Nordling
V.I.P. AmberLander
*faze. Well, unless he's afraid that Captain Kirk will take action on his trolling.
NicoleRiley said:BeetFarmer said:See you at the convention next year in Vegas "bb" so you can say it to my face? I bet a lot of models would relish that opportunity.
What is comical is that you piss and moan about me (even though I had not shown up in the thread until after the fact) and then you piss and moan about it being continued when you are questioned on your choice of words. I still have not taken the low road and said anything derogatory about you as a person. Anything I may have said were observations or opinions, not a direct insult. Could I have said "Boy, Nicole is such a fucking whore!"? Sure, but why would I? Doing that does absolutely nothing.
You opened yourself up to a discussion by choosing to publicly berate me. It honestly doesn't phase me and if anything makes me laugh. A lot of the things I see models post about me on Twitter, social media or that they have stated in their MFC rooms makes me laugh. It's almost like a badge of honour.
:hello2: :handgestures-salute:
I would LOVE for you to walk up and introduce yourself in Vegas. Please do. You do not scare me. Trying to intimidate me is comical. I have never talked about you on Twitter or have ever mentioned you anywhere before. You are not someone I think about on a daily basis. I just saw what I thought was you post and said what was on my mind about "you" trying to justify what you do. I think that you making money off other people is totally wrong. But that's my opinion.
It obviously does phase you, because I was done talking about it and you felt the need to continue. If you're going to step on people's toes then you need to learn to handle being disliked.
:twocents-02cents:
BeetFarmer said:NicoleRiley said:BeetFarmer said:See you at the convention next year in Vegas "bb" so you can say it to my face? I bet a lot of models would relish that opportunity.
What is comical is that you piss and moan about me (even though I had not shown up in the thread until after the fact) and then you piss and moan about it being continued when you are questioned on your choice of words. I still have not taken the low road and said anything derogatory about you as a person. Anything I may have said were observations or opinions, not a direct insult. Could I have said "Boy, Nicole is such a fucking whore!"? Sure, but why would I? Doing that does absolutely nothing.
You opened yourself up to a discussion by choosing to publicly berate me. It honestly doesn't phase me and if anything makes me laugh. A lot of the things I see models post about me on Twitter, social media or that they have stated in their MFC rooms makes me laugh. It's almost like a badge of honour.
:hello2: :handgestures-salute:
I would LOVE for you to walk up and introduce yourself in Vegas. Please do. You do not scare me. Trying to intimidate me is comical. I have never talked about you on Twitter or have ever mentioned you anywhere before. You are not someone I think about on a daily basis. I just saw what I thought was you post and said what was on my mind about "you" trying to justify what you do. I think that you making money off other people is totally wrong. But that's my opinion.
It obviously does phase you, because I was done talking about it and you felt the need to continue. If you're going to step on people's toes then you need to learn to handle being disliked.
:twocents-02cents:
Actually to you (and the others who commented on convention comment) it was not in the slightest intended to be some act of "intimidation", but it's clear that everyone has some preconceived notion. The comment was meant to be sarcastic seeing as I was toying with the idea of going anyway.
Come on Nicole, really? "If you're going to step on people's toes then you need to learn to handle being disliked." Should you not take that advice to heart considering you bellyached about others making preconceived notions about you? You can't say give advice if you yourself are breaching it.
And no, it doesn't "faze" me at all. That is not why I posted. I signed up and posted for a couple reasons, 1. To see if Amber would ban the account and 2. To see what sort of reception would be given. So far neither models nor regular members have surprised me. The only one that has is Amber herself.
And I never said you had moaned about me on social media, which is why I said "models" and not you specifically. Will you turn anything I say around as a direct comment to you?
BeetFarmer said:I signed up and posted for a couple reasons, 1. To see if Amber would ban the account.....
NicoleRiley said:BeetFarmer said:NicoleRiley said:BeetFarmer said:See you at the convention next year in Vegas "bb" so you can say it to my face? I bet a lot of models would relish that opportunity.
What is comical is that you piss and moan about me (even though I had not shown up in the thread until after the fact) and then you piss and moan about it being continued when you are questioned on your choice of words. I still have not taken the low road and said anything derogatory about you as a person. Anything I may have said were observations or opinions, not a direct insult. Could I have said "Boy, Nicole is such a fucking whore!"? Sure, but why would I? Doing that does absolutely nothing.
You opened yourself up to a discussion by choosing to publicly berate me. It honestly doesn't phase me and if anything makes me laugh. A lot of the things I see models post about me on Twitter, social media or that they have stated in their MFC rooms makes me laugh. It's almost like a badge of honour.
:hello2: :handgestures-salute:
I would LOVE for you to walk up and introduce yourself in Vegas. Please do. You do not scare me. Trying to intimidate me is comical. I have never talked about you on Twitter or have ever mentioned you anywhere before. You are not someone I think about on a daily basis. I just saw what I thought was you post and said what was on my mind about "you" trying to justify what you do. I think that you making money off other people is totally wrong. But that's my opinion.
It obviously does phase you, because I was done talking about it and you felt the need to continue. If you're going to step on people's toes then you need to learn to handle being disliked.
:twocents-02cents:
Actually to you (and the others who commented on convention comment) it was not in the slightest intended to be some act of "intimidation", but it's clear that everyone has some preconceived notion. The comment was meant to be sarcastic seeing as I was toying with the idea of going anyway.
Come on Nicole, really? "If you're going to step on people's toes then you need to learn to handle being disliked." Should you not take that advice to heart considering you bellyached about others making preconceived notions about you? You can't say give advice if you yourself are breaching it.
And no, it doesn't "faze" me at all. That is not why I posted. I signed up and posted for a couple reasons, 1. To see if Amber would ban the account and 2. To see what sort of reception would be given. So far neither models nor regular members have surprised me. The only one that has is Amber herself.
And I never said you had moaned about me on social media, which is why I said "models" and not you specifically. Will you turn anything I say around as a direct comment to you?
Sorry I took your "you can say it to my face" comment negatively. Everyone knows that sarcasm is not conveyed well through text. I do have a preconceived notion of you. You do a disservice to models so I am defensive and assume you're being malicious. I acknowledge that I should not go into situations this way, but it is human nature. It's just like how you all jumped to conclusions about me after hearing about one thing that I did. I also realize this is human nature.
Mainly I was annoyed at how wrong you all got things. Little "facts" that were absolutely incorrect. I don't care what you think of me, but I get annoyed when people are saying things based on "facts" that are not correct. I am used to people trolling me and saying hateful things so it's not like this is anything new. But this is the first time someone has taken my words (in more than one situation) and twisted them.
We're basically just going in circles here. I don't agree with what you do, and you don't have to like me. It is what it is. This thread has been completely derailed and has gone off topic.
I do have a question that has always puzzled me and it is on the topic of stolen videos. Why is it that cappers get all possessive over "their content"? You are mad that someone is stealing something that you stole? Makes no sense to me. In my opinion you have zero right to tell other people not to take your "work" and post it as their own. Do you acknowledge that it is hypocritical?
Kenshi said:Would love to see "Dwight" or one of these other cappers moon-logic on this one!
zippypinhead said:Kenshi said:Would love to see "Dwight" or one of these other cappers moon-logic on this one!
Well, you see, gravity on the Moon is only 1/6 the strength of that on Earth, so you only weigh 1/6 as much on the Moon. This enables a person to get protective over the stuff that they pirate. It's fucking science, man.
Honestly (in my opinion anyways), it's less about the fact that our work is being pirated (although that does matter) and more about the fact that when we're camming, we have the ability to geo-block locations and a lot of camgirls do this for safety reasons.
.Our capped material isn't geo-restricted and if, for example, that creepy guy that lives down the street from me happens across a screencap/recording of me, he's going to know exactly where to find me whereas if that same creepy guy that lives down the street happens upon MFC, it's less likely that he's going to find me since I have my location blocked
Sure, there are still ways around it and those of us who have been in this business are well aware of it, but it's at least a small thing that's in place to help models stay safe from harm.
Yes, these are all risks that we take as camgirls working our butts off in this business but it seems that cappers have no regard for our personal safety whatsoever and I think that's the thing that a lot of people get worked up over.
So, you know, telling us to "just get over it" isn't actually helpful.
Saying to a camgirl "Your shit's gonna be all over the internet, so, if you don't like it then don't work it"
The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
yummybrownfox said:BeetFarmer said:I signed up and posted for a couple reasons, 1. To see if Amber would ban the account.....
Wow...an ACF member who actually ADMITS to being a troll? LOL. How refreshing.
NicoleRiley said:I do have a question that has always puzzled me and it is on the topic of stolen videos. Why is it that cappers get all possessive over "their content"? You are mad that someone is stealing something that you stole? Makes no sense to me. In my opinion you have zero right to tell other people not to take your "work" and post it as their own. Do you acknowledge that it is hypocritical?
NicoleRiley said:The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
Yeah we've already established who he is. The leader of the land of the cappers!
I should start capping my own shows and posting them so that at least I'm the one who's making the money :lol:
The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
The Insider said:Yeah, he's Dwight K Schrute (schrute farms on the tv show "the office" is a beet farm) from [site name banned*6].net that seems to do nothing but screen cap all mfc models even if sleeping and redistributing vids that models have sold.
BeetFarmer said:And then there are the models who will take the recorded shows either they themselves recorded or that were done by a capper and sell those. That too constitutes copyright infringement, regardless of whether you are in the video. You cannot claim I am infringing and then turn around and take that same material and state you are not
BeetFarmer said:You have taken something I said and put it into your own misconstrued context.
BeetFarmer said:Some people would not be apt to have the "enemy" as a member on their board...BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...
keep in mind I have means of getting the last laugh, heh.
They're all balls-out fucked. More than once I have seen models freak out because they didn't bother to read their contract (many of you know I am not often a deliberately mean person, but if you sign up for a cam site and don't read the contract, you're fucking stupid) and later find out the reality of what they agreed to.zippypinhead said:Wait wait wait.
I got curious about what, exactly, the models are agreeing to when they join the site, so I looked up the model agreement (PDF.) I had assumed that MFC was working under some kind of a licensing scheme, since the models are required to bring to the table pretty much all but the hosting. But that's not the case. The model agreement is "For Hire" which means that, according to that contract, everything you produce as a model in association with MFC is their moral and intellectual property. You, the model, forfeit all claims to everything streamed and possibly uploaded to MFC, including your face and your name, forever. More than that, you, the model, assume all the risk associated with piracy or defamation in connection with MFC material.
This is kind of insane. I really am shocked.
What it means is that, unfortunately, the beet farmer is technically right when he states that any model who wishes to sell caps of their own streams through a third party are committing copyright infringement according to the contract.
HOWEVER
That doesn't indemnify the behavior of cappers in the least. "You models are infringing too!" is the "I am rubber, you are glue" gambit of legal defense. It's ridiculous, and it doesn't excuse the fact that cappers are still committing blatant acts of piracy. They can rationalize it all they want, but they're still criminals and parasites (and let's face it, they know that -- otherwise, they wouldn't be here trying to defend their twisted character.)
But, seriously, that contract is balls-out FUCKED.
BeetFarmer said:yummybrownfox said:BeetFarmer said:I signed up and posted for a couple reasons, 1. To see if Amber would ban the account.....
Wow...an ACF member who actually ADMITS to being a troll? LOL. How refreshing.
I have not admitted to anything of the sort, but rather you have taken something I said and put it into your own misconstrued context. That comment was merely to state that I figured Amber would have simply banned the account of the "notorious Dwight_K_Schrute" when I said who I was. Some people would not be apt to have the "enemy" as a member on their board regardless of the fact that forums are usually supposed to be just that, an open forum for discussion.
You seem to relish your opportunity to be sarcastic with me eh? Sarcasm is fine, but keep in mind I have means of getting the last laugh, heh.
NicoleRiley said:I do have a question that has always puzzled me and it is on the topic of stolen videos. Why is it that cappers get all possessive over "their content"? You are mad that someone is stealing something that you stole? Makes no sense to me. In my opinion you have zero right to tell other people not to take your "work" and post it as their own. Do you acknowledge that it is hypocritical?
Well anything I have said on the matter is misconstrued, or I jot down a response quickly (as was the case a while back) and it was taken in a different context then was intended as I was not fully clear. As I posted earlier on [site name banned*6] (prior to even seeing this question on ACF) I have issue with the re-posters as many of the people who re-post do simply that, they re-post and add nothing new. That is where my gripe comes in. In the past I know of at least one comment I made where I was hasty in the response and it appeared that I was complaining about the fact I felt cheated by others re-posting the videos I spent time making. That was not the intended message, but it is what it is and it gave models and their white knights something to fuel their fire over.
Now many models will jump down my throat on that subject, which is fine, however can models not also be called hypocrites and called out on similar grounds of copyright infringement? Many models listen to music while streaming live or using music in the videos they sell. This is copyright infringement. Did you secure the rights to use the music while making money in the process? I am not pointing a figure at anyone here, but rather making a point. And then there are the models who will take the recorded shows either they themselves recorded or that were done by a capper and sell those. That too constitutes copyright infringement, regardless of whether you are in the video. You cannot claim I am infringing and then turn around and take that same material and state you are not.
We can go back and forth until the cows come home, but a model and a capper will never see eye to eye on 99% of this.
NicoleRiley said:The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
Yeah we've already established who he is. The leader of the land of the cappers!
I should start capping my own shows and posting them so that at least I'm the one who's making the money :lol:
See above...also, you are most welcome to join the ranks of the capper and post on [site name banned*6].net or [site name banned*7].org! In fact I encourage you to do so (no joke). I'll even coach you if you like - free of charge.
Also, I am the leader? This is news to me. It's interesting to see how high up you feel I am. I've been placed on a pedestal.
The Insider said:Maybe i'm missing something but has no one else made the connection as to who beet farmer is ?
I already stated who I was, so if anyone is misinformed they clearly have comprehension problems.
The Insider said:Yeah, he's Dwight K Schrute (schrute farms on the tv show "the office" is a beet farm) from [site name banned*6].net that seems to do nothing but screen cap all mfc models even if sleeping and redistributing vids that models have sold.
Does this make you Captain Obvious? Or were you just left behind in the American education system?
JoleneBrody said:In regards to models breaking copyright law when reselling videos of themselves taken from a live MFC stream, poopy McCapper pants is right- ish . Here be the "Ish" ...
If a model records a show from MFC and sells it on a site other than MFC, for funds MFC will never see a cut of, that model is indeed committing a crime.
If the model sells those videos through MFC only, for tokens, then no it's not. That is in fact how 99% of recorded shows are sold so the point and argument was pretty silly.
I know for myself anyway, the few videos I do have that are edited recorded shows I knowingly do not sell on my C4S store. Only tokens via MFC. I'm not saying this is 100% of the time by any means but C'mon.
Now I will say that I could actually post all but one of my "recorded" shows technically because Lucy and I recorded from a second source and Amber and I have a professional videographer... though it still doesn't feel right to me because MFC provided the ability for that show to be happening and I feel they deserve a cut of those.
But you know, I'm a nice person who tries to always do the right thing. It's a pretty sweet and satisfying way to live.
BeetFarmer said:Some people would not be apt to have the "enemy" as a member on their board regardless of the fact that forums are usually supposed to be just that, an open forum for discussion.
zippypinhead said:Wait wait wait.
I got curious about what, exactly, the models are agreeing to when they join the site, so I looked up the model agreement (PDF.) I had assumed that MFC was working under some kind of a licensing scheme, since the models are required to bring to the table pretty much all but the hosting. But that's not the case. The model agreement is "For Hire" which means that, according to that contract, everything you produce as a model in association with MFC is their moral and intellectual property. You, the model, forfeit all claims to everything streamed and possibly uploaded to MFC, including your face and your name, forever. More than that, you, the model, assume all the risk associated with piracy or defamation in connection with MFC material.
This is kind of insane. I really am shocked.
What it means is that, unfortunately, the beet farmer is technically right when he states that any model who wishes to sell caps of their own streams through a third party are committing copyright infringement according to the contract.
HOWEVER
That doesn't indemnify the behavior of cappers in the least. "You models are infringing too!" is the "I am rubber, you are glue" gambit of legal defense. It's ridiculous, and it doesn't excuse the fact that cappers are still committing blatant acts of piracy. They can rationalize it all they want, but they're still criminals and parasites (and let's face it, they know that -- otherwise, they wouldn't be here trying to defend their twisted character.)
But, seriously, that contract is balls-out FUCKED.
Alexandra Cole said:I might have the urge to choke you out, but I'm still interested in what you say, and how you say it.
I can't tell you how refreshing it is to hear a fellow model say something to the tune of this.Alexandra Cole said:BeetFarmer said:Some people would not be apt to have the "enemy" as a member on their board regardless of the fact that forums are usually supposed to be just that, an open forum for discussion.
This might be the only thing we'll agree on, even if it's a bit disingenuous. There's no way your forum would embrace a discussion that questioned its existence. And I don't think that's wrong. Forums are self-selecting communities. Your forum attracts members who are either cap-happy or cap-hungry, most of whom, I assume, are touching their cocks. And it's never fair to argue with someone who's been handicapped by his bloodflow.
But this isn't that, and I do think it's important that you're allowed to be here. I might have the urge to choke you out, but I'm still interested in what you say, and how you say it.
Just Me said:It is a very standard contract and there is nothing unusual about it. I think many people would be surprised what rights they sign away in employment contracts. They can dictate what you wear, what you say and what you can do when not actually working. The big thing now is binding arbitration, you sign away your right to take your employer to court if they abuse you in some ways.
I think this is an instance of you being a bit biased and too nit-picky because it was directed at your favorite person. I closed the report on it because honestly it really isn't anything to be looked further into.Nordling said:Granted, this isn't a direct threat:
"You seem to relish your opportunity to be sarcastic with me eh? Sarcasm is fine, but keep in mind I have means of getting the last laugh, heh."
But it's a veiled threat. I really don't consider veiled threats, even if they reference something harmless to be "mature discourse."