The IIN site being exposed for comedy? How do you feel about this?

Ahh, I know, I do get what your issues with it are. As far as I can see, there are three sets of issues: (a) privacy/security, (b) copyright, and (c) that it won't be any good. I did stick to the first issue because that's what this seemed to be about but I'll talk about the other two. The last issue (the quality)... absolutely no idea. None of us know what is planned so none of us can really say. As for the issue that is bothering you...

I'm in that weird position of being able to argue both sides. I understand IP laws in my country because I was part of an application to our IP officer at work because of an idea I had which was seen as commercially unique and groundbreaking. Got rejected for complicated reasons but I did go through the whole process. From what I could see, it was our responsibility to protect our IP by registering it (in much the same way you may file a patent). The argument against you is that we should have personal responsibility for protecting ourselves. I'd also say that when I post on someone's story, the site gives the OP the right to delete my words. The implication of the site meting out power over my words is that they now belong to the site; that by posting, I have donated them. As for the freeness of our words, they're still free. If people want to pay to see them performed as opposed to reading them here free, they have a choice. Part of what they are paying for (I can't argue "all", obviously) is the performance.

There's a fair amount on the other side of the argument, though. When I signed up, I wasn't told that my words would be used for profit (although I accepted they'd be used to drive advertising which I imagined would be enough to keep IIN running - TheManagement said publicly that it doesn't and he makes a loss, although that's not wholly relevant to this issue). Yes, someone will (I imagine) make a profit by performing our words and we'll see nothing. As you say, we wrote the words. The script. The core material. I could also argue about the idea of the words being owned by us individually if we said something litigious but not owned by us when they are used in profit-making. And what if something one of us says becomes a meme or the idea becomes a Hollywood movie (not going to happen but for the sake of argument)? I'd feel a bit aggrieved if my words made some people multi-millionaires and I didn't see anything for it.

Being pragmatic, though, as opposed to principled, I still think it's a good thing. If positive feedback increases IIN's user or subscriber base and allows the site to operate at a profit (or closer to one), then we all get to keep the site we enjoy. Our contribution will be worth something commercially as well as personally. From a purely selfish point of view, I also think many of us hope something of ours gets chosen (I've seen this expressed a lot). I'll hold my hand up here because I do hope I get to be part of it too and would forego payment to be involved in something that'll probably be unique to me in my lifetime. As it is, I'm really very excited that the site is being used, even if every contribution used is by someone I don't even know.

Finally, the key pro point for me is that we give our information for free. We've already done that. We've agreed to do it, just by doing it. And the key sticking point, which I've got no way around, is that someone may make profit from our effort. I can't argue it because you're right. What's going to matter is how strongly people feel about the pros and how strongly about the cons. For me, I tip into the pro side. Completely understand anyone on the con side, though, because they're valid arguments.

P.S. Thanks for making me Kurt Vonnegut. I love Kurt Vonnegut. :)