So I emailed the roar last night about all this and this was the reply I got. Has there been a mid understanding?



"

Thanks for getting in touch.

I know what you're talking about. Basically, the short story is that at some point, on the FourFourTwo Forums, entires articles from our site were being copy/pasted across. That's plagiarism and really hurts our site.

We asked if instead of entire posts being placed on the site, that at the maximum a paragraph or two from the piece should only be posted.

It appears as though that was interpreted as no links, ever. That's not what we want - it's allowed, just so long as a complete article isn't copied across.

Guys like Mike Tuckerman, Tony Tannous, Vince Rugari and co should be getting as much exposure as possible as they contribute strongly to the football media landscape.

We'll work on getting this rectified. Let us know if you feel there's a good person to speak with about it.


Cheers,
Tristan

-

Tristan Rayner
Managing Editor
Conversant Media"

There is no misunderstanding, the above is pretty much true to my knowledge, the decision was made by Four Four Two, after consultations with 'the Roar', not to allow Roar articles....again as I understand it.

At the end of the day both are commercial entities, who make commercial decisions....I guess this is just one of them.

Edited by Joffa: 8/11/2013 10:06:42 AM

I understand the roars view completely. I am confused as to why 442 would then just ban it though? Eh if that's the case rules are rules

If people want to read Roar articles...then go to the Roar site and read them.
You can also discuss them there too. :shock:

It was KA's decision and he's the boss.

"Well...who made you boss then, I didn't vote for you"

One of the things I said in that email was that I use 442 as my source of linked football information. I quite enjoy the roar articles but I am so used to frequenting 442 as a source that I don't go on there seperately. I also think some of the conversations would be nice to have within the 442 community. Like I said if that's the decision rules are rules. I just don't see the need for what seems to be a feud. There are plenty of forums where u can only post a paragraph and a link which is completely understandable. It then will still allow discussion on that matter

But like I said if that's KAs decision then that's fine, I just thought I would bring it up in case of misunderstanding

It's not a 'feud'.

It's making the simplest and easiest choice for this site. No grey areas, no 'ooh how many paragraphs are allowed'. No worrying about The Roar getting antsy if their traffic goes down and start suing people or wanting even more restrictive terms on their articles.

It's easier to just ban them outright.

Pretty much all of this. The Roar got defensive over their traffic, FFT decided that it was in their best interests to put an end to any confrontation sooner rather than later.

If you've got a problem with there being no content from The Roar on here, you can always just go to The Roar to read it. Y'know, common sense and shit.

its only a feud when users start initiating DDOS attacks against the opposing site :lol:

The roar pissed me off when they started removing all negative comments on their exclusive Llubo interview.

It's almost like they were shocked and appalled by him receiving negative feedback :lol:

This. TBF though he is a top bloke.

Edited by theselectfew: 9/11/2013 12:00:12 PM

No he's not.

I guess it is a feud.

He is the only one in Oz football that speaks honestly and provided the most lulz on this forum.

No poster since has matched it tbh.

Him speaking honestly doesn't make him a top bloke.

it does. let him back in.

Part of being a 'top bloke' is knowing when to keep your mouth shut.

You should take some of that advice.

You should take all of it.