Skip to Content
6-28-2009 @ 9:49PM
Hey, er... thanks for linking to SoL (this is Omacron from the website)... but... er, did you have to basically parrot our entire discussion on the subject in your article?Must be a slow news day.
6-28-2009 @ 10:19PM
The conversation in TB is something I'd mentioned in an as-yet unpublished Shifting Perspectives and within It Came From the Blog gchat yesterday afternoon. WoW.com writers have also had a discussion about it since a few of us managed to get on the PTR. I sent Dan the link to the Scrolls of Lore forums late last night after the writers talked about it (found it searching for the two new NPC's in question), just because I thought you guys had a really good thread going with some good points, but I can assure you that everything he's written about here is something he'd talked about before I thought to send him the Scrolls thread.I'm sorry you find this offensive, Omacron. I won't link Scrolls of Lore again if this causes issues; I just thought it would be good attention to a great forum community containing a relevant thread.
6-28-2009 @ 11:08PM
Eh. SoL has a rampant bot problem and most of the people, including me at times, just don't suffer newbs very well. It's fine that you link us, I suppose, just try to add something more to the lore theories than reiterating what we have already said. Surely you must have your own opinions, no?
6-28-2009 @ 11:25PM
"It's fine that you link us, I suppose ... " (emphasis mine)Is this your first day on the Interwebs or something? Linking is what people do, especially when they think something on the other end of the link is interesting and they want other people to read it. It's actually considered to be a bit of a compliment.
6-28-2009 @ 11:27PM
WoW.com ate my fancy emphatic italics!
6-28-2009 @ 11:53PM
"Eh. SoL has a rampant bot problem and most of the people, including me at times, just don't suffer newbs very well. It's fine that you link us, I suppose, just try to add something more to the lore theories than reiterating what we have already said. Surely you must have your own opinions, no?"The majority of Dan's article was drafted before I ever sent him the link to the Scrolls thread, so I don't know what to tell you. I don't find it a big stretch that reasonable commenters on different sites can reach the same or similar conclusions from the same bit of ingame lore. I just thought, "Hey, neat thread, and WoW.com has lots of lore junkies who'd love to see it."To be frank, I don't believe anyone is obligated to get your permission to link Scrolls if your forums are publicly available, but I understand that you are not necessarily comfortable with this (btw, you may also be able to solve some of your bot problem by going private). I'll try to make sure we don't link Scrolls again.
6-29-2009 @ 1:21AM
This is totally ridiculous. I'll make sure to avoid SoL in the future.
6-29-2009 @ 1:41AM
What exactly are you so upset about? News reporting is always about condensing events into digestible form. It's not much of a news post to just say, "here's a link to , go read it."
6-29-2009 @ 3:02AM
I read the conversation from the link before I read the article.From the conversation I came up with 2 of the theories presented in the article and SoL.Was I psychic? Did I unknowingly manage to steal the ideas in SoL without having read them?Nope. I'm guessing it was freaking logic.Don't act like someone coming to the exact same conclusions had to steal the ideas on your site. It's insulting to the intelligence of the readers. The article easily could have come to the conclusions without your site.Coming onto a blog that frequently causes wow lovers to crash sites with new traffic, boosts permanent readership in some sites and complaining about being linked is bad. But then acting holier than thou and effectively accusing someone of plagiarism is downright stupid.Had they not linked to your site I would not have even known about it. I was liking what I saw until I read this pissy comment of yours. So now not only have you managed to make yourself look like a donkey, but you lost a potential reader. Congrats.
6-29-2009 @ 8:26AM
Obviously SoL is so cool that no one else could EVER come up with the same ideas. Ah well, at least now I know not to bother making an account at SoL, because "elitists" is all that comes to mind. I mean, how could I not see that only a select group of people on the intarwebz are awesomez enough to delve into WoW lore, eh?Take your elitist forum private and save yourself some trouble, and the rest of us the bother. :)
6-29-2009 @ 9:47AM
"Is this your first day on the Interwebs or something? Linking is what people do, especially when they think something on the other end of the link is interesting and they want other people to read it. It's actually considered to be a bit of a compliment."Seriously! I totally agree. You get material from somewhere else and you don't link it or source it, just imagine what the comments would have been: "Hey, er...yeah, zomg, you like totally used stuff from my, er, site, and uh, didn't link the actual info. Can you, uh, correct this, er, error? Ok thanks, bai."Anyhow...
6-29-2009 @ 2:50PM
Don't worry man, "The Internets for Beginners" is a Knaak book, so I don't think you read it.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.