You get slides…!
Unsettled ChristianityOne blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category
In my short time with Logos, I had long hoped for a more classics-centered focus, bundles or the what-not. Looks like they’ve answered my secret ruminations.
Noet is a suite of tools and texts for scholarly work in the classics. The mobile and web apps launch this fall; next comes an even more robust desktop version. Noet serves disciplines that involve original-language research and text comparison—classical studies, philosophy, intellectual history, and more.
The mobile research app will give professors, students, and scholars advanced scholarly resources: original-language tools, fast searches, and side-by-side study of related texts. The desktop version will introduce even more advanced features for original-language research, as well as a social platform for students and researchers to engage the classics together.
Update: See my update here.
My good friend James McGrath doesn’t seem to follow the trail of what happened.
He writes, in part,
…Joel’s copyright complaint and his attempt to remove the Creative Commons notification on his posts after the fact… This incident, and the issues it raises, need to be given serious attention in its own right..
As a final word on this, let me help James understand what exactly happens/ed.
First, I have had for the past years of blogging an ALL RIGHTS RESERVED notice at the bottom of the blog page, each and everyone of them.
I employed the CC because of a previous attempt, figuring (following WP/DMCA’s then-advice) this would help in the future and I posted about my problems with content theft.
But, before we get to the second, let me state again — this is getting tiresome — that the process for DMCA reporting looks to be relatively simple.
If you feel you have a complaint, you report it to the hosting provider. In this case, it is WP, which makes it easier. They look at the complaint, including my site which is why you place only links to both sites. They would have seen the CC and the bottom (c) notice.
Now, I realize this is a mystery to everyone, but unless you understand this part, then you either believe a giant conspiracy or that somehow I transgressed some ethical commandment. If WP/DMCA looks at the sites involved and decides that the first person has merit, then they will request the second person to respond.
Let me spell this out again, because regardless of what I’ve said either on McGrath’s site and others, people lack the reading comprehension to understand this: WP/DMCA makes the final ruling on whether or not the claim as merit to proceed to the next level. The next level includes the ability to counter the claim.
This is the second point. While McGrath and pleasantly followed Ian and posted pictures WITHOUT CONTEXT, let me say what happened again.
Finding that people are generally too ignorant to understand the point of CC, and to examine the entire site for other (c) notices (which WP/DMCA did before they decided the complain had merit), I changed my entire copyright notice. Why? Where did I get it from? Here.
Note, again, because I have to repeat myself because people lack the ability to read, or have otherwise already made up their mind, WP made the decision the complaint had merit.
So what issues does this “incident” actually raise? My guess, first, is that people need to learn how to read. They need to learn how to follow the thought process. I find it rather odd that this is generally the same arguments passed to and fro between McGrath and other mythicists, that neither side follow the other side’s arguments but instead rest only on their pre-conceived notions of what the other side is saying.
Further, as is evident in their to and fro arguments, the argument of “do you understand the process” is essential. This is the same argument both sides throw at each other. And now I get to throw it around. Ugh.
Anyway, that’s just about all I can say… again, three or four times now.
I am very sorry the entire site came down. That was not my intention.
I realize I can’t make the people who didn’t like me before like me now, nor to take Neil’s or James’ words over my photographic and legal evidence, but then again, some people aren’t given to liking evidence.
So, sorry, but I’m done with this convo.
Update: S. Carr is posting around the web various suggestions I “doctored” the photos, as displayed here. I gave up reading the forum when S. Huller sorta came to my defense, suggesting nothing was there, and that maybe this is just a conspiracy within a conspiracy (Inception?). Of course, what they have is my outlook screengrab. They don’t have my gmail screengrab where all the sent emails go to wait the day of resurrection.
Neil does bring up important thing in his latest post. It seems DMCA requires one to post on the site and not email the site owner a personal takedown request. I did not do that. I further thought Automattic would have investigated this or included this in the check-off list. They did not. Is it WP’s fault? No.
Now, Neil and the relict of Google’s field will spend some time proving I doctored the photos. Maybe they are correct. Maybe Huller is correct… or maybe there is as sometimes reported a glitch with Outlook on a Mac. But, one thing you cannot do is to break in Gmail’s servers. I mean, unless I am a Freemason and have contact to the Illuminati.
Regardless of the evidence produced, their will be nothing to prove to anyone that Neil is wrong. Of course, Neil also claims he didn’t receive WP’s first notice so I guess they lied too.
Update (5 July, for you Aussies.)
I wrote the below comment in response to the relict’s post here (the links are added).
You got me, I guess, unless this is a conspiracy within a conspiracy like Huller first suggested. Of course, if I have an gmail screengrab, I guess that would solve absolutely nothing. The thing about mythicists is that they don’t take kindly to evidences…
As I have stated on other blogs, my big mistake was seeing it go as far as shutting the ENTIRE site down. My apologies. That was not my intention or my actual request. I believed, in good faith (all rights reserved and the cc, which we clearly have a disagreement over), I had the right to remove my content from Neil’s blog. This has happened before, not with Neil’s blog, when someone was stealing entire posts. I actually catalogued this on the blog some time ago.
Unfortunately, when Neil disobeyed Lord WordPress, which I pray to daily if not hourly and have been known to sacrifice various companions (Dr. Who reference), he had his own blog shut down.
Now, gents, I really enjoy this posts, I do, and I urge you to take this comment as fuel for the fire. Burn.down.the.internet.
As you are now on WordPress.org, i would equally urge you to use the jetpack comments (wish I could convert, but I am still a but superstitious) and find the All-in-One SEO plugin. This latter plugin helps with, well, SEO — search engine optimization. I have a few more if you want the tips. Anyway, best of luck and cannot wait to see what happens ‘next well’ as Steve Carr is hinting at.
Steve Carr is out promoting an impending lawsuit. Should be fun. I mean, because unlike Online Policy v Diebold, this was a one time issuance, and made in good faith due to previous existing examples. They seem to think the email (do I or do I know have a screengrab) is part of the DMCA issuance… and that would be a no. But… there you go. Let’s rock-n-roll.
Sure wish they’d get back to bashing Bart. E, however, as that is at least one we can agree on.
If you haven’t heard, Neil’s website is (most likely temporarily) suspended.
Under DMCA, you cannot quote in full unless authorized. There is a process then to ask for removal ONLY of the content copied IN FULL. One cannot simply ask for the removal of an entire website, even on WordPress, due to subject matter or words used. (Unless it is deemed radical hate speech or something like child porn).
The first is this:
You ask the author to remove the copied content (not the post, you can still post a link and have fair use) or summarize.
If the author does not, Automattic (who runs and is ultimately responsible for DMCA (federal law)) takes over. They will disable the post and ask you (the copier) for your response/challenge where the author gets say whatever he/she wants about the use of the copied content. Neil could have responded or amended the post.
During this time, the content and only the content (not the website) was hidden. Then, he re-posted it by himself and against what wordpress.com’s policy says.
In other words, I asked Neil not to repeat the entirety of the post, but he didn’t care. He had the chance amend his post to remove the copied content (and he copied every word from start to finish) or seek authorization. When he not only refused but re-posted it, it was not in my hands any longer.
Neil, on his FB, is saying this today:
“My Vridar blog was deactivated by WordPress because I exposed Joel Watts, a published New Testament “scholar”, as a fraud and liar — He complained to WordPress that I had quoted his own (fraudulent) blogpost in full as part of my analysis of it. I am therefore deemed to be in some sort of violation of copyright law.”
That’s not exactly true… And yes, I do have emails to prove it. See the link below for the process.
What could Neil have done? Easy. Removed the copied in full content or asked for permission. Or challenged the removal request. Instead, he put the material back up.
Neil can spin it and that’s fine… But…in the end, he is lying, again.
Anyway, there you go.
Neil has taken to various places to distribute my personal contact information, including my name and address. Where did he get this from? The DMCA notice he says he never received.
Anyway, I wanted to post a few things, to help my defenders along:
First, Neil left a comment on the blog:
I then sent an email to him, shortly there after… Note the time difference. I know he’s in Australia.
When he didn’t reply, I sent in the request later that evening. You will note that it included ONLY the link to the content and specified the content:
Note as well Neil had the chance to respond or challenge. Notice as well, originally, the ONLY think disabled was the POST. When Neil went to re-post, that’s when the blog was taken down. He had ignored (although he says he failed to receive) notices.
- June 26 – 12:43 AM, Neil leaves a comment.
- June 26 – 12:56 PM, I’m awake, refreshed, at work and email him, deciding to see if he’ll respond first.
- June 26 – 9:48 PM, Hearing nothing, and a little perturbed, I file a DMCA complaint with WordPress (Automattic) requesting ONLY MY CONTENT be removed.
- The DMCA Process (Infographic) (nexcess.net)
MAP stands for Modular Aggregation of Principles for Bible Translation. It is an online learning community created by the Nida Institute. MAP is a collection of videos, PDFs, MP3s, TED and YouTube links, and original content created by community members. While aimed at Bible translators, anyone interested in Bible, language, and cultures should check it out. Content ranges from discussions of Relevance Theory, Ancient Near East, and neurology. Its open to the public, so feel free to join.
MAP is a question driven tool. So the best way to get around is to use the search bar. If you don’t find what you’re looking for, you can ask a question and someone else in the community might have your answer.
Logos’s bible guides looks like, from a quick look on the iPad a fantastic way to connect and use all of your resources… This is from the volume on Colossians. The locked one are those resources I don’t have. The open book, well, you know figure it out.
What’s nice is that it is all interconnected… a living bibliography.
Just thought I’d share a bit.
well, sometimes i do, but when i read some comments, like the ones posted here and at huff post… from people who have otherwise engaged with me in the past… i just don’t.
Watt’s article was annoying to me because he added nothing of scholarly value to the conversation, and yet makes a few sideswipes against Ehman and an unnamed quasi-mythicist (Carrier?) without offering an iota of evidence that Ehrman’s writings have “problems”.
It’s a vague opinion piece with an unearned air of condescension.
Learning how things work is the first step, of course. I responded with
Why yes, it is an opinion piece… where we are given between 800 and 1000 words. It does not add scholarly insight because writing an editorial really isn’t supposed to.
As far as offering evidence, I did what I could with links, in the absence of footnotes, I mean.
As far as unearned… well, that is a rather subjective opinion, which you are , of course, entitled to have. I tried to strip any sense of publicly humiliating mythicists for their tripe, but I see some got by me…
anywho… I guess everyone will have someone who doesn’t like what they say or do… but it would be nice if said detractor would, you know, get the context of the action…
huff po is not, and i repeat, not an academic journal. it is a news and opinion site.
do i care? not really, i mean besides writing this post so that i could post at least something to do…
oh and sticks and stones, beau… sticks and stones.
If not, go here.
Among the apostles, God’s redemptive work appears most dramatically in the life of Paul. Redeemed and transformed, Paul becomes an apostle who not only established churches throughout the ancient world, but who was also used by God to author much of what would become the New Testament. Understanding the exegetical and theological issues of Paul’s letters represents an important part of any Christian’s study. The Lexham Bible Guides prepare your to submerse yourself in the depths of God’s Word like you’ve never done before.
In preparing for my work on Mark, I often wish there was something like this… and now that I am preparing for a study in John, I long for this.
However, for those reading Paul — and who shouldn’t — this is here. Now.
Take a look and tell me what you think.
So I would like to ask my fellow bloggers if they have any ideas on this topic and, in particular, if they have any specific blog posts and series of posts that they think impact on this topic of teaching, researching and communicating Mark via the internet.
Um, so I didn’t post the entire thing, but head on over there and see if you can help with the project on teaching The Gospel of Mark.
Logos is finally bringing to its excellent operating system the Sacra Pagina New Testament Commentary series. For my, I am looking forward to having Francis Moloney’s commentary on John available:
The expression “Sacra Pagina” (“Sacred Page”) originally referred to the text of Scripture. In the Middle Ages, it also described the study of Scripture to which the interpreter brought the tools of grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, and philosophy.
This series presents fresh translations and modern expositions of all the books of the New Testament. Written by an international team of Catholic biblical scholars, it is intended for biblical professionals, graduate students, theologians, clergy, and religious educators. The volumes present basic introductory information and close exposition, with each author adopting a specific methodology while maintaining a focus on the issues raised by the New Testament compositions themselves. The goal of Sacra Pagina is to provide sound, critical analysis without any loss of sensitivity to religious meaning. This series is therefore catholic in two senses of the word: inclusive in its methods and perspectives, and shaped by the context of the Catholic tradition.
The Second Vatican Council described the study of “the sacred page” as the “very soul of sacred theology” (Dei Verbum 24). The volumes in this series illustrate how Catholic scholars contribute to the council’s call to provide access to Sacred Scripture for all the Christian faithful. Rather than pretending to say the final word on any text, these volumes seek to open up the riches of the New Testament and to invite as many people as possible to study seriously the “sacred page.”
This series brings a unique depth of interaction with ancient and modern sources. In Logos, you can investigate these references simply by hovering your mouse over them. Additionally, Sacra Pagina will appear in your Passage Guide or Sermon Starter Guide, allowing you to interact with the text any time you search by passage or topic. If you loved having these books in print, having them in Logos will renew and refresh your love for this highly acclaimed New Testament commentary.
Further, for those who love the Hebrew:
As they have for centuries, people still turn to the Hebrew Bible to hear afresh the life-giving words of God’s everlasting covenant. Berit Olam (“The Everlasting Covenant”) brings the latest developments in the literary analysis of the ancient Hebrew texts.
Written for lay people, Bible scholars, students, and religious leaders, this multi-volume commentary reflects a relatively new development in biblical studies. The readings of the books of the Hebrew Bible offered here all focus on the final form of the texts, approaching them as literary works, recognizing that the craft of poetry and storytelling that the ancient Hebrew world provided can be found in them and that their truth can be better appreciated with a fuller understanding of that art.
The authors reflect a variety of religious traditions, professional backgrounds, and theoretical approaches. Yet they share a common desire: to make available to all of God’s people the words of the everlasting covenant in all of their beauty.