just my take on things. Consult an attorney to see if just writing a post taking it back is enough.


----------



## eleutheria

I somehow think the new owners would be willing to use that part of the TOS in ways we don't like a lot more than the old owners were, regardless of whether the new owners added or if it's always been there.


----------



## Guest

I'm a Little Teapot said:


> Hell no. This is not cool. Between this and the skeevy ads, this whole new ownership thing feels dirty, and not in a good way.


I'm a newbie here and will probably delete my account. I've not contributed enough here to make a difference.

I've been a longtime member (also moderator) of the Blueboards--a kidlit writing community started by Verla Kay and it was bought by SCBWI and it's clean with different levels of privacy--the open board, the registered members, the SCBWI section for paying members, etc. We had tech issues while merging but things run smoothly now. If anybody has interest, they can probably contact her to see how to set up a forum without the nonsense.


----------



## bdwilson

According to the wayback machine, this ToS wasn't there at least back in March. This is the copy they have of the previous registration agreement (from July 2017): 


Code:


http://web.archive.org/web/20170701054543/https://www.kboards.com:80/show-reg-agreement.php

(That was the only thing I saw that resembled a terms of service.)

Those are very different. A change this size should have required us to opt-in again.

Edit: Link fail. Forum keeps changing the kboards URL to https and breaking the way back link. So, uh, I guess take the s out?


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

I always, as a matter of course, read all terms when signing up to any apps, websites, or other services. This is not a simple boilerplate. It resembles an odious paragraph which appears in several less reputable services. It is a section which always sends me away from whoever is using it. Yes, there are paragraphs similar to this in almost every forum's terms of service, however the wording is different in critical ways which alter the meaning to be much less odious and purely about what they require to legally display what you post within the scope of the website. This one is about ownership, as well as further exploitation of material, and has no end of licence or whatever to allow a writer to cancel the relationship. 

I do not grant the consent this change demands. I will never grant the ownership this change demands.

I was not notified of the change, and it was certainly a change. If this was in the terms when I first signed up, I would have cancelled my membership on the spot.

Also, can somebody point me to the information about this "new owner" thing? It's the first I have heard of it.

As a result I have changed my display name, deleted my signature, and the posts being too many to go through and delete, I have scanned through and taken out any images or blurbs or valuable content regarding my works. I will consider deleting everything based on the response from the site.


----------



## bdwilson

M R Mortimer said:


> Also, can somebody point me to the information about this "new owner" thing? It's the first I have heard of it.


The announcement can be found here: https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,265925.0.html


----------



## VirginiaMcClain

Just throwing in with everyone else who has stated here that I do not give consent to this change of terms. Nor shall I ever give said consent.


----------



## johannesrexx

Once again we are reminded that when a service is free, we are the product. Always read the EULA. And yes an unethical company will simply post whatever terms and conditions they like in some dirty obscure little corner of its website and change it whenever the mood strikes them.

South Park even did an episode on the importance of reading the EULA. It's called _HumancentiPad_.

I'm very pleased that Lynn Is a Pseudonym was alert to this and shared it. Now we can make informed choices. Thank you.

Maybe paying $5/month to be free from oppressive and exploitative EULAs is worth it. Privacy and freedom matter.

Best wishes to all of you.


----------



## 98700

This is bollocks. There's no reasonable reason at all that the site needs those rights. But, like with the ads, this doesn't surprise me, considering the new owners.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

bdwilson said:


> The announcement can be found here: https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,265925.0.html


Thanks for that. I feel that these changes betray the legacy of Harvey and his family, and break the spirit of the sale of kboards. This is not on, not acceptable, and to be forgivable requires serious backpedalling and change of attitude within the mindset of the new owners. I am greatly saddened, as this feels like a loss of home and a shattering of bonds. I miss Harvey like we all do - he an his family built this wonderful place, and sold it in good faith when it was the right time for them to do so. the actions of the new owners have been seemless so far, but then we find out this has been slipped past us in the background, and it feels like a total betrayal. I will miss kboards, and if this change is not reversed, I will have to find a new home.


----------



## AltMe

penpapernovel said:


> I would love to find a message board for writers that is NOT indexed by Google and has "can't read until you register" forums (as in you can see the forums exist but can't read the posts unless you're a registered member). I hate that so many are open and indexed by search engines.
> If anyone has recs for a forum like I described, please post!





WasAnn said:


> Seriously...anyone know of a board we can migrate to that isn't erotica and doesn't have TOS that says they own what you write? Even if it's paid.


It's not difficult to build a new site, where nothing can be read without being registered. All you need is your own site, and the right up to date forum software.

Such things like the offending wording here, can be edited as part of the installation. And you can make areas visible to the non-registered, and completely private, including sections for specific people only.

I've done this a number of times in the past. The main problem is, not enough people move to the new forum to make it viable, and given a few month down the track, the few dozen starters drop out because there are no new people joining.

One thing I am very disappointed about was the fact the previous owners didn't offer to sell to forum users first, either as a collective, or to someone for whom the costs of running the forum are not even an issue. We didn't even know the forum was for sale, and I for one would have been interested in buying it. I may not have been able to raise the price, but there are people here who could have.

I can build an alternative forum, without the ads, without the rights issues, without the post editing, but still moderated as fairly as possible. It can have more areas, such as for craft and marketing, keeping the posts separate. But we'd lose a lot of the tools, including the signature maker.

But will anyone use it? Probably not. I would set one up if a couple of hundred people wanted it, all of whom are here daily. Otherwise, it isn't worth the effort.

I think it is worth doing, but it needs a significant number of people who not only register there on day 1, but actively post every day, the same as here.

My experience though is people never like to move, regardless of the problems where they are. I've been monitoring the recently set up board, which has the same issues as mentioned in this thread, and while it gets posts, it's not what I call viable yet, and possibly never will be.

It might be simpler to get a group together and attempt to buy Kboards back from the new owners.


----------



## Alan Petersen

bdwilson said:


> According to the wayback machine, this ToS wasn't there at least back in March. This is the copy they have of the previous registration agreement (from July 2017):
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> http://web.archive.org/web/20170701054543/https://www.kboards.com:80/show-reg-agreement.php
> 
> (That was the only thing I saw that resembled a terms of service.)
> 
> Those are very different. A change this size should have required us to opt-in again.
> 
> Edit: Link fail. Forum keeps changing the kboards URL to https and breaking the way back link. So, uh, I guess take the s out?


Interesting. It does look like Vertical Scope added the new terms. The link to that verbiage in on their URL. So looks like Harvey didn't have that verbiage in there and the new owners added it. I do agree such a big change should have at the very least resulted in an email warning to read the new terms to re-confirm we accept the changes/new terms.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

I once ran a large and popular forum, and when it closed, the thing that was lost was not simply the forum, it was the community - comprised of tens of thousands of people who read the forum and many of those who posted to it. We are the valuable part of kboards. So if we move, we move on mass, and the community - that is us - lives on somewhere else. It is not expensive to run a simple forum, where you are not providing masses of downloads or other bandwidth intensive things. My old gaming forum had dozens of gigabytes of user created download files, and still did not break the bank. But it broke the clock. This is one thing that kills new forums - the creators time is always limited, and keeping it lively enough to reach critical mass and float above the dross of the Internet takes that most critical resource. So you need a great team, and that is what I guess they thought they were selling kboards to.


----------



## Guest

The problem with new writer forums is a complex issue. You first need to achieve critical mass, which can take forever. You then have to have a forum that is properly managed, which takes people. Nobody likes to feel they're in a vacuum so you also need to have a means of making it worth the author's while to be there and post - ergo you need readers and fans. It then becomes a full-time job that also requires servers and bandwidth which means a revenue stream is required. All of this requires commitment. Then you have the biggest problem of all which is balance. How do you ensure that the posting, management, moderation and control is kept even-handed. Kboards isn't and not many others I know are either. If you have authors controlling authors you're going to get issues with bullying, intimidation and pressure to conform to one group's standards. You need clear-cut rules of engagement, clearly defined protocols for handling disputes, proper management of offenders and above all a means of redress for all. In addition, you need to provide a balanced platform for major issues without curtailing the right of an individual's freedom of speech. Not an easy task and there are few forums up to the task of managing all that.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

Lynn Is A Pseudonym said:


> I normally don't think of stuff like this as bothersome, but I know some of you use your author names as your usernames, and you could find your words used to promote this site on other vertical scope websites.
> 
> Unless I'm reading this wrong.
> 
> Anyway, not sure it's a problem, but you know how it goes. Someone's nice today and a bear tomorrow.


This is not enforceable in law if not agreed to at the time of joining. It is a bluff, and if a lawsuit arose regarding misuse of a contributor's material, the contributor would win as no contract can be enforced if not initially agreed to by both parties. Nothing can be legally binding if the person involved was not made aware of the conditions. It is like those signs in stores that claim that by entering you are agreeing to have your bags searched on exit. They are not valid, and where court cases have arisen, the store has lost.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I know that there was some language at some point in our ToS that allowed things posted here to be used in advertisement; I remember a conversation about it when Harvey still ran the forum. If I can find it, I'll post it, but it was years ago.

Someone asked about PMs. PMs are private. We cannot see people's PMs unless a recipient reports the PM using the in-PM report feature.

Someone else asked about editing posts. I believe that our mod staff is extremely ethical and is committed to only removing material that violates Forum Decorum. However, if a moderator has edited a post, the fact that an edit has been made is shown in the post and that fact (though not the actual edit) is tracked in a database of moderator actions. If you disagree with a moderator edit, you can report the post and request we review that moderator's actions. You can also delete the post if you think it no longer reflects your views as long as it doesn't start the thread. You can contact the owners using the contact link at the bottom of every KBoards page.

I hope this clarifies a couple of issues that were raised in this thread.

Betsy
KB Admin


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

Not just that, but two critical words in that are "irrevocable," and "perpetual," meaning those rights being claimed can never be rolled back under these terms.


----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## Guest

LL2018 said:


> OTOH, it looks like this is their boilerplate ToS for all their sites, and very few of the sites they have now seem to deal with original creative works where that kind of overbroad claim would be alarming.


That shouldn't reassure you much. It might be that this amendment was written specifically for KBoards, but for the appearance of normality it might have rolled across to all of their other forums to 'hide their duplicity'.

Whichever, you have [to] decide whether to share information on here, or not. Considering the possibilities I would guess most of the savvy authors on here would choose to NOT participate (me included, not that I'm savvy, but I read stuff  )


----------



## VanessaC

"... Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM *the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information* as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM"

(emphasis mine)

So, I think we all know and understand that posts here a public and searchable - anyone can find our posts with a google search. I certainly keep that in mind when I'm posting here.

I'm not absolutely happy with the whole clause as it seems awfully wide but, without reading the articles linked by LL2018, it seems to me that LL2018 is right - the only way to get this overturned would be a Court action. And that's not easy, as we know.

I think it would be useful, at minimum, to have some kind of heads up or explanation from the new owners about how they would intend to use this clause in practice. It may be that it's never used - still doesn't make it a great clause to have, but less concerning in practice. And I fully agree that this kind of change should have been flagged up to us - it's not hard for the owners to put a pinned post up saying "hey, we've changed the TOS, please check".

However, the bit I've picked out in the quote above is of some concern because a lot of us (including me) have user names for our interactions here and pen names for our writing. The bit highlighted would suggest that Kboards can (potentially) use our legal names next to bits quoted from the site and I am not cool with that. I'm ok with my username being used, because I knew that would be public when I signed up to the forum and started posting. I am not ok with Kboards using my legal name. If I wanted my legal name to be used, I would be using that and not a user name / pen name.


----------



## AltMe

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Someone else asked about editing posts. I believe that our mod staff is extremely ethical and is committed to only removing material that violates Forum Decorum. However, if a moderator has edited a post, the fact that an edit has been made is shown in the post and that fact (though not the actual edit) is tracked in a database of moderator actions. If you disagree with a moderator edit, you can report the post and request we review that moderator's actions. You can also delete the post if you think it no longer reflects your views as long as it doesn't start the thread. You can contact the owners using the contact link at the bottom of every KBoards page.


My issue here, is the fact that you do not notify someone a post has been modified. I NEVER read back a thread. The only way I found out I'd had a post modified in the past was re-reading a thread I'd forgotten I'd read, and found my own post with a mod edit on it. I've since found a few when I went hunting for a previous post I wanted to quote before something else I was about to quote on. Once I found more posts of mine edited, I had no idea what the edits were.

I personally don't use an editor for my books, and I find it offensive to have my posts edited at all. I've said this before. I will accept a post being deleted for not following rules, but editing changes everything. I've gone back and deleted posts I know were edited, but how many more are there? I don't know, because the mod doing the editing never told me it was edited.

And here we get to the problem now. If the owners quote one of my edited by a mod posts, without the edited comment on the bottom, I suddenly am responsible for something I didn't know what was edited, and doesn't say what I actually said, with potentially disastrous context misunderstandings.

I dont mind the fact the place is public. But using what is here somewhere else without us even being able to verify it is what we actually said, is really bad. And like others, I do NOT agree to this policy. I've never seen it presented to me, and have had no opportunity to opt out.

But here's my thing: If this policy stands, editing posts by mods must STOP, and be replaced by deleting the whole post.


----------



## nail file

TimothyEllis said:


> My issue here, is the fact that you do not notify someone a post has been modified. I NEVER read back a thread. The only way I found out I'd had a post modified in the past was re-reading a thread I'd forgotten I'd read, and found my own post with a mod edit on it. I've since found a few when I went hunting for a previous post I wanted to quote before something else I was about to quote on. Once I found more posts of mine edited, I had no idea what the edits were.


This is really concerning. I understand why the moderators may want to edit posts but the nature of the internet means many don't respect the whole post, which would include the wording by the mod that it was edited. Nefarious quoters could drop that part and the words that were modified are now attributed to the original poster.

That's worrisome enough. On top of this? I'm glad I only have 4 posts now.

brb, going to change all my information so it's not used.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Personally, I think the mods do a fantastic job. I have zero problem with that.

It's the scope of the TOS that's changed and is not like anything I feel comfortable with. Essentially, it says they can use anything at all, including private personal information not actually available on the boards, in any way they want forever and ever in *any business* they ever come to own.

Think about that. Imagine Google doing that? 

This new TOS taken in a google context would allow Alphabet to take text out of an email where you rave about your new toothbrush to your mom. Next thing you know, your words, "I love it! I don't know how I lived without this my whole life!" are suddenly plastered on the review page of one of the latest start-ups they bought with app-based vibrator performance. 

Seriously, such a broad TOS isn't meant to be kind or protect anyone from liability. It's meant to allow for a widespread harvesting of all material, including private material not actually on the front page, and using it for any means they want. If they buy a porn site? Sure, why not use a post from a famous romance author talking about dictation software an slipping that in as an endorsement for the new porn site. 

Likely? No, but then again, this is a situation without limits of any kind. That's always dangerous.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

If you don't consent, but then you continue to use a service, then you imply consent.


----------



## Mike Coville

> KBOARDS.COM reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time, and you agree that each visit you make to


This is what gives them the power to make changes without announcing them. As soon as you VISIT the site, you agree to the newest term posted.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Douglas Milewski said:


> If you don't consent, but then you continue to use a service, then you imply consent.


To a change for which you received no notification? I'm not sure that would hold up.

On one hand, the language is boilerplate. I haven't looked recently, but a long time ago, when I was first uploading to YouTube, I checked their TOS, and it has very similar language. That means YouTube could theoretically do whatever it wanted with people's videos, including sell them. Yet it doesn't. I think the language is intended to allow YouTube to display things as it wishes on the site, use excerpts in ads, etc. The intent isn't sinister at all, and the existence of the language has not caused a mass exodus from YouTube.

That said, I'm not any happier than anybody else with such sweeping language. I hereby serve notice to the new owners that I do not agree to the TOS changes (which I was never given the opportunity to accept or reject). They are at liberty to delete my account. If they do not do so, I will take that as implied acceptance of my refusal.

Hey, Kboards members who live in the EU--can you bring a complaint under GDPR? As I recall, don't you have to be notified of this kind of change and have the opportunity to refuse it?

As far as starting a new forum is concerned, I'm in. Just let me know where it is.


----------



## ilamont

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I hope this clarifies a couple of issues that were raised in this thread.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Admin


Unfortunately, it doesn't clarify the issue with the unjustified rights grab in the new TOS.

I appreciate the hard work of you and the other mods, but on this issue the owners need to step up and remove or adjust this language ASAP ... or there will be an exodus.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Mike Coville said:


> This is what gives them the power to make changes without announcing them. As soon as you VISIT the site, you agree to the newest term posted.


Yes, but was that in the language originally? If not, I doubt they can enforce it against people who signed up earlier than the change, at least not without notification.


----------



## Nicholas

Vijaya said:


> I'm a newbie here and will probably delete my account. I've not contributed enough here to make a difference.


Vijaya, I think you are a treasure to this community. I always appreciate your posts.


----------



## Sapphire

blank


----------



## CathleenT

Well, shoot. My covers are posted on here. Does that mean that kboards now owns my covers? I'd hate to find out later that my covers are no longer mine.

ETA: If that's the case, I'm going to invoke the GDPR right to be forgotten.


----------



## jb1111

I seem to recall a controversy concerning some of FB's TOS language, which hinted that all your photos are their property, once you post them on their site.

I think that all got cleared up, though. I think they all include such language so that if they use a screenshot of their site to advertise or whatever, you can't sue them if your user name shows up or perhaps your book cover shows up. But I'm just making a wild guess here, because I don't see any other reason why a forum would want to risk angering its users. That doesn't make business sense.


----------



## Guest

WasAnn said:


> It's the scope of the TOS that's changed and is not like anything I feel comfortable with. Essentially, it says they can use anything at all, including private personal information not actually available on the boards, in any way they want forever and ever in *any business* they ever come to own.
> 
> Think about that. Imagine Google doing that?
> 
> This new TOS taken in a google context would allow Alphabet to take text out of an email where you rave about your new toothbrush to your mom.


Google/Alphabet Corp does do that already. Their TOS claims the rights to any and all content transmitted through gmail. It has for a few years now.

Unfortunately, nowadays, as Nicholaus Erik posted, it's pretty standard for forums as well.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

A transfer of any rights in a copyright must be executed in writing by operation of federal law:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204

Any work fixed in a tangible medium is copyrighted the moment it is created:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101

Therefore any TOS provision that claims license in or ownership of any copyrighted work (including e-mail or forum posts) is unenforceable in the United States.


----------



## ilamont

Luke Everhart said:


> Google/Alphabet Corp does do that already. Their TOS claims the rights to any and all content transmitted through gmail. It has for a few years now.


With clear messaging that IP remains with the owner, and clarification that the license is for "the purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones" with examples (Google Maps, translations, etc.):



> Some of our Services allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.
> 
> When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.


Source: https://policies.google.com/terms?gl=US&hl=en#toc-content


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Not quite. By agreeing to the terms of service, you, the copyright holder are explicitly granting a non-exclusive license for them to use your copyrighted work.


That's the point. You can't grant a license in your copyright unless it's in writing and signed by you or your authorized agent. A second party can't unilaterally claim a license either, even if you check a box. It has to be in writing. That's the law.


----------



## 98700

Luke Everhart said:


> Google/Alphabet Corp does do that already. Their TOS claims the rights to any and all content transmitted through gmail. It has for a few years now.


This is why when I created my website, I went ahead and got a paid Google mail account (at my own domain). All the reliability of gmail, but the TOS doesn't include that "we can use your content" language.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> I've seen sites that say that, but I haven't found it in the US Copyright Law.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204

I didn't know about this myself until I started studying IP law for my M&L gigs. Copyright is a big heavy club. That's for sure.


----------



## AltMe

I've started a Facebook group called 'KB Relocation' (for now) for anyone who wants to discuss setting up a new forum. It may not go anywhere, but while it's easy to create one, doing it properly needs discussion.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/281305096034401/

It's a closed group, so it can be seen as a group, but only members can see who is a member or what is posted. Anyone who is a member can add anyone else. If you join in the next half hour, I can get you added, before I go to bed.

Please feel free to invite people who would be interested, or pass on the address.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204
> 
> I didn't know about this myself until I started studying IP law for my M&L gigs. Copyright is a big heavy club. That's for sure.


The cited passage specifically refers to transfer of ownership. The TOS here doesn't claim ownership. It claims a perpetual, nonexclusive license to use the content, which is a different thing.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

TimothyEllis said:


> I've started a Facebook group called 'KB Relocation' (for now) for anyone who wants to discuss setting up a new forum. It may not go anywhere, but while it's easy to create one, doing it properly needs discussion.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/281305096034401/
> 
> It's a closed group, so it can be seen as a group, but only members can see who is a member or what is posted. Anyone who is a member can add anyone else. If you join in the next half hour, I can get you added, before I go to bed.
> 
> Please feel free to invite people who would be interested, or pass on the address.


What would a new Kboards be called? OkBoards to differentiate it from the no longer ok Kboards?


----------



## MClayton

Bill Hiatt said:


> The cited passage specifically refers to transfer of ownership. The TOS here doesn't claim ownership. It claims a perpetual, nonexclusive license to use the content, which is a different thing.


Yes, that's my thought, too.


----------



## Guest

TimothyEllis said:


> I've started a Facebook group called 'KB Relocation' (for now) for anyone who wants to discuss setting up a new forum. It may not go anywhere, but while it's easy to create one, doing it properly needs discussion.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/281305096034401/
> 
> It's a closed group, so it can be seen as a group, but only members can see who is a member or what is posted. Anyone who is a member can add anyone else. If you join in the next half hour, I can get you added, before I go to bed.
> 
> Please feel free to invite people who would be interested, or pass on the address.


This doesn't make a lot of sense. Moving to a Facebook group out of privacy & content concerns is like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire a giant, raging active volcano.


----------



## 98700

vagabond.voyager said:


> What would a new Kboards be called? OkBoards to differentiate it from the no longer ok Kboards?


Well, considering the K in Kboards stands for Kindle, and Writers' Cafe is about a lot more than Kindle publishing (a great many of us are wide), maybe something that isn't a riff of Kboards would be better.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

LL2018 said:


> That is incorrect, at least in the US. Website Terms can be changed at any time - courts have held, though, that there are some hoops folks must jump through to re-agree for it to be binding, and how to properly notify people of substantial changes. Here's a general article, and a super-meaty article, on some of the issues.


I disagree. This is more than simply a website changing its TOS, this is an attempt to segue into a pretend contract reassigning copyright rights without discussion or permission. After half a lifetime in publishing, including in the US, and having experienced similar attempts to "squat" on rights, attempts that failed to succeed in court, I think that if challenged, this would fail as well. A contract, to be bulletproof in court, needs to be signed, witness, and acknowledged as clearly understood by both parties. Ticking a box online will never do it. Even Apple and Microsoft run on bluff with their TOS as they will never withstand a real legal challenge. One instance where such a case did go to court, it was dismissed on the basis that the party opposing a large retail organisation didn't understand the conditions or the contract. I'm far from being a lawyer, but I have decades of first-hand experience with contract law and copyright. We used to end up in litigation several times a year. Usually we lost on the basis that the contract was not clearly explained, understood and witnessed.


----------



## Diamond Eyes

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> Any work fixed in a tangible medium is copyrighted the moment it is created:
> 
> Therefore any TOS provision that claims license in or ownership of any copyrighted work (including e-mail or forum posts) is unenforceable in the United States.


Email and forum posts are considered a tangible medium?


----------



## Guest

There is nothing to be gained by jumping ship at this moment in time. Neither is there any need to go annononononymous because frankly, there's no point.

Why don't we put together a thread that people vote yes, or no in a poll and use that to unofficially protest to the owners (followed up with a letter from the author community - remember, without us, there is no forum).
Then, if they refuse to change the terms of the TOS, then we can consider moving en-masse to another forum that can be setup, preferably not 'on the hoof' by a few lone rangers, but with forethought and consideration for the whole community.


----------



## beccaprice

One of the things that I find most useful on this site is the ability to brainstorm ideas, and get feedback on them. I think I won't use that feature until this gets settled.

-Becca


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Email and forum posts are considered a tangible medium?


They are. The legal definition of "tangible medium" is covered in section 101.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101



> A work is "fixed" in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration. A work consisting of sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is "fixed" for purposes of this title if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously with its transmission.


Pretty much anything you write that isn't on a whiteboard or in beach sand is technically copyrighted.


----------



## 101569

I am semi trying not to freak out. I pm ed  large portions of my books to several people here and I did not do it knowing that they would have rights to my books. That is seriously scary!
I agree that we should give the owners the chance to respond to the community, but it never hurts to have a plan if their response is not satisfactory.


----------



## Guest

Sapphire said:


> Don't we all know that anything we write on a public site (and most private sites) anywhere on the internet are searchable? Those that aren't easily searchable can still be found by a tech-savvy sleuth. The days of privacy are long gone. This is a tough nut to swallow, especially for us "older" folk. Still, it is what it is.


The issue is not whether or not it is searchable. The issue is that the current change gives the owners the right to take what we post and profit from it in any business they chose.

Think of all of the excerpts that have been posted on these boards. Now imagine that they compiled them all in a book and started to sell them, or use them in a larger story? Think about the cover artists who post samples of their book covers on here now having to worry about someone taking those images and using them? Think about someone taking your name and image and using in in some advertising for an unrelated site owned by the new owners.

WILL they do any of that? Don't know. CAN THEY under the terms of the TOS? They could.

And, no, I do not agree to the TOS. They can kick me out and deactivate my account if they want to. But frankly, this is like walking into a restaurant and having the owner say, "just by walking in the door, you are giving us the right to use your image for anything we want, even commercial and even things unrelated to you dining here today." Well, no, I don't give you the right to use my image. You can tell me to leave your restaurant and I will, but you sure as heck aren't going to "force" me to give you a blanket right to my image just by virtue of entering the door and ordering food.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

This is starting to remind me of the conversation over EU jurisdiction in the United States. 

What you write in e-mail or on a message board cannot be taken by someone and used without your permission.  Under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, anything you fix in a tangible medium is copyrighted the moment you write or upload it.  You cannot transfer any of your exclusive rights in that copyright without a signed, written instrument by operation of federal law.  The fantasies contained in click-through agreements do not supersede Title 17 U.S.C. Section 204.


----------



## crebel

"General Terms of Use

By accessing KBOARDS.COM you are agreeing to be bound by these Web Site Terms & Conditions of Use and all applicable laws and regulations, and you agree that you are solely responsible for compliance with any applicable local laws. If you do not agree with any of these terms, do not use this site. Any claim relating to KBOARDS.COM shall be governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario, Canada. The materials contained on the Web Site are protected by applicable copyright and trademark laws."

I confess when welcoming the new owners in announcement thread, I had no clue we would now be operating under Canadian law of which I have zero knowledge.  I do not know how that changes the landscape yet again.


----------



## Patty Jansen

> However, sometimes I wonder why those who post a lot & overshare on FB forums or especially public Internet boards, w/out even attempting to make themselves anonymous, have to gain from it. B/c nothing comes for free on either side of the transaction & some people seem overly trusting to me of Internet strangers in the name of some notion of old fashioned 'community' or human interaction that really can't be replicated online the same way it is in real life.


I identify myself because I have nothing to hide. Those who want to go scope me out have twenty-five years worth of story to work through. I've been on the internet since 1993. I've used my own name all that time, and have used this email address since 2000. Seriously, go for it. Good luck, but get lots of coffee ready. My life is boring.

There are things you don't want shared. CC numbers, personal details that can be used as ID for banking etc. Stuff about other people who may not want to share it. The rest? That I went shopping this morning and my phone locality triggered ads for laptops because I ventured into a store to buy a USB cable? Seriously, go for it. I don't care. If it annoys me too much, I'll use an adblocker. But it amuses me.

I believe lack of anonymity and transparency fosters trust and trust fosters long term business relationships. I have nothing to hide.

Using material without consent. Well, that's kinda the premise of the internet. If you put it online, expect it to go places. If you don't want it to be used, don't put it online.

I think the wording of the TOS is crap, and would be happy with Google's version.


----------



## Alan Petersen

Al Stevens said:


> Free also means unfettered, unbound, not enslaved. etc. But you knew what I meant.


None of those words come to mind when I think about Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook.


----------



## PhoenixS

Of course, there's always the site backup and the archives. So, even if you've deleted posts, there's likely still a copy on the backup servers, which now belong to VerticalScope. And if you've changed your name, it's probably still traceable and attributable to your IP address.

The mods once wiped a url from one of my posts. I needed it for reporting purposes and asked one of the mods to retrieve it for me several months later. They were able to with little fuss. Just sayin'...


----------



## MClayton

Patty Jansen said:


> I identify myself because I have nothing to hide. Those who want to go scope me out have twenty-five years worth of story to work through. I've been on the internet since 1993. I've used my own name all that time, and have used this email address since 2000. Seriously, go for it. Good luck, but get lots of coffee ready. My life is boring.
> 
> There are things you don't want shared. CC numbers, personal details that can be used as ID for banking etc. Stuff about other people who may not want to share it. The rest? That I went shopping this morning and my phone locality triggered ads for laptops because I ventured into a store to buy a USB cable? Seriously, go for it. I don't care. If it annoys me too much, I'll use an adblocker. But it amuses me.
> 
> I believe lack of anonymity and transparency fosters trust and trust fosters long term business relationships. I have nothing to hide.
> 
> Using material without consent. Well, that's kinda the premise of the internet. If you put it online, expect it to go places. If you don't want it to be used, don't put it online.
> 
> I think the wording of the TOS is crap, and would be happy with Google's version.


This is my thought process, too. I use my real name and real photo nearly everywhere. I just recently updated here to my photo instead of an avatar because it's everywhere else, so may as well be here, too. Back when I was fourteen years old I wrote a racy "love" note to a boy that ultimately got into the hands of the high school football team. My fourteen-year-old life was in what qualifies as teen hell for a few weeks, but I never forgot the lesson: Don't post any comments in writing anywhere unless you'd be okay having them on a billboard in the middle of a very small town. (Super fun when you're the daughter of the only Methodist minister in the town, but that's another story. Yeah, that lesson stuck!)


----------



## Nicholas

Al Stevens said:


> You have no idea how easy it is to hide out in the open. Anonymity is indeed possible. To start, use an aliased handle and join and participate by using an anonymous Dark Web browser.


----------



## 77071

It's not some identity thing I'm worried about.  I don't want them claiming to own anything I've written, or making money off my words, or doing scammy things with whatever information they're harvesting from me.


----------



## AltMe

Luke Everhart said:


> This doesn't make a lot of sense. Moving to a Facebook group out of privacy & content concerns is like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire a giant, raging active volcano.


You misunderstand.

The FB group is simply to discuss how to set up a new forum. Issues like domain and forum name, content, and what the registration message should actually say, etc etc etc. Its just a place for initial discussion.

I could set up a new forum now, but no-on would go there. Doing a temporary FB group where issues can be discussed first, and the any forum which follows can be what people really want, makes the difference between wasted effort, and something which works.



Phoenix61 said:


> I PMed Phillip, the forum administrator advising him to comment in this thread about their intentions. That was yesterday, still no comment or PM in return. I do not agree to the new terms and do not consent. I have already deleted all my messages and changed my profile.


I've also PMed the new Admin on several issues, without response.

How do you delete all your posts? Is there a delete everything option somewhere?

Given your posts, there are now some significant threads with big holes in the flow. If enough people who regularly contribute do this, the existing threads will become unreadable.


----------



## catowned

I signed up a few months back under the Harvey user agreement (his tos). I wouldn't have signed up with this new kb tos and I won't consent to it.
I have no problem with posts being public or publicly searchable. That's the whole point of the site.

Most forum sites have wording that user content is used to provide the service, and for promotion. 
But most do not have wording to sublicense or create derivative works. Even youtube doesn't. 
This is facebook/instagram level, thought even facebook/instagram allow that licensing and use to end (except in certain circumstances) if privacy settings change or if the account is deleted. This new kb tos doesn't do that.

We post here often about protecting and respecting intellectual property rights.

So there's the new kb mobile site that requires cookies and then sets persistent cookies. Deleting cookies doesn't delete those.
On the laptop, when signing in from the EU, there's the required cookies acknowledgement  that grants consent to a plethora of partner companies in addition to kboards. You don't see that when signing in from the US.
And there's this new tos.

I haven't been here long. I could post more than I do. I'm in to move.

Also, for those who've pm'd their writing, and to the mods.
pms aren't private and they are included as user content in the new tos. 
Mods may not be able to see pms, but the owner certainly can see them and can use the content.


----------



## AltMe

catowned said:


> Mods may not be able to see pms, but the owner certainly can see them and can use the content.


If that's true, this is something which has been changed from earlier versions of the software.

On the older versions of phpBB I've used in the past, as owner, there was zero access to PM's within the forum.

Presumably writing a custom data miner to trawl the database itself is possible though.


----------



## Simply_Me

TimothyEllis said:


> You misunderstand.
> 
> The FB group is simply to discuss how to set up a new forum. Issues like domain and forum name, content, and what the registration message should actually say, etc etc etc. Its just a place for initial discussion.
> 
> I could set up a new forum now, but no-on would go there. Doing a temporary FB group where issues can be discussed first, and the any forum which follows can be what people really want, makes the difference between wasted effort, and something which works.


I have a suggestion, that it might accommodate those who distrust FB.

Since Amazon knows everything about most of us, an alternative location for a secret group to discuss the new forum, could be a Goodreads group. We can use our authors accounts, or readers accounts.

Most of us are members, and like I said above, what else can Amazon learn about us?

Besides, the interface is pretty easy to navigate, and it has all the features of FB groups, without giving away our real identities and family connections. Because FB will connect everybody in a way or another.

Even if we create a provisional FB account, just for the group, FB will use our new account and email it as possible friends, or people who one might know. Well, we all got those emails, right? I know they do that, because I have two different pen names accounts. And I get invitation to befriend my pen names in my personal account. And it's not just for the IP, they use other methods to match people together.

Well, it's just a suggestion. If it's not a good one, please let me know how to join the FB group again. I didn't understand what it's necessary to do in your first post.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

TimothyEllis said:


> If that's true, this is something which has been changed from earlier versions of the software.
> 
> On the older versions of phpBB I've used in the past, as owner, there was zero access to PM's within the forum.
> 
> Presumably writing a custom data miner to trawl the database itself is possible though.


 I feel it would be possible to trawl the database and read whatever records are there. The PMs are stored somewhere in that forum database. SO if you have access to the database directly, which an owner should because you might need such to fix a broken something or other one day, then yes, they can with some effort read anything in it. Mods would never have such access though.


----------



## Simon Haynes

select * from PMs where USERID = 'xyz';

That's all you'd have to type if it's based on an sql database, and taking a guess at the field names.

or, if you wanted the lot:

select * from PMs

Not much effort required, that's for sure.


----------



## Jerri Kay Lincoln

I DO NOT give my consent, and since that is not the TOS that was in effect at the time I signed up, I am not bound by it.


----------



## AltMe

Simply_J said:


> Since Amazon knows everything about most of us, an alternative location for a secret group to discuss the new forum, could be a Goodreads group. We can use our authors accounts, or readers accounts.


I find GR one of the most frustrating sites ever. And I think if you look at the ToS, it will have everything we dont like in it as well.

I also dislike the forum interface. Quite intensely.

The thing about having a private site is it's totally customization to the level the admin wants to, or people ask for.

Discussion on the FB group is now in progress. I've posted a number of threads on various issues for people to comment on.


----------



## Queen Mab

Thanks for doing this, Timothy.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

kw3000 said:


> While anonymity is not possible, it is possible to 'in effect' withdraw whatever implied consent has been attributed to me by going back and deleting all of my posts, removing thumbnails from my signature of books carrying my name, and changing my display name to something more non-descript.


This is pretty much what I've done. I'm not going to delete my posts (3000! I don't think so). This is a public forum, and a lot of those posts were written to be helpful to other authors, so I'm happy for them to stay. If anyone wants to put in the work to monetise them, I don't much care.

But I DO care about my name being bandied about in a commercial manner without my say-so, and ditto my book covers. Maybe it would never happen, but as someone pointed out upthread, if a clause is in there, it's always possible that it will be used one day. I have no idea what the legal position is on all this, but by removing my real name and covers from my profile, I'm making it clear that I don't give my permission for them to be used. I'm not trying to hide my identity, just make a point.

I should add that I've been online continuously since CompuServe days, and this is the first time I've ever felt I needed to use a pseudonym rather than my real name.


----------



## Klip

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018.


----------



## AltMe

Masha du Toit said:


> If there is going to be a move to another platform, I want to know if any of the moderators who work here, are going to be part of it. They are the people who've kept the writer's cafe going, and if they moved across too, I'd be way more confident of the new group's chances. Good moderation is essential for the survival of any online forum, especially a writer's discussion group.


I wouldn't have a problem with it, but I doubt they would be interested due to workload here. If they care to join the discussion in the new FB group, they are welcome, as is everyone, author or reader, who would like to contribute.



Masha du Toit said:


> I would be surprised if the new owners much cared if Writer's Cafe ceased to be.


Good point.

And if WC went down the WC here, the mods might find themselves bored just looking after what is left.


----------



## Secret Pen Pal

For the record, I don't agree with the new TOS.

I'm curious, is there an efficient way to mass-delete forum posts? Maybe a macro?

I've run into the same issue with an old AOL account now under one of the worst privacy violation policies I've seen. 

No doubt they can mine servers, but I'd still like to remove everything. Giving i


----------



## Secret Pen Pal

For the record, I don't agree with the new TOS.

I'm curious, is there an efficient way to mass-delete forum posts? Maybe a macro? 

I've run into the same issue with an old AOL account now under one of the worst privacy violation policies I've seen. 

No doubt they can mine servers, but I'd still like to remove everything. Giving it a couple days to see if there's any response.

I agree with the posts about taking care with what we post anywhere. I've seen many instances of screen shots presented out of context. The potential for abuse is significant and not something I support even in a cloaked account. Unfortunately, complete privacy protection doesn't seem possible. I still don't want to support such garbage as the new TOS here.


----------



## Susanne O

I run a small, very private forum for writers that has been running for for over four years (with some KB members posting there too). Only twenty or so active members, so it's small but as I said private and nobody steals whatever you write. Members only so passers-by can't see your posts. But I don't want it to be so huge I can't manage it, so if you join now, I'll accept another fifty or so for now.

http://thewriterspub.proboards.com/


----------



## AltMe

Susanne. said:


> I run a small, very private forum for writers that has been running for for over four years (with some KB members posting there too). Only twenty or so active members, so it's small but as I said private and nobody steals whatever you write. Members only so passers-by can't see your posts. But I don't want it to be so huge I can't manage it, so if you join now, I'll accept another fifty or so for now.
> 
> http://thewriterspub.proboards.com/


Proboards has already been identified as having the same ToS issues.


----------



## Susanne O

TimothyEllis said:


> Proboards has already been identified as having the same ToS issues.


Really? I didn't know that. Must take a look.. In any case I run the forum and the posts are confidential as much as they can be these days. No Internet is safe, not even Facebook or Goodreads.


----------



## Guest

Despite the new TOS (which can be changed if desired by those in power) I STILL believe that KBoards is central to all our needs. If any forum was to be mooted as a replacement it's going to need to have everything that is available here with a plus. I defy any of you to write and survive in a vacuum and if you go into a private group that reflects only your own views and outlooks, then that's what you will be doing.

One of the big draws (for me) is the extremely wide range of views on here. Coupled with that, the reach of each and every author with their readers and followers is second to none, excepting BookBub. Why would you jump this ship for a rudderless, motorless, inflatable dinghy with only one oar?

Instead of all of this negativity, why aren't you all doing something positive and looking at ways that we can turn this negative into a plus and organise sweeping changes to the way the boards operate. You're obviously dissatisfied, so why not organise yourselves into a strong resistance movement and get talking to the management.  Better the devil you know than risking the deep blue sea in a skiff.

Like many on here, I'm very experienced in running online forums. So much so that I recognise that what you're all looking for is already here and isn't easily copied or replaced. So, do yourselves a big favour and instead of discussing leaving, discuss change and change the forum for the betterment of everyone.


----------



## Vidya

“Instead of all of this negativity, why aren't you all doing something positive and looking at ways that we can turn this negative into a plus and organise sweeping changes to the way the boards operate. You're obviously dissatisfied, so why not organise yourselves into a strong resistance movement and get talking to the management.  Better the devil you know than risking the deep blue sea in a skiff.”

To be honest, some of us have issues with the moderation as well. These issues have been raised recently and many of us arent satisfied with the answers we were given, especially with regard to RH and what could be said about her. And then there was Melody’s helpful post warning us about a designer who copied famous images, and that post was modded into meaninglessness too.

We can’t insist the moderation change to any significant extent; it’s not really our place to insist on that. So the alternative is to set up a new place where we agree on what kind of moderation we want.


----------



## Guest

Vidya said:


> To be honest, some of us have issues with the moderation as well. These issues have been raised recently and many of us arent satisfied with the answers we were given, especially with regard to RH and what could be said about her. And then there was Melody's helpful post warning us about a designer who copied famous images, and that post was modded into meaninglessness too.
> 
> We can't insist the moderation change to any significant extent; it's not really our place to insist on that. So the alternative is to set up a new place where we agree on what kind of moderation we want.


You're preaching to the choir. I've been released from 6 months plus in purgatory just through this thread. I know the moderation needs changing as I said in an earlier post, but that's easily resolved if there is a structure instead of a private discussion between moderators out of hearing of the forum. There's no need to move if we can have acceptable changes in the _'modus operandi'_ of the forum.

[edit to add]
The very fact that I've been allowed to participate in this discussion implies a willingness on the part of the management to listen to the views of [ALL] the members on here. Me included.


----------



## AltMe

Susanne. said:


> Really? I didn't know that. Must take a look.. In any case I run the forum and the posts are confidential as much as they can be these days. No Internet is safe, not even Facebook or Goodreads.


Most of the public forum provider sites are the same as far as ToS goes. Which is why a new private site is being proposed. Being on a private site means you can have whatever is acceptable as ToS.



TobiasRoote said:


> Despite the new TOS (which can be changed if desired by those in power) I STILL believe that KBoards is central to all our needs. If any forum was to be mooted as a replacement it's going to need to have everything that is available here with a plus. I defy any of you to write and survive in a vacuum and if you go into a private group that reflects only your own views and outlooks, then that's what you will be doing.


That's the plan. Everything here, plus a lot more. Kboards has been refusing to expand for author needs since I started coming here.

I'm proposing a forum with both public and private areas. So if people want to discuss reviews for example, it can be done where only members can see it.



> Why would you jump this ship for a rudderless, motorless, inflatable dinghy with only one oar?


What if the dingy was actually the Tardis?



> Instead of all of this negativity, why aren't you all doing something positive and looking at ways that we can turn this negative into a plus and organise sweeping changes to the way the boards operate. You're obviously dissatisfied, so why not organise yourselves into a strong resistance movement and get talking to the management. Better the devil you know than risking the deep blue sea in a skiff.


Because crickets. A number of us have contacted the new Admin on a number of issues, and received nothing back.



> Like many on here, I'm very experienced in running online forums. So much so that I recognise that what you're all looking for is already here and isn't easily copied or replaced. So, do yourselves a big favour and instead of discussing leaving, discuss change and change the forum for the betterment of everyone.


And I have no illusions about it. But this thread has been going a day, and no Admin response of any kind, in thread or answering PM's. I don't believe the new owners care, and it's way more likely they would just turn off Writers Cafe, than deal with the issues. There is also the documented history of these new owners out there as well, which gives no hope to them doing anything positive.

I'll give them time to respond, but those doing ourselves a favour are those talking about building something better. Will it happen? I dont know. Will it work? I dont know. But it's better than bashing your head against a brick wall here. Even the mods are totally silent, and I expected them to have been editing this thread by now.



TobiasRoote said:


> There's no need to move if we can have acceptable changes in the modus operandi of the forum.


It isn't going to happen. The way the ToS was changed shows us that. They snuck it in and hoped no one would notice.

The sad fact is, by not offering the forum to us first, the previous owner has effectively sold the forum into slavery. I for one would definitely have been interested in buying it. If I couldn't raise the price, someone else here probably could have, or a co-op could have been formed. But the forum is now in the hands of people with a reputation for running them into the ground, caring only for advertising revenue. It's only a matter of time. The forum was already bleeding people over moderation issues, now it will begin to accelerate for owner issues.

If the worst happens, I want somewhere to go. And if don't build it now, it wont be there when we need it.


----------



## Guest

TimothyEllis said:


> If the worst happens, I want somewhere to go. And if don't build it now, it won't be there when we need it.


I don't disagree with anything you say, even this - BUT if you're going to build something, then it needs to take account of everyone on here, not just the writers or select groups. That's not going to be achieved in five minutes of programming. So, let's work on that as plan 'B' and in the meantime try and get a concerted effort going to present to the forum owners. I've read of isolated incidents of people writing to the management, but that fact I'm here posting IS a sign that there is something going on up there. I wrote to them a few days ago about the continuing censoring of my posts, here I am censor-free a few days later.

Against all of the hassle I've had to put up with from KBoards moderation over the last year, I still believe this is the place to be. I'm supporting staying, but I will happily support you building a second ARK.


----------



## Writer&#039;s Block

This is effectively a retrospective rights grab, not cool... not cool at all. 

I do NOT agree, so I have changed my profile and deleted my sig. 

It is such a shame, because Writer's Cafe was incredibly helpful to me when I started out, as I'm sure is was to a great many others. The authors here gave freely of their wisdom simply to help the community... and they asked for nothing in return. It's a sad day for this forum, and for all of us who care about this place.


----------



## AltMe

TobiasRoote said:


> I don't disagree with anything you say, even this - BUT if you're going to build something, then it needs to take account of everyone on here, not just the writers or select groups.


The original proposal was exactly that. But current discussion is all authors, and its going the other way, to perhaps a reverse version of Kboards, where the author section is bigger than the readers section. If we had some readers join the group, we might get a balanced discussion. HINT HINT. 



> That's not going to be achieved in five minutes of programming.


Couple of hours for the basic framework. Couple of days for the full monty. Depends how we do the installation. Setting up the forum is actually the easy part.



> So, let's work on that as plan 'B' and in the meantime try and get a concerted effort going to present to the forum owners. I've read of isolated incidents of people writing to the management, but that fact I'm here posting IS a sign that there is something going on up there. I wrote to them a few days ago about the continuing censoring of my posts, here I am censor-free a few days later.Against all of the hassle I've had to put up with from KBoards moderation over the last year, I still believe this is the place to be. I'm supporting staying, but I will happily support you building a second ARK.


Plan A ALWAYS flops!  We're authors, we should all know that.

"Hunter to all sections. Plan A flopped, go to Plan B."

"Whats plan B?" asked BA.

"He's got that look on his face again!" said Alison.


----------



## Guest

"They want us to move 80 billion of our people to Mars so they can have our planet?" Jim's astonished voice quavered.

"That's the nub of it, Jim, yes!" Alison replied knowing where this was likely to go next.

"But, but... that's absurd. How are we going to shift all those people?" He exploded.

"Slowly, Jim. Slowly!" Was all she could say. 

Just how DO you move a planet full of people, most of whom are happy where they are, she thought.

Jim's expression was one of incredulity. He couldn't believe what he was hearing. He gathered himself to try and maintain a dignified presence in front of his Commanding Officer. "And in the meantime?" he asked her, not even sure he wanted to know the answer to the question.

"We suck it up and soldier on, Soldier!"  She smiled recognising they had reached the end of the conversation she needed to have with him.


----------



## 97251

I new forum can be done. 

I had the unfortunate (turned fortunate) experience of being kicked out of a fan forum (or conveniently invited to post in the fanclub section, since our ideas were too silly for the main forum). 

The people got together, a new forum was created, and it runs until today. It's smaller, but it's not bigoted, and overall the quality of the discussions is a lot better. 

This is just to say that people banding together and finding a new home is doable. And at the end of the day, what matters most is the community. 

Kboards is so helpful only because there are some 10 to 40 experienced authors participating and giving solid advice. It's a small number, really. 

Get this type of posts anywhere searchable, and the new forum would grow.


----------



## Guest

Phoenix61 said:


> Yeah, it's not just the new TOS, it's also the ads and other stuff mentioned about moderation. I mean I just saw an advertisement for a vanity publisher!! Not cool. Not cool at all. Any noobs coming on here seeing an ad like that...


Just FYI as far as ads in case it's helpful, on Safari with the prepackaged ad bloc on I never see any of the kboards ads. I assume google chrome & the windows integrated browser have similar options.

As far as all the talk of a new forum, I'll go where the experienced indies go but if we have just a partial migration and lose a lot of hugely important names (imo) like Wayne Stinnett, Rosalind James, Amanda M Lee, Mark Dawson, Mike Omer, Rick Scott & more, as well as ones I find in the archives that sadly don't post much now like HM Ward, Jana DeLeon, Kristen Painter, Russell Blake, Michael Anderle, Izzy Shows, Annie Bellet & still more, not to mention the info gurus like David Gaughran, Phoenix S, Nicholaus Erik and so on, then I'm going to be really bummed and lose my best indie resource.   So, I do hope that it's a near universal mass migration or none at all and we just agitate the admin to accommodate the TOS concerns many have.

PS: Just because I didn't name you in the above list doesn't mean you're not awesome and appreciated by we noobs on this forum. It's just a proper list would likely turn into a huge wall of text.


----------



## AltMe

Luke Everhart said:


> As far as all the talk of a new forum, I'll go where the experienced indies go but if we have just a partial migration and lose a lot of hugely important names (imo) like Wayne Stinnett, Rosalind James, Amanda M Lee, Mark Dawson, Mike Omer, Rick Scott & more, as well as ones I find in the archives that sadly don't post much now like HM Ward, Jana DeLeon, Kristen Painter, Russell Blake, Michael Anderle & still more, not to mention the info gurus like David Gaughran, Phoenix S, Nicholaus Erik and so on, then I'm going to be really bummed and lose my best indie resource.   So, I do hope that it's a near universal mass migration or none at all and we just agitate the admin to accommodate the TOS concerns many have.


Those are the names. And yes I agree, the major players need to want to go to a new forum, or do both, in order for a new one to work. I've sent a message to Michael Anderle, but he and Craig Martelle have a huge thing going on FB, and might not be interested. Thanks for the spelling of David Gaughran's name, now sent him a msg as well.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Luke Everhart said:


> Just FYI as far as ads in case it's helpful, on Safari with the prepackaged ad bloc on I never see any of the kboards ads. I assume google chrome & the windows integrated browser have similar options.
> 
> As far as all the talk of a new forum, I'll go where the experienced indies go but if we have just a partial migration and lose a lot of hugely important names (imo) like Wayne Stinnett, Rosalind James, Amanda M Lee, Mark Dawson, Mike Omer, Rick Scott & more, as well as ones I find in the archives that sadly don't post much now like HM Ward, Jana DeLeon, Kristen Painter, Russell Blake, Michael Anderle, Izzy Shows, Annie Bellet & still more, not to mention the info gurus like David Gaughran, Phoenix S, Nicholaus Erik and so on, then I'm going to be really bummed and lose my best indie resource.   So, I do hope that it's a near universal mass migration or none at all and we just agitate the admin to accommodate the TOS concerns many have.
> 
> PS: Just because I didn't name you in the above list doesn't mean you're not awesome and appreciated by we noobs on this forum. It's just a proper list would likely turn into a huge wall of text.


Migrating isn't necessarily an either/or proposition. I know lots of people who post on multiple forums. I used to post on this one and on the KDP forum, though the significant problems of bot moderation eventually drove me away completely.

My first choice would be for Kboards' new management to get its act together, but we have no control over that. There has to be a Plan B.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Luke Everhart said:


> Just FYI as far as ads in case it's helpful, on Safari with the prepackaged ad bloc on I never see any of the kboards ads. I assume google chrome & the windows integrated browser have similar options.


I use Chrome and don't see any ads.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Luke Everhart said:


> As far as all the talk of a new forum, I'll go where the experienced indies go but if we have just a partial migration and lose a lot of hugely important names (imo) like Wayne Stinnett, Rosalind James, Amanda M Lee, Mark Dawson, Mike Omer, Rick Scott & more, as well as ones I find in the archives that sadly don't post much now like HM Ward, Jana DeLeon, Kristen Painter, Russell Blake, Michael Anderle, Izzy Shows, Annie Bellet & still more, not to mention the info gurus like David Gaughran, Phoenix S, Nicholaus Erik and so on, then I'm going to be really bummed and lose my best indie resource.   So, I do hope that it's a near universal mass migration or none at all and we just agitate the admin to accommodate the TOS concerns many have.


^this^

Aren't the new ToS merely lawyer 'mind your backs' terms? They seem to be quite common on other forums.
If they were to actually use some of our work, covers, posts etc I should imagine the backlash would be the end of KBoards.


----------



## AltMe

Bill Hiatt said:


> Migrating isn't necessarily an either/or proposition. I know lots of people who post on multiple forums.


True.

I am interested in hearing from anyone who doesn't want to post publically, or join the discussion on FB, but who would either move, or participate on both. Part of the process at the moment is assessing if there is enough real interest to justify a new forum. So by all means msg me with a yay/both/ney if you want.

I'm particularly interested in the big names, and constant contributors, who might not want to get involved, but do have an opinion. Msg me so I know what you think. (Enough no's from the major people here is a useful thing to know.)


----------



## Guest

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> ^this^
> 
> Aren't the new ToS merely lawyer 'mind your backs' terms? They seem to be quite common on other forums.
> If they were to actually use some of our work, covers, posts etc I should imagine the backlash would be the end of KBoards.


Depends on who has the bigger lawyers and media attention.

Facebook, for all their drama, is fairly "regulated" by the court of public opinion. They can't sneeze without the media jumping on them and getting dragged into a Congressional hearing. So the chance of FB trying to do too much overly nefarious is actually low (OK, they commonly do things mildly nefarious, but, you know...)

KBoards is important to US, but who outside of the Kindle community really is impacted by it? Is Fox or CNN going to take up a news report about the forum engaging in nefarious tactics? Probably not. And if the new owner's goal is a pump-and-dump and they intend to just milk the site for as much as possible and then offload it, it is a real concern. We don't know if the new owners are in for the long haul and want to develop the community or if they are just interested in a quick turn on investment and then dump/close the site.

Because THAT is the real problem. They could do all sorts of things, and at the first sign of legal trouble just close the site. They are in Canada, what are we legally going to do? Facebook can't really hide that easily. Twitter can't hide that easily. They get their butts hauled into international hearings. But the new owners, what is their real risk?


----------



## Guest

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> KBoards is important to US, but who outside of the Kindle community really is impacted by it?


At the end of the day, this is 'just' a forum. If Julie is right then it doesn't matter two hoots what we do, come, go, jump up and down, or scream. The pump and dump merchants will have their way (if that's what they are). BUT, we don't know that and whilst I'm aware that most have had no response from the management, admins, or moderators (officially) I'm certain that someone, somewhere knows the way things are swinging. Perhaps it's a matter of discussion behind the scenes that were not privy to. I can't believe we're being ignored. The emails and PM's should have evoked some kind of response up there in the ether.

I like TimothyEllis's idea of Plan 'B' and in the end, I think he's right - we'll move on. The tragedy is that KBoards has been home to many for lots of years. It would [be] sad indeed if we moved on without scuffing the rug even a little, dragging our heels so to speak. Heck! I've just had my handcuffs taken off after almost forever, I'd like a chance to post a bit before the whole thing collapses.


----------



## vsadmin

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> ^this^
> 
> Aren't the new ToS merely lawyer 'mind your backs' terms? They seem to be quite common on other forums.
> If they were to actually use some of our work, covers, posts etc I should imagine the backlash would be the end of KBoards.


This is completely accurate, especially when it comes to your books, covers, and other IP. We have not been in the business of publishing anything outside of blogs in years and have never been in the business of misrepresenting other people's works as our own. In the instances where posts have ever been used for advertising they have been directly requested from the users as reviews of a product by a vendor; as such we would only use a post here for advertising a product if you wrote a review of said product through a campaign that you had already consented to, like a contest or in exchange for the product. This also pretty much never happens unless it's an automotive site and it's for an engine part. The "reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense etc" is intended to cover things like internal site newsletters, subscription notifications, or other such communications, which this site already has and has had for some time as I understand it. Because we are a bigger company we have to have these terms included as a general catch all. This is exclusive to public areas. PM's are not accessible to anyone but the author and recipient without a court order to pull them from the database. What data you have on the site and how it is used is listed directly in the Privacy Policy which is right there next to the copyright and terms links. All three links would have gone up at the time of the announcement.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

vsAdmin said:


> This is completely accurate, especially when it comes to your books, covers, and other IP. We have not been in the business of publishing anything outside of blogs in years and have never been in the business of misrepresenting other people's works as our own. In the instances where posts have ever been used for advertising they have been directly requested from the users as reviews of a product by a vendor; as such we would only use a post here for advertising a product if you wrote a review of said product through a campaign that you had already consented to, like a contest or in exchange for the product. This also pretty much never happens unless it's an automotive site and it's for an engine part. The "reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense etc" is intended to cover things like internal site newsletters, subscription notifications, or other such communications, which this site already has and has had for some time as I understand it. Because we are a bigger company we have to have these terms included as a general catch all. This is exclusive to public areas. PM's are not accessible to anyone but the author and recipient without a court order to pull them from the database. What data you have on the site and how it is used is listed directly in the Privacy Policy which is right there next to the copyright and terms links. All three links would have gone up at the time of the announcement.


Thank you. Hopefully this puts everyone at ease.


----------



## ilamont

vsAdmin said:


> This is completely accurate, especially when it comes to your books, covers, and other IP. We have not been in the business of publishing anything outside of blogs in years and have never been in the business of misrepresenting other people's works as our own. In the instances where posts have ever been used for advertising they have been directly requested from the users as reviews of a product by a vendor; as such we would only use a post here for advertising a product if you wrote a review of said product through a campaign that you had already consented to, like a contest or in exchange for the product. This also pretty much never happens unless it's an automotive site and it's for an engine part. The "reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense etc" is intended to cover things like internal site newsletters, subscription notifications, or other such communications, which this site already has and has had for some time as I understand it. Because we are a bigger company we have to have these terms included as a general catch all. This is exclusive to public areas. PM's are not accessible to anyone but the author and recipient without a court order to pull them from the database. What data you have on the site and how it is used is listed directly in the Privacy Policy which is right there next to the copyright and terms links. All three links would have gone up at the time of the announcement.


So, in other words, no change to the TOS?

Phillip, this part of the forum is used by publishers (self publishers, indie publishers, and related service providers) and, as a group, we are very sensitive about language that grants unlimited rights to another entity to do whatever it wants, with no recourse if we don't like it. Your reassurances about your company has done in the past mean nothing if the legal terms make it clear that what we add to the forum -- including our own IP such as excerpts, book covers, etc. -- can be used or monetized without out permission "in any media now known or hereafter developed." VerticalScope's majority owner (a Canadian newspaper conglomerate) had no inkling 5 years ago it would be operating hundreds of forums about motorcycles, self-publishing, and other topics, and similarly it doesn't know what businesses or products it might be producing 5 years from now.

Each one of the VS forums has its own dedicated TOS, my recommendation is the legal team reword the KBoards TOS to confirm that our IP is our IP, and VS will not use such materials without our consent beyond the purposes of providing a discussion forum and related services. I am sure there are more knowledgeable KBers here who have specific suggestions about wording or other issues in the TOS that need to be addressed, as well.

There's a real risk many of the top contributors to this forum are going to leave unless this issue (and perhaps other issues with the way the new owners are operating KB) is addressed soon. I would hate to see that happen, as this forum has been a wonderful resource to me and many others over the years.


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth Barone said:


> Thank you. Hopefully this puts everyone at ease.


No, it doesn't. Because the courts are filled with people who said "trust me, just because it says that doesn't mean we would do it" who then turned around and did.



> You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but redistribution in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM.


You don't have the right to grant that. Only the poster does. This is a rights grab. You are claiming the right to grant distribution of content that you did not create. There have been countless times a fellow KBoarder has asked "Can I quote you" and I granted permission. This clause claims they have to ASK YOU for permission to QUOTE ME.

Or, worse, if I start a conversation here and then write a longer post for my blog, I need to ASK YOU for permission to republish MY OWN WORDS on my blog? This clause essentially prohibits cross-posting of comments or ideas that we ourselves create.



> Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites.


No, I really don't like the idea of you using things I post here for marketing of other sites you own. It is one thing if I walk into a restaurant and the owner takes a picture to use on his Facebook page promoting the restaurant. It is quite another if he takes a picture and slaps it on the cover of a book he is self-publishing that has nothing to do with the restaurant or, worse, something I fundamentally disapprove of.



> You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.


So if I post a cover of my new book here that uses stock art, and you decide to take that image and use it for advertising on another site, I have NO RECOURSE for you violating the terms of the stock art license?



> The "reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense etc" is intended to cover things like internal site newsletters, subscription notifications, or other such communications, which this site already has and has had for some time as I understand it.


The fundamental difference is that the new license is EXPANDED to allow you to use this stuff on sites unrelated to Kboards in ways we have no control over. I have no issues with a normal license in relation to the operation of Kboards. My problem is this notion that because I post a comment on Kboards, I would be okay with that comment being republished on another site. Just because I make a comment here about how much I love my Prius doesn't mean I want to grant permission for that comment to appear on Toyotanation.com.

Maybe your company genuinely does not understand the problem because it appears, to date, you have dealt primarily with sports and automotive enthusiasts. But this forum is filled with creatives whose very livilhoods are dependent on controlling their intellectual property rights, and your blanket rights grab is terrifying. It doesn't matter what you say TODAY. It matters what the TOS legally says.

That TOS needs to be changed to reflect the nature of this site and what goes on here.


----------



## 101569

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> That TOS needs to be changed to reflect the nature of this site and what goes on here.


This!!!!!!


----------



## Guest

Here, because ***** is a helper: 

This:


> By posting/sending a message in any public electronic forum on the Web Site, you agree to have that message along with your name and/or user name posted for public viewing both here and in other promotional and advertising materials and on other VerticalScope Inc. web sites, without compensation. KBOARDS.COM does not undertake to necessarily post every submission. All messages that are posted here represent the opinions of the individuals or organizations posting those messages, and do not express the ideas or opinions of KBOARDS.COM or VerticalScope Inc. You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but redistribution in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM. In consideration of this authorization, you agree that any copy you make of any message(s) located on this web site shall retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.


Should become this:


> By posting/sending a message in any public electronic forum on the Web Site, you agree to have that message along with your name and/or user name posted for public viewing both here without compensation. KBOARDS.COM does not undertake to necessarily post every submission. All messages that are posted here represent the opinions of the individuals or organizations posting those messages, and do not express the ideas or opinions of KBOARDS.COM or VerticalScope Inc. You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but redistribution in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM except as permitted under Fair Use or in relation to your own posts. In consideration of this authorization, you agree that any copy you make of any message(s) located on this web site shall retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.


This:


> You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a non exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, create derivative works of, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM or which you provide by email or any other means to KBOARDS.COM and in any media now known or hereafter developed. Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.


becomes this:


> You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a non exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM as it relates to the operation of the site. Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and/or user name in connection with the non-proprietary submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related to Kboards.com. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM that is not the result of VerticalScope or KBoards.com's activities.


You're welcome.


----------



## Guest

Take the positives ^^^^ and we all win


----------



## Guest

AMEN
to Bards and Sages (Julie)


----------



## bdwilson

Adding my agreement to Julie's posts


----------



## Alan Petersen

thedudeminds said:


> Scrubbed. Nearly 900 posts was a lot! Anyway, lurking while waiting to hear from site owners on this issue.


Those posts are still on the owner's database backups. Once it's on the internet it's there forever no matter how much deleting and scrubbing you do.


----------



## C. Gockel

Am I the only person who doesn't care? If kboards posts my book cover in an advertisement that's free advertising for me. If they alter it in anyway the stock photo company can and will come after them for using their photos without license. I guess I have occasionally said things I regret, but in general, try to only say things that I don't mind being repeated. And they're going to post my name with it. I guess ... I am confused as to how them sharing such things would be anything but beneficial?


----------



## Alan Petersen

C. Gockel said:


> Am I the only person who doesn't care? If kboards posts my book cover in an advertisement that's free advertising for me. If they alter it in anyway the stock photo company can and will come after them for using their photos without license. I guess I have occasionally said things I regret, but in general, try to only say things that I don't mind being repeated. And they're going to post my name with it. I guess ... I am confused as to how them sharing such things would be anything but beneficial?


No, you're not alone.  This thread has been interesting. If folks are really that freaked out just ask the admin to delete your account. And even then all your old posts are archived in some database backup somewhere out there. I'm sure the new owners are giddy waiting to re-purpose your old posts for big bucks.


----------



## Guest

C. Gockel said:


> Am I the only person who doesn't care? If kboards posts my book cover in an advertisement that's free advertising for me. If they alter it in anyway the stock photo company can and will come after them for using their photos without license. I guess I have occasionally said things I regret, but in general, try to only say things that I don't mind being repeated. And they're going to post my name with it. I guess ... I am confused as to how them sharing such things would be anything but beneficial?


If you have a stock art license, for example, that limits you to so many "impressions" or restricts how the art can be used in advertising, then the stock art agency would come after YOU not them, because you are the one that agreed to their license.

Or if they granted some third party the right to reproduce one of your comments, and it was twisted to imply you endorsed them when you did not. I've been on the receiving end of stuff like that. In those cases, I've been able to get it removed. But in the case of the license, I would have no recourse if Kboards gave them the right to use it.

Or if you publish an excerpt here for critique, and someone gets the "right" to use it in their book without your consent? Particularly in light of all the scammers out there. Do you want your name associated with someone republishing your stuff, without your permission, in something that might get you in trouble with Amazon?

Imagine some scammer republishing a bunch of stuff, using our words and our names, with Kboards' consent, and putting it on Amazon and then using some scheme to generate fake pageviews. We all know how Amazon works. If your name is associated with that product, there is a high chance they come after you. Don't think it can happen? It already has to a lot of romance and erotica authors (if you recall a lot of the plagiarism stuff that transpired a few years back). In a normal situation, you could argue you never granted them the right. But what happens when they pull out an agreement that says KBoards did?

Are these extreme examples? Sure they are. But I'm pretty sure that up until last year, nobody thought they would get sued simply for donating to a GoFundMe for a fellow writer's legal fees, and then it happened. That is why things like this are a problem. Because when those extreme examples happen (and they always, eventually, do to someone) everything goes sideways.


----------



## nail file

Alan Petersen said:


> I'm sure the new owners are giddy waiting to re-purpose your old posts for big bucks.


Was that really necessary?


----------



## Guest

Alan Petersen said:


> I'm sure the new owners are giddy waiting to re-purpose your old posts for big bucks.


You have apparently never dealt with pump-and-dump investment companies. While I don't know if this particular company is such, I have seen investment companies destroy smaller companies that they bought on purpose, milking as much revenue as possible out of them until they were dried up, and then closing shop. Particularly if they were able to buy the smaller company cheap (which is often the case when an owner retires and they just want to "see the company continue"). They often have no clue about the actual industry and are just interested in short-term maximization of profit. Which is why the terms are of concern: they are so unnecessarily broad in scope in relation to operating the forum that one has to ask "why?"


----------



## 101569

Alan Petersen said:


> No, you're not alone.  This thread has been interesting. If folks are really that freaked out just ask the admin to delete your account. And even then all your old posts are archived in some database backup somewhere out there. I'm sure the new owners are giddy waiting to re-purpose your old posts for big bucks.


I shared in pm parts of my up coming books do you think they should have rights to books of mine? Cause that's what their TOS is saying they have.


----------



## Guest

Well, we got what I expected. A response from the Management. They will either take the changes and run with them, or they will ignore them in which case we'll know what's what and make our own way to the back door. As I've said I'm keen to keep the KBoards going, but if it comes to backing plan 'B' I'm on it.


----------



## MClayton

C. Gockel said:


> Am I the only person who doesn't care? If kboards posts my book cover in an advertisement that's free advertising for me. If they alter it in anyway the stock photo company can and will come after them for using their photos without license. I guess I have occasionally said things I regret, but in general, try to only say things that I don't mind being repeated. And they're going to post my name with it. I guess ... I am confused as to how them sharing such things would be anything but beneficial?


No, you're not alone, but that's because I haven't posted anything I mind people seeing (or that isn't already out there in a bazillion other places). Having said that, if I'd posted potential covers or blurbs and excerpts, that would be another story. Then I would very much mind a TOS that says someone else has the right to use it somewhere else.

When it comes to the site having access to our books (I'll have to go back and find that concern when I have more time), I don't think that's something we need to worry about. Linking to a book doesn't put the book on site, it simply puts a link to the book on site. Now, if I post the whole thing in a thread here that's a different matter, but simply linking to it doesn't put the content of that book on this site.


----------



## Guest

Maybe an actual example is on order:

I'm hardly a household name, but I do a lot of conventions. A few years back, I discovered that someone on Goodsreads had added quotes from me regarding things I said on panels and such. And while it was slightly creepy, I didn't think much of it. It was my author profile and the quotes are my quotes and it was just on a reader site so no harm no foul.

A few months later, while doing a search on Amazon, I came across a book linked to my name that I had not published nor had any part in. It was one of those "inspirational quote" books. Someone had scrapped a bunch of quotes off Goodreads and self-published it, and presented it in a way to imply approval from the authors.

Well, thankfully, I was able to get Amazon to remove the book, because I never granted any rights to use those quotes like that. 

Now imagine if that happened with stuff I said here on Kboards, but instead of just scrapping the quotes, they paid Kboards a fee to use them (and any other posts they wanted) for a book on self-publishing. 

This sort of stuff goes on all the time. And in the day of book stuffers and Amazon freezing accounts for little to no reason, we all need to be very careful about rights grabs that can cause us to lose control of our own words.


----------



## PhoenixS

I think if the TOS is rewritten, even this proposed change is too broad:



> You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but redistribution in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM except as permitted under Fair Use or in relation to your own posts. In consideration of this authorization, you agree that any copy you make of any message(s) located on this web site shall retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.


I've been asked by others here for permission to reproduce some of my KB posts in various formats. There are way too many shady sorts putting out overpriced learning modules re: indie publishing. I would not want KB to have the ability to grant permission to some of these bad actors to include my words and name in any vehicle of theirs as though I'm endorsing their sh- er, stuff. What I might grant KB in relation to the operation of the site is not at all would I would grant to the users of the site in general.

I would suggest "...requires the written permission of the author of the posted message(s) except as permitted under Fair Use."


----------



## Guest

PhoenixS said:


> I think if the TOS is rewritten, even this proposed change is too broad:
> 
> I've been asked by others here for permission to reproduce some of my KB posts in various formats. There are way too many shady sorts putting out overpriced learning modules re: indie publishing. I would not want KB to have the ability to grant permission to some of these bad actors to include my words and name in any vehicle of theirs as though I'm endorsing their sh- er, stuff. What I might grant KB in relation to the operation of the site is not at all would I would grant to the users of the site in general.
> 
> I would suggest "...requires the written permission of the author of the posted message(s) except as permitted under Fair Use."


You're correct. More fine-tuned revision is necessary. But I was assuming they would take it to their legal for revision and not cut-and-paste.


----------



## Guest

Just to clarify, the issue is not the concept of anonymity. I suffer no delusions that someone couldn't find me if they wanted to. The issue is commercial rights. 

I have no concern about someone reposting my comments elsewhere for discussion.
I have no concern about someone linking to a thread I am a participant in.
I have no concern about someone quoting me on their blog.

My concern is someone talking what I post and repurposing it for commercial purposes that i did not authority, particularly in a way that can damage my business relationships with other companies (particularly Amazon). 

Right now, if someone scrapped a bunch of content off of Kboards and tried to sell a "how to" self-publish book, we could easily get the book removed because none of us granted the right to take our comments and commercialize them. But under the terms of the current TOS, Kboards COULD sell that right to a third-party. At which point, we would all be screwed. because not only would they be selling our words, the TOS grants them the right to our name  for publicity purposes for ANY purpose. 

I suspect Hugh Howey doesn't want to find posts he wrote five years ago here being used to promote a self-publishing book he had no participation in, particularly if it was promoting ideas he no longer agrees with or for which his opinion has changed. And I am sure he would be annoyed with "Use the secrets Hugh Howey used to become a bestseller!"

THAT is what this TOS currently allows if the owners decided to sell that license. WOULD they do that? Probably not. COULD they under the current TOS. Absolutely.


----------



## munboy

I'm not thrilled with the TOS, but honestly just saying "I do not give permission" in a thread does not remove you from that TOS. The continued use of the board gives the owners permission. The only true way to revoke the permission is to delete all your posts and personal information and close your account....while you're at it, stop using Google, Facebook, Instagram, Outlook, ect.... and stop browsing any website...in fact, stop using the Internet because your information is being collected and sold every time you log on. It's a fact of life on the Internet.

At least outside the European Union, anyways. Everybody lost their minds when the GDPR passed, but this is exactly what it's trying to curtail, the ambiguous collection and sale of your information. If you live within the bounds of the EU, you're somewhat protected and should call out the board owners on this new language. If you're like me in the US, well...that's life.


----------



## Patty Jansen

C. Gockel said:


> Am I the only person who doesn't care? If kboards posts my book cover in an advertisement that's free advertising for me. If they alter it in anyway the stock photo company can and will come after them for using their photos without license. I guess I have occasionally said things I regret, but in general, try to only say things that I don't mind being repeated. And they're going to post my name with it. I guess ... I am confused as to how them sharing such things would be anything but beneficial?


Nope, you're not. I don't give a rat's, and all the stuff Julie says can also happen if you post elsewhere.

Basically, class, what you put on the internet can and occasionally WILL, be misappropriated. You can go into a flap, dive back in your hole and be miserable and all like "Something is wrong on the internet!!!", waste time posting takedowns, restrict yourself by "deleting" everything online (hint: you can't), or you can just shrug, chalk it up to free advertising and move on.

Life's too short.

Not moving anywhere else.


----------



## Nicholas Erik

Also don't care, not leaving, and not going elsewhere.

Nick


----------



## Used To Be BH

vsAdmin said:


> This is completely accurate, especially when it comes to your books, covers, and other IP. We have not been in the business of publishing anything outside of blogs in years and have never been in the business of misrepresenting other people's works as our own. In the instances where posts have ever been used for advertising they have been directly requested from the users as reviews of a product by a vendor; as such we would only use a post here for advertising a product if you wrote a review of said product through a campaign that you had already consented to, like a contest or in exchange for the product. This also pretty much never happens unless it's an automotive site and it's for an engine part. The "reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense etc" is intended to cover things like internal site newsletters, subscription notifications, or other such communications, which this site already has and has had for some time as I understand it. Because we are a bigger company we have to have these terms included as a general catch all. This is exclusive to public areas. PM's are not accessible to anyone but the author and recipient without a court order to pull them from the database. What data you have on the site and how it is used is listed directly in the Privacy Policy which is right there next to the copyright and terms links. All three links would have gone up at the time of the announcement.


You can see what our concerns are. The question is whether or not your company is interested in addressing them. Particularly since you have assured us that our fears are groundless, and that what we are worrying about will never come to pass, making suitable changes in the TOS should not be a problem.

When you say, "at the time of the announcement," I assume you mean the announcement of the change of ownership, because I don't recall any announcement of the change in TOS and privacy policy. Under GDPR, your company can't make changes without notification and renewed consent, at least as they apply to citizens of the EU. And the language that Julie points out could allow you to give someone else permission to use our intellectual property probably runs afoul of copyright laws in several countries.

I'd have been more inclined to view the policy as boilerplate if it hadn't been instituted without any kind of notification. The fact that it was makes me more suspicious.

What we need is a prompt answer, followed by a revised TOS. If that is not the intention of Verticalscope, please indicate that to us, so that we can sever all connection to this platform at the earliest possible moment.


----------



## Guest

Patty Jansen said:


> Nope, you're not. I don't give a rat's, and all the stuff ***** says can also happen if you post elsewhere.


Again, the issue is that, if my stuff is used without my permission normally, I can do something about it. Go back and see the real world example I posted of something that actually happened to me. I was able to get Amazon to take the book down because I had not granted permission.

Under the new TOS, Kboards could grant the same company permission to use my quotes and I would have no recourse. I could complain to Amazon, and they would pull out the receipt that they bought the rights to use quotes from this board.

The issue is not "Can anyone steal from anyone on the internet." OF COURSE they can. The issue is, why does the new TOS take away my right to call the cops if I am robbed?


----------



## Patty Jansen

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Again, the issue is that, if my stuff is used without my permission normally, I can do something about it. Go back and see the real world example I posted of something that actually happened to me. I was able to get Amazon to take the book down because I had not granted permission.
> 
> Under the new TOS, Kboards could grant the same company permission to use my quotes and I would have no recourse. I could complain to Amazon, and they would pull out the receipt that they bought the rights to use quotes from this board.
> 
> The issue is not "Can anyone steal from anyone on the internet." OF COURSE they can. The issue is, why does the new TOS take away my right to call the cops if I am robbed?


OK, so my attitude is: if I put it in a forum or on my blog, I WILL be robbed. They're welcome. Good luck to them.

The forum is advertising. If you're selling something, you should put teasers, never the whole thing because people WILL copy it. And those people will be in places where you can't get to them, and besides this running around with takedown notices takes too much time and--er. Recourse? I don't care. I'm not precious about my blatherings here.

Don't put anything on a forum that you don't want to turn up anywhere else.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Tulonsae said:


> So what about your books? Doesn't this TOS say something about having rights to derviative work. At least one of your writer's books seems to be a derviative of several of your posts on KBoards. So doesn't that mean that KBoards could give a license to your derviative books to others to use?
> 
> It's not likely to happen, I'm sure. But what about the future and your heirs? KBoards has the rights in perpetuity.


It may say that, but 1. I don't believe it, 2. KB won't last that long, 3. there is no one stopping me selling my book, 4. no one will mount a legal case that I can't sell my book, 5. if it went to court, it wouldn't stand up. 6. I just don't care. It's all legal claptrap no one is ever going to do anything about.

Unenforceable. No one cares. Especially across national borders. Legal people will only move when there is something in it for them.

Seriously, move away from the panic button.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Lynn Is A Pseudonym said:


> We're cautious about the terms when we click through the distributors' agreements, right?
> 
> We're cautious about the terms in a contract with a publisher, right?
> 
> No, I wouldn't like it if my author name ended up pasted all over some other site (without recourse, no less) attached to a quote of something I'd said here endorsing something I might have since decided is a scam. Think about if this site had been run by someone like, oh, I don't know, a certain "hungry" promoter. Say the name and quote ended up on one of those attached sites. Assume you're under these terms of use and you have agreed to the "no recourse" portion of the terms.
> 
> Author names are a huge part of an author's brand. Protecting that name and limiting how it can be used by other people commercially is a real concern, IMO.
> 
> So, really, why is it smart to worry about these other legal agreements but silly to worry about _this_ legal agreement (the terms of use for this site)?


Actually, I don't pore over agreements.

I look at:

1. How much do they pay
2. When do they pay and what are the payment options
3. Do they have a reliable payment record
4. Do they ask for exclusivity

I ignore all the rest, because no one site is going to claim that suddenly your books are theirs because the outrage would destroy them in three seconds flat.

"But they'd still hold the right to your books"

Seriously? What would they do with those rights that are legally yours anyway?

Remember the thing where Facebook said that everything you posted was theirs? Well, what a ridiculous statement that everyone went on ignoring and nothing ever came of it.

You are not signing a publication contract, you're signing an agreement for use or distribution. If you sign a publishing contract, you sign away your copyright. If you sign for distribution, you sign for a company to sell your stuff. That will never translate into copyright.

I have had things from here end up on other sites exactly as you suggested: that insinuated that I endorsed a service where I didn't. Sad as it may sound, there is only one way to prevent this: keep your mouth hermetically shut. Never say anything, good or bad. Once you've said it, it's no longer yours, and people will do with it as they see fit.

The only way to combat it if you don't like the hermit option is to say more stuff. The collective memory of the internet is about 24 hours. If something blows up in my face, I unplug for 24 hours before I venture back, and hey, it's gone. Then I'll keep going without referring back to it and the incident gets buried very quickly.

If someone wants to scroll back through my life to find the dumb things I've said, they're welcome. As I already said, most of my life is insanely boring.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Dennis Chekalov said:


> Just for your information. The new TOS give the forum owners rights to take your forum posts and publish them as a book under YOUR name. You'll have no control over this book, you'll not get paid, but this book will still be listed as YOURS: _*Patty Jansen*. The secrets of my success. Advices from a bestselling Amazon author_. And they can add any rubbish they want in this book, publishing it under YOUR name (a derivative work). That's what the new TOS mean. If you are OK with this -- good.


I don't care, because they won't do it.

In the first place, they're not that evil.

If by chance, they are, that's really dumb, because the outrage shall be great and it will cost the forum more in social capital. WE are the product. The owners make money because we are here and discuss things and attract more people.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Patty Jansen said:


> Actually, I don't pore over agreements.
> 
> I look at:
> 
> 1. How much do they pay
> 2. When do they pay and what are the payment options
> 3. Do they have a reliable payment record
> 4. Do they ask for exclusivity
> 
> I ignore all the rest, because no one site is going to claim that suddenly your books are theirs because the outrage would destroy them in three seconds flat.
> 
> "But they'd still hold the right to your books"
> 
> Seriously? What would they do with those rights that are legally yours anyway?
> 
> Remember the thing where Facebook said that everything you posted was theirs? Well, what a ridiculous statement that everyone went on ignoring and nothing ever came of it.
> 
> You are not signing a publication contract, you're signing an agreement for use or distribution. If you sign a publishing contract, you sign away your copyright. If you sign for distribution, you sign for a company to sell your stuff. That will never translate into copyright.
> 
> I have had things from here end up on other sites exactly as you suggested: that insinuated that I endorsed a service where I didn't. Sad as it may sound, there is only one way to prevent this: keep your mouth hermetically shut. Never say anything, good or bad. Once you've said it, it's no longer yours, and people will do with it as they see fit.
> 
> The only way to combat it if you don't like the hermit option is to say more stuff. The collective memory of the internet is about 24 hours. If something blows up in my face, I unplug for 24 hours before I venture back, and hey, it's gone. Then I'll keep going without referring back to it and the incident gets buried very quickly.
> 
> If someone wants to scroll back through my life to find the dumb things I've said, they're welcome. As I already said, most of my life is insanely boring.


My life's insanely boring, too, and I want to keep it that way. So far, I'm not well enough known that anyone is going to be tempted to create a book out of my Kboards posts and sell it on Amazon. Perhaps the day will come, though.

Nothing ever goes wrong--until it does. A lot of things I would have thought unlikely have eventually come to pass. Do I think it's likely that the new owners are going to go on a rampage of intellectual property theft? No. However, I see no reason to keep the language that would theoretically allow them to do so. If they are well-intentioned, they'll try to address our concerns. If they don't address our concerns, then perhaps their intentions can reasonably be questioned. Why take a chance on them if they retain language that their representative said was never intended to do the things we fear?



> Once you've said it, it's no longer yours, and people will do with it as they see fit.


I don't know how this works in Australia, but under US copyright law, once you've written something down, it's yours, and you have a great degree of control over what happens to it. Kboards has a legitimate interest in making clear that they can display the content we post, index it, etc. In that sense, we have licensed it to them. They also have a legitimate interest in using some of it to advertise the site. As far as I can tell, they have no legitimate interest in using it in any other way. And yes, Facebook has made some crazy statements, too, but as Julie pointed out earlier, large sites like that are more vulnerable to the onslaught of public opinion because many more people are involved. The bad press FB would have run into if it had really tried to steal people's intellectual property would have been immense. Is that true here? I doubt it. It's also worth noting that FB has a much more complex operation. Posts appear not only in one's own profile and/or page but in newsfeeds all over the site. In our litigious society, I could see the possibility of someone filing a nuisance lawsuit alleging copyright violation for displaying an FB post in a way or in a part of FB that the writer didn't approve of. It makes a little more sense for FB to have somewhat more inclusive language. In the much simpler world of this forum, that sweeping language seems more out of place.

If the owners don't respond appropriately, anyone who is dissatisfied should leave. Anyone who is indifferent should probably leave, too, because why take the risk? As I said, we don't want our lives to be that kind of interesting.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Most of what we say here is banter, and only the aggregate of the discussion is useful, often with a degree of extrapolation required. What we say here is not publishable material.

I have that one post about keeping your backlist selling, but that's literally the only post (about 750 words) that would be worth something in book form. Supposing the forum owns the right to reproduce what I've said here, they can't string a good book together out of my replies here. If you've ever tried to make a book out of blog posts, you'd know this. You need to add stuff and alter it in order to make it a coherent book.

Supposing they gathered a bunch of our posts and made them into a book without asking us. HIGHLY unlikely, but let's just suppose.

Someone would discover it on Amazon.

Outrage would break loose.

We would, in short order, engage the rage of every influential selfpublishing podcast and blog on the planet. And perhaps Forbes magazine or other high profile internet news services.

While this may not be big in numbers, it's big in the selfpublishing world, and those people are the KB's clientele. They would back down very quickly. 

No, I don't think there is a risk of that happening, and that's on top of the fact that replies here =/= ready-to-publish material.

People who skive off others want easy. Making a coherent book out of our replies is not easy. Skeezy people won't do it, because it's W.O.R.K.


----------



## catowned

Telling the owner it's not ok to take commercial rights in the tos is the same as
--reminding authors that taking gaming art and using it on a cover isn't ok,
--reminding authors that taking part of another writer's story and using it isn't ok.
We do a lot of reminding about the value of name and copyright and commercial use.

I get it that some folks don't understand, some don't care, and some think it's a marketing opportunity. That's fine.
It's also fine that some folks object to the new tos declaring that the owners can sell commercial rights to a member's name and content. 

And yes, posting on the board is public, that's true. And those named posts also have commercial value, that's why they're covered in the new tos.
It's an asset like the board as a whole, something that can be sold.

Philip has said the owner won't do that. 
If that's correct, then changing the tos would be straightforward and easy. And if the owner later wants use, payment would be negotiated with the members concerned.

As a courtesy, the company could also add wording that a notice would be sent to each member anytime tos or privacy policy is changed. 
Saying that we were noticed is incorrect.

Questioning the tos, and asking for a change to protect creatives is ok.
Odd that writers are fighting that.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

Mark Gardner said:


> I often come to the boards to brainstorm blurbs, elevator pitches, and even difficult story text.
> 
> When I sign a publishing contract with Del Rey or another large publishing house, one of the things that I stipulate in the contract is that no other entity can claim rights to my work, and with the new kBoards TOS written the way it is, I cannot stipulate this.
> 
> As it stands, the new kBoards TOS could cost me a five-figure contract. I can't risk that. A large publisher has the literary equivalent of a title company, and they will most definitely come across the TOS, and the dubious rights assignment. I cannot have my intellectual property be "unclean" just as real estate title has to be clean for a valid sale.
> 
> Now, Phillip, I believe that you are genuine when you say that VS is not interested in our rights, but there are too many variables, and as a famous judge routinely says, the contract is what's enforceable, and any other promises and guarantees are meaningless.
> 
> Julie has so helpfully indicated the problematic paragraphs, and suggested remedies to the language. They are easily implemented, and it would defuse this situation, and demonstrate that VS wants the community to thrive and continue.
> 
> Phillip, ignoring this concern, or being flippant regarding the desired remedy will only alienate the community you just acquired. Please implement Julie's suggestions. I and other hybrid authors will have no choice but to abandon kBoards to protect our rights, future rights and livelihoods.


This is it. But there are two key words that really make it bad - irrevocable and perpetual.

And on top of that, whatever VS says and does is irrelevant when the murdoch empire or some other bigger fish swallows them whole and loves the idea of all those lovely rights they've now acquired. And verbal or posted assurances from VS go out the window, and any of us who have gone on to publish something with snippets on here gets sued* by the swallowing behemoth and have little recourse because they have the money and we don't. Now, keep in mind that we already are seeing a situation where KBoards changed owners and the TOS subsequently changed underneath us, and you can see why we as producers of content would be nervous of this possibility.

*OK, so you wouldn't get sued, it's a non-exclusive licence. But you couldn't sue, and neither could your publisher who doesn't want their product in any form showing up and them not selling it.


----------



## Simon Haynes

To me, the new TOS is equivalent to putting a disclaimer on my website which states that if you visit more than once I own your cat, your car and your house.

In other words, GLWT.

Pretty sure you can't override existing legal, binding agreements (for example, an indie publisher's license to use a particular font or a stock image) by throwing wild, rights-grab clauses into the T&C for a public discussion forum.  Especially when they're updated years after you joined, and you weren't notified of the changes.


----------



## Guest

TBH there are more pressing issues on KBoards than 'will they steal my words' which I consider highly unlikely in any event. 

I'd personally like to see the moderation 'moderated' to a point where we can know what to expect, like when, why and how long for. It shouldn't be a witch hunt just because ten people are offended, or because egos clash. If we're looking to change a TOS that consists of wordy legalese that is immediately invalidated by EU and US laws, then heck! who cares. But, Moderation? that's like being banned from writing until an unknown person in the sky decides you have been punished enough. What

There are some very sensible points on here relating to copyright and theft of stuff (and its likelihood of never occurring). If we're going to get change for the better we shouldn't exclude other issues either. Especially as they DO occur, often.


----------



## Guest

OK, you license a photo or art for your book cover, and a special font for the title, etc., and through a site's TOS you give the publishing rights, including commercial rights, to a third party?

Who will the original copyright holders go after?
Would the target be a big company with deep pockets and attorneys?

Or you? Because you did not honor your original license agreement.


----------



## Simon Haynes

okey dokey said:


> OK, you license a photo or art for your book cover, and a special font for the title, etc., and through a site's TOS you give the publishing rights, including commercial rights, to a third party?
> 
> Who will the original copyright holders go after?
> Would the target be a big company with deep pockets and attorneys?
> 
> Or you? Because you did not honor your original license agreement.


Even if they got me to sign a 400 page legal document, in person, I still don't own the rights they're trying to gather up with the TOS.

It's like telling me I'm granting them the rights to the colour orange if I continue to use their forum.

But as Patty says, they're just not going to do it. These draconian TOS exist because people will sue at the drop of a hat nowadays, and the wording might just stop someone from lawyering up when a discussion with the mods or the site owners would resolve whatever the issue might be.

Let me pluck an example from thin air. Let's say there was a thread on shoddy book covers, and that thread included one of mine along with a bunch of cutting comments. Personally I'd take the criticism and go off to rework the cover. But another person might want to sue the forum owners for damages/hurt/whatever, and perhaps the TOS would make them think twice and reach out to a mod instead.

I don't know. Maybe I'm naive, or just too laid back. I've been around the internet a long, long time, and before that, many dial-up BBSs, FIDONET, and USENET, from about 1986 or '87 on. (300 baud modems suck, btw.)

Also, I see people complaining about mods, but I have absolutely no issue with the handling of some posts which may have crossed the line, or threads that get locked while tempers cool off. I've seen forums and mailing lists descend into chaos in the blink of an eye, and I appreciate being able to visit KBoards for sensible discussions.


----------



## AltMe

Simon Haynes said:


> and before that, many dial-up BBSs, FIDONET,


I remember Fightonet. I was a node for a number of years.


----------



## Simon Haynes

TimothyEllis said:


> I remember Fightonet. I was a node for a number of years.


Heh.

I was a point, using my Atari ST off a node called Gamma Istari.


----------



## Simon Haynes

Jeff Tanyard said:


> I remember those days. I used to prowl around rec.sport.football.college back in the early 1990s. Lots of passionate discussions about red v.s yellow barbecue sauce. lol The Star Wars newsgroup was fun, too.


I remember getting hammered for mentioning my first novel in rec.arts.writing.sf or somesuch.

_plus ça change and all that._


----------



## Guest

Simon Haynes said:


> Also, I see people complaining about mods, but I have absolutely no issue with the handling of some posts which may have crossed the line, or threads that get locked while tempers cool off. I've seen forums and mailing lists descend into chaos in the blink of an eye, and I appreciate being able to visit KBoards for sensible discussions.


Mods are important I agree and am a moderator elsewhere, but there should be some rhyme/reason/rationale behind it. Being kicked off the forum and moderated for most of this year for kicking back at the moderators [by defending someone else] meant I had no ability to PM anyone, no means of communicating with the mods and no means of identifying the length of time I was to be punished, no idea as to the necessary requirements to rectify things or any form of appeal whatsoever. I was silenced and ANYTHING I said that didn't conform to someone else's viewpoint was deleted. I'm only here now because I wrote to the owners about my situation. So, don't think they [the management] don't listen.

I'm not against moderation, just uncontrolled, unreasonable and unfair treatment without recourse. I would like guidelines and a channel by which people who are punished have the means to resolve issues without personality conflicts being in the way. Nobody wants chaos, but we do want the freedom to speak our mind and say what we think or feel without being penalised because a minority of posters object to someone having a different opinion. That's all.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Bill Hiatt said:


> I don't know how this works in Australia, but under US copyright law, once you've written something down, it's yours, and you have a great degree of control over what happens to it.


What about a letter? Who owns the copyright - the writer or the recipient?


----------



## Guest

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What about a letter? Who owns the copyright - the writer or the recipient?


The writer. The writer always owns the copyright to whatever they wrote unless they give that write to someone else.

People, this is not just U.S. law. This is the law of every country that is a signatory of the Berne Convention. Copyright exists the moment a work is put inb fixed form. It does not need to be registered. It does not need a (c) symbol on it. It does not need to be sent registered mail to yourself. The moment it is in fixed form, it is protected by international copyright law.

Period. Full Stop. This is not even up for discussion. That is a matter of international law.

It is the very reason forums and social media need a TOS requiring certain rights to begin with, because if you don't grant them the right to reproduce your work, they can't reproduce your work. Things like the "quote" function would be a violation of copyright law, because you didn't give the forum the right to reproduce your words. Facebook wouldn't be able to allow people to share posts without that right. Twitter users couldn't share your tweets. Forums have to have a license to reproduce your work in relation to the operation of the site BY LAW.

That is the entire point of this conversation.

The problem with THIS license is that it is giving them rights they do not need to run the site. There is zero reason they need the right to reproduce comments posted here ON OTHER UNRELATED SITES THEY OWN. There is no reason they need the right to reproduce stuff posted her in advertising for things UNRELATED to this site.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The writer. The writer always owns the copyright to whatever they wrote unless they give that write to someone else.
> 
> People, this is not just U.S. law. This is the law of every country that is a signatory of the Berne Convention. Copyright exists the moment a work is put inb fixed form. It does not need to be registered. It does not need a (c) symbol on it. It does not need to be sent registered mail to yourself. The moment it is in fixed form, it is protected by international copyright law.
> 
> Period. Full Stop. This is not even up for discussion. That is a matter of international law.
> 
> It is the very reason forums and social media need a TOS requiring certain rights to begin with, because if you don't grant them the right to reproduce your work, they can't reproduce your work. Things like the "quote" function would be a violation of copyright law, because you didn't give the forum the right to reproduce your words. Facebook wouldn't be able to allow people to share posts without that right. Twitter users couldn't share your tweets. Forums have to have a license to reproduce your work in relation to the operation of the site BY LAW.
> 
> That is the entire point of this conversation.
> 
> The problem with THIS license is that it is giving them rights they do not need to run the site. There is zero reason they need the right to reproduce comments posted here ON OTHER UNRELATED SITES THEY OWN. There is no reason they need the right to reproduce stuff posted her in advertising for things UNRELATED to this site.


Interestingly, I also found this answer -

_"but it's also worth noting that although the copyright belongs to the writer of the letter, the letter itself - the physical object - belongs to the recipient. So if I have an autographed letter from Margaret Thatcher, I can sell it, lend it for public exhibition, etc. But I can't publish the contents or allow anyone else to do so."_
Linda Gardiner, Sherborn, Ma, USA ([email protected])


----------



## AltMe

Writer-Fueled Dreams said:


> Timothy's website alternative is well under way, and looks great! I'll be going to it as soon as it's ready...and I bet there won't be a blanket rights-grab, either.


I just posted a proposed ToS (short story). Its marginally longer than the standard forum ToS, including some of Julie's suggestions for here.

Interestingly, the standard SMF ToS looks nothing like what the one here looks like. No resemblance of any kind.

Edit: Ok, now I am confused. I just had a look at what you get on registration, and it IS very close to the default SMF terms, and does NOT contain whats being discussed here.

So where is this ToS that everyone is objecting to?


----------



## Used To Be BH

TimothyEllis said:


> I just posted a proposed ToS (short story). Its marginally longer than the standard forum ToS, including some of Julie's suggestions for here.
> 
> Interestingly, the standard SMF ToS looks nothing like what the one here looks like. No resemblance of any kind.
> 
> Edit: Ok, now I am confused. I just had a look at what you get on registration, and it IS very close to the default SMF terms, and does NOT contain whats being discussed here.
> 
> So where is this ToS that everyone is objecting to?


Check out the terms of use link under submissions. (The very bottom of the page--you know, the part you'd never scroll down to, except by accident.)



> You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a non exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, create derivative works of, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM or which you provide by email or any other means to KBOARDS.COM and in any media now known or hereafter developed. Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.


I believe that's the language the OP was referring to.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Mark Gardner said:


> A week is far too long. If it's not addressed to my satisfaction in three business days, then I'm gone. I can't jeopardize future contracts or my livelihood.


I know the admin who popped up earlier doesn't have the authority to change the TOS, but it would help if there were some further communication, such as "Verticalscope understands your concern and is working with its legal team to address it." No company is going to start rearranging legal verbiage without talking to its lawyers, so it's reasonable there would be a little lag caused by that. What worries me is the absence of any further communication. A lot could be happening--or nothing could be happening.


----------



## AltMe

Bill Hiatt said:


> Check out the terms of use link under submissions. (The very bottom of the page--you know, the part you'd never scroll down to, except by accident.)
> 
> I believe that's the language the OP was referring to.


Holy ****! 

Admin, you have a real problem here. The terms of registration are totally different from your terms of service page, and this constitutes serious misrepresentation!

People registering now are not being told what the real ToS is.

The registration ToS must be the same as the ToS page.


----------



## PhoenixS

Mark Gardner said:


> I meant that I had previously removed the kBoards affiliate link, and I was gonna be hella p*ssed if VS added their affiliate link to my forum signature.


It's all handled by viglink, and the viglink affiliate code is automatically appended by viglink. I'm assuming it does that the way most link-shortening companies will append their own aff codes if no other aff code is present. So even 'clean' links get tagged, but with any aff money going to viglink, not to VS.

In other words, someone's going to make a profit off of any conversions on any Amazon link posted, whether the poster includes an affiliate code or not.

I also believe it was in the old terms that forum users gave KB the right to append their aff code to any link in any signature. So anyone editing out the KB aff code so that any conversion was directed to viglink rather than KB was in violation of those terms. Just as it was a violation to replace a KB aff code with one of our own.

_ETA: This is from the current TOS..._



> KBOARDS.COM reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users of KBOARDS.COM, with our own internal tracking. You agree not to post or otherwise make available content that constitutes or contains "affiliate marketing," "link referral code," or "unsolicited commercial advertisement."


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## NatPane

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> He ended with telling me that no website is worth risking almost two decades of building an online reputation. If they aren't going to change the terms, leave the site and demand that your account be scrubbed.
> 
> So, as it is a weekend and they may not have people around to respond to this thread, I'll give it until Tuesday to see if anything changes. If not, I'm taking my lawyer's advice.


Thank you for that. I will be doing the same thing too


----------



## ilamont

I notified someone on the VerticalScope executive team about this a few days ago. He said that the content and legal teams were looking into it.

Not sure if anything will happen beyond the response we've already seen.


----------



## CathleenT

I'm concerned about the rights grab even though I'm very much a prawn. The lone official response was hardly a response at all. It's basically: Don't worry, nothing bad will happen. Anyone who's ever been through a divorce or lawsuit can tell you that's trouble in the making. It may not come now, or ever--but it might. I don't need that sort of uncertainty in my life.

But where are people going to go? Personally, I'd love to see a mass migration to AW--make their self-publishing forum a place to really learn something about marketing. As much as I love all that site has taught me about writing in terms of process, honestly, the marketing advice is very basic and outdated. Transport kboards there, and you might really have an author's resource that would kick some serious backside. Something to think about.

However, some people here seem dismissive of AW. So again, where are people going to go? That's what I'd like to know before people like Mark and Julie leave. If we only have a few days to resolve this, Phoenix has a new board. Tim is starting one. If people fragment and splinter, much of the kboards collective wisdom will be lost.

Moderation...that's the real trick. I've always been in favor, even knowing it will annoy me at times. AW has a lot of mods and a system in place, although do yourself a favor if you go there--NEVER publicly criticize the mods. What will the new sites have? No moderation at all is merely a recipe for flame wars.

So where are people going to go? And how will it be moderated? Could folks chime in so others like me will know where to move?


----------



## Guest

Al Stevens said:


> How do you delete your account?


I'm trying to figure this out as well. It's not under account settings or any of the profile settings menu. 
Admins, I'm sorry to bother you but could you delete my account? This *is* a great community but the new owner' ToS is not acceptable. Thank you.

Tony, AW is Absolute Write.

Julie, thanks for explaining the issues, and thanks too, to everybody who's helped me. I hope to find you all on another forum devoted to successful self-publishing.


----------



## CathleenT

Tony, as Vijaya said, AW stands for Absolute Write. It's mostly trade authors, although it does have a fledgling SP subforum. Not a lot of successful SPers there. A fresh influx of talented, successful self-publishers would be awesome. But as Al noted above, never argue with the moderators--even if you know you're right. Some folks can't deal with that sort of thing. I usually shrug it off (I've been a member for four years). As of now, it's a good place to go to post your work on a password-protected subforum and talk about craft issues. It has an awesome recommendations and bewares subforum for those pursuing trade options who don't want to get screwed. I'd avoid the political subforum even if your politics are liberal. Link is here: http://absolutewrite.com/forums/forum.php. Registering is free.
.
Phoenix's is here: http://www.selfpublishingforum.com/. I've only popped in thus far, so I can't speak from any personal experience, but I did see some familiar names there.


----------



## Simply_Me

There is irony in this situation, if indies are now moving into Absolute Write, because about ten years ago, indies were not welcome at AW. I remember that clearly. And I'm sure many others do too. I personally stopped visiting around 2010. 

One of the reasons Kboard and its Writer Cafe became popular, it was because of the exodus of self-publishers from AW. It's ancient history, but it is ironic how life circles. 

I'm editing this to add:

But don't take my word at face value, just check those awesome threads, and you will notice how the best content in AW suddenly slowed down and stopped being significant. It was because of the exodus. 

I used to love AW, but I felt uncomfortable with some of the posts over there, it was almost as if I was a sinner for self-publishing. And worse, for being a hybrid. 

I wasn't banned, my account is still good. But there were many authors kicked out because of their strong opinions. I've learned to be low profile and anonymous back then. 

And if they welcome indies these days, I'm glad of knowing that.


----------



## PhoenixS

CathleenT said:


> Phoenix's is here: http://www.selfpublishingforum.com/. I've only popped in thus far, so I can't speak from any personal experience, but I did see some familiar names there.


Oops, no, that's not mine. I don't have a site. I mooch off others. Not sure whose that is.


----------



## CathleenT

Good point, Simply J. Irony will always be with us.

There's no stigma about self-publishing at AW now. I'm very open about my choice, although some successful trade authors have occasionally tried to steer me in their direction. I took it as a compliment.

And now, if the new TOS aren't modified, it looks as though there will be a mass migration from kboards. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose...

(Note: I apologize to all French speakers. I STILL haven't figured out the way to put the little accents in all the right places.)

P.S. AW does have a lot of advantages that come with a long-established forum, but be advised of this. The mod in charge of the subforum is heavily involved in trade pubbing. She's usually reasonable, but this is not her area of expertise. Extra courtesy may be needed to get through settling in.

I still think it could be incredible if it worked out. 

Part two:

I'm sorry, Phoenix. My mistake.


----------



## PhoenixS

Al Stevens said:


> And don't disagree with them particularly when you know more about the subject than they do.


Yeah, that's not going to work. The whole point of a business board is to share real, boots-on-the-ground knowledge. Pretty sure the first time a successful ex-KBer gets "moderated" (told they're wrong about something they're clearly right about) will be the last time they set a boot in that forum, even if they aren't officially banned. It's why I never joined in the first place. Courtesy must extend both ways.

A whole heck of a lot of folk I personally know who actually know something about self-pubbing were banned from there in the early days -- most wear that distinction proudly. I wonder how many bannees would be welcomed back? Or how many would want to go back.



CathleenT said:


> I'm sorry, Phoenix. My mistake.


A quick peek shows at least a couple of Phoenixes over there, so an understandable assumption. Sigh. It's kind of like being a trendsetter for a new trope. Now everyone wants to be a Phoenix.


----------



## CathleenT

Well, Phoenixes are amazingly awesome. That's a trend I'd like to join.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

PhoenixS said:


> Oops, no, that's not mine. I don't have a site. I mooch off others. Not sure whose that is.


Now I'm disappointed. A PhoenixS site would be awesome. If you'd care to tell us who you mooch with, we could all join and pretend it's your site.


----------



## Guest

Not sure what the criticism of absolutewrite is about. I've been a member there for almost 10 years, it's a great forum for discussing craft and other writer related issues. Kboards is really only useful for self-publishing info. 

In general AW is a bit more professional while Kboards has always been full of cliques. If you choose to post anonymously here don't ever get into a disagreement with anyone from the "popular" circle otherwise expect to get dogpiled. Or have people reply "This is why Kboards should have a like button!" after one of the popular people flame you. 

Threads here are over-moderated to the point of absurdity. Scammers in the community run amok but we can't really say anything or we risk getting our words edited or deleted. Also, on more than one occasion I've seen moderators here jump into heated discussions to protect the ego of a popular poster so that she wouldn't leave because people disagreed with her instead of worshiping her words. 

Sorry, but Kboards has never been perfect. I still like the site but if I didn't there have always been viable alternatives around. I don't really see the new TOS here as being a big deal. The new owners are just trying to cover their own asses. You shouldn't be posting excerpts from your unpublished books on a publicly accessible message board anyway. Even if you do, it's still your work. It just qualifies as previously published material, and it's always been that way. If the TOS is suddenly changed to state that the owners of this forum can come to your house and borrow your car whenever they felt like it does that mean that it's true?

Years ago I used to run a fairly large message board. Frequently I would take articles and entertaining posts from the forums and repost them on the website under the original posters username, which is a pretty standard thing to do and lots of sites do it. One thing to always keep in mind no matter where you're posting is that you don't own the website you're posting on, you're contributing content to someone else's property. Regardless of your interpretation of what the TOS says(I think many of you are overreacting), if you don't trust the new owners perhaps it's best that you move on.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Riddick said:


> I don't really see the new TOS here as being a big deal. The new owners are just trying to cover their own asses. You shouldn't be posting excerpts from your unpublished books on a publicly accessible message board anyway. Even if you do, it's still your work. It just qualifies as previously published material, and it's always been that way. If the TOS is suddenly changed to state that the owners of this forum can come to your house and borrow your car whenever they felt like it does that mean that it's true?


It may or may not be true, but do you want to spend tens of thousands of dollars to find out?

For me, it's not about the content. This is a public forum, searchable from external sources, so everything I've ever posted here is out there for people to find. My concern is about my *name*. The new TOS gives the new site owners the right to use my name in pretty much any way they choose, and I'm not happy with that. Would they actually do it? Probably not. Do they have the right to do it if it says so in the TOS? Maybe, maybe not, but I don't want to spend tens of thousands of dollars to find out. So they can have my new throwaway username, if they want, and if they want to use my real name, they have to take the extra step of tracking it down.

But they can have my avatar. That's well out of copyright.


----------



## 98700

I've seen people on here ask that their account be deleted, which AFAIK has to be done by a mod, but it looked like all their posts stayed, and only their profile/avatar/name got scrubbed. So it seems to me that even when a mod deletes an account, all their comments are kept around. Please let me know if I have that wrong.

I also would like to know if there's an easier way to delete and scrub an account that doesn't involve individually deleting hundreds or thousands of posts.


----------



## going going gone

PhoenixS said:


> Yeah, that's not going to work. The whole point of a business board is to share real, boots-on-the-ground knowledge. Pretty sure the first time a successful ex-KBer gets "moderated" (told they're wrong about something they're clearly right about) will be the last time they set a boot in that forum, even if they aren't officially banned. It's why I never joined in the first place. Courtesy must extend both ways.
> 
> A whole heck of a lot of folk I personally know who actually know something about self-pubbing were banned from there in the early days -- most wear that distinction proudly. I wonder how many bannees would be welcomed back? Or how many would want to go back.


This. Also, I don't like to be given orders about what I can and cannot call myself.

I'll feel sad to lose kboards, and I won't go to Facebook because of obvious reasons. But no one wants to give up 30 years of work to a bunch of land-grabbers.


----------



## Simply_Me

CathleenT said:


> Good point, Simply J. Irony will always be with us.
> 
> There's no stigma about self-publishing at AW now. I'm very open about my choice, although some successful trade authors have occasionally tried to steer me in their direction. I took it as a compliment.
> 
> And now, if the new TOS aren't modified, it looks as though there will be a mass migration from kboards. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose...
> 
> (Note: I apologize to all French speakers. I STILL haven't figured out the way to put the little accents in all the right places.)
> 
> P.S. AW does have a lot of advantages that come with a long-established forum, but be advised of this. The mod in charge of the subforum is heavily involved in trade pubbing. She's usually reasonable, but this is not her area of expertise. Extra courtesy may be needed to get through settling in.
> 
> I still think it could be incredible if it worked out.
> 
> Part two:
> 
> I'm sorry, Phoenix. My mistake.


Thanks for the update on the situation, I think I know who are referring to, and if I ever go back, it won't be a problem. I'd learned to take what works for me, and let go of what it doesn't. Change is hard to accept, but we must adapt in order to survive.



Riddick said:


> Not sure what the criticism of absolutewrite is about. I've been a member there for almost 10 years, it's a great forum for discussing craft and other writer related issues. Kboards is really only useful for self-publishing info.


It's not criticism, I simply pointed out a fact. It happened, self-published authors were unwelcome. You don't know because maybe you arrived after we had left. Many of our posts are still up there, I've seen them while googling something else. And we helped to built that place. People who were banished lost their avatars, but their posts remained. I guess AW owned the content.

There was a time that Absolute Write was the best writer's resource online, in a time, that there were no social networks to connect us.

And I'm not saying don't go there. There were always good people willing to help, many I continue to befriend to this day in other sites.

But regardless of AW seeing the light, or the cash, and eventually acknowledging self-publishers, the place that you joined ten years ago, it's just a shadow of what once was. The death of one of the founders also might contributed to its decline.

I'm glad that it was preserved and it can continue to prosper. I repeat, I'm not saying don't go there, I'm just pointing out the irony of self-published authors taking refuge in a place that didn't want anything to do with indies a decade ago.



Riddick said:


> In general AW is a bit more professional while Kboards has always been full of cliques. If you choose to post anonymously here don't ever get into a disagreement with anyone from the "popular" circle otherwise expect to get dogpiled. Or have people reply "This is why Kboards should have a like button!" after one of the popular people flame you.
> 
> Threads here are over-moderated to the point of absurdity. Scammers in the community run amok but we can't really say anything or we risk getting our words edited or deleted. Also, on more than one occasion I've seen moderators here jump into heated discussions to protect the ego of a popular poster so that she wouldn't leave because people disagreed with her instead of worshiping her words.


I agree with you about this, sadly it has damaged the value of Kboards long before this TOS issue came to be.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Riddick said:


> If the TOS is suddenly changed to state that the owners of this forum can come to your house and borrow your car whenever they felt like it does that mean that it's true?


No, it doesn't, but it does make litigation more complicated. I wouldn't be worried about losing in court, but I would be worried about having to spend thousands of dollars in legal fees to get anything at all done. Also, every single judge isn't necessarily sympathetic to, "Well, gee, your honor, yes, I saw that language, but I didn't think it would ever actually be used."

The people who assume that any risk is very minor are probably correct--but why take unnecessary risks? Part of the problem is that most of us aren't familiar with Verticalscope, and what little we have seen so far (weird ads, for example) isn't encouraging.


----------



## Guest

Puddleduck said:


> I've seen people on here ask that their account be deleted, which AFAIK has to be done by a mod, but it looked like all their posts stayed, and only their profile/avatar/name got scrubbed. So it seems to me that even when a mod deletes an account, all their comments are kept around. Please let me know if I have that wrong.
> 
> I also would like to know if there's an easier way to delete and scrub an account that doesn't involve individually deleting hundreds or thousands of posts.


I don't mind if the posts stay. I think esp. for people who've posted a lot, it'd be weird to have all their posts disappear. There would be no continuity in the discussion.


----------



## Becca Mills

We can:

1) delete your account, leaving your posts in place;
2) delete your account and all your response posts; or
3) delete your account and every single post you've made, including posts that initiate threads.

The last of these actions can be quite destructive, depending on the member in question, as it removes not only all that member's posts but all the posts in every thread they've initiated, causing the deletion of, potentially, hundreds of threads and thousands of other people's posts. Due to the GDPR, we can't deny these requests, despite the fact that the good-faith posts of many other members may be destroyed along with the departing members' threads.

I understand that some of you are very worried about this TOS language, but I hope you'll give Philip and his people some time to work on the issue. Corporate wheels turn slowly. We don't want to lose you.

*Edit:* On September 18, KB's moderators were directed by VerticalScope to stop deleting "content and user accounts," and the ability to delete accounts, mass-delete posts, and delete material from the Recycle Bin* has since been removed from the forum software for us. Those seeking removal of their data from the site need to PM Philip at the vsAdmin account or email [email protected] Our understanding, at this point, is that VerticalScope has a GDPR-compliant data removal or "anonymizing" process, which may take up to 30 days.

*See my explanation of the Recycle Bin here.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Becca Mills said:


> I understand that some of you are very worried about this TOS language, but I hope you'll give Philip and his people some time to work on the issue. Corporate wheels turn slowly. We don't want to lose you.


I'm relatively easy. If Philip popped up and said they were working on it, I'd be inclined to wait a bit. However, we haven't heard that that's the case yet.


----------



## CassieL

Becca Mills said:


> We can:
> 
> 1) delete your account, leaving your posts in place;
> 2) delete your account and all your response posts; or
> 3) delete your account and every single post you've made, including posts that initiate threads.
> 
> The last of these actions can be quite destructive, depending on the member in question, as it removes not only all that member's posts but all the posts in every thread they've initiated, causing the deletion of, potentially, hundreds of threads and thousands of other people's posts. Due to the GDPR, we can't deny these requests, despite the fact that the good-faith posts of many other members may be destroyed along with the departing members' threads.
> 
> I understand that some of you are very worried about this TOS language, but I hope you'll give Philip and his people some time to work on the issue. Corporate wheels turn slowly. We don't want to lose you.


As an example, if I requested to delete all of my posts that would take out the most recent AMS thread that has hundreds and hundreds of posts on it. That seems a very drastic thing to do if the management is working on tweaks to the terms so I'll hold off and see where this all falls out.

As for the AW discussion. I post there in the self-pub forum on a very irregular basis under one of my other pen names, but I usually try to push the more serious self-publishers to come over here because the level of self-pub info available over there is not as accurate or comprehensive. I have also seen them ban people in the self-pub forum for no good reason, one of whom went on to dominate the Amazon charts for close to a year. I didn't see that conversation happen real-time, but when I looked at the last posts by that user it didn't make any sense to me. Also, AW will not let you delete prior posts. They believe we're all writers and should own our words. (Or at least there is a post to that effect somewhere in the SP forum made by the moderator of that forum who it appears to me does have favorites among those who post there.)


----------



## CassieL

Al Stevens said:


> I just tried to log into AW to see if this discussion has been noticed over there. Apparently, it has. The forum doesn't recognize my userid or password. I guess they don't like being talked about.


What's the thread title? Because it's not in the self-pub forum and when I searched for "kboards" in posts in the last week nothing seemed relevant to this conversation.


----------



## Pandorra

Bill Hiatt said:


> I'm relatively easy. If Philip popped up and said they were working on it, I'd be inclined to wait a bit. However, we haven't heard that that's the case yet.


I agree, if they changed the terms I wouldn't be averse to staying, I haven't been that active lately anyways, but I have no intention of keeping an active account where someone has free access to my work .. this terminology may work for some sites where it isn't much of an issue but for us our names and our work is all we really have, _giving_ anyone those rights should be a big deal and something that is carefully considered and actually agreed upon, not a hidden byproduct of using a service. I am not even sure why that particular language is in the terms, it does NOTHING to protect the owners and everything to expose us to a multitude of {potential} problems.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Watching this thread. Not using KBoards much anymore, and do not agree to retroactive changes ostensibly affecting my prior participation.


----------



## Mercedes Vox

PearlEarringLady said:


> But they can have my avatar. That's well out of copyright.


Mine isn't. The wineglass is a picture I took, and my name is written in my actual handwriting.


----------



## Ellie L

x2 said:


> Not to worry, though. Canadians are pretty leftist, so they'll probably just encourage the mob to gang up on victims--it creates more hits for the advertisers, and that's what it's all about.


I'm sorry... what? We'd do what? As a Canadian posting on this board, I'm a tad bit offended. 
I think this thread is about to get pushed into an ugly area. I'm out.


----------



## Becca Mills

x2, issues with moderation should be handled via PM with the admin team. No more on that here, please.



Bill Hiatt said:


> I'm relatively easy. If Philip popped up and said they were working on it, I'd be inclined to wait a bit. However, we haven't heard that that's the case yet.


I do hope we hear something along those lines, Bill. Legal stuff often seems to move slowly in the corporate world. Perhaps the wheels are turning.



Cassie Leigh said:


> As an example, if I requested to delete all of my posts that would take out the most recent AMS thread that has hundreds and hundreds of posts on it. That seems a very drastic thing to do if the management is working on tweaks to the terms so I'll hold off and see where this all falls out.


Oh yes, that's a great example of the kind of important thread I had in mind, Cassie.


----------



## AltMe

For anyone interested, the new forum is up, just temporarily located, pending a domain name.It's not a replacement for Kboards, but more a reverse. The writer areas predominate, with a small reader area. So I'm hoping writers and even some readers will use both forums, each one having its own strengths.

http://thehunterlegacy.com/authortest


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

TimothyEllis said:


> For anyone interested, the new forum is up, just temporarily located, pending a domain name.It's not a replacement for Kboards, but more a reverse. The writer areas predominate, with a small reader area. So I'm hoping writers and even some readers will use both forums, each one having its own strengths.
> 
> http://thehunterlegacy.com/authortest


What is a Stag pub?


----------



## AltMe

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What is a Stag pub?


Play on English pub names. Just my sense of humour running amok.  
Also, I figured Authors would prefer a Pub to a Cafe.


----------



## Guest

I'm happy to wait if the new owners are indeed working on a ToS that's not so grabby. Julie gave them good working language to work with, this shouldn't take a long time, given how quickly they changed the original ToS. I like the analogy of the house--if I don't like the house rules, then I don't have to visit. Play by the rules.


----------



## 98700

Vijaya said:


> I'm happy to wait if the new owners are indeed working on a ToS that's not so grabby.


The problem, of course, being that we've been given no indication at all that the new owners are working on such a thing or have any interest in doing so. The owner's only post on here was to pat our hands and tell us not to worry our pretty heads. If they have any intention of modifying the TOS, they need to at least tell us they are working on doing that, and soon.


----------



## Guest

Puddleduck said:


> The problem, of course, being that we've been given no indication at all that the new owners are working on such a thing or have any interest in doing so. The owner's only post on here was to pat our hands and tell us not to worry our pretty heads. If they have any intention of modifying the TOS, they need to at least tell us they are working on doing that, and soon.


What's an important priority for us, might well be under 'any other business' on their agenda. Be cool and patient...


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

TimothyEllis said:


> Play on English pub names. Just my sense of humour running amok.
> Also, I figured Authors would prefer a Pub to a Cafe.


Stag Pub sounds like a pub for males, as in a stag party. Maybe a bar/coffee bar would be more universally understood. Sounds like a brain-storming session is in order


----------



## AltMe

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Stag Pub sounds like a pub for males, as in a stag party. Maybe a bar/coffee bar would be more universally understood. Sounds like a brain-storming session is in order


Open to all ideas.


----------



## 98700

TimothyEllis said:


> Open to all ideas.


Maybe just "writers' pub"? I agree that the "sounding like a pub name" joke doesn't really come across, and if anything it does kinda sound like it means it's a guys-only place.


----------



## Guest

Puddleduck said:


> Maybe just "writers' pub"? I agree that the "sounding like a pub name" joke doesn't really come across, and if anything it does kinda sound like it means it's a guys-only place.


I'm teetotal....... :/

......justkidding


----------



## Alan Petersen

Al Stevens said:


> Getting way off topic here. Maybe move this to your FB page?


Yes, it's a bit cheeky that the plan for this new forum is being discussed here. Any names you come up with here can be used by VS in perpetuity.


----------



## mjl1966

Diamond Eyes said:


> Email and forum posts are considered a tangible medium?


You bet. This text right here resides on a storage device in a server. Quite tangible.


----------



## mjl1966

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> This is starting to remind me of the conversation over EU jurisdiction in the United States.
> 
> What you write in e-mail or on a message board cannot be taken by someone and used without your permission. Under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, anything you fix in a tangible medium is copyrighted the moment you write or upload it. You cannot transfer any of your exclusive rights in that copyright without a signed, written instrument by operation of federal law. The fantasies contained in click-through agreements do not supersede Title 17 U.S.C. Section 204.


Depends on whether or not they stand up as legal contracts. Contracts trump copyright law. Sorry.


----------



## mjl1966

Let's take this apart, bit by bit.

_You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a non exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, create derivative works of, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM or which you provide by email or any other means to KBOARDS.COM and in any media now known or hereafter developed. 
_

Standard stuff - this is primarily so they can publish our posts without us coming back and demanding a royalty. However, this is missing the typical limitation I see in most other TOSs, which limit the license to use only for the purpose of operating the site. Notice that this license does not include a right to charge for whatever we write here. (i.e. - they can't distribute for sale - they can just redistribute.) As for copyright, the fact that they are having us grant a license implies what we write here is, in fact, copyrighted. (Otherwise no such license would be required.) An important term here is "public areas." They don't mention PMs. Implication: PM contents do not fall under this license. The bit about providing material by email or any other means would pertain to stuff not submitted on the platform. For me personally, the fact that they are not limiting the license for the purpose of running the site bothers me.

_Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. _

This part - the one everyone is really complaining about - pertains to a little number called moral rights. That's a legal term and it deals with a person's right to control what is and is not attributed to their good name. Some publishing contracts contain clauses like this so they can bandy about your name without having to clear it with you first. (And they often use the actual legal term "moral rights.") I've never ever seen a TOS that explicitly requires a waiver of moral rights. If I were somebody whose brand is actually worth money, I'd get with a lawyer on this one.

_You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.
_

Well, here in the U.S., you can't sign away your right to litigate. Most TOS and EULA agreements these days have an arbitration clause. Here, they are flat out saying we are agreeing not to do anything at all if we disagree with their use of our content. Even if they legally infringe your rights! ("actual infringement") I've never seen any such blanket disclaimer in a TOS. I have, however, seen such a disclaimer defeated in court time and again. Once again, if I had a valuable brand as an author, I'd run this whole thing by my lawyer.

For myself personally, I understand it well enough to know that VerticalScope can and will do just fine without my patronage. There are plenty of media on the Internet where I can express myself without signing away my moral rights, without granting an unpaid license to my content without limitation and where I am not expected waive my right to arbitration or litigation in the event somebody actually infringes my legal rights. (That last one actually makes me giggle. But not enough to stick around.)

See you in the funny papers.


----------



## 97251

TBF I'll say that the ads for Ukrainian women bother me more than those TOS. 

The thought that lurkers (and people doing Google searches)  can find my name in connection with this stuff doesn't please me. Of course, a solution is to change the username.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

hate spammy ads said:


> TBF I'll say that the ads for Ukrainian women bother me more than those TOS.
> 
> The thought that lurkers (and people doing Google searches) can find my name in connection with this stuff doesn't please me. Of course, a solution is to change the username.


When I started out, my first baby author website was on a free russian host (if you referred one new site a month, all was peachy.) It was great. The server was never down, the website ran fast and all was grand in the ToS. The best hosting experience I have had, with one exception. After about eighteen months, they decided free wasn't going to cut it anymore, and plopped a massive 500 pixel high banner add under my web site header, featuring not just an add, but actual hard core pornography GIF of some poor woman being rather violently defiled in a way that does not produce babies. Fortunately I had a small family forum attached which I kept open on my PC, and saw it pretty quick (well, to be honest, my sister saw it first.) An hour later, I had deleted my website entirely and opened a new paid account with a US based host, my domain redirected...

My point is, until you are paying for a service, as soon as advertising enters into things this reputation smasher is a risk. When attached to your actual author name, advertising must be avoided, so we have to pay for our hosting and related services as well as take care where else we put our names. Even if you write erotica, there are things out there you don't want to be attached to.


----------



## Guest

TheWriterFormerly KnownAsMRM said:


> My point is, until you are paying for a service, as soon as advertising enters into things this reputation smasher is a risk. When attached to your actual author name, advertising must be avoided, so we have to pay for our hosting and related services as well as take care where else we put our names. Even if you write erotica, there are things out there you don't want to be attached to.


Yes, this is why we all freaked out when the viglinks had started to appear in our posts right after the site was purchased. Suddenly our posts were being used to advertise things we had either no interest in or didn't approve of simply because we used a specific keyword. Adding those links to conversations not only implied endorsement from the poster, it caused confusion because you didn't know which hyperlinks were relevant to the discussion or which were ads.


----------



## Guest

Do we all see the same links? I use an adblocker so I'm unaware of this as a problem. I'm not going to turn it off to prove there is one, I'm happy for you to say it's there. However, I thought most of these ads were redirected subject to a set of rules usually relevant to keywords picked up by crawlers. I know it can be more sophisticated than that, like harvesting IP addresses and gaining country locations etc., but if those ads are appearing maybe it's because something within the site is activating them.

My real point is this - Now you're all being anonymous - who the hell am I reading about? How much notice should I pay to what you say? Am I on a writer's forum now, or have I been transferred by the moderators to a parallel universe? Are we all throwing out the baby with the bathwater here?

signed: _Bemused of Corfu_


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> Do we all see the same links? I use an adblocker so I'm unaware of this as a problem.


The vigilinks were deactivated quickly after our first revolt lol

The vigilinks pick up keywords in individual posts and add automatic hyperlinks to advertised content. So if you said something about Amazon, Amazon would end up hyperlinked and the link would go to an Amazon page. It could be the most random of things. You could be talking about content generators for blogs and the word generators would get hyperlinked to a website that sells gas generators.


----------



## AltMe

TobiasRoote said:


> or have I been transferred by the moderators to a parallel universe?


Kboards has always been a parallel universe!


----------



## 97251

TobiasRoote said:


> Do we all see the same links? I use an adblocker so I'm unaware of this as a problem. I'm not going to turn it off to prove there is one, I'm happy for you to say it's there. However, I thought most of these ads were redirected subject to a set of rules usually *relevant to keywords* picked up by crawlers.
> 
> signed: _Bemused of Corfu_


Yeah, you know... Haven't you heard that Ukrainian brides is the new trend in indie publishing? All authors are either researching about the topic, or writing about it. That's obviously the reason so many of us see things like that.

Anyways... I understand people writing "I have ad blockers, I don't see any of that." You can also say, "oh, it's only for non-logged-in users, so why bother?" 
Or worse: "it's based on your browsing habits." Cause we're all looking for Ukrainian brides or perhaps researching the topic, since it's the new indie publishing trend. Obviously.

The issue is that lurkers who don't use adblocks see all the nasty ads. You have an ad blocker, but the website where you post doesn't. Right now the links are gone. When they were there, it meant that someone could click on your post and be taken to a very shady website, thinking you sent them. That said, I don't check Kboards when I'm not logged in anymore, so I can't say if the links have returned.

Also, remember that most people have the assumption that links and ads are related to the content of the website. Again, everyone will be sure that Ukrainian women or Russian women caught on camera are the new publishing trends. You know, how comfortable are you contributing to a site that has racist, sexist, demeaning ads? Cause when you post content you are supporting the ads, right?

Yes, when we're not paying for a service, it makes sense that it should be supported by ads. No issue with that. No issue whatsoever. The problem are the types of ads and links.

And what does it have to do with the TOS?

It's a bigger issue than just TOS.

I do appreciate mods and admins for allowing this conversation, though.


----------



## Guest

TimothyEllis said:


> Kboards has always been a parallel universe!


Hmm! I recollect a short story somewhere that covered this. A man argued incessantly day after day in a forum that 'black was white', and 'white was black' only to find through some quirk of time and space that he was arguing with people in a different parallel universe where everything was reversed and 'white was black' and 'black was white'. I vaguely recollect going temporarily insane after finishing it.


----------



## Guest

Yay! said:


> Yeah, you know... Haven't you heard that Ukrainian brides is the new trend in indie publishing? All authors are either researching about the topic, or writing about it. That's obviously the reason so many of us see things like that.
> 
> Anyways... I understand people writing "I have ad blockers, I don't see any of that." You can also say, "oh, it's only for non-logged-in users, so why bother?"
> Or worse: "it's based on your browsing habits." Cause we're all looking for Ukrainian brides or perhaps researching the topic, since it's the new indie publishing trend. Obviously.
> 
> The issue is that lurkers who don't use adblocks see all the nasty ads. You have an ad blocker, but the website where you post doesn't. Right now the links are gone. When they were there, it meant that someone could click on your post and be taken to a very shady website, thinking you sent them. That said, I don't check Kboards when I'm not logged in anymore, so I can't say if the links have returned.
> 
> Also, remember that most people have the assumption that links and ads are related to the content of the website. Again, everyone will be sure that Ukrainian women or Russian women caught on camera are the new publishing trends. You know, how comfortable are you contributing to a site that has racist, sexist, demeaning ads? Cause when you post content you are supporting the ads, right?
> 
> Yes, when we're not paying for a service, it makes sense that it should be supported by ads. No issue with that. No issue whatsoever. The problem are the types of ads and links.
> 
> And what does it have to do with the TOS?
> 
> It's a bigger issue than just TOS.
> 
> I do appreciate mods and admins for allowing this conversation, though.


Well! I didn't mean to cause offence on such a point, and if I knew who you were I might even be aware of who I upset, but as I don't I can't. So there you go. I was thinking about the reader's side as well as writers and I wasn't trying to imply anything. I think the internet is well-used to these things which is why ad-blockers are so popular these days. As an aside, I wonder if their income from ads has grown as a result, or withered and died. 

Yes, I think the Mods allow this thread to exist because it's on topic, civil and TBH I think they are as much interested in how this pans out as we are.


----------



## Used To Be BH

TobiasRoote said:


> What's an important priority for us, might well be under 'any other business' on their agenda. Be cool and patient...


I think part of the reason that some people aren't inclined to be cool and patient is that every minute we remain here as members makes it easier to argue that we are implicitly consenting to this nonsense.

I'm sure Verticalscope would want to consult with its lawyers on this issue before drafting new language, and I'm OK with that. I'm not OK with Verticalscope saying nothing one way or the other about what its intentions are.

At first, I thought the language was boilerplate. However, the analyses here, most recently the one by mjl1966, have rightly pointed out there are sections here that are unusual and that grant Verticalscope far more than it needs to run this forum. Maybe the intent isn't sinister, but, if that's the case, changing the language to reflect common practice in the industry shouldn't be that hard. If other companies don't extend their TOS to involve other sites, unrelated except in being owned by the same company, if other companies can restrict their TOS to things they need to run their own site, if other companies don't require unprecedented use of our names in other context, then why would Verticalscope need it. Practically every deviation from the standard boilerplate is one that could be used against us.

My one cause for optimism is that the vigilink problem was correctly fairly quickly. Maybe that was actually a mistake in the way the system was set up. How well and how fast the TOS concerns are addressed will tell the tale.


----------



## Guest

Bill Hiatt said:


> I think part of the reason that some people aren't inclined to be cool and patient is that every minute we remain here as members makes it easier to argue that we are implicitly consenting to this nonsense.


Yes, it's nonsense. The fact this thread exists is sufficient to call it into dispute in legal terms. There are responses on here that are very sensible, but this mass exodus and immediate eradication of past posts and identities is ridiculous. People are right to be concerned, but not to the point where everyone dives for the nearest rabbit hole. In one week the posters on here have destroyed something that will be difficult [for them] to replace. How many spin-off forums are going to splinter the author sector now? How much better off will we be segregated into smaller vertical interest groups/cliques?

The answer is we lost, but the owners didn't destroy this forum - we did - by throwing away all that effort, and goodwill and our own reputations on the forum. Maybe this was just the last straw, but now, it will never be the same again and for me, that's a loss. I'm sure it's the same for a lot of others on here.


----------



## 97251

TobiasRoote said:
 

> Well! I didn't mean to cause offence on such a point, and if I knew who you were I might even be aware of who I upset, but as I don't I can't. So there you go. I


I'm not offended, i'm just trying to explain why there are other things bothering me apart from the TOS.

I'm a noob here, I'm a noob in publishing, I rarely post here, and when I post it's never anything useful, so no worries.

Plus I'm never offended about having different opinions. I'm sorry if you felt my response was harsh. That was not the intent.


----------



## Guest

Yay! said:


> Plus I'm never offended about having different opinions. I'm sorry if you felt my response was harsh. That was not the intent.


All good,


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Guest

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> as my lawyer friend always like to tell me, "How much do you want to go into debt just to prove you were right?"


Excellent advice  in the UK you need $140k in their hands to get started.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

TobiasRoote said:


> The answer is we lost, but the owners didn't destroy this forum - we did - by throwing away all that effort, and goodwill and our own reputations on the forum. Maybe this was just the last straw, but now, it will never be the same again and for me, that's a loss. I'm sure it's the same for a lot of others on here.


What! The forum has been destroyed . When, where, what happened ? It looks very much the same to me


----------



## Becca Mills

TobiasRoote said:


> TBH I think they are as much interested in how this pans out as we are.


And how.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

I went incognito a long time ago, but remain concerned for all the reasons stated. It's not just the TOS and the length of time it's taking to go to something more normal and far less reaching. It's the vigilink fiasco, the ads for extremely shady stuff (it's absolutely demeaning to women to be faced with that kind of horsepucky), but most of all, it's the uncertainty that this rapid trend downward will require constant vigilance because I have no clue what other shady stuff will come down the pike. 

This is a board meant for writers to socialize, trade info, improve craft, get advice, and generally do writerly things. It shouldn't be a minefield that requires close examination of the terms and minutia on a frequent basis. Once that happens, it's not fun anymore.

I'm waiting for the new site with optimism and will happily pay my annual dues there to keep it clean and professional.


----------



## Guest

WasAnn said:


> This is a board meant for writers to socialize, trade info, improve craft, get advice, and generally do writerly things. It shouldn't be a minefield that requires close examination of the terms and minutia on a frequent basis. Once that happens, it's not fun anymore.


Agreed! Trouble is business people, especially those who aren't attuned to us 'creatives' might view things differently and need time and discussion/reflection to reappraise their position. I'm just keen we don't jump too soon when there's a solution around the corner. I know I've been there and there's a world of difference between a strong P/L sheet and a [relatively speaking, tiny] discussion forum of little to no consequence to the business itself causing ructions in the ether. I'm sanguine about it all.

Like others here, I'm prepared to move, I might even staddle two boards to keep myself 'fixed' but I see no point in losing my identity here when I work hard to be identifiable and, as I stand by everything I say I don't mind if anyone quotes me. especially if I sell lots of books on the back of it.


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Guest

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I work for a huge corporation. There is no reason we have had no reply to this thread save for one post. None. Forums ARE their business. That is what they do. The fact that this thread started on the 12th and, here we are on the 17th, still don't even have a "Our legal team is reviewing the TOS to address your concerns. We ask for your patience while we work to resole this issue" tells me there is probably NOT a discussion happening. Because one of the first thing legal does is try to buy time. And you buy time by asking for time. The worst thing for a legal department to do is to not try and at least buy time to make a decision or come up with a counter.
> 
> We are all told that if we get any sort of legal complaint, to forward it to legal immediately regardless of how silly we might think it is. And then legal immediately acknowledges it. It might still take them a month to resolve it...but they acknowledge it to prevent festering that leads to escalation. Because festering and ignoring can create liability if a formal complaint is filed with a government agency (which I, BTW, and fully prepared to do). Because by acknowledging it, they can mitigate problems if a formal complaint is filed. They can say, "we immediately responded to the complainant when it was first brought to our attention" because the one thing you never want to tell the government is "Um, yeah, we got the complaint but haven't gotten around to looking at it yet."


Heck! I'm just saying that not all business are customer-facing and pro-reactive to PR issues. Maybe they don't give a s-hit, but I really don't think we need to jump ship when shore is a forty mile swim and there be sharks...  We have lifeboats, we have time. It's not the Titanic and we can afford to wait.


----------



## 98700

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I work for a huge corporation. There is no reason we have had no reply to this thread save for one post. None. Forums ARE their business. That is what they do. The fact that this thread started on the 12th and, here we are on the 17th, still don't even have a "Our legal team is reviewing the TOS to address your concerns. We ask for your patience while we work to resole this issue" tells me there is probably NOT a discussion happening. Because one of the first thing legal does is try to buy time. And you buy time by asking for time. The worst thing for a legal department to do is to not try and at least buy time to make a decision or come up with a counter.
> 
> We are all told that if we get any sort of legal complaint, to forward it to legal immediately regardless of how silly we might think it is. And then legal immediately acknowledges it. It might still take them a month to resolve it...but they acknowledge it to prevent festering that leads to escalation. Because festering and ignoring can create liability if a formal complaint is filed with a government agency (which I, BTW, and fully prepared to do). Because by acknowledging it, they can mitigate problems if a formal complaint is filed. They can say, "we immediately responded to the complainant when it was first brought to our attention" because the one thing you never want to tell the government is "Um, yeah, we got the complaint but haven't gotten around to looking at it yet."


Yeah, I'm pretty sure they've just shrugged and gone, "Well, if a few people leave, so what?" I'm not sure they entirely realize that a writers'/publishers' forum is different than a forum where people go to chat about cars or whatever. The successful professionals we have on here who share their expertise are what makes kboards valuable. If they leave, people stop coming. If people like Julie leave, I'm pretty sure I will too. The value just won't be here anymore. And that's not a threat to boycott or anything; just a statement of fact. If I stop seeing the value in something, I stop using it. I think there are a lot of others who feel the same.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

One of the huge benefits of KBoards is the vast amount of expertise of the posters. If you need advice on any subject there seems to be someone here able to help. It would be a shame to lose this valuable resource, and I'm not sure it can be replicated anywhere else.


----------



## Used To Be BH

TobiasRoote said:


> Yes, it's nonsense. The fact this thread exists is sufficient to call it into dispute in legal terms. There are responses on here that are very sensible, but this mass exodus and immediate eradication of past posts and identities is ridiculous. People are right to be concerned, but not to the point where everyone dives for the nearest rabbit hole. In one week the posters on here have destroyed something that will be difficult [for them] to replace. How many spin-off forums are going to splinter the author sector now? How much better off will we be segregated into smaller vertical interest groups/cliques?
> 
> The answer is we lost, but the owners didn't destroy this forum - we did - by throwing away all that effort, and goodwill and our own reputations on the forum. Maybe this was just the last straw, but now, it will never be the same again and for me, that's a loss. I'm sure it's the same for a lot of others on here.


I don't *want* to dive for the nearest rabbit hole. As I've said, I'd be content, at least for a few days, with some indication that the TOS was being worked on. We don't even have that yet. All we have is one statement from Philip, which basically said nothing unusual was intended and that the TOS is basically just there for legal reasons. I buy that for the standard boilerplate, but not for the elements that are unusual.



> Yes, it's nonsense. The fact this thread exists is sufficient to call it into dispute in legal terms.


 I'm not sure a lawyer would agree with you, but I'm asking mine on Monday. I think we could be in territory that hasn't yet been litigated. If we deny our implied consent in writing in a forum thread, and Verticalscope does not remove us as members, does that mean it has implicitly accepted our refusal of some or all of the terms? It could be the basis of an argument, but my gut is telling me not a winning one. The same thing is true of Philip's reassurances. The TOS would likely trump both of those in court.

Like you, I don't want to see Writer's Cafe die. I've gotten a lot of good information and support over the years. You know what, though? The contributors here aren't going to disappear. I see a number of them in Timothy's forum already. Some may go elsewhere, but they won't cease to exist just because they've left Kboards. It will take time to build a community of the same size and depth, but if it needs to happen, it can.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> One of the huge benefits of KBoards is the vast amount of expertise of the posters. If you need advice on any subject there seems to be someone here able to help. It would be a shame to lose this valuable resource, and I'm not sure it can be replicated anywhere else.


It will take time for sure, but it can be done. As I understand it, when Kboards started, the emphasis was on readers and Kindle owners. The writers' part came later. It built up with time. The same will happen elsewhere if the new owners continue on their current course. It won't be tomorrow. It may not be next month. But, give time, it will be...


----------



## Guest

Bill Hiatt said:


> I see a number of them in Timothy's forum already. Some may go elsewhere, but they won't cease to exist just because they've left Kboards. It will take time to build a community of the same size and depth, but if it needs to happen, it can.


Yes, but isn't it a shame to lose something that has such a following and I'm talking of the readers as well as everyone else associated with the author tribe. I do think it's too late for some, possibly many, but my comment earlier about it being dead referred to it in its current form. There's nothing to stop a revival occurring if the problems are sorted. The trouble is I feel the writing IS on the wall and I'm probably just in denial. Still, Timothy's shows promise so, let's wait and see.


----------



## 101569

Any one know their time Zone? It's rapidly approaching 5est.


----------



## telracs

I haven't posted in quite a while, and probably won't post again for a while, but I need to say a few things.

1.  I understand authors worrying about their reputation and rights and if they feel they are in jeopardy here, I can support them not being cool with posting here.
2.  KB was NOT started as a place for self publishers or for writers of any kind.  It was started  by Harvey as a place for kindle owners (back when kindle first came out) to discuss kindles.  and then books on kindles.  and then the authors who wrote books for kindle. 3. Some of those authors came to KB as members.  And there was not division of readers and writers.
4. Authors started discussing craft and business and other issues.  So, the Writers' Café was born.  Not to segregate people, but to keep topics clear.
5.  The balance between authors and readers tilted towards the authors and the WC became the most popular place on KB.
6. Carrie decided to sell the board after Harvey's death. I sometimes wonder if Carrie actually knew how much the board had shifted to the author side of things.  Perhaps she just thought it was still readers mostly and did not feel that the new owners would be stepping on people's toes with their TOS.

Lastly, something of a long term view...
Fora come, fora evolve, sometimes fora die.  
But keeping a good attitude when interacting with others will always lead to better karma.

I miss a number of the old posters.  I miss some current posters who I don't interact with much any more.  And I will miss some of the current posters if KB closes.  
But I will still have my memories.  For those, I thank everyone.


----------



## Caddy

Geez. I just came back. But I've been gone so long it's not worth the potential hassle. Closing my account. Bye!


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

thedudeminds said:


> This.
> 
> I'm out end of day tomorrow if we don't hear anything from ownership between now and then addressing our concerns. Of course, little ol' me leaving is hardly fatal for kboards, and in the grand scheme might seem meaningless or rash, but everyone has their own personal line in the sand when it comes to their business, their name, reputation, etc - this is one of mine.
> 
> Even reconciling the TOS language is likely something the company would never act on, still, the language exists. For me, standing on principle in this instance matters.


I sure hope you'll come over to the other board! You're such a good influence! Also, every board needs their own The Dude.


----------



## R. C.

T...online said:


> I just joined Timothy's forum, seems to be increasing in membership, I'm hoping the long standing regulars, along with their expertise & knowledge, go there too if things go pear shaped here.


Agreed - hopefully it takes off.

Cheers,
Ruairi


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Hey, thirteen pages...what'd I miss when I was in my bunker writing to a deadline? 

Someone save me from reading thirteen pages and summerise, pretty-pretty, please.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Mark Gardner said:


> no response from new owner indicating they're even looking at the TOS. If no response, I'm gone close of business tomorrow, and will request that all my posts be deleted.


Thanks, Mark. I guess people posting under their author name have a lot to lose from what I've scanned of this thread so far.

Has anyone else got some really suspect emails lately, and by lately, since the site changed hands? I've only used the email I signed up with here for a couple of things and my junk box is full of ****. I'm in the UK and stopped getting that stuff after the EU rule came into force a few months ago. Now it's being bombarded every day. Are they allowed to sell our email address?


----------



## PhoenixS

Someone else has already grabbed "Phoenix" over on Timothy's forum. That's going to be a brand dilution that I just don't believe is worth it. So sorry, not going there.

I think if we don't hear from VS by end of day tomorrow (Tues), I'll ask for a full wipe from KBoards. I've always shared freely here, but I won't risk someone else commoditizing my research, analysis and observations. 

I've also used KB as a platform to "speak" to Amazon reps, knowing they trawl here. Will they begin visiting other fora? Which one(s)? By the time I figure that out, I'll be even further out from the day-to-day biz. Pretty sure it won't be long anyway before I become an anachronism.

So if I leave here, I'll likely not go to another public forum.


----------



## 98700

Sounds like the end of the day tomorrow is the deadline for the new owners to indicate if they have any intention of trying to hold onto members or not.


----------



## going going gone

PhoenixS said:


> Someone else has already grabbed "Phoenix" over on Timothy's forum. That's going to be a brand dilution that I just don't believe is worth it. So sorry, not going there.
> 
> I think if we don't hear from VS by end of day tomorrow (Tues), I'll ask for a full wipe from KBoards. I've always shared freely here, but I won't risk someone else commoditizing my research, analysis and observations.
> 
> I've also used KB as a platform to "speak" to Amazon reps, knowing they trawl here. Will they begin visiting other fora? Which one(s)? By the time I figure that out, I'll be even further out from the day-to-day biz. Pretty sure it won't be long anyway before I become an anachronism.
> 
> So if I leave here, I'll likely not go to another public forum.


For people like me, middling authors still learning, that's a catastrophic loss. I was in the process of reading through all your posts here (sorry, that was an edit. Long darned day) this past week, gleaning what I could. Thank you for all of that wisdom and work. If that knowledge is monetized, you should definitely be the only one pulling in any cash for it.


----------



## Guest

Becca Mills said:


> We can:
> 
> 1) delete your account, leaving your posts in place;
> 2) delete your account and all your response posts; or
> 3) delete your account and every single post you've made, including posts that initiate threads.


Becca, please go ahead and delete my account. #1. Thank you.


----------



## MyCatDoesNotConsent

Я не согласен с условиями T.O.S.


----------



## telracs

Al Stevens said:


> The major problem with the TOS for me is their right to use my name. That name used to carry weight when I was writing computer programming books and had a magazine column with a huge readership. It's a brand among a previous generation, not so much anymore since I retired, but I'd be upset if it was misused in a way that did not carry my approval, especially as an endorsement of anything.
> 
> I'm still considering options. I'll have to make a decision when we hear from the V-peeps. Or when we do not. Whatever I decide about KB, I'll hang out in Timothy's new place to see how it shakes out.
> 
> I'm wondering. Has the grass begun to stir in the readers' sub-fora over this issue? Are they involved, uncaring, or totally ignorant?
> 
> This too shall pass.


Oh, those of us who are still here have noticed (please see my post on the previous page).
But many of the "readers" have quietly left over the past few years as KB became less about kindle and more about self publishing and the writers didn't bother coming out to play.


----------



## AltMe

telracs said:


> Oh, those of us who are still here have noticed (please see my post on the previous page).
> But many of the "readers" have quietly left over the past few years as KB became less about kindle and more about self publishing and the writers didn't bother coming out to play.


Maybe that's what will happen, and KB will return to its roots, being a Kindle forum, and a reader forum.


----------



## MClayton

telracs said:


> Oh, those of us who are still here have noticed (please see my post on the previous page).
> But many of the "readers" have quietly left over the past few years as KB became less about kindle and more about self publishing and the writers didn't bother coming out to play.


That's really sad, telracs. I'm betting a lot of authors are shy about joining in. I know I am. Back in the day, if you tried to participate in a reader forum on many of the Amazon boards, you'd be chased out of town with pitchforks. It was the authors' fault in the beginning, because the boards were overrun with rude drive-by authors interrupting conversations trying to sell their books. After a while, the ill will spread toward any author who tried to participate on most (not all, but most) of those threads. For a couple of years we were allowed to have links to our books in our signature (this was in 2009-2011). Then the spamming authors got so bad we were no longer allowed to include links, and for years after I stopped participating there (in 2014 or so), I would still occasionally get a warning email from Amazon because someone had dug up a zombie thread from 2009-2011 and complained that I was spamming the boards.

Now I stay out of reader threads because if I don't want to intrude or be seen as a spammer.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

If you wish to delete your account and/or your posts, please send a message directly to a moderator. Please be clear about what you are requesting.

Thanks.



edited:
Sorry, as of around Sept 18, 2018, moderators can not delete accounts. Please contact vsAdmin via PM or email the ownership at [email protected]


----------



## Medea is not a victim type

I've moved on because I do not agree to the TOS the new owners have unilaterally employed without any prior notice. It's unethical behavior and shows ill will even if in a court of law it wouldn't be enforceable. 

All a company needs is an idiot lawyer, and the result is legalese that no sensible person would agree to. But regardless of the obnoxious and unenforceable verbiage, the bottom line for us posters is that we do not need anything on this site. Information can be passed around elsewhere.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

NotMyCat said:


> tl;dr -- they're in it for the short-term profit and don't care about the long-term loss.


That would be my guess as well.

I might wait a bit longer before requesting deletion (complete deletion), but there's no real reason to wait. Maybe I'm just feeling a bit of denial about what is pretty clearly happening here. Although I'm rarely on here anymore, KBoards used to be one of my most-frequented sites. Sad...

I already have other ways to connect with other writers, so I won't be joining a new forum. If anyone wants to contact me, I'm not hard to find.


----------



## Atunah

telracs said:


> Oh, those of us who are still here have noticed (please see my post on the previous page).
> But many of the "readers" have quietly left over the past few years as KB became less about kindle and more about self publishing and the writers didn't bother coming out to play.


Yep. That.

Some of us readers have been silent, made feel unwelcome in the WC, but by extension many have left all together. Some of us still read though. I been told to stay out of the WC so I have. Not many authors participating in the other parts of KB. And here we are. No, we are not ignorant. We notice. I been here since 2008. KB has meant something to me as KB, not just an authors board though.


----------



## telracs

MClayton said:


> That's really sad, telracs. I'm betting a lot of authors are shy about joining in. I know I am. Back in the day, if you tried to participate in a reader forum on many of the Amazon boards, you'd be chased out of town with pitchforks. It was the authors' fault in the beginning, because the boards were overrun with rude drive-by authors interrupting conversations trying to sell their books. After a while, the ill will spread toward any author who tried to participate on most (not all, but most) of those threads. For a couple of years we were allowed to have links to our books in our signature (this was in 2009-2011). Then the spamming authors got so bad we were no longer allowed to include links, and for years after I stopped participating there (in 2014 or so), I would still occasionally get a warning email from Amazon because someone had dug up a zombie thread from 2009-2011 and complained that I was spamming the boards.
> 
> Now I stay out of reader threads because if I don't want to intrude or be seen as a spammer.


Unfortunately, there were some less than nice people on both sides of the equation at various times, some readers wanting authors to stay out of thread, and then some authors wanting readers to stay out of the cafe.

As I've said before, fora evolve. This is not the first time I've seen a forum change and wither on the vine. Hopefully, it won't be the last.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## AltMe

For anyone wondering, this is the beginning of the ToS for the new forum. It took a bit of discussion, but people seem to be happy with this.



> By posting, uploading, or displaying anything on this forum, you agree to grant WriterSanctum.com a non-exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, ongoing license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, and publicly display any materials and other information you submit to any part of the forum of WriterSanctum.com, under your choice of username, for as long as you leave such material on the forum. You agree that you shall have no recourse against WriterSanctum.com for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to WriterSanctum.com that is not the result of WriterSanctum.com's activities.
> 
> WriterSanctum.com affirms that your Intellectual Property will not be used in any way outside the forum.
> 
> In other words, you give permission by your activity for the forum to function, and display whatever you add to it. You further agree to allow your posts to be quoted on this forum by others. You retain 100% of rights and copyright for your words, images, and Intellectual Property.


----------



## Blocked Writer

In my day job, I teach Software Engineering at a large state university. Some of my colleagues, in conjunction with Sociologists and Psychologists, are researching the dynamics of social networking. It's interesting stuff, and there are some cool research papers forthcoming. Without going into detail as to why--because I don't want to offend anyone, or hurt any feelings--I'd discourage people from being too hasty, or jumping to any of the "lessor" existing sites or yet another hastily established site.

This is an intelligent and sophisticated group of people. These problems have caused angst across a large swath of the community. Rather than a bunch of individual knee-jerk reactions, the community should band together and devise a migration path that's rational and works for the vast majority of members. Instead of entrusting your interests and rights to yet another third party, take ownership of them. Control them. For example, I'd suggest establishing a self-governing board/forum/site owned by a nonprofit. Rather than one person or for-profit entity "owning" the forums and content, the members should "own" it. After all, it's the members who generate the content anyway. 

Additionally, if members want to maintain their persona and/or reputation, all existing KB IDs ought to be reserved at the new site. That would be very easy to do.


----------



## Simon Haynes

Blocked Writer said:


> In my day job, I teach Software Engineering at a large state university. Some of my colleagues, in conjunction with Sociologists and Psychologists, are researching the dynamics of social networking. It's interesting stuff, and there are some cool research papers forthcoming. Without going into detail as to why--because I don't want to offend anyone, or hurt any feelings--I'd discourage people from being too hasty, or jumping to any of the "lessor" existing sites or yet another hastily established site.
> 
> This is an intelligent and sophisticated group of people. These problems have caused angst across a large swath of the community. Rather than a bunch of individual knee-jerk reactions, the community should band together and devise a migration path that's rational and works for the vast majority of members. Instead of entrusting your interests and rights to yet another third party, take ownership of them. Control them. For example, I'd suggest establishing a self-governing board/forum/site owned by a nonprofit. Rather than one person or for-profit entity "owning" the forums and content, the members should "own" it. After all, it's the members who generate the content anyway.
> 
> Additionally, if members want to maintain their persona and/or reputation, all existing KB IDs ought to be reserved at the new site. That would be very easy to do.


I think the horses have already bolted.

The problem is, authors are a very different audience to, say, 4WD enthusiasts. Words are our tools and our product, and our online identities are a crucial part of our marketing.

(I'm not denigrating members of other forums here - as it happens, I belong to a forum for my particular make and model of car, and it _is_ a whole different ball game.)

Having said all that, I'll continue to visit Kboards to see how things shake out - I like the place, I don't care about the TOS for any site I use, and I think the moderators do a great job.


----------



## Blocked Writer

Simon Haynes said:


> The problem is, authors are a very different audience to, say, 4WD enthusiasts. Words are our tools and our product, and our online identities are a crucial part of our marketing.
> 
> (I'm not denigrating members of other forums here - as it happens, I belong to a forum for my particular make and model of car, and it _is_ a whole different ball game.)


That's exactly why I think this group ought to take control, and is capable of doing so! Btw, I too belong to multiple car sites as well as a piano forum.


----------



## 41419

I don't post on Kboards anymore for a variety of reasons, but as the new owners haven't even bothered to give the courtesy of a holding response to those who still do, I will join with the others: if we don't hear from the site owners by end of day today, I will also request a full wipe of everything I have posted here.


----------



## Jill Nojack

I assume that none of the people who are leaving have a Facebook account? Because the terms are pretty much identifical:

https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

Lots of sites in which the majority of what they offer is user-generated content have the exact same terms. And most of them use it just to cover themselves for every possible eventually in case they are sued.

Well, except Facebook, which really does use your likeness to sell stuff to your friends.


----------



## Klip

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018.


----------



## Guest

Jill Nojack said:


> I assume that none of the people who are leaving have a Facebook account? Because the terms are pretty much identifical:
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms
> 
> Lots of sites in which the majority of what they offer is user-generated content have the exact same terms. And most of them use it just to cover themselves for every possible eventually in case they are sued.


Yeah, this thread is one of the biggest overreactions I've ever seen on a forum. I don't like the new TOS and I don't like the new ads but I completely understand the perspective of the owners.

Having said that, I'm happy that someone is starting a new forum for self-published authors. One that is geared more towards writers and has a different approach to moderating. There will never be one forum that satisfies all tastes and there is nothing saying that we can't post on more than one forum.


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Klip

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Mark Gardner said:


> You're not imagining it. Since yesterday afternoon, the total post count for Writer's Cafe has gone down from 2,043,276 to 2,039,739. I didn't check the day before, but I remember it being higher.


People have asked for their accounts/posts to be deleted. We are honoring such requests.

We are NOT deleting posts or accounts unless very specifically requested by the members as per this post by Becca: https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,267677.msg3731183.html#msg3731183


----------



## 98700

Jill Nojack said:


> I assume that none of the people who are leaving have a Facebook account?


I don't, and I know I'm not the only one who's posted on this thread who doesn't.


----------



## Guest

What maybe isn't made totally clear here* (and should be) is that if you want to take these people to court now, or at any time in the future it's going to cost you your house just to get it into court in the first place. Meanwhile, your reputation will be trashed by whatever it is they're doing. This might or might not be true, or affect all of us, but if it hurt just one person on here, then it's bad news. This is why rightly or wrongly, people are jumping ship. It may be that everyone's running around like chickens with their heads lopped off, but who's to say they're wrong. If everyone took this in their stride maybe nothing would ever happen, but if it did and nobody had reacted? .... Well, go figure. (no offence intended, the chickens were not hurt during this demonstration of crass writing!) 

[edit] *It might have been mentioned, but many of the points have been hidden in a ton of legal jargon so people might not have noticed.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Meh. Business as usual here. I'm not going anywhere.


----------



## Lydniz

I have no time for any other forums (I haven't even got time for this one really) so I'm not going anywhere just yet. I haven't posted anything it would bother me to see elsewhere (in fact, I did a bit of judicious deleting of posts a couple of years ago for this sort of eventuality), although I understand others might have more to lose.


----------



## Kathy Dee

Lydniz said:


> I have no time for any other forums (I haven't even got time for this one really) so I'm not going anywhere just yet. I haven't posted anything it would bother me to see elsewhere (in fact, I did a bit of judicious deleting of posts a couple of years ago for this sort of eventuality), although I understand others might have more to lose.


That's about how I feel. However, I think a lot of the value here has been because of mixing with other like minded people. Perhaps, it will become less attractive for me to hang out here for a few minutes each day.

As far as my account is concerned, it is a penname I specifically reserved for this place. After reading what others had said about people leaving bad reviews on their books, I figured it was better to be relatively anonymous.

I am really surprised that KBoards have not just said 'sorry' and changed their TOS - it is easy enough


----------



## Used To Be BH

Kathy Dee said:


> That's about how I feel. However, I think a lot of the value here has been because of mixing with other like minded people. Perhaps, it will become less attractive for me to hang out here for a few minutes each day.
> 
> As far as my account is concerned, it is a penname I specifically reserved for this place. After reading what others had said about people leaving bad reviews on their books, I figured it was better to be relatively anonymous.
> 
> I am really surprised that KBoards have not just said 'sorry' and changed their TOS - it is easy enough


Yes, it is surprising that Kboards hasn't at least indicated they're working on it. Getting their TOS to conform to that of other social media would not be that difficult.

At the end of the day, the more egregious clauses may never be enforced--but they could be. I'm just too risk-averse to take the chance. Nor do I want to spend thousands in court if something does go wrong. Kboards has been a great place for information. However, there are other places, and as more and more people leave, Kboards will decline in value.


----------



## Guest

I'm still missing something after reading through this thread.
How do I delete a post?

Step 1, do this
Step 2, do this
Step 3, etc
Etc

Thank you


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

I'm not going anywhere yet, either. I'm giving the new owners a fair chance -- a few days is hardly enough time for a corporate legal team to draw up a new TOS -- to address the concerns raised here. I'm not sure it's anything to worry about, but I don't want to be part of a forum where the owners don't respond to members' concerns. KBoards has always been a community, and the new management should consider keeping that atmosphere alive.

We did get a response from an admin, but I think it's fair for the TOS to be revised, since so many members aren't comfortable with it.

Members raised concerns on the 12th, only six days ago, only four of which were business days. I'm giving management some time, because as others have mentioned, nothing moves quickly in the corporate world.


----------



## 98700

I'm not sure a week or more is really an unreasonable timeframe for them to change the TOS. Regardless of that, though, the fact that they haven't even indicated they are looking at it or have any indication of so much as considering changing the TOS makes me wonder why some people are so willing to give them time. Give them time to do what? It would take a moment for them to come on here and say, "We hear you, and we're working on it." They haven't. Ergo, why assume they have any intention of changing? Like someone else said, if they wanted us to give them more time, all they have to do is ask for it. They haven't. So I think it's more reasonable to assume that they have no intention of doing anything than to assume they're working on it and it just hasn't worked through the corporate process.


----------



## Kathy Dee

Elizabeth Barone said:


> I'm not going anywhere yet, either. I'm giving the new owners a fair chance -- a few days is hardly enough time for a corporate legal team to draw up a new TOS -- to address the concerns raised here.


We're in c21 - 2 minute job!


----------



## Used To Be BH

Puddleduck said:


> I'm not sure a week or more is really an unreasonable timeframe for them to change the TOS. Regardless of that, though, the fact that they haven't even indicated they are looking at it or have any indication of so much as considering changing the TOS makes me wonder why some people are so willing to give them time. Give them time to do what? It would take a moment for them to come on here and say, "We hear you, and we're working on it." They haven't. Ergo, why assume they have any intention of changing? Like someone else said, if they wanted us to give them more time, all they have to do is ask for it. They haven't. So I think it's more reasonable to assume that they have no intention of doing anything than to assume they're working on it and it just hasn't worked through the corporate process.


I agree that we should by now at least have seen a message that they're working on it.

I'm waiting until Monday when I have a meeting with my attorney, but I'm reasonably sure his reaction will be the same as Julie's attorney's reaction. If it is, I will be regretfully gone at that point.


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Atunah said:


> I been told to stay out of the WC so I have.


What!  Who told you to stay out? I've always welcomed input from readers, and I thought everyone else here did.


----------



## AltMe

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What!  Who told you to stay out? I've always welcomed input from readers, and I thought everyone else here did.


Ditto. Some of the reader perspectives on some issues have been very important.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Is there any reason why the people who have deleted their accounts cannot come back under another name and still take part in discussions? The KBoards have so much to offer, and I think I would have withdrawal symptoms if I could no longer participate.


----------



## munboy

My couple of cents (for what it's worth...and that's all it's worth).

The TOS doesn't bother me. I don't care.

What DOES bother me is how the change has been handled. Most people know they sign their life away when they agree to use a service. The problem I see is when a company makes a significant change to their TOS like it appears was done, they send out a notification to inform their users (usually in the form of an email). I didn't receive any such email. Shows a lack of professionalism and common courtesy. Not a good start for the new company that took over.

I'm also surprised by the lack of dialogue. There are a fair number of people who have expressed concerns and the only response seems to be what amounts to "This is how you can leave and don't let the door hit you on the way out."

I don't spend a lot of time on the board because my life doesn't afford that luxury, but I will say I've learned quite a bit in the few months I've been here...more than I learned going it alone over the past few years of publishing. For now, I'll be in a holding pattern. If I don't see an improvement in how the new management conducts business and see its users as an asset instead of playing the numbers game (for all the people dropping out, new users will sign up), I'll probably end up fading away.


----------



## munboy

Speaking of fading away.... Seeing post counts go down and people leaving is giving me flashbacks to Infinity War.

Looks like Mark Gardner will be the next to be Thanos'd away.

"I don't want to go Mr. Stark."


----------



## 98700

munboy said:


> I'm also surprised by the lack of dialogue. There are a fair number of people who have expressed concerns and the only response seems to be what amounts to "This is how you can leave and don't let the door hit you on the way out."


To be fair, the post I think you're referring to was from the mods as a direct reply to some of us wondering if we could easily delete all our posts. The only response from the actual owners have been more like, "Nothing to see here. Move along."



munboy said:


> Speaking of fading away.... Seeing post counts go down and people leaving is giving me flashbacks to Infinity War.
> 
> Looks like Mark Gardner will be the next to be Thanos'd away.
> 
> "I don't want to go Mr. Stark."


I'd complain about spoilers, but even though I haven't seen the movie, I could hardly have avoided that particular spoiler even if I'd wanted to. (Part of the reason I haven't seen the movie. Maybe if the next one brings them all back, but otherwise, I'm feeling pretty MCU'd out.)


----------



## AltMe

Puddleduck said:


> I'd complain about spoilers, but even though I haven't seen the movie, I could hardly have avoided that particular spoiler even if I'd wanted to. (Part of the reason I haven't seen the movie. Maybe if the next one brings them all back, but otherwise, I'm feeling pretty MCU'd out.)


Best not look at the list of up coming movies then.


----------



## 98700

TimothyEllis said:


> Best not look at the list of up coming movies then.


Haha, I know, but I'll probably just ignore them like I do the new Star Wars movies (despite being a fan of what SW was before Disney got it).


----------



## munboy

Puddleduck said:


> Haha, I know, but I'll probably just ignore them like I do the new Star Wars movies (despite being a fan of what SW was before Disney got it).


You're missing out. Rogue One is an incredibly excellent movie. I even enjoyed Solo quite a bit. (The actual new Star Wars sequels are just kinda...eh)

As for Marvel....Marvel comics are what originally got me into reading many many years ago. I will always geek out on the movies. Even the horrible ones.

Also...yay, thread hijacking!


----------



## Used To Be BH

munboy said:


> Speaking of fading away.... Seeing post counts go down and people leaving is giving me flashbacks to Infinity War.
> 
> Looks like Mark Gardner will be the next to be Thanos'd away.
> 
> "I don't want to go Mr. Stark."


That's an interesting analogy, except that people aren't being wiped out of existence. This is more like the kind of science fiction in which people migrate to a new planet as the ecosystem on their home world collapses. It's a tough transition, but it's also a hope for a better future.


----------



## Kristen Painter

Don't love the new ToS, but thanks to David G for the heads up. I'll be deleting too. I have too much going on to add another worry.


----------



## 101569

munboy said:


> You're missing out. Rogue One is an incredibly excellent movie. I even enjoyed Solo quite a bit. (The actual new Star Wars sequels are just kinda...eh)
> 
> As for Marvel....Marvel comics are what originally got me into reading many many years ago. I will always geek out on the movies. Even the horrible ones.
> 
> Also...yay, thread hijacking!


Oh my I love the iron man movies. i dont think i've ever laughed so hard.

Orignal X-men storyline has to be some of the best comics ever.

Is it wrong that i prefer the star trek movies to the new star wars movies, but i love to play swg?


----------



## Becca Mills

Philip from VS has been in communication with the mod team. My understanding is that he's writing up an explanation of the situation to send up the chain to VS's legal department. I hope he'll post here with more details.

I hope we'll get a resolution quickly, but I wouldn't be surprised if we don't. If the current TOS was developed by VS's legal department and is applied to all the forums it owns, and if we're asking for something different, surely that's going to require discussion at that company -- and I don't have any sense for how big/well staffed VS is.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> Meh. Business as usual here. I'm not going anywhere.


I'm so glad to hear it, Rick, as removal of all your posts would delete the entire "Box set scams on Passive Voice" thread.

Many of you may have noticed the legal threats made in the most recent Books Butterfly thread. The Chutes bore those kinds of risks on our behalf for decades. VerticalScope is bearing them now. I think there's always risk in public speech, especially online -- legal risk, risks to privacy and financial data, risk of self-damage, the risk of vengeful acts by others, etc. Risk is omnipresent, and the more public the speech, the more risks go with it. The question is when that risk becomes great enough to stop speech, understanding that there's also a downside when speech stops or goes private. In all honesty, I don't feel at all qualified to judge the risk presented by the TOS as it pertains personally to someone like me, someone with no fame to trade on. The viglink thing was clearer to me: I could see the links in my posts, and I didn't want to appear to be endorsing something I didn't actually endorse. That's pretty straightforward. But how the TOS could/would concretely affect me feels foggier. Speaking personally (not as a moderator), having been a member since 2012, and having 9,000 posts and 100 thread-starts, I feel I'm sitting on too big a piece of the history of the self-publishing industry to delete it -- and take a bunch of other people's posts out too -- unless I become more certain the risk to me outweighs the benefit to the community.

I understand that many of you feel differently and am, in fact, off to delete a bunch of accounts now.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Becca Mills said:


> I feel I'm sitting on too big a piece of the history of the self-publishing industry to delete it -- and take a bunch of other people's posts out too -- unless I become more certain the risk to me outweighs the benefit to the community.
> 
> I understand that many of you feel differently and am, in fact, off to delete a bunch of accounts now.


I've bookmarked so many useful threads and will be sad to lose them if people are deleting their accounts and posts . 
I'm taking note of my own words under my avatar and staying put.


----------



## 98700

Becca Mills said:


> unless I become more certain the risk to me outweighs the benefit to the community.


The question, as I'm reading it from those with more to lose than a (currently) tiny fish like myself, is not whether the risk to them personally outweighs the benefit to the community, but whether the risk to them personally outweighs the benefit to them personally. Community well-being is great and all, but when our businesses and livelihoods are on the line (as expressed by some of the big fish who've posted here), _no _amount of benefit to the community is worth taking the risk personally. Especially when the one really benefiting is a corporation. Sure, the community benefits from the shared expertise, but it's VS who, by claiming the rights they do in the TOS, actually owns the value of the expertise shared here. And those with expertise of the level that it has actual monetary value don't want that value going to some company who claims it in a unilateral rights-grab. This isn't, in my mind, about taking value away from the community to protect our (their) own personal risk. It's about owing nothing to a corporation that wants to grab rights to our own personal IP, even if that, unfortunately, has the secondary effect of that expertise no longer being as accessible to the larger community.

I don't mean to speak for anyone else, of course; that's just how I'm reading the situation.


----------



## Guest

If the new owner backs up all the posts, and our book covers, art and personal info, then it doesn't do any good for us to delete our stuff.
It's already on the new owner's database to sell as he wishes.


----------



## 98700

okey dokey said:


> If the new owner backs up all the posts, and our book covers, art and personal info, then it doesn't do any good for us to delete our stuff.
> It's already on the new owner's database to sell as he wishes.


Except possessing those things doesn't give him the right to use/sell them. Since the new TOS happened without warning and without requiring any additional confirmation from users that we agree to it, having our accounts deleted is probably the only way we can indicate that we don't agree to the TOS and that he has no right to use whatever info he's gathered from us. No, it's not perfect, but presumably it's the best option we have (for those of us for whom the TOS is a concern).


----------



## PhoenixS

I'm the OP on the Christina/RH lawsuit thread. That thread will not disappear because of me. So I'll have to walk back a full wipe, and accept any repercussions that leaving my thread-starts here might leave me open to for the next few weeks or months.



okey dokey said:


> If the new owner backs up all the posts, and our book covers, art and personal info, then it doesn't do any good for us to delete our stuff.
> It's already on the new owner's database to sell as he wishes.


That's always been the case. With our consent and continuance on KB under the new TOS, that's legal [ETA: _potentially_ legal -- still some possibility a site wrap like that won't hold up in court]. However, without our consent, it's not legal. People _staying_ and simply deleting old posts are _potentially_ giving consent to use all posts past and present. That's the difference.



Becca Mills said:


> Philip from VS has been in communication with the mod team. My understanding is that he's writing up an explanation of the situation to send up the chain to VS's legal department. I hope he'll post here with more details.
> 
> I hope we'll get a resolution quickly, but I wouldn't be surprised if we don't. If the current TOS was developed by VS's legal department and is applied to all the forums it owns, and if we're asking for something different, surely that's going to require discussion at that company -- and I don't have any sense for how big/well staffed VS is.


Save for Mark, who has broader legal issues to consider regarding the TOS, most of us who are mainly concerned about the TOS verbiage would be willing, I think, to give VS time -- within reason -- to consider a rewrite.

That the rep isn't interacting with the community at large, however, is also problematic. Many folk who actually aren't concerned about the TOS verbiage itself _are_ concerned that VS isn't communicating. On a forum that's dedicated to, you know, communicating.


----------



## Guest

If he has the database, it doesn't matter if we stay or go.
He already has (supposedly) our pemission forever and ever.


----------



## CassieL

...


----------



## Becca Mills

Puddleduck said:


> The question, as I'm reading it from those with more to lose than a (currently) tiny fish like myself, is not whether the risk to them personally outweighs the benefit to the community, but whether the risk to them personally outweighs the benefit to them personally. Community well-being is great and all, but when our businesses and livelihoods are on the line (as expressed by some of the big fish who've posted here), _no _amount of benefit to the community is worth taking the risk personally. Especially when the one really benefiting is a corporation. Sure, the community benefits from the shared expertise, but it's VS who, by claiming the rights they do in the TOS, actually owns the value of the expertise shared here. And those with expertise of the level that it has actual monetary value don't want that value going to some company who claims it in a unilateral rights-grab. This isn't, in my mind, about taking value away from the community to protect our (their) own personal risk. It's about owing nothing to a corporation that wants to grab rights to our own personal IP, even if that, unfortunately, has the secondary effect of that expertise no longer being as accessible to the larger community.
> 
> I don't mean to speak for anyone else, of course; that's just how I'm reading the situation.


Fair enough. It's probably one of those things people see/understand in different ways.


----------



## 97251

munboy said:


> Speaking of fading away.... Seeing post counts go down and people leaving is giving me flashbacks to Infinity War.
> 
> Looks like Mark Gardner will be the next to be Thanos'd away.
> 
> "I don't want to go Mr. Stark."


Wrong movie.

This is Thor Ragnarok: "Asgard is not a place, it's a people."

There will be another place.

Hopefully it won't end up like it did in Infinity War, though.


----------



## KevinMcLaughlin

okey dokey said:


> Cassie, that's a good clarification.
> But does that only apply to the EU?
> I don't recall that being approved by the UN, or accepted as a treaty by the US.
> Did I miss news reports of that?
> Of does EU policy apply to everyone on earth?


EU policy only affects residents of the EU. But since it is exceptionally difficult to determine if someone is an EU citizen or not (can't even use IP addresses, since someone from France vacationing in Florida is still an EU citizen and covered by their protection laws), virtually every online service has had to update their information policies to EU standards. Those which didn't risk massive fines from the EU if they get caught violating EU law for an EU citizen, regardless where the website happens to be based.


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Again, based on your post, he KNOWS we set a deadline for his response. And he has made a choice not to give one.
> 
> That says everything about him I need to know.


Maybe his lawyers have told him not to say anything


----------



## Guest

leaving


----------



## Becca Mills

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Becca, you are a joy and a wonderful person. But I am even more annoyed now because I feel like Phillip is a coward. If there is really communication going on, why has HE NOT COME FORWARD and said something in an official capacity? He should have said something DAYS ago. And if he had, I wouldn't be sending my request to remove me from this forum at the end of the day. I'm not unreasonable. if he had said something DAYS AGO along the lines of, "Hey, I understand your concerns. I am getting together something to present to legal and will keep everyone posted" then I would have been happy to wait.
> 
> But that didn't happen. Instead, he is hiding. And frankly, that is all I can assume at this point. Because I take you at your word that he has been in communication with the mods. Which means he is aware of the concerns. He is aware than many of us gave him a deadline...and he chose to say nothing.
> 
> Again, based on your post, he KNOWS we set a deadline for his response. And he has made a choice not to give one.
> 
> That says everything about him I need to know.


I got PMs from him last night and this morning.

I'm assuming he probably doesn't work on the weekends, so Monday was as soon as he would've gotten to a PM I sent late-ish on the 15th. He may not have understood the scope of the problem until he read my PM. Everyone knows forums "have drama," and he may not have understood this was a legit problem, not drama, until he got my PM. Which I should've sent earlier, but I was tied up trying to get some language lessons started at my kids' school. And Betsy's been traveling -- lots happening to slow things down.

It would be nice if Philip stepped in here with more specific information than I can provide. At the same time, there's quite a bit to be said for corporate ownership that errs on the side of a hands-off attitude toward content. I think I'd rather have that, with the occasional attendant too-slow response to a crisis, than the reverse, if you know what I mean. If we can get through this rocky transition, I'm hoping we can end up with the best of all worlds -- deep enough pockets that legal threats won't be much of an issue anymore, strong tech support, and no interest in controlling content from above.


----------



## Simon Haynes

KevinMcLaughlin said:


> EU policy only affects residents of the EU. But since it is exceptionally difficult to determine if someone is an EU citizen or not (can't even use IP addresses, since someone from France vacationing in Florida is still an EU citizen and covered by their protection laws), virtually every online service has had to update their information policies to EU standards. Those which didn't risk massive fines from the EU if they get caught violating EU law for an EU citizen, regardless where the website happens to be based.


Interesting, I didn't realise that. I have dual british/aussie nationality, and (for now at least, until Brexit) I guess that makes me an EU citizen, albeit not a resident. My last british passport was a Euro one, in any case.

All those people who've been culling euro email addresses from their newsletter mailing lists for GPDA reasons ... this means it's probably a pointless exercise, because you'll never weed them all out.


----------



## CassieL

...


----------



## Guest

Becca Mills said:


> I got PMs from him last night and this morning.


You should not be accepting responsibility for his lack of response. He was aware of this thread on the 14th when he posted to it. Even if he doesn't work weekends, as the official representative of the company...a company's whose primary business is forum management...there is no reason he hasn't been back here himself. He shouldn't need prompting to come here and say "I have forward the concerns to legal and will keep folks posted." If that is an accurate statement.


----------



## Guest

Thanks Cassie for the thoughtful response.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Even more reason to leave the forum then if he has to clear every communication with members with an attorney.


I don't feel that there is much likelihood of a resolution that will satisfy all members of Kboards. Verticalscope bought the Fixya.com website a few weeks ago, a very large and active community, and they had similar problems that were not resolved. Verticalscope seems to own a large number of active forums. Maybe we will get a better idea regarding what they intend to do with them when it gets closer to election times and politics. With all these sites they would have a big voice. Or maybe they just got bored with collecting stamps.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

JRTomlin said:


> I think the change was poorly handled on the end of the new owner, but he probably has no experience with writers who tend to protect our words and our work. On the majority of forums, no one would notice a change to the TOS.


Oh, I think they know how writers are. Torstar bought a 56% share in verticalscope in 2015. Tolstar Corp is a Canadian media and publishing company.

Edited to add - they are also linked to - Aimia, formerly Groupe Aeroplan, is a marketing and loyalty analytics company based in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Aimia manages various loyalty programs including Aeroplan in Canada and provides loyalty strategy, program development and management services to clients.


----------



## Becca Mills

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You should not be accepting responsibility for his lack of response. He was aware of this thread on the 14th when he posted to it. Even if he doesn't work weekends, as the official representative of the company...a company's whose primary business is forum management...there is no reason he hasn't been back here himself. He shouldn't need prompting to come here and say "I have forward the concerns to legal and will keep folks posted." If that is an accurate statement.


Well, I do think there's a coming-up-to-speed process for us, the mod staff, when it comes to effective communication with new ownership, and that would be the case with any new owners. I'm thinking it includes being more active in conveying our forum's culture and communicating about significant problems more strongly. So, not our _fault_, per se, but definitely part of our responsibilities here.


----------



## 99896

[removed]


----------



## 91831

Simon Haynes said:


> Interesting, I didn't realise that. I have dual british/aussie nationality, and (for now at least, until Brexit) I guess that makes me an EU citizen, albeit not a resident. My last british passport was a Euro one, in any case.
> 
> All those people who've been culling euro email addresses from their newsletter mailing lists for GPDA reasons ... this means it's probably a pointless exercise, because you'll never weed them all out.


Even after Brexit, the UK will be part of the GDPR as all EU laws will become British law (at least as far as I understand it - but then who really knows what's going on with Brexit?? That's not a political statement, it's a fact! We just don't know until the deal is done!). Therefore even then, UK citizens/residents will be able to enforce such rules being applied. The ICO has done too much work to overlook it and I'm considering getting in touch with them regarding the TOS and the lack of opt-in requirement to the new ones. I'd be interested to know who the registered data controller for the site is if I do decide to report.


----------



## ImaWriter

Atlantisatheart said:


> Oh, I think they know how writers are. Torstar bought a 56% share in verticalscope in 2015. Tolstar Corp is a Canadian media and publishing company.


Torstar also used to own Harlequin (and Mills & Boon), but I doubt that means they know how to write a romance.

But you have a point. Since it's inception, Torstar has been about writers, whether we're talking about newspapers or novels. Their in house council should have a clue about the way writers feel about their words.


----------



## Dpock

Becca Mills said:


> Well, I do think there's a coming-up-to-speed process for us, the mod staff, when it comes to effective communication with new ownership, and that would be the case with any new owners. I'm thinking it includes being more active in conveying our forum's culture and communicating about significant problems more strongly. So, not our _fault_, per se, but definitely part of our responsibilities here.


I'm sure you and the other moderators are doing your best.

I spent a good half hour clicking through Verticalscope's collection of forums (there are thousands). A few of the links 404ed, and more than two-thirds of the forums that did exist showed almost no recent activity, meaning those forums are duds. That's okay, there are always more to buy.

Anyway, I don't get the impression Verticalscope is in the business of servicing forum user's needs. They're in the business of selling advertising. Their dead forums are now just billboards (they still get clicks, so why not?). As others have said, their TOS is a boilerplate that serves their business model and has to work for thousands of forums. I doubt they'll tamper with it for a single board (but you never know).

I don't know that the writing is on the wall in terms of Kboard's future, but if the moderators here agreed it was time to bail, it would certainly lend strength to its rebirth elsewhere.


----------



## Nicholas

Dpock said:


> I spent a good half hour clicking through Verticalscope's collection of forums (there are thousands). A few of the links 404ed, and more than two-thirds of the forums that did exist showed almost no recent activity, meaning those forums are duds. That's okay, there are always more to buy.
> 
> Anyway, I don't get the impression Verticalscope is in the business of servicing forum user's needs. They're in the business of selling advertising. Their dead forums are now just billboards (they still get clicks, so why not?). As others have said, their TOS is a boilerplate that serves their business model and has to work for thousands of forums. I doubt they'll tamper with it for a single board (but you never know).


I get the sense their business model is to buy a forum, harvest its data, sell that data, and move on.


----------



## NatPane

Vijaya said:


> Becca, please go ahead and delete my account. #1. Thank you.


I'm not sure if this is the way I'm suppose to do this. However I've looked for a delete button and could not find it. So Please delete my account via #3. Thanks. It was good to be here. I learned a lot.


----------



## Crayola

I requested my old posts and post starters be deleted, but I wanted to keep my profile. It's easier for me than making a new profile. Now I can lurk and sometimes comment with the new TOS in mind. The mods weren't sure it would work, but it did! 

Something peeps may want to consider.


----------



## Quiss

Well, isn't this annoying.

I never considered anything I post here to be super-secret personal private or of monetary value, so meh.

However, one of the reasons I haven't been posting much is because so many folks are posting anonymously. Many many of us come here for advice or to exchange information, or for networking. A person's experience in this industry is what makes their advice or information credible and useful.  A post by Bobsyeruncle is just lacking in context. 
It's the members here that makes this site valuable.


----------



## 71202

If the new owner did not see how an stealth change of ToS was a problem, that would be on him IMHO.  It is problematic on its face regardless of what the changes are or how people react.


----------



## Becca Mills

Everyone, I'm very sorry, but I'm afraid I erred in directing you to let us mods know if you wanted your account and posts removed from the site.

While that method of deletion removes posts from public access, it doesn't actually remove posts from the site. I checked the forum's Recycle Bin (accessible to mods and admins only), and the posts from deleted accounts are in there. If they're in the Bin, VerticalScope will still have access to them. Same thing for posts you delete yourself: they end up in the Bin.

I apologize. It didn't occur to me that material deleted via account-removal would land in the Bin. Since such material cannot be undeleted, it seems counter-intuitive to retain it, but that's what the software does.

So, the long and the short of is that Philip has directed us to stop deleting accounts in the way we've been doing, as it seems to promise something it's not actually accomplishing and is, in fact, totally ineffectual.

Instead, *you should PM him or email [email protected]* and request the removal of your data from the site. He says there's a formal process in place to verify and remove data fully, in keeping with the GDPR's right to be forgotten.

If you know someone whose account may already have been deleted, I'd appreciate it if you could drop them a link to this post, so they can contact VS and get the correct process started. And ... um ... please pass along my sincere apologies at the same time? Feeling pretty dumb, here. 

- B


----------



## 101569

Becca Mills said:


> Everyone, I'm very sorry, but I'm afraid I erred in directing you to let us mods know if you wanted your account and posts removed from the site.
> 
> While that method of deletion removes posts from public access, it doesn't actually remove posts from the site. I checked the forum's Recycle Bin (accessible to mods and admins only), and the posts from deleted accounts are in there. If they're in the Bin, VerticalScope will still have access to them. Same thing for posts you delete yourself: they end up in the Bin.
> 
> I apologize. It didn't occur to me that material deleted via account-removal would land in the Bin. Since such material cannot be undeleted, it seems counter-intuitive to retain it, but that's what the software does.
> 
> So, the long and the short of is that Philip has directed us to stop deleting accounts in the way we've been doing, as it seems to promise something it's not actually accomplishing and is, in fact, totally ineffectual.
> 
> Instead, *you should PM him or email [email protected]* and request the removal of your data from the site. He says there's a formal process in place to verify and remove data fully, in keeping with the GDPR's right to be forgotten.
> 
> If you know someone whose account may already have been deleted, I'd appreciate it if you could drop them a link to this post, so they can contact VS and get the correct process started. And ... um ... please pass along my sincere apologies at the same time? Feeling pretty dumb, here.
> 
> - B


This option requires everything be deleted?


----------



## PhoenixS

Gah. He can't come on here and say that himself? This kind of cat-and-mouse is really making VS look worse and worse. And mods don't have the permissions needed to delete accounts? No blame to you, Becca. How were you to know?

Becca, do you have any idea if an account deletion by VS is a full delete of everything? Or can I still ensure the lawsuit thread remains onsite? I'm not invoking the right to be forgotten; I'm protesting the TOS and protecting the data and content that's mine to protect. I'm feeling like I'll need to go through a 2-page explanation, and then still wind up with that thread being deleted regardless (which is not an option). Hard to trust someone who doesn't want to do us the courtesy of addressing us directly about this whole issue.


----------



## Monique

That is a troubling development, Becca.


----------



## Becca Mills

idontknowyet said:


> This option requires everything be deleted?


I honestly don't know. It sounds like a "comply with the GDPR" process, so maybe? 

I do have mod rights in the Bin and can delete posts/threads from there, but so far as I can see, it has to be done one at a time, and there are 2,437 pages of threads in there, going back to 2008. The posts from deleted accounts are scattered throughout. Finding them all ... I just don't think it's possible. So yeah, getting data off the site in a thoroughgoing way doesn't seem to be something we can use the forum software to do.

I will say that, so far as I know, the software keeps no permanent record of the original state of modified posts outside of the Reported-to-Moderators area (the reports seem to sundown out of the system after about six months, so even that record isn't permanent). So, if there's something you really want to see removed -- a blurb or cover you shared, to mention some concerns I've seen raised -- modifying the post to empty it out might be more effective than deleting it.



PhoenixS said:


> Gah. He can't come on here and say that himself? This kind of cat-and-mouse is really making VS look worse and worse. And mods don't have the permissions needed to delete accounts? No blame to you, Becca. How were you to know?


Well, we certainly _can _delete accounts, though now Philip has asked us not to -- for good reason, I think. The deletion tools the software offers were clearly designed to remove posts/threads from public access, not from the owner's/admin's access. Which makes sense, I guess, given that this is pre-GDPR software.



PhoenixS said:


> Becca, do you have any idea if an account deletion by VS is a full delete of everything? Or can I still ensure the lawsuit thread remains onsite? I'm not invoking the right to be forgotten; I'm protesting the TOS and protecting the data and content that's mine to protect. I'm feeling like I'll need to go through a 2-page explanation, and then still wind up with that thread being deleted regardless (which is not an option). Hard to trust someone who doesn't want to do us the courtesy of addressing us directly about this whole issue.


I think he's waiting to hear from legal. This may be issue the higher-ups are required to handle. He didn't say that, exactly. It's a guess on my part.

I don't know, Phoenix. I would also be worried about losing that thread. I'm trying to think of a workaround ... what if we merged it with an earlier, disposable thread started by someone who's staying? Would your OP then no longer be seen by the software as an OP? The posts in the merged thread would sort chronologically, so your OP wouldn't come first anymore. Maybe it would disappear without taking the rest of the thread down with it.

ETA: We could test this workaround. If it worked, the thread would no longer show up when you used the "Topics" method of viewing your posts. I think. I hope that's right. I'm not sure we'd be able to split the thread out again, though, if it didn't work. The thread-splitting feature was broken a while back, and I can't remember if it got fixed.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Cherise

WasAnn said:


> Did someone make an alternative to Kboards recently? It might be time to start thinking about that. We're authors, the idea that we're signing over all rights of any words to someone else in such a broad fashion isn't making me feel warm and fuzzy.


https://www.facebook.com/groups/781495321956934/


----------



## AltMe

Cherise said:


> https://www.facebook.com/groups/781495321956934/


It is an alternative, but 2 comments.
1. It has 20,000+ people in there now, and finding anything requires a search.
2. The moderators are tone oversensitive. Say anything a way they dont like, and they ban you without even telling you. The moderation is being done by amateurs. Good people, but they suck at moderating.

I do recommend it as a place to get help, but not as a place to be yourself in. It's essentially grown to big now.


----------



## AltMe

Becca Mills said:


> I don't know, Phoenix. I would also be worried about losing that thread. I'm trying to think of a workaround ... what if we merged it with an earlier, disposable thread started by someone who's staying? Would your OP then no longer be seen by the software as an OP? The posts in the merged thread would sort chronologically, so your OP wouldn't come first anymore. Maybe it would disappear without taking the rest of the thread down with it.


Can you create a new thread Becca, and merge the other thread into it? The second OP becomes the 2nd post. (In theory). The first post is a special one, so merging should put everything merged in after it. As long as you specify the order correctly. I really doubt if you merge 1 thread into another, that the OP post of the one not being merged would change. It could be worth a test anyway. Create a test thread with a few random posts. Create a new thread. Merge the 1st thread into the second one, and see what happens.


----------



## AltMe

JRTomlin said:


> Unfortunately a Facebook page just does not function the same as a forum. They aren't interchangeable.


True. Good for short time limit conversations, but little else. And the admin tools are pathetic.


----------



## Simon Haynes

One quick SQL command at the console and the bin is empty. Something like:


delete * from BIN; (or whatever the table is called)


Something the site maintainer can do in seconds, but definitely not a mod.


And I'm certain they could do this as well.


delete * from BIN where USERID = 'xyz';


(I've run a few fora/forums as the maintainer of the software and database. Once you get down to the metal you have unlimited power.)


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

TimothyEllis said:


> Can you create a new thread Becca, and merge the other thread into it? The second OP becomes the 2nd post. (In theory). The first post is a special one, so merging should put everything merged in after it. As long as you specify the order correctly. I really doubt if you merge 1 thread into another, that the OP post of the one not being merged would change. It could be worth a test anyway. Create a test thread with a few random posts. Create a new thread. Merge the 1st thread into the second one, and see what happens.


When merging threads, the oldest post in either thread becomes the originating post. So starting a new thread and merging wouldn't change the OP of the lawsuit thread. However, the issue in deleting the lawsuit thread, as I understand it, is not that Phoenix began the thread; it's that the current starting post is by her; even if we were able to merge it with a thread where her post (the current OP) were not the originating post, deleting all of her posts would delete those posts in that thread. The mod staff has no way to selectively delete posts or not delete posts as part of an automated process. We'd have to do it one post at a time, the same way a user would.

Folks,

I've been traveling and have been trying to keep up. The mod team (especially Becca and Ann since I've been away the last two weeks) have been working, as always, on behalf of the membership on this issue.

We've been used, in the past, to being a family-run forum with quick access to the ownership. Obviously, things are different now. What hasn't changed is the commitment the mod team has to this community. I'd ask that you give us a little more time to work with Philip on this. We believe in this community and we want to see it flourish and be a safe place for its membership. We always have and will continue to be straight with you on what we learn.

EDIT: Simon, I believe there are also concerns about stability in a forum with a database as large and complex as ours is. We are working with VS on how to best handle this issue.

Betsy
KB Admin


----------



## AltMe

Betsy the Quilter said:


> When merging threads, the oldest post in either thread becomes the originating post. So starting a new thread and merging wouldn't change the OP of the lawsuit thread. However, the issue in deleting the lawsuit thread, as I understand it, is not that Phoenix began the thread; it's that the current starting post is by her; even if we were able to merge it with a thread where her post (the current OP) were not the originating post, deleting all of her posts would delete those posts in that thread. The mod staff has no way to selectively delete posts or not delete posts as part of an automated process. We'd have to do it one post at a time, the same way a user would.


If you cant save the thread, before deletion you can print to a pdf virtual printer and create a pdf document out of it. This could be linked for download in a replacement thread. Alternatively, you can save it to a text file, move to Word, and if someone edits it to keep only the useful stuff, it can also be made into a download pdf. Or if mainly all the useful stuff is by Phoenix, the good stuff could be salvaged and released an ebook, once the thread no longer exists. If other good stuff is in there, permissions could be gained to use them in the ebook version. Or even mobi and epub versions could be downloaded here from a new thread.

I've already saved my mega-thread this way. I've not decided what I'm doing re here yet, but I saved my best thread yesterday, and removed my signature covers, replacing with a banner.

I've done the save to disc and release as an ebook before,mainly from a thread which lasted 4 years. The forum died from owner neglect, and long before, I saved everything I'd started or posted. After the forum was deleted, I was free to remove all the identifying stuff, pick out the good stuff, and publish in a series of ebooks.

If all else fails, the raw data can be saved, and made available a different way, if someone wants to make an effort.


----------



## Guest

Becca Mills said:


> I think he's waiting to hear from legal. This may be issue the higher-ups are required to handle. He didn't say that, exactly. It's a guess on my part.


HE IS BEING A COWARD. If "legal" truly told him not to say anything (and again, I work with a huge legal department) he would have instructed YOU to do the same thing. He is giving you information to repeat to us, instead of coming here and doing it himself. That isn't legal talking. If legal was talking, NO MOD would be talking, either. Because you would have been instructed not to. Because even though you are unpaid, you are still a representative of the company and the same liabilities apply to you as an employee.

So his failure to respond has nothing to do with legal and everything to do with HIM being a coward. Period. Full stop. He has logged into this forum multiple times since this started. Many of us have seen it in the members online. He's been around and is hiding.

Believe me, they WILL be getting their "formal" request today.


----------



## Guest

This is the email I just sent. I grant permission to fellow members seeking to leave to use it:



> This is my official demand that you purge the membership data and all related posts for the account of bardsandsages on the Kboards forum and across any and all sites owned by your company.
> 
> This is a formal declaration that I did not agree to your retroactive terms of service. This is a formal declaration that I am exercising my legal rights to terminate my account from your sites.
> 
> If my data is not removed from your sites and servers by September 29th, I will file formal complaints with both Canadian and U.S. consumer protection agencies.


I suggest that everyone that include a firm date for the purge to be complete and if the date is not met, to file formal complaints with the appropriate Canadian and U.S. Consumer protection agencies (or the appropriate agency in your home country).

I will research all of the appropriate agencies for reporting and post them in the new forum for reference


----------



## 41419

This is completely unacceptable. I'll be sending my wipe request today.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

TimothyEllis said:


> Can you create a new thread Becca, and merge the other thread into it? The second OP becomes the 2nd post. (In theory). The first post is a special one, so merging should put everything merged in after it. As long as you specify the order correctly. I really doubt if you merge 1 thread into another, that the OP post of the one not being merged would change. It could be worth a test anyway. Create a test thread with a few random posts. Create a new thread. Merge the 1st thread into the second one, and see what happens.


The OP of any thread is always the earliest post in the thread. So If I start a thread TODAY and merge it with one from 6 years ago, the OP will be the one from 6 years ago. It's purely chronological.


----------



## AltMe

Interestingly, I was browsing the mods list for SMF this afternoon, and came across a GDPR mod. It also has a Pro version for $24.99 for a year of updates.



> GDPR Helper For SMF 2.0.x
> Warning does not guarantee GDPR compliance. No warranty provided.
> 
> Includes:
> Allows member to export their data. Their profile and post information
> On member deletion clears IP address and email from posts and assigns a new username to all old posts.
> Includes a privacy policy page, adds link in the footer e and adds a section for consent on registration
> Stores the date/time that the privacy policy was changed and option to force to reagree
> Stores the date/time that the registration agreement was changed and option to force to reagree
> 
> We also have GDPR Pro which offers other features and we do listen to feedback for requests.
> More information: https://www.smfhacks.com/gdprpro.php





> *Information:
> GDPR Pro helps with compliance with GDPR in SMF. This is a must have if you running a forum that has users from Europe and allows your members more control over their information and the option to export their data.
> Requires
> Supports SMF 2.0.x (MySQL) and SMF 1.1.x (MySQL)
> 
> Features:
> *
> Privacy Policy system with option to force reagree. Supports multiple languages
> Adds link to the footer for privacy policy
> Consent for the privacy policy on registration
> Ability for the users to export their profile information in (csv,html,xml) format and posts
> Clears information from database tables when an account is deleted
> Option to force reagree to the registration agreement. Supports multiple languages
> Logs the date of agreeing to the privacy policy and the registration agreement
> And more!





Ann in Arlington said:


> The OP of any thread is always the earliest post in the thread. So If I start a thread TODAY and merge it with one from 6 years ago, the OP will be the one from 6 years ago. It's purely chronological.


I would think it would be simple for a mod programmer to write something to do it. All it needs is a tweak of the standard code, and run off a different button in mod land. Whoever redid the signature tool should be able to do it.


----------



## 98700

I had sent an account deletion request to Becca, but then she posted about them not being allowed to do that anymore, so I sent a PM to the admin account as she instructed. I sent that soon after she posted that info. So I'm curious how long it will take.


----------



## AltMe

Puddleduck said:


> I had sent an account deletion request to Becca, but then she posted about them not being allowed to do that anymore, so I sent a PM to the admin account as she instructed. I sent that soon after she posted that info. So I'm curious how long it will take.


Better repeat it to the email address as well.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> Why would someone come on here, where every word, sentence, structure, tone and exemption is dissected, reconstructed, torn apart and fed through the smallest of body apertures? Why would they do that if they could avoid it?


Because the entire business of the company that bought the forum is forum management.

Because of the official representative of the company that bought the forum, it is his job to communicate with us.

Because if he has done his job days ago and at least acknowledge our concerns and told us that the situation was under review, most of us would have been more than happy to wait for a final resolution.

This is a situation Phillip created. This thread started on the 12th. As I have said multiple times, all that he needed to do was say "I've taken your concerns to legal. As soon as I get more information, I will let folks know." Because he told Becca that was what was going on, according to her posts. Based on Becca's post, there are only three scenarios available:

1. Becca lied. I don't believe that. But if she lied, I would think he would come here and correct that immediately.
2. Phillip DID tell Becca it was under review, and it is. In which case, there is zero reason for him not to tell us that directly.
3. Phillip DID tell Becca it was under review, but he lied to her. In which case, he threw Becca under the bus to hide his own inaction on the matter. And at this point, I believe number 3 is the most likely scenario, based not only on what has transpired here, but what has turned up about other forum run by this company. There are old threads on other forum owned by this company where the same thing happened and nothing was done. Most of those sites are now practically dead and overrun with ads.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

I believe option 3, with a touch of 2 tossed in, is probably correct. While that touch of 2 may consist entirely of Philip (or whoever) nudging someone near the coffee bar and saying that the forum is freaking and the other shrugging, it would still count as a bit of two.

A lot of people are wondering why would they do this? Why would they buy the most popular self and hybrid publishing forum on the internet and run it into the ground like this? What do they gain? It might make people wonder if they're wrong to feel a sense of unease at the changes. 

Well, look at some of the other forums. What do you see? A lot of them imploded. What do they gain? They weren't buying the forum...they were buying your information. We were the product, not the forum. They've now harvested every single thing and that change in TOS simply allows for a far greater level of selling and harvesting. That's it. 

And bottom line...we've already been sold on as information to countless buyers. Everything from our keywords, searches, mentions of pertinent product lines, social engagement, links we've clicked, our personal emails, all our the linked personal information you can get from that email....all of it. It's been sold on and on and will keep on being sold no matter how often we ask to be purged.

That's why we should have been warned the sale was going to happen and that's why they probably didn't WANT us warned that the sale was going to happen. They didn't want us to purge ourselves from the database before it could be harvested like a body stripped for parts. It's been harvested. They don't give two flying f...licks of a tail.

I feel bad for the mods here. You were another product in this sale, sold without your permission or choice, and you're taking the brunt of it. I'm sorry for that.


----------



## NatPane

WasAnn said:


> bottom line...we've already been sold on as information to countless buyers. Everything from our keywords, searches, mentions of pertinent product lines, social engagement, links we've clicked, our personal emails, all our the linked personal information you can get from that email....all of it. It's been sold on and on and will keep on being sold no matter how often we ask to be purged.


And this is what I'm most worried about. I've donated here and done ads here and I'm not comfortable with the TOS because of this. I'm not really concerned with my posts because I rarely post. I'm more of a lurker, but I feel highly uncomfortable with the personal information that I've given to this site and the power they now have to do whatever they want with that.

And it's highly annoying that I'm still here and have to jump through hoops to be deleted, and my information may not even be deleted, if and when I'm deleted. This fact is a deep warning sign for me.


----------



## Llano

deleted


----------



## jb1111

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> 1. Becca lied. I don't believe that. But if she lied, I would think he would come here and correct that immediately.
> 2. Phillip DID tell Becca it was under review, and it is. In which case, there is zero reason for him not to tell us that directly.
> 3. Phillip DID tell Becca it was under review, but he lied to her. In which case, he threw Becca under the bus to hide his own inaction on the matter. And at this point, I believe number 3 is the most likely scenario, based not only on what has transpired here, but what has turned up about other forum run by this company. There are old threads on other forum owned by this company where the same thing happened and nothing was done. Most of those sites are now practically dead and overrun with ads.


You forgot number 4, which I have seen at some places in the past: Perhaps he is hesitant to be completely open with us because of the vagaries of his job. When one is a spokesman for a company, you generally adhere to the company line. It's just the way it is.

I'm not saying this is true in this case, of course. I have no idea who Philip really is. But when people are working at a corporation, it makes the concept of open and brutally honest communication a challenge at times, especially when dealing with corporate policy.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> I'm sorry, but who the hell are we to demand this guy comes here and falls on his sword in front of us?


Nobody asked him to fall on his sword. I asked him to do his job as the forum admin.

I work for a corporation. I am painfully familiar with communication issues regarding corporations. Which is why I pointed out that, if this was a legal directive not to speak, the MODS would have been given the same directive.

In all seriousness, if someone accidentally calls my desk and asks a legal question, I can't just hang up on them. I'm supposed to direct them to the right person. I can't just ignore my phone ringing because I know it is an annoying salesman or an irate customer or even a wrong number. I have to pick up the phone and, at a minimum, direct them to the right party. I don't get to just NOT answer the phone.

What Phillip has done is the equivalent of me going over to one of our design interns and saying, "Look, if Jane Doe comes in asking about her contract, just tell her I forwarded it to legal." Instead of me telling Jane Doe myself. Even though the design intern has nothing to do with the legal situation and it is my responsibility to handle it.

I'm not mad because I don't understand how corporations work. I'm made because I do.


----------



## Moe D

WasAnn said:


> I believe option 3, with a touch of 2 tossed in, is probably correct. While that touch of 2 may consist entirely of Philip (or whoever) nudging someone near the coffee bar and saying that the forum is freaking and the other shrugging, it would still count as a bit of two.
> 
> A lot of people are wondering why would they do this? Why would they buy the most popular self and hybrid publishing forum on the internet and run it into the ground like this? What do they gain? It might make people wonder if they're wrong to feel a sense of unease at the changes.
> 
> Well, look at some of the other forums. What do you see? A lot of them imploded. What do they gain? They weren't buying the forum...they were buying your information. We were the product, not the forum. They've now harvested every single thing and that change in TOS simply allows for a far greater level of selling and harvesting. That's it.
> 
> And bottom line...we've already been sold on as information to countless buyers. Everything from our keywords, searches, mentions of pertinent product lines, social engagement, links we've clicked, our personal emails, all our the linked personal information you can get from that email....all of it. It's been sold on and on and will keep on being sold no matter how often we ask to be purged.
> 
> That's why we should have been warned the sale was going to happen and that's why they probably didn't WANT us warned that the sale was going to happen. They didn't want us to purge ourselves from the database before it could be harvested like a body stripped for parts. It's been harvested. They don't give two flying f...licks of a tail.
> 
> I feel bad for the mods here. You were another product in this sale, sold without your permission or choice, and you're taking the brunt of it. I'm sorry for that.


I often have wondered why the sale was so secret. It would have been nice to know it was for sale. Perhaps someone on the forum would have stepped up to buy it. There are some big players here who say they make tons of money. One may have purchased it.

Such a shame. But like WasAnn said, we've all been sold out already.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Having seen the repercussions from a jokey tweet posted by an employee/family member while on holiday that lost him his job and nearly brought down the company, I can see why Philip would not want to post on here for fear that anything he says will be taken down and may be used against him. If he tells us they are working on it and then nothing changes he might be accused of lying. I think he's probably taking the attitude that we take to poor reviews - keep calm, don't reply, and carry on.


----------



## 98700

Moe D said:


> I often have wondered why the sale was so secret. It would have been nice to know it was for sale. Perhaps someone on the forum would have stepped up to buy it. There are some big players here who say they make tons of money. One may have purchased it.
> 
> Such a shame. But like WasAnn said, we've all been sold out already.


I agree. It would have been very nice if the previous owners had offered to sell it to one of the people who actually uses the board. My guess is that VS made an offer (because buying forums is what they do), and the owners decided they didn't want to keep running the forum and agreed to the deal without exploring other options or fully considering the effect such a sale might have on the Kboards community (or possibly not caring). I don't entirely blame them for this, since this wasn't their "baby" after all. But yeah, it is a shame.


----------



## Used To Be BH

TobiasRoote said:


> Your mad because he won't do what you want. I understand that. He doesn't want to and he doesn't have to. It's clear you're all up in arms and leaving. His company have changed their terms across the board which means they've made that 'corporate' decision - he doesn't have to explain himself to you or me.
> 
> All we have to do is quietly pack our bags and leave, or in the case of many on here - remain and see what transpires in the short to medium term.


I'm usually a low-conflict kind of guy, and that's exactly what I'd do. But here's the problem: Verticalscope changed the TOS without notice and added dangerous features that are not in the normal boilerplate. The new effective date appears to be May 18. As it is, Verticalscope can already argue that, by continuing to use the forum, we have already consented to the new TOS about which we were never notified. (That wouldn't work under GDPR, but we aren't all EU citizens.) The only way I can see for someone to signal that he or she did not consent is to make some noise. Yes, we can PM Philip to start the process, and I will, but that doesn't leave a public record of any kind that could be invoked in future legal proceedings. It also raises legal questions. In order to see what's going on with my request, I have to continue to use the site, at least to check my messages. Using the site can buttress an argument that by implication I'm consenting to the TOS. I don't think that would be a winning argument in court, but I don't want to spend thousands of dollars to find out.

In another situation, I learned from an attorney that loudly protesting against something that is happening makes lack of consent unambiguous. Keeping quiet can definitely be seen as consent in some siutations.

I think it's also important to warn others. If Lynn hadn't started this thread, I wouldn't have known about the change. Many people still might not. Of course, people can decide that the change is no big deal--but they can't choose one way or the other if they don't know about it. That's why voicing concerns is important.

Upon reflection, I've decided to wait to start the process until I speak to my lawyer on Monday, but for the record, my continued use of this forum does not imply consent to the new terms of service. I'm simply giving the new ownership a little time to investigate the issue and taking time myself to consult legal counsel.


----------



## PhoenixS

TobiasRoote said:


> All we have to do is quietly pack our bags and leave, or in the case of many on here - remain and see what transpires in the short to medium term.


The problem is that leaving isn't that easy. Here's the boilerplate the mods have shared with me. Please note that, once again, I am not invoking any 'right to be forgotten' policies with my account deletion request; I am protesting the TOS and the right to protect my content and data. Simply walking away and not using the site, as the TOS suggests as being the recourse for not agreeing to the terms, is a ship that, for me, sailed 7.5 years ago. My data is already on this site under less egregious terms. Walking away means I leave it in the hands of VS. Not acceptable.



> We've received your request for your account to be deleted and the site admin has been so advised.
> 
> The site admin has advised us to inform members who wish their accounts deleted that the company has 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. Questions concerning this policy should be directed to [email protected]
> 
> If this changes, and we are given the o.k., I will delete your account at that time.
> 
> Please also see Becca's post here for other considerations.


As for the lawsuit thread, it's the thread itself that must remain on this site and in its current form. As people delete their posts, some of that information may well be lost. But the thread will not be lost, insomuch as I have ANY control over that.



Bill Hiatt said:


> But here's the problem: Verticalscope changed the TOS without notice and added dangerous features that are not in the normal boilerplate. The new effective date appears to be May 18.


May 18? May I just remind everyone that the official(?) notification of the sale was not posted until August 9:
https://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=265925.0


----------



## PhoenixS

At the parent index level, there's a Privacy Policy update notice from May 26 that does not mention a sale, nor does it mention there's any update to the TOS, nor mention any of the data sharing possibilities implied in the TOS.

The announcement of the sale is not even stickied. And the subject line for it is nothing more than: Changes.


----------



## munboy

PhoenixS said:


> We've received your request for your account to be deleted and the site admin has been so advised.
> 
> The site admin has advised us to inform members who wish their accounts deleted that the company has 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. Questions concerning this policy should be directed to [email protected]
> 
> If this changes, and we are given the o.k., I will delete your account at that time.
> 
> Please also see Becca's post here for other considerations.


I've been kinda sitting back in wait and see mode, but this is the most damning thing I've seen come out of this whole mess. It clearly shows that this new company and its admins care only about numbers. How many people visit so they can sell ads. How much money can be made on the content they've collected. They don't care about fostering an open and supportive community. It seems we are just a number (either in clicks or dollar signs) and they'll use their full legal rights to keep that number attached to us and our content.

To be honest, I'm really glad I never took the time to fill out my profile and signature with my books or other content. All they got from me is a few posts of me being dumb.


----------



## AltMe

Moe D said:


> I often have wondered why the sale was so secret. It would have been nice to know it was for sale. Perhaps someone on the forum would have stepped up to buy it. There are some big players here who say they make tons of money. One may have purchased it.
> 
> Such a shame. But like WasAnn said, we've all been sold out already.


I would have tried. Not knowing what the sale price was, one cant be sure about being able to, but had it been announced as for sale on forum, I expect quite a few of us would have at least asked what the price was.


----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## 99896

I have sent a PM to "Philip" requesting a full wipe of my account. In case I haven't made this clear, I will re-state: I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope revised (with no notification of same) TOS, and rejected same as soon as I was made aware of the TOS's language. 

I have allowed for time for a response regarding the language in the TOS - that time allowance should not be construed as consent but rather a good faith attempt at allowing KB/VS to respond to membership concerns. I am not satisfied with the response or lack thereof in what I feel was a reasonable time frame.

Given that, I would like to be removed from this site and any/all content I've posted here to be removed as well. As soon as possible.

Additionally, my continued use of this forum while waiting for my account and all content to be deleted should not be construed as consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS. I continue to lurk here to monitor this thread for developments and to continually check to see that my request for account deletion has been completed. I have deleted or modified everything manually from my account, I've done what I can from my end, save for a PM to and from moderator Becca and a PM to "Philip" and also this post. I expect those to be deleted as well along with everything else.

I post all of the above publicly in this thread so that it may be 'on the record' and made clear - I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS - and I do not want any/all data pertaining to me to remain. I request that it ALL be deleted. I have sent a private message requesting account deletion and that all content attributed to it be forever wiped. I wish to be forgotten as per the EU's GDPR. Again, I request that this be done as soon as possible.

Thank you.


----------



## morgancole

> We've received your request for your account to be deleted and the site admin has been so advised.
> 
> The site admin has advised us to inform members who wish their accounts deleted that the company has 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. Questions concerning this policy should be directed to [email protected]
> 
> If this changes, and we are given the o.k., I will delete your account at that time.
> 
> Please also see Becca's post here for other considerations.


I was thinking that the reaction was a little overblown, but this is straight up scummy.


----------



## Zelah Meyer

I am also very unhappy with the new terms that have been snuck in & that they hope to inflict on us retrospectively.  I do not agree to them.

I am going to give the company a reasonable time (to be determined by me, based on their responses/updates/lack of the same with regards to this issue.)  and then ask for deletion if they aren't willing to see reason and change the terms back to something less likely to have authors running screaming from the forum.

It is in the nature of company lawyers to try to draft these things in such a way that they give the company as much freedom as possible, but these go too far, especially the line about derivative works and their claim to be allowed to sub-licence them!  

So yes, formally stating that I do not agree to these terms, and hope that this is soon resolved.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> Your mad because he won't do what you want.


I'm mad because a company tried to sneak a change in contract terms on me that endangers my business, and the only official representative of the company has failed repeatedly to address the issue publicly, instead speaking through unpaid intermediaries. This is not some "Give me a discount on a product" or "can I get a freebie" or something mundane. The company pushed through a legal quagmire that jeopardizes my business.

This isn't about "not getting my way." This is about making it crystal clear, repeatedly, that I did not consent to this TOS that they tried to enact retroactively and deny me the right to end, forever. I put in my request to have my account closed this morning, after sending a request to Becca the night before only to be told it had to go through "official" channels.

Which is hysterical, really. Becca is "official" enough to rely Phillip's statements to us so he doesn't have to, but not "official enough" to perform the actions that need to be done.

But at this point, every day my account remains active after I requested it to be closed is a day I am documenting, which is why I am still posting specifically to this thread. I've taken screenshots and printed copies of this thread for legal documentation in the event the company decides to give me grief about removing my content. I am at the "gathering evidence" phase now, a phase I would never have gotten to if Phillip had simply asked us for more time while he looked into the issue.


----------



## 98700

Zelah Meyer said:


> It is in the nature of company lawyers to try to draft these things in such a way that they give the company as much freedom as possible, but these go too far, especially the line about derivative works and their claim to be allowed to sub-licence them!


This makes me think of a different forum (not a writers' forum; a fan forum) that I used to post on a decade and a half ago. We did a collaborative story type thing for fun. I ended up stopping my participation with that story because I decided the character I'd created for it was one I'd like to use in an actual novel at some point. I'm pretty sure the forum changed over between now and then in such a way that all the posts prior to a certain point have been wiped, so I'm not _too _worried about it. But the thought of that forum being bought out by VS and having these terms applied--and I was far from the only person who created original characters and storylines on that forum--gives me a creeping feeling up my spine.

Their "we'll look at your content and remove it only if we're legally obligated to" response, as reported by Becca, significantly undermines the admin's "don't worry, we won't do anything shady" assurances. Why cling so tightly to something they supposedly have no intention using?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Bill Hiatt said:


> I'm usually a low-conflict kind of guy, and that's exactly what I'd do. But here's the problem: Verticalscope changed the TOS without notice and added dangerous features that are not in the normal boilerplate. The new effective date appears to be May 18. As it is, Verticalscope can already argue that, by continuing to use the forum, we have already consented to the new TOS about which we were never notified. (That wouldn't work under GDPR, but we aren't all EU citizens.) The only way I can see for someone to signal that he or she did not consent is to make some noise. Yes, we can PM Philip to start the process, and I will, but that doesn't leave a public record of any kind that could be invoked in future legal proceedings. It also raises legal questions. In order to see what's going on with my request, I have to continue to use the site, at least to check my messages. Using the site can buttress an argument that by implication I'm consenting to the TOS. I don't think that would be a winning argument in court, but I don't want to spend thousands of dollars to find out.
> 
> In another situation, I learned from an attorney that loudly protesting against something that is happening makes lack of consent unambiguous. Keeping quiet can definitely be seen as consent in some siutations.
> 
> I think it's also important to warn others. If Lynn hadn't started this thread, I wouldn't have known about the change. Many people still might not. Of course, people can decide that the change is no big deal--but they can't choose one way or the other if they don't know about it. That's why voicing concerns is important.
> 
> As far as Philip sending messages through Becca, it's profoundly suspicious. It's possible he's doing it that way because anything he says here could be used later in court. By delivering his messages secondhand, he could always claim later that Becca misquoted him. Julie has laid out the reasons why assuming the lawyers told him not to say anything don't make sense in this context.
> 
> Upon reflection, I've decided to wait to start the process until I speak to my lawyer on Monday, but for the record, my continued use of this forum does not imply consent to the new terms of service. I'm simply giving the new ownership a little time to investigate the issue and taking time myself to consult legal counsel.


Agree with all of this.

Because I am still involved with a lawsuit in which this forum plays a part, (in the countersuit, not my causes of actions) I am legally obligated not to delete any posts that pertain to it. My staying in no way indicates compliance with or acceptance of these new terms of service.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Yes, the database has been harvested and sold over and over, more than likely. 

Yes, that retroactive insertion that says they can while ensuring the sale process was kept entirely secret was probably so that they could harvest the moment the sale went through without us purging anything.

Yes, anything and everything about us ever connected to anything in any way on this board is probably now being used by seedy scammers and marketers everywhere (which explains member reports of sudden increases in spam at emails only used here).

Yes...all this is true. BUT, future sales channels and future content and future relevance in Google that brings more suckers to the organ harvesting table ARE up to us. I'm already down to Scheherazade, and I'll be down to whatever the lower level is soon. DELETE your posts. I'm saving some to transfer over to other places, but then they're gone. 

Leave no organs here to pick over, not even infected tonsils. Yes, their harvesting database will have it, and we can wrestle with them for that deletion too, but the Google search and other ranking systems will be based on what's still live on here. Take it from them.

I barely knew Harvey, but I know enough to be pretty confident he would be appalled that we were secretly sold so that we could be harvested by scummy data brokers.


----------



## Used To Be BH

PhoenixS said:


> May 18? May I just remind everyone that the official(?) notification of the sale was not posted until August 9:
> https://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=265925.0


I may have misspoken. I now can't see the May 18 date anywhere.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Al Stevens said:


> They already have our data. That was, no doubt, their first action when they acquired access to those data. And inasmuch as we've posted since the TOS went into effect, they have our implicit consent to use those data in the manners spelled out in the TOS. The only recourse we have if we want to stay is to carefully watch what we post.
> 
> As far as mining names for whatever uses, they, or the buyers of their lists, are probably interested only in the well-known names, ones that would carry weight in endorsements and promotions. Amanda, Hugh, David, and so on. But your name, while it might be unknown today, could hit the big time. Changing your forum name won't help. They already have every nane you ever used here. And every author's website you linked to. And the signatures' amazon links. They have your names and email addresses. At last count that was over 100,000 members. They've no doubt already sold it. If you ever included your email address in your Profile, it is now in the hands of every Nigerian scammer who can afford the list.
> 
> Do they care what happens to KB now? No. This smells like a hostile takeover in the business world. The investor buys the stock, liquidates the company's assets, fires all the employees, and walks away, profit in hand. In this case, the assets are our data. The VS peeps don't give a rusty crap whether the forum survives or dies. It's served its purpose for them.
> 
> Okay, you can explicitly withhold your acceptance of the new TOS. What good does that do? You can go to court if you can find a lawyer to represent you and a court to hear the case. How much time do you have? How deep are your pockets?
> 
> As far as being legally forgotten goes, they've already forgotten us. But the entities that bought our data haven't. And no GDPR directive will reach that far, and if it does, they'll ignore it.
> 
> As to why Philip isn't participating in this discussion: He's probably waiting for the noisiest and most contentious of us to leave. (You know who you are.) Can't blame him there. I wouldn't have his job up my ass if I had room for a sawmill.
> 
> I hope the moderators are being paid. If not, I cannot imagine why any of them is still here.
> 
> Carry on.


Much as I dislike the new TOS, I'm not seeing in it anything that gives Verticalscope the right to sell information like email addresses. I'm pretty sure that anyone using such purchased lists would be breaking antispam laws in both US and Canada.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

WasAnn said:


> I barely knew Harvey, but I know enough to be pretty confident he would be appalled that we were secretly sold so that we could be harvested by scummy data brokers.


I've been here for nearly ten years and knew Harvey pretty well. Yes, he would be appalled. And I hope to heaven Carrie has not been reading this thread. It must have been like losing Harvey all over again to sell KB. I admired her for holding on so long. Probably the secrecy was part of the deal.


----------



## Used To Be BH

> We've received your request for your account to be deleted and the site admin has been so advised.
> 
> The site admin has advised us to inform members who wish their accounts deleted that the company has 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. Questions concerning this policy should be directed to [email protected]
> 
> If this changes, and we are given the o.k., I will delete your account at that time.
> 
> Please also see Becca's post here for other considerations.


What exactly does "Posted content needs to be verified of information" mean?


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Bill Hiatt said:


> What exactly does "Posted content needs to be verified of information" mean?


It means we're going to play h-e-double hockey sticks getting our stuff deleted since if it isn't strictly ID'able under GDPR's right to be forgotten, then it isn't breaking GDPR.

Which is why we should delete the stuff that shows up so prominently when others search questions regarding publishing.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Gertie Kindle said:


> I've been here for nearly ten years and knew Harvey pretty well. Yes, he would be appalled. And I hope to heaven Carrie has not been reading this thread. It must have been like losing Harvey all over again to sell KB. I admired her for holding on so long. Probably the secrecy was part of the deal.


I don't know Carrie well enough to know what kind of business experience she has, but I would imagine she had no idea what problems might come from the change of ownership. Certainly, no one should blame her for what happens.


----------



## 98700

Bill Hiatt said:


> What exactly does "Posted content needs to be verified of information" mean?


That's a good question, and I'd like an answer to that as well. My guess would be that if the legal people looked at a post and determined that there was no personally identifying information, it wouldn't fall under the "right to be forgotten" laws, and they wouldn't take it down. Which, of course, completely disregards the whole issue of those being our words and us owning the copyright to them, not VS. I take that to mean that they have no intention of removing the vast majority of what we're asking them to remove.

It's sounding like we may have to just edit all of our posts into nothingness, if it's true that previous versions of posts are not stored but deleted posts are.


----------



## Guest

Since I am still here despite sending in my notice, buried under the otherwise mundane list of "you shall not's" is this:



> Use the Web Site to advertise or solicit to anyone to buy or sell products or services, to cease using the Web Site, to visit another competing Web Site, or to make donations of any kind, *without our express written approval*.


So we are not allowed to:

The act of TELLING SOMEONE NOT TO USE THIS SITE is a violation of the TOS?

The act of promoting a new forum is a violation of the TOS

Kickstarter threads? Violation.

GoFundMe threads? Violation.

New book threads? Violation.

Offering a service? Violation.


----------



## PhoenixS

I also hope no one is thinking of buying any ad space on the boards now. I know I have created and run banner ads here on a couple of rare occasions. However, the TOS says, in no uncertain terms:



> When you submit a classified ad for publication on the Web Site, you agree that the advertisement as it appears on the Web Site becomes our property and you assign all ownership interest in the advertisement as it appears on the Web Site under copyright law or otherwise to us.


Ownership. Not license. Compare to Facebook's verbiage (since someone pointed their way earlier):



> You own the content you create and share on Facebook and the other Facebook Products you use, and nothing in these Terms takes away the rights you have to your own content. You are free to share your content with anyone else, wherever you want. To provide our services, though, we need you to give us some legal permissions to use that content...


----------



## 87552

Just asked for deletion. I find this "shady" change disgusting if nothing else. I may not be a huge author or name, but I am not going down without a swing.


----------



## Blocked Writer

Puddleduck said:


> It's sounding like we may have to just edit all of our posts into nothingness, if it's true that previous versions of posts are not stored but deleted posts are.


Based on how the software seems to work, yes, if you truly want your content gone, then you should use the modify function to erase it. Of course, as someone pointed out earlier, those with database access could easily delete the the data (if you trust them to do so).


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Puddleduck said:


> That's a good question, and I'd like an answer to that as well. My guess would be that if the legal people looked at a post and determined that there was no personally identifying information, it wouldn't fall under the "right to be forgotten" laws, and they wouldn't take it down. Which, of course, completely disregards the whole issue of those being our words and us owning the copyright to them, not VS. I take that to mean that they have no intention of removing the vast majority of what we're asking them to remove.
> 
> It's sounding like we may have to just edit all of our posts into nothingness, if it's true that previous versions of posts are not stored but deleted posts are.


So, what's the best method? Stop using "Delete" on each message, and instead use "Modify" and then write the word "Nothing" or something so it overwrites?

For locked threads, I guess the delete is our only option, but that's only a few threads.


----------



## Guest

Bill Hiatt said:


> I may have misspoken. I now can't see the May 18 date anywhere.


The May 18 date appears at the top of the Privacy Policy, which is hosted on the company's own page, not Kboards, and explicitly refers to VerticalScope, not Kboards.

The sale was announced in August.


----------



## munboy

Bill Hiatt said:


> What exactly does "Posted content needs to be verified of information" mean?


I think they're just trying to talk their way around GDPR. Only some stuff is protected under the act, so they have to "verify" that the information you're asking to be deleted is or not.... Read as: "If we legally have to, then we will. If not, screw you."


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## 98700

WasAnn said:


> So, what's the best method? Stop using "Delete" on each message, and instead use "Modify" and then write the word "Nothing" or something so it overwrites?
> 
> For locked threads, I guess the delete is our only option, but that's only a few threads.


If I go this route (and I might, though it'll take a while), I'll probably be more specific, like that I'm deleting the contents because of the TOS. Just so it's clear why. But yeah, based on what has been said here, it sounds like that should overwrite what you had previously.


----------



## Mercedes Vox

ChristinaGarner said:


> Agree with all of this.
> 
> Because I am still involved with a lawsuit in which this forum plays a part, (in the countersuit, not my causes of actions) I am legally obligated not to delete any posts that pertain to it. My staying in no way indicates compliance with or acceptance of these new terms of service.


I put my nonacceptance/noncompliance statement in my sig. That way, it shows up on every post I've ever made.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Bill Hiatt said:


> I don't know Carrie well enough to know what kind of business experience she has, but I would imagine she had no idea what problems might come from the change of ownership. Certainly, no one should blame her for what happens.


After KBs was dragged into the lawsuit, I should imagine she was glad to just walk away. She probably thought selling to a big corp would guarantee Harvey's baby lived on. I hope she doesn't find out.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

FWIW: I believe people have the right to remove their posts if they wish.

You can also edit any thread starter posts to be empty.

Even when people were asking for account deletion for really stupid reasons ("John said mean things to me; I don't like you; You don't like me;I'm going home") we always honored those requests. I am not happy at having been told I should no longer do so.

This is EXACTLY what we were told by Philip:


For now please stop deleting content and user accounts from the site.

Ideally its best to have these users reach out to me directly or to [email protected] and not be bothering you all.

I will get the info from our legal people on how this is supposed to be handled but typically its supposed to go to us as to deal with.

Each of those were separate comments among the mod/admin staff about the many requests for thread deletion.

And in response to this comment from Becca (I hope you don't mind that I share this)

My understanding is that we cannot legally ignore or fail to act on the requests, not for those in the EU, anyway. And failing to act on those from outside the EU would court a PR nightmare, IMO.

the response was

This is not how GDPR responses work. We, the company, have 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. If users have issue with this they are to be directed to [email protected]

You all now know exactly as much as I do.


----------



## 98700

So yep, they're definitely looking at it as, "We own everything you post, and if you want it gone, you have to ask us for permission, and we'll only grant it to the extent we're legally obligated to."

I think I'll go ahead and modify all my posts into oblivion while I still have the option.


----------



## Monique

I can think of all sorts of things that might be good replacement text for modified posts.


----------



## Guest

Ann in Arlington said:


> This is not how GDPR responses work. We, the company, have 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. If users have issue with this they are to be directed to [email protected]


The problem is that this is not a simply GDPR issue. This is a "we are trying to shove a retroactive TOS on users and engage in a rights grab that would make Facebook blush" issue. This isn't about "right to be forgotten." This is about "I do not give Kboards permission to commercialize my name, business name, and posts across every single site the new owners own, nor do I give them permission to assign rights to my posts to third parties without my consent."

I hate that you mods are being thrown under the bus because Phillip can't be man enough to come here and talk to us himself. It is childish, unprofessional, and disconcerting giving the scope of the concerns that are being brought up here. There is no justification for him to hide behind any of you when he is the official representative for the owners.

Harvey never hid from us. He'd have Betsy use the cattle prod on us, but he never HID. Phillip has made this situation a thousand times worse than it had to be because he has made a choice to hide behind the mods and use you all as his mouthpiece instead of speaking to us himself.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Yeah, I'm replacing everything with "Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms."

It's sad to do it too. So many milestones are just being deleted away, never recorded anywhere else. Also, I had forgotten how much I took for granted that I came out of the gate of SP with a rocket...though a small rocket. 

::Sigh:: 

Eventually, even this post will be gone!


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The problem is that this is not a simply GDPR issue. This is a "we are trying to shove a retroactive TOS on users and engage in a rights grab that would make Facebook blush" issue. This isn't about "right to be forgotten." This is about "I do not give Kboards permission to commercialize my name, business name, and posts across every single site the new owners own, nor do I give them permission to assign rights to my posts to third parties without my consent."
> 
> I hate that you mods are being thrown under the bus because Phillip can't be man enough to come here and talk to us himself. It is childish, unprofessional, and disconcerting giving the scope of the concerns that are being brought up here. There is no justification for him to hide behind any of you when he is the official representative for the owners.
> 
> Harvey never hid from us. He'd have Betsy use the cattle prod on us, but he never HID. Phillip has made this situation a thousand times worse than it had to be because he has made a choice to hide behind the mods and use you all as his mouthpiece instead of speaking to us himself.


Okay...can the mods do this? Julie has almost 14K posts here. There's no way she can go through and edit each one, and you guys aren't allowed to delete anymore. So, if they're going to be all legal-destrustro-beagle about it...can you maybe do something like go through a person's posts and MASS replaced all content with a simple "..." or something?


----------



## 101569

WasAnn said:


> Okay...can the mods do this? Julie has almost 14K posts here. There's no way she can go through and edit each one, and you guys aren't allowed to delete anymore. So, if they're going to be all legal-destrustro-beagle about it...can you maybe do something like go through a person's posts and MASS replaced all content with a simple "..." or something?


Companies fire people for doing that.


----------



## Anarchist

Monique said:


> I can think of all sorts of things that might be good replacement text for modified posts.


I'll bet I'm not the only one hoping you'll post examples.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## 98700

WasAnn said:


> Yeah, I'm replacing everything with "Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms."


I'm doing this now. Even though I had other stuff to do today, dangit. Here's what I'm using:

"[Post removed because I don't agree with the changes VerticalScope made to the TOS without notification, and VS has decided account deletion is no longer an option available to us.]"


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Puddleduck said:


> I'm doing this now. Even though I had other stuff to do today, dangit. Here's what I'm using:
> 
> "[Post removed because I don't agree with the changes VerticalScope made to the TOS without notification, and VS has decided account deletion is no longer an option available to us.]"


I would suggest hurrying with this. And anyone groaning at the number and saying they'll do it later might want to reshuffle that a bit. Once they get wind of this, we might easily see the ability to modify posts "temporarily" suspended.

I'm going to power through...


----------



## Monique

It will take some time to do that for 11k posts. Is there any mass modify that the mods are capable of?


----------



## Nicholas

Monique said:


> It will take some time to do that for 11k posts. Is there any mass modify that the mods are capable of?


It would be great if you could replace all your old posts with instructions on how to mass modify all your old posts.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The problem is that this is not a simply GDPR issue. This is a "we are trying to shove a retroactive TOS on users and engage in a rights grab that would make Facebook blush" issue. This isn't about "right to be forgotten." This is about "I do not give Kboards permission to commercialize my name, business name, and posts across every single site the new owners own, nor do I give them permission to assign rights to my posts to third parties without my consent."


All three of us have pointed out that it's not, strictly speaking, a GDPR issue.



WasAnn said:


> Okay...can the mods do this? Julie has almost 14K posts here. There's no way she can go through and edit each one, and you guys aren't allowed to delete anymore. So, if they're going to be all legal-destrustro-beagle about it...can you maybe do something like go through a person's posts and MASS replaced all content with a simple "..." or something?


We have no way to do a mass edit -- all we could do is a mass deletion, and we've been told not to for the time being.



idontknowyet said:


> Companies fire people for doing that.


Well, we're volunteers, really, so . . . .



Anarchist said:


> I'll bet I'm not the only one hoping you'll post examples.


Please remember we do want to keep the 'family friendly' thing going!


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Ann in Arlington said:


> FWIW: I believe people have the right to remove their posts if they wish.
> 
> You can also edit any thread starter posts to be empty.
> 
> Even when people were asking for account deletion for really stupid reasons ("John said mean things to me; I don't like you; You don't like me;I'm going home") we always honored those requests. I am not happy at having been told I should no longer do so.
> 
> This is EXACTLY (as in cut and paste from a PM) what we were told by Philip:
> 
> 
> For now please stop deleting content and user accounts from the site.
> 
> Ideally its best to have these users reach out to me directly or to [email protected] and not be bothering you all.
> 
> I will get the info from our legal people on how this is supposed to be handled but typically its supposed to go to us as to deal with.
> 
> Each of those were separate comments in separate PMs among the mod/admin staff about the many requests for thread deletion.
> 
> And in response to this comment from Becca (I hope you don't mind that I share this)
> 
> My understanding is that we cannot legally ignore or fail to act on the requests, not for those in the EU, anyway. And failing to act on those from outside the EU would court a PR nightmare, IMO.
> 
> the response was
> 
> This is not how GDPR responses work. We, the company, have 30 days to resolve a GDPR grievance. Posted content needs to be verified of information and does not immediately fall under right to be forgotten. If users have issue with this they are to be directed to [email protected]
> 
> You all now know exactly as much as I do.


At first, the new TOS didn't bother me. Like Becca said, I wasn't really sure how or if it'd affect me. It's so vaguely worded. It seemed more like a CYA in case of future lawsuits.

But I don't like this.

Even though GDPR doesn't cover users outside of the EU, it's a good faith action to allow mods to delete users upon request. I don't like that the mods have been told not to delete anymore accounts. I also don't like the vague response those of us who did PM/email VS directly received.

I wish we'd known about the sale, too; maybe we could've pulled together and collectively bought it. I've been so busy and sick -- chronic illness flare -- I've barely been keeping up over here, so I didn't even know when the forum sold in August. It's a shame, because I'm starting to think Kboards is done for.

I decided I'd wait and see, and I don't like what I'm seeing.



WasAnn said:


> I would suggest hurrying with this. And anyone groaning at the number and saying they'll do it later might want to reshuffle that a bit. Once they get wind of this, we might easily see the ability to modify posts "temporarily" suspended.
> 
> I'm going to power through...


This ignores those of us who have physical limitations and can't work on a computer/device for that long.

I certainly don't have the time or physical ability to individually delete or edit hundreds of posts right this second. And finally, that destroys the history of this place, the useful information database we've essentially built over the years together.

I'm still sort of hoping we can work this out. It'd be a shame to lose Kboards in any way.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

If a member of the Bar in any of the fifty states is willing to clarify my interpretation with case law to the contrary, I am more than willing to be persuaded otherwise.

In the meantime, it is my understanding, by a plain text reading of the statute, that by operation of federal law it is impossible to assign a copyright, equity or a license to any copyrighted work in the United States without a written instrument signed by the author or the author's agent.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204

Under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, copyright vests the moment any eligible work is fixed in a tangible medium.

While the TOS may claim ownership of what we post, according to 17 U.S.C. Section 204 it isn't enforceable. Once copyright vests in the author, it cannot be conveyed legally (assigned or licensed) without a signature on a physical document. Period.

P.S. Despite the fact the TOS belongs to a Canadian company, the Berne Convention still allows U.S. law to prevail. Canada and the U.S. are both signatories.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> If a member of the Bar in any of the fifty states is willing to clarify my interpretation with case law to the contrary, I am more than willing to be persuaded otherwise.
> 
> In the meantime, it is my understanding, by a plain text reading of the statute, that by operation of federal law it is impossible to assign a copyright, equity or a license to any copyrighted work in the United States without a written instrument signed by the author or the author's agent.
> 
> https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204
> 
> Under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, copyright vests the moment any eligible work is fixed in a tangible medium.
> 
> While the TOS may claim ownership of what we post, according to 17 U.S.C. Section 204 it isn't enforceable. Once copyright vests in the author, it cannot be conveyed legally (assigned or licensed) without a signature on a physical document. Period.
> 
> P.S. Despite the fact the TOS belongs to a Canadian company, the Berne Convention still allows U.S. law to prevail. Canada and the U.S. are both signatories.


I think I said this earlier, but the statute you're citing refers to ownership of copyright. It doesn't directly address licensing of copyrighted materials, which is what the TOS alleges we're doing.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

Under federal law a "transfer of ownership" subsumes all but non-exclusive licenses.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=17-USC-1015724446-364936160&term_occur=5&term_src=title:17:chapter:2:section:204

Further, a copyright owner may withdraw or place conditions on their permission to exploit their works at any time, just like a landlord can issue notice to vacate.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Guest

Because this thread is 20 pages, I've highlighted the problematic parts of the TOS and created a timeline of events in the event members are put in a position where we need to file formal complaints in order to get our content removed. I've always found having dates available to be very helpful with these things.

https://bardsandsages.com/**********/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/


----------



## Mercedes Vox

Al Stevens said:


> I do know that my spam bucket is getting about twice the load it got before all this came about.


Same here. And I have multiple email addresses (too many), and the only one suddenly registering a very noticeable increase in spam is the one that also happens to be associated with my Kboards account. Could be a coincidence, but . . . . ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's enough to make me think that deleting anything now is shutting the barn door after the horse has already bolted. And with a database this size, I can't imagine they don't have the whole thing backed up anyway, in case of a crash.


----------



## 71202

Well he said to email account deletion requests to him, I did so from my registered email with my username.  I'll give it a week.  That seems like a reasonable period of time to me.


----------



## 25803

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because this thread is 20 pages, I've highlighted the problematic parts of the TOS and created a timeline of events in the event members are put in a position where we need to file formal complaints in order to get our content removed. I've always found having dates available to be very helpful with these things.
> 
> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/


I sent my request for deletion and registered my rejection of the new TOS to Philip today.

Julie, can we use your exact wording for our signatures. Thanks.


----------



## vsadmin

Hello All,

Helena here  I am the director of Community Management here at VS and have been with the company for 8 years. I am and have been for over 15 years a forum user. I am an active user on 3 forums and in my youth was active on over 10.

Why I am telling you this, well because I want you to understand that I am a forum user as well as an employee of verticalscope.

I have read through all I can on here and have to say that it seems like there is more trolling going on in this thread than actual relevant debate. When My team posts to you instead of talking to the points some people resort to troll tactics and just wish to confuse everyone and take away from the topic.

SO .... Let's have a real conversation about this.

I chose to quote Shane Lochlann Black because he has posted the most accurate to what the law is.

The TOS is broad yes, correct, but as you all know people are sue happy so we cover our bases.

WE DO NOT OWN... nor want... the copyright to your material. We do however own the RIGHTS to your posted content (images, text any raw posted information) Now there is a big difference between copyright and rights.

Copyright means we are liable for your content. So if you wrote a biography essay about Kim Kardashian and posted it on here and in said article used defamatory information she could sue us. Since we would own the copyright to that content. I will take it one step further, if you posted child pornography and we owned the copyright, we would be charged. (sorry I know that is extream but highlights the point).

Owning the rights to your content on the forum means we own the right to have your content here and to use that content on the site. Why do we do this and need to say this well, me quoting Shane Lochlann Black, for example, if the site did not own the rights, he could come after me as a user and sue me for copying his content. Or if we posted your thread on the home page, or in a newsletter, we need the rights to do that.

It means that you gave the site permission to post on it. - now we don't technically need a TOS, since the internet is an open forum and when you post on the internet you automatically give that place the rights to that content. Larger companies needs more protection then that. This is a privatly owned forum, so by signing up and posting you gave that right to the old owner without a TOS, If that wasnt the case, we couldnt buy sites.

Now there are many a legitimate question in here. I would like to answer all of them. So if we can stick to legitimate questions and concerns and try to keep them in a singular place or post. so that means if the question was asked please don't ask again.

I read that users (authors) are upset about I think google ad works showing up to guests, I can have it turned off in the author's section.

Look we will make mistakes, something you don't like will happen, but I assure you we will fix it and work with you all. But the post blasting, and trolling is not the right way to go about it.

The sky isn't falling and we are not the devel. We won't reply real time to a post or a PM, because we can't be online every second. But we will try to answer you when we can.

Now if you still want clarification about the TOS I can have my legal team answer some questions, so work together and put them into a single post that is easy to work with and I can make that happen.

If there is someone who feels cheated about the site being sold PM us ask for Helena and gives us your email address and I will email you back.

Before you think the sky is falling take a breather. We are not here to steal your content and sell it for profit if we did that we would not be very successful and people would not be inclined to sell to us.

I hope this helps, and I hope we can have a better conversation about this. I appreciate you all reading this.

Side note, I am a read-a-holic and am trying to read a book a week this year. I have been snooping around for books I may want to read  ... ok off topic I know

Helena



Shane Lochlann Black said:


> If a member of the Bar in any of the fifty states is willing to clarify my interpretation with case law to the contrary, I am more than willing to be persuaded otherwise.
> 
> In the meantime, it is my understanding, by a plain text reading of the statute, that by operation of federal law it is impossible to assign a copyright, equity or a license to any copyrighted work in the United States without a written instrument signed by the author or the author's agent.
> 
> https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/204
> 
> Under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, copyright vests the moment any eligible work is fixed in a tangible medium.
> 
> While the TOS may claim ownership of what we post, according to 17 U.S.C. Section 204 it isn't enforceable. Once copyright vests in the author, it cannot be conveyed legally (assigned or licensed) without a signature on a physical document. Period.
> 
> P.S. Despite the fact the TOS belongs to a Canadian company, the Berne Convention still allows U.S. law to prevail. Canada and the U.S. are both signatories.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Mercedes Vox said:


> Same here. And I have multiple email addresses (too many), and the only one suddenly registering a very noticeable increase in spam is the one that also happens to be associated with my Kboards account. Could be a coincidence, but . . . . ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> 
> *It's enough to make me think that deleting anything now is shutting the barn door after the horse has already bolted. And with a database this size, I can't imagine they don't have the whole thing backed up anyway, in case of a crash.*


While it is true that the harvested data is still in their paws, the value of such data amortizes.

The value here is the number of people arriving to the board via searches, primarily on Google.

Deleting your posts gives Google bounces when it displays a post in a search and it's not there anymore. That hurts SEO if it happens enough, but usually, it's the whole thread that comes up in search results, so no foul.

On the other hand, when you replace all your posts with "Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms," then whatever you had in that post that would inspire or give weight to a search result disappears. Less results = less clicks.

Also, if you replace the post with the above (or anything you choose) then THAT is what gets saved to backups. So, if it dumps and they put it back up, it will show your empty posts only.


----------



## Chad Winters

Sad Days......I wonder how much they paid for a site that will soon be empty


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

OMG...we just got called trolls.

Isn't that against the forum decorum?


----------



## vsadmin

WasAnn said:


> OMG...we just got called trolls.
> 
> Isn't that against the forum decorum?


To my point  Thanks for helping me prove it 

And to your point, I am not calling everyone a troll I am saying troll tactics are being used. Like pinpointing one phrase out of context of the original thread.

Helena


----------



## 97251

> if the site did not own the rights, he could come after me as a user and sue me for copying his content. Or if we posted your thread on the home page, or in a newsletter, we need the rights to do that.


That's one of the issues. These TOS allow VS to post the content elsewhere, such as in a different website or a newsletter.

Why would VS want to post content from this site on a newsletter?

OK, it was an example, but as an example, it exemplifies the problem.


----------



## vsadmin

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because this thread is 20 pages, I've highlighted the problematic parts of the TOS and created a timeline of events in the event members are put in a position where we need to file formal complaints in order to get our content removed. I've always found having dates available to be very helpful with these things.
> 
> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/


Thank you for this  Much appreciated that took time I am sure.

I will work with my legal team to get you the correct answers to your concerns.

I would like to highlight though if you have concerns about something especially something with legal wording talk to a lawyer who can properly explain the wording of something instead of interpreting yourself. I am not trying to be rude here, sorry if it comes off that way.

Helena


----------



## 98700

WasAnn said:


> OMG...we just got called trolls.
> 
> Isn't that against the forum decorum?


I know, right? Walks in here and immediately calls us trolls. Totally someone who wants a rational and open discussion. Not to mention breaking the forum's own rules, which means she hasn't read them. And assumes that we'll be satisfied with someone coming on and "clarifying the TOS" as if the problem is that we don't understand it or that we need our heads patted and assured they won't use the TOS how the TOS as written could be used.





vsAdmin said:


> To my point  Thanks for helping me prove it
> 
> And to your point, I am not calling everyone a troll I am saying troll tactics are being used. Like pinpointing one phrase out of context of the original thread.
> 
> Helena


In what way does someone pointing out that calling us trolls is against forum rules count as trolling? (And yes, "You're using troll tactics," is the same as calling us trolls.)


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Guest

vsAdmin said:


> To my point  Thanks for helping me prove it


WOW. Just...WOW....I don't even...

Can you provide us with an ETA on when our requests to have our accounts deleted and content removed will be honored? because as Phoenix and others have noted, this is not a privacy issue but a contractual issue. Because I don't agree to the retroactive TOS, and despite your patronizing commentary, nothing you said negates the fact that, legally, the TOS allows you to grant rights to both my posts and my actual NAME to whomever you see fit for whatever reason you see fit. This is a critical issue for writers, and your promises to be good don't negate what the TOS actually says.

Your TOS goes far beyond what is needed to run the site, and even goes further than Facebook (I already pointed this out in a previous post).


----------



## 97251

Puddleduck said:


> And assumes that we'll be satisfied with someone coming on and "clarifying the TOS" as if the problem is that we don't understand it or that we need our heads patted and assured they won't use the TOS how the TOS as written could be used.


Well, she literally claims that we don't understand the terms



vsAdmin said:


> I would like to highlight though if you have concerns about something especially something with legal wording *talk to a lawyer* who can properly explain the wording of something instead of interpreting yourself.
> 
> Helena


Many authors here actually consulted their lawyers, who agreed that the TOS were problematic.


----------



## 71202

Regardless of how VericalScope perceives this situation the PR ship has saled and I have requested full account deletion.  I expect that request to be actioned along with all like requests.  That request is reasonable absolutely regardless of context.  I have no interest in getting involved in the narrative of intent VS staff are creating.


----------



## AlexaGrave

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Since I am still here despite sending in my notice, buried under the otherwise mundane list of "you shall not's" is this:
> 
> So we are not allowed to:
> 
> The act of TELLING SOMEONE NOT TO USE THIS SITE is a violation of the TOS?
> 
> The act of promoting a new forum is a violation of the TOS
> 
> Kickstarter threads? Violation.
> 
> GoFundMe threads? Violation.
> 
> New book threads? Violation.
> 
> Offering a service? Violation.


I've been lurking in the thread for the most part since it started. Pretty much sitting on the fence until I see where this all lands (people like Julie anyhow express and summarize things much better than I ever could, so leaving the discussion up to others is for the better - heh).

The privacy issues aside (I'm still observing the back and forth on this), as a person who offers services on the forum, I'm honestly curious with these new terms that Julie is referring to in the quoted post above, if I should be posting on my services thread anymore. I also am curious if this means the awesome Yellow Pages functionality of Kboards is against these terms as well? Are these new terms a precursor to changing some of the very useful functionality of Kboards? Or was this simply a mistake to include such "do nots" because they used a blanket ToS for all of their forums?

I think it was a huge mistake on VS's part to use the same ToS for all of their forums. Not all forums are the same, and as such one blanket ToS for many different forums could go completely against things that are already in place.


----------



## vsadmin

Al Stevens said:


> Thanks for that, Helena. But you did not address the concerns expressed here about our rights to privacy with respect to our names, email addresses, website links, etc. And it would seem that changing the TOS to address our concerns is not on the table.


That is because no one is clear. If you fall under the GDPR criteria then we can help anonymize your account
If you would like personal information removed from forum View then I can anonymize that as well.

When you sign up for anything, you use the information to do so, even without a TOS you surrender that information. Since it is in the back end and not visible to others as well as in a locked environment that is securely stored (the back end) it is not considered public and therefore stays. Even with GDPR.

We can anonymize your accounts, however.

Helena


----------



## vsadmin

Tulonsae said:


> Umm.... Julie did talk to a lawyer. So did a few of the other folks.


OK have their lawyer call our lawyer.


----------



## 71202

For people who run forums they seem very surprised by normal social-media-type things happening on a rapid time scale. How many actual active forums do they own... and how much if anything did they pay for this one?


----------



## MyraScott

And the end is heralded with a single word; the forbidden word. 

Troll


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

vsAdmin said:


> OMG...we just got called trolls.
> 
> Isn't that against the forum decorum?
> 
> 
> 
> To my point  Thanks for helping me prove it
> 
> And to your point, I am not calling everyone a troll I am saying troll tactics are being used. Like pinpointing one phrase out of context of the original thread.
> 
> Helena
Click to expand...

Helena - Trolling is a specific, though occasionally subjective, term. In this thread, not everyone understands everything everyone else means, but there is no trolling. All is relevant to the topic, meant to clarify understanding of said topic, often meant to add to the aggregate knowledge of the group with respect to the topic, and generally useful.

None of that is trolling.

Second, trolling is a banned word here. It's not allowed. To accuse someone of that is to fling the highest of insults aimed at their actual code of conduct and internal character.

In case you're not up on the definition of troll, here's a handy reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Quite frankly, if the company that bought this board's first response to a valid issue is to post that anyone concerned with it is using troll tactics, then one must question many things.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

I'm old enough to remember when not hearing from the new owner and his team was a bad thing. Now that we have, I long for that innocent time.

TLR: calling any member of your forum a troll, especially those coming with valid concerns, is unprofessional beyond measure.


----------



## vsadmin

Yay! said:


> Well, she literally claims that we don't understand the terms
> 
> Many authors here actually consulted their lawyers, who agreed that the TOS were problematic.


OK have them contact our lawyers.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

MyraScott said:


> And the end is heralded with a single word; the forbidden word.
> 
> Troll


My kingdom for a "like" button.


----------



## Guest

vsAdmin said:


> OK have their lawyer call our lawyer.


Just to clarify, you DID say you were the Director of Community Management? And this is your reply?

I think you just played your company's hand here. You guys plan to double down and see who has the biggest lawyers.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

vsAdmin said:


> That is because no one is clear. If you fall under the GDPR criteria then we can help anonymize your account
> If you would like personal information removed from forum View then I can anonymize that as well.
> 
> When you sign up for anything, you use the information to do so, even without a TOS you surrender that information. Since it is in the back end and not visible to others as well as in a locked environment that is securely stored (the back end) it is not considered public and therefore stays. Even with GDPR.
> 
> We can anonymize your accounts, however.
> 
> Helena


What about the spam at our email addresses (only used to sign up here) from such wonderful places as s-e-x sites, US mortgage lenders (I'm in the UK) phishing scams (Your order is ready - you're order can't be sent because your payment has failed, etc) Hi, I'm Candy and I want to suck... ? You see where I'm going with this? Not ******* cool.


----------



## 71202

Hi there VS guy

Technicalities aside communities are about a common purpose and a liked/trusted location.  Once that is gone keeping people locked inside the fence doesn't lead to a kittens and rainbows atmosphere.  Just let us out as requested and see what you can build with what you have left.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Question for the mods:

If it were anyone else except for Helena, 'director of community management' had accused the forum membership--especially many who have proven their integrity time and again--of trolling, would that comment be edited for non-compliance with forum decorum?

Never mind; I don't want to put any of you in a worse spot than you are, and we all know the answer anyway.


----------



## munboy

Mercedes Vox said:


> I put my nonacceptance/noncompliance statement in my sig. That way, it shows up on every post I've ever made.


Sorry, but your continued use of this board gives them permission no matter what declarations you shout into the void...or where you make them. That's pretty standard for any forum, website, social media, ect...if you continue to use the service, you're agreeing to whatever terms they decide to enforce. Just saying you don't agree doesn't exempt you from them.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.
Many formally active members now participate in discussions HERE.
Since board ownership changed hands, the email address I used to sign up has been spammed with fishing emails and scummy advertisements. In addition, the forum is now packed with equally offensive ads within every thread. This place has become a sleezy spam trap. It is no longer a safe community.


----------



## 71202

munboy said:


> Sorry, but your continued use of this board gives them permission no matter what declarations you shout into the void...or where you make them. That's pretty standard for any forum, website, social media, ect...if you continue to use the service, you're agreeing to whatever terms they decide to enforce. Just saying you don't agree doesn't exempt you from them.


I don't think that is the case. Otherwise I would not have to click agree on some many other sites every time they changed the ToS.


----------



## 98700

That's not my name said:


> Can someone link me the post with instructions on how to delete our accounts? I lost track of where I saw it and I'd rather stab my own eyes out than rehash this crapshow. By the responses from the new admin, it's clear this is no longer a community that anyone should risk being involved with.


Admin has told the mods not to delete our accounts anymore, and we can't do it ourselves.


----------



## 71202

That's not my name said:


> Can someone link me the post with instructions on how to delete our accounts? I lost track of where I saw it and I'd rather stab my own eyes out than rehash this crapshow. By the responses from the new admin, it's clear this is no longer a community that anyone should risk being involved with.


All they will accept is a request to privacy at verticalscope.com -- and some of the comments since indicate they won't necessarily honor the request.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

Lawyers or no, the provisions of Title 17 are clear.  Only a copyright owner can authorize public performance or distribution of a copyrighted work.  What are being referred to as "rights" in this thread are more likely to be interpreted as "permission" which is something that can be granted or withdrawn at the pleasure of the author.  

As authors, we have all invested considerable time and effort into a full and complete understanding of copyright law.  Aside from writing, copyrights comprise our entire business.  So it stands to reason we understand what can and cannot be done with them.  

A terms of service "agreement" that specifies the forum has permission to publicly perform and distribute our work for the benefit of the forum owner is a customary clarification the poster has the option to withhold their posts. But it doesn't have any practical or legal effect on our properties.  If something we've posted here is published or distributed elsewhere or in some other medium, that is called a "derivative work" which is also the exclusive province of the copyright owner.  

Like it or not, some very large and very wealthy companies in America have seen to it copyright is an ironclad mile-tall fortress when it comes to legal matters, with trademarks and patents not far behind.  Every minute detail of every attempt to circumvent, overcome or twist Title 17 to suit someone's attempts to appropriate that which they do not own has been litigated in every possible way for the last 90 years.  The law is clear.  The issues are long settled, and all the king's horses and all the king's men can't use Humpty-Dumpty's copyrights again.  

Motion to adjourn.


----------



## Guest

munboy said:


> Sorry, but your continued use of this board gives them permission no matter what declarations you shout into the void...or where you make them. That's pretty standard for any forum, website, social media, ect...if you continue to use the service, you're agreeing to whatever terms they decide to enforce. Just saying you don't agree doesn't exempt you from them.


I've put in a formal request to have my account closed and content removed. This thread is my only way of monitoring the situation and making sure that my request is being handled. At this point, legally, it is very important to keep reinforcing the fact that we did not agree to the browsewrap agreement so that VerticalScope can't claim we did.


----------



## munboy

Is it just me or did this admin's attitude just make everything worse?


----------



## Monique

I would like for all of my content here to be removed. Please allow the mods to delete accounts/posts and purge the bin. This would alleviate VS of any potential burden that might arise from it and protect me and my content/rights.


----------



## Guest

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> Lawyers or no, the provisions of Title 17 are clear. Only a copyright owner can authorize public performance or distribution of a copyrighted work. What are being referred to as "rights" in this thread are more likely to be interpreted as "permission" which is something that can be granted or withdrawn at the pleasure of the author.


The issue at this point is that Helena just played their hand. They are betting on having bigger lawyers, because regardless of what the law says, copyright is a civil matter. So they are betting that their lawyers can scare most people and the threat of going into debt to cover legal expenses in a drawn out case works in their favor. The fact is, I can't afford to sue a company in Canada. The good news is, I don't have to. There are other legal channels available, and the conduct of VerticalScope's employees works in the favor of consumers.


----------



## 91831

munboy said:


> Is it just me or did this admin's attitude just make everything worse?


100%

I'll be contacting the ICO on Monday to ensure I understand my position with the GDPR, their (VS) interpretation of it, my rights to know what they (VS) have done with my data, and how their terms of service work in relation to the rights of my data (and their failure to ask me to opt in to such changes).
The ICO doesn't mess around when it comes to data and its use.

If anyone knows who the registered data controller is at VS (if they even have one) I'd be much obliged.


----------



## 99896

vsAdmin:

When will my account and all content I've previously posted be deleted?


----------



## MClayton

Helena, first of all, thanks for posting and at least giving some idea of what's going on. I know that probably wasn't your favorite thing to do today, but I appreciate that you did it. However, I knew when you began with the word "troll," things weren't going to go well. I think it might help to have a little bit of the history of KBoards.

KBoards is very different from most online forums. Honestly, that's why many of us are here. The previous owner, Harvey, was a kind man who had strict rules banning a lot of the behaviors (such as trolling) that are so often seen on other fora. No trolling, insulting, cursing, name calling, etc., has ever been allowed on KBoards. Our mods have strictly enforced those rules. Again, that's why a lot of us are here. It's a safe, informative community where people can go to ask questions and know they won't be ridiculed or attacked. The people here are generous, kind, and extremely knowledgeable when it comes to the publishing industry. 

A few years ago, Harvey died. His death was a huge loss to our community. His wife and daughters continued with KBoards because it's such a hugely important resource for writers, and they wanted to honor his memory. Our mods also continued, I assume for many of the same reasons.

The sale was a shock, although I certainly understand why, all these years later, they chose to sell. The change in ToS was also a shock. We'd grown used to a give-and-take between forum owners and forum participants. When concerns were expressed (21 pages worth now), with no real answers, that was still another shock.

These incidents are all very much different from the experiences we've had here for years. I joined in 2010. I've spent much more time lurking than I have posting, in this thread and across the site as a whole. It's alarming to go, so quickly, from being run as a family/writer/reader-friendly environment to an environment that seems to be headed the way most online forums operate. It's scary, and quite honestly, for those of us who come here precisely because of the way KBoards was built and has operated, it's heartbreaking. 

My guess is that you'll lose many more members over the change in atmosphere than you ever would have over the change in ToS. I don't want to see that happen; I'd ask you to please consider the history of KBoards so you can understand where people are coming from.


----------



## 98700

Monique said:


> I would like for all of my content here to be removed. Please allow the mods to delete accounts/posts and purge the bin. This would alleviate VS of any potential burden that might arise from it and protect me and my content/rights.


Mine as well. I've already PMed you with that request, but I thought I'd make it clear publicly too.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> The issue at this point is that Helena just played their hand. They are betting on having bigger lawyers, because regardless of what the law says, copyright is a civil matter.


Then we can only hope their bigger lawyers advise their client or clients willful infringement of a copyright for the purposes of financial gain is a criminal offense under U.S. law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/506

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2319



> The fact is, I can't afford to sue a company in Canada. The good news is, I don't have to.


That is true. I'm frankly a little disoriented myself. This all seems to have gone from a simple question to adversarial chaos in a rather short time.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Tulonsae said:


> vsAdmin,
> 
> Does this mean that we can no longer have our accounts deleted?


This is my question as well. VS changed the TOS for this site without notice or any opportunity to accept the new terms. (That's a GDPR violation all by itself.) Helena, if you examine the earlier posts, particularly Julie's, you will notice there is clear evidence that what VS includes in its TOS is not just the usual boilerplate language. Also included are a couple of troubling provisions that could easily be misused. I would have been perfectly content if VS had addressed our concerns with a modified TOS, but it seems from your responses that this will not be the case. Those of us who are not comfortable with the new TOS should be able to delete our accounts in this kind of situation. At one point, the moderators were able to do this for us. Now, Philip has told them not to but has said we can PM him. Is this still the correct procedure?


----------



## Nicholas

vsAdmin said:


> it seems like there is more trolling going on in this thread than actual relevant debate.


----------



## 83360

I've already made a request via PM, but want to state publicly that I do not agree to the updated terms and want my account permanently deleted.


----------



## Mark Dawson

Now I have really seen it all. If that is customer service, then... well.


----------



## sisley

munboy said:


> Sorry, but your continued use of this board gives them permission no matter what declarations you shout into the void...or where you make them. That's pretty standard for any forum, website, social media, ect...if you continue to use the service, you're agreeing to whatever terms they decide to enforce. Just saying you don't agree doesn't exempt you from them.


I mostly lurk here and I have very few old posts to worry about anything. This will likely be my last posts, and even this one will probably get lost in the shuffle. But munboy is right. By continuing to post here and participatem you're pretty much consenting to the TOS by action.

You best option right now is: (1) change for password, (2) hire a fiverr to log in and delete every post you ever made.

That doesn't help those of you with issues of names, but at least your content will be removed.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Moe D

Bill Hiatt said:


> Much as I dislike the new TOS, I'm not seeing in it anything that gives Verticalscope the right to sell information like email addresses. I'm pretty sure that anyone using such purchased lists would be breaking antispam laws in both US and Canada.


I have been reading through this thread today and trying to get my head around the revised ToS. What I can say from my experience with the anti-spam laws in Canada is that if VS has sold our email addresses, they are in very hot water. If they have, and right now we have no idea if they have, but if we find out they did, I encourage every Canadian to report them here http://fightspam.gc.ca/eic/site/030.nsf/eng/h_00017.html. Canadian anti-spam law is no-nonsense. They will be investigated. And if it's proven, a massive fine.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Listen folks...for those who are posting here to have your content removed...well, I'm not sure that's a winning battle.

For those with less than 10,000 posts (I'm so sorry Monique and Julie!), you're going to need to go in a "modify" each post with something. You can simply erase the content and leave  space there or you can put a NO or whatever you want. Then save.

What that will do is erase the Google-Fu the post offered. And there is a LOT of Google-Fu on this board, which is why it is clicked so often from Google. If it's a non-Google-Fu post, then you can simply hit delete. HOWEVER, deletion does not overwrite what was there before. Modifying and saving then overwrites the previous bits.

I know this is rough. I deleted a bunch, but am now modifying then saving. 

It won't get back what they've already sold and harvested. No. But it makes sure that your posts don't inadvertently draw in another author who's looking for a home from Google.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.
Many formally active members now participate in discussions https://writersanctum.com/.
Since board ownership changed hands, the email address I used to sign up has been spammed with fishing emails and scummy advertisements. In addition, the forum is now packed with equally offensive ads within every thread. This place has become a sleezy spam trap. It is no longer a safe community.


----------



## going going gone

Puddleduck said:


> Mine as well. I've already PMed you with that request, but I thought I'd make it clear publicly too.


ditto, and I emailed you. my account, my posts, binned posts, everything.


----------



## Nicholas

WasAnn said:


> Listen folks...for those who are posting here to have your content removed...well, I'm not sure that's a winning battle.
> 
> For those with less than 10,000 posts (I'm so sorry Monique and Julie!), you're going to need to go in a "modify" each post with something. You can simply erase the content and leave space there or you can put a NO or whatever you want. Then save.
> 
> What that will do is erase the Google-Fu the post offered. And there is a LOT of Google-Fu on this board, which is why it is clicked so often from Google. If it's a non-Google-Fu post, then you can simply hit delete. HOWEVER, deletion does not overwrite what was there before. Modifying and saving then overwrites the previous bits.
> 
> I know this is rough. I deleted a bunch, but am now modifying then saving.
> 
> It won't get back what they've already sold and harvested. No. But it makes sure that your posts don't inadvertently draw in another author who's looking for a home from Google.


There's got to be a bot that does this right? For example, there's an app called NukeReddit that does this for reddit comments. It modifies every comment you made to replace it with a random sentence. Then it deletes them.


----------



## Kat Faitour

MClayton said:


> Helena, first of all, thanks for posting and at least giving some idea of what's going on. I know that probably wasn't your favorite thing to do today, but I appreciate that you did it. However, I knew when you began with the word "troll," things weren't going to go well. I think it might help to have a little bit of the history of KBoards.
> 
> KBoards is very different from most online forums. Honestly, that's why many of us are here. The previous owner, Harvey, was a kind man who had strict rules banning a lot of the behaviors (such as trolling) that are so often seen on other fora. No trolling, insulting, cursing, name calling, etc., has ever been allowed on KBoards. Our mods have strictly enforced those rules. Again, that's why a lot of us are here. It's a safe, informative community where people can go to ask questions and know they won't be ridiculed or attacked. The people here are generous, kind, and extremely knowledgeable when it comes to the publishing industry.
> 
> A few years ago, Harvey died. His death was a huge loss to our community. His wife and daughters continued with KBoards because it's such a hugely important resource for writers, and they wanted to honor his memory. Our mods also continued, I assume for many of the same reasons.
> 
> The sale was a shock, although I certainly understand why, all these years later, they chose to sell. The change in ToS was also a shock. We'd grown used to a give-and-take between forum owners and forum participants. When concerns were expressed (21 pages worth now), with no real answers, that was still another shock.
> 
> These incidents are all very much different from the experiences we've had here for years. I joined in 2010. I've spent much more time lurking than I have posting, in this thread and across the site as a whole. It's alarming to go, so quickly, from being run as a family/writer/reader-friendly environment to an environment that seems to be headed the way most online forums operate. It's scary, and quite honestly, for those of us who come here precisely because of the way KBoards was built and has operated, it's heartbreaking.
> 
> My guess is that you'll lose many more members over the change in atmosphere than you ever would have over the change in ToS. I don't want to see that happen; I'd ask you to please consider the history of KBoards so you can understand where people are coming from.


Thank you for saying all this so eloquently. I was content to wait and continue as a lurker to see how things might pan out. But the admin's responses have definitely left a sour taste in my mouth. The volunteer mods, while utterly wonderful, should be backed by equally professional owners. Helena's responses are an embarrassment to the company she works for, the people she directs (mods and anyone else she might manage), and to herself. Someday, I expect she will wish she could have her own posts permanently deleted.

Thanks to all for the information and support you've provided. Special thanks to Timothy Ellis for taking one for the team and setting up a new forum. It clearly speaks to the caliber of members we've all come to appreciate here.

What a great ride! I guess I'll see you all on the other side. Much love to all.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Nicholas said:


> There's got to be a bot that does this right? For example, there's an app called NukeReddit that does this for reddit comments. It modifies every comment you made to replace it with a random sentence. Then it deletes them.


I've been looking between trying to research some of the other items that have come up, but I'm not finding anything. If anyone does find one...please for the love of Julie...let us know where it is.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Wayback machine hitting this now before it disappears.
As usually happens around here.


----------



## munboy

MClayton said:


> Helena, first of all, thanks for posting and at least giving some idea of what's going on. I know that probably wasn't your favorite thing to do today, but I appreciate that you did it. However, I knew when you began with the word "troll," things weren't going to go well. I think it might help to have a little bit of the history of KBoards.
> 
> KBoards is very different from most online forums. Honestly, that's why many of us are here. The previous owner, Harvey, was a kind man who had strict rules banning a lot of the behaviors (such as trolling) that are so often seen on other fora. No trolling, insulting, cursing, name calling, etc., has ever been allowed on KBoards. Our mods have strictly enforced those rules. Again, that's why a lot of us are here. It's a safe, informative community where people can go to ask questions and know they won't be ridiculed or attacked. The people here are generous, kind, and extremely knowledgeable when it comes to the publishing industry.
> 
> A few years ago, Harvey died. His death was a huge loss to our community. His wife and daughters continued with KBoards because it's such a hugely important resource for writers, and they wanted to honor his memory. Our mods also continued, I assume for many of the same reasons.
> 
> The sale was a shock, although I certainly understand why, all these years later, they chose to sell. The change in ToS was also a shock. We'd grown used to a give-and-take between forum owners and forum participants. When concerns were expressed (21 pages worth now), with no real answers, that was still another shock.
> 
> These incidents are all very much different from the experiences we've had here for years. I joined in 2010. I've spent much more time lurking than I have posting, in this thread and across the site as a whole. It's alarming to go, so quickly, from being run as a family/writer/reader-friendly environment to an environment that seems to be headed the way most online forums operate. It's scary, and quite honestly, for those of us who come here precisely because of the way KBoards was built and has operated, it's heartbreaking.
> 
> My guess is that you'll lose many more members over the change in atmosphere than you ever would have over the change in ToS. I don't want to see that happen; I'd ask you to please consider the history of KBoards so you can understand where people are coming from.


Reading the history of the board makes me sad because I'm reminded of a time many many years ago (1995/6) when there was a forum/board for people to write/roleplay together called wbs (dot) net...the board was specifically called the Inn of the Weary Traveler...awesome name! I first discovered my love of writing there (though I didn't start writing to publish until a few years ago). In fact, I met my wife of 20 years on that board...along with many many friends over the world. Then a company much like VS that buys up websites, go (dot) com (which still services sites such as Disney and ESPN), bought WBS and started making wholesale changes, refusing to listen to their users. People left the site en masse and WBS closed not a year later. I tried to stay in contact with the friends I met there, but keep in mind this was before social media, and email was still very clunky. Needless to say, I lost contact with all of them besides two. My wife and my bestwoman at our wedding.

With all the people trying to leave, I see the same type of thing. They'll be left with a bunch of inactive users with few clicks and no money for the owners. It's horrible business sense.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Taking my troll a$$ outta here 'cause IDFWU said:


> Wayback machine hitting this now before it disappears.
> As usually happens around here.


And this is why we love your t*oll a$$.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.
Many formally active members now participate in discussions https://writersanctum.com/.
Since board ownership changed hands, the email address I used to sign up has been spammed with fishing emails and scummy advertisements. In addition, the forum is now packed with equally offensive ads within every thread. This place has become a sleezy spam trap. It is no longer a safe community.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

I'm appalled at the unprofessional and adversarial responses from Helena. This could've been an opportunity to continue discussion of users' concerns, but instead it's left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I'd hoped we could come to a resolution but I'm no longer seeing that happen.

I too am using this thread to keep an eye on the situation, but I do not consent to the new terms.

This thread marks the end of Kboards for me, which is a shame.


----------



## Amyshojai

Oh my ... doG. 

Will have to remove all recommendations to my coaching clients about this site. *sad face* There goes 6000+ posts, and a beautiful relationship.


----------



## MyraScott

So, from someone who's been in Internet marketing since the Internet became the Internet, let me break down what's going on here. 

VerticalScope bought 10 years of content. 

Very old content, very trusted content.  This forum's never been plagued with spambots or autoposters, it's 10 years of real content. 

All of that content is indexed by Google.  Deeply crawled, it ranks for literally thousands of keyword phrases.  Ranks very well, as there are no other public forums that are open and crawled like this one, specific to publishing on Amazon. 

People search, they end up here. 

"But I'm taking all my content with me!" you say, triumphant. 

Here's the womp womp to that strategy... it doesn't matter. 

Searchers who click a link and DON'T find the answer they are looking for are far more likely to click a relevant ad... and VS gets paid. 

They don't need an active forum; they don't want an active forum.  It requires maintenance and attention and hiring people like "Helena" to "deal with them."  The faster we all leave, the less they have to worry about answering "stupid" questions and "trolls." 

All they wanted was the search engine gold... vast, vast quantities of indexed content that will stay indexed (because it's old and unlikely to attract a spider) and lead users to a dead end where their best way out is to click a link for something else that might have the answer. 

That's how the money is made... not babysitting people who are part of a community.


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## Used To Be BH

MyraScott said:


> They don't need an active forum; they don't want an active forum. It requires maintenance and attention and hiring people like "Helena" to "deal with them." The faster we all leave, the less they have to worry about answering "stupid" questions and "trolls."
> 
> All they wanted was the search engine gold... vast, vast quantities of indexed content that will stay indexed (because it's old and unlikely to attract a spider) and lead users to a dead end where their best way out is to click a link for something else that might have the answer.
> 
> That's how the money is made... not babysitting people who are part of a community.


Myra, I'm sure you're right, but as long as my name and/or my content can't be used in odd ways without my permission, I'm OK with that. Well, I'm not OK with the damage to Kboards, but there's nothing I can do about that.

I was going to wait for Monday's meeting with my attorney, but things are moving faster than I anticipated, so I PMed my request for deletion.


----------



## munboy

MyraScott said:


> So, from someone who's been in Internet marketing since the Internet became the Internet, let me break down what's going on here.
> 
> VerticalScope bought 10 years of content.
> 
> Very old content, very trusted content. This forum's never been plagued with spambots or autoposters, it's 10 years of real content.
> 
> All of that content is indexed by Google. Deeply crawled, it ranks for literally thousands of keyword phrases. Ranks very well, as there are no other public forums that are open and crawled like this one, specific to publishing on Amazon.
> 
> People search, they end up here.
> 
> "But I'm taking all my content with me!" you say, triumphant.
> 
> Here's the womp womp to that strategy... it doesn't matter.
> 
> Searchers who click a link and DON'T find the answer they are looking for are far more likely to click a relevant ad... and VS gets paid.
> 
> They don't need an active forum; they don't want an active forum. It requires maintenance and attention and hiring people like "Helena" to "deal with them." The faster we all leave, the less they have to worry about answering "stupid" questions and "trolls."
> 
> All they wanted was the search engine gold... vast, vast quantities of indexed content that will stay indexed (because it's old and unlikely to attract a spider) and lead users to a dead end where their best way out is to click a link for something else that might have the answer.
> 
> That's how the money is made... not babysitting people who are part of a community.


Couple things. That 10 years of gold? With how fast things change in the publishing world, it'll all be obsolete soon anyways. Secondly, the algorithms, SEOs, and methods search engines use change almost daily. Without new, quality content, this board will die, too. VS will reap the rewards of their purchase for awhile and once it's no longer making them money, they'll sell it off or close it down.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black




----------



## lilywhite

munboy said:


> Couple things. That 10 years of gold? With how fast things change in the publishing world, it'll all be obsolete soon anyways. Secondly, the algorithms, SEOs, and methods search engines use change almost daily. Without new, quality content, this board will die, too. VS will reap the rewards of their purchase for awhile and once it's no longer making them money, they'll sell it off or close it down.


If that's victory, it's a pretty hollow one; we still get screwed out of a forum that was important to us.


----------



## MyraScott

munboy said:


> VS will reap the rewards of their purchase for awhile and once it's no longer making them money, they'll sell it off or close it down.


Exactly.

But you'd be surprised how the long tail can keep generating income... when there are no other real results for an odd search. A trickle of income is fine if you've got a dozen of these tired old monsters generating money with zero effort.

And new people will trickle in, because this is the only place they can find. The few other forums are invite-only or paywall.

A new crop of members is a heck of a lot easier to manage than than keeping up with people who have long-term expectations of how things should work.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Shane Lochlann Black said:


>


I did spit out my tea at that clip.

But, if you can say all is well after that woman's attitude - I'm not sure we're living on the same planet.


----------



## spellscribe

Am I alone in thinking there is no way someone like THAT actually works for a company supposedly big enough to invite litigation for funsies? By bet is on Helena being from a competitor company, or just a troll out for some laughs and pot stirring.


----------



## MyraScott

JRTomlin said:


> While what you say is true about their profit (in the short term anyway), taking our content is *not* being _'triumphant_'. It is a *loss*, loss of community, of content, of friends of longstanding. It is the loss of a forum that has meant a great deal to many, many authors. But many of us see no other choice at this point.


I would never call it triumphant. I don't think anyone else has either.

I would call it a devastating loss to the indie publishing world. But reality is, they didn't buy a community, they bought search-harvested content and the "trolls" are more trouble than they are worth.


----------



## MyraScott

spellscribe said:


> Am I alone in thinking there is no way someone like THAT actually works for a company supposedly big enough to invite litigation for funsies? By bet is on Helena being from a competitor company, or just a troll out for some laughs and pot stirring.


That would be quite the plot twist!


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

While it is true that the spiders might not crawl the old threads, right now there are a lot of changes happening on old threads, so who knows.

Also, some of the ones I've been over-writing were big ones that are still getting a lot of hits because I get redirected hits, particularly the big KU scam research ones. There just aren't that many of those big projects that aren't behind a paywall.

So, overwriting them does impact utility.

Also, see that down there at the bottom of my post. Yeah, that stays.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

spellscribe said:


> Am I alone in thinking there is no way someone like THAT actually works for a company supposedly big enough to invite litigation for funsies? By bet is on Helena being from a competitor company, or just a troll out for some laughs and pot stirring.


Somehow she came in under vsAdmin...and you can't get that by signing up as a user, so...


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## 98700

spellscribe said:


> Am I alone in thinking there is no way someone like THAT actually works for a company supposedly big enough to invite litigation for funsies? By bet is on Helena being from a competitor company, or just a troll out for some laughs and pot stirring.


While that would be amusing, she did post from the admin account. I doubt that could be easily faked.


----------



## munboy

WasAnn said:


> Somehow she came in under vsAdmin...and you can't get that by signing up as a user, so...


There's also the nice, shiny "Administrator" under the name.


----------



## Zelah Meyer

Calling users with valid concerns 'trolls' and basically telling them to suck it up or sue was all I needed to hear to know what kind of result is likely here.  I guess I know what I'll be doing tomorrow now - going through thousands of posts and replacing anything of substance with a copy-paste response before changing my user name and requesting deletion.  There is clearly no reasonable solution to be negotiated if this is the way they are approaching the matter.  A sad situation, as I'd hoped for some kind of reasonable response that would allow the forum to continue.


----------



## CassieL

spellscribe said:


> Am I alone in thinking there is no way someone like THAT actually works for a company supposedly big enough to invite litigation for funsies? By bet is on Helena being from a competitor company, or just a troll out for some laughs and pot stirring.


It did cross my mind that with all the spelling errors that might not have been a legitimate post by a company representative. But I hope that if that was the case the mods would've stepped in, seen what was happening, and deleted it by now.


----------



## spellscribe

WasAnn said:


> Somehow she came in under vsAdmin...and you can't get that by signing up as a user, so...


Well then. Guess there's no coming back from that...


----------



## munboy

Cassie Leigh said:


> It did cross my mind that with all the* spelling errors* that might not have been a legitimate post by a company representative. But I hope that if that was the case the mods would've stepped in, seen what was happening, and deleted it by now.


What, you don't believe they're not the "devel"?


----------



## Guest

Now that I am digging:

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/11/2nd-breach-at-verticalscope-impacts/

From last year, but they have so far had TWO breaches. This might explain why some people are reporting a lot more spam since the purchase...


----------



## 98700

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Now that I am digging:
> 
> https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/11/2nd-breach-at-verticalscope-impacts/
> 
> From last year, but they have so far had TWO breaches. This might explain why some people are reporting a lot more spam since the purchase...


Also worth noting that she said that even to the extent they submit to our requests to have our info deleted, it's not actually deleted, only 'anonymized' and will remain in their possession. Which means that no matter what, we're susceptible to having our data stolen in further breaches.


----------



## 97251

MyraScott said:


> Very old content, very trusted content. This forum's never been plagued with spambots or autoposters, it's 10 years of real content.
> 
> All of that content is indexed by Google. Deeply crawled, it ranks for literally thousands of keyword phrases. Ranks very well, as there are no other public forums that are open and crawled like this one, specific to publishing on Amazon.
> 
> All they wanted was the search engine gold... vast, vast quantities of indexed content that will stay indexed (because it's old and unlikely to attract a spider) and lead users to a dead end where their best way out is to click a link for something else that might have the answer.
> 
> That's how the money is made... not babysitting people who are part of a community.


That's why they forbid mods from deleting accounts: because they don't want to lose the content.


----------



## munboy

Yay! said:


> Yes, but if the content is no longer there, soon there will be bounces, which will lower the SEO rankings, and once Google crawls again and doesn't find the content, it won't index it anymore.
> 
> That's why they forbid mods from deleting accounts: because they don't want to lose the content.


Good point. It's a chore, but if people are completely against what VS has done (and their response to concerns), the best thing to do is to go back and delete all their posts. VS might still have the posts backed up and claim rights to it, that doesn't mean it will show up during search engine crawls. Which means less new users finding what they're looking for, which means less visitors, which means less hits, which means lower search engine rankings, which means less money for VS.


----------



## David VanDyke

vsAdmin said:


> Hello All,
> 
> I have read through all I can on here and have to say that it seems like there is more trolling going on in this thread than actual relevant debate.


I hope you realized you used the T-word in violation of our own KBoards community standards. I myself was put on posting moderation for a week for merely referring to the t-word, not even aiming it someone. Basically, you just undercut the current mods--although that's not necessarily a bad thing.

So, until the mods--and their bosses--start following their own rules, all your explanations and justifications are moot. The moderators of this board have, over the past year, become part of the problem, rather than the solution--which is common when trying to over-control a situation whist simultaneously not being evenhanded--something widely noted.

I fully expect this post to be deleted and for me to be banned or put on post mod, but at this point, I'm beyond caring too much. I'd like to stay, but it's becoming hard to justify, though I hope things turn around here.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

"I have read through all I can on here and have to say that it seems like there is more trolling going on in this thread than actual relevant debate."

There are too many swear filters here for me to articulate what I think of this.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

munboy said:


> Good point. It's a chore, but if people are completely against what VS has done (and their response to concerns), the best thing to do is to go back and delete all their posts. VS might still have the posts backed up and claim rights to it, that doesn't mean it will show up during search engine crawls. Which means less new users finding what they're looking for, which means less visitors, which means less hits, which means lower search engine rankings, which means less money for VS.


Yeah, I'm not pleased, but that's what it looks like I'll have to do. I'm sorry to the mods. It's not cool they've been put in this position, either.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## 97251

David VanDyke said:


> I hope you realized you used the T-word in violation of your own community standards. I myself was put on posting moderation for a week for merely referring to the t-word, not even aiming it someone.
> 
> So, until you mods start following your own rules, all your explanations and justifications are moot. The moderators of this board have, over the past year, become part of the problem, rather than the solution--which is common when trying to over-control a situation whist simultaneously not being evenhanded--something widely noted.


Helena is not part of this community and is not one of the mods. She speaks for the owners of the forum.


----------



## WHDean

Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. A PR slam-dunk got turned into a five-alarm dumpster fire with one poor choice of words followed up with a doubling down. Calling the picking out of sentences a bad thing with a bad word, only to refer everyone to lawyers whose job it is to pick out sentences in documents...Jebus.

I was thinking some people were too focused on the possibilities implied by the TOS and not on the economic and legal realities. You can't copy copyrighted material just because someone copied it on your site. But after the tin-eared input from VSadmin, I'm starting to have my doubts about the future.


----------



## MClayton

David VanDyke said:


> I hope you realized you used the T-word in violation of our own KBoards community standards. I myself was put on posting moderation for a week for merely referring to the t-word, not even aiming it someone. Basically, you just undercut the current mods--although that's not necessarily a bad thing.
> 
> So, until the mods start following their own rules, all your explanations and justifications are moot. The moderators of this board have, over the past year, become part of the problem, rather than the solution--which is common when trying to over-control a situation whist simultaneously not being evenhanded--something widely noted.
> 
> I fully expect this post to be deleted and for me to be banned or put on post mod, but at this point, I'm beyond caring too much. I'd like to stay, but it's becoming hard to justify, though I hope things turn around here.


David, do you think that's fair? I'm not sure how the mods are supposed to put the owners of the board on "post moderation." I imagine that would only result in them being removed from their positions (which, God knows, at this point would probably be a blessing for them).


----------



## Tulonsae

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## 97251

Tulonsae said:


> So is it better to modify the posts or to delete them?
> 
> Also, we can't delete threads we've created. Only the mods can do that. (As I recall and just recently tried.)


If you want to make sure your information can't be found, modifying is best.


----------



## Mercedes Vox

After supper tonight, I'm going to replace all my posts with "NOTHING TO SEE HERE" and then enter lurk mode until my account is deleted. I have a feeling I'll be lurking for a lonnnnnnnng time.

I'll miss this community terribly, and that makes me sad. Thanks to all you heavy hitters and everyone else, all of whom treated this newbie with respect from the get-go and from whom I've learned a metric effing [crap]ton. I've offered advice and assistance when I felt qualified to do so, and I hope I haven't been too much of a jack-wagon along the way. I truly did make an effort not to be jack-wagony.

I'll raise a glass to all y'all when I replace my last post, which would be this one.

See ya 'round. Be excellent to each other.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Soooooooooooooooooo

I've gone into my account. I can see my posts. I can quote, reply, and notify. I had a delete option, which I took, and now I can't do anything. Am I looking in the wrong place?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

vsAdmin said:


> To my point  Thanks for helping me prove it
> 
> And to your point, I am not calling everyone a troll I am saying troll tactics are being used. Like pinpointing one phrase out of context of the original thread.
> 
> Helena


Helena,

I know you are new to KBoards, but "troll" is a four letter word here. We neither call people trolls or accuse them of trolling. Typically, posts that do so would be edited or deleted.

Folks,

We're still getting requests PM'd to us for account deletion. I'm sorry, but we are not able to delete your accounts. Please contact vsAdmin directly with your requests.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Justa Nobody

Krista D. Ball said:


> Soooooooooooooooooo
> 
> I've gone into my account. I can see my posts. I can quote, reply, and notify. I had a delete option, which I took, and now I can't do anything. Am I looking in the wrong place?


You have to click on the title of the thread. That will take you to your actual post and in that post you should see 'MODIFY' on the top right. Click that, paste in whatever text you want and hit save.

But you can't modify from the post list. You have to go to each and every post individually!


----------



## crebel

Krista D. Ball said:


> Soooooooooooooooooo
> 
> I've gone into my account. I can see my posts. I can quote, reply, and notify. I had a delete option, which I took, and now I can't do anything. Am I looking in the wrong place?


You actually have to "go" to each post when you find it in the profile then "modify" it from within it's actual thread. It's daunting with 1,000's of posts. I've barely made a dent in 333 pages of personal posts, but even as "just a reader" I don't want any of my words to be associated with the new ownership.


----------



## going going gone

poor Betsy, poor Ann, poor Becca. I feel for you guys and thank you for the many hours of service. I won't likely join a private forum, for they often blow up, and somehow moderation here did not make much explode at all. Kudos to you, and sorry a  ---- whatever --- bought the forum


----------



## 69959

I've been following this thread since the get-go. I joined Kboards in 2013 and though I haven't been as active recently, I'm sad to see the demise of the board. I was hoping things would go differently, but with Helena's posts, it's clear that Kboards as we know it is over. I've been going back and forth trying to figure out if I'm going delete my account, and her responses were the final nail in the coffin.

I'm infuriated by her responses, but my responding won't help. Others have said just about everything there is to say.

However, I do take issue with her saying that our data cannot be deleted. I read so much on the GDPR in May that I ended up in tears more than once. According to everything I've read on the EU's rules: people have the RIGHT to be forgotten. IE: completely removed from the system. So, either I understand wrong, or they somehow found a way around GDPR.

As to Sisley's comment about hiring someone from Fiverr to delete our posts, can that really be done? I've already wasted enough of my time editing and deleting posts. I have a blurb to write, emails to send, and other important things to do with my time.

Email and PM to admin to delete my account will be going out promptly, I'm sorry to say.

I'll miss Kboards.


----------



## 97251

OilyWriter said:


> As to Sisley's comment about hiring someone from Fiverr to delete our posts, can that really be done? I've already wasted enough of my time editing and deleting posts. I have a blurb to write, emails to send, and other important things to do with my time.


I've had people on Fiverr to do random, repetitive website stuff. They could obviously do this as well. If they live in a country with a lower hourly wage, you could pay for the 4, 5, or 6 hours to do that. You'll need to give them your login and pwd, though.

It is sad that the administration can't simply delete profiles and posts.


----------



## 69959

Yay! said:


> I've had people on Fiverr to do random, repetitive website stuff. They could obviously do this as well. If they live in a country with a lower hourly wage, you could pay for the 4, 5, or 6 hours to do that. You'll need to give them your login and pwd, though.
> 
> It is sad that the administration can't simply delete profiles and posts.


Thank you. I'll have to look into that, assuming the admin doesn't disable the abilities to delete/modify.

And yes, it is sad. Feels like we've been taken over by dictators.


----------



## Becca Mills

Helena, I'm surprised and saddened that a specialist in community relations would make an inadequate effort to understand our community's culture before posting. As many have noted, we don't call one another "trolls" here. KBoards has always treated that word as the ultimate profanity, and for good reason: assuming, at the very least, that we're all expressing genuine thoughts and feelings is the bedrock of civil conversation. Once that goes away, community becomes at best fragmented and suspicious, at worst impossible.

No one in this thread trolling. People are angry and worried and upset in a 100% genuine way. I am absolutely sure of this because I've known most of these folks for years. 

Please don't call us trolls again.

Becca
Moderator


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

David VanDyke said:


> I myself was put on posting moderation for a week for merely referring to the t-word, not even aiming it someone.


For the record, no one in the entire history of KBoards has ever been put on post moderation for a single utterance of the T-word.. for that matter, I don't believe anyone has been placed on post approval for a single instance of anything. Post approval is something that is built up to over a series of incidents. Just sayin'. I'd be happy to discuss our moderation philosophy via PM, David.

Betsy
KB Moderator


----------



## CassieL

Becca Mills said:


> Helena, I'm surprised and saddened that a specialist in community relations would make an inadequate effort to understand our community's culture before posting. As many have noted, we don't call one another "trolls" here. KBoards has always treated that word as the ultimate profanity, and for good reason: assuming, at the very least, that we're all expressing genuine thoughts and feelings is the bedrock of civil conversation. Once that goes away, community becomes at best fragmented and suspicious, at worst impossible.
> 
> No one in this thread trolling. People are angry and worried and upset in a 100% genuine way. I am absolutely sure of this because I've known most of these folks for years.
> 
> Please don't call us trolls again.
> 
> Becca
> Moderator





Betsy the Quilter said:


> For the record, no one in the entire history of KBoards has ever been put on post moderation for a single utterance of the T-word.. for that matter, I don't believe anyone has been placed on post approval for a single instance of anything. Post approval is something that is built up to over a series of incidents. Just sayin'. I'd be happy to discuss our moderation philosophy via PM, David.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Moderator


Just want to send some visible support to our mods during such an insanely difficult time here. So sorry you guys are having to go through this and thank you for all of your efforts through the years that never get as much praise as they deserve. That includes Ann, too, she just wasn't right here for me to quote.

I'm not deleting anything yet because I worry there could be legal repercussions to doing so and I don't have time to go figure out if that's the case, but I'm afraid the earlier post by the new ownership's representative solidified for me that I'm done posting here. Thank you to everyone who has shared their knowledge through the years. I appreciate each and every one of you even the ones I disagreed with.


----------



## Patty Jansen

That was the most unprofessional response in a crisis of confidence ever.

I feel for the moderators who have put so much effort into this forum and are being shafted.

Still not going anywhere (I really should spend more time writing), but I'm feeling concerned about the community and the lack of respect from the owners.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

crebel said:


> You actually have to "go" to each post when you find it in the profile then "modify" it from within it's actual thread. It's daunting with 1,000's of posts. I've barely made a dent in 333 pages of personal posts, but even as "just a reader" I don't want any of my words to be associated with the new ownership.


Found it! Looked like a lot of what I've posted was in locked threads, which I couldn't modify.


----------



## lilywhite

Krista D. Ball said:


> Found it! Looked like a lot of what I've posted was in locked threads, which I couldn't modify.


You instigator, you!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Krista D. Ball said:


> Found it! Looked like a lot of what I've posted was in locked threads, which I couldn't modify.


There's a shock!


----------



## Dpock

Maybe rather than just delete posts, paste in the URL for the new forum with some useful SEO keywords (for link popularity for the new site).


----------



## Used To Be BH

Dpock said:


> Maybe rather than just delete posts, paste in the URL for the new forum with some useful SEO keywords (for link popularity for the new site).


If you want to make a clean exit, that might be unnecessarily provocative.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

thedudeminds said:


> I have sent a PM to "Philip" requesting a full wipe of my account. In case I haven't made this clear, I will re-state: I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope revised (with no notification of same) TOS, and rejected same as soon as I was made aware of the TOS's language.
> 
> I have allowed for time for a response regarding the language in the TOS - that time allowance should not be construed as consent but rather a good faith attempt at allowing KB/VS to respond to membership concerns. I am not satisfied with the response or lack thereof in what I feel was a reasonable time frame.
> 
> Given that, I would like to be removed from this site and any/all content I've posted here to be removed as well. As soon as possible.
> 
> Additionally, my continued use of this forum while waiting for my account and all content to be deleted should not be construed as consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS. I continue to lurk here to monitor this thread for developments and to continually check to see that my request for account deletion has been completed. I have deleted or modified everything manually from my account, I've done what I can from my end, save for a PM to and from moderator Becca and a PM to "Philip" and also this post. I expect those to be deleted as well along with everything else.
> 
> I post all of the above publicly in this thread so that it may be 'on the record' and made clear - I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS - and I do not want any/all data pertaining to me to remain. I request that it ALL be deleted. I have sent a private message requesting account deletion and that all content attributed to it be forever wiped. I wish to be forgotten as per the EU's GDPR. Again, I request that this be done as soon as possible.
> 
> Thank you.


Just in case the full wipe on your account goes through, I'm copying and pasting your quote. It states everything I want to say about this subject (and thank you, thedudeminds)

I have sent a PM to "Philip" requesting a full wipe of my account. In case I haven't made this clear, I will re-state: I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope revised (with no notification of same) TOS, and rejected same as soon as I was made aware of the TOS's language.

I have allowed for time for a response regarding the language in the TOS - that time allowance should not be construed as consent but rather a good faith attempt at allowing KB/VS to respond to membership concerns. I am not satisfied with the response or lack thereof in what I feel was a reasonable time frame.

Given that, I would like to be removed from this site and any/all content I've posted here to be removed as well. As soon as possible.

Additionally, my continued use of this forum while waiting for my account and all content to be deleted should not be construed as consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS. I continue to lurk here to monitor this thread for developments and to continually check to see that my request for account deletion has been completed. I have deleted or modified everything manually from my account, I've done what I can from my end, save for a PM to and from moderator Becca and a PM to "Philip" and also this post. I expect those to be deleted as well along with everything else.

I post all of the above publicly in this thread so that it may be 'on the record' and made clear - I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS - and I do not want any/all data pertaining to me to remain. I request that it ALL be deleted. I have sent a private message requesting account deletion and that all content attributed to it be forever wiped. I wish to be forgotten as per the EU's GDPR. Again, I request that this be done as soon as possible.

Thank you.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot

For a good (disturbing) time, Google "Verticalscope problems" without the quotes.

Harvey's family couldn't have sold to a more despicable company.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## 69959

I'm a Little Teapot said:


> For a good (disturbing) time, Google "Verticalscope problems" without the quotes.
> 
> Harvey's family couldn't have sold to a more despicable company.


That was eye-opening.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Betsy the Quilter said:


> There's a shock!


I am offended by this fair and accurate assessment.


----------



## BGArcher

So looks like I will be editing all my old posts and just lurking instead of posting going forward, but I do love having this water cooler community. Hopefully the new forums people are setting up will be where people head over to. I don't particularly care about what I post here, but you guys blew it so royally with how you handled this thread it's laughable. My thoughts and prayers go out to the mods though. You have all been awesome here, including raining me in once or twice when I got a little heated in some of the old threads.


----------



## 98700

Writer-Fueled Dreams said:


> Just in case the full wipe on your account goes through, I'm copying and pasting your quote. It states everything I want to say about this subject (and thank you, thedudeminds)
> 
> I have sent a PM to "Philip" requesting a full wipe of my account. In case I haven't made this clear, I will re-state: I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope revised (with no notification of same) TOS, and rejected same as soon as I was made aware of the TOS's language.
> 
> I have allowed for time for a response regarding the language in the TOS - that time allowance should not be construed as consent but rather a good faith attempt at allowing KB/VS to respond to membership concerns. I am not satisfied with the response or lack thereof in what I feel was a reasonable time frame.
> 
> Given that, I would like to be removed from this site and any/all content I've posted here to be removed as well. As soon as possible.
> 
> Additionally, my continued use of this forum while waiting for my account and all content to be deleted should not be construed as consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS. I continue to lurk here to monitor this thread for developments and to continually check to see that my request for account deletion has been completed. I have deleted or modified everything manually from my account, I've done what I can from my end, save for a PM to and from moderator Becca and a PM to "Philip" and also this post. I expect those to be deleted as well along with everything else.
> 
> I post all of the above publicly in this thread so that it may be 'on the record' and made clear - I do not consent to KBoards/Vertical Scope TOS - and I do not want any/all data pertaining to me to remain. I request that it ALL be deleted. I have sent a private message requesting account deletion and that all content attributed to it be forever wiped. I wish to be forgotten as per the EU's GDPR. Again, I request that this be done as soon as possible.
> 
> Thank you.


Same. I'm in the process of removing all the content from my posts. I'm doing everything I can think of to indicate as clearly as possible that I don't agree to the current TOS, changed without notifying us or getting our agreement to them.


----------



## estelle

vsAdmin said:


> That is because no one is clear. If you fall under the GDPR criteria then we can help anonymize your account
> If you would like personal information removed from forum View then I can anonymize that as well.
> 
> When you sign up for anything, you use the information to do so, even without a TOS you surrender that information. Since it is in the back end and not visible to others as well as in a locked environment that is securely stored (the back end) it is not considered public and therefore stays. Even with GDPR.
> 
> We can anonymize your accounts, however.
> 
> Helena


I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong about this. I'm not sure you understand what GDPR is. If an EU citizen asks to have their data deleted, then you need to delete that data EVERYWHERE it is hiding in your systems, including back end, backups and archives. Not only that, you need to notify third parties to do the same if you have shared said data.


----------



## MyCatDoesNotConsent

Mark Dawson said:


> Now I have really seen it all. If that is customer service, then... well.


Some explanations cast light, others throw shade.

For the record, I want to state the now traditional trifecta:

1 - I Do Not Consent to the TOS
2 - I want to thank the Mod Squad. Even when they rapped my knuckles, it was done as gently as possible. You are much appreciated.
3 - I also want to thank all the contributors who have made this forum so valuable to newbies. (And some oldbies, no doubt.)

And on the plus side, not reading this forum will give me more time to watch reality TV shows write!


----------



## Llano

Dpock said:


> Maybe rather than just delete posts, paste in the URL for the new forum with some useful SEO keywords (for link popularity for the new site).


Then add the same text in a new post at the end of the thread and watch the fireworks.


----------



## BGArcher

estel said:


> I'm sorry, but you're wrong about this. If an EU citizen asks to have their data deleted, then you need to delete that data EVERYWHERE it is hiding in your systems, including backend, backups and archives. Not only that, you need to notify third parties to do the same if you have shared said data.


Yeah, they are 100% correct in this. You have to delete the data.


----------



## Carol (was Dara)

Betsy, Anne, and Becca,

I just want to thank you for the immense amount of time and energy you have put into moderating this forum over the years. As frustrating as this situation is for all of us, especially those of us who have been here for many years, you three have put far more hours of your lives into this forum than anybody, and I really feel like you're being screwed worst of all by these new changes. I don't know if/where I'll go from here, but it's been a pleasure to have been part of KBoards at a time when the self-publishing and Kindle community was just taking off, and your moderating was part of what made this a safe, comfortable environment in those early days. I haven't always agreed with your moderating decisions but I _have_ always believed that you were acting in what you felt to be the best interests of the forum as a whole--even when those decisions may have brought you a lot of grief or even gone against your own personal wishes. I respect that.

To the new owners,

If you consider any of the _people_ here, versus just the user content and data, to be valuable assets, I highly recommend you do everything in your power to treat the volunteer moderation staff here with respect. Over the eight years I've been a member, I've watched them devote huge chunks of their lives to this community, and the positive tone they've done their best to encourage here is part of what has kept members returning. For that matter, the freely shared knowledge of long-time users with thousands of posts (I'm not counting myself) are a major draw here, and I would suggest you do everything you can to reassure both those old users and new that you value their presence and are willing to listen to their reasonable suggestions on how to improve your TOS to make it a better fit for this specific community.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## David VanDyke

Yay! said:


> Helena is not part of this community and is not one of the mods. She speaks for the owners of the forum.


You appear to have no idea how things should work in business. Anyone speaking for any company's owners should know what their subordinates are doing and what their policies are. If they suddenly appear and work against those subordinates (the mods) by undermining their policies, that's telling, don't you think? It's evidence of hypocrisy, disarray, bad business practices, cluelessness--and sometimes, it's revealing of what's really happening.


----------



## David VanDyke

MClayton said:


> David, do you think that's fair? I'm not sure how the mods are supposed to put the owners of the board on "post moderation." I imagine that would only result in them being removed from their positions (which, God knows, at this point would probably be a blessing for them).


It's utterly fair to hold "management" responsible, collectively, for the train wreck we are all watching--the owners, the mods, and anyone else involved in running KBoards.

Note that holding them responsible is not the same as saying who's at fault, in the same way the President (whomever it is) is responsible for running the country, but not necessarily at fault for the actions of any individual member of their administration.


----------



## John Twipnook

Betsy, Anne, and Becca,

Sorry. I don't know what to say.


----------



## A Dark Path

vsAdmin said:


> That is because no one is clear. If you fall under the GDPR criteria then we can help anonymize your account
> If you would like personal information removed from forum View then I can anonymize that as well.
> 
> When you sign up for anything, you use the information to do so, even without a TOS you surrender that information. Since it is in the back end and not visible to others as well as in a locked environment that is securely stored (the back end) it is not considered public *and therefore stays. Even with GDPR.
> *
> We can anonymize your accounts, however.
> 
> Helena


Actually, _*no.*_
I've been lurking throughout this thread, my thoughts leaning toward those copyright protections set down by Shane. I was interested to see how long it would take someone from your end to step-up, and hopefully dispel some worries.
I have to say your opening lines were a doozy... and not in a good way.

Anyhow, perhaps your company has a representative who actually understands the implications of GDPR, because it seems you do not.

Firstly, with regards your sneaked in TOS: Consent under GDPR must be active, requiring affirmative action by the data subject, rather than the passive acceptance under some current models that allow for pre-ticked boxes or opt-outs.
Controllers (that's you) must keep a record of how and when an individual gave their consent, and that individual may withdraw their consent whenever they want. Your current model for obtaining consent must be in place for when the GDPR applies in 2018.

Secondly, any citizen can withdraw consent whenever they like. They might do so because they object to how an organisation is processing their information, or simply because they don't want it collected anymore. In this instance *all* data will be removed.
The controller (again, that's you) is responsible for telling other organisations (for instance, Facebook, Google, PhishingScams.com, etc) *to delete all links to copies of that data, as well as the copies themselves.*

Thirdly, it may be worth mentioning for those covered by GDPR, if you wish to transfer any of the data you have posted here, and use it elsewhere; the controllers (Vertical Scope) are required to assist you - and to assist you swiftly: the legislation means citizens can expect to have a request honored within four weeks. Controllers must ensure the requested data is in an open, common format such as CSV, meaning that when it moves to another provider it can still be read.

Helena, I hope this helps to clarify your obligations under GDPR. It is a worldwide _regulation_, affecting *all* companies holding data on EU residents/citizens.


----------



## meh

After reading up on some of the other websites acquired by Verticalscope, I have to say one thing . . . I wonder if this company really understands the bee hive they've stirred up in angering a group of INDIE PUBLISHED WRITERS. Oh, the damage that could be done . . . . 

As the Bard wrote, "Good my lord, will you see the players well bestowed? Do you hear, let them be well used, for they are the abstract and brief chronicles of the time. After your death you were better have a bad epitaph than their ill report while you live."


----------



## 69959

Maybe someone in the EU should report the VS/Kboards TOS and policies to the GDPR governing authorities. They obviously don't care about complying.


----------



## A Dark Path

OilyWriter said:


> Maybe someone in the EU should report the VS/Kboards TOS and policies to the GDPR governing authorities. They obviously don't care about complying.


To be fair, Oily, as they themselves stated, they have 30 days to comply to requests. Nothing much can happen before then.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Carol (was Dara) said:


> Betsy, Anne, and Becca,
> 
> I just want to thank you for the immense amount of time and energy you have put into moderating this forum over the years. As frustrating as this situation is for all of us, especially those of us who have been here for many years, you three have put far more hours of your lives into this forum than anybody, and I really feel like you're being screwed worst of all by these new changes. I don't know if/where I'll go from here, but it's been a pleasure to have been part of KBoards at a time when the self-publishing and Kindle community was just taking off, and your moderating was part of what made this a safe, comfortable environment in those early days. I haven't always agreed with your moderating decisions but I _have_ always believed that you were acting in what you felt to be the best interests of the forum as a whole--even when those decisions may have brought you a lot of grief or even gone against your own personal wishes. I respect that.


This and more. It's been a privilege to know you.


----------



## 69959

David Brian said:


> To be fair, Oily, as they themselves stated, they have 30 days to comply to requests. Nothing much can happen before then.


They're saying they will only anonymize the account, not delete the information:


David Brian said:


> Actually, _*no.*_
> I've been lurking throughout this thread, my thoughts leaning toward those copyright protections set down by Shane. I was interested to see how long it would take someone from your end to step-up, and hopefully dispel some worries.
> I have to say your opening lines were a doozy... and not in a good way.
> 
> Anyhow, perhaps your company has a representative who actually understands the implications of GDPR, because it seems you do not.
> 
> Firstly, with regards your sneaked in TOS: Consent under GDPR must be active, requiring affirmative action by the data subject, rather than the passive acceptance under some current models that allow for pre-ticked boxes or opt-outs.
> Controllers (that's you) must keep a record of how and when an individual gave their consent, and that individual may withdraw their consent whenever they want. Your current model for obtaining consent must be in place for when the GDPR applies in 2018.
> 
> Secondly, any citizen can withdraw consent whenever they like. They might do so because they object to how an organisation is processing their information, or simply because they don't want it collected anymore. In this instance *all* data will be removed.
> The controller (again, that's you) is responsible for telling other organisations (for instance, Facebook, Google, PhishingScams.com, etc) *to delete all and any links to copies of that data, as well as the copies themselves.*
> 
> Thirdly, it may be worth mentioning for those covered by GDPR, if you wish to transfer any of the data you have posted here, and use it elsewhere; the controllers (Vertical Scope) are required to assist you - and to assist you swiftly: the legislation means citizens can expect to have a request honored within four weeks. Controllers must ensure the requested data is in an open, common format such as CSV, meaning that when it moves to another provider it can still be read.
> 
> Helena, I hope this helps to clarify your obligations under GDPR. It is a worldwide _regulation_, affecting *all* companies holding data on EU residents/citizens.


----------



## MClayton

David VanDyke said:


> It's utterly fair to hold "management" responsible, collectively, for the train wreck we are all watching--the owners, the mods, and anyone else involved in running KBoards.
> 
> Note that holding them responsible is not the same as saying who's at fault, in the same way the President (whomever it is) is responsible for running the country, but not necessarily at fault for the actions of any individual member of their administration.


I'm unsure what you want the mods to do, or what you think they have the power to do. I'm also confused by your analogy.

The President holds the power. According to you, the President is responsible for what the people under him do (even though he may not be at fault). I agree with this.

But the moderators _don't_ hold the power. According to your analogy, the moderators are responsible _for what the people who hold the power do_ (even though they may not be at fault).

That's not how it works.

If you read the thread, you'll see that the power of the moderators is already being stripped away.

At any rate, the very last thing I want to do is get sidetracked from the real issue. And I'd really hate to see us pull a _Lord of the Flies_-type scenario and start attacking our own.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Krista D. Ball said:


> I am offended by this fair and accurate assessment.


Luv ya


----------



## Nicholas

I don't know about all of you guys, but I'm fascinated with Vertiscope's apparent business model. It's shady and mysterious. It's international. It involves piles and piles of money. I think this is exactly the type of story that something like NPR's planet money or Freakanomics would love to explore. This whole fiasco touches on all kinds of hot topics like privacy, cyber security, GDPR, copyright laws, information manipulation and the state of public discourse. Nearly everyone has some nostalgia for the quirky little forums that used to be ubiquitous before Facebook and Reddit came along, and they might like a story about the little underdog communities pushing back.  

You would think a community of writers would be able to convince a major outlet that this is a story that's got legs.


----------



## 39416

I admit, I'm confused.

I'm just a prawnie author. Could somebody describe for me the worst-case scenario of what this company can do to me because of my posting here? I don't really understand what it is I'm supposed to be worried about. They might re-post my posts somewhere? They might sell my email address? Is that it?


----------



## Fay

I'm new to this board, and I've been so impressed with the real community feeling here and the skilled moderators. You don't get a strong community like this without very good moderation. Just wanted to voice my appreciation.


----------



## Patty Jansen

loraininflorida said:


> I admit, I'm confused.
> 
> I'm just a prawnie author. Could somebody describe for me the worst-case scenario of what this company can do to me because of my posting here? I don't really understand what it is I'm supposed to be worried about. They might re-post my posts somewhere? They might sell my email address? Is that it?


I'm a bit like you, but not so prawny, and have been online for a long time. I don't really see what they can do with the info other than target ads at me, and loads of people are already doing that so see if I care, because I really don't.

That said...

Not notifying us of the changes in TOS is NOT COOL.
Not replying to concerns was NOT COOL.
Helena's "response" was DEFINITELY NOT COOL.

And it's getting to the point where I'm like IDGAF about my stuff here. It's mostly banter and eh. It would have been really nice to have been notified, but I get it, big company, different priorities yada yada.

But to let someone as unprofessional as that loose in an already charged environment and insult all of us?

I don't have to put up with that BS on top of all the other BS.

I have loved the KB because of the community. I might just log out for the first time since 2011, close the tab and go somewhere else. We don't have to put up with people who don't respect us. I've been invited into a lot of cool FB groups today.

What a pity that Facebook appears to have temporarily and goofily removed the ability for almost everyone in Australia and New Zealand to see comments. Gah. Maybe I should go and write.


----------



## AltMe

vsAdmin said:


> WE DO NOT OWN... nor want... the copyright to your material. We do however own the RIGHTS to your posted content (images, text any raw posted information)


You have ZERO rights to any book covers displayed here. Book covers are a special case, and they involve rights assigned by artists to authors, licenses and rights involving the owners of specific images on the cover, and often publisher contracts.

You have NO RIGHT to anything to do with book covers, and never will.



vsAdmin said:


> OK have them contact our lawyers.


Word to the wise. That attitude in here will just make things worse. And apparently has.

And before you think it will be joe bloggs local lawyer calling, if it comes down to it, authors will be contacting the really big author associations who have lawyers on staff to deal with anything author related. If enough of us complain to them, you'll be dealing with lawyers who deal with author issues all day every day. And they will be telling yours all about the law regarding author rights.

And as it happens, it might actually be an idea for those who can explain this situation coherently to start contacting the associations for advice. I think we need a heavy hitter in here. Both for cover rights, other author related rights, and the whole EU legislation thing.


----------



## TheWriterFormerly

Based on this thread, it seems the fight is not going to end any time soon. My purge has begun in earnest and I reitterate my refusal to accept all claims foisted on users by this new TOS. See you all in the void.


----------



## 75814

I wasn't worried about the TOS changes. They seemed unnecessarily broad, but struck me more as the kind of stupid thing some idiot's barely competent cousin in the legal department thought up as opposed to something actively malicious. So I wasn't going to stress over it.

But that was before I read Helena's completely unprofessional response. And then I did a search for "VerticalScope problems." Seems this company has a habit of taking over boards, driving them into the ground, and taking a giant crap on the members. I found several forums with "Open Letter to VerticalScope" posts complaining about increases in spam, ignoring technical issues, and lack of communication. 

Congratulations, VS. You just saw a minor grease fire and went, "Y'know what this fire needs? A few gallons of gasoline."


----------



## jjj

[deleted]


----------



## TiffanyTurner

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because this thread is 20 pages, I've highlighted the problematic parts of the TOS and created a timeline of events in the event members are put in a position where we need to file formal complaints in order to get our content removed. I've always found having dates available to be very helpful with these things.
> 
> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/


Thank you Julie. I was trying to figure out what happened, and have been crawling through all the pages of thread. This is what happens when you work on the weekend, and have to catch up mid week.

I have just two words.

THIS SUCKS!


----------



## writerlygal

This thread & the 'community outreach' person's posts in it are crazy. It's really scary that anyone can buy all of our data & info & be this crazy about it. I keep thinking it's got to be one of the following explanations:

1. It's Amazon who bought the forum to silence negativity against it.

2. The VerticalScope people are intentionally stirring drama & chaos to make KBoards more active & get more clicks & attention.

3. It's one of the banned KU scammers who bought the forum so they could keep scamming, while also getting all the deets on their enemies so they can exact revenge.

😮🤔🤨😮😯

I don't know about ya'all but at this point, any of these consipracy theories make about as much sense to me as anything else I can come up w/ to explain why an admin would post such things. Yikesies!


----------



## TiffanyTurner

Okay. I have more to say now. I've been on this thread since 2009. I have advertised. I have started a new pen name and advised for almost 10 years on how to self publish. Tonight, it's as if I'm seeing an era disappear. Corporate takeover, data mining. I'm on the verge of tears. Because I know the people on this board know exactly what is going on. They didn't buy an ignorant lot of people and data. 

They bought the very chronicles of the rise of self publishing in the ebook/digital age. 

People on this board are too smart not to see what is going on. 

I'm just flabbergasted right now.  

I'm sure Harvey is rolling in his grave. And yes. I remember Harvey, his posts, and I'm sure his family didn't realize what they may have been doing, or that this would happen. Or maybe they did. Who knows.

All I can say is that most likely, this is the death of this board people. I am so upset right now. 

And most likely, it's time to start moving the community somewhere else. 

UNLESS, something happens like real administrators doing something like talking to us.

But over the last few weeks, I haven't seen that. I've only seen the mods I know trying to do the lip service these new owners have told them. And the owners aren't even instructing them well. 

All I know is that the friends and people I respect for the last decade, people I trust, are not trolling. They are not freaking out. They are sounding a true alarm that is going to maybe get lawyers involved. So, I'm going to take their advice.

I don't agree to the new TOS. I have years of personal data and posts that I don't agree to be used under any new TOS. 
Using this forum now is to just try to straighten out what is going on until I can figure my next steps. What that may be might be determined in the way this administration decides to handle this situation.

I'm going to miss Kboards. Dang, I even remember when Harvey announced he had to change the name from Kindleboards.com to Kboards.com. I am like near tears here. I've run promotions, worked on projects, made so many friends here. This board jump started my career into Romance writing. 

I am going to miss this community.

The only thing that would save it is somebody coming on the board from the new ownership and making an effort to solve this problem.
This thread is of legitimate issues and needs to be properly addressed. 

Just so sad right now. 
First Createspace and AMS and KDP all joining together and messing up my life. 
Now this. 
It's like the world is out to destroy the Indie Publishing Movement and try to drag us into corporate slavery.

*Sorry* But my emotions are really running high tonight.


----------



## TiffanyTurner

Crayola said:


> I requested my old posts and post starters be deleted, but I wanted to keep my profile. It's easier for me than making a new profile. Now I can lurk and sometimes comment with the new TOS in mind. The mods weren't sure it would work, but it did!
> 
> Something peeps may want to consider.
> 
> I'm glad you kept your avatar. I would have missed it. ;-)


----------



## Queen Mab

I'm sad as well. The writing's on the wall and despite everything this place has given me, I can't stay. The new reality here is feeling very dystopian, or even diabolical.

I'll be lurking from now on and tidying up loose ends. And I guess I'll go check out Tim's forum. I'd say there's a wake for Kboards going on over there right now...

Hugs to all. Thanks, mods.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

TiffanyTurner said:


> I remember Harvey, his posts, and I'm sure his family didn't realize what they may have been doing, or that this would happen. Or maybe they did. Who knows.


I know.

I want to stop this line of thought now. I know that the Chute family thought this was the best for KB going forward--and that they felt there was a commitment that KB's culture would not be changed. I don't know if Carrie is aware of the discussion in this thread--I hope not--but I know without a shadow of a doubt that this would be heartbreaking for her and Harvey's daughters. Please stop this line of speculation, it helps no one.

Betsy
KB Moderator and member since 2008. Member no. 72


----------



## TiffanyTurner

vsAdmin said:


> Hello All,
> 
> Helena here  I am the director of Community Management here at VS and have been with the company for 8 years. I am and have been for over 15 years a forum user. I am an active user on 3 forums and in my youth was active on over 10.
> 
> Why I am telling you this, well because I want you to understand that I am a forum user as well as an employee of verticalscope.
> 
> I have read through all I can on here and have to say that it seems like there is more trolling going on in this thread than actual relevant debate. When My team posts to you instead of talking to the points some people resort to troll tactics and just wish to confuse everyone and take away from the topic.
> 
> SO .... Let's have a real conversation about this.
> 
> I chose to quote Shane Lochlann Black because he has posted the most accurate to what the law is.
> 
> The TOS is broad yes, correct, but as you all know people are sue happy so we cover our bases.
> 
> WE DO NOT OWN... nor want... the copyright to your material. We do however own the RIGHTS to your posted content (images, text any raw posted information) Now there is a big difference between copyright and rights.
> 
> Copyright means we are liable for your content. So if you wrote a biography essay about Kim Kardashian and posted it on here and in said article used defamatory information she could sue us. Since we would own the copyright to that content. I will take it one step further, if you posted child pornography and we owned the copyright, we would be charged. (sorry I know that is extream but highlights the point).
> 
> Owning the rights to your content on the forum means we own the right to have your content here and to use that content on the site. Why do we do this and need to say this well, me quoting Shane Lochlann Black, for example, if the site did not own the rights, he could come after me as a user and sue me for copying his content. Or if we posted your thread on the home page, or in a newsletter, we need the rights to do that.
> 
> It means that you gave the site permission to post on it. - now we don't technically need a TOS, since the internet is an open forum and when you post on the internet you automatically give that place the rights to that content. Larger companies needs more protection then that. This is a privatly owned forum, so by signing up and posting you gave that right to the old owner without a TOS, If that wasnt the case, we couldnt buy sites.
> 
> Now there are many a legitimate question in here. I would like to answer all of them. So if we can stick to legitimate questions and concerns and try to keep them in a singular place or post. so that means if the question was asked please don't ask again.
> 
> I read that users (authors) are upset about I think google ad works showing up to guests, I can have it turned off in the author's section.
> 
> Look we will make mistakes, something you don't like will happen, but I assure you we will fix it and work with you all. But the post blasting, and trolling is not the right way to go about it.
> 
> The sky isn't falling and we are not the devel. We won't reply real time to a post or a PM, because we can't be online every second. But we will try to answer you when we can.
> 
> Now if you still want clarification about the TOS I can have my legal team answer some questions, so work together and put them into a single post that is easy to work with and I can make that happen.
> 
> If there is someone who feels cheated about the site being sold PM us ask for Helena and gives us your email address and I will email you back.
> 
> Before you think the sky is falling take a breather. We are not here to steal your content and sell it for profit if we did that we would not be very successful and people would not be inclined to sell to us.
> 
> I hope this helps, and I hope we can have a better conversation about this. I appreciate you all reading this.
> 
> Side note, I am a read-a-holic and am trying to read a book a week this year. I have been snooping around for books I may want to read  ... ok off topic I know
> 
> Helena


Okay, I finally found this post. My main thought was, maybe she should hang out on our board a little before belittling everyone here. 
COCKYGATE ended up in court. It was international news. And there were people on this board involved in it. 
That's just one thing to mention that maybe people thought was a whole bunch of romance writers having a spat, but really had huge reprocussions throughout the web and news media.

Things that get out of hand on this board get REAL very fast and seriously. Treating everyone on her like children is NOT going to fly.

So, I'd say, the new owners are scoring a 2 so far on a scale of 1-10. If they want any new content or users to sell their precious ads to, they better get on the ball better than this kind of message. Worst customer service I've ever seen.


----------



## TiffanyTurner

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I know.
> 
> I want to stop this line of thought now. I know that the Chute family thought this was the best for KB going forward--and that they felt there was a commitment that KB's culture would not be changed. I don't know if Carrie is aware of the discussion in this thread--I hope not--but I know without a shadow of a doubt that this would be heartbreaking for her and Harvey's daughters. Please stop this line of speculation, it helps no one.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Moderator and member since 2008. Member no. 72


Betsy,
This entire thread is heartbreaking to me. I'm sure it is upsetting to anybody that has been on this board for as long as we have. 
I won't mention anything along those lines again. But I have to acknowledge my own grief for what I am seeing unravel before my eyes tonight.

And what has been done to you is unfair. People on this board are not stupid. Many of us understand how boards work, can write them, code them, and calling us "trolls" was not a way to try to communicate well. I'm sure the moderators were left in charge because you know the community. But this is getting to the point that I can see many of the writers on the board leaving, just like what happened to the erotica writers when Ad Words came into play on the board.

So, this is most likely another evolution of the board. But I don't know if I see it surviving this time. Though, I hope it does. Too many good points have been brought up.


----------



## AltMe

As I posted before, there is a Modification for the forum to be GDPR compliant. All they need to do is install the free version, or the very cheap pro version. It will be on my forum shortly.


----------



## IWFerguson

Oh. My. Goodness. I had actually been following this thread until about 11 or 12 pages, which is a lot for me. When I saw it was up to 26, I wondered what the heck happened? So I scrolled though until I found what I think/hope are all of "Helena"'s posts. At first I couldn't understand how a "Director of Community Management" with the extensive forum experience could possibly be so insulting. But then I realized that's how the thread ended up so long.

Which is what forum owners want, right? It's always okay to insult people and then defend by claiming you were "spot-quoted" right?

So, yes, I'm out of here, for what it's worth. But I'm leaving my posts public (except for any with book content such as early blurb drafts), because I think this forum has been well over 80% good, and I'm proud of my tiny, tiny role in it (with the possible exception of this post). I hope to see WriterSanctum grow, and talk to you all there or wherever we end up. To the mods, thanks for all your work to help keep things nice around here. To VS, here's your last sandwich.


----------



## Can neither confirm nor deny that I am W.R. Ginge

It's pretty blindingly obvious by now that VS bought KBoards simply for the billboard space it presented. As long as it gets clicks and can be used for ad-space, it's still worth the price for them.

If I'd posted anything more than moderately annoying or helpful, I might go through and get rid of all I've said. Since I haven't, I won't.

But I very much doubt I'll post here again. I'll keep to Writer's Sanctum and a few others from now on.

The admin responses are so far from helpful or useful (in fact, I'd describe them as inflammatory, condescending, and nyah-nyah-we've-got-your-data), that I don't see things getting better. I'm sad, too; I haven't been here anywhere near as long as a lot of you, and I've mostly lurked, but I've learned SUCH a lot from you all.

Thanks  

Hope to see you around on the netz...


----------



## Victoria.T76

I did not originally care about the change in TOS, as I consider posting on the internet to always be a risk. However, I do feel this situation has been handled badly and having googled the company I have deleted/over-written my posts.
***


----------



## EllieKeaton

Victoria.T76 said:


> I did not originally care about the change in TOS, as I consider posting on the internet to always be a risk. However, I do feel this situation has been handled badly and having googled the company I am also saying my farewells - I have deleted/over-written my posts.
> 
> To other users - thank you for all your help over the years, I am sure I will see some of you in the new forum or on Facebook. Thank you to the mods for all your hard work.
> 
> Please check GDPR and know your rights - all data does not have to be deleted just personal data identifying data - so when the new owners note that they can anonymise the accounts, this is what they are able to do.
> 
> I would note that I do not believe the following principles have been upheld:
> 
> * You must use personal data in a way that is fair. This means you must not process the data in a way that is unduly detrimental, unexpected or misleading to the individuals concerned.
> * You must be clear, open and honest with people from the start about how you will use their personal data






Victoria.T76 said:


> As a UK and EU citizen under GDPR, I would like to exercise my right to erasure / right to be forgotten.
> 
> Individuals have the right to have their personal data erased if:
> 
> * the personal data is no longer necessary for the purpose which you originally collected or processed it for;
> * you are relying on consent as your lawful basis for holding the data, and the individual withdraws their consent;
> * you are relying on legitimate interests as your basis for processing, the individual objects to the processing of their data, and there is no overriding legitimate interest to continue this processing;
> * you are processing the personal data for direct marketing purposes and the individual objects to that processing;
> * you have processed the personal data unlawfully (ie in breach of the lawfulness requirement of the 1st principle);
> * you have to do it to comply with a legal obligation; or
> * you have processed the personal data to offer information society services to a child.






Victoria.T76 said:


> Although, it can be debated as to whether a few of the rules have been broken, it is enough for me as the data subject, to withdraw my consent and am making a request to your company for erasure of all my personal identifying information - as is my right, I make that request for erasure here as it does not have to be to a specific person or contact point. It is your responsibility to identify that an individual has made a request to you and handle it accordingly.
> 
> If you have disclosed my personal data to any other organisation, you should tell them of my request. As is your obligation, I would also like to be informed of the recipients of my information.
> 
> I understand that back-up information may not be immediately deleted, but am sure you will comply with your obligation to ensure that information will be put 'beyond use' until such a time as it is overwritten.
> 
> Thank you for your help in this matter, I wish you all the best in the future.


Ditto the above.

Just wanted to add my thanks to Betsy, Becca and Ann as well as Evenstar. I have lurked here forever and enjoyed reading some great information. I have helped where I could - I used to post under my real name - closed that account and decided to use my author name but thankfully I never posted much . I gained a lot from this board - sometimes seriously high blood pressure but usually great information. It was this board that helped to gather the community to take action against various issues over the last ten years. I have made some amazing online and offline friends. I will miss Kboards.

The moderators did an awesome job under trying circumstances. Thank you ladies.


----------



## 84413

Account deletion requested.

I'm disgusted at the fact that the new owners thought it was acceptable to try to sneak in a rights grab. And I'm even more disgusted at their response to the concerns raised.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

If nothing else, this thread is a good example of how NOT to respond to a customer complaint. If you begin with an insult (such as the T-word), then everything you say after that, no matter how true or rational, will be read with a degree of skepticism, if it is read at all.


----------



## Susanne O

This is appalling. And very, very sad. I've been a member here since 2011, that's seven years of a board I used to love coming to for information and help. Seems like the good days are over.

We still have a little space in the writers pub, if you want to squeeze in. Not as big and fashionable as this one, but small friendly and very informative.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

There is also a KUForum in the UK. It's similar to the KBoards, but not quite as active. 
http://www.kuforum.co.uk/kindleusersforum/index.php


----------



## 41419

Seems like the end of Kboards to me. Certainly the end *for* me.

I've been a member here since 2011. This forum is the reason I self-published. I've sent hundreds (thousands?) of writers here via my books/blog etc., but I won't be doing that anymore. I'm leaving, obviously, and requesting erasure under GDPR. I'll post the form of language later in case it's useful to anyone. For those who aren't EU citizens, that doesn't mean you are without rights here either. Hopefully some American/Canadian lawyers can give some advice there, in an informal capacity at least.

I am not a lawyer, but this is my layman's understanding of GDPR. For those who are EU citizens, VerticalScope must comply with all provisions of GDPR, even if they aren't based in the EU themselves, relating to any data held pertaining to EU citizens. The rights EU citizens have here are extremely broad, and include the right to erasure - popularly known as the right to be forgotten.

VerticalScope must process your request within 30 days. VerticalScope can only refuse such requests under very limited grounds - none of which apply here. VerticalScope may, in certain circumstances, anonymize your data instead of deleting it, if doing so renders it no longer personal identifying information. But in practical terms, I'd be surprised if VerticalScope will review thousands of my forum posts to see which contain personally identifying information - it's easier just to delete everything.

*(And I suspect there is more chance of them taking that approach of we all assert our GDPR rights simultaneously - just saying...).*

Two interesting tidbits:

1. VerticalScope must also delete all personal data from back-up systems.
2. VerticalScope must also inform any third-party of the erasure request who has received your personal data also.

For non-EU citizens, The right thing to do would be for VerticalScope to process all deletion requests - as Philip appeared to suggest they would do initially. That seems to have been walked back, as this car crash unfolds further. I can't speak as to the rights that Americans and Canadians and Australians may have in this scenario, but that line of enquiry should be worth pursuing, including things like Freedom of Information acts and Data Processing/Privacy regulations as well as contract law in your own jurisdictions.

On a personal level, it's unbelievable to me that VerticalScope may not comply with all requests for account deletion/data wipe. I'd love to know what legal advice they have received which states they can surreptitiously change the terms of the TOS, insert a massive rights grab we would never actively consent to, and then claim the new TOS governs its relationship with us and our content when we haven't even been made aware of a TOS change, let alone seen it or agreed to it. However, given the dim assertions made by VS employees in this thread about IP rights and copyright and GDPR, it's entirely possible they misunderstood the legal advice they received.

(For the avoidance of doubt, I don't agree to this TOS, I haven't even seen the changes, bar some troubling passages quoted here, and continued use of this site cannot be construed as any form of agreement with the TOS.)


----------



## Evenstar

I'm British, so I assume I can request total deletion and it would have to be complied with due to GDPR?

But what happens to all our quoted posts? Almost every post I've started has been quoted later in the thread. Do they get purged too?

*To Betsy, Becca and Ann. *You know how amazing I think you are and you know how much I love Kboards. I'm feeling for you so hard right now!

*To everyone else:* I only stepped away from being a Moderator because my work was suffering, it's basically a full time job that these amazing people do voluntarily. They are giving up their precious time for the love of it, they are more dedicated to the ethos of Kboards than any of us. I know this is upsetting but try to remember that...


----------



## John Twipnook

Passive Guy (the lawyer) posted on all this. He copy-pasted the new VerticalScope Terms of Use and bolded certain language in the Submissions clause that he found worthy of examination.

*Dumpster Fire at KBoards?*
http://www.thepassivevoice.com/dumpster-fire-at-kboards/


----------



## AltMe

dgaughran said:


> However, given the dim assertions made by VS employees in this thread about IP rights and copyright and GDPR, it's entirely possible they misunderstood the legal advice they received.


The problem is, people ask for advice using the wrong questions, or a wrong perspective on things, and so receive the right answer to the question they asked, but the wrong answer to the true situation. Then wonder how misunderstandings occurred.

I also seriously doubt they've taken advice about authors and rights involving them. They are using their general advice which isn't good enough for Kboards issues. And I doubt they asked the right questions, even then.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

John Twipnook said:


> Passive Guy (the lawyer) posted on all this. He copy-pasted the new VerticalScope Terms of Use and bolded certain language in the Submissions clause that he found worthy of examination.
> 
> *Dumpster Fire at KBoards?*
> http://www.thepassivevoice.com/dumpster-fire-at-kboards/


Lovely! There's a reason that's the guy I hire when needed!


----------



## thesmallprint

The fish rots from the head down.

Once that TOS was made public, the tone of the reply from the company rep was utterly predictable. Companies who behave like this ensure the culture permeates through the whole corporate body. Helena's response shows the kind of people they employee (and she's their customer-facing advocate: Lord knows how non-customer-facing employees behave).

Those of you who blog might want to comment on this sorry tale and drive VS up those Google rankings. If nothing else it'll warn newbies what Kboards has turned into.

Betsy, Ann, Becca, Evenstar . . . Thanks for the memories. You might feel you can stay and maybe repair things; trust me, you can't. The fish rots from the head down.


----------



## 41419

EU peeps: here is a template you can use if you wish to exercise your rights under GDPR and have your Kboards account terminated and all your personal data wiped. Note that they have the right to anonymize your data instead, but that is a very laborious process if done correctly when it comes to a forum, meaning they would have to go through each of your posts and excise and potentially identifying information. It's highly likely that mass deletion - which we want anyway - will be much easier for them. Particularly if they get lots of GDPR erasure requests, I guess...

Probably best to send this to [email protected] - although technically under GDPR even posting such a request here (or giving it on the phone or otherwise verbally) is actually sufficient. So a PM to VSadmin would also work, is my understanding.



> To Whom It May Concern:
> 
> As an EU citizen, I am hereby exercising my rights under General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 ("GDPR") and requesting immediate erasure of personal data concerning me, according to Article 15 of GDPR. You have 30 days to comply with this request under the terms of GDPR.
> 
> Please inform me immediately the identity and contact details of the Data Controller appointed by your organization to handle issues pertaining to GDPR. Please immediately erase all personal data concerning me as defined by Article 4(1) of GDPR. Please also erase and personal data concerning me held on back-up systems.
> 
> I am of the opinion that the requirements set forth in Article 17(1) of GDPR are fulfilled.
> 
> If I have previously given consent to the processing of my personal data (e.g. according to Article 6(1) or Article 9(2) of GDPR), I am hereby withdrawing said consent. In addition, I am objecting to the processing of personal data concerning me (which includes profiling), according to Article 21 of GDPR.
> 
> In case you have disclosed the affected personal data to third parties, you have to communicate my request for erasure of the affected personal data, as well as any references to it, to each recipient as laid down in Article 19 of GDPR. Please also inform me about those recipients.
> 
> If you object to the requested erasure, you have to justify that to me.
> 
> My request explicitly includes any other services and companies for which you are the controller as defined by Article 4(7) of GDPR.
> 
> As laid down in Article 12(3) of GDPR, you have to confirm the erasure to me without undue delay and in any event within one month of receipt of the request.
> 
> I am including the following information necessary to identify me:
> Name: [INSERT]
> Kboards.com Forum name: [INSERT]
> Date of Birth: [INSERT]
> Address: [INSERT]
> 
> If you require documentary proof of my identity etc., please reply immediately with that request.
> 
> If you do not answer my requests above within the stated period, I am reserving the right to take legal action against you and to lodge a complaint with the responsible supervisory authorities.
> 
> Yours sincerely,
> 
> [INSERT]


----------



## Vaalingrade

I've seen this before, back when Wizards of the Coast changed their TOS to literally this exact same corporate boilerplate.

And the same reality applies here: No one wants our posts. No one is going to make any money from posts from some random forum posts on ANY forum. The problem is that unless you're going to go Something Awful's paygate route and make it so you can't read the forums without registering, some bot somewhere is going to scrape the forum for content and then either put it into an ebook or blog. Then someone will try to sue kboards because of course they would. Thus the butt-covering TOS.

So honestly, if you want to find a place without this, you're going to need to find an amateur site that doesn't know they're just begging to be sued.


----------



## David VanDyke

jun said:


> I'm just getting started on my author journey... and this has to happen...
> 
> Argh. Is there any consensus on where people are regrouping?


Try IndieAuthorHaven, if you like.


----------



## Guest

Patty Jansen said:


> That was the most unprofessional response in a crisis of confidence ever.


It was pretty unprofessional. She was combative and used the "T" word, which may have been accurate, but in doing so she took the bait. There is a reason why Phillip refused to reply, he knew he was being baited into a fight and there was no way to win.

But I think she was surprised at some of the absolutely absurd over-reactions in this thread. There was a poster who claimed that he wouldn't be able to sign a contract with trade publishers because of the Kboards TOS(huh), people are running around claiming that the new owners are trying to own their book covers. It's absolutely ridiculous. They don't own your covers, but they have the right to repost your forum messages which includes whatever thumbnails or other images were in your posts.

She flatout stated that the TOS was broad in-order to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits. I can understand some people being cautious and not being comfortable with the new owners, in which case they have the right to leave. But trying to make everyone believe that the new owners are evil and want to ruin your name and steal your content is going a bit far.

It makes me wonder if some people even understand how message boards work.



loraininflorida said:


> I admit, I'm confused.
> 
> I'm just a prawnie author. Could somebody describe for me the worst-case scenario of what this company can do to me because of my posting here? I don't really understand what it is I'm supposed to be worried about. They might re-post my posts somewhere? They might sell my email address? Is that it?


There isn't much to be worried about. They can't do anything that any other forum couldn't already do. People are over-reacting.


----------



## jb1111

Vaalingrade said:


> I've seen this before, back when Wizards of the Coast changed their TOS to literally this exact same corporate boilerplate.
> 
> And the same reality applies here: No one wants our posts. No one is going to make any money from posts from some random forum posts on ANY forum. The problem is that unless you're going to go Something Awful's paygate route and make it so you can't read the forums without registering, some bot somewhere is going to scrape the forum for content and then either put it into an ebook or blog. Then someone will try to sue kboards because of course they would. Thus the butt-covering TOS.
> 
> So honestly, if you want to find a place without this, you're going to need to find an amateur site that doesn't know they're just begging to be sued.


Interesting take on the situation, Vaalingrade.


----------



## Guest

https://bardsandsages.com/**********/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/

A reminder for those looking for a summary and timeline of events.

My suggestion:

EVERYONE who has put in a request for their content removed should take note of the timeline and take screenshots or print pages of the relevant time events. Because you will need them when (and it will be when...I think it is clear they intend to double-down) you have to file formal complaints with various government agencies. Helena's response, in particular, is damning beyond measure insofar as what government agencies will consider as evidence of consumer abuse. Screenshot/print those before they are deleted.

For those that are late to the apocalypse and are looking for specific facts in the case:

The new TOS was not announced and creates significant rights for VS that are unneeded to operate a forum. We were not notified. We were not informed. We were not given the ability to opt out.

The new TOS gives them the right to reproduce your content. Now to be clear, _this isn't unusual for forums per se._ There are certain rights they need in order to operate the site. For example, like when Facebook allows you to "share" posts, they can do that because you gave them the right to "share" your content across their platform. If a new technology is developed, they may need to reproduce your content in a different way for the forum to work on the technology. THAT is normal legalese.

What is NOT normal legalese is:



> Further, you grant to KBOARDS.COM the right to use your name and or user name in connection with the submitted materials and other information as well as in connection with all advertising, marketing and promotional material related thereto, together with use on any other VerticalScope Inc. web sites. You agree that you shall have no recourse against VerticalScope Inc. for any alleged or actual infringement or misappropriation of any proprietary right in your communications to KBOARDS.COM.


This gives VerticalScope the right to use your content and your NAME in actions unrelated to the function of the site. This gives them the right to reuse your content on any site they own for commercial purposes. This is a huge problem for rights holders. Because while I may have the right, for example, to use a stock art image in a promo post for my book, I don't have the right to TRANSFER that license to VS for commercial use.

The name use is even more problematic. Besides the violations of Right of Publicity laws, there are privacy issues. We all understand that what we say here is searchable by Google. But being searchable by Google is not the same thing as having a comment posted deliberately in from of an audience it was not intended for. While my opinion of copyright and piracy is well known, for example, I wouldn't go to a site filled with pirates and state it. Sure, they could GOOGLE me and find the topic, maybe, if they cared. But that is not the same thing as shoving some of those statements in their face. What happens when VS inadvertently shares one of my anti-piracy posts on a site of "information enthusiasts?"

And yes, it can happen, because much of their ad network is driven by keywords...not content. We've all seen the Vigilinks going to things completely unrelated to posts simply because of a word used (I gave the previous example of a discussion about story generators having the word "generator" linked to ads for gas generators. A post in opposition of something can very easily end up on a website supporting that thing simply because of a keyword.

There are other issues pointed out in my blog post.


----------



## AltMe

David VanDyke said:


> Try IndieAuthorHaven, if you like.


Has the same basic ToS. It's a corporate forum providing service. Was proved a long way up the thread.



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The new TOS was not announced and creates significant rights for VS that are unneeded to operate a forum. We were not notified. We were not informed. We were not given the ability to opt out.


AND the registration screen you agree to when you register, HAS NONE OF IT ON IT.

So even after they brought the new ToS in, they were lying to every person who registered after that moment. People agreed to a completely separate document, and likely still are.



verysecretsquirrel said:


> Consensus seems to be


Use the new SSL address. 
https://writersanctum.com

Private forum on a private site. ToS designed for authors. No ads.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> EVERYONE who has put in a request for their content removed should take note of the timeline and take screenshots or print pages of the relevant time events. Because you will need them when (and it will be when...I think it is clear they intend to double-down) you have to file formal complaints with various government agencies.


Or, you know, you could just spend all that time and effort on something worthwhile, like writing the next novel. At first I was concerned about this, but then I realized people seem to just be venting all their pent-up frustrations against Amazon into a target they think they have actual influence over...


----------



## Guest

You guys who keep repeating "GDPR" over and over, are you claiming that your anonymous username has the right to be forgotten? If your username is your real name, your writer pen name, or the name of your business, you can just go into your profile and change it by yourself. While you're at it, go ahead and change your email to [email protected] or some other junk addy not associated with you. Then forgot this forum ever existed.

If you just want to have your posts deleted because you're angry and you want to "hurt" the forum somehow then the new owners aren't obligated to oblige.


----------



## Guest

Vaalingrade said:


> I've seen this before, back when Wizards of the Coast changed their TOS to literally this exact same corporate boilerplate.


I would never use WoC as an example of trustworthy sources. They have sued both fans and other publishers multiple times (though they are a bit less sue-happy these days). And they have taken user content before and monetized it. There is a reason a lot of publishers don't ever post anything even NEAR WoC. They are KNOWN to do it.

And I have said this multiple times but I will say it again since you and others still seem to believe this never happens.* It happened to me*. Someone scrapped comments off of Goodreads and tried to sell them in a book of "famous quotes". I was able to get Amazon to remove the book because I had never granted those rights. And you might wonder why I would bother and "free publicity" but it was a horribly done hot mess of amateur manure that I did not want my name associated with. I did not want to be associated with the product. And I was able to do something about it.

The new TOS gives KBOARD the right to do what this other person did. They could, for example. put together a "self-publishing guidebook" and use all of our posts. Or, they could SELL that right to a third party, without our knowledge. That is a very real possibility. Because the TOS gives THEM not ME the right to grant reprint rights to posts.


----------



## Guest

Riddick said:


> You guys who keep repeating "GDPR" over and over,


To be clear, most people are not CITING GDPR as the reason to have posts removed. It is being discussed because VerticalScope is trying to say this is a GDPR issue and claiming they don't have to do certain things. That is why people are discussing GDPR. The primary concern is the fact that they are trying to retroactively claim rights to our names and work, which we never agreed to.


----------



## Sam Kates

TimothyEllis said:


> Use the new SSL address.
> https://writersanctum.com


Timothy, Firefox blocks that link - this message pops up:

Your connection is not secure

The owner of writersanctum.com has configured their web site improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this web site.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Sam Kates said:


> Timothy, Firefox blocks that link - this message pops up:
> 
> Your connection is not secure
> 
> The owner of writersanctum.com has configured their web site improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this web site.


I don't think the SSL certs are up yet. I'm not using the secure version. Just the name of the forum, without the https will get you there.


----------



## Sam Kates

WasAnn said:


> I don't think the SSL certs are up yet. I'm not using the secure version. Just the name of the forum, without the https will get you there.


Okay. Cheers.


----------



## Guest

KathyCarmichael said:


> I sent my request for deletion and registered my rejection of the new TOS to Philip today.
> 
> *****, can we use your exact wording for our signatures. Thanks.


I want to highlight a point so people understand just how horrible the TOS is. Under the current TOS, Kathy is not supposed to ask ME for permission to use my wording. She is supposed to ask Kboards.

Repeating: under the TOS. I AM NOT THE PERSON authorized to give Kathy permission to USE MY WORDS. She is supposed to ask Kboards for permission.

Though, honestly, I would LOVE to see the look on Helena's face should Kathy actually email her asking for permission.


----------



## AltMe

Sam Kates said:


> Timothy, Firefox blocks that link - this message pops up:
> 
> Your connection is not secure
> 
> The owner of writersanctum.com has configured their web site improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this web site.


It shouldn't be. The SSL is in. But there are some reports of this happening still. I'll follow it up.

A lot of people are still using the http link, and they wont get the green lock.

I notice KB doesn't always have a green lock either, so it could be something to do with the software.


----------



## 41419

Riddick said:


> You guys who keep repeating "GDPR" over and over, are you claiming that your anonymous username has the right to be forgotten? If your username is your real name, your writer pen name, or the name of your business, you can just go into your profile and change it by yourself. While you're at it, go ahead and change your email to [email protected] or some other junk addy not associated with you. Then forgot this forum ever existed.
> 
> If you just want to have your posts deleted because you're angry and you want to "hurt" the forum somehow then the new owners aren't obligated to oblige.


You don't seem to understand GDPR.


----------



## Guest

TimothyEllis said:


> It shouldn't be. The SSL is in. But there are some reports of this happening still. I'll follow it up.
> 
> A lot of people are still using the http link, and they wont get the green lock.
> 
> I notice KB doesn't always have a green lock either, so it could be something to do with the software.


I'm using Chrome. The forum works fine with the normal http link, when I use the other URL I get this; 
"Your connection is not private
Attackers might be trying to steal your information from writersanctum.com (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). Learn more
NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID

Help improve Safe Browsing by sending some system information and page content to Google. Privacy policy"


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> To be clear, most people are not CITING GDPR as the reason to have posts removed. It is being discussed because VerticalScope is trying to say this is a GDPR issue and claiming they don't have to do certain things. That is why people are discussing GDPR. The primary concern is the fact that they are trying to retroactively claim rights to our names and work, which we never agreed to.


FWIW, I think it's both.

I think many are not in agreement with the retroactive TOS, and most of those feel like it's a Very Big Problem -- and the fact that it's been instituted retroactively only makes the whole situation worse. Others seem fine with it -- either not as concerned, or feel like it's unenforceable so why should they get hot and bothered. *Each person gets to decide for themselves what they are willing to accept.* I fully agree that the responses given by the ownership on this part of the issue have not been reassuring and have possibly exacerbated things.

BUT -- GDPR or NOT -- I think a person has a right to delete content from where they've posted it publicly -- whether the reason is "I'm thinking better of having posted that" or "Whoa, this changes everything; I don't want my name or ideas associated with the new normal." I obviously have the right to do that myself if I go post by post. As do any of you. For me, with over 65,000 posts, that would take some time. 

We've also had instances over the last 11 years where people asked to have their accounts deleted. As a moderator, I have always acted without argument on such a request. The most any of us moderators has done is ask the person "Why?" if they didn't give the reason when they asked. Or maybe have a discussion with 'em if we feel like they've misunderstood something. Still, if they insisted, we deleted their accounts when asked to do so.

This situation presented us with a dilemma: mass deletion of accounts and posts of many long time members could make many of the threads lose coherency. We really didn't want that.  BUT -- we also recognized that people _have that right_ -- whether or not there's something that requires us to assist in the effort. We decided we were willing to assist on the basis that it was the RIGHT thing to do, and did probably a dozen or so account deletions. Until the ownership told us we shouldn't do that any more. And subsequently removed our powers to do so.

I disagree with that policy and don't think the reasons given for it justify it.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Timothy and Riddick  . . . . may I ask that you take the discussion of the other forum and whether or not it's secure OFF the boards? It's a bit off topic for this thread but mostly, it's just kind of bad form.

Thanks.


----------



## Guest

dgaughran said:


> You don't seem to understand GDPR.


The GDPR doesn't give you the right to demand anonymous posts are deleted from a message board.


----------



## AltMe

Ann in Arlington said:


> Timothy and Riddick . . . . may I ask that you take the discussion of the other forum and whether or not it's secure OFF the boards? It's a bit off topic for this thread but mostly, it's just kind of bad form.


Wheres the hang dog look smilie?
Sorry


----------



## John Twipnook

Vaalingrade said:


> I've seen this before, back when Wizards of the Coast changed their TOS to literally this exact same corporate boilerplate.
> 
> And the same reality applies here: No one wants our posts. No one is going to make any money from posts from some random forum posts on ANY forum. The problem is that unless you're going to go Something Awful's paygate route and make it so you can't read the forums without registering, some bot somewhere is going to scrape the forum for content and then either put it into an ebook or blog. Then someone will try to sue kboards because of course they would. Thus the butt-covering TOS.
> 
> So honestly, if you want to find a place without this, you're going to need to find an amateur site that doesn't know they're just begging to be sued.


You could be 100% correct about the TOS issue. However, even if you are, the TOS isn't the only issue.

One issue is lack of transparency. VerticalScope changed the Terms and made no announcement. That's how this thread got started.

Another issue is control. The mods (the very very good mods) on this thread have been told... well, here.



Ann in Arlington said:


> This situation presented us with a dilemma: mass deletion of accounts and posts of many long time members could make many of the threads lose coherency. We really didn't want that.  BUT -- we also recognized that people _have that right_ -- whether or not there's something that requires us to assist in the effort. We decided we were willing to assist on the basis that it was the RIGHT thing to do, and did probably a dozen or so account deletions. Until the ownership told us we shouldn't do that any more. And subsequently removed our powers to do so.
> 
> I disagree with that policy and don't think the reasons given for it justify it.


Crap. I'm sorry, Ann. Becca, Betsy. I really am.

Yet another issue is customer relations. "Helena" and co are tone-deaf. Their posts on this thread are tone-deaf. The overall impression they delivered was aggressive, pedantic and weirdly unprofessional (the misspellings and grammatical errors in what was supposed to be a first impression, on a writer's forum no less).

Finally, there's historical precedent for VerticalScope buying a forum and then the forum dying through VerticalScope's efforts to maximize cash flow and control of the forum while minimizing money and care investment. This link below is from less than a year ago. VerticalScope bought the forum Overclock dot net. There are more case examples, if you hunt around.

https://hardforum.com/threads/its-about-to-get-real-busy-ocn-has-died.1953154/

So, even ignoring the TOS issue (which I'm not), there's quite a few reasons to reconsider one's participation in the new Kboards with VerticalScope at the helm.

And now, I await my banishment...  Tase me bro, we're all slaves now anyway.


----------



## Zelah Meyer

Riddick said:


> You guys who keep repeating "GDPR" over and over, are you claiming that your anonymous username has the right to be forgotten? If your username is your real name, your writer pen name, or the name of your business, you can just go into your profile and change it by yourself. While you're at it, go ahead and change your email to [email protected] or some other junk addy not associated with you. Then forgot this forum ever existed.
> 
> If you just want to have your posts deleted because you're angry and you want to "hurt" the forum somehow then the new owners aren't obligated to oblige.


Unfortunately, it's not as simple as changing your forum name. Many posts contain personally identifying information - links to blog posts, links to social media accounts, NaNoWriMo profiles, book titles, etc. that make it easy to identify who the author of the post was.


----------



## ImaWriter

Just stumbled across this in my morning news feed: 
https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/20/facebook-and-airbnb-told-to-change-their-tos-to-fix-eu-consumer-rights-issues-by-years-end/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29

Facebook and Airbnb told to change their ToS to fix EU consumer rights issues by year's end


> In Facebook's case the Commission wants to see greater transparency in its ToS on the key characteristics of its services and relations with third parties with whom the company shares consumers' data -- saying a clearer link needs to be made between the actual provision of the service; the fact that consumers' data constitute the consideration for receiving that service; and the commercial exploitation of the data and user generated content (by providing targeted advertising services to third parties).
> It is also not happy about Facebook's terms granting the company a perpetual licence on user generated content even after a user quits Facebook, saying this is unfair.
> It also believes the rights Facebook grants itself over the content users upload is not made sufficiently prominent to consumers when they sign up.
> Additionally it criticises Facebook's terms for not being clear on its obligations to remove user generated content and/or suspend or terminate an account, saying its ToS include vague phrases and do not clarify whether the consumer will be notified in advance.
> The Commission also flags the lack of an appeal option for consumers in some cases.
> It's also not happy about Facebook granting itself the power to unilaterally change its terms of service, saying this is contrary to EU consumer legislation which identifies as unfair terms that enable: _"the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract"_.


----------



## AltMe

ImaWriter said:


> Just stumbled across this in my morning news feed:
> https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/20/facebook-and-airbnb-told-to-change-their-tos-to-fix-eu-consumer-rights-issues-by-years-end/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29
> 
> Facebook and Airbnb told to change their ToS to fix EU consumer rights issues by year's end


Cat, meet pigeons.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

I posted my reply before Vertical Scope came here and decided to dump some rocket fuel on this fire, and it really has made me reconsider. 

That said, I'm sticking by my guns for one main reason: Future authors who come here to read old posts.  I've been a part of several ... err ... contentious threads in the past. Heck I've started a few. And I really don't want someone coming here and seeing one side of an argument:  hearing that stuffing is a good thing, or that certain marketing companies are A-okay, or that bullying has never happened; because all of the posts railing against certain behaviors have been removed.  

As for VS using my posts ... good luck. I'm pretty sure I'm not even remotely in a ballpark where someone could use my name for monetary gain.


----------



## Llano

A little music to lighten the mood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47E2tfK5QAg


----------



## Susanne O

Rickie Blair said:


> Quick question: Say one wanted to "modify" a previous post--how do you do that? The "modify" button on my previous posts has been replaced with a "notify" button (i.e. if someone else posts a reply). (This is in the "show posts" section of my profile.) Is that new? Or am I missing something?


Hmmm...


----------



## Kathy Dee

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Repeating: under the TOS. I AM NOT THE PERSON authorized to give Kathy permission to USE MY WORDS. She is supposed to ask Kboards for permission.


Where in the TOS does it say anything like ^ this?



> You agree to grant to KBOARDS.COM a *non exclusive*, royalty free, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual license to reproduce, distribute, transmit, sublicense, create derivative works of, publicly display, publish and perform any materials and other information you submit to any public areas, chat rooms, bulletin boards, newsgroups or forums of KBOARDS.COM or which you provide by email or any other means to KBOARDS.COM and in any media now known or hereafter developed.


With all due respect, I think you are mistaken.


----------



## crebel

Rickie Blair said:


> Quick question: Say one wanted to "modify" a previous post--how do you do that? The "modify" button on my previous posts has been replaced with a "notify" button (i.e. if someone else posts a reply). (This is in the "show posts" section of my profile.) Is that new? Or am I missing something?


After you find the post in your profile, you have to click on it to open the post itself - the modify button will be there.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rickie Blair said:


> Quick question: Say one wanted to "modify" a previous post--how do you do that? The "modify" button on my previous posts has been replaced with a "notify" button (i.e. if someone else posts a reply). (This is in the "show posts" section of my profile.) Is that new? Or am I missing something?


It was pointed out a few pages ago that you cannot modify from the list of your posts, you must click through to each individual post for the modify button to appear. Are you doing that? Following those steps, the modify button is still available for me.


----------



## Klip

Rickie Blair said:


> Quick question: Say one wanted to "modify" a previous post--how do you do that? The "modify" button on my previous posts has been replaced with a "notify" button (i.e. if someone else posts a reply). (This is in the "show posts" section of my profile.) Is that new? Or am I missing something?


You need to go to the post itself. You can't modify it from the show posts section. Click on the link there, and you'll see a little edit icon.


----------



## unkownwriter

What we need to do is remove anything that will allow money to flow to the forums, like book links and the like. Change forum names and remove all identifiable information we can find. For many, it's going to be a horrendous task. I have more than 6K posts myself, and over the years I've shared personal information, not to mention posted helpful links and instructions.

This forum needs to die. Sorry. I've been here since 2011 and learned a lot. I don't blame the mods for any of this mess, it wasn't their doing. I wish Mrs. Harvey had checked into these people before they sold the forum.

Again, I do not agree to the new TOS, and will not ever. My personal data is not to be used in any way, sold or given away, now or in the future. My images, book covers, personal links nor any other content is to be used for any purpose in any way, now or in the future.


----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## Victoria.T76

The problem isn't just the TOS - it's the way the matter has been handled.

I ignored this thread after reading the initial posts for a long time - the change is TOS, whilst annoying and probably against GDPR - it happens.

Last night I saw the thread had blown up an read through - I also googled the company. This is what they do - buy forums then turn them in to spam centres. They are not interested in the community, only the money they can make. They forums are riddled with problems, and adverts - As I sit here typing there are currently 21 adverts on my screen - 21 - how ridiculous is that? They aren't just at the top and bottom of the page but throughout the posts.

If you search google, you will see the complaints, see the forums destroyed, and see people who are angry at their actions - there's even a youtube video from 2008 made by disgruntled ex forum users. This has been going on for over a decade that I can see and kboards is not the only forum they have newly acquired. You can read about the max exodus from forums they acquire - and the steadily increasing adverts, that is their only interest. I can't say to the truthfulness of these stories, but I can see the change in ads that has occurred in the last few months and given their response to this thread and their lack of transparency when dealing with  the change in TOS, they are not a company I need to be associated with.


----------



## 25803

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Though, honestly, I would LOVE to see the look on Helena's face should Kathy actually email her asking for permission.


LOL!

To the wonderful moderators, Betsy, Ann and Becca. You guys have been fabulous. Thank you!


----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## MyraScott

I didn't care about the TOS, personally.

But I do care when KBoards' "community manager" with an attitude who waltzes in here with no understanding of what trolling is (despite her claims to be a forum "expert"), dismisses people's concerns, and tells them to have their lawyer contact her lawyers.

This is how they handle new acquisitions? By tossing someone at us who can't be bothered to actually read the thread or understand what people are asking for?

I sent my comments directly to VerticalScope here: https://www.verticalscope.com/contact-us/connect-with-us.html

They aren't going to be seen posted here as no one in the higher chain of command can be bothered to follow up on their designated community expert.

Here's the management team: https://www.verticalscope.com/about-us/management-team.html

Send them comments here: https://www.verticalscope.com/contact-us/connect-with-us.html


_edited, PM if you have questions -- Ann_


----------



## Guest

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I know.
> 
> *I want to stop this line of thought now.* I know that the Chute family thought this was the best for KB going forward--and that they felt there was a commitment that KB's culture would not be changed. I don't know if Carrie is aware of the discussion in this thread--I hope not--but I know without a shadow of a doubt that this would be heartbreaking for her and Harvey's daughters. Please stop this line of speculation, it helps no one.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Moderator and member since 2008. Member no. 72


I'm not sure a moderator should be the one to stop this line of thought.

The fact of the matter is that the previous owners of kboards sold their website that has been a sanctuary for hundreds of indie writers across the globe to a company with a terrible online reputation. You cannot, as a moderator of this forum, criticize the users who have an obvious problem with this. Just look at how much destruction has been brought about to this forum by the decision to sell to them.

There is plenty of easily searchable information online as to how this company handles forums and I think every member here has the right to be angry that the decision was made - without our input or consultation - to sell to them.


----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## Guest

Kathy Dee said:


> Where in the TOS does it say anything like ^ this?
> 
> With all due respect, I think you are mistaken.





> KBOARDS.COM does not undertake to necessarily post every submission. All messages that are posted here represent the opinions of the individuals or organizations posting those messages, and do not express the ideas or opinions of KBOARDS.COM or VerticalScope Inc. You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but redistribution in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM. In consideration of this authorization, you agree that any copy you make of any message(s) located on this web site shall retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.


----------



## AltMe

TobiasRoote said:


> I agree with this response. I cannot accept that the seller was ignorant of their actions and the potential for mayhem it would cause let alone the feelings for many of being betrayed. Whilst I understand the business side of this whole farce there was absolutely nothing stopping the owner(s) enquiring quietly within the forum for a potential buyer, or consortium of writers and such to take it over. There's certainly a lot of money floating around these halls of writerly wisdom that could have been put to good use.
> 
> The fact is they went for a high price, quick sale and fast exit. I don't blame them if they had their reasons. I don't think it's down to the moderators now to decide if the issue is discussed. When they sold up they lost the right to loyalty and protection. It is what it is.


I'm inclined to agree with this. Not happy about it, but it is what it is.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> I agree with this response. I cannot accept that the seller was ignorant of their actions and the potential for mayhem it would cause let alone the feelings for many of being betrayed.


Actually, I can completely see her being ignorant of their actions. That is precisely how these sort of companies function. Based on the initial thread announcing the changes, my interpretation of events is that they contacted her out of the blue to inquire if the site was for sale. This was always Harvey's baby. She kept it running in his memory, but forums of this size require a lot of effort and they offered her a way to "keep the site running" without having to do it. Because I guarantee them made all kinds of swarmy promises about "respecting the culture" and not making changes. And the fact that they wanted the mods to stay on probably made her feel better, because she assumed the mods would still have all of the same powers they always did.

I am more inclined to believe she didn't know than she did. And maybe it was willful blindness because she didn't look too deeply. But like authors that get caught up with vanity publishers or poor publisher contracts, sometimes people see what they want to see and not what is really in front of them. That is human nature, and that is what vultures like VerticalScope prey on.


----------



## Victoria.T76

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Actually, I can completely see her being ignorant of their actions. That is precisely how these sort of companies function. Based on the initial thread announcing the changes, my interpretation of events is that they contacted her out of the blue to inquire if the site was for sale. This was always Harvey's baby. She kept it running in his memory, but forums of this size require a lot of effort and they offered her a way to "keep the site running" without having to do it. Because I guarantee them made all kinds of swarmy promises about "respecting the culture" and not making changes. And the fact that they wanted the mods to stay on probably made her feel better, because she assumed the mods would still have all of the same powers they always did.
> 
> I am more inclined to believe she didn't know than she did. And maybe it was willful blindness because she didn't look too deeply. But like authors that get caught up with vanity publishers or poor publisher contracts, sometimes people see what they want to see and not what is really in front of them. That is human nature, and that is what vultures like VerticalScope prey on.


I agree - they are no way responsible for what has happened - from reading posts on other forums, the company have often lied about how things would move forward and there are many previous owners who have returned and tried to save the sites in a no-owner capacity. It's easy to search and find things in hindsight but if a large verifiable company comes along many people would proceed a sale - especially considering it was not her baby and there may even be painful memories attached to keeping it running for the family.


----------



## Guest

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Actually, I can completely see her being ignorant of their actions. That is precisely how these sort of companies function. Based on the initial thread announcing the changes, my interpretation of events is that they contacted her out of the blue to inquire if the site was for sale. This was always Harvey's baby. She kept it running in his memory, but forums of this size require a lot of effort and they offered her a way to "keep the site running" without having to do it. Because I guarantee them made all kinds of swarmy promises about "respecting the culture" and not making changes. And the fact that they wanted the mods to stay on probably made her feel better, because she assumed the mods would still have all of the same powers they always did.
> 
> I am more inclined to believe she didn't know than she did. And maybe it was willful blindness because she didn't look too deeply. But like authors that get caught up with vanity publishers or poor publisher contracts, sometimes people see what they want to see and not what is really in front of them. That is human nature, and that is what vultures like VerticalScope prey on.


It doesn't matter if she did know or didn't know, she SHOULD HAVE known. She should have asked us, if she was unable to do the research herself. Betsy is trying to shut down criticism of previous owners, but the fact remains it was their decision that has caused this mess. It could have easily been avoided with transparency and communication with the community. But that didn't happen. And it didn't happen because they weren't looking out for us. They have failed to appreciate the scope of importance this board has had for writers worldwide. And they have failed to protect present, past, and future users.


----------



## John Twipnook

Blaming the Chute family is wrong for two reasons.

A. it's not what Harvey would have wanted; if you respect him, cut it out already.

B. it won't bring back the old days. You want to vent, I get it. But this ain't the place. You know?


----------



## Guest

Victoria.T76 said:


> I agree - they are no way responsible for what has happened - from reading posts on other forums, the company have often lied about how things would move forward and there are many previous owners who have returned and tried to save the sites in a no-owner capacity. It's easy to search and find things in hindsight but if a large verifiable company comes along many people would proceed a sale - especially considering it was not her baby and there may even be painful memories attached to keeping it running for the family.


Easily searchable in hindsight The members of this board would have ripped the potential sale to VS to shreds. Their activities are widespread, destructive and nefarious. They are absolutely responsible.


----------



## 71202

It seems to me that our previously extremely valuable moderators no longer have the information or authority to moderate effectively.  The previous rules clearly no longer apply and the new ones are known only to VS staff.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> If not here, then where. And we're not trying to apportion blame, but it's not the moderator's place to decide whether that aspect should be discussed.


Exactly. People are angry because this could have been easily avoided with communication with the users. That didn't happen because of a lack of respect for the user base. Our forum was seen as private property that could be sold and not something that belonged to the members of our community.


----------



## John Twipnook

TobiasRoote said:


> If not here, then where. And we're not trying to apportion blame, but it's not the moderator's place to decide whether that aspect should be discussed.


Not here. And the mods are having a hard enough day. Leave them alone dude. They're good people. The mods never said anything about censorship; the mods said basically the same thing I did. If you're blowing up at the Chutes, then the devil wins, you know? Be mad at VerticalScope, not the mods, not me. The old days are over, they're gone with the buffalo.

Did you guys ever consider that maybe Mrs Chute and her family could have been still hobbled by grief? And here you are holding them to a standard of a Big Six accounting firm. Harvey died, man. He died young. Leave his family alone. Jesus Christ, you guys. Show some sensitivity.


----------



## Blocked Writer

C Winters said:


> Exactly. People are angry because this could have been easily avoided with communication with the users. That didn't happen because of a lack of respect for the user base. Our forum was seen as private property that could be sold and not something that belonged to the members of our community.


Exactly. The community that exists here in the Writers' Cafe doesn't need a new forum "owner." The community needs to take ownership itself. The community is larger than the forum software and the server that hosts it. IMO, a self-governed group of like-minded people is the best route forward for the community that exists here. Non-profit. Elected leadership. Etc.


----------



## Guest

John Twipnook said:


> Not here. And the mods are having a hard enough day. Leave them alone dude. They're good people. The mods never said anything about censorship; the mods said basically the same thing I did. If you're blowing up at the Chutes, then the devil wins, you know? Be mad at VerticalScope, not the mods, not me. The old days are over, they're gone with the buffalo.
> 
> Did you guys ever consider that maybe Mrs Chute and her family could have been still hobbled by grief? And here you are holding them to a standard of a Big Six accounting firm. Harvey died, man. He died young. Leave his family alone. Jesus Christ, you guys. Show some sensitivity.


I think you need to leave Tobias alone. He and every user here have the right to be upset and not be shamed. VerticalScope are the monster that's destroying the community here, but we all know who let them in the front door. And of course focusing on the previous owners gets us nowhere because that ship has sailed, they're not here.

But Betsy the moderator was trying to shut down criticism, as if it were her place to say people aren't allowed to be upset with the previous owners. My feeling is that position is at odds with common sense. And further more, it's insult to injury. Just as VS aren't changing their TOS or admitting wrongdoing, neither are the previous owners. They're not here saying they made a mistake and they're sorry. They're not taking responsibility.


----------



## Llano

C Winters said:


> I'm not sure a moderator should be the one to stop this line of thought.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that the previous owners of kboards sold their website that has been a sanctuary for hundreds of indie writers across the globe to a company with a terrible online reputation. You cannot, as a moderator of this forum, criticize the users who have an obvious problem with this. Just look at how much destruction has been brought about to this forum by the decision to sell to them.
> 
> There is plenty of easily searchable information online as to how this company handles forums and I think every member here has the right to be angry that the decision was made - without our input or consultation - to sell to them.


+1


----------



## Guest

Blocked Writer said:


> Exactly. The community that exists here in the Writers' Cafe doesn't need a new forum "owner." The community needs to take ownership itself. The community is larger than the forum software and the server that hosts it. IMO, a self-governed group of like-minded people is the best route forward for the community that exists here. Non-profit. Elected leadership. Etc.


You should visit writer sanctum if you haven't already. I know there have been other forums recommended, but I haven't looked into them so they might also be good.


----------



## 71202

It's something we disagree on.  But IMHO the days of dealing with it through moderation are in an inter-regnum, at best.


----------



## Jerry S.

MyraScott said:


> So, from someone who's been in Internet marketing since the Internet became the Internet, let me break down what's going on here.
> 
> VerticalScope bought 10 years of content.
> 
> Very old content, very trusted content. This forum's never been plagued with spambots or autoposters, it's 10 years of real content.
> 
> All of that content is indexed by Google. Deeply crawled, it ranks for literally thousands of keyword phrases. Ranks very well, as there are no other public forums that are open and crawled like this one, specific to publishing on Amazon.
> 
> People search, they end up here.
> 
> "But I'm taking all my content with me!" you say, triumphant.
> 
> Here's the womp womp to that strategy... it doesn't matter.
> 
> *Searchers who click a link and DON'T find the answer they are looking for are far more likely to click a relevant ad... and VS gets paid.*
> 
> They don't need an active forum; they don't want an active forum. It requires maintenance and attention and hiring people like "Helena" to "deal with them." The faster we all leave, the less they have to worry about answering "stupid" questions and "trolls."
> 
> All they wanted was the search engine gold... vast, vast quantities of indexed content that will stay indexed* (because it's old and unlikely to attract a spider) and lead users to a dead end where their best way out is to click a link for something else that might have the answer. *
> 
> That's how the money is made... not babysitting people who are part of a community.


See bolded. I used to run websites as well. And Google doesn't like it when you do that to its searchers (lead them via link to a page that doesn't "answer their question" or "solve their problem").

The result is that your pages fall in the rankings and you have less traffic.

Less traffic = less clicks on Ads = less $$

Also, if the content was modified, it will notify the search engines to crawl over them. An unmodified page will rarely be crawled by a spider. But one that is modified, or say, a 3rd party website that has a new link that links to the content on the page, will get a spider crawling over that sites page and then through the link to the new page. At which time, the index of the page will change from the wealth of content to a series of periods and dashes and maybe a picture of a puppy (or what ever you decide to change your content to).


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Evenstar

TobiasRoote said:


> OK, so the owner has no duty of care when selling, but the buyer is required to? How does that work?


Do you really want to force a thread lock?

The mods have made it clear they don't feel this response is appropriate for the forum and I'd suggest cutting it out, otherwise you will have no where to vent about TOS!


----------



## Llano

Blocked Writer said:


> Exactly. The community that exists here in the Writers' Cafe doesn't need a new forum "owner." The community needs to take ownership itself. The community is larger than the forum software and the server that hosts it. IMO, a self-governed group of like-minded people is the best route forward for the community that exists here. Non-profit. Elected leadership. Etc.


That train has left the station, which is incredibly unfortunate. I have absolutely no doubt that had the previous owners posted here that they were exploring the possibility of a sale one or more successful authors would have bought it. There are many members for whom this forum was instrumental in their success. I've dabbled since joining the forum six years ago, but if I'd been even one-tenth as successful as some I would have made an offer, had I known it was for sale. Several weeks before the sale I even suggested to another member, whose success is directly attributable to this forum, that he buy it. Had I known a sale was even being considered I would have PMed several others.

What might have been.

I had previously purged all my posts for other reasons, but once I read the forum was sold I did it again. I've seen other forums implode when bought by companies like VS. I knew immediately it was only a matter of time for this one. I never expected it to happen this quickly.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> OK, so the owner has no duty of care when selling, but the buyer is required to? How does that work?


I just understand how easy it is for an innocent person to get blindsided by professional vultures.

This was Harvey's business. She inherited it by default when he passed. She wasn't actively involved in it and it became one more thing a grieving widow had to manage after her husband's death. So, yeah, I can see how a grieving widow can easily be fast-talked into selling and maybe wouldn't have thought to Google the company.

My thought that it is important to prevent this thread from splintering off the focus: which is VerticalScope itself. People like this often depend on impacted parties "turning" on each other. It is actually an effective tool to prevent mass organization against an unpopular policy. We see politicians use it all the time...because it so often works. If we are all fighting each other, we aren't focused on the real enemy.

Would I have researched the company first? Of course I would have. But this is my life and my business. There are a lot of due diligence steps I take that others don't. Just because I have seen too much and been through too many of these dances not to. But for a person with no actual experience dealing with this sort of thing? 100% understand how this could happen.


----------



## Llano

Evenstar said:


> Do you really want to force a thread lock?
> 
> The mods have made it clear they don't feel this response is appropriate for the forum and I'd suggest cutting it out, otherwise you will have no where to vent about TOS!


The thread will be locked by the new overlords soon enough anyway. I'm surprised they haven't already. Then again, hits translate into advertising dollars and that's what it's all about.


----------



## Blocked Writer

C Winters said:


> Blocked Writer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. The community that exists here in the Writers' Cafe doesn't need a new forum "owner." The community needs to take ownership itself. The community is larger than the forum software and the server that hosts it. IMO, a self-governed group of like-minded people is the best route forward for the community that exists here. Non-profit. Elected leadership. Etc.
> 
> 
> 
> You should visit writer sanctum if you haven't already. I know there have been other forums recommended, but I haven't looked into them so they might also be good.
Click to expand...

Does writer sanctum have an "owner," or is it owned by the community?
Is writer sanctum run by elected representatives?


----------



## Max X

I do NOT agree to the new Terms of Service.


----------



## Guest

Blocked Writer said:


> You should visit writer sanctum if you haven't already. I know there have been other forums recommended, but I haven't looked into them so they might also be good.
> 
> Does writer sanctum have an "owner," or is it owned by the community?
> Is writer sanctum run by elected representatives?


The owner / admin is Timothy Ellis - an author and member at Kboards. He's been amazing on the board. Beyond words. I have full faith in him, most definitely. Check out the board here: https://writersanctum.com/index.php


----------



## Evenstar

TobiasRoote said:


> If not here, then where. And we're not trying to apportion blame, *but it's not the moderator's place to decide whether that aspect should be discussed.*


You know what a Moderator is, right? It IS their place to decide what constitutes helpful discussion and what doesn't.

That's the entire point of Moderation! Otherwise any old idiot could post whatever crap they felt like...

How on earth is it helpful to discuss how caring the previous owners were when it comes to a sale that has already happened? It adds _nothing_ to bash the Chute family.


----------



## thesmallprint

The grimmest of ironies as this thread develops into an argument that will upset many.  This is what awaits the would-be creators of new writer forums. This is what happens when superb mods lose the power to act in the way that has made and kept KB what it is.

You don't know what you got til it's gone.


----------



## 99896

Forget it, Donny. You're out of your element.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Blocked Writer said:


> You should visit writer sanctum if you haven't already. I know there have been other forums recommended, but I haven't looked into them so they might also be good.
> 
> Does writer sanctum have an "owner," or is it owned by the community?
> Is writer sanctum run by elected representatives?


He was put in the same shock-boat as the rest of us. This is a good thing he's doing and if it grows and seems to be a new home, we'll all talk next steps.


----------



## nail file

Come on. Are we seriously going to throw the previous owners under the bus in our frustration at not getting VS answers?

Will the community drag them behind the bus if they don't make an appearance at an appropriate time limit to explain and justify themselves when they don't really owe one?

Wow, you guys. Just wow.


----------



## 71202

Moderating the deck chairs


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I am sickened by the attacks on Carrie and blaming her for having sold KBoards. You all don't REALLY know me all that well. I tend to be a 'roll with the flow' kind of person. I get that some things really bother people and those same things barely affect me. But I am sitting here feeling literally nauseated at this tangent. It's despicable.

Please: stop this line of discussion. I get that it's probably borne of frustration and anger but it is incredibly hurtful.


----------



## Blocked Writer

Gavroche said:



> Blocked Writer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. The community that exists here in the Writers' Cafe doesn't need a new forum "owner." The community needs to take ownership itself. The community is larger than the forum software and the server that hosts it. IMO, a self-governed group of like-minded people is the best route forward for the community that exists here. Non-profit. Elected leadership. Etc.
> 
> 
> 
> That train has left the station, which is incredibly unfortunate. ...
> What might have been.
Click to expand...

I wasn't thinking so much about turning the clock back as how the community moves forward. We've been dealt a crappy hand for the moment, but how we choose to play it is up to us. Hasty moves may be regrettable. Forum software is easy to install. We need not run to the first place someone sets up a new forum (and I think that's a bad idea).


----------



## Guest

Ann in Arlington said:


> I am sickened by the attacks on Carrie and blaming her for having sold KBoards. You all don't REALLY know me all that well. I tend to be a 'roll with the flow' kind of person. I get that some things really bother people and those same things barely affect me. But I am sitting here feeling literally nauseated at this tangent. It's despicable.
> 
> Please: stop this line of discussion. I get that it's probably borne of frustration and anger but it is incredibly hurtful.


This is why we need moderators to be impartial.


----------



## Blocked Writer

On one hand I think there's no point in beating up on the Chutes, because if you were happy with how they ran the site while they owned it, then you have no beef with them. After all, no one is obliged to remain in a business that they don't want to be, or to stay in a job that they don't like, or to continue to own something that they'd rather trade for cash.

On the other hand, I understand the frustration because on a site that's content driven, and the users generate the content, there are natural feelings of ownership developed by "sweat equity." All the more reason to take control of the a venue in which the content is generated, and control the rules of engagement between members, who controls things, etc.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Riddick said:


> It was pretty unprofessional. She was combative and used the "T" word, which may have been accurate, but in doing so she took the bait. There is a reason why Phillip refused to reply, he knew he was being baited into a fight and there was no way to win.
> 
> But I think she was surprised at some of the absolutely absurd over-reactions in this thread. There was a poster who claimed that he wouldn't be able to sign a contract with trade publishers because of the Kboards TOS(huh), people are running around claiming that the new owners are trying to own their book covers. It's absolutely ridiculous. They don't own your covers, but they have the right to repost your forum messages which includes whatever thumbnails or other images were in your posts.
> 
> She flatout stated that the TOS was broad in-order to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits. I can understand some people being cautious and not being comfortable with the new owners, in which case they have the right to leave. But trying to make everyone believe that the new owners are evil and want to ruin your name and steal your content is going a bit far.
> 
> It makes me wonder if some people even understand how message boards work.
> 
> There isn't much to be worried about. They can't do anything that any other forum couldn't already do. People are over-reacting.


I might have bought the overreaction idea at an earlier point in the conversation. VS's responses have convinced me that it isn't an overreaction. It's not that VS is necessarily trying to own our book covers or anything else. The problem is that the new language is overly broad, giving them rights they don't need to have to operate forum, rights that typically aren't asked for. So no, this isn't just about protection from litigation. Something like the old TOS would have done that job. Nor is it true that they can't do anything under the TOS that any other forum couldn't already do. This point has already been disproved through comparison of the language several times.

Also, if VS's only interest was in avoiding lawsuits, the very last thing they would do would be to try to hold people back who really want to leave. Aren't such people exactly the most likely to sue over something? Yet one of the first things VS did when this controversy erupted was to make it progressively harder for people to just leave.

VS could have said they would examine their TOS with our concerns in mind. They didn't. They could have made it easier for people who were dissatisfied to leave. They didn't. I don't know why they would want to hang on to overly broad language or to people who really want out, but both situations decrease my willingness to trust general assurances of good intent.


----------



## Anarchist

thesmallprint said:


> You don't know what you got til it's gone.


New theme song for Kboards?


----------



## Used To Be BH

Ann in Arlington said:


> I am sickened by the attacks on Carrie and blaming her for having sold KBoards. You all don't REALLY know me all that well. I tend to be a 'roll with the flow' kind of person. I get that some things really bother people and those same things barely affect me. But I am sitting here feeling literally nauseated at this tangent. It's despicable.
> 
> Please: stop this line of discussion. I get that it's probably borne of frustration and anger but it is incredibly hurtful.


I agree. This mess is not the fault of the previous owners. Our concerns with VS should not blind us to that.


----------



## Blocked Writer

TobiasRoote said:


> The other forum is up and running like a steam train, but nobody seems to be taking responsibility here for moving KBoards on and getting past this 'hump'. ...


A comment like the implies that "everyone is moving to writer sanctum" is a done deal. But it isn't.

(Side note to the handful of people who continue to cheerlead for writer sanctum: I've already looked at it. Don't like it. Also don't like the pretext under which it was started.)


----------



## Nicholas

Here's the problem folks. There are shady stories about Verticalscope all over the internet. But you have to dig through decrepit forums to find them. The first hits on a google search direct you to their side of the story, which sounds very reassuring. We need to use our power as writers to let it be known far and wide how this company does business so it can't prey on unsuspecting people in the future.


----------



## Nicholas

Perhaps it might also be good for us to send our traffic towards one prominent blog article so that it has more SEO power?


----------



## Used To Be BH

Blocked Writer said:


> A comment like the implies that "everyone is moving to writer sanctum" is a done deal. But it isn't.
> 
> (Side note to the handful of people who continue to cheerlead for writer sanctum: I've already looked at it. Don't like it. Also don't like the pretext under which it was started.)


Of course it isn't, and I'm sure those leaving Kboards would appreciate other suggestions. That would perhaps be a better approach than criticizing the work of someone who is trying to give people an alternative to the present mess.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Nicholas said:


> Perhaps it might also be good for us to send our traffic towards one prominent blog article so that it has more SEO power?


A few of us are doing some pointing toward PV...now the google rankings for a kboards search have Dumpster Fire at Kboards showing up at numbers 3, 4, and 5 depending on platform.

ETA: Also, we're still showing up in first page results at prominent reference portals where we're listed green or safe. Those venues need to be notified that a reclassification might be in order. Up to them, of course, but since they are cautious about referrals, a red or run classification change seems likely.


----------



## Blocked Writer

Bill Hiatt said:


> Of course it isn't, and I'm sure those leaving Kboards would appreciate other suggestions. That would perhaps be a better approach than criticizing the work of someone who is trying to give people an alternative to the present mess.


Naturally, it's easy to criticize one post, but in virtually every other related post I have suggested that the community take ownership of things and move towards non-profit self-governance.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Blocked Writer said:


> Naturally, it's easy to criticize one post, but in virtually every other related post I have suggested that the community take ownership of things and move towards non-profit self-governance.


I'd like to think that's what we're trying to do, however we needed the framework set up to move to and feel out and get settled. We sure can't do it here.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Blocked Writer said:


> Naturally, it's easy to criticize one post, but in virtually every other related post I have suggested that the community take ownership of things and move towards non-profit self-governance.


I stand corrected. I'm cranky and unfocused from having to delete my posts one at a time.


----------



## Guest

Authoress said:


> Anyone?


https://bardsandsages.com/**********/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/

3rd time posting this now, but I can understand how it gets lost in all the chaos.


----------



## Alan Petersen

Susanne. said:


> This is appalling. And very, very sad. I've been a member here since 2011, that's seven years of a board I used to love coming to for information and help. Seems like the good days are over.
> 
> We still have a little space in the writers pub, if you want to squeeze in. Not as big and fashionable as this one, but small friendly and very informative.


Word up on that! I've been a member for years. It's a good alternative.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Okay folks, it is disgusting that some of you are attacking the Chutes. For the love of all that is holy, her husband died. She made the best decisions she could while dealing with an unimaginable amount of grief. Shame on every single one of you dragging them through the mud. This has nothing to do with them and everything to do with you being unhappy with VS. VS is the [redacted redacted] here, not the Chutes.

As for the mods, lord knows me & them haven't seen eye to eye over the years, and ultimately I faded away because of I believed our "Be Civil" rule was weaponized to scam and harm people. But that doesn't mean I think we should now all sit around and take massive dumps on people who have given years of their lives to holding this place together as best as they could.

ffs people. Behave like adults.


----------



## munboy

Anarchist said:


> New theme song for Kboards?


Gotta love a good 80's power ballad.


----------



## Blocked Writer

WasAnn said:


> I'd like to think that's what we're trying to do, however we needed the framework set up to move to and feel out and get settled. We sure can't do it here.


In a thread titled "Trial Moderator is now on duty," someone whose title is "Forum Owner" says "I've appointed a first moderator ... If a thread deteriorates when I'm not here, the Mod is instructed to lock the thread until I'm back."

That strikes me as quite authoritarian. Is there a "we" in there anywhere?


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Alan Petersen said:


> Word up on that! I've been a member for years. It's a good alternative.


On the other thread, she says it's 'carefully vetted' - meh, the only things I want vetted are my little mini-beasts.


----------



## munboy

Lynn Is Going Away said:


> I normally don't think of stuff like this as bothersome, but I know some of you use your author names as your usernames, and you could find your words used to promote this site on other vertical scope websites.
> 
> Unless I'm reading this wrong.
> 
> Anyway, not sure it's a problem, but you know how it goes. Someone's nice today and a bear tomorrow.


Granted I haven't gone through every page of this thread, but something that definitely hasn't been done enough is giving props to the intrepid Lynn for actually reading the TOS (something I'm ashamed to admit I never do) and sparking this little keyboard revolution.


----------



## Blocked Writer

Bill Hiatt said:


> I stand corrected. I'm cranky and unfocused from having to delete my posts one at a time.


No harm. No foul.  I've been cleaning up some of my own posts. It's crazy around here lately...


----------



## Susanne O

Atlantisatheart said:


> On the other thread, she says it's 'carefully vetted' - meh, the only things I want vetted are my little mini-beasts.


What I meant is, that we only want writers and they have to state that in the application. I had to do that because in the beginning we got lots of spammers, so that had to be stopped. We haven't had a problem since then.


----------



## Atlantisatheart

Susanne. said:


> What I meant is, that we only want writers and they have to state that in the application. I had to do that because in the beginning we got lots of spammers, so that had to be stopped. We haven't had a problem since then.


So no DNA checks, blood donation, drop 'em and cough? Good to know, So authors can remain anonymous?


----------



## Blocked Writer

Sidenote (and speaking of crazy): did anyone else notice the page count of this thread dropped? I saw it go from 31 to 30 a few posts ago (and now back to 31 with the last few additions).

Posts are vanishing... **queues Twilight Zone theme**


----------



## Gone To Croatan

Blocked Writer said:


> Posts are vanishing... **queues Twilight Zone theme**


Yeah, it's weird. About 20% of my posts have vanished in the last 24 hours.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

Blocked Writer said:


> Sidenote (and speaking of crazy): did anyone else notice the page count of this thread dropped? I saw it go from 31 to 30 a few posts ago (and now back to 31 with the last few additions).
> 
> Posts are vanishing... **queues Twilight Zone theme**


People are leaving and deleting their posts. It is to be expected that threads will shrink.


----------



## Blocked Writer

vagabond.voyager said:


> People are leaving and deleting their posts. It is to be expected that threads will shrink.


Yeah, I get it! Just weird to see it happen in real time...


----------



## Blocked Writer

TobiasRoote said:


> This thread was 31 pages two days ago and I'm sure there have been another 31 pages since then. hehehe! It's kinda weird.


I knew it!  That's why I made a note of the number of pages earlier. I thought it had already been longer.


----------



## Just Another Vampire Writer

What a mess.

I was a moderator on another popular forum years ago (it wasn't writing related), and I watched it die a prolonged and miserable death after the owner there sold. Like the former owners of Kboards, I don't think they sold it to who they did maliciously, and once it was out of the original owner's hands, there was nothing to be done about it. They had their reasons for needing out, and I get that. I hold no ill-will to the former owners, the problem has arisen from VS's tactics. I hate to see this happening here, but the signs are all too familiar.

This is certainly the forum I frequent the most, and it's sad. I learned a lot here. I went from a rookie who made all the typical mistakes-no editing, crappy covers, etc.-to someone who now sells because of what I learned here over the years. I'm not deleting my posts at this time, I've hardly posted enough to even justify doing so over the last 7 years, but man, what a bummer this all is. I hope this ship rights itself, but I'm gonna hang out near the lifeboats for now.

Oh, fun note, though I've deleted nothing, my post count has dropped by several hundred this week. I was at 675 and as of this I'm at 115? Interesting.


----------



## AltMe

Blocked Writer said:


> In a thread titled "Trial Moderator is now on duty," someone whose title is "Forum Owner" says "I've appointed a first moderator ... If a thread deteriorates when I'm not here, the Mod is instructed to lock the thread until I'm back."
> That strikes me as quite authoritarian. Is there a "we" in there anywhere?


Blocked Writer, if you have a problem with me, do what everyone else is doing and talk to me. I don't bite.

What you just quoted is for tonight. It's 3.40am for me, and the new moderator and I have not had a chance to actually talk about how to go about it. We have moderating guidelines in place, but until I need to do more than boot out the odd spammer, while I'm asleep, if anything comes up, I want it frozen until I'm up tomorrow morning to deal with it. I actually dont expect anything, as everyone has been brilliant today. But there is too much activity at the moment to leave it completely unattended. I was offered experienced help, and I took it. Tomorrow is a different and new day.

Most of what else your saying is a case of already sailed. Had we been able to form a co-op and buy here as such, what you keep saying would be possible. But we never got the chance, and unless VR sells the forum in the future, and gives people left here the chance, it isn't going to happen.

I started a Facebook group to discuss how to set up a new forum. I was quite happy for anyone else to do it. No-one went in that direction. I know how to set up a forum, having done it 8 times already. I could do it, I had the site it could be done on, I had the time to devote to it, and so I did it. So I'm not a committee, but I'm talking to everyone about what they want. A little authoritarianism is going to happen, as the last word is always mine, given its my site, my time, and my money going into it. The latter is not an issue. But the combination means the last word is always mine, especially since its me implementing it. As it was Harvey's here, back in the day.

I'm not sure what your problem is, but I know my new forum wont be for everyone. Nothing ever is. Its not even an issue. You can choose to go where ever you like. Like everyone else. But you are welcome to talk to me about any concerns you might have. Or not. But not now.

I'm choosing to go to bed.


----------



## Used To Be BH

For those of you wondering about legal remedies, EU citizens are not the only ones protected, particularly in the event of a change in terms of service with no notice. Rights and remedies may vary, but here are some examples relative to the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (serving California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, Montana, Idaho).



> It may seem obvious to any first-year law student that one party to a contract can't change the terms of that contract without notifying the other. But the Ninth Circuit in Douglas v. US District Court ex rel Talk America, No. 06-75424 (9th Cir. July 18, 2007), had to remind the district court of this basic principle. In Douglas, Talk America had posted revised contract terms on its website, which included a mandatory arbitration clause for its customers. When Douglas, a Talk America customer, filed a class action lawsuit against the company, the company moved to compel arbitration based on the revised contract, and the district court granted the motion. Douglas petitioned the Ninth Circuit for mandamus. In granting the petition, the Ninth Circuit held that "*[p]arties to a contract have no obligation to check the terms on a periodic basis to learn whether they have been changed by the other side."* The district court's decision, according to the Ninth Circuit, "reflect[ed] fundamental misapplications of contract law."


 (emphasis mine) The case did not address the issue of whether a company can build in a responsibility to check terms periodically into an agreement, but


> The Ninth Circuit in Douglas noted how cumbersome such a requirement would be, forcing customers to "check the contract every day for possible changes" and "compare every word of the posted contract with [the] existing contract in order to detect whether it had changed."


 http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/07/courts-says-aol.html



> Basically, this logic creates two-tiered system of online contract making. In the first instance, a clickwrap agreement (clicking "OK" or "I agree") is used to bind the user. But, in the second instance, after a modification to the first agreement, a browsewrap agreement (continued use=assent/agreement to the new terms) is used to bind the user. The Court, thankfully, doesn't look too kindly upon this new contractual arrangement, arguing that it creates the expectation for "consumers to spend time inspecting a contract they have no reason to believe has been changed" and that "the imposition of such an onerous requirement on consumers would be particularly lopsided."
> 
> The Court [in Rodman v Safeway, Inc.] put the situation pretty simply: "The safeway.com agreement did not give Safeway the power to bind its customers to unknown future contract terms, because consumers cannot assent to terms that do not yet exist. A user confronting a contract in which she purports to agree to terms in whatever form they may appear in the future cannot know to what she is are agreeing."


 https://medium.com/@jlkoepke/we-can-change-these-terms-at-anytime-the-detritus-of-terms-of-service-agreements-712409e2d0f1

Those two cases, taken together, make it clear that a company cannot bind customers to a new or amended TOS without their consent, and the second case makes clear that browsewrap agreement is not enough.


----------



## Evenstar




----------



## LL2018

Deleted.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Discussion of any other forum and it's rules and policies should take place THERE . . . not here. Further such posts will be removed.

Thanks for understanding.

Also: if posts are being removed, know that it is not Betsy, Becca, or I doing the removing -- except infrequently in the case of violations of the existing Forum Decorum.


----------



## Guest

So what exactly is your point, Bill?

https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=billhiatt.com

See what I did there? That's just a generic TOS Verticalscope uses for every single one of the thousand message boards they own. They put absolutely no effort into it, the script is written so that they can auto-generate a TOS for any website they purchase just by inserting a domain name at the end of the URL.

Once they buy a forum, they slap that generic TOS on the bottom. This forum still has the exact same registration agreement that it has always had. The real TOS that members actually agree to has not changed, as far as I can tell. The one you see at the bottom of the forum, that none of us have agreed to, is not enforceable, it's just a link to another website. People have been saying this from the start.

The real issue is that this forum went from a family operated website to one owned by a corporation that doesn't care about the members and is just looking to make money selling advertisements. If you're uncomfortable with that, find an alternate forum. The previous owner "sold out." I don't blame her for it, but it is what it is.


----------



## 99896

The old man told me to take any rug in the house.


----------



## Monique

Insert "stay on target" gif here. 

Too lazy to look for it and don't want VS to think it's suddenly theirs.


----------



## Guest

https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=verticalscopesucks.com
https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=verticalscopeisclueless.com
https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=thisisfunny.com

That's...bizarre...and hysterical. And probably explains why this company has had two major security breaches if their TOS is so easily screwed with.


----------



## DanielGibbs

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=verticalscopesucks.com
> https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=verticalscopeisclueless.com
> https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=thisisfunny.com
> 
> That's...bizarre...and hysterical. And probably explains why this company has had two major security breaches if their TOS is so easily screwed with.


I laughed so hard at that I almost sprayed my coffee out of my mouth. Bravo.


----------



## david_macrae




----------



## Becca Mills

A number of posts back, Tobias wondered if there might be ways to move toward the positive. I won't hazard a general answer on that one. I do think some things are just plain old _bad_, and all you can do is endure the badness of them. Maybe a silver lining emerges later, maybe it doesn't. That said, I have taken one action today that's made me feel a little better and figured I'd share it.

As Tiffany Turner noted,



TiffanyTurner said:


> They bought the very chronicles of the rise of self publishing in the ebook/digital age.


Well, the Wayback Machine crawled and saved www.kboards.com "369 times between March 25, 2002 and August 28, 2018." It saved www.kindleboards.com (our earlier incarnation) "964 times between June 12, 2008 and September 13, 2018." Each of those saves created a discrete, publicly accessible representation of the site as it was on that date, one anyone can view for free. I don't think it's too much to say these saves form a record of the rise of self-publishing, along with Konrath's blog, Passive Voice, and a few other early sites. It's certainly not everything -- plenty of major indie authors never posted here -- but it's a lot.

I've stopped my monthly donation to KBoards, as I doubt VerticalScope needs financial help the way the Chutes did, and have set up a monthly donation to Wayback instead. I'm not sure what the future holds for KBoards, but I'm going to do my part to make sure our past is preserved, because indie publishing is wonderful and amazing, and if anyone in the future is interested in how it played out, I want our stories to be there.

Please note this is not a solicitation for donations for Wayback, but rather a personal narrative of an action that's brightened my outlook. I hope you each find your own ways to feel better.


----------



## munboy

david_macrae said:


>


You beat me to it! lol That was the exact one I was going to use, too.

But, yeah...I'd love to see VS tell Disney to have their lawyers contact theirs.


----------



## Susanne O

Atlantisatheart said:


> So no DNA checks, blood donation, drop 'em and cough? Good to know, So authors can remain anonymous?


If you want, you can be invisible too. And the private part is not visible to the naked eye.


----------



## Curious Author

Just want to add my 2c and get in my thanks to the mods, Betsy, Ann and Becca (and also Evenstar). I was a forum moderator for a while (and paid, not even volunteer!), so I know what it's like to be on the other end of things. 

I've enjoyed my time here (under a different name) and will miss the community. I have benefited so much from all of the assistance and advice and am sad to see another good platform fade away. Kboards and Kindleboards have helped launch and boost many an indie author career, including mine, and I am deeply saddened to think of all the "institutional memory" and expertise that will be lost as people leave and go elsewhere.

Hopefully, another platform will arise, and maybe our mods will find a new home there, too. Best wishes to each and every one of you, mods and authors, in your various career paths.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Riddick said:


> So what exactly is your point, Bill?
> 
> https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=billhiatt.com
> 
> See what I did there? That's just a generic TOS Verticalscope uses for every single one of the thousand message boards they own. They put absolutely no effort into it, the script is written so that they can auto-generate a TOS for any website they purchase just by inserting a domain name at the end of the URL.
> 
> Once they buy a forum, they slap that generic TOS on the bottom. This forum still has the exact same registration agreement that it has always had. The real TOS that members actually agree to has not changed, as far as I can tell. The one you see at the bottom of the forum, that none of us have agreed to, is not enforceable, it's just a link to another website. People have been saying this from the start.
> 
> The real issue is that this forum went from a family operated website to one owned by a corporation that doesn't care about the members and is just looking to make money selling advertisements. If you're uncomfortable with that, find an alternate forum. The previous owner "sold out." I don't blame her for it, but it is what it is.


My posts was directed to people who wish to leave in the event that VS refuses to allow them to delete their accounts. Basically, a lot of courts have rejected the idea that a company can change the TOS and bind previous members to it without their consent. That gives people grounds to ask for deletion if they do not wish to continue under the current TOS.

The discrepancy between the registration agreement and the VS generic TOS has already been noted--but so what? All that means is that someone forgot to update the registration form. I don't see why that should increase any of our confidence levels. As far as the new TOS, yes, I'm pretty much sure it is unenforceable--but I don't want to spend thousands of dollars to fight that battle, and I doubt anyone else does, either. People and sometimes even large companies, sometimes sue because they have deeper pockets.

I'd love to find an alternate forum, but, like many others, I'm not going to leave my intellectual property lying around here to be used at VS's discretion under the terms of the new TOS. The fact that it's more extensive than what companies typically ask for has already been documented. So that, to answer your original question, is exactly my point: that there are legal remedies available if VS tries to force people to keep their posts up. I'm hoping it won't come to that, of course, but one should be prepared for the worst-case scenario.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

LL2018 said:


> I've been through this - twice. I sold my own company, and I was concerned about my customers continuing to get the integrity of the service claimed. I built certain assurances into the sale documents to give me grounds to sue if they didn't meet certain criteria, and I joined the new company that bought me. In that case, it actually worked out - I became the control of the new larger company, got promoted, became a Director. It went well.


I've been there several times before: Small to medium sized company, independently owned ... then a corporation, sometimes a holding company, swoops in and buys it. And the first words out of their mouths are always the same, "Don't worry, nothing is going to change" aka one of the biggest lies in corporate America.

Not surprising at this point in my life, but always sad because you know it's only a matter of time before the heart and soul of the original company is completely cut out.


----------



## TiffanyTurner

Gavroche said:


> A little music to lighten the mood.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47E2tfK5QAg


Thanks. I needed a good laugh. At least we're keeping the humor until the very end. Working on a blog post right now. ;-)


----------



## writerlygal

Yeah, this is just a business transaction & a fact of life. Look, ya'all, no one care about us little people & a community. It's all about money. This is true w/ Amazon & true about Kboards or pretty much any internet forum that needs money to run, to defend against lawsuits, to have moderators, that can have advertisements, etc. 

I have always said that Amazon, like politicians as someone mentioned a few pages back, pits us little people against each other & makes vendors fight w/ each other so we don't unify & demand fair treatment & better terms. Companies that own message boards do the same thing. Or maybe they don't have to do it - they just let us loose & we do all the work ourselves. But that doesn't fix anything & it doesn't change the fact that the Internet is a for profit venture. 

Thanks to the mods for all your hard unpaid work. My condolences to the Chute family. I'm sure you did what you thought was necessary & best after trying times on many fronts.


----------



## 69959

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/19/verticalscopes-overreaching-tos/
> 
> 3rd time posting this now, but I can understand how it gets lost in all the chaos.


I shared this post on G+ and now my G+ account is under suspension. Not saying that's why, but it's also the only thing I've posted in some time. Not saying I particularly care, either, but I do find it interesting. Won't stop me from sharing.


----------



## MarilynVix

TimothyEllis said:


> Blocked Writer, if you have a problem with me, do what everyone else is doing and talk to me. I don't bite.
> 
> What you just quoted is for tonight. It's 3.40am for me, and the new moderator and I have not had a chance to actually talk about how to go about it. We have moderating guidelines in place, but until I need to do more than boot out the odd spammer, while I'm asleep, if anything comes up, I want it frozen until I'm up tomorrow morning to deal with it. I actually dont expect anything, as everyone has been brilliant today. But there is too much activity at the moment to leave it completely unattended. I was offered experienced help, and I took it. Tomorrow is a different and new day.
> 
> Most of what else your saying is a case of already sailed. Had we been able to form a co-op and buy here as such, what you keep saying would be possible. But we never got the chance, and unless VR sells the forum in the future, and gives people left here the chance, it isn't going to happen.
> 
> I started a Facebook group to discuss how to set up a new forum. I was quite happy for anyone else to do it. No-one went in that direction. I know how to set up a forum, having done it 8 times already. I could do it, I had the site it could be done on, I had the time to devote to it, and so I did it. So I'm not a committee, but I'm talking to everyone about what they want. A little authoritarianism is going to happen, as the last word is always mine, given its my site, my time, and my money going into it. The latter is not an issue. But the combination means the last word is always mine, especially since its me implementing it. As it was Harvey's here, back in the day.
> 
> I'm not sure what your problem is, but I know my new forum wont be for everyone. Nothing ever is. Its not even an issue. You can choose to go where ever you like. Like everyone else. But you are welcome to talk to me about any concerns you might have. Or not. But not now.
> 
> I'm choosing to go to bed.


Dude, you are awesome. If we have a place to go, that is the important part. We'll build the rest. It will take time. 
If you build it, they will come. ;-)

I've been catching up and blogging about recent events all morning. 
Here is my blog post about the last few days. Might help others catch up too. 
https://marilynvix.com/2018/09/20/the-death-of-kboards-com-my-indie-publishing-home-implodes/


----------



## lyndabelle

Looks what happens when I go away for a few days. 

This is why we can't have nice things.

Made the big migration. Will check back from time to time. But my promos/deals threads will be moving there. 

Adios everyone! Going to miss you all. 

I will be only maintaining this account. New posts will be on the new forum. 

Thanks for the good times everyone.


----------



## Marti talbott

Ann in Arlington said:


> Discussion of any other forum and it's rules and policies should take place THERE . . . not here. Further such posts will be removed.
> 
> Thanks for understanding.
> 
> So Ann, usually when I post the thread dies. Want me to try it?
> 
> Also: if posts are being removed, know that it is not Betsy, Becca, or I doing the removing -- except infrequently in the case of violations of the existing Forum Decorum.


----------



## Nope

I thought they were discussing our community, which isn't really confined by any specific virtual/artificial boundary. Perhaps I missed something, it's a long thread, was it intended that we no longer discuss the KB community?


----------



## Used To Be BH

Nope said:


> I thought they were discussing our community, which isn't really confined by any specific virtual/artificial boundary. Perhaps I missed something, it's a long thread, was it intended that we no longer discuss the KB community?


I think what you're referring to is a discussion of an alternative forum. No one has said we shouldn't continue to discuss the KB community.


----------



## 75814

I understand the frustration that KBoards was sold to such a shady, disreputable company. I share it.

But blaming Harvey's family is flat-out uncalled for. They've been dealing with the loss of a husband and father. They tried to keep this forum alive in his memory, but it's not easy to run a forum as massive as KBoards, even with moderators. And I'm sure they were dealing with legal orders for discovery with the various lawsuits flying around and were concerned about any potential liability they may have just for keeping this forum open.

I don't blame them at all for selling. They probably just needed a break and I'm sure that the VS representatives they spoke to told them all the things they wanted to hear. That's how companies like VS operate. They find these high-traffic forums owned and operated by individuals or small companies and to close the deal, they send the kind of greaseball who's so convincing, they could get nuns to star in a porno. Bonus points if they could get to the owners when they're in a position to be more willing to sell, such as under a cloud of having to deal with legal orders. 

The Chutes aren't to blame for any of this. There's only one place to direct our anger and frustration, and that is directly at VerticalScope.

Don't lose focus. Keep the anger where it belongs.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Just Another Vampire Writer said:


> Oh, fun note, though I've deleted nothing, my post count has dropped by several hundred this week. I was at 675 and as of this I'm at 115? Interesting.


Unless there's a glitch, I believe the only way that could happen would be if you posted in a lot of threads in which the OP was someone who got his or her account deleted while the mods could still do that. If the original post gets deleted, the whole thread vanishes.


----------



## Just Another Vampire Writer

Bill Hiatt said:


> Unless there's a glitch, I believe the only way that could happen would be if you posted in a lot of threads in which the OP was someone who got his or her account deleted while the mods could still do that. If the original post gets deleted, the whole thread vanishes.


That's entirely possible. The bulk of my posts were VERY old from the long, long ago and if folks are bailing and threads have been deleted, that seems perfectly reasonable. I didn't suspect I'd done anything offensive as I've done my best to keep my head down and not draw attention to myself here in recent years.


----------



## Crayola

Here's my take, espec. after reading VSadmin's posts... 

We are not the customers. They don't care for our feedback. We are the content, and likely, we've already been sold. Many many times. If this place closes down tomorrow, they've probably already made their money back. 

::backs up, back into obscurity::


----------



## Dpock

Who Watches The Watchmen? said:


> Don't lose focus. Keep the anger where it belongs.


If the owner of my favorite pub sold out to a corporation that subsequently came in and destroyed the pub's atmosphere, I'd be pissed at the owner for selling and the corporation that bought and destroyed my favorite pub.

If anyone is angry over what's happened here, they should feel free to express it.


----------



## Monique

Dpock said:


> If the owner of my favorite pub sold out to a corporation that subsequently came in and destroyed the pub's atmosphere, I'd be p*ssed at the owner for selling and the corporation that bought and destroyed my favorite pub.
> 
> If anyone is angry over what's happened here, they should feel free to express it.


True, and people should feel free to express their displeasure with that opinion.

I would also just hasten to add that it's the _widow_ of the owner who sold it, and that we have no idea of the circumstances that led to it. Having been lucky enough to know Harvey here I would give the Chute family the benefit of the doubt every time. Ultimately, what's done is done and all the remains is how VS will handle things going forward.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Dpock said:


> If the owner of my favorite pub sold out to a corporation that subsequently came in and destroyed the pub's atmosphere, I'd be p*ssed at the owner for selling and the corporation that bought and destroyed my favorite pub.
> 
> If anyone is angry over what's happened here, they should feel free to express it.


Except that in that example, the owner may not have known that the corporation would destroy the pub. (Very few buyers tell the sellers if they have plans the seller might not approve of.)

I agree with the many people who have expressed the desire to keep the previous owner out of the discussion. She kept the forum her husband started alive for a long time after his death. We can hardly blame her if managing such a large operation eventually became more than she wanted to do. Anyway, the new owners didn't have to handle things the way they did. If this problem is on anyone, it's on them.


----------



## DrewMcGunn

Dpock said:


> If the owner of my favorite pub sold out to a corporation that subsequently came in and destroyed the pub's atmosphere, I'd be p*ssed at the owner for selling and the corporation that bought and destroyed my favorite pub.
> 
> If anyone is angry over what's happened here, they should feel free to express it.


I can understand that view. I'm certainly not happy about the events that have happened after the sale of the forum, but dogpiling on the widow isn't helpful. If she is aware of what has happened, I'm sure she's heartbroken things have turned out as they have. Expressing your displeasure at her is just pouring salt into an open wound. Especially given the lowbrow response from the officials at VS.


----------



## Dpock

DrewMcGunn said:


> Expressing your displeasure at her is just pouring salt into an open wound.


I don't know if that was expressed at me but I feel no displeasure with the former owner. I simply accept that some may feel otherwise and support their right to vent.

Due diligence is a good strategy when buying or selling. Failure to do so, either way, can result in unpleasant outcomes.


----------



## 39416

"We are the content, and likely, we've already been sold. Many many times."

Who would buy our posts?


----------



## Dpock

loraininflorida said:


> Who would buy our posts?


Not a soul. They're just useful for seeding Google and drawing in traffic.


----------



## DrewMcGunn

Dpock said:


> I don't know if that was expressed at me but I feel no displeasure with the former owner. I simply accept that some may feel otherwise and support their right to vent.
> 
> Due diligence is a good strategy when buying or selling. Failure to do so, either way, can result in unpleasant outcomes.


To what end? Venting here only hurts the former owner's widow. I'm not disputing the issue of due diligence. There's a lot to be said for doing one's homework. That's how I came to have an account on here, as I researched what it would take to become an independent writer. But my point is that venting here against the widow might give a small catharsis, but at what cost? She doesn't deserve to have folks turning her into a pinata.


----------



## erikhanberg

Becca Mills said:


> Please note this is not a solicitation for donations for Wayback, but rather a personal narrative of an action that's brightened my outlook. I hope you each find your own ways to feel better.


The Internet Archive is an amazing treasurer. Thanks for reminding me/us that it's captured this forum and so many other important resources over the years.


----------



## Clementine

I am so incredibly sad to see K Boards go down this way. 

Betsy, Ann, and Becca, thank you for all that you’ve done for the community. My heart hurts from reading through this thread and I’ve mostly been a lurker; I can’t imagine how hard it must be to watch the fallout of something that you’ve nurtured for so long. 

The response from VS has been both cringe-worthy and infuriating. I am embarrassed on their behalf that this is the best that they have to offer in terms of a communications team. Any professional knows that using the word troll is inflammatory. Hell, it was not even allowed on the boards mere weeks ago. Yet their community liaison breezed in and used it repeatedly? Please. Betsy’s cattle prod would need to charge for a long time before responding to VS’s post. 

I am really sad tonight, selfishly for the loss of a corner of the Internet where I’ve lurked and learned for years, but more than than for the self-publishing history that is being lost with the deleted posts. Ugh. Awful.


----------



## 75814

Dpock said:


> If the owner of my favorite pub sold out to a corporation that subsequently came in and destroyed the pub's atmosphere, I'd be p*ssed at the owner for selling and the corporation that bought and destroyed my favorite pub.
> 
> If anyone is angry over what's happened here, they should feel free to express it.


Not the right analogy because as has been mentioned, it wasn't the owner who sold it, it's the widow of the owner who had already struggled to try to keep it open and had faced challenges you can't even begin to fathom. And as has also been stated, you don't know the circumstances of the deal. You don't know what she was promised. You don't know if they lied to her or not. The woman was under no obligation to you or anyone else to consult you on this decision. She was under no obligation to do deep dive research into this company. What have you ever done to help her situation, hmm?

She doesn't owe you or anyone else on this board a damn thing. Not even an explanation.

TLDR: _Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Interestingly, I did not receive any emails to say there were new posts in this discussion (expected many). Perhaps the deleted posts have something to do with it.


----------



## Nate Hoffelder

my god - VerticalScope owns Pornhub: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=Pornhub.com

And Amazon: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=amazon.com


----------



## Kathy Dee

Kathy Dee said:


> Where in the TOS does it say anything like ^ this?
> 
> With all due respect, I think you are mistaken.





> KBOARDS.COM does not undertake to necessarily post every submission. All messages that are posted here represent the opinions of the individuals or organizations posting those messages, and do not express the ideas or opinions of KBOARDS.COM or VerticalScope Inc. You may copy the posted messages for personal use, but *redistribution *in any way requires the written permission of KBOARDS.COM. In consideration of this authorization, you agree that any copy you make of any message(s) located on this web site shall retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.


@BardsandSages - you mean the *redistribution* wording?

I don't think they actually mean content reposted here, after all, they give us a _quote _facility that does exactly that. However, it is a matter of interpretation and I agree, it does illustrate that they need to go over their TOS much more thoroughly.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

I said once that speculation about the Chutes' reasons and intent in selling KBoards were not appropriate here. I'll say it again.

You can find the announcement about the sale and the reasons behind it here. As with any member, the KB way is to assume good faith in posting. We should do that here.

This thread is for discussion of the new ToS, reactions to it and ideas on actions that you, the members, might want to take going forward to address your concerns.

Let's look forward, people.

And, as long as I'm a moderator here, there will be no name calling, no matter who the owners are. Posts that contain name calling have been and will be edited.

Thanks,

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## ufwriter

Nate Hoffelder said:


> my god - VerticalScope owns Pornhub: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=Pornhub.com
> 
> And Amazon: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=amazon.com


You can plug any site into the TOS generator at the end of the URL and it works, even total gibberish. VS does not own Amazon.


----------



## Nate Hoffelder

ufwriter said:


> You can plug any site into the TOS generator at the end of the URL and it works, even total gibberish. VS does not own Amazon.


that was the joke, yes


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Writer-Fueled Dreams said:


> Betsy,
> 
> If one were to do any of the things you're referring to, would it mean that one's account would be banned and deleted?
> 
> Asking for a friend...


Contrary to forum mythology, banning is a last resort here and rarely employed. We prefer to use the cattle prod, withholding of coffee bar privileges, the rack, banning from a thread or post approval first.

Betsy


----------



## A Dark Path

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks,
> 
> I said once that speculation about the Chutes' reasons and intent in selling KBoards were not appropriate here. I'll say it again.
> 
> You can find the announcement about the sale and the reasons behind it here. As with any member, the KB way is to assume good faith in posting. We should do that here.
> 
> This thread is for discussion of the new ToS, reactions to it and ideas on actions that you, the members, might want to take going forward to address your concerns.
> 
> Let's look forward, people.
> 
> And, as long as I'm a moderator here, *there will be no name calling,* no matter who the owners are. * Posts that contain name calling have been and will be edited.*
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Betsy
> KB Mod


Does this include calling people trolls?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

The poster who used the term earlier was responded to by two moderators and advised that the term was absolutely not appropriate to use here.  It still isn't.  

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## 97251

I don't think anyone's legacy was lost.

The friendships, the learning, the community stands. Yes, people are going to other forums, but I think everything Kboards achieved is an important legacy in itself.

As to the new owners, I really think they are not going to delete our accounts. I don't see what they have to gain in leaving us here. We're just going to complain and make the forum worse. Or do they want the traffic that the drama generates?


----------



## AltMe

TobiasRoote said:


> As I've said above. They don't care two hoots and why should they? We're posting all the time, they're getting Google ranking, they get paid good money for high-earning advertising on forums they own. So long as there are visitors, refreshes, visitors, refreshes etc., they will get paid.


How do they get paid if you never click on a link?


----------



## Guest

https://bardsandsages.com/**********/2018/09/21/selling-forum-users-what-the-verticalscope-tos-allows/

Had an "enlightening" conversation with a co-worker this morning. Which led to some digging. Which led to an epiphany. A company that controls the content of over a thousand forums controls a lot of content to create new forums to sell advertising on...


----------



## ImaWriter

AltMe said:


> How do they get paid if you never click on a link?


Um, really? What do you want to bet the 728x90 at the bottom of this page is a CPM ad?

ETA. Okay, they rotate ad platforms in that space, and it looks like some are CPM and some are CPC.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/21/selling-forum-users-what-the-verticalscope-tos-allows/
> 
> Had an "enlightening" conversation with a co-worker this morning. Which led to some digging. Which led to an epiphany. A company that controls the content of over a thousand forums controls a lot of content to create new forums to sell advertising on...


Oh gosh, I think I might have mentally thrown up a little. I need another shower. VS is just grosser and grosser.


----------



## AltMe

TobiasRoote said:


> IMPRESSIONS


Well I must be costing ad owners a fortune then.


----------



## Guest

TobiasRoote said:


> What? WHAT?! You're saying we're all BOTS? We're in the Matrix.....


I'm just saying that, under the current TOS, this entire thread could be replicated across dozens of sites by bots using our names and avatars.

So WE are not bots...but we could have evil bot doppelgangers!


----------



## AltMe

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm just saying that, under the current TOS, this entire thread could be replicated across dozens of sites by bots using our names and avatars.
> 
> So WE are not bots...but we could have evil bot doppelgangers!


Stop the world, I want to get off.


----------



## Used To Be BH

TobiasRoote said:


> And this, unfortunately, is a double-edged sword. All the data carefully preserved on that Wayback machine is also accessible by VS, and of course, they are entitled to use it accordingly as per their TOS.


No, they aren't. If you take a look at the court decisions in one of my earlier posts, they make it clear that companies can't arbitrarily change the TOS without notice or acceptance (at least in states within the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction, and I believe there's also a Texas case that says the same). Nor can they make such changes for any EU citizen because GDPR prohibits it. The new TOS is invalid on its face, at least for many of us. An attempt to invoke its added provisions could easily lead to litigation. VS would be on even shakier ground if it tried to invoke its TOS on material not any longer available on its site.


----------



## 97251

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> https://bardsandsages.com/juliedawson/2018/09/21/selling-forum-users-what-the-verticalscope-tos-allows/
> 
> Had an "enlightening" conversation with a co-worker this morning. Which led to some digging. Which led to an epiphany. A company that controls the content of over a thousand forums controls a lot of content to create new forums to sell advertising on...


So you can build a forum, then buy activity to post ads in it? It makes a lot of sense. Again, sure, VS might not be doing this, but the possibility with the TOS is scary.

Something else that VerticalScope does is content syndication. They mostly sell content on automotive news and reviews. They also own hundreds of forums on the auto industry. Again, sure, of course they don't take content from the forums and sell, but the TOS would allow them to do so. Also, it's a whole lot of forums.

And then we realize that, for VerticalScope, the terms are not overreaching, they are exactly what they need to make money.

I do feel disappointed that the community took so long to notice the implications of this acquisition. I was never a big participant here, but even then, I have my share of guilt at not investigating things further.

To each their own, but people who are absolutely fine with these TOS do puzzle me.


----------



## 71202

It's pretty clear buying forums to jam ads them in is exactly what VS does.  This is not the first forum they have looted and would not be the first one they killed in the process.


----------



## 97251

Anon1 said:


> It's pretty clear buying forums to jam ads them in is exactly what VS does. This is not the first forum they have looted and would not be the first one they killed in the process.


Yes. And one thing that is a little upseting is how long the community at Kboards took to notice this. Some people did mention that VS had a reputation of ruining forums, but the first reaction was to give them the benefit of doubt.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

In some ways, VS probably paid a good amount for a forum that won't do what they want, though buying up and pillaging forums isn't my bailiwick.

As pointed out elsewhere, people searching for info on their old Chevy don't care if the info is old. An old Chevy remains an old Chevy. Ditto for a Kimber .45. The mechanics of them don't change, so the information on those boards remains very harvestable for a long time.

Here, they bought golden SEO, but the Indie and Hybrid author scene is hugely changeable. Anything from last year isn't the state of the industry anymore. Anything two years ago is almost entirely irrelevant. And the traffic here is brought via Google, but what sends so many to search KBoards on Google are the ratings at other locations. Green, safe, recommended, useful, valuable.

Those ratings are changing, though more of us need to notify places that a reconsideration needs to be done. Already some have changed to something equating to "stay away" because data is no longer safe. 

Yes, they're getting a whole lot of visitors right now, and that's their bread and butter, but that's because people are coming to watch the dumpster fire. Once the fire is out and those who post the best stuff are gone, who's still going to come to a site rated with a "predatory TOS"?

Which brings up the Google Fu. If you have posts with excellent Google-Fu, overwrite them. I know a lot of folks have so many thousand that they're impossible to delete, but a quick look at what comes up first in searches will show you where your value is. Take that value with you.


----------



## munboy

Nate Hoffelder said:


> my god - VerticalScope owns Pornhub: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=Pornhub.com
> 
> And Amazon: https://www.verticalscope.com/aboutus/tos.php?site=amazon.com


They don't own Pornhub or Amazon. They simply operate the websites for these companies.


----------



## Dpock

WasAnn said:


> In some ways, VS probably paid a good amount for a forum that won't do what they want, though buying up and pillaging forums isn't my bailiwick.


Website valuation calculators vary widely on Kboards ($14,000 to $71,000), as do revenue estimates. "Worth of the Web" estimates Kboard's optimal yearly revenue at $65,000, so the higher valuation may be correct. "Optimal" likely means when jam-packed with ads (hence...).


----------



## 98700

Yay! said:


> I don't think anyone's legacy was lost.
> 
> The friendships, the learning, the community stands. Yes, people are going to other forums, but I think everything Kboards achieved is an important legacy in itself.


Well said. Given the speed at which indie publishing changes, the actual information is of limited value, and as new info stops being added, will become of less and less value as time goes on. Yes, as a historical record, it's valuable, but most people interested in indie publishing are interested in what's current--they're writers, not historians. It's sad that this place is no longer going to be useful for newbies, but for those of us who managed to get use out of it while it was still active, we're not losing what we learned here.

I'm working my way through deleting my posts, other than the ones on this thread. The more people who delete/modify their posts, the less value VS can suck out of our work. That and using ad blockers on our own browsers are our only way to fight this (unless people want to get into actual legal proceedings). Our accounts are probably not going to go away; VS has made it clear they won't do that short of being forced to legally, and even then they seem to have some incorrect beliefs about what they're legally required to do. So make our visits and our accounts as worthless to them as we can. It takes a while. It took me 6-7 hours to modify 1200+ posts. It's a pain. But I fully expect them to remove our ability to delete/modify posts any time now, so if you want your posts gone, I suggest buckling down and doing it while you can. VS thinks it owns the contents of our posts, to which we own the copyright, and they're not going to remove them unless legally forced to because, in their belief, that content is part of what they paid for when they bought the site. If you want your content protected, you have to do it yourself.



Yay! said:


> Yes. And one thing that is a little upseting is how long the community at Kboards took to notice this. Some people did mention that VS had a reputation of ruining forums, but the first reaction was to give them the benefit of doubt.


I didn't say much about it at the time (because what's the point) but I knew this was bad as soon as it was announced. Maybe I'm just not as tenderhearted as some people (strike that; I _know _I'm not), but I've never understood giving people the benefit of the doubt when any thinking person with a healthy enough sense of skepticism can see through the lies and blather to what their real intentions are. I'm just glad they finally showed everyone openly what they're like with their own words, since the mods and others kept stepping in to defend them whenever anyone raised issues prior to this thread.


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

munboy said:


> They don't own Pornhub or Amazon. They simply operate the websites for these companies.


They don't. It was a joke on their extremely messaboutwithable TOS generator.


----------



## Trioxin 245

An observation of this all.
What we have seen here is what happens when a mom n pop business sells to the big guys aka corporations. First I don't blame the owners for selling, I am sure they were offered a tidy sum and with all the sweet talk about keeping it the same as it has been.But that never happens. That is not a knock on Verticalscope but it just happens. Think of a small craft brewery. You picture the guy with the beard, his family and friends working and then the corporation buys it out. Bob and Sue just become another mark under the employee name list.Its gone from names and faces to numbers. If those long standing employees quit (people leave the forum) the new owners do not care because *they have bought the recipe not the people. *
What makes this interesting is that the recipe here is the quality post which are owned by the people posting them. Long time members that are deleting are taking away the recipe at least for now. They will no doubt over time build the information back up as new members come here, but I think that is going to be a challenge as well as news of this self imposed destruction continues to spread.
Last thought. Whoever that person was that accused the posters of trolling is one horrible PR person, that is not as a person but as an asset to their company. A simple, "I understand that there are a lot of questions and concerns and we at vertical are going to address them in due time. Please be patient," would have done wonders.
But alas they did not, for we are now just a number and no longer a person.


----------



## Randall Wood

WasAnn said:


> In some ways, VS probably paid a good amount for a forum that won't do what they want, though buying up and pillaging forums isn't my bailiwick.
> 
> As pointed out elsewhere, people searching for info on their old Chevy don't care if the info is old. An old Chevy remains an old Chevy. Ditto for a Kimber .45. The mechanics of them don't change, so the information on those boards remains very harvestable for a long time.
> 
> Here, they bought golden SEO, but the Indie and Hybrid author scene is hugely changeable. Anything from last year isn't the state of the industry anymore. Anything two years ago is almost entirely irrelevant. And the traffic here is brought via Google, but what sends so many to search KBoards on Google are the ratings at other locations. Green, safe, recommended, useful, valuable.
> 
> Those ratings are changing, though more of us need to notify places that a reconsideration needs to be done. Already some have changed to something equating to "stay away" because data is no longer safe.
> 
> Yes, they're getting a whole lot of visitors right now, and that's their bread and butter, but that's because people are coming to watch the dumpster fire. Once the fire is out and those who post the best stuff are gone, who's still going to come to a site rated with a "predatory TOS"?
> 
> Which brings up the Google Fu. If you have posts with excellent Google-Fu, overwrite them. I know a lot of folks have so many thousand that they're impossible to delete, but a quick look at what comes up first in searches will show you where your value is. Take that value with you.


I'm told that one can find someone via Fivr to overwrite your posts for you.

Just sayin.....


----------



## Used To Be BH

For those of you concerned about misuse of your posts, here's some food for thought. (I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.)

I've already quoted the court cases that suggest a browsewrap agreement, particularly one changed without notice, is often unenforceable in the US, as would be any clause within one granting consent to any future changes. There is a Canadian case (VS is based in Canada) in which a browsewrap agreement was upheld (Century 21 vs. Rogers Communications). However, in that case the court ruled the way it did because Zoocasa, the company being sued, had notice of the agreeement.


> Canadian law on contracts "requires that the offer and its terms be brought to the attention of the user, be available for review and be in some manner accepted by the user."


 So while Canadian courts have thus far been more friendly to browsewrap agreements than US ones, Canadian law would still restrict the enforcement of browsewrap agreements where there was no notification. https://termsfeed.com/blog/browsewrap-clickwrap/

Could VS enforce the old registration terms? Probably, but here they are: https://web.archive.org/web/20170701054543/https://www.kboards.com:80/show-reg-agreement.php I've reproduced the relevant paragraph below. I've bolded the most important part.



> You remain solely responsible for the content of your posted messages. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint or legal action arising from any situation caused by your use of this forum. *Content such as text and images that you post in this forum remain the property of the copyright owner(s), but while that content is posted on the forum it may be fairly used by the forum owner in other media settings; for example, in our blog or in guides or other promotional publications that the site may assemble and distribute from time to time.*


Notice particularly the "while the content is posted on the forum" and "fairly used." The first makes clear that removal of the content would void any expressed or implied license to use it. The second ties the use to "fair use," under US copyright law, which sharply restricts what can actually be done with it.For example, a post could be quoted, but not reproduced in its entirety. Notice also that all uses are tied to the site and its communications. Unlike the current TOS, there is no license to post content to other sites.

That's all that we agreed to when most of us signed up. It appears case law in the United States and Canada supports our right to be notified of changes. Such notification was not given. If push came to shove, we could prevail in court. (Hopefully, it won't come to that, but I thought it might be reassuring.)

What VS bought was the forum structure. It couldn't "buy" the posts and other content because the previous owner had no right to sell them.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Trioxin 245 said:


> An observation of this all.
> What we have seen here is what happens when a mom n pop business sells to the big guys aka corporations. First I don't blame the owners for selling, I am sure they were offered a tidy sum and with all the sweet talk about keeping it the same as it has been.But that never happens. That is not a knock on Verticalscope but it just happens. Think of a small craft brewery. You picture the guy with the beard, his family and friends working and then the corporation buys it out. Bob and Sue just become another mark under the employee name list.Its gone from names and faces to numbers. If those long standing employees quit (people leave the forum) the new owners do not care because *they have bought the recipe not the people. *
> What makes this interesting is that the recipe here is the quality post which are owned by the people posting them. Long time members that are deleting are taking away the recipe at least for now. They will no doubt over time build the information back up as new members come here, but I think that is going to be a challenge as well as news of this self imposed destruction continues to spread.
> Last thought. Whoever that person was that accused the posters of trolling is one horrible PR person, that is not as a person but as an asset to their company. A simple, "I understand that there are a lot of questions and concerns and we at vertical are going to address them in due time. Please be patient," would have done wonders.
> But alas they did not, for we are now just a number and no longer a person.


Yes, a statement that VS was working on the issue would have done wonders for me. All of us know the ambiguities of the new TOS would have taken time for the lawyers to chew on. If only we'd gotten any indication that VS was going to something other than try to convince us the whole situation wasn't really bad at all. Sigh!


----------



## PhoenixS

I'm re-reading all my existing posts, so this is very slow going for me. It'll take a few days to go through everything. I replaced the last 4 months' worth to basically reiterate my new siggy verbiage. Stuff before June will get a series of asterisks. I'm not deleting anything because having my siggy show up in various threads will send a message to visitors to those threads. 

I'm not overwriting anything that has to do with scamming. 

Regretfully, I am overwriting everything that has to do with my research and analysis results. There were a lot of 'firsts' and 'new understandings' shared here that were my own products or the products of a specific team of savvy authors who did a lot of diligent testing and analysis. I shared here for the benefit of the community at large rather than via my own social media network (blog, Twitter or FB page -- pretty much all dead vehicles for years now). I've periodically updated our understandings here as algos changed and as more data became available. A lot of it is still useful and 'in the ballpark.' A lot of it probably needs another thorough testing to see if things that were still are. And a smaller portion is likely too outdated to be useful. 

I admit, I had hoped to be able to point to KB for a long time to come and proudly acknowledge the aggregate of my posts here to be my indie legacy. Sadly, I bet on the wrong horse.

My brain understands and accepts everything that entails.

My heart, however, twinges with the loss. 

The loss of the expression of my research and analysis work, of the work of the team I was involved with, of the work of others here, of the support received, of the challenges that made both me and my work better, and of the community -- with whom I shared all in hopes that together we would become strong.

Go out, take names and kick butt. Become stronger.


----------



## 97251

Used To Be BH said:


> Yes, a statement that VS was working on the issue would have done wonders for me. All of us know the ambiguities of the new TOS would have taken time for the lawyers to chew on. If only we'd gotten any indication that VS was going to something other than try to convince us the whole situation wasn't really bad at all. Sigh!


I'm glad they were honest, though. They could have extended this imbroglio by picking carefully crafted words and promises. We're lucky that they're not very good at crafting words.

Also, it's important to note that the TOS are not crazy and overreaching (from their POV), but might simply be part of the way the business operates. Maybe they do want the right to repost and reuse content from the forums they buy.

Notice that most forums they buy die after 1 year or less. Wouldn't it be a terrible business decision, if the goal was to keep making money with traffic and ads? What's the goal then? I don't know.

Do they make the money back with dead forums plastered with ads fast enough to make up for the investment?


----------



## My_Txxxx_a$$_Left_Too

Yay! said:


> I'm glad they were honest, though. They could have extended this imbroglio by picking carefully crafted words and promises. We're lucky that they're not very good at crafting words.
> 
> Also, it's important to note that the TOS are not crazy and overreaching (from their POV), but might simply be part of the way the business operates. Maybe they do want the right to repost and reuse content from the forums they buy.
> 
> *Notice that most forums they buy die after 1 year or less. Wouldn't it be a terrible business decision, if the goal was to keep making money with traffic and ads? What's the goal then? I don't know.
> 
> Do they make the money back with dead forums plastered with ads fast enough to make up for the investment?*


Short answer: Yes.

Longer answer: A zombie forum is easier to maintain than an active one. Old cars and guns don't change, so a searcher looking for "how to fix my Kimber .45 safety" will still get the same results for many, many years. Mechanical objects don't change. The SEO they bought will keep floating, with no investment in maintaining a forum with living beings.

Consider that research on historic pricing for the forums they've bought favors forums with LOTS of posts in the archive. Kill the forum, harvest the data, get paid on the SEO.

That won't work as well here because the industry is so reliant of WoM and already KB is disappearing or getting red-zoned. And it changes fast. The value of our old posts will drop much quicker than posts about fixing up a '57 Chevy.


----------



## Used To Be BH

PhoenixS said:


> I'm re-reading all my existing posts, so this is very slow going for me. It'll take a few days to go through everything. I replaced the last 4 months' worth to basically reiterate my new siggy verbiage. Stuff before June will get a series of asterisks. I'm not deleting anything because having my siggy show up in various threads will send a message to visitors to those threads.
> 
> I'm not overwriting anything that has to do with scamming.
> 
> Regretfully, I am overwriting everything that has to do with my research and analysis results. There were a lot of 'firsts' and 'new understandings' shared here that were my own products or the products of a specific team of savvy authors who did a lot of diligent testing and analysis. I shared here for the benefit of the community at large rather than via my own social media network (blog, Twitter or FB page -- pretty much all dead vehicles for years now). I've periodically updated our understandings here as algos changed and as more data became available. A lot of it is still useful and 'in the ballpark.' A lot of it probably needs another thorough testing to see if things that were still are. And a smaller portion is likely too outdated to be useful.
> 
> I admit, I had hoped to be able to point to KB for a long time to come and proudly acknowledge the aggregate of my posts here to be my indie legacy. Sadly, I bet on the wrong horse.
> 
> My brain understands and accepts everything that entails.
> 
> My heart, however, twinges with the loss.
> 
> The loss of the expression of my research and analysis work, of the work of the team I was involved with, of the work of others here, of the support received, of the challenges that made both me and my work better, and of the community -- with whom I shared all in hopes that together we would become strong.
> 
> Go out, take names and kick butt. Become stronger.


If I were you, I'd make sure to copy any posts that might have enduring value. Some day, you may find a new forum home on which you might wish to post them.

I'm procrastinating, not because my posts have the same value yours do, but because I feel as if I'm deleting part of my life. I'm unhappy with the direction the new ownership seems to be taking, but I've been very happy with Kboards before that--with what I learned and many people I've met and formed attachments to. I will get it done because I must, not because I want to.


----------



## The Fussy Librarian

We have a monthly banner ad for our free ebooks newsletter that we're going to let expire when it runs out in mid-October. This is / was a good place to reach authors, but I'm not comfortable with the direction things are headed here.

Jeffrey Bruner
The Fussy Librarian


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

A number of people have been changing their signatures to have a very long block of text.

Per Forum Decorum, the maximum size for a signature is 140x800 pixels.

I've edited one of the signatures down as shown below and I *think* it just barely is within the 140x800...close enough. If I have to edit your signature to get down to the 140x800, for some of you I'm just going to have to delete content. I don't want to have to do that--please rethink your sigs.

I realize those with these sigs are leaving the forum and don't care or consider yourself to be sticking it to the owners. However, there are members who have expressed the wish to remain here. We have the rule on signature size because for those on slow connections, smaller monitors or mobile devices, large signatures create a burden. Please be considerate of the members who are remaining.

Betsy

On September 19th, 2018, I sent a PM to the admin requesting my account to be deleted.
-I do not agree with the fact that new Terms of Service were instated without notifying us. | I do not agree with parts of the Terms of Service which allow Vertical Scope to use my information elsewhere. | I do not allow VerticalScope to reproduce any content I posted on this forum in any newsletter, website, or other forum. | This is my personal opinion, not intended to influence anyone, and I believe I am within my rights to think so.
-I don't want this signature to be in the forum anymore. I've already asked for account deletion, however, the owners of this forum REFUSE to delete my content. 
-I had no choice but to modify my postings. I don't think I ever posted anything of importance but that still doesn't mean I give anyone authorization to steal and reproduce any content I added to this forum. 
-Further, the site started to show links and ads that I don't consider appropriate. Just today, (September 20th 201, while browsing not logged in, I saw a link to an image of a bare chested woman. I have nothing against nudity, but this is not the right place for this, and I do not want to associate my content, my ideas, my book titles or anything related to my work to these ads. | Further, I do not desire to have any association with ads that are sexist, racist, and demeaning to women, such as ads for Ukrainian wives, or links to posts saying "These Russian women were caught at the right time". This is why I no longer want my blurbs, my ideas, links to any of my sites, or comments about anything I do to remain on these boards. | Again, I do not want to display this message, or messages that I don't agree with the terms of service, but I have no choice, considering the administration's refusal to delete my content.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Used To Be BH said:


> If I were you, I'd make sure to copy any posts that might have enduring value. Some day, you may find a new forum home on which you might wish to post them.
> 
> I'm procrastinating, not because my posts have the same value yours do, but because I feel as if I'm deleting part of my life. I'm unhappy with the direction the new ownership seems to be taking, but I've been very happy with Kboards before that--with what I learned and many people I've met and formed attachments to. I will get it done because I must, not because I want to.


Note that, as was pointed out somewhere in one of these threads, you can print a thread to a PDF file if you desire.

Betsy


----------



## Guest

Just to reiterate the issue about legalities:

I think most everyone understands that the agreement is unenforceable legally. The problem is that these sort of issues are mostly CIVIL court, not CRIMINAL COURT. And in civil court, you can end up going bankrupt even if you win. We've seen how expensive it can be to fight a civil issue even when it is clear and obvious. The fact that Helena threw out the "have your lawyer call our lawyers" line was a threat: She's basically saying "we have bigger lawyers, and we will bury you." 

The good news is, there are other avenues that don't require the courts. Today, I sent a registered letter to VerticalScope's main headquarters, and CC'd letters to their U.S. offices. That letter included the complete timeline of events, screenshots of pertinent statements made by VerticalScope employees, and notice that I had already send an email to the privacy address and gotten no confirmation that my request was received. 

They are officially being put on notice that if my concerns are not addressed, I will file formal complaints with any and ALL state, U.S., and Canadian agencies that cover Consumer Protection and Privacy, as well as any independent agencies, such as the BBB and others. And I encourage everyone that wants their content removed to do the same. 

Because VerticalScope does not fear the Court of Law. They are confident that nobody is going to sue, and even if someone did, their lawyers would bury them in paperwork.

But they should fear what would happen if a Canadian privacy advocate or a bored U.S. Consumer Affairs agent gets two dozen identical complaints about the same issue and takes a look at the official employee responses.


----------



## MyCatDoesNotConsent

Betsy,

I probably need more coffee, but I'm not sure how to estimate the pixel size of my sig. I just typed words into the sig field.



Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks,
> 
> A number of people have been changing their signatures to have a very long block of text.
> 
> Per Forum Decorum, the maximum size for a signature is 140x800 pixels.
> 
> I've edited one of the signatures down as shown below and I *think* it just barely is within the 140x800...close enough. If I have to edit your signature to get down to the 140x800, for some of you I'm just going to have to delete content. I don't want to have to do that--please rethink your sigs.
> 
> I realize those with these sigs are leaving the forum and don't care or consider yourself to be sticking it to the owners. However, there are members who have expressed the wish to remain here. We have the rule on signature size because for those on slow connections, smaller monitors or mobile devices, large signatures create a burden. Please be considerate of the members who are remaining.
> 
> Betsy
> 
> On September 19th, 2018, I sent a PM to the admin requesting my account to be deleted.
> -I do not agree with the fact that new Terms of Service were instated without notifying us. | I do not agree with parts of the Terms of Service which allow Vertical Scope to use my information elsewhere. | I do not allow VerticalScope to reproduce any content I posted on this forum in any newsletter, website, or other forum. | This is my personal opinion, not intended to influence anyone, and I believe I am within my rights to think so.
> -I don't want this signature to be in the forum anymore. I've already asked for account deletion, however, the owners of this forum REFUSE to delete my content.
> -I had no choice but to modify my postings. I don't think I ever posted anything of importance but that still doesn't mean I give anyone authorization to steal and reproduce any content I added to this forum.
> -Further, the site started to show links and ads that I don't consider appropriate. Just today, (September 20th 201, while browsing not logged in, I saw a link to an image of a bare chested woman. I have nothing against nudity, but this is not the right place for this, and I do not want to associate my content, my ideas, my book titles or anything related to my work to these ads. | Further, I do not desire to have any association with ads that are sexist, racist, and demeaning to women, such as ads for Ukrainian wives, or links to posts saying "These Russian women were caught at the right time". This is why I no longer want my blurbs, my ideas, links to any of my sites, or comments about anything I do to remain on these boards. | Again, I do not want to display this message, or messages that I don't agree with the terms of service, but I have no choice, considering the administration's refusal to delete my content.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

MyCatDoesNotConsent said:


> Betsy,
> 
> I probably need more coffee, but I'm not sure how to estimate the pixel size of my sig. I just typed words into the sig field.


You're good. 

For anyone trying to estimate max size, look at my sig, or a sig generated by the author tool with nine standard thumbnail covers--they are about the right size. Close enough, anyway.


----------



## Nope

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks,
> 
> A number of people have been changing their signatures to have a very long block of text.
> 
> Per Forum Decorum...


Is this the same Forum Decorum that our new owners could care less about and violate willy-nilly?

You guys have been amazing, all of the Mods, and kept this place together for years. You should be very proud of your contribution to this community and the work you've done. But as I posted in another thread, the Writers Cafe is dead (dying), mostly because it's no longer safe for writers or discussion. And furthermore, VS doesn't even appear to care. It's as if it's business as usual for them.

The only thing left to work for now are the people that make up our community. And that's Harvey's legacy - our community, not this empty shell of a click-bait platform.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Right now, right here, there are still members posting in good faith who have expressed a desire publicly to continue here.  I support those members as long as they are here and as long as I am a moderator.  Forum Decorum is here for them.

Betsy


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

What happens if someone has posted here using a quote from someone else that has not been attributed to that person, and then VS uses that quote in an ebook they have put together. Who does the original writer sue?


----------



## 98700

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What happens if someone has posted here using a quote from someone else that has not been attributed to that person, and then VS uses that quote in an ebook they have put together. Who does the original writer sue?


Presumably, VS. Because by deleting the post and explicitly retracting/denying consent to the TOS, the author of the original post has retracted any license they'd originally given to the forum to use/duplicate their content, which includes quotes in other people's posts. (Lack of ability to obtain permission does not constitute permission. So the lack of attribution doesn't mean the content is up for grabs. The responsibility to obtain appropriate permission from the original creator is on the person who wants to use the conent. If circumstances render that difficult or impossible, the person wanting to use the content must simply do without.)


----------



## MClayton

TwistedTales said:


> Thank you, Betsy.
> 
> I don't plan to go anywhere and I appreciate your ongoing balanced moderation and support. I have been tracking the angry threads and think the mods are showing a remarkable level of patience. Not everyone is upset by the TOS or the ads (Helena did offer to stop them in the author section and, once the dust settles, it's an offer that might be worth exploring).
> 
> In the meantime, I hope the drama will end soon and we can get back to regular programming. I know some people think the forum is dying and maybe it is for them, but others will continue and more will turn up and life will go on.
> 
> So, thank you again for keeping our interests in mind during what appears to be a bit of moment. Your hard work and honest dedication is greatly respected.


Ditto this.


----------



## 99896

removed


----------



## MClayton

thedudeminds said:


> Any forum that won't allow a member to leave or actually delete their content when they've politely and respectfully asked for that ought to die. Same can be said for any forum whose ownership refers to its members/value-providers as the T-word.


I don't disagree with you - in fact, I find myself generally agreeing with pretty much all of your posts. In this case, though, I think until the dust settles and things shake out, the mods need to keep doing what the mods do. When the dust does settle, maybe no one will be here, and maybe the forum will die. None of us knows. But until we see what's going to happen, I really hope the moderation continues. Of course, I guess if it doesn't the death of the forum will happen more quickly, because I definitely won't stay.


----------



## 97251

TwistedTales said:


> Personally, I don't care about deletion because I know whenever I post anything on the internet that it's probably impossible to truly remove it.


True. But posting on the internet doesn't give anyone the right to reuse, redistribute and create derivative works based on what you wrote. Sure, people may steal your words, but you're not implicitly authorizing people to use your content, your image, and even your name!!!

But of course not everyone has the same opinion.


----------



## Nope

I'm reminded of the thread where we discussed the meaning of Community and the unintended consequences of neutrality. Although, this may simply be a matter of picking sides. Real life gets complicated.


----------



## Nope

TwistedTales said:


> At the risk of being pounced on or adding to the drama, I don't care what people do with my forum posts. To be honest, most posts on a forum aren't particularly meaningful or useful for very long assuming they ever were at all. I don't view forum posts the same way I do say my books, but plenty of pirates have stolen those (yes, I've found them fully reproduced on a publicly accessible site where anyone could read them without logging in -- I was in good company though as Lee Child and Stephen King were on there too --I was weirdly pleased about that).
> 
> Anyway, upshot is, I don't feel any ownership over any of my forum posts. Hey, Helena, go crazy and reproduce this anywhere ya like.


Many users here stood behind their brand and entered discussions and shared freely, including observable data. And many of them plan to stick around, but not at the risk of their brand. You appear to agree with this practice since your brand is similarly hidden. And while there's nothing wrong with this, you don't have anything at risk either. I don't mean to be an asshat about it, just stating a fact. There's lots of new names and empty signatures around here lately.

This seems to mark the divide. Those posting as their brands have a problem with the new TOS, anonymous avatars - much less so. I think it's important to understand the consequences for each.


----------



## Lydniz

Nope said:


> This seems to mark the divide. Those posting as their brands have a problem with the new TOS, anonymous avatars - much less so. I think it's important to understand the consequences for each.


I think this is a fair point. I don't particularly like the new direction but I don't have a whole lot at stake here. Other posters do.


----------



## Pandorra

My issue is this, if we are posting asking about signatures, covers, blurbs, snippets, income or many other topics where the older authors have been generous in sharing examples of their own work in order to assist new authors, how comfortable are they going to be now in any discussion involving those things? The answer is _not at all comfortable. _Nobody is going to feel at home here with the terms of service hanging over their head, so the essence of what _was_ Kboards is no longer in this forum and that loss is not intangible it is going to be felt and felt HARD, changing the content and availability of information which was so valuable...not to the kboards owners.. but to the people who come here to learn from others who have BTDT.

On another side, I have seen more kick-up-your-heels fun in Timothy's new forum then I have seen here in a very, very long time and I am rather enjoying seeing everyone so relaxed and not needing to choose every word as if they might have just stepped one foot closer to the 9th circle of hell... the emoji's aren't bad either!


----------



## 98700

Nope said:


> This seems to mark the divide. Those posting as their brands have a problem with the new TOS, anonymous avatars - much less so. I think it's important to understand the consequences for each.


Heh. I posted anonymously, and I still had a problem with it. But a lot of that was A) support for those who weren't anonymous, and B) the principle of the thing. I personally am a lot more likely to take issue with someone's business practices on basic principle, even if it's unlikely to have direct consequences for me, than some are.


----------



## 97251

TwistedTales said:


> I genuinely believe in sharing knowledge, so much so that I made vast swathes of it available on the web. That information has been used by companies and students all over the world. It did not harm my brand.
> 
> So, I thought this through over a decade ago and concluded better to teach and inspire than to hoard. It's my philosophy and one I have stood by for decades. Do not judge me by my decision as an author because you don't know why I have chosen anonymity on this site, but I still share my findings and opinions even here.


I think almost everyone who posts on forums agree with sharing knowledge. The issue is the way that the knowledge is shared, and the control they have over it. I don't mind sharing knowledge, but there are some places where I wouldn't want to see any of my knowledge, and some places where I wouldn't want to see my name.

Not everyone has a problem with that, though, and it's fine.


----------



## Guest

TwistedTales said:


> I hear your point, but once anything is published in any form we lose control of it.


This is fundamentally untrue. If this was remotely true, no site would even NEED a TOS. There would be no such thing as copyright law. There would be no such thing as right of publicity laws. There would be no trademark law.

You are confusing the issue with the ease of stealing someone else's intellectual property. Look, I've said this multiple times (In this thread) but I will say it again. I have HAD people steal my words and republish them. Publish them in ways I did not want my name or brand associated with. When it happened, however, because I did not give up my copyright to my words, I was able to take action.

None of us are under any delusion that we can physically stop someone from stealing something posted online. But that doesn't mean we should happily give up our right to do something about it when it happens.

If you personally don't have an issue with the TOS, that is your right. But to imply those of us that do have valid legal concerns due to the nature of our brands are somehow overreacting is unhelpful and just reinforces a lot of false notions that allow companies like VS to do what they do.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Nope said:


> This seems to mark the divide. Those posting as their brands have a problem with the new TOS, anonymous avatars - much less so. I think it's important to understand the consequences for each.


This is true. I've always posted everywhere under my real name, but VS apparently claims the right to use my name in whatever way it wants. I don't much care about my posts, but I care very much how my name is used.

I've changed my user name to an anonymous one, but that isn't enough because every single time a post of mine was quoted before that change, it included my real name and those quotes are not updated to reflect my new user name. I want my real name GONE from this site, and I can't do that myself, the mods can no longer do it, and VS won't do it. I don't know what the answer is to that.

I'm not in a rush to leave, at least not until Christina's case is finally settled, but once that is done I shall be joining the crowd claiming under GDPR legislation. I'd be happy to be anonymised, but it must guarantee the removal of my name from every post where it occurs, and not just changing my user name.


----------



## Nope

TwistedTales said:


> The reason I'm hidden...


With all due respect, why you're hidden doesn't matter, neither does it matter how many IPs you've shared over the years. We're specifically talking about *this* forum and how the new owners of *this* forum can create chaos for our brands. Again, you've nothing to lose one way or the other, but to say that business owners who have published here under their brand names also have nothing to lose is at best, disingenuous.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

All I want is my account deleted and my posts wiped.

I've asked respectfully.

Why is that so hard to do?


----------



## Chad Winters

Good points Twisted Tales....not being an author I am not nearly as upset as some and I'm not sure how much of the drama is that most TOS sound very bad when you actually read them. VS has been around for awhile and I'm not sure yet that I've seen evidence that they actually steal peoples work and make derivative novels from them even if it could technically be ok per the TOS


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

I'd like to point out that after many pages of abject chaos, not a single practicing attorney has stepped in to explain where I was wrong when I pointed out a copyright transfer requires a written instrument and a signature under U.S. law.

You know, it's not a mistake the word "authorize" is derived from the word "author." United States law is as clear as a bell on this matter, and any contract, web-based or otherwise, that purports to claim someone else's intellectual property in contravention of 17 U.S.C. 204 is not enforceable. Leaving aside our manuscripts and posts, there is also the Lanham Act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act 

--which is the primary law that governs trademarks in the U.S. Many of us have significant trademark protection even if we haven't yet registered our marks. We are also a signatory to the Berne Convention and so is Canada, so our copyrights are enforceable in over 100 nations.

Perhaps the new TOS is boilerplate language meant to protect the company's right to publish the forum itself. Perhaps not. But ultimately there is not only a list of statues but a body of case law that almost always leans in favor of rights holders for obvious reasons. Copyright, trademark, patent, trade dress, et al. were considered important enough by the framers to include in Congress' constitutional enumerated powers. This nation has taken intellectual property seriously ever since, and the results speak for themselves. The entire self-publishing industry was made possible by our well-established and well-protected two-centuries-old concept of copyright. It is one of several equalizing forces in this economy, and it is rather unlikely to be overturned by a unilateral change in the TOS on a web site.

All that said, I will leave the invitation open for the time being for any member of the Bar in any state to point out where my plain text readings of the statues above are flawed. In the meantime, I'll reserve judgment on whether I should look elsewhere for a writer's forum.


----------



## crebel

Pandorra said:


> My issue is this, if we are posting asking about signatures, covers, blurbs, snippets, income or many other topics where the older authors have been generous in sharing examples of their own work in order to assist new authors, how comfortable are they going to be now in any discussion involving those things? The answer is _not at all comfortable. _Nobody is going to feel at home here with the terms of service hanging over their head, *so the essence of what was Kboards is no longer in this forum* and that loss is not intangible it is going to be felt and felt HARD, changing the content and availability of information which was so valuable...not to the kboards owners.. but to the people who come here to learn from others who have BTDT.
> 
> On another side, I have seen more kick-up-your-heels fun in Timothy's new forum then I have seen here in a very, very long time and I am rather enjoying seeing everyone so relaxed and not needing to choose every word as if they might have just stepped one foot closer to the 9th circle of hell... the emoji's aren't bad either!


Pandorra, forgive me for singling out your post to bold one particular section, but I do feel it is an accurate representation of what many have said. As an early member of KBoards when it was still Kindleboards and there was no Writers' Cafe, I just don't think this is true. The essence of the KBoards Forum is still here while the Writers' Cafe sub-forum is in great upheaval. The demise of the WC may be imminent (at least as it has been known), but many still exist who don't want to see the ending of KB as a whole.

My personal dilemma is whether I want to continue tacitly support a site through posting, Amazon links, etc. when new ownership has treated the creatives who found a home in the WC sub-forum so abominably. Unlike the efforts being made to provide alternate sites for the writers' to continue their discussions without possible chaos to their brands, no such efforts are being made on behalf of the non-writers.

We also have years of discussions, Kindle information, recommendations, virtual and real-life friendships on the line if KB goes belly-up.

*TLDR* Words matter. The WC is not the whole of, nor the essence of KB.


----------



## Chad Winters

great points crebel


----------



## Guest

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> I'd like to point out that after many pages of abject chaos, not a single practicing attorney has stepped in to explain where I was wrong when I pointed out a copyright transfer requires a written instrument and a signature under U.S. law.


I don't think anyone is saying you are technically wrong. The problem is that, again, this is a matter of civil law and it is expensive to litigate these things. Companies like VS depend on burying people in legal debt (ergo why Helena just smirked "have your lawyers call our lawyers."

Companies do things that are technically illegal ALL the time: from copyright infringement to sexual harassment to racial profiling to age discrimination. But the burden too often falls on the injured party to litigate for justice, which is a burden many cannot afford and thus how certain behaviors continue despite being technically illegal.

Which is why it is important to proactively take steps on the front end to avoid the need to litigate on the back end.


----------



## Nope

TwistedTales said:


> You are talking about this forum and I am talking about my philosophy to sharing my identity and information. Before I posted under my real name I gave a lot of thought as to what I'd be giving away and decided I was ok with that. Equally, I thought about my author brand and decided a load of one-star drivebys probably wouldn't do it any good so I chose to be anonymous.
> 
> I thought about these issues and made my decisions before I posted anything anywhere, even in 2006 when I put up my first website.
> 
> We don't have to agree and I knew posting a different opinion would inflame and here we are.
> 
> I haven't got all day to defend my opinion or reasoning nor do I feel the need. I have at least managed to get another view on the table even if it's not a popular one.
> 
> PS Someone here just corrected me and I had my first website loaded in 2004. How time flies...


I don't see any flames and I get what you're saying. And there's certainly nothing wrong with your web philosophy. But for those who did not choose anonymity from the git-go, this is a serious clusterfuck just waiting to happen. I think we need to be careful, since posts here are often taken as advice, not to confuse the issue, and more importantly, not to minimize the potential for real harm. If you're anonymous, you're probably okay. It could be a truck nuts forum for all you care. But if your brand is here, you need to be extremely cautious moving forward. I think the legal aspects of this have been explained well enough by others.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Which is why it is important to proactively take steps on the front end to avoid the need to litigate on the back end.


That's a point well taken, and I think authors should do what they feel is necessary to protect themselves. Our copyrights are our livelihood, so it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone we make defending them a priority. The good news is we have formidable built-in legal protection.


----------



## Used To Be BH

TwistedTales said:


> The reason I'm hidden as an author is thanks to other author's predisposition toward one-star drivebys (you know how it goes in this game).
> 
> On my other website I have posted thousands of pages of unique IP created by me and owned by my company. Given that this was how my company made money you would think that was counter-intuitive, but there's a huge gap between reading something and knowing how to apply it. This point is never lost on my clients.
> 
> I also developed customized courses for well known universities (free of charge) and spent seven years delivering them as a guest lecturer (I was asked to do it this year, but I've decided to quit). Again, why would I bother?
> 
> I'm not judging anyone for their choices, but I genuinely believe in sharing knowledge, so much so that I made vast swathes of it available on the web. That information has been used by companies and students all over the world. It did not harm my brand.
> 
> So, I thought this through over a decade ago and concluded better to teach and inspire than to hoard. It's my philosophy and one I have stood by for decades. Do not judge me by my decision as an author because you don't know why I have chosen anonymity on this site, but I still share my findings and opinions even here.


Your generosity with your intellectual property is commendable. I will point out, though, that there is a big difference between sharing voluntarily and having someone else decide to share for you. There is also a big difference between piracy and a corporate rights grab. We all agree piracy is probably not worth pursuing most of the time. As Julie points out, though, if you did decide to pursue it, you'd have a legal leg to stand on. If you consent to a rights-grabby TOS, you may not. At least, it won't be as easy. That's the crux of the argument.

When this started, I thought at first that the new TOS was just standard boilerplate. Thanks to Julie and others for pointing out the very serious deviations. Then I thought VS would make some effort to address those concerns. Instead of doing that, they just poured gasoline on the fire. It's possible that VS doesn't really understand the situation, and why a forum for writers might be different from a forum for auto enthusiasts--but that's not exactly a reason to stick around, either.

Then VS made it more difficult to leave. If I were a company facing that much dissension, I would let the unhappy people go--and, if I truly didn't have any sinister designs on their intellectual property, I would let them delete their whole accounts. Anyway, I followed their protocol and got no response so far, yet another indication of either ineptitude or bad faith. Any reasonable management strategy would either have addressed the identified issues or let the discontented people go without making it a big struggle. VS has done neither. That's not a good omen for the future.

To paraphrase that famous line from _Thor: Ragnarok_, "Kboards is not a place. It's a people." I wish the best for anyone who stays, but even if the whole thing falls apart--and it wouldn't apparently be the first time something like this has happened--there are other places you can be. The people are what made Kboards what it was, and they aren't going to vanish from the face of the earth.


----------



## 97251

TwistedTales said:


> *In the end, everyone agreed there is no way to win over anyone who didn't want to be sold. *I can't speak to Helena's reasoning, but I sort of understand why she was blunt.


That's very unfair. Users here didn't complain about the sale, or about VS. Some mentioned that the company had a reputation for ruining forums (you can Google it), but that was all.

Complaints started with the weird links and ads. Some links were removed and people were OK. Nasty adds continued being displayed to guests and apparently most people were also fine with that. That's a huge degree of tolerance.

When the new TOS was brought to light, people's reactions was not to say: "Oh, this monster company! They're horrible!". No. The issues with the wording of the TOS were brought up, a lot of people, in good faith, emailed the company or pmd the admin, and the idea was to find a resolution. People only started worrying when the company didn't reply. When they forbid the mods from deleting account, it was clear that they weren't interested in a resolution or in respecting our free will and our rights to protect our information.

Finally, Helena came. She clearly stated that the company needed the TOS in order to be able to post our content elsewhere (such as in newsletters, in her example), and, like you, accused us of being angry because our beloved forum was sold. She also implied we're ignorant and are making false assumptions of legal terms, and that we should have checked with lawyers. When informed that many authors did check with lawyers, her response was a veiled threat.

Anyways, it's fine for you or anyone to accept this, and to be willing to subject yourself to this. To each their own. But to claim that the issue was that people here didn't want to be bought is to ignore the gigantic amount of goodwill shown in the first pages of this thread, for example. It's unfair to Kboard users, and a very unfair assessment of Helena's attitudes.

Again, you want to stay, you think everything is dandy, cool. But please don't twist what happened here.


----------



## 97251

Used To Be BH said:


> Then VS made it more difficult to leave. If I were a company facing that much dissension, I would let the unhappy people go--and, i*f I truly didn't have any sinister designs on their intellectual property, I would let them delete their whole accounts.* Anyway, I followed their protocol and got no response so far, yet another indication of either ineptitude or bad faith. Any reasonable management strategy would either have addressed the identified issues or let the discontented people go without making it a big struggle. VS has done neither. That's not a good omen for the future.


Yeah, I think at this point any assumption that it's just a poorly worded Terms of Service or that users are being unfair towards VS is beyond naive.

Further, many people here could have perhaps had their posts deleted much earlier if it weren't for the goodwill and desire to dialogue with VerticalScope.


----------



## Chad Winters

Honestly I can see the problem on their side with post deletion. I like Kboards, its function to me as a member goes down a lot if the 10 years of threads and conversations I have been involved suddenly make no sense because half the posts have been redacted. It would essentially make the site unusable and illegible.


----------



## 98700

Chad Winters said:


> Honestly I can see the problem on their side with post deletion. I like Kboards, its function to me as a member goes down a lot if the 10 years of threads and conversations I have been involved suddenly make no sense because half the posts have been redacted. It would essentially make the site unusable and illegible.


That's a feature, not a bug.

I mean, their perspective is pretty obvious. They believe that by buying the forum, they bought our posts (i.e. our IP)--if not the copyright, then at least a perpetual and unlimited license to use it--and therefore have a right to it. The posts are, after all, what give the forum any value. Therefore of course they want to protect their investment by not allowing us (the ones who actually own the IP, along with our personal data) to remove our property from their possession. It's a bit like a bank not letting people take money out of their own accounts.

The issue is not that we don't see their side of it. The issue is that we argue that they have no right to what they're trying to protect because, despite what they think, it doesn't belong to them but to us.

(And yes, they're not stopping us from deleting/modifying posts--yet. But refusing to allow the mods to do it en masse at our request shows where their thinking lies, and unless their lawyers tell them they legally can't stop us from modifying/deleting posts, I believe they will remove that function at some point.)


----------



## Dpock

Chad Winters said:


> Honestly I can see the problem on their side with post deletion. I like Kboards, its function to me as a member goes down a lot if the 10 years of threads and conversations I have been involved suddenly make no sense because half the posts have been redacted. It would essentially make the site unusable and illegible.


They're not worried about the forum's usefulness to members. They want to the posts (content) to remain to seed Google and bring in eyeballs to register impressions and clicks for their advertisers.

The usefulness of old posts is another matter. Six months is a long time in self-publishing. Advice becomes dated very quickly, and what was a good tip a year ago could be bad advice today (billionaires are hot! Bonus stuffing is okay!).


----------



## Used To Be BH

splish splash said:


> I mean, their perspective is pretty obvious. *They believe that by buying the forum, they bought our posts (i.e. our IP)* [emphasis mine]--if not the copyright, then at least a perpetual and unlimited license to use it--and therefore have a right to it. The posts are, after all, what give the forum any value. Therefore of course they want to protect their investment by not allowing us (the ones who actually own the IP, along with our personal data) to remove our property from their possession. It's a bit like a bank not letting people take money out of their own accounts.
> 
> The issue is not that we don't see their side of it. The issue is that we argue that they have no right to what they're trying to protect because, despite what they think, it doesn't belong to them but to us.
> 
> (And yes, they're not stopping us from deleting/modifying posts--yet. But refusing to allow the mods to do it en masse at our request shows where their thinking lies, and unless their lawyers tell them they legally can't stop us from modifying/deleting posts, I believe they will remove that function at some point.)


Except that, as I pointed out in one of my earlier posts, they couldn't have bought our IP because it wasn't the previous owner's to sell. If you check out the old TOS, the forum claimed license to it only as long as it was on the site, and then only under the doctrine of fair use--far from the expansive license VS now claims. However they try to modify the TOS, the fact remains that they couldn't have bought something that wasn't available at the time of sale. Nor can they claim we somehow agreed to the new TOS and claim rights that way, because, from what I've read, neither a Canadian nor an American court is likely to rule in their favor on the issue of whether or not a browsewrap agreement is valid if people aren't notified of it.

I'm sure you're right about their perspective, but I think it's not a perspective founded in the law.


----------



## 99896

I wouldn't hold out much hope for the tape deck, though. Or the Creedence.


----------



## Blocked Writer

I guess it could be worse. I was talking to my brother about this, and look what he had to sign to send his girls to camp:

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/create/release_to_use_image.pdf?lang=eng

It's two paragraphs of oh-my-god-i-would-never-sign-it stuff!


----------



## Pacman

Blocked Writer said:


> I guess it could be worse. I was talking to my brother about this, and look what he had to sign to send his girls to camp:
> 
> https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/create/release_to_use_image.pdf?lang=eng
> 
> It's two paragraphs of oh-my-god-i-would-never-sign-it stuff!


OMG!


----------



## 75814

Blocked Writer said:


> I guess it could be worse. I was talking to my brother about this, and look what he had to sign to send his girls to camp:
> 
> https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/create/release_to_use_image.pdf?lang=eng
> 
> It's two paragraphs of oh-my-god-i-would-never-sign-it stuff!


[email protected]#$%...

Please tell me your brother didn't sign this crap.


----------



## Kathy Dee

Blocked Writer said:


> I guess it could be worse. I was talking to my brother about this, and look what he had to sign to send his girls to camp:
> 
> https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/create/release_to_use_image.pdf?lang=eng
> 
> It's two paragraphs of oh-my-god-i-would-never-sign-it stuff!


Gulp! Are they owned by VS too?


----------



## Doglover

Atlantisatheart said:


> What about the spam at our email addresses (only used to sign up here) from such wonderful places as s-e-x sites, US mortgage lenders (I'm in the UK) phishing scams (Your order is ready - you're order can't be sent because your payment has failed, etc) Hi, I'm Candy and I want to suck... ? You see where I'm going with this? Not ******* cool.


Is this why I've suddenly been getting loads of filth spam all of a sudden?


----------



## Trioxin 245

TwistedTales said:


> @thedudeminds
> 
> I get it. *You're angry *and offended by VS, but *don't tell me how I should think or feel*.


The irony is strong with you young padiwan.


----------



## Trioxin 245

TwistedTales said:


> You can be as rude to me as you like, I don't know you so I don't care, but it's about time different views were allowed on this thread. Just because I have a different view doesn't mean you can't have yours as well.
> 
> Now, you have yourself a nice day or night, but I don't need to engage with you either. It's a waste of my time.


I read through the numerous post above and I realize every single person has come after you. I mean they have offered their opinion which was different than yours, but we really know that your the victim in all of this. It truly saddens me on this grand conspiracy of everyone that *doesn't agree with you is simply rude. How dare they!*. Fear not, I will not take part in replying to you anymore for fear that your emotions are fragile enough at this point and time and I do not want to contribute to hurting them anymore.
So I publicly apologize for having a different opinion than you and pointing out your flawed logic earlier. It was not my intention to hurt you and if I had a comfort blanket to offer you as a sign of peace I would.
In due time I hope that you find the strength to move on and that you story of persecution is strength and hope for others who are told things they do not like.

May you live in interesting times!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

Let's stop making personal comments about each other.  You're derailing the thread.

Let's take it as a given that people can have different reactions to what has happened.

Move on.  If anyone wants to know how to use the ignore feature, just ask.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## NoLongerPosting

Over the years, we've garnered advice from the top names in indie publishing on this site. Pure gold. Irreparably tarnished now for me. 

It took me a few hours, but since I only had 20+ pages of posts to "modify," it wasn't bad. Then, of course, I had to strip my name and all of my books. 

To be honest, I'd been missing the days anyway when WC posters were real, verifiable people. Just for the record, I consider endless hyperbole from anonymous posters (who could be Russian bots for all I know!) to be nothing more than noise.

So long! And thanks for all the fish!


----------



## AltMe

NoLongerPosting said:


> So long! And thanks for all the fish!


Ditto


----------



## Randall Wood

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> I'd like to point out that after many pages of abject chaos, not a single practicing attorney has stepped in to explain where I was wrong when I pointed out a copyright transfer requires a written instrument and a signature under U.S. law.
> 
> You know, it's not a mistake the word "authorize" is derived from the word "author." United States law is as clear as a bell on this matter, and any contract, web-based or otherwise, that purports to claim someone else's intellectual property in contravention of 17 U.S.C. 204 is not enforceable. Leaving aside our manuscripts and posts, there is also the Lanham Act.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act
> 
> --which is the primary law that governs trademarks in the U.S. Many of us have significant trademark protection even if we haven't yet registered our marks. We are also a signatory to the Berne Convention and so is Canada, so our copyrights are enforceable in over 100 nations.
> 
> Perhaps the new TOS is boilerplate language meant to protect the company's right to publish the forum itself. Perhaps not. But ultimately there is not only a list of statues but a body of case law that almost always leans in favor of rights holders for obvious reasons. Copyright, trademark, patent, trade dress, et al. were considered important enough by the framers to include in Congress' constitutional enumerated powers. This nation has taken intellectual property seriously ever since, and the results speak for themselves. The entire self-publishing industry was made possible by our well-established and well-protected two-centuries-old concept of copyright. It is one of several equalizing forces in this economy, and it is rather unlikely to be overturned by a unilateral change in the TOS on a web site.
> 
> All that said, I will leave the invitation open for the time being for any member of the Bar in any state to point out where my plain text readings of the statues above are flawed. In the meantime, I'll reserve judgment on whether I should look elsewhere for a writer's forum.


You aren't wrong, you just got beat to it by Passive Guy over at TPW. He wrote a long post saying the same thing in somewhat greater detail. The fact that you both agree just makes your point stronger.

The only thing I would say that you left out is the cost of litigation. A self-pub author doesn't have the funds to engage in a long civil suit againt a large corporation. That's what VS is counting on the most in my opinion. We can have the law on our side all day, but if it cost hundreds of thousands to use that law then its a moot point for most. So while the law may be on the side of the copyright holder the system is on the side of VS.

Best thing is to deny them the material. As Ann has said, overwrite everything. Detach yourself from the board. And for those who think Kboards will live on, you only need to visit a site that VS has already plundered to see the folly of that idea.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

NoLongerPosting said:


> So long! And thanks for all the fish!


I wondered when someone would say that!


----------



## 10105

Shane Lochlann Black said:


> I'd like to point out that after many pages of abject chaos, not a single practicing attorney has stepped in to explain where I was wrong when I pointed out a copyright transfer requires a written instrument and a signature under U.S. law.


Of course not. You are correct in that. But that's not what VS has claimed. They do not claim to have appropriated copyrights. They claim to be licensed to distribute copyrighted works. Two different things. So, your point is valid, but it is irrelevant.

Back into my spider hole...


----------



## nail file

Randall Wood said:


> And for those who think Kboards will live on, you only need to visit a site that VS has already plundered to see the folly of that idea.


This is the most chilling aspect of this entire situation. It's been discussed time and again in the several threads about it. Still people insist on defending VS, as if believing their assurances that 'nothing will change'.

Time will tell.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.

Since board ownership changed hands, the email address I used to sign up has been spammed with fishing emails and scummy advertisements. In addition, the forum is now packed with equally offensive ads within every thread. This place has become a sleezy spam trap. It is no longer a safe community.


_edited, PM if you have questions -- Ann_


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

This is becoming a guessing game of who the new changed names and avatars are/were


----------



## 54706

How in the heck do we get our accounts deleted and posts deleted? I'm not getting anywhere with my messages or emails.


----------



## AltMe

nobodyknows said:


> How in the heck do we get our accounts deleted and posts deleted? I'm not getting anywhere with my messages or emails.


They have a 30 day window on the emails. I think they ignore PM's.
If you started a thread, you can get the mods to delete it. Especially if you gut it first.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot

Taking my troll a$$ outta here 'cause IDFWU said:


> Since board ownership changed hands, the email address I used to sign up has been spammed with fishing emails and scummy advertisements. In addition, the forum is now packed with equally offensive ads within every thread. This place has become a sleezy spam trap. It is no longer a safe community.


Same.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Moe D

I'm a Little Teapot said:


> Same.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


I cannot stress enough, if you think they are selling your email address, report them. As a Canadian company, they _*will*_ be investigated. Even if you aren't Canadian, it doesn't hurt to complain.

The Canadian government has already levied massive fines to repeat offenders.

Here is the link. http://fightspam.gc.ca/eic/site/030.nsf/eng/h_00017.html

Also, some interesting info here on email harvesting.

https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/privacy-laws-in-canada/the-personal-information-protection-and-electronic-documents-act-pipeda/r_o_p/canadas-anti-spam-legislation/casl-compliance-help-for-businesses/casl_guide/


----------



## TromboneAl

To help me understand the new-TOS issue, could someone describe a worst-case scenario in which the owners of this forum might use the information that the new TOS gives them a right to?


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Generally not posting here because doing so will support VerticalScope, but the worst case will depend on the person whose content is being (mis)used. What is terrible for one person might be trivial to another. The point is not the specific cases, the point is the loss of control that leads to such cases at all.

I acknowledge that VerticalScope may have rights to this reply but I deny that they have retroactive rights to content posted here by me before they bought KBoards.


----------



## Secret Pen Pal

Has VerticalScope responded in any way to the TOS issues?

Again, for the record, I don't consent to the rights-grabbing TOS.


----------



## Becca Mills

Secret Pen Pal said:


> Has VerticalScope responded in any way to the TOS issues?
> 
> Again, for the record, I don't consent to the rights-grabbing TOS.


There are a few responses in the long thread Lynn started about the TOS: https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,267677.0.html. They're from VS employees Helena and Philip.

We'll probably fold this thread into that larger one eventually -- leaving it out for a bit in hopes it get some more eyes.


----------



## time was

I don't understand the danger. As long as we don't post political statements, who cares if they quote us elsewhere. Plus, the moderators do a good job of keeping our discussions apolitical. Then as long as my titles and author name are on my covers, they can hardly sell them out from under me. Am I wrong in these assumptions?


----------



## Kathy Dee

time was said:


> I don't understand the danger. As long as we don't post political statements, who cares if they quote us elsewhere. Plus, the moderators do a good job of keeping our discussions apolitical. Then as long as my titles and author name are on my covers, they can hardly sell them out from under me. Am I wrong in these assumptions?


Your happy for them to 'own' the copyright to the images in your sig then?


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

I did wonder why I was getting an upsurge of spam/phishing emails and have been forwarding them to my service provider for investigation. Most of them were phishing, and some quite cleverly disguised  .


----------



## going going gone

you gave advice here in a particular context where it was clear you were being helpful and supportive. It gets re-posted in another forum in a way that offends someone you never even knew existed because they think it was you aiming an insult at them, which is seems to be from that context. They run around and one-star your books because you linked back to your website or otherwise identified yourself. That's the kind of thing VerticalScope can do to you.

What we posted here (and if we are smart removed from here) was meant for here, at that moment, in one particular discussion, to help other authors. It was not meant for someone five years from now in a different discussion at a different forum to make some disgusting greedy, sexist person whom we don't know or like richer. (and yes, advertising wives to buy is sexist.)


----------



## Jena H

Kathy Dee said:


> Your happy for them to 'own' the copyright to the images in your sig then?


I've only been following this issue very shallowly, since my brain doesn't always grasp intense details, but let me see if I get this right:

VS claims rights to 'own' and possibly 'use' anything that appears in this forum, including avatar images, user names, images in signature, and of course the content of the comments. Is that correct? If so, then, as unpalatable as that sounds (and it does), it also sounds as the VS person says: broad and encompassing and in the vein of CYA. How different is that to the TOS we all "agree" to with phone plans, or any other thing we join--including online forums.

A few years back I was very active on a particular online forum. I decided I wanted to publish my comments, so I contacted the forum admin and asked if they considered my comments their 'property,' and they assured me they did not, and that my comments were my own. I mention this because just because VS claims the 'right' to X or Y or Z, doesn't mean they'll actually exercise that right. So judicious use of this forum likely means no danger to anyone or any property (use of non-photo avatar and made-up username, remove covers from sig, etc.)

I know, I know, people say it's "the principle of the thing," and I'm a naive sheep, blah blah blah. So what.


----------



## Alice Doesn&#039;t Live Here Anymore

I was an infrequent anonymous poster lurker here. I hope to become an infrequent anonymous lurker at one or more of the other forums mentioned earlier in this thread, but I too am out of here. It's been real, folks.

Here's a piece of content that I don't own which VS can now claim license to. It sums up my mood about the changes being made to this forum. Lenny Bruce is not afraid.


----------



## Kenosha Kid

Dude, where's my forum?


----------



## 99896

TOS aside, why be part of something whose ownership treats community members this poorly? The only reason I'm still here is because my repeated requests to be deleted and have my content fully deleted have been ignored. 

I'm waiting here, tapping my foot like Sonic the Hedgehog, for them to finally follow through - and because I don't trust that they will follow through on my request (and why would anyone trust VS at this point?) - I have to wait around here and (hopefully) see it done.


----------



## Jena H

JRTomlin said:


> Even Facebook does not claim to own the rights to what we posted there; in fact the very specifically state that they do not. It is VERY different. No phone plan I know of claims to own the rights to what I say in phone calls. And how do you know they will not use the rights they have gone to some trouble to claim?* Your use of another forum which did NOT claim the rights to your posts as a defence of VS which DOES is rather peculiar* but if you feel that VS will never abuse your trust, that is your right. No one has brought name calling into the discussion except you.
> 
> My name and my rights are my living. They pay the mortgage. I do not just hand them over to anyone.
> 
> Just to make it clear, I am visiting this forum to continue removing the content of my posts. I do not give permission for their use.


Re the bolded part: I don't know what the old forum's TOS said. (Who can plow through six pages of legalese??) That's why I took the time to contact the administrator and simply ASK them what their policy was. And even if they _could_ claim "ownership" of what was typed on their forum, that doesn't mean they _would,_ and they could easily waive that right. My point is, how many times did Mom have to tell us: You never know until you ask a specific question?


----------



## 96158

My 2 emails to VerticalScope have been ignored, If I'm not released from this place soon, I'll make sure you kick me out.

I'll post about this shit in every thread, on every post, every day until I'm allowed to leave.

Don't believe me? Try me. 
Delete my account NOW.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Authoress,

While you are welcome to post this in threads that have to do with VerticalScope ToS, they will be removed as off topic in threads in which they are, indeed, off topic.

The moderating staff is not able to delete your account.  I recommend that you also PM vsAdmin about your account.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## 96158

My 2 emails to VerticalScope have been ignored, If I'm not released from this place soon, I'll make sure you kick me out.

I'll post about this shit in every thread, on every post, every day until I'm allowed to leave.

Don't believe me? Try me.
Delete my account NOW.
I asked to leave on the 18th Sept, I don't expect to be held here against my will.


----------



## writerlygal

GoneOverThere said:


> I've not received any spam at all. Stop visiting porn sites


Neither have I. And the banner ads that show up on Kboards for me show either cars or medications, relevant to what my live-in partner or I have Googled or sites we have visited. There are also ads for car insurance as well as for books & devices from Amazon, all of which I consider relevant to things we have gone looking for or might be interested in. I have never seen any of these ads for Ukrainian brides or smut that people complain about, although I honestly wouldn't care if I didm. [Not going to act holier than thou & say we never visit porn sites but due to our personal lives being heavily extrenched with our professional lives & family sharing our devices & bosses or employees or co workers easily seeing our screens or searches etc., we know to do that kind of browsing on our VPN that has a different IP address. Maybe if I visit Kboards from our VPN it will be full of ads for Ukrainian smut!?!? But I usually browse here on my phone - hence my shortcuts & typos - & my phone is connected to our regular house or office Wi-Fi's].


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Are you logged in when you visit?  Most of the people who have mentioned the ads are visiting without being logged in, maybe from work or on their phone, and they aren't planning on posting so they haven't logged in.

Betsy


----------



## Paranormal Kitty

writerlygal said:


> Neither have I. And the banner ads that show up on Kboards for me show either cars or medications, relevant to what my live-in partner or I have Googled or sites we have visited. There are also ads for car insurance as well as for books & devices from Amazon, all of which I consider relevant to things we have gone looking for or might be interested in. I have never seen any of these ads for Ukrainian brides or smut that people complain about, although I honestly wouldn't care if I didm. [Not going to act holier than thou & say we never visit porn sites but due to our personal lives being heavily extrenched with our professional lives & family sharing our devices & bosses or employees or co workers easily seeing our screens or searches etc., we know to do that kind of browsing on our VPN that has a different IP address. Maybe if I visit Kboards from our VPN it will be full of ads for Ukrainian smut!?!? But I usually browse here on my phone - hence my shortcuts & typos - & my phone is connected to our regular house or office Wi-Fi's].


I haven't seen any of those ads either. I'm pretty sure they're still targeted (at least if you're logged in) because half of mine are still in the other language I search in...pretty sure not everyone is getting those. Although I used to get ads for local business and haven't seen those in awhile. Now they're more generic like Clorox and Jeep.


----------



## Used To Be BH

I tried logging out and then browsing a day or so ago. I didn't see anything appalling, but there were definitely more ads, including in-thread ads (though now better labeled, so it's clear they aren't posts), and a large section at the bottom such as I've seen on many websites, in which several clickable images appear, together with article titles from other sites. I think that part's managed to Taboola, if I recall correctly.

I'm no fan of VS, as you know, but it looks as if there may be some effort being made to keep the ads above the caliber of Ukranian brides, even for people who aren't logged in.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Authoress,
> 
> While you are welcome to post this in threads that have to do with VerticalScope ToS, they will be removed as off topic in threads in which they are, indeed, off topic.
> 
> The moderating staff is not able to delete your account. I recommend that you also PM vsAdmin about your account.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Mod


That is what they told us to do. However, I'm noticing that they aren't exactly flying into action when they receive a PM. I haven't gotten even so much as a form response acknowledging that I submitted something. It's too early to tell, but My gut feeling is that this could be an "Ignore it, and it will go away," strategy. (I hope I'm wrong, though.)


----------



## Used To Be BH

I'd be the first to concede that a lot of things people are worrying about are unlikely. My question, however, continues to be the same: if VS doesn't intend to use our content in any of the ways we fear, then why not amend the TOS to explicitly rule any of those issues out? I would have been totally satisfied with a statement that their legal team was working on it, followed by an amended TOS in due course. Instead, we've gotten evasive responses, rude responses, and non-responses. If VS was trying to calm people down, it didn't do a very good job of it. Everything they've done has only made me more suspicious.


----------



## Guest

Why do we need a second thread on this when everything has already been said in the first thread?


----------



## 75814

I use the AdBlock Plus plugin for Chrome and it does a good job of blocking almost all the ads.


----------



## Becca Mills

I'll go ahead and merge.


----------



## klerner

Angry at being held hostage here said:


> I'll post about this [crap] in every thread, on every post, every day until I'm allowed to leave.
> 
> Don't believe me? Try me.


You realize if you're banned, your account isn't deleted, right? They'd likely just put you in a BANNED usergroup and you won't be able to post (and possibly will not be able to see the board unless logged out--I don't know how hardcare the banning system works here).

That'll also mean you won't be able to edit your past posts, or contact anyone by PM. So you'll have _less_ ability to control your content (even less than we already do).

Trying to get yourself banned gives you fewer options. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.


----------



## Lydniz

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Are you logged in when you visit? Most of the people who have mentioned the ads are visiting without being logged in, maybe from work or on their phone, and they aren't planning on posting so they haven't logged in.
> 
> Betsy


I was logged in and was regularly getting ads for Ukrainian wives and breast enlargement services - neither of which I am in need of, for the record.  I turned on the ad blocker and they stopped.


----------



## TromboneAl

Some thoughts:

The TOS terms are despicable and are a good reason to abandon the forum.
Changing the TOS without an announcement was worse.
The company was probably warned by a lawyer that death and destruction would follow if they didn't adopt those terms. IOW, VS may have accepted them reluctantly.
Saying, "They'll never enforce those rules" isn't a good reason to accept them.
Someone asked, "why should we tolerate this?" The answer: because this is a valuable forum.
Someone explained why it's difficult to get a new forum going (getting critical mass, etc.). Very true.
Perhaps a thread like the "In a post-Kboards World ..." thread could present members' research on different forums, followed by a poll thread in which we "vote" on a forum to move to. IOW, if members could move en masse to a particular new forum, perhaps the new home could work.


----------



## John Twipnook

My ads today (while not logged in). Somebody thinks I'm a dirty old man with health problems. Where'd they get that idea?


----------



## 91684

I have PM'd vsAdmin multiple times, I have emailed the privacy email at Vertical Scope multiple times - NO RESPONSE. I've requested account deletion and purge, and they are ignoring everything being sent to them.


----------



## John Twipnook

TwistedTales said:


> What are they trying to tell me?


I know right? At least you and I are not getting the erectile dysfunction ads. Not yet anyway. I'll take bunions any day.



TwistedTales said:


> Seems to me VS are reducing the number of ads whether you're logged in or not and the one advertizing brides are gone.


You think, maybe... they're listening to us?!! *ghasp*


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

This thread is specifically about the new KB ToS.

We also have a thread about other writers' forum (the "Post K-Boards" thread).

And the Writers' Sanctum has a vendor thread for actual feedback on the site or questions you have for the site owner.

Please visit those threads for those conversations.  I'm going to do some pruning....

EDIT:  And, while the ad thing is tangentially related, I think there's a thread for that, too....

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Aloha

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks,
> 
> This thread is specifically about the new KB ToS.
> 
> We also have a thread about other writers' forum (the "Post K-Boards" thread).
> 
> And the Writers' Sanctum has a vendor thread for actually feedback on the site or questions you have for the site owner.
> 
> Please visit those threads for those conversations. I'm going to do some pruning....
> 
> EDIT: And, while the ad thing is tangentially related, I think there's a thread for that, too....
> 
> Betsy
> KB Mod


Whoa, Betsy. There are more threads here than there are plotlines in a Shakespearean tragedy.


----------



## Kenosha Kid

John Twipnook said:


> My ads today (while not logged in). Somebody thinks I'm a dirty old man with health problems. Where'd they get that idea?


Talk about a low relevancy score. They do know this is a reader/writer forum, right?

Jesus...


----------



## Guest

I just received delivery confirmation from the Post Office regarding the formal letter I sent to their headquarters, so I have proof of delivery of my request to have my account deleted.


----------



## munboy

Sorry to keep the slightly off topic Ads discussion going, but I wanted to clear up how they actually work.

The type of ads you get doesn't matter if you're logged in or not. The sites you visit collect and place cookies on your browser that tell where you've been and what you're doing. Other websites collect those cookies (and the info they contain) and place ads based off what you've looked at (or scrolled through...more on this later). This crosses all platforms. For example, I'm not usually an ad clicker, but I saw an ad on instagram (on my phone) for a certain clothing company and clicked it. Lo and behold, while scrolling Facebook (on my laptop) later that day, I had ads from that clothing company jammed in my face.

Which brings me to getting stuff you never looked at. All it takes is for somebody on your Facebook (or other socials) to share a story about something and you just scroll past it, but the cookies will pick that up and remember it. That could be a reason you're seeing things that you don't have interest in. Also, there are default ads that will be placed if the ad server can't find relevant ads to place there.

Last point, most websites don't have anything to do with their ads. They just put in the code pointing to a third party that services up the ads. So, as abhorrent VS's business practices are, the ads aren't necessarily their fault...directly.

Also, ad blockers are beautiful things.


----------



## Guest

munboy said:


> Last point, most websites don't have anything to do with their ads. They just put in the code pointing to a third party that services up the ads. So, as abhorrent VS's business practices are, the ads aren't necessarily their fault...directly.


Actually, they are.

https://www.verticalscope.com/solutions/advertise-with-us.html

They sell advertising directly. This isn't a matter of them just being an ad affiliate for Google of vigilinks (though they also use those). They actually direct sell ads across their forums.


----------



## 75845

I've not been posting much for a long time as I have written nothing bookwise since November 2017. I also now work in a sensitive post that has already seen my delete all my social media accounts (except Google Plus which cannot be deleted AFAIK). I have not even been reading the forum due to work commitments and most of the threads being irrelevant to me now. The TOS change is disappointing and an automated notification similar to the GDPR notice would have been nice. The attitude shown by the new owners in this thread has been unhelpful, but the attacks on Harvey's family remind me why I periodically wanted to leave kboards because of the hatred that some members were happy to spew. I have expected that kboards would eventually disappear as a result of Harvey's untimely demise. Those who posted here do not have a right to determine what the site owners can do. A service was provided which you took advantage of, but you cannot enforce a demand that the site is maintained in the way you want just because you have posted often in the past.

I will be asking under GDPR for my account to be deleted, but it has nothing to do with the TOS, the hard-working moderators, or even those taking out their anger on the family that gave you this website. It is purely because of my new-found employment that requires me to be careful what appears online due to the nature of my employer's clients.

Goodbye from a former writer and kboards member since 2014.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Mercia McMahon said:


> I've not been posting much for a long time as I have written nothing bookwise since November 2017. I also now work in a sensitive post that has already seen my delete all my social media accounts (except Google Plus which cannot be deleted AFAIK). I have not even been reading the forum due to work commitments and most of the threads being irrelevant to me now. The TOS change is disappointing and an automated notification similar to the GDPR notice would have been nice. The attitude shown by the new owners in this thread has been unhelpful, but the attacks on Harvey's family remind me why I periodically wanted to leave kboards because of the hatred that some members were happy to spew. I have expected that kboards would eventually disappear as a result of Harvey's untimely demise. Those who posted here do not have a right to determine what the site owners can do. A service was provided which you took advantage of, but you cannot enforce a demand that the site is maintained in the way you want just because you have posted often in the past.
> 
> I will be asking under GDPR for my account to be deleted, but it has nothing to do with the TOS, the hard-working moderators, or even those taking out their anger on the family that gave you this website. It is purely because of my new-found employment that requires me to be careful what appears online due to the nature of my employer's clients.
> 
> Goodbye from a former writer and kboards member since 2014.


You will be missed.

Just for the record, no one is expecting a new owner to run things the same way the previous owners did. The issue is the unilateral change in TOS without notice or an opportunity to accept or reject the new TOS. And no, we can't dictate their TOS, either, but we should be able to withdraw if we are unwilling to accept it. The new owner could hold us to the old TOS (which makes none of the unusual rights grabs the new one contains), but has no right to hold us to the new one, to which we never consented.


----------



## georgette

Put me down as someone who does not agree with or consent to the new Kboards Overlords rights grabbing, or changing the original TOS that I agreed to when I created a membership.  I learned a lot from this site in the early days.  I'm now warning all of my writer friends off Kboards - I used to send a lot of people here.


----------



## 75814

TromboneAl said:


> Some thoughts:
> The company was probably warned by a lawyer that death and destruction would follow if they didn't adopt those terms. IOW, VS may have accepted them reluctantly.


I thought this was a possibility at first, but after doing some research on VS and the way they operate, I sincerely doubt it. They don't care about the forums, they're just buying user data and content for search results to push ads.



> Perhaps a thread like the "In a post-Kboards World ..." thread could present members' research on different forums, followed by a poll thread in which we "vote" on a forum to move to. IOW, if members could move en masse to a particular new forum, perhaps the new home could work.


You could try, but I'd recommend tamping down your expectations. You're not going to get a consensus on where people want to move to, if they want to move at all. I've already seen some people in private FB groups saying they just won't bother with forums anymore, while others have differing opinions on some of the alternatives for whatever reasons. Right now, the only real non-FB contender I've seen that has promise is probably Tim's writersanctum.com.


----------



## CynthiaClay

Regarding the new ToS, I do not agree to the new terms. I do not accept the new terms. Just as in letters and email, I own copyright to my writing. Unless the terms that require I relinquish my copyright to my posts and pm's are withdrawn, I will not be posting.


----------



## 67499

KB has been great and taught me a lot, for which I thank you all.  But I can't stay under the changed conditions.  Farewell and best wishes!


----------



## georgette

I'm right there with you, GTT.  I joined Writer Sanctum, I'll be checking on KBoards a few more times, I guess, but thanks to the new owners' changing of the TOS, I'm out.  And so are a lot of other good people. TERRIBLE move on their part.


----------



## Bella Breen

Any mod from writersanctum.com here?  I can't login to writersanctum. It's in a loop of login, your session expired so log in, I log in, your session expired so log in, etc.


----------



## Becca Mills

monamorabooks said:


> Any mod from writersanctum.com here? I can't login to writersanctum. It's in a loop of login, your session expired so log in, I log in, your session expired so log in, etc.


Here's the WS thread: https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,274043.0.html


----------



## 91831

I've requested, under the GDPR for my account to be deleted as I don't agree with the terms and there was no notification or opt-in acceptance of this.  SINCE I emailed them to have this removed, I've since got a tonne of spam, such as what others have reported since the takeover. I did not have this before.  I'm still waiting to hear and if I have not heard from them within 30 days I shall be reporting them to the ICO in the UK. 

They have no listing of their data controller (which they're supposed to) and I do believe that SINCE MY REQUEST TO DELETE MY INFORMATION they have passed on my details to those who are now spamming me (this is the ONLY website that I use that email on save for my own website!).  Again I will be adding this to my complaint when I contact the ICO.


----------



## NatPane

evdarcy said:


> I've requested, under the GDPR for my account to be deleted...SINCE I emailed them to have this removed, I've since got a tonne of spam, such as what others have reported since the takeover. I did not have this before.


I honestly sensed that would happen and held off from e-mailing them when I leaned that was the only way to delete my account. I decided to wait and hopefully get confirmation from writers on the new forum that their e-mail requests to delete their accounts were indeed being acknewledged. Smh. So they're not deleting our accounts. Instead they've decided to spite us with spam. What in the world is happening to Kboards?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

This thread is for discussion of the ToS.

There's a thread for the new forum--Becca posted the link earlier.  Please ask your questions there, PM the site owner.

I'm going to remove off topic posts here so as to not derail the conversation.

Betsy


----------



## 41419

Just posting here to note that VerticalScope has not responded to my formal GDPR takedown request or even acknowledged it. While VS does have 30 days to comply, they are supposed to reply and tell me who their nominated Data Controller is but haven't even done that.

Not exactly promising, especially given the earlier comments about GDPR from VS in this thread.


----------



## Nic

I've been absent from the forum for a while. 

So do I get this right: the forum was sold to one of the companies which skim off the cream for ads/publicity? Many writers left (how many)? Old posts are getting deleted? Alternatives have been founded (which and who is where)?

Personally I have no qualms of allowing the new owner to do what they will with my posts. Nic is not my real name and I don't work for Foyles. I haven't posted anything leading to me personally and have suffered the continued suspicion for refusing to "prove" myself. I knew why I kept my relative anonymity, I let out a couple of minor facts after all. But in the end I was being as cautious as I usually am on the net, except for when I am in an official role, such as with my business.

My main question at this point is where KB stands now as a writer forum. Will enough of the valued oldtimers stay to make it worth the while, or is the current exodus its death knell?


----------



## AisFor

evdarcy said:


> I've requested, under the GDPR for my account to be deleted as I don't agree with the terms and there was no notification or opt-in acceptance of this. SINCE I emailed them to have this removed, I've since got a tonne of spam, such as what others have reported since the takeover. I did not have this before. I'm still waiting to hear and if I have not heard from them within 30 days I shall be reporting them to the ICO in the UK.
> 
> They have no listing of their data controller (which they're supposed to) and I do believe that SINCE MY REQUEST TO DELETE MY INFORMATION they have passed on my details to those who are now spamming me (this is the ONLY website that I use that email on save for my own website!). Again I will be adding this to my complaint when I contact the ICO.


Following...


----------



## Jena H

Nic said:


> I've been absent from the forum for a while.
> 
> So do I get this right: the forum was sold to one of the companies which skim off the cream for ads/publicity? Many writers left (how many)? Old posts are getting deleted? Alternatives have been founded (which and who is where)?
> 
> Personally I have no qualms of allowing the new owner to do what they will with my posts. Nic is not my real name and I don't work for Foyles. I haven't posted anything leading to me personally and have suffered the continued suspicion for refusing to "prove" myself. I knew why I kept my relative anonymity, I let out a couple of minor facts after all. But in the end I was being as cautious as I usually am on the net, except for when I am in an official role, such as with my business.
> 
> My main question at this point is where KB stands now as a writer forum. Will enough of the valued oldtimers stay to make it worth the while, or is the current exodus its death knell?


To clarify, "old posts are getting deleted," yes, but as far as I know, they're being deleted by the forum members themselves. Many people went through and either have (or want/ed to) gone back through history and deleted their own posts. Imagine how time-consuming that could be!!!

Like you, nothing on this forum suggests or can lead to my identity (except the state that I live in). I do realize that if I've posted in in Book Bazaar, someone could look at the links to my books, but.... eh. I could go back and delete those posts, but, honestly, I don't know what good that info would do them.

As for your last question, I don't know how many "old timers" are still here. Many may simply be lurking at this point. I think the panic and wholesale "cutting off nose to spite the face" actions were a bit extreme, but who am I to say. Their life, their right. There IS a new forum, which apparently had some initial bugs, not sure how it's operating at this point. Many of the WC "regulars" seemed to have made a presence there.


----------



## Nic

Jena H said:


> To clarify, "old posts are getting deleted," yes, but as far as I know, they're being deleted by the forum members themselves. Many people went through and either have (or want/ed to) gone back through history and deleted their own posts. Imagine how time-consuming that could be!!!
> ....


Thank you! I guess I will wait and see. A pity if this concentrated well of knowledge would be gone.


----------



## writerlygal

I think much of this sky is falling stuff was over hyped. I've noticed that many of the people claiming they're done w/ Kboards for good have come back to post. Even some of the big names who threw big fits are here posting under new names. So to me it all seems like a whole lotta hoopla about nothing & a big waste of time. Maybe Kboards is just too hard to quit.


----------



## PhoenixFromTheAshes

The ads look to have been fairly well cleaned up. Still some dodgy vanity presses coming through, but I don't know how any company can filter those except on a per-ad basis. I do have deep concerns about VerticalScope, in general, and am waiting to see how the GDPR requests play out. 

My main personal beef with them, though, is the covert rights (licensing) grab of content, and the outright ownership rights grab of ads. I do not grant them permission for the over-reaching rights grab to any of the content I've posted here prior to being made aware of the new terms. I'm continuing to selectively overwrite posts that are not scam-related that I want to ensure remain out of VS's over-reach (and yes, it's time-consuming).

As a compromise, I made a clean break with the content I don't want under VS's control. As my new name, I am posting here with the acceptance of the new terms. But I will always be aware of what I'm posting, and will make decisions on what I post based on the filter of the TOS. So while you'll see very little in the way of marketing data from me going forward, I'll continue to post about scammy behavior and maybe answer a few newbie-type questions while I'm browsing here. My hope is that the Amazon reps who read this board in the past will also continue to frequent this board. Much of what I have to say here, I suspect, will be directed toward them, in particular.


----------



## Lydniz

I don't post much anywhere any more, but I do like to keep up with the news, and now I'm having to lurk in two places to get it instead of one. Bah. 

It is a pity that activity has slowed down so much here, as there are some very valuable threads on KB - plus it looks like a lot of the nefarious stuff is starting up again (banned publishers slipping in through the back door, and new developments in the Hamilton case), and I think it's in everyone's interest to discuss that publicly rather than on a non-indexable site like the new one.


----------



## writerlygal

I stick to what I said in the beginning. If someone doesn't like the TOS of a free forum they can pay for a payroll one or start their own.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy_


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks, bothered by the ToS, not bothered by the ToS, staying, going.  Let's accept everyone's right to make their own choices and keep it civil.  No need to deride either side.  Make a civil case for your point of view, thanks.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## 69959

writerlygal said:


> I think much of this sky is falling stuff was over hyped. I've noticed that many of the people claiming they're done w/ Kboards for good have come back to post. Even some of the big names who threw big fits are here posting under new names. So to me it all seems like a whole lotta hoopla about nothing & a big waste of time. Maybe Kboards is just too hard to quit.


Personally, I check in to see if VS has honored my demand to delete my account. [Cue hysterical laughter.]


----------



## writerlygal

OilyWriter said:


> Personally, I check in to see if VS has honored my demand to delete my account. [Cue hysterical laughter.]


Yeah sadly I think you'll be checking in forever at that rate.


----------



## P.A. Woodburn

I've been out of it for while and didn't know the forum was sold --sad. Then this last couple of days I noticed the number of forums written per day were a lot fewer than in the past. I'm not too worried about the new owners making money out of me because I certainly am not. Problem is we have lost a lot of people or no longer recognize those people because of ID changes etc. 


I truly miss those I have met on this site and know more and more will vanish if they move to different new sites. I'm not particulary happy with Facebook at the minute and haven't looked at Goodreads in years. Spell check is not working.


I guess I'm just mourning what once was. I also think the quality has dropped in the short time that I've been back probably because many of the stronger writers have left.


----------



## Vidya

PA, many writers have now moved to here:

https://writersanctum.com/

Join us there! it's very active.


----------



## 41419

21 days ago I filed a GDPR Erasure Request with VerticalScope. Yesterday I received the first response to that message. As you can see, Vertical Scope are interpreting GDPR in such a way as to keep as much of my content as possible on the site and have not agreed to my request to delete all my posts.



> We are writing to confirm that we have reviewed your GDPR request to delete your kboards.com account and remove your personal data from www.kboards.com.
> 
> When GDPR applies and the conditions relating to the right of erasure under GDPR are satisfied, we are required to remove personal data about you -- in other words, information from which you can be identified and relates to you. As GDPR sets out, it may be possible to identify you from your name, username/online identifier, and other information about you. We are not required, however, to remove or redact posts that contain information from which, on a stand-alone basis or if combined with other information, you cannot be identified. Your profile data and posts (if applicable) have been anonymized on this basis. If there is other information that you believe could identify you on the basis specified above, please specifically identify the applicable posts or messages by including the post date, time, number, the url linking to the applicable post, and the reason why you believe this information could identify you.


Aside from the fact that I strongly contest their interpretation of GDPR above, and will be filing an official complaint with my data protection agency and seeking that Vertical Scope be sanctioned, and forced to comply with my request, VerticalScope has also completely ignored other parts of my GDPR Request - including, but not limited to, identifying their official Data Controller, informing me all the third parties with whom they have shared data, and passing on my erasure request to all of those third parties.

Furthermore, VerticalScope hasn't even carried out the limited acts that it said it would in this response - as you can see my account is still active, and my posts have not been deleted or modified in any way, and I'm still identifiable from them. VerticalScope did not respond to my email pointing this out, sent immediately on receipt of theirs.

VerticalScope has 9 days to comply.


----------



## 41419

GoneOverThere said:


> Whilst you might not like this, it seems to me that their interpretation of the GDPR is fair.
> 
> In the end, they are saying they will remove what they can and anonymise what is left.


Their interpretation of GDPR is that I'm required to provide URLs to all instances of personally identifying data that I would like to have removed.

This is most certainly inaccurate.


----------



## 41419

I've no interest in debating this with you. I'm no longer part of this forum, I'm only posting in this specific thread for a specific reason: to keep members up to date with attempts to have my GDPR request acceded to and my content deleted.


----------



## ET

dgaughran said:


> I've no interest in debating this with you. I'm no longer part of this forum, I'm only posting in this specific thread for a specific reason: to keep members up to date with attempts to have my GDPR request acceded to and my content deleted.


David, I've found your posts on Amazon issues useful, so I'm by no means an opponent. (On the contrary, I admire the work you do.)

I think one thing should be pointed out, though: The GDPR is an _EU regulation_. K-Boards is owned by a US entity and (I would guess) it's hosted in the U.S. Therefore, GDPR isn't relevant here.

_Two sentences of political commentary have been removed. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Blocked Writer

I'm not a lawyer, but... 

Has it actually been established by precedent that the EU can enforce punitive measures against non-EU entities? It's one thing for the EU to say that anyone storing EU residents' data is subject to the GDPR; it's altogether another to enforce it. If a "guilty" entity resides completely outside of the EU, then I assume they'd need the cooperation of some non-EU government to enforce punitive measures. Has that actually happened yet?


----------



## Becca Mills

Folks, we don't do political commentary here, so negative remarks about the EU (or any nation, bloc, or pact) are not welcome.

Discussing the GDPR's content and application in a factual way is fine.

ETA: I've removed a post. "Brexit, yea or nay?" is a subject for elsewhere.


----------



## estelle

GoneOverThere said:


> Whilst you might not like this, it seems to me that their interpretation of the GDPR is fair.
> 
> In the end, they are saying they will remove what they can and anonymise what is left.


I'm not sure I understand why they can't just delete David's account and all his posts like he requested? Mods used to be able to do that with a click of a button until VS removed that ability from them.


----------



## estelle

GoneOverThere said:


> This is the point - you don't understand.
> 
> Threads are files. These files are linked to hundreds of users, thousands even. When you attempt to remove aspects of those files you create dis-associative elements that are tied to those posts. When you do that the file itself begins to unravel because the tags that link one post to another become unattached. When that happens you end up with a corrupt file. When this happens in successive files you end up with corrupt sections. These sections then corrupt whole segments of a forum making it unreachable by enquiry because the tags that held that file have been deleted.
> 
> You cannot just DELETE everything. There are people whose posts in response to another's depend on that link being maintained. (quotes) if the original filed goes - so does the quote. The ramifications for a massive database over decades are enormous. You cannot JUST delete someone's files and presence without major disruption to the forum. It simply is impossible and nonviable.


I'm not disputing what you're saying but they should have thought of that before they went ahead and alienated a bunch of members.

Also, can't people just can go in and delete their own posts? I know I did and no quotes were affected. Or is that different and it doesn't affect the original file?


----------



## Blocked Writer

GoneOverThere said:


> the EU can and WILL enforce anything it wants. It's by no means a small fish when it comes to internet infrastructure and has successfully forced Microsoft and Google (amongst others) to cough up fines for misdemeanours to the tunes of many of millions of euros.
> 
> What people don't appear to realise is that any website that even shows on an individual's computer in the EU makes it subject to their rules. Many years ago Microsoft attempted to thwart the European countries on this and in the end had to release their SOURCE CODE for Windows to ameliorate punitive action.
> 
> In these days of global enterprise, there are equally global responsibilities that, if necessary, will be forced upon the wayward company that puts up two fingers to the power of the institutions that govern. So, when you 'assume' that you're out of their reach, you may be until you create a website or a social media presence that crosses those borders. Then you're subject to their rules.


Microsoft and Google obviously conduct massive operations in the EU. If a company has no operational presence in the EU, no bank accounts in the EU, sells nothing in the EU, etc ... in fact, maybe a better summary would be to say their only presence in the EU is that some EU resident interacts with their website ... how does the EU enforce punitive action without the complicity of the government in which the company resides? Has *that* actually happened?

How about if I set up Blocked Writer's Writers' Forum, and I fail to comply with GDPR. I don't live in the EU. I don't transact business in the EU. I don't bank in the EU. I don't own anything in the EU. How does the EU enforce any punitive action against me?


----------



## Blocked Writer

GoneOverThere said:


> They don't get to you. They get to the ISP and hosting organisation and have you shut down. If the hosting company resists they force compliance on them. This isn't the free world that you think it is. You should do some research into the power of the Economic Bloc, then take a look at China. It should give you some eye-popping examples. If you're too small to paint the backside of a gnat, they'll just ignore you. If you begin to have an influence, they will take notice. In the end they will win because they control the infrastructure.


That's a lot of hypothetical and theoretical conjecture. If I can split hairs, my question isn't "can it happen?" Or "will it happen?" My question is *has it happened yet*? Don't point me to Google and Microsoft. Point me to a small fry, mom-and-pop type whose home country extradited them to the EU, or in someway facilitated the EU's punishment of them. In fact, you mentioned China. Point me to a Chinese company--that only operates in China--that the Chinese government has allowed to be punished by the EU.

My point is that I think it's way too early to know what the long-term ramifications of this will be.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

To clarify: members can delete their own posts*. Moderators can delete members posts. We do that only if the post violates forum decorum in some way and generally only after discussion among the mod team.

*members can NOT delete a post that starts a thread. Moderators can, but we prefer not to do that unless there's a reason more than "I just don't want it there any more." If that's your reason, members can _modify_ their own posts INCLUDING posts that start a thread. It might make the rest of the thread nonsensical and is not good for the community/conversation, but it is your right.

Moderators USED TO be able to delete a person's account. We'd do this routinely when new members showed up to hawk essay writing services or 'how to fix your printer' sites. These were clearly spam and we'd remove the post and the count. We Can No Longer Do That. We CAN remove the offending post, and do, but we can NOT remove the account.

Moderators USED TO be able to delete a person's posts in one fell swoop without deleting their account. We can no longer do that either.

We can still ban members, but, while this will prevent you from posting, it doesn't affect posts already on the forum. We have, historically, only banned people for continued spamming OR egregious bad behavior. The number of bad behavior bans over the last 10+ years is probably less than a dozen.

*My personal opinion*: if a person no longer wants to be a member of a forum and would like their account deleted, the site should act on that request when made. I am NOT speaking to any REQUIREMENT to do so per any European/Global/Galaxian/Universal law. I just think it's a reasonable policy.

_edited to correct: Betsy tells me we've actually banned about 45 people over the years for bad behavior. With over 100,000 members registered since 2007, that's still a pretty small percentage. Banning is definitely a last resort._


----------



## writerlygal

I think if people don't agree to the new TOS they should just stop posting on this forum. I've read through all of this & I too feel the reaction is very overblown but I often feel that way about things people get upset about on this forum so I guess it's a place people come to rant & commiserate.  It seems to me like there is always something upsetting that people are complaining about & if they want to constructively help other authors or share what has worked for them etc., then several alternatives have already been provided & even new options have been made by former members. But I suppose the nature of forums & message boards is to share complaints & those threads are the ones that are the most active compared to people asking for advice or help or sharing positive news & encouragement, etc.

I highly doubt VS is going to make & sell a book out of our posts or somehow get our stories from PMs & publish them & make money off of them. If people have posts that are that valuable or stories that valuable that they have shared with others on here then I would advise them to use those words to make & sell their own books, whether 'how to be successful as an indie author' books or their own books of written work. Indeed, many people who have services or books have already done so & have advertised their services or books while posting here on Kboards, for free. They have said they help market or publish other authors' works & they have included links to their services, books, blogs, & made services threads, all for free. So I think that they should just look at it as all that free advertising over the years & if they no longer want that advertising b/c it comes at the cost of some TOS they don't like, then it is their right to stop posting & leave. 

I've also seen concern about the future hypothetical possibility of posts being shown alongside advertisements that the poster may not endorse. If this is a concern then I would say don't post on a message board you don't own & can't control b/c I can only assume that running a forum costs money or is a business endeavor to make money so the forum owners are going to advertise things. I suppose there are some places you can still post that are completely free w/ no advertising but those places are fewer & fewer between & most forums advertise & I feel the general public is aware that there are advertisements & that everyone posting on a forum doesn't get a say or vote in what ads are displayed so it would be silly to think that anyone posting on a forum is endorsing all the ads on that forum. Currently there is project management software ad above what I'm posting & I don't endorse it b/c I've never used it & in fact use a competitor software. But I don't think the fact that I'm posting this message means I endorse it & I don't think most people would assume that when they read my post and see an ad above it.

Idk, it just seems to me while reading this thread that there can be an entitled attitude of thinking that we have the right to post on free message boards & even advertise our books or services until the owners don't do what we want & then we blame everyone & anyone, from the new owners to the old owners to the mods to other posters, stomp out of here except to come back under different names or accounts & post when it still suits us, or come back & complain or point fingers etc. To me this is all just very unnecessary & makes no sense. But I would like to thank the mods for the hard work. My posts have been modified a lot & I really try not to make the mods do extra work by accidentally writing the wrong thing but I figure it's just b/c I say what's on my mind & get too blunt even after trying to tone down what I really think.


----------



## JRTomlin

I do not accept the Terms of Service which were instituted without notification. I do not consent to VerticalScope reproducing content I posted on this forum in any newsletter, website, or another forum. I've requested account deletion; however, the owners of this forum REFUSE to delete my content. Further, I repudiate any association with ads that are sexist, racist, and demeaning to women which are now appearing on this site.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

GoneOverThere said:


> Except as you later admitted they weren't being deleted just put into a deleted posts bin that 'apparently couldn't be deleted'.


Not exactly true.

It used to be posts deleted went to a recycle bin. They were held there in case the person deleting them wanted them back. BUT, we used to have access to that area and so could permanently delete them if we chose or if it was requested.

We no longer have access to that area. So at this point, if you delete something, there's nothing we can do to either help you recover it or assure you that it's really truly completely gone.

It is certainly not visible to the membership as a whole. We suspect it is still visible to someone with Administrator status, which, at this point, is only people who are paid employees of Verticle Scope. (This is also a change as Betsy used to have Administrator status; now she, Becca, and I are "Global Moderators" which is a lower level of access.)

Note: if you modify a post, so the post is still there but the content is gone, as far as we can tell, that's 100% non-recoverable by anyone. It effectively overwrites the info in the database.


----------



## Crayola

GoneOverThere said:


> This is the point - you don't understand.
> 
> Threads are files. These files are linked to hundreds of users, thousands even. When you attempt to remove aspects of those files you create dis-associative elements that are tied to those posts. When you do that the file itself begins to unravel because the tags that link one post to another become unattached. When that happens you end up with a corrupt file. When this happens in successive files you end up with corrupt sections. These sections then corrupt whole segments of a forum making it unreachable by enquiry because the tags that held that file have been deleted.
> 
> You cannot just DELETE everything. There are people whose posts in response to another's depend on that link being maintained. (quotes) if the original filed goes - so does the quote. The ramifications for a massive database over decades are enormous. You cannot JUST delete someone's files and presence without major disruption to the forum. It simply is impossible and nonviable.


They did it with me, it took them about five clicks. It's not impossible Tobias.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Crayola said:


> They did it with me, it took them about five clicks. It's not impossible Tobias.


Yes, there used to be a procedure that mods could access that allowed bulk deletion of a member's posts (removal to the recycle bin.) Although that, as GoneOverThere says, didn't remove quoted data from other people's posts. The forum handled it well, though removing, say, my account all at once I guess could cause stability issues. The sheer size of our forum database sometimes can cause issues due to the volume of scale. A tiny blip gets magnified.

We can't bulk delete or perm delete from the recycle bin any more. You got in under the wire, C.

Betsy


----------



## JRTomlin

Ann in Arlington said:


> Not exactly true.
> 
> It used to be posts deleted went to a recycle bin. They were held there in case the person deleting them wanted them back. BUT, we used to have access to that area and so could permanently delete them if we chose or if it was requested.
> 
> We no longer have access to that area. So at this point, if you delete something, there's nothing we can do to either help you recover it or assure you that it's really truly completely gone.
> 
> It is certainly not visible to the membership as a whole. We suspect it is still visible to someone with Administrator status, which, at this point, is only people who are paid employees of Verticle Scope. (This is also a change as Betsy used to have Administrator status; now she, Becca, and I are "Global Moderators" which is a lower level of access.)
> 
> Note: if you modify a post, so the post is still there but the content is gone, as far as we can tell, that's 100% non-recoverable by anyone. It effectively overwrites the info in the database.


Thanks for this, Ann.


----------



## SerenityEditing

Boy, I fade away for a few months and...


----------



## Popper

I thought I would point this out in case no one else has.

Anyone can put anything in a "legal agreement" (/contract) they want. That does not make it legal or enforceable.


----------



## vagabond.voyager

Popper said:


> I thought I would point this out in case no one else has.
> 
> Anyone can put anything in a "legal agreement" (/contract) they want. That does not make it legal or enforceable.


Definitely not when the terms were changed without notice after a person has joined the forum. It is almost laughable to suggest that in such a case the new terms would be supported in a court challenge. Copyright laws are not easily put aside or overturned.


----------



## Nate Hoffelder

while we are on the topic of this site, WTF is up with these adverts?


----------



## Guest

Popper said:


> I thought I would point this out in case no one else has.
> 
> Anyone can put anything in a "legal agreement" (/contract) they want. That does not make it legal or enforceable.


Many of us pointed this out at the time. However, people often jump on those swimming against the tide.


----------

