WW2Talk linked to 'The Heritage Group'?

I think you have answered your own query Steve.
Threads on Public view are open to the entire internet .
PMs are private.
Can you read other members' PMs ? no.

 

*
No I can't read other members PM's, but I don't know what Paul Reed's quoted 'RSS Feed' is able to read/lift; hence my question...

Best,

Steve.

 

RSS feed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS

for example.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10628494

 

...Not unless they're an alias for the NSA...I don't believe that you're a US citizen so you're a legitimate target as far as they are concerned.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data

 

*
Thanks Rich.

So, the conclusion is that anything 'e' is accessible to anyone who has the capability and wishes to so access.

That reminds me of a quote:

"There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.
There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know.
But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know."

US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld; 10 February 2002.

The NSA has the capability and that is a known known, but what about the unknown unkowns; which leads me to a question:

Should we not be concerned that someone somewhere is tapping into everything we send on WW2Talk, whether on the open forum (a known known), PM or VM (an unkown unkown) or private e-mails to forum members where details included in PMs and our profiles?

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but I really don't want a fraudster or any other form of crook to imitate my identity (or bank account details or passport number) in any way, shape or form. That is not what I call flattery.

Does anyone else have concerns?

Best,

Steve.

 

No Steve, I'm not concerned, because I know what RSS is and how it works.

I allow RSS on part of my own website. It's a way of allowing others to get updates/alerts. It has been used to generate a list on another website. I could do more or less the same without RSS feed by adding url after url from threads here, on a page on my own website.

It's a different technology and a mighty big leap to what you're worried about re access to private communications.

 

If anyone is really that worried.

DON'T GO ON THE INTERNET.

 

Just 'cause you're not paranoid doesn't mean the bastards aren't out to get you too ! :P

 

Although I don't understand the complexities of RSS feeds etc I am with Adam on this.

No need to start lobbing toys around aimlessly - let's hope Adam and the Gent in question can have a civilised discussion and come to an agreement regarding use of WW2 Talk posts.
It could work out to be advantageous to both websites. Who was it who said 'there is no such thing as bad publicity'?

There may be some IP rights or copyright issues but, as this is a public forum, I don't think anyone who posts here expects PRIVACY of the content of their posts. If you don't want the world to know what you are posting don't post it.

This is above all a forum for information exchange - someone asks a question and hopefully someone answers the question.

If you want the exchange to be private take it to PMs or by email.

 

Adam, the Dick Winters of the group. The quiet voice of reason.

 

For those curious, think of the forum RSS feed like your cable TV provider. Your provider has a set number of channels they offer and you pay for the ones you want (in this case, subscribe to the RSS feed, which is free), the content you receive on the channel is only what your provider is broadcasting.

You can't access channels your provider doesn't offer, just as on the forum you can't access private messages through an RSS feed for example, the channel simply doesn't exist/isn't provided. By design RSS feeds only provide a brief "tease" of the content you're subscribed to, you have to click through for the full picture. On this forum from what I can tell the feeds just provide the first post in a thread and low quality images (you don't even get usernames or any other identifiable information), you'll have to visit the site to actually get use out of the thread/gallery.

Hope that helps.

 

RSS?

Is that site even using the WW2Talk RSS Feed or are they just linking. By rights they should acknowledge the source better than they do. You are initially left with impression it's their own "News" content. The header link does of course bring you back here.

When I subscribe to the WW2Talk Feed (top one) by live bookmarks I only get links to 20 threads. I'm not sure if you can change that? What's the rhyme or reason behind what gets chosen to be shown is not apparent. I don't intend to use it anyway as "New Content" works well for me for the latest posts.

Cheers ...

 

Dear A

Whilst going along completely with your "Softly, softly, catchee monkee" approach (Comment #24) I have to say that I would have liked to have seen somewhere in that article an indication that Heritage would be told in no uncertain terms that members of this forum are not at all happy at Heritage's lack of common courtesy.

Just for the record and like many other members, I have often spotted articles written by myself that have been re-published by sundry websites as "stocking-fillers" without due and proper accreditation to the original source. I have always made a point of contacting the offenders and pointing out their offence.

I usually find that the multiple use of the word "copyright" in my letter is enough to produce the desired effect.

Despite my reservations, I am more than happy to leave the matter in your capable hands

Ron

 

We're not so innocent on here either to be honest.
Quite often members will copy & paste stuff from other websites with no link to where info came from.
Mods/Admin have had to ask members to edit a link into their posts or have done it themselves.
I remember we were contacted awhile back by a website owner (Diggerhistory) who was rather narked about it & had a few words.
If anyone is going to copy & paste from another website , at least add a link to that website, which The Heritage Group as already mentioned has done to us.
Until this thread was started we were all blissfully unaware of them.

 

Owen

No argument there, at all !

Offenders can be found everywhere on the internet and it is one of the true perils of the open internet.

One of my other objections re Heritage is that they copy & paste, without rhyme or reason, and then dare to call it "News" !

Ron

 

I did a breeze through the page source and it appears they are using the WP RSS Multi Importer. Also picked out this link to their RSS feed:

http://www.heritage-group.org/feed/

Notice it states on there for example:

"The post Operation Postmaster appeared first on The Heritage Group."

Yeah right. There isn't even a link to WW2Talk on their links page. They strike me as a legitimate group but they should give credit where credit is due.

Regards ...

 

In my opinion there is something more insidious here than simply the linking. I'd rather they were more open about that but it's no big deal. However, a look at the Home page sets all sorts of alarm bells ringing.

Their title page is dominated by a photograph of the usual overweight German re-enactors (SS in that camouflage ?). The heading has a Swastika flag central (and that of Mexico ? I don't get that). German vehicles dominate allied three to one.

There is then the disclaimer that they are non political but that they 'Commemorate and honour those who served'. These disclaimers always seem a little odd. Does WW2t have one ? It certainly doesn't need it .



Well I'm sorry but if their non-political views allow them to honour the thugs who amongst other things massacred civilians at Vinkt and murdered disarmed prisoners at Wormhoudt and La Paradis (and that was just May 1940) then I feel that I should be able to question their motives and the desirabilty of being linked by them.

I feel that there is a good chance that this organistion is using WW2t (the voice of reason) as a cloak of respectability and historical accuracy for their pro-Nazi fantasies.

 

It is the war flag of Italian Socialist Republic. The eagle in the Mexican flag does not have its wings extended.