So I know that the Droz accident and Owen Hart tragedy are in the WWE video archives, but they are under specific instructions to "never destroy, view or duplicate". There is often reference to the fact that such media exists, but those tapes are bound to degrade eventually, are they not? They cannot copy them, under self-imposed rules, so who knows when those tapes may last until.
So I know that the Droz accident and Owen Hart tragedy are in the WWE video archives, but they are under specific instructions to "never destroy, view or duplicate". There is often reference to the fact that such media exists, but those tapes are bound to degrade eventually, are they not? They cannot copy them, under self-imposed rules, so who knows when those tapes may last until.
WWE wouldn't want to risk those copies getting leaked.
Not familiar with the Droz accident, but I think they're doing the right thing with the Hart tape: they're respectfully preserving his memory - if you destroy or view it it's disrespectful, and there's really no need to duplicate it. I think the same can be said about the Chubbuck tape, though I guess the morbidly curious should be allowed to view it since she did it intentionally, but now I'm just rambling.
♪ Good day, good day, I'm glad you came my way... ♪
I just find it interesting these videos are sources of legend now. They inspire so much discussion in these parts, but one day they are going to naturally degrade since the tapes of that time expire after a long time period. I'm sure they've kept them in great condition, but there will come a day when the footage is gone because the tapes expire and they will forever be sources of mystery.
Also, in the book Broken Harts, it's claimed that no actual footage exists of the fall, just the immediate aftermath recorded by a WWE cameraman who was outside the ring at the time. That is interesting to me. The wording in the book was a bit obfuscated but that's what was conveyed.
Yeah,there was a whole thread about the owenhart thing that is hidden now because people were misrepresenting the rules and it started an argument. Was an interesting thread until it became diluted with BS.
I tend to believe such footage should be destroyed but I suppose letting the video decay in a secure archive is better than allowing it to leak. There is no mystery. A life was lost. And yet I question if that is truly the right way to look at it either..
Not familiar with the Droz accident, but I think they're doing the right thing with the Hart tape: they're respectfully preserving his memory - if you destroy or view it it's disrespectful, and there's really no need to duplicate it. I think the same can be said about the Chubbuck tape, though I guess the morbidly curious should be allowed to view it since she did it intentionally, but now I'm just rambling.
The Droz incident refers to a match that Darren "Droz" Drozdov had with D-Lo Brown in 1999, during tapings for Smackdown! that were being done on Long Island. D-Lo brought Droz up for a powerbomb, but due to Droz's loose clothing, D-Lo didn't have a good grip and unfortunately botched the move, dropping Droz almost directly on his neck, which permanently paralyzed him from the neck down. There are a few pictures of the match, including moments right before and right after the incident, and some of the footage from after is a part of some of WWE's older "Don't Try This At Home" vignettes from the 2000's, but pictures or footage of the actual incident obviously has not seen the light of day, as has been discussed here already.
Yeah,there was a whole thread about the owenhart thing that is hidden now because people were misrepresenting the rules and it started an argument. Was an interesting thread until it became diluted with BS.
Can you just not? The rules say you can't search for nsfl media on here, that's it.
"oooh, you're a- a freaked out child in the woods..."
Yeah,there was a whole thread about the owenhart thing that is hidden now because people were misrepresenting the rules and it started an argument. Was an interesting thread until it became diluted with BS.
Can you just not? The rules say you can't search for nsfl media on here, that's it.
“A code of conduct has been discussed on the Christine Chubbuck thread but nobody is going to see that unless they click on a very specific page out of a 40-page dialogue. I feel we ought to post these expectations in a separate, easy-to-find thread so that newcomers understand what's expected when dealing with NSFW/NSFL topics. It's not fair to enforce rules which some may be genuinely ignorant of.
The two that came up specifically are:
1. No contacting the bereaved survivors of NSFL content. Don't ask them to identify a picture or recording, don't ask them to share footage they probably don't even have, let them come to us or another outlet of their own volition if they even want to come forward at all. They deserve the right of privacy and empathy.
2. No links to NSFL content on the forums.
Besides these specific guidelines, we can add the general rule of "don't be a jerk to other forum members." We are here to discuss things, and any behavior which intentionally impedes this flow of ideas is not conducive to a good community. That means don't insult each other personally or troll or spam/brigade.
If there are to be any other rules set down in the future, they should arise from an organic need of the posters themselves. IE a new problem presents itself that requires a new guideline to rectify so that discussion may continue in a respectful, productive manner.”
those are the rules, I have not broken them. Thanks.
Can you just not? The rules say you can't search for nsfl media on here, that's it.
“A code of conduct has been discussed on the Christine Chubbuck thread but nobody is going to see that unless they click on a very specific page out of a 40-page dialogue. I feel we ought to post these expectations in a separate, easy-to-find thread so that newcomers understand what's expected when dealing with NSFW/NSFL topics. It's not fair to enforce rules which some may be genuinely ignorant of.
The two that came up specifically are:
1. No contacting the bereaved survivors of NSFL content. Don't ask them to identify a picture or recording, don't ask them to share footage they probably don't even have, let them come to us or another outlet of their own volition if they even want to come forward at all. They deserve the right of privacy and empathy.
2. No links to NSFL content on the forums.
Besides these specific guidelines, we can add the general rule of "don't be a jerk to other forum members." We are here to discuss things, and any behavior which intentionally impedes this flow of ideas is not conducive to a good community. That means don't insult each other personally or troll or spam/brigade.
If there are to be any other rules set down in the future, they should arise from an organic need of the posters themselves. IE a new problem presents itself that requires a new guideline to rectify so that discussion may continue in a respectful, productive manner.”
those are the rules, I have not broken them. Thanks.
While you have a point about this not being a written down rule, I would like to remind you that in a community such as this, there are rules explicitly stated, as well as those implicitly communicated through the conduct of members. While there is no written rule banning nsfl media searches, we as a community greatly discourage such activities. Look at any thread about lost media we do not want to be found and media such as this is what is most often brought up. Do what you will on your own, but don't expect to make lots of friends here with conduct like this.
"oooh, you're a- a freaked out child in the woods..."
I haven’t searched or even suggested searching fir anything. We are only talking about it. If people don’t want to befriend me here, that’s ok. If they want tomake a big deal over the media I chose to discuss, that’s on them. I choose not to worry myself with the topics others choose to talk about, why others would want to concern themselves with what others are doing is beyond my comprehension. That being said, I appreciate your concern, but you do you and I’ll do me.
I’m sorry, is that against the rules? Didn’t think so.
That still does not mean that it is not frowned upon, especially with such a controversial topic. As I said before, there are explicit and implicit laws to any social space. And you are very brazenly violating the latter.
"oooh, you're a- a freaked out child in the woods..."