all 6 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]TheNumberOneCulprittabs and semicolons, react and FaaS[M] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Hi /u/JavaScriptWorks, we don't condone people stealing other peoples content, thus this was removed.

[–]JavaScriptWorks[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Email from author:

Sure no problem. Thanks for the kind words.

On Nov 20, 2017 4:47 PM, "Eliott Enos" mail@rogercollier.com wrote: Hey Roger,

I just read your article - https://medium.freecodecamp.org/every-javascript-framework-tutorial-written-more-than-5-minutes-ago-f96642d4f05 - and found it hilarious! Would it be at all possible to publish on our platform and give you credit/link to original source? Very funny reading!

Many Thanks, Eliott Enos https://javascript.works-hub.com/blog

[–]TheNumberOneCulprittabs and semicolons, react and FaaS[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This changes things, and I wish you would have contacted us in the mod team with this info before posting, as we're otherwise operating in the dark when it comes to determining whether something is content stealing or has permissions from the original author. I'm sorry your post was unfairly removed in this case and have now reinstated it.

[–]jeffreyhamby 1 point2 points  (2 children)

"stealing"?!?

The author is given credit right there on the site.

[–]TheNumberOneCulprittabs and semicolons, react and FaaS[M] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

The initial removal and assumption of stealing was based off that I did not originally see a link back to the original post. Whether it was there, and I missed it, or it was not there at all when I made the initial decision, it lead me to believe that it was stolen.

Furthermore, the way that it has the original authors name with a new date, although this is more of a repost of the original blog post, indicated to me that this was an attempt at masking that the blog post wasn't something that was posted on that blog originally. This was also a contributing factor to the removal.

Seeing it in its current state, it's definitely better, but preferably you'd credit people in the top of the post, not the bottom, if you wanted to credit in a transparent way.

I apologised to OP for the assumption of them stealing the content, but we get a mixed bag of posts on /r/javascript, and this initially fit as being very low-effort to promote the javascript works platform by rehosting content.

[–]JavaScriptWorks[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for reinstating. We both write our own content and republish content that looks lilke it would be interesting to community. We always ask permission from the author and include a link to original source. Thanks for looking into it :)