I'm searching for some help on x2go. After posting in this forum somebody has cloned my post.
-
Doesn't the Exchange have some ninja coders we can give some of our rep points to so they will jack up that site?– xtianCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:28
-
See: meta.serverfault.com/questions/5874/…– Ward - Trying Codidact ModCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:35
-
1I'm not sure if there's a list somewhere you can check to see if SE already knows about a particular site, but as per the early Q&A here, and others on meta.SO, just report the site and ninjas will be dispatched from SE HQ...– Ward - Trying Codidact ModCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:36
-
3Alright, I'm tired of seeing "Holy terd burgler" in my chat windows in the notification bar, so I fixed. No more of that. If one must use the phrase "turd burglar," one really needs to spell it correctly, at the very least.– HopelessN00bCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 1:22
-
Expletives know no bounds--spelling be damned! But point taken.– xtianCommented Mar 16, 2014 at 23:11
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
Please see: What is the license for content I post?
As noted in the Stack Exchange Terms of Service and in the footer of every page, all user contributions are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike. Proper attribution is required if you republish any Stack Exchange content.
The site you linked to appears to have hit all the required attribution points, except they linked back to SF with nofollow. Specifically the link "View full answer on Server Fault" is nofollowed.
The current procedure to report such sites is to contact Stack Exchange through the contact form linked on the footer of every page.
answered Mar 15, 2014 at 0:39
-
Ahh. I just noticed the link back to SE. I guess that's cool. Something to do. Whatever. (still want ninja's dispatched)...– xtianCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:53
-
It isn't supposed to be nofollowed, so they can still be reported, and SE will dispatch their ninjas. Or lawyers, if the ninjas aren't available for some reason.– Michael Hampton ModCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:55
-
3I think they are not following CC BY-SA 3.0 terms, as there is no reference to the license (see also on Meta SO). Jeff’s blog post doesn’t mention this requirement, but it’s still required by the license itself.– unorCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 1:29
-
-
FWIW, I created a discussion on Meta SO: “Attribution Required” misses requirement to reference the license. Update resp. replace it?– unorCommented Mar 15, 2014 at 2:21