I have just been Alan Mackie'd
- Thread starter dylanwinter
- Start date
- Status
claymore
Well-known member
Its usually a shot to one's own foot when one deigns to offer an opinion on behalf of others but reading through the posts, this thread has surely run its course? That seems to be the sentiment expressed from a decent number of contributors and so perhaps the time has come to close the pages and move on?
stevepick
...
Quote Originally Posted by stevepick
"Note he states in his posts, and in the reports about him, he has taken libraries and charities to court to claim what is "rightfully his" - judge that how you like, I find it distasteful ."
Quote originally posted by Jumbleduck
"I think libraries and charities should pay their bills. Don't you?"
JD, I very much respect that you are a far more forgiving soul than I. I do respect that, but you have rather taken my words out of context. Libraries and charities should pay their bills, having said that libraries and charities ( the charity commissioners do, by and large, ensure that charities carry out soemthing good for society) are a great part of the fabric of our society, they are forces for good.
My full quote, that you edited above, is below:
"I would be slightly more interested in whether Alan Mackie had paid back the £24368 he fraudulently stole from the public purse first. He may have spent time in prison for his crime, but he seems to imply he makes a good living in some of his posts, and I think the decent thing would be for him to pay back all the money he owes to us - us as in the general public.
Note he states in his posts, and in the reports about him, he has taken libraries and charities to court to claim what is "rightfully his" - judge that how you like, I find it distasteful"
I understand why you didn't want to quote me fully because you don't think people should re-iterate in public his past crimes, but I just don't think Alan Mackie is a force for good, nothing he does in his business model is illegal , but his previous crime is the elephant in the room here.
As far as this threads continued running - its done good service to the some of the yachting public , I hope people are more careful about copyright, and I sincerely hope that Alan Mackie never has another claim to make in a court.
"Note he states in his posts, and in the reports about him, he has taken libraries and charities to court to claim what is "rightfully his" - judge that how you like, I find it distasteful ."
Quote originally posted by Jumbleduck
"I think libraries and charities should pay their bills. Don't you?"
JD, I very much respect that you are a far more forgiving soul than I. I do respect that, but you have rather taken my words out of context. Libraries and charities should pay their bills, having said that libraries and charities ( the charity commissioners do, by and large, ensure that charities carry out soemthing good for society) are a great part of the fabric of our society, they are forces for good.
My full quote, that you edited above, is below:
"I would be slightly more interested in whether Alan Mackie had paid back the £24368 he fraudulently stole from the public purse first. He may have spent time in prison for his crime, but he seems to imply he makes a good living in some of his posts, and I think the decent thing would be for him to pay back all the money he owes to us - us as in the general public.
Note he states in his posts, and in the reports about him, he has taken libraries and charities to court to claim what is "rightfully his" - judge that how you like, I find it distasteful"
I understand why you didn't want to quote me fully because you don't think people should re-iterate in public his past crimes, but I just don't think Alan Mackie is a force for good, nothing he does in his business model is illegal , but his previous crime is the elephant in the room here.
As far as this threads continued running - its done good service to the some of the yachting public , I hope people are more careful about copyright, and I sincerely hope that Alan Mackie never has another claim to make in a court.
Last edited:
197aerial
New member
Indeed. He posts lies about me that have been widely discussed by many and are generally agreeed to be known to be lies.
I'm getting a bit fed up with the bullshit and garbage that's flying my way and the constant repetition of fairy stories and outright drivel.
I want it to stop. I will have it stopped if need be. I'm perfectly happy to discuss facts and truth but I will not succumb to mindless bullying and libellous comments made about me in public.
Does that seem unreasonable to you? If so, I pity you.
Be assured, a court will take my side, every time.
All I want is for the Dylan Winter claque in here is to stick to the facts, not conjecture and fabrications. Surely that's not beyond your abilities?
And you can be sure some moron will now refer back to my criminal conviction as if that's got any relevance to Dylan Winter's conduct, because that's all people of that mentality are capable of doing.
To paraphrase a current TV advert:
I wonder how some of you guys manage on a boat.
But then I read all the reports of sinkings, collisions, people falling overboard and the helicopters and RNLI volunteers risking their live to save them and it dawns on me...
macd
Active member
Why? People can vote with their keyboards. Everyone's free - important word, that - to read the thread, or not.
197aerial
New member
I'd like to. Really I would. Could you please address that request to the only party who can actually cause that to happen? Thanks.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Noted and sorted. Many thanks. JD.
bitbaltic
Well-known member
Sorry to press the point but is #395 reasonable behaviour, or not, in your view?
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
I agree on all these points. I think it's a shame that Mr Mackie's published rates for website use of his photographs are so high, because I have browsed through his site and there are some damn good pictures there which deserve wider exposure (ha ha). However, that's his decision.
webcraft
Well-known member
Sounds like a legal threat to Time Inc. Good luck with that, it might end up slightly further up the legal food chain than the Small Claims Court. I am however surprised that either you or Dylan haven't asked for this thread to be pulled.
I don't think any of the bullying has been entirely mindless, neither do I think any of the comments have been libellous. But as a professional litigant you would no doubt know better. Good luck - there should be enough court cases here to keep you going for a while before you have to start trawling again.
Your criminal conviction surely is relevant because it shows you have behaved dishonestly in the past. This is public information that helps us make a judgement about your moral character and fitness to disparage others on here. A man who is happy to use the law for his own financial gain but apparently equally happy to break it for his own financial gain is surely not standing, morally, on a very high point. - and you were doing both simultaneously, not sequentially. A little humility might go a long way here to softening some attitudes.
Why round it off with a general go at sailors, completely unrelated to anything else in this thread? It's hardly likely to endear you to people. It may be true that there is no such thing as bad publicity, but I think your performance on here might be stretching the axiom.
- W
Last edited:
WhiskeyTownRacer
Member
I've followed this thread with interest since the outset and one aspect simply refuses to leave my thoughts.
Setting aside copyright infringements and commercialisation or otherwise of a sailing blog, I keep wondering why someone documenting their travels would actually want to use a picture they didn't take themselves. Surely KTL is a record of personal discovery, as such I would have expected the content to be fully personal too.
Perhaps I'm naive. Not sure my comments add much to the discussion, other than the obvious fact that the entire thread wouldn't exist if my view was more prevalent.
Like others, I hope this can be resolved to the satisfaction of both parties, sooner rather than later.
Setting aside copyright infringements and commercialisation or otherwise of a sailing blog, I keep wondering why someone documenting their travels would actually want to use a picture they didn't take themselves. Surely KTL is a record of personal discovery, as such I would have expected the content to be fully personal too.
Perhaps I'm naive. Not sure my comments add much to the discussion, other than the obvious fact that the entire thread wouldn't exist if my view was more prevalent.
Like others, I hope this can be resolved to the satisfaction of both parties, sooner rather than later.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
If he is being continually misrepresented regarding what he has written to DW then I think his action in asking for a retraction and an apology alongside a complaint to the moderators (AM, they don't generally monitor posts - you alert them with the wee triangle icon to the bottom left) seems reasonable though the post you reference is perhaps most forcefully expressed than I would choose to do myself.
Glisferox
Member
Dear Alan
I have no wish to pick a fight with you, I read the thread quickly last night and could not sleep because I felt so strongly about its content and tone. On both sides.
Tired, this morning, I wrote that post because I feel it needed to be said, if only to put the wider context of Dylan’s voyage in perspective.
I seem to have misread the nature of your demand and if you have not demanded money, then I most humbly apologise for saying you did.
On the second point, I fear you have misinterpreted my words. I have accused Dylan on the sin off omission not you. I’m also expressing my heartfelt opinion that it would be sad to see this go to court, that in a fight such as this everybody dies a little.
You are however perfectly entitled to peruse copyright infringement as you see fit.
As I said we all have frailties and I’m no exception.
All I ask is that you understand that I was trying to explain why some people are so upset and most certainly not accusing you of lying.
Jamie
bitbaltic
Well-known member
The post concerned does contain a little bit more action than the qualifications you give above. Let me be clear that I am asking your opinion of the unabridged article not selected bits thereof. Once again may I press you: is post #395 is reasonable in your opinion?
webcraft
Well-known member
.
Mr. Mackie is very keen to emphasise that he has not demanded money. However, he has repeatedly indicated that he has no intention of letting this matter drop. I fear that the attempts of posters on here to defend Dylan or reason with Mr. Mackie have done more harm than good.
Best if this thread vanishes IMO.
- W
Mr. Mackie is very keen to emphasise that he has not demanded money. However, he has repeatedly indicated that he has no intention of letting this matter drop. I fear that the attempts of posters on here to defend Dylan or reason with Mr. Mackie have done more harm than good.
Best if this thread vanishes IMO.
- W
yachtorion
New member
@197aerial I too would prefer to be done with the thread but I do feel I owe you a reply to that. Your reply seemed a little brusk, I apologise if I have offended you, it was not my intention and I have tried not to. As before, nothing in this is intended to relate to any specific example.
No.
No, other than software patents.
Quite. I doubt we're going to find a way to stop content being shared, the internet has accelerated that process to the point that it's killing businesses. We need to find a way to change the model to accommodate this or creators aren't going to get much money. It's a modern business reality vs centuries old copyright ideal.
And that's why it's so important that we do so.
Was that aimed at me? I certainly have few creative talents, though I'd like to think that I play a small part in the process by helping to build and run some of the platforms that allow others to express and benefit from their creativity. I certainly don't object to fair and reasonable copyright, I just also feel words like "realistic" and "enforceable" are important if the benefit is to outweigh the harm.
I don't think anyone on this thread has criticized the notion of fair copyright laws and rights. Some including me have suggested the current setup doesn't work.
I don't know the right answer - if it was easy it would have been done - but I think it might be related to the Open Source software industry where a lot of fortunes have been made by creating something and then giving it away.
Am surprised this hasn't been moved to "The Lounge" yet. But I do think thread deletion might be better and I for another would support it, and have reported the thread. If you want to also report the thread there is a report button at the bottom of each post.
Am also surprised no-one has pointed out that we don't know for a fact that the account 197aerial is actually the gentleman concerned and I wonder if this should be considered when choosing what aspects of this issue to discuss.
No.
No, other than software patents.
Quite. I doubt we're going to find a way to stop content being shared, the internet has accelerated that process to the point that it's killing businesses. We need to find a way to change the model to accommodate this or creators aren't going to get much money. It's a modern business reality vs centuries old copyright ideal.
And that's why it's so important that we do so.
Was that aimed at me? I certainly have few creative talents, though I'd like to think that I play a small part in the process by helping to build and run some of the platforms that allow others to express and benefit from their creativity. I certainly don't object to fair and reasonable copyright, I just also feel words like "realistic" and "enforceable" are important if the benefit is to outweigh the harm.
I don't think anyone on this thread has criticized the notion of fair copyright laws and rights. Some including me have suggested the current setup doesn't work.
I don't know the right answer - if it was easy it would have been done - but I think it might be related to the Open Source software industry where a lot of fortunes have been made by creating something and then giving it away.
Am surprised this hasn't been moved to "The Lounge" yet. But I do think thread deletion might be better and I for another would support it, and have reported the thread. If you want to also report the thread there is a report button at the bottom of each post.
Am also surprised no-one has pointed out that we don't know for a fact that the account 197aerial is actually the gentleman concerned and I wonder if this should be considered when choosing what aspects of this issue to discuss.
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
I don't think it's attempts to reason with Mr Mackie which are the problem - there have been precious few of them anyway. It's attempts to bludgeon him into submission and drag up irrelevances which are not helping. And, to be fair, after the initial posting and the re-use of the image in question here, both of which I think were errors of judgment, Mr Winter has not been fanning the flames.
claymore
Well-known member
Oh dear....
Glisferox
Member
Yes uncommercial may not be the right word, though I do tend to consider a commercial operation one capable of making a profit. I’m not entirely sure Dylan does on this count. I suspect the best he can do is defray some of his expenses.
Alan Mackie is entirely entitled to peruse his infringement claims as he likes. I seems to me however that this is a lot of heat over a relatively minor infraction, one which as far as I can tell was rectified the moment Dylan found out.
Bru
Well-known member
- Status