(10-08-2024, 10:08 AM)GethN7 Wrote:(10-08-2024, 07:44 AM)MilkmanConspiracy Wrote: Roger that:
On a completely unrelated note, I’m not really sure how If I had a handle on my interaction here on the thread for Th0mas9991. It’s a bit of an odd situation, and I don’t want to scare them off or be rude: my gut feeling from reviewing their edits is that they’re telling the truth.
I pinged everyone for their input, but given the recent issues with notifications, I figured it was good to mention it here just in case.
Caution is never inadvisable. If in doubt, give them a chance to explain themselves. If they refuse, keep the edits rejected. We'd rather be assured of no legal issues than be careless.
(10-08-2024, 10:08 AM)GethN7 Wrote:(10-08-2024, 07:44 AM)MilkmanConspiracy Wrote: Roger that:
On a completely unrelated note, I’m not really sure how If I had a handle on my interaction here on the thread for Th0mas9991. It’s a bit of an odd situation, and I don’t want to scare them off or be rude: my gut feeling from reviewing their edits is that they’re telling the truth.
I pinged everyone for their input, but given the recent issues with notifications, I figured it was good to mention it here just in case.
Caution is never inadvisable. If in doubt, give them a chance to explain themselves. If they refuse, keep the edits rejected. We'd rather be assured of no legal issues than be careless.
(10-08-2024, 10:08 AM)GethN7 Wrote:(10-08-2024, 07:44 AM)MilkmanConspiracy Wrote: Roger that:
On a completely unrelated note, I’m not really sure how If I had a handle on my interaction here on the thread for Th0mas9991. It’s a bit of an odd situation, and I don’t want to scare them off or be rude: my gut feeling from reviewing their edits is that they’re telling the truth.
I pinged everyone for their input, but given the recent issues with notifications, I figured it was good to mention it here just in case.
Caution is never inadvisable. If in doubt, give them a chance to explain themselves. If they refuse, keep the edits rejected. We'd rather be assured of no legal issues than be careless.
(10-08-2024, 10:08 AM)GethN7 Wrote:(10-08-2024, 07:44 AM)MilkmanConspiracy Wrote: Roger that:
On a completely unrelated note, I’m not really sure how If I had a handle on my interaction here on the thread for Th0mas9991. It’s a bit of an odd situation, and I don’t want to scare them off or be rude: my gut feeling from reviewing their edits is that they’re telling the truth.
I pinged everyone for their input, but given the recent issues with notifications, I figured it was good to mention it here just in case.
Caution is never inadvisable. If in doubt, give them a chance to explain themselves. If they refuse, keep the edits rejected. We'd rather be assured of no legal issues than be careless.
Sorry to necro this, but whenever I try to reply, I get hung up over potentially implying the wrong thing regarding what is and isn’t acceptable. (I understand it, but I’m failing to articulate it in a way that is both accurate and friendly.)
I just want to convey that their edits are OK to import, if attributed to themselves properly, containing no work of others who did not explicitly consent to their work being used under a different license, that there isn’t a need to rewrite it to appear different (But there is to use mediawiki syntax/different trope names), and any improvements over earlier versions are obviously welcome.
They requested a copy of their old edits, Is it ok to PM them that?
I've been a bit disoriented recently - I apologize for my hang up here.