Re-used tornado video from 6/12/04

[nickgrillo]

I think it's easier for people who haven't driven tens of thousands of miles and haven't spent (tens of) thousands of dollars in pursuit of severe weather for many seasons to say that an apology can so easily be accepted for something like this. In this case, the guy didn't even do that -- but rather gave a public display of his no remorse for what he did.

Why not kick the crooks, thieves, and scam artists off the forum for good when they do stuff like stealing and misusing photos and videos?
Put a little more credibility back into the forum to show each other and the media we do not allow people to be a member when they commit these type of actions and crimes.
Suspensions and allowing them back at a later time does not help our positions.
We can then start maintaining and further build our contacts, credibility, and reputation.
I feel we would be much more able to get positive recognition from all involved if we are not known to allow these type people to stay or return to the forum.
A couple of bad people here hurts everyone of us and what the honest people here do.

That would be nice. But remember that these forums don't really cater to the people who have actually chased storms. Photo thieves who ripped off a dozen chasers so blatently can once again become more "reputable" [for people who perhaps haven't been here long enough to know the truth] on these forums as time passes it seems.

Wow, I'm getting into chase politics. Better stop... LOL

 

[David Wolfson]

As for still photography, it seems that a partial solution is stock video agencies who warrant and manage the copyright, and that provide a timely, efficient point of contact for both media and video suppliers. I don't see that niche being filled yet as much as it could be by a few enterprising, well-connected chase videographers.

As for the other issue.... I'd guess that most of us have done similar stupid things, or things that we're not proud of in our lives and benefit from some forgiveness and understanding! LOL

 

[Dennis Sherrod]

We're not going to get involved with forming tribunals to deal with issues that take place entirely outside the forum. This is solely a discussion forum meant to serve the severe weather community. If someone is walking around with a criminal conviction that reflects badly on our discussion board, that's one thing, but we're electing to refrain from getting involved and leaving it to members to deal with the situation individually. Tim

Tim. To some extent I understand what you are saying, but so-called allowing each person to deal with it individually does not solve, resolve, or correct the problem of allowing these criminal element type people here on the forum.
These people of ill repute are representative of the forum and the other chasers. Like it or not, we are judged by what others say and do. Some see through it, but a lot don't.
For example.. Look at what Doug spoke of several days ago..the media did not want to buy video footage because of this controversy. That is only the start of it. The media is rightfully and understandably leery now of picking up footage if they are unsure of the source and/or validity.
Looking at it from their viewpoint, I would be leery to purchase video or photographs from someone who is associated with a known photo thief and now a video scammer.
I do find it somewhat baffling that the forum administration and moderators will post infractions, suspend, and ban someone for saying the wrong things on a forum or for posting in the wrong thread.
I have seen no one person ask for or expect "tribunals" to deal with this issue. No-one I have seen is saying we should hold trials for these people. That is a legal issue and we are not into that here. I think myself and some others may want it resolved by the way of rule of the forum.
We have rules and guidelines to not curse each other out, verbally abuse each other, have flame wars, and don't get political or deal with religious issues,
but it is OK and acceptable to be a scam artist or thief and retain membership here on ST.
The people here do have NOT have any authority to deal with it individually here. We may voice our opinions, though mildly and very cautiously, so as not to get punished ourselves for speaking out in the wrong manner. Yet, we can not and do not obviously have any say-so if these people are allowed to remain here on these past and any future issues. If this is truly a member's forum, why not put it out to the members to vote on this issue? Since you and others do not have the time to monitor and read every PM vote that may come in, why not do it as a poll? Find a way for the majority of members voting to decide whether a serious violation such as photo theft or video scamming is grounds for termination from the forum. If voting agrees this should happen, then make the rule that will suspend (indefinitely) someone until enough information is in to make a final determination.
If the majority decides this is not a good idea, then so be it. I will stop my input into this issue and continue to deal with my current media sources as I have been doing. Then, hopefully others will be able to each deal and make their contacts while at the same time dealing with thieves and scammers being a part of this same forum we are.

I think we did have some discussion about creating a chaser organization a few years ago to help set some guidelines for integrity but it didn't go over very well and I believe there wasn't much volunteer effort available.
Tim

I do not know if this is the answer. It has been discussed extensively in the past and obviously failed, despite Mike's and other's valiant efforts to try something good.
Shane had some of the more logical interpretations of this in his posts.

 

[Billy Griffin]

Basically, if I'm reading you correctly Dennis, is that no matter what type of explanation a person gives for what happens, they INDIVIDUALLY are "guilty" until proven otherwise? Absolutely, in the 3-yr old photo incident, it was obvious that photos were taken off of ST posts, others' web pages, etc. and posted onto this individuals website, claiming to be of his/her own. Fact is though, the individual concerned in this dispute is NOT the one who did the deed, but still did and still does accept ownership, responsibility and has tried to make amends with numerous apologies.

This previous incident from three years ago some refer to, yes indeed, sadly it did happen. But perhaps you did not read all the facts presented once the individual discovered what the heck was going on with his/her website, took care of that issue privately, then offered an APOLOGY to those affected, along with an explanation as to how it happened... or perhaps you don't accept the explanation or the apology?

 

[Dennis Sherrod]

Basically, if I'm reading you correctly Dennis, is that no matter what type of explanation a person gives for what happens, they INDIVIDUALLY are "guilty" until proven otherwise? Absolutely, in the 3-yr old photo incident, it was obvious that photos were taken off of ST posts, others' web pages, etc. and posted onto this individuals website, claiming to be of his/her own. Fact is though, the individual concerned in this dispute is NOT the one who did the deed, but still did and still does accept ownership, responsibility and has tried to make amends with numerous apologies.

This previous incident from three years ago some refer to, yes indeed, sadly it did happen. But perhaps you did not read all the facts presented once the individual discovered what the heck was going on with his/her website, took care of that issue privately, then offered an APOLOGY to those affected, along with an explanation as to how it happened... or perhaps you don't accept the explanation or the apology?

Billy,
What it comes down to, is people have to be responsible and pay the price for their own actions and what is under their control. If someone used your website, well, that is between you and that person, yet, you as the owner of the site are the responsible person. If someone, employee, etc steals from a bank holding monies or documents, the bank is still responsible and must pay the price to the owner of the monies or documents. If we, as citizens, or members of a forum, generally allow excuses to be made for a theft or wrong doing, then nothing is done to enhance or make our position and goals better.
As an example, you spoke, posted, recently of a weird neighbor you had that was causing problems. You stated he did such and such that you did not agree with, and you no longer wanted him around anymore. You were concerned of the welfare of you and your family.
Well, using your same type reasoning, I can say I do not think thieves and scammers should be allowed to continue to be a part of somewhere (ie; this forum) that some of us use for our benefit, job security, training, credibility, and welfare of our family being fed and clothed.
Absolutely, each and everyone one of us make mistakes and these mistakes and errors can be forgiven. YET, each person is solely responsible for their own actions and what is under their control. People must pay the price for what they do wrong.
If we just allowed everybody to give an excuse and offer up an apology and then think everything should go back to the norm, then we have major problems. If that is so, then I should just be able to apologize every time I do or say something wrong and never pay a price.
There is no deterrent to doing wrong if using that philosophy. If people are forced to have to endure the consequences of their actions, then possibly they and others will learn not to act in such manners. The same as in criminal and civil laws.. there is punishment for someone's actions. If I went out and scammed someone or stole their photos and videos, I should be held responsible for my actions. I should not be allowed to just blame it on another employee or relative and say OOPS, I am sorry and expect everything to be good. I should be banned for life from this and any other weather related forum.
Frankly, I would be too embarrassed to ever show my face or post again if I was guilty of these type actions. I might post with an apology, but then I would be long gone on my own if I had not already been banned. I guarantee I would learn from my mistakes and see that I made a mistake and now I must pay the price and be gone for good as I know some people would always realize that I was a thieve or a scammer.
I think it is an absolute disgrace to this type of well known and mostly respected forum and the good, honest members to allow this to continue. I joined after "lurking" for a few years and I saw that maybe I could learn more from being here and possibly "occasionally" contributing something worthwhile.
Maybe this posting will have me earned with a suspension or ban. If so, so be it. I will realize even more that being politically correct here is more important than what is more ethically and morally correct.

 

[AlDanks]

As for still photography, it seems that a partial solution is stock video agencies who warrant and manage the copyright, and that provide a timely, efficient point of contact for both media and video suppliers. I don't see that niche being filled yet as much as it could be by a few enterprising, well-connected chase videographers.

As for the other issue.... I'd guess that most of us have done similar stupid things, or things that we're not proud of in our lives and benefit from some forgiveness and understanding! LOL

David is on the track of one possibility - a storm photography agency with a crew of trusted photographers. The photographers could contact news media through the agency to sell the photos. Might even be able to get better pricing.

I suppose another option would be to get bonded. It increases the expense, but would be an indication of trustworthiness.

 

[Greg Ansel]

Judging criteria

What would concern me with creating a membership revocation tribunal would be the criteria on which such revoking would be based on. As several of you know, I was roasted for some traffic violations while live streaming. Would I also be kicked off as a ST member for this infraction which possibly paints chasers in a bad light? And, if so, where would the line be drawn as to what is cause for removal, blocking a dirt road, driving too fast on the highway, etc? We need to be careful when treading this ground, as it might bite more people in the backside than first thought.

 

[Steve Miller]

Speaking of live streaming, has this been considered as an alternative to flashing timestamps, newspapers and otherwise as a way to sell your video? Live video is live video afterall. It's worked for me.

As for Greg's comments, I think driving outside the limit of what some consider appropriate is a lot different than throwing someone else's photos and/or videos on your website, to the AP, etc. and taking credit for them as your own. Or, in the case this thread is covering, re-hashing your own video and calling it something else. It reflects poorly on the chase community and should not be tolerated.

 

[Dennis Sherrod]

What would concern me with creating a membership revocation tribunal would be the criteria on which such revoking would be based on. As several of you know, I was roasted for some traffic violations while live streaming. Would I also be kicked off as a ST member for this infraction which possibly paints chasers in a bad light? And, if so, where would the line be drawn as to what is cause for removal, blocking a dirt road, driving too fast on the highway, etc? We need to be careful when treading this ground, as it might bite more people in the backside than first thought.

Greg,
It is true you got bashed pretty hard for driving errors. I take partial blame for this also as I have told you before.
But you broke no laws in the arena of theft, fraud, or unauthorized use is concerned.
To me what you are talking about, is way beyond the scope of what this thread is about which is the intentional theft, fraud, deception, and scamming.
I would agree that someone's driving habits have no place for disciplinary actions as in banning from a forum. If someone makes the bonehead maneuver and it is brought to attention, they could do exactly as you did, by being a man about it and admitted your mistake and move on. As the saying goes... If you don't like the way I drive, stay off the sidewalk.
This is totally different than being a thief and taking from someone else.

 

[Dennis Sherrod]

Speaking of live streaming, has this been considered as an alternative to flashing timestamps, newspapers and otherwise as a way to sell your video? Live video is live video afterall. It's worked for me.

As for Greg's comments, I think driving outside the limit of what some consider appropriate is a lot different than throwing someone else's photos and/or videos on your website, to the AP, etc. and taking credit for them as your own. Or, in the case this thread is covering, re-hashing your own video and calling it something else. It reflects poorly on the chase community and should not be tolerated.

Steve, your idea is right on the money. With the Live Streaming and Spotter Network, you have your live video as well as archived data to show the proof of when, where, etc. When you go through a service like Severe Studios and pay the monthly fee, you or the media can have the access to the data that is archived. That pretty much eliminates any doubt issues that may arise.

 

[Jim Saueressig]

I was roasted for some traffic violations while live streaming. Would I also be kicked off as a ST member for this infraction which possibly paints chasers in a bad light? And, if so, where would the line be drawn as to what is cause for removal, blocking a dirt road, driving too fast on the highway, etc? We need to be careful when treading this ground, as it might bite more people in the backside than first thought.

Poor judgment in driving during a chase is a far cry from being a thief who is stealing from others and or bringing shame on an entire community for self gratification and a few measly bucks by selling bogus or stolen video or photos.

You don't have to be a member here to steal photos from chasers though so banning from the forum might be pointless for anything but a anti character political statement.

 

[Martin North]

I dunno if anyones mentioned this (as I've scanned fairly fast through this)...

There clearly is a bird flying backwards in this. Quite damning imo.

 

[John Erwin]

I think I'll have to agree with Tim on this one; it really isn't his job to punish folks for their conduct off-forum.

I don't condone what this current person did; clearly the misrepresentation has damaged our reputation collectively and will take a long time (if ever) to repair. However, I think Greg voiced a very clear point. While his example was fairly mild, what if this was a different scenario? What if a chaser here was charged with DUI? How about if reckless driving resulted in injury or death? Some other crime or violation?

The copyright, video theft, misrepresentation issue is obviously a real hot button with many users here, especially since many of them also sell media of their own or have been victimized by this. Accordingly when a member here is involved in this area it's likely going to spell trouble.

Tim essentially said that each of us can handle this accordingly. For my part, I don't speak with people that have been involved in something I find distasteful/illegal or whatever, which would include the other scenarios I described above. For instance I personally ignore the other user here that was involved in copyright issues from the past. I doubt the current person would even show up here given the anger that would be directed at them; the person's account will expire and then the issue regarding membership here is finished. Now whether or not they decide to come back later is another matter.

I suggest since this is essentially Tim's board that we give him the lattitude to run it as he sees fit; so far I beleive he (and his team) have done a great job.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I dunno if anyones mentioned this (as I've scanned fairly fast through this)...<br />
<br />
There clearly is a bird flying backwards in this. Quite damning imo.

LOL, I mentioned it too, but took that comment down right after. If he reversed it yeah, it'd be flying backwards. I think he mirrored it though, so I think the bird is still going forwards, just the "other way". It looks strange whatever the case.

As for the burn the evil chasers thing, that gets pretty tiring. I don't see why it's worth being that concerned over(and I've had plenty of experience with "theft".

The over-concern on chaser image rapidly smells like stinky socks...to me anyway. One can't control everyone/anyone so it's best to just forget crap. If others view "you" badly because of something someone else did....oh well! Screw them then. If they don't have brain enough to realize the obvious...they aren't worth bothering with. If making money from chasing becomes so horribly troubling with all that, then screw it...don't sell crap. At least that is how I've viewed things. Letting it all bug you so much can ruin a person's initial HOBBY.

 

[Jim Saueressig]

lol, yeah the bird still flies forward but.... While looking for something else after converting it to avi and looking frame by frame I noticed that numerous frames were ripped from the picture which is a by product of speeding it up.... This causes the bird to jump forward or backwards on frames with no route of ever getting there.

You can also note the storm motions just look wrong.....

That video was so obviously edited in time compression even if nothing else is easily provable.