Ironcross, how do you actually know any of that? Do you have access to our mailing list?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Ironcross, how do you actually know any of that? Do you have access to our mailing list?
I have just one question for you Jayde
Why, would ironcross need to see your mailing lists in order to make a quite reasonable assumption to why Liam left?
As well as make a quite good comparason?
I mean, when you criticized him in the past, his points actually kind of had a reason to be criticized. i don't think him saying that thing about the fire burning itself out required criticizing. Now, it seems like you're yelling at him, just for the hell of it. "
Either we are against cloning or we let it go. There's really no way we can straddle the fence on this. Either we need to crack down for the community's sake or just let the clones and discussion/distribution happen. I'd prefer we crack down on it because of reasons stated above, namely that we are the largest forum for blind and VI gamers, and if we want inclusion we need to stand up for the rights of game developers and studios in order to have even a possibility of achieving this goal.
@26 ok what the hel dude. I don't know if you stepped out of bed with the wrong leg first the last few days or something like that, but attacking Ironcross for proposing a possible reason why Liam had left the team was not necesary nore fit of a moderator. Ironcross posted a perfectly possible reason and the way you reacted either tells me that he might have hit the target a bit closer than you liked or you are just now coming down to senslessly lashing out at users because you have people on the forum which openly critizise your work, the vote when you came onto the mod list and the hole Laury ´/Walter situation where you had no idea what was even going on, but voted anyway without knowing any further information.
I don't know if you want to uphold your image as the saviour of all the forum or what ever you see yourself as, but you should have realised that moderating only works as a team which comes to the same opinion on certain matters which are then put into place, but the fact that two moderators went away in the last 3 days should give you some food for thought eventually.
So, regarding clones, I agree with TGC here, I think that the topics and the users who post them have to be delt with swiftly and without chance of parole.y You read the rules, you accept the rules so you know what's allowed and what is not.
Some might now screem scensorship, but in this case this deels with stolen code, sounds and possibly music, so at leased my opinion is, the mods should make an acception when it comes to that.
1). We add a new rule: any topics that discuss games whose source code has been verified to be stolen, either in the first post, or for a run of at least 4 consecutive posts (You can actually back up your claim with post numbers), should be dealt with. This would still allow a person to mention a cloned game such as Constant Battle in passing, like I just did, without running a foul of the rule. But if people start arguing about it then it can be squelched quickly.
Another concern is the phrase "verified to be stolen". Unfortunately this one's a bit harder to watch because some source code stealers are pretty smart and actually modified enough things that it's hard to know. But at least for the obvious ones like Sudden Attack, if enough people say that it's been stolen, and the only opposition are a few sketchy people, you can do something about it. I feel like we should be able to trust the mods' judgment on this, even regardless of the opinion you may hold about how they dealt with more personal issues like personal attacking or corruption or whatever. I mean, it's in everyone's universal best interest to shut it down; no one can really disagree except the code stealers, the majority of whom are little kids who don't have many moral scruples anyway.
So what should we do? You can close the topic, and if you can spot the main offender such as the person who created a topic about a game with stolen code, give that person a strike to his record. But that's just boring; I'm going to repeat a suggestion I put up a few months ago:
The kids room.
These stupid argument topics are entertaining for us. I would honestly be a little sad to see them go. If these people are going to act like kids, we should treat them like kids. Put their topics into a kids room so that they're all aggregated so that we can sit back and laugh. And once the kids have argued themselves hoarse maybe, just maybe they'll realize how dumb it is. Right now, the mods are just closing the topics and not letting the kids get all their argumentative energy out. See, if you were trying to help calm adults down, you might suggest that they sit very still in a meditative position or something. Kids can do this too, but it's forcing them to grow up too fast. Most child psychologists believe that kids need adventure play to get their energy out, which means running around, yelling, climbing, etc, which is why time in the gymnasium or on the playground is so essential. It is so bad for the kids that elementary schools are shortening playground time more and more in favor of Common Core test prep. But I digress here. We can draw a parallel to the kids here. If we just tell them to shut up they won't really get their energy out. So put them in the kids room.
If you are really feeling it, you could create a new forum rank for the kids, and restrict kid users to only being allowed to post in the kids room.
P.S.: You may think the kids room thing is a joke, but it's only halfway so. Think about this stuff seriously!
Edit/PPS: if you believe that the kids room is a good idea, click the thumbs up button!
@31 lol, that kids room is actually a darn fun idea honestly, I would be all for that one.
After seeing some of the topics on here of late, i’m starting to think the kids room sounds like a good idea, and hilarious to boot. but we must actually consider the consequences of such a move, not that it’s actually going to happen. as much as I wanted to happen, how would that look on this website, or make this website look? I vote for sudden attack and the just a quick note topics to go in there first if it ever becomes a thing.
AS for the clones, keeping in mind what was said about Allowing a few things within reason, crack down on the motha fuckas!
Ok, I have to admit the kids' room idea, whether it's in jest or not, is appealing. There's just one problem with it. If you let them go at it, you won't be depleting their sources of energy, you'd only be creating a hunger for more and more drama. This stuff is addictive, especially to younger people who don't have the maturity or have developed enough of a moral compass yet to know that what they're doing is causing more harm than good, especially when that harm can't be quantified. I mean, as far as I know, posts on this forum haven't caused someone actual physical or emotional distress, and, of course, it's hard to measure such things objectively anyway. As long as it's "just the internet", where acting like an ass gets out your aggression that you may or may not even be able to pinpoint, that can be a powerful intoxicant. Plus, as I said above, and I was only half joking as well, going outside is a far cry different than sitting in front of your computer talking shit. it expends energy, yes, but not the same type or amount of energy needed to really satisfy a growing person. This problem isn't even unique to children/teenagers, there are many adults who use their online lives to fill voids, say things they would never dream of saying to the people in their immediate circle, etc.
So, if you were being facetious in bringing this up, well, congratulations on making me think more deeply about this, lol. If this idea was borne of cynicism though, by the state of the world in general or the forum or something else, I'm with you 100%.
Actually, there has been one well-known incident where things on this forum very well could have caused real life consequences, but I hope we're not going to rehash that again. I just thought I'd head that off at the pass in case someone caught my error, which I definitely should not have made given my proximity to said situation. In any case, what I meant was that the usual drama between kids that we're seeing as of late certainly does not fall into that category.
The point isn't really to deplete the kids' energy; that's just an extra attractive possibility that might work for some of the kids. Kids do have tons of energy. You can see it in even age 10 kids where they'll do the same annoying thing over and over and over again and still be just amused by it the 20th time as the first.
The real point is to separate them from adult discussions. Kids can still learn from wiser people such as their parents, which is why I believe that parents should have tough discussions, like financial ones, together in the presence of the kids. It gives them an example of how to resolve conflicts or solve problems together, and also, if the parents know how to communicate well, that mutual good communication does make a big impact on the young.
That's also why I don't think a brand new forum for the kids is a good idea, though if you decide to crack down harshly and stop them from posting, some kid is going to make one. They will find a way to talk about this stuff, which is why it's better that they do it here where adults can keep an eye on them before any actual harm like character assassination or real-life threats to harm are done.
Mainstream developers probably wouldn't look at the kids room as a place where serious discussion would take place. But would know that their stuff is also being seen by juveniles which is important because the kids are their future customers so the ones who care about making games accessible in the future would do well to look at what the kids are talking about. They don't have to though.
And as I said before in that other topic in november, the average age of audio gamers and internet users is going down not up. We can make it hospitable to all by giving kids a play area to play. A lot of establishments have this sort of thing, either by an outdoor play area like at many fast food joints, or with child care workers who keep the kids amused.
And I just had a great idea for the kids room: all topics in the kids room have a 2 week open period, then they are closed. start a new topic if they want to keep talking, but by putting a sort of lid on things, it will at least make them reconsider whether the material is worth continuing to harp on about or whether they have just been contributing to an echo chamber.
So I am continuing to argue for the kids room.
See, here's the thing, folks. Ironcross's explanation for Liam leaving might be true, except:
1. Liam already said that it was because there was a lot of stuff going on and he didn't want the stress, and
2. We'd already explained at least once that there is no such fire burning
In other words, Ironcross is suggesting a reason for Liam's leaving that does little except look like a conspiracy theory.
Here, I'll give an example.
Some of you have been vocal about how you think I'm dealing with this. Okay fine. Now how would you feel if I came back with the following?
"These people must have a skype group or some other personal list where they're crafting their responses in order to get the greatest backlash. That's got to be it. It's why I'm having such trouble not just ignoring them out of hand; the whole damn thing is crafted to get me upset, and I guess it must be working."
See, technically that could be true. I know damn well it isn't true, but it could be. If I were to go around spouting that, and then I hid behind the "it might be true" angle, that's a point made in bad faith (I'm using that a lot lately).
The reason I called out Ironcross in post 26 is because what some of you see as a legitimate reason for Liam leaving has already been debunked pretty thoroughly. That is -not why he left, by his own admission. Bringing it up now just makes it look like Aprone, Ironcross and others are right to have the same worries they all seemed to have half a year ago. There is not actually any evidence to support this stance; it's harmful conjecture. My willingness to jump on it with both feet does not represent fear of it. I know it is untrue so I have nothing to be afraid of. Conversely, I'm really, really tired of baseless accusations gaining weight simply because eome people won't let them die, so perhaps I acted with more firmness because I'm just done to death with the whole thing and wanted to squash it.
At the end of the day, some of you will think whatever you want, regardless of what I say. If you are bound and determined to see thing 1, nothing I bring to the table will actually cause you to admit that thing 1 is flawed.
Now, as to the topic itself: that kids' room idea sounds like great fun, but I'm not sure if it would work in theory. As has been pointed out, we're trying (perhaps too hard, who knows?) to have a better presence in case more mainstream devs come here, and how would that look?
That rule about talking about cloned/stolen source-code games is a neat idea, where it's okay to mention them but not okay to, say, get into big arguments/discussions about them. There are some holes in it, but I like the jist of it. My only big concern at this point is that if there is a hard number of posts beyond which it is against the rules, people may try and dance around that. I suppose, though, that community failure might cover this if it becomes an issue. It is something to think about, so thank you for the idea.
It's unfortunate that the average age of gamers is going down, but there's nothing we can do about that. I do agree that something needs to be done. I guess the only other objection I want to raise is, how do you make such a place palatable? Calling it the kids' room is sort of degrading, even if there's a large part of me that likes the fact that that's how it can be taken. However, you have to make it a place where kids would actually want to redirect their spats, and having that separation there would probably make it less likely that kids would post in it at all. I know I wouldn't have, but it's also true that I was a lot more stubborn and tenacious than the average teen. My younger self would have railed against this scenario, thus making me look even more immature in the process, but it's a point to consider.
Lol Kids room. Hahahahaha, I assume this refers to my example? Hey listen people. If that kids room being refered to my example on infringement and not infringement game, let me clarify and explain this further for the last time why the cloner will not be held liable under that situation. The coppy right infringement law says “only the owner has the right to coppy, reproduce, produce blablabla” right? So if others will coppy, reproduce or produce your product without your permission, they will be held liable under the cpr. We might all agree on this if the application of the law is as simple as that. But you know, in reality its not cause if the coppy rights holder decided to file a complaint before the court against a particular person whom he suspected of violating his rights as a coppy right holder, he cannot just go in court and say your honor, this person violates my rights as a coppy rights holder so please let him pay me damages. He cannot just say that. He must introduce evidence first against that person in order for his complaint to be able to stand in court. Alright we all use our common sense on this scenario people for all of us to understand this better. Suppose you are all the owner of a coppy righted matterials and I am the cloner who produce a clone of your matterials without your consent. In other words, you are all a plaintiff and I am the defendant. You decided to bring a case against me in court. If you apply that provisions of coppy right infringement law which says the owner has the right to coppy, reproduce, produce etc. verbatimly or as it is, using your common sense, can you not see the immidiet insurmountable problem that you have to solve first so that your case against me will progress in court? First. Assuming that the coppy in my possession is the exact imitation of the matterials you are holding, how can you prove that the one I am holding is just a clone and not one of the authorized coppy of your matterials that you already circulated in the public or in the market as the case maybe. Cause you cannot just say before the court that “your honor, as you can see, the coppy he is holding is just a clone” you have to prove your claim by introducing a convincing evidence. Second. Assuming that by some miraculous means, you are able to prove that the coppy under my possession is not one of the authorized coppy that you have permitted to be circulated among the public, You have to prove alsow by introducing evidence that I come in to possession of such matterials by illegal or unauthorize means. Cause you cannot just say again that “your honor, he produces the coppy of my material under his possession by the code or by the matterials that he had stolen or that he had copied from my computer without my permission” You cannot just say that then the court agree. You have to produce evidence against the defendant and if I am not mistaken, since the case already touch the criminal aspects of the case, the kind of evidence that you need to produce is not just ordinary or convincing. You have to introduce evidence that will prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. So the court will have to devise a means in order to apply that particular provisions of the coppy right infringement law against those violators and so they come up with this exception or rules which provides that “as long as the defendant is not claming ownership and making profits out of the matterials belonging to others, the case against him will certainly dismiss” or in other words, the case against him has no basis. Hey its not me who said this, it’s the your court who comes out with this means or devise. remember that conflict between a particular provisions of a law and the decisions of the court, the court will prevail cause in a democratic government like the rural areas of the united states, legislative department will create a law, the court or judiciary will interpret it and the executive department will enforce it. We all know that right? Except in our area here in the highly urbanize city of Timbuktu cause we don’t have such kind of laws. We just say good bye to the violators of the law. That’s how urbanized and civilized we are. Hey we are going off topic already so I will end it here. I am being sarcastic on this rural and urbanize blablabla. And to end properly my post, this post is not meant to offend, degrade, criticize belittle or even to argue someones opinion. This is only to explain further that kids room example further if the kids room you are talking about refers to the infringement and not infringement game I posted before as an example. But if its not, then my sincerest apology. And I say this community will not commit an error if they ever decided to adopt that as a means in dealing with the cloners in here if cloners does exist in here. Afterall, that means or devise comes with your own court. Thank you.
@38, Enough with the looking for a damn fight mindset, got that? I, and others, have explained to you how this works countless times. Stop looking for a fight and grow up!
Good job missing the point entirely, UltimateBlade.
Let me revise your example though.
Say I made a game. Now say you cloned my game, made something with it, and it was almost entirely my own code and ideas and whatnot. You slapped a few new sounds in, maybe, changed a couple of small things, but at base it's the same game.
If that goes to court, I have to prove that:
1. I have the right to pursue this in the first place (if I have a copyright, or if I have expressed authorship and have asked that no unauthorized distribution or copying should occur, I have this by default)
2. Your game is enough like mine to fall within the bounds specified by law, and
3. That having done so, I have grounds to chase you for damages or, at the very least, a cease-and-desist style order
Your game does not have to be like mine, line for line. Ever see authors suing people for borrowing their ideas, musicians suing people for using their riffs, etc? Happens all the time, my friend. it does not have to be a straight-up copy; it just has to be close. Many of these similarities result in out-of-court settlements for damages.
Now I don't think anyone's talking about taking anyone to court here, but since we are a forum and a community unto ourselves, we are well within our rights to decide that if you have made a clone of a game, or are endorsing same, we want no part of you.
40, in your example, when you are talking already is not a clone as provided for or defined in dictionary. its only an alteration of your game. not a clone. remember that a clone is an exact immitation as stated by 38 before and I agree cause that is what in the dictionary. And dont get me wrong, I am not endorsing or defending cloners. I am only making an statement base on what the existing laws are provided. hey just to be clear, we are not arguing with each other right? we are only exchanging ideas? you are sharing your ideas base on your understanding and interpretation of the law and i am only sharing my ideas base on what i read as an explanation and as how to enforce that law. I hope no hard feelings again on your part.
I've been referring to them as unauthorized forks, which I think is waaaay more accurate.
Whether you use the term "clone", "unauthorized code", "unauthorized fork" or whatnot, if one were to pursue this with any sort of legal counsel, they'd set you straight and tell you what the appropriate term was.
At this point, you're arguing semantics. It's a bad-faith argument because you seem to agree with the sentiment, but you are dead set against the term "clone" because of a definition you read in the dictionary.
@TURTLEPOWER, most of the content in the kids room would have been due to moderators moving it out of other rooms into the kids room. I don't think that kids would be making their own threads there most of the time. And the point of the name the kids room is to show that the discussion is beneath what adults should be doing.
I get that, thanks for clarifying. I honestly think it's a good idea. Whether the mods would be willing to do something like this is another matter.
at Ethin dude, just stop it, you are wasting your time with that guy, just let the fucker shout around and some day he'll stop.
Yeah the kids room sounds quite nice and all, maybe it should ahave the possibility that noone can post in it accept the mods and admins who then can also move topics to that room.
slap a good name on it, kids room, daycare center, trashpits, foal raising meadow, or wait, foals are actually cute, forget about that one.
well, as I said, get a good name, slap some sort of describtion on it, along the lines of, childish discussions are moved here, don't look for your own safety.
Oh wait, another idea. Can a room be modified in a way that people are only allowed posting in a certain room? You could then change the read and write permission of certain users to only see and or write posts in the kids room.
the kids room is a good idea. it's going to be entertaining watching kids argue.
@46, yeah, I'm done with him. If he wants to live under the delusion that the dictionary is 100-percent correct on all things and is the ultimate authority on all things words and word usages, cannot possibly have any ambiguities, and is perfect in all ways, fine by me.
Generated in 0.034 seconds (69% PHP - 31% DB) with 10 queries