IMPORTANT: Do Not Copy and Paste Entire Articles

[KnotaDinghy]

Just my vote. Way easier to delete then start with a clean group and the new guidelines of summarize & post link - not whole article.
Her other option is to edit EVERY post that has been made and every reply that has an article.
I wouldn't wish that on anyone - there are a ton of posts on here, and articles in comments.

But again, just me offering my opinion, as a former group owner from CM who went through several group changes. Just easier to start fresh.

Delete this group? Then what?

Big challenges.
I'd vote for starting fresh - just group delete. I fear your reports will increase though as people will mainly be fighting over opinions without being able to post articles that support their opinion. As I said before, many sites are requiring subscriptions- so I know when I see a Washington Post link I won't even click on it - can't read it. But this is a necessary evil for you to remain searchable and monetized by Google. Trying to maintain lists of authorizations would be a nightmare.

Things also get more difficult with a forum. If I reposted an article with written authorization or shared it within guidelines on a blog, I could appeal to google with my evidence and have the content indexed and monetized again.

With a forum, I would have to research each source and request authorization either from the source or have the person who posted acquire authorization and then submit evidence. At this point news and politics has a lot of topics made and most of them are articles.

My options at this point are to either delete all of the current posts made, go through myself and adjust the posts, or request the topic authors to change the posts, then resubmit to google and hope that it’s good enough.

I really don’t want to start fresh with news and politics but it would be the easier option since this is the main group they are upset about. I’m going to think of ways I can do this without effecting things too much. One option I was thinking about is to delete older posts and change up the newer ones to fit the guidelines.

[Poietes]

Delete this group? Then what?

Big challenges.
I'd vote for starting fresh - just group delete. I fear your reports will increase though as people will mainly be fighting over opinions without being able to post articles that support their opinion. As I said before, many sites are requiring subscriptions- so I know when I see a Washington Post link I won't even click on it - can't read it. But this is a necessary evil for you to remain searchable and monetized by Google. Trying to maintain lists of authorizations would be a nightmare.

Things also get more difficult with a forum. If I reposted an article with written authorization or shared it within guidelines on a blog, I could appeal to google with my evidence and have the content indexed and monetized again.

With a forum, I would have to research each source and request authorization either from the source or have the person who posted acquire authorization and then submit evidence. At this point news and politics has a lot of topics made and most of them are articles.

My options at this point are to either delete all of the current posts made, go through myself and adjust the posts, or request the topic authors to change the posts, then resubmit to google and hope that it’s good enough.

I really don’t want to start fresh with news and politics but it would be the easier option since this is the main group they are upset about. I’m going to think of ways I can do this without effecting things too much. One option I was thinking about is to delete older posts and change up the newer ones to fit the guidelines.

Delete the group and then make an entirely new group. Which means all of the old posts that are giving skip so much trouble would be gone. Otherwise she has to go in one by one to fix all of them to make them happy.

[morgan]

Well, I apologize. I'm totally guilty of posting entire articles. I didn't know, and now that I do I'll make sure not to. I'll also do my part in whatever is necessary to either fix it, (going back and editing my threads if need be) or go along with a transition and helping out there any way I can. I really like this group.

[Billie.jeens]

Well, I apologize. I'm totally guilty of posting entire articles. I didn't know, and now that I do I'll make sure not to. I'll also do my part in whatever is necessary to either fix it, (going back and editing my threads if need be) or go along with a transition and helping out there any way I can. I really like this group.

wow, what a suck up.

[morgan]

Well, I apologize. I'm totally guilty of posting entire articles. I didn't know, and now that I do I'll make sure not to. I'll also do my part in whatever is necessary to either fix it, (going back and editing my threads if need be) or go along with a transition and helping out there any way I can. I really like this group.

wow, what a suck up.

I know. Being nice isn't for everyone.

[KnotaDinghy]

Nope.
I'd have to declare that at work and I'm sure there would be some conflict that some busy body would point to.

You?

Are you getting a cut?

I'm not going to call them idiots, but progressives really may have an issue with it.

Myself, as a capitalist, I'm happy to help figure out the best way to improve or optimize monetization, without me subscribing that is.

When the idiot progressives figure out what monetize means, they are going to be pissed anyway.

[Billie.jeens]

Not yet.

We are piss poor Capitalists yes?

Nope.
I'd have to declare that at work and I'm sure there would be some conflict that some busy body would point to.

You?

Are you getting a cut?

I'm not going to call them idiots, but progressives really may have an issue with it.

Myself, as a capitalist, I'm happy to help figure out the best way to improve or optimize monetization, without me subscribing that is.

[KnotaDinghy]

I like to think of it as charitable - I'm allowing others to consume any share that I might want. All in the name of career responsibility. I've too much time invested to jeopardize my current monetary stream.

Not yet.

We are piss poor Capitalists yes?

Nope.
I'd have to declare that at work and I'm sure there would be some conflict that some busy body would point to.

You?

Are you getting a cut?

[Billie.jeens]

You can't just do a shadow company in say Belize like normal people do?

I like to think of it as charitable - I'm allowing others to consume any share that I might want. All in the name of career responsibility. I've too much time invested to jeopardize my current monetary stream.

Not yet.

We are piss poor Capitalists yes?

Nope.
I'd have to declare that at work and I'm sure there would be some conflict that some busy body would point to.

You?

[12skipafew]

She is more than welcome to have a cut of my debt, I don’t think that I’m very good at this whole capitalism thing lol.

Are you getting a cut?

I'm not going to call them idiots, but progressives really may have an issue with it.

Myself, as a capitalist, I'm happy to help figure out the best way to improve or optimize monetization, without me subscribing that is.

When the idiot progressives figure out what monetize means, they are going to be pissed anyway.