Having said that, I must say that I don't have that much of a problem with NAQT's business model. Obviously, I am in no way capable of passing judgement about whether those allegations are true / what should be done about them if so (although if what Eric said is true, that's a really bad look for Ike), but it doesn't seem like the complaint at hand is "NAQT should stop making people pay to look at their questions", and as such, when you say "we should resist these moves, hard", I don't think NAQT has made any "moves" or in fact changed their policies in any way - it seems to have been, based on what people have said so far, entirely Ike's prerogative. I don't think Eric's complaint is about NAQT's enforcement of its intellectual property rights, but rather about Ike (who, as a non-NAQT member, seemingly has no stake in the enforcement of NAQT's intellectual property rights, having already been paid for the many questions he's written) unilaterally levelling accusations against him and another team, threatening various penalties unrelated to NAQT, and demanding that he surrender various private conversation logs in order to disprove said allegations - all of which seem like Bad Things. I want people to get paid for writing questions but don't be cops, guys. What that contract means is that NAQT currently has the power to do this - in response, I think we should resist these moves, hard. So, enclosing this part of the commons parasitically drains resources from the rest of us, in addition to the other problems with adding microtransactions to quizbowl. The ICT production process relies on those questions being available. I don't think there's any moral content to NAQT's intellectual property rights over its questions that makes it okay to privatize their sets.like, the public question archive evens the playing field for competitors to study, for writers to learn, and for editors to check their clues against old tournaments. More seriously, I'm pretty sure NAQT's writer contracts give them exclusive rights to the questions. ![]() ![]() Granny Soberer wrote:if any1 haz ict packets pls send 2 NAQT can and should do something to rein in this kind of deranged behavior on the part of one of their employees/contract writers, and seriously consider the way that they relate to the community in the face of it.ĮDIT: In the light of Jeff's post, I have edited this post to reflect the fact that Ike is not an NAQT member. This sets a very dangerous precedent any NAQT participant in the future can be asked to similarly sign away their privacy under the threat of censure if this is allowed to happen. We also cannot and should not stand for being coerced into waiving privacy rights under threat of being barred from future tournaments, as Ike is attempting to do by demanding chat logs from anyone who talks to me. I will make this absolutely clear - the team Ike threatened did not send me a copy of 2017 ICT, and the fact that he was willing to level sanctions on them shows just how dangerous this kind of behavior is. We, as a community, cannot and should not stand for an employee of a high-profile quizbowl organization randomly threatening paying customers (a set which includes me and everyone else threatened by Ike) based on no evidence or incorrect evidence. It was also demanded that private chat logs be made available to Ike so that he could send them to NAQT. The team that Ike believed to have sent me the packets was threatened with similar censure. Sanctions for me personally at Chicago Open 2017 (which Ike is head editing, and has no relationship to NAQT) ![]() Sanctions for me and my team for future NAQT eventsĢ. I have also contacted NAQT with an order for the 2017 ICT, hoping for a copy as it is not available on their website (which I checked last week). Initially, Ike accused a particular team of scanning and sending me the packets. Today at 12:01PM EST, I was contacted by NAQT writer Ike Jose, who told me I need to "pay for ICT" because he believes I have a copy of the questions, and that I did not "appreciate" the work he had put into the set.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |