Also, as I posted in another thread debating this: policy or guideline? Guildeines are mere advice. Policy is norms or, at least, something the forum staff that acts in the name of the invisible Thunderfall wants to enforce.
Proposed Policy Change - the Modiquette
- Thread starter leif erikson
- Start date
This has always been my standing principle with my own modding work; I'd encourage other people to use it, but I'm a little uneasy about the forum dictating to people that they must do so.
DRJ
Hedonist
I'd say grab the stuff from him which the community needs to make progress, though credit it with "thanks for your friendly help", then kick the troll out and everyone goes back to normal, friendly sharing of ideas and code, which already rightfully cited, is the true purpose of this forum.
I think rules should be adjusted to the situation, and this situation is like there is someone taking without giving, he should be ripped off, tared and feathered.
So just have the rules a bit vague and excercise the will of the people.
After all, only if the community values the benefits of the collective over a minority oftrolls coders only trying to get attention by a strategy of exclusion, an atmosphere of trust and creativity can flourish for the majority.
After all what can happen? He can't sue the forum or anyone lol, even if he wanted to. So whatever---
Just use common sense, decide whats right and move on, don't feed the troll.
I think rules should be adjusted to the situation, and this situation is like there is someone taking without giving, he should be ripped off, tared and feathered.
So just have the rules a bit vague and excercise the will of the people.
After all, only if the community values the benefits of the collective over a minority of
After all what can happen? He can't sue the forum or anyone lol, even if he wanted to. So whatever---
Just use common sense, decide whats right and move on, don't feed the troll.
I have to say, I don't like this as a principle: I think that each individual modder does have a right, should he see fit, to be selfish.
Blue Monkey
Archon Without Portfolio
Characterizing people who want to decide for themselves what creative working arrangements to make with other modders as "selfish" is rude. Self-determination is not selfish.
Genghis.Khan
Person
Maybe add something like this
Ogedei_the_Mad
Caffeinated Khagan
Absolutely. This is my position also. I don't oppose the idea as a guideline but when it becomes a rule, there lies the problem.
I don't think it's 'selfish' to allow everyone to decide how much of his (or her) rights they extend to other people, and what 'uses' are contemplated with the freedom to use. If I make something and then someone else uses it for other modding, it's presumed to be donated.
However, if that someone uses it to make money, why should they grab up what I do for free? Why are others getting paid but not me?
However, if that someone uses it to make money, why should they grab up what I do for free? Why are others getting paid but not me?
'Unless the mod author {expressly} modifies this in any way', would be a better wording.
Well, if it is all such easy-going and serene talk, then why do not just leave it as it is now, or rather stress the fact that if people want to make derivatives of your work they have to ask for your permission? I have allowed some people to make derivatives, but some others just went on and did without notifying me. The mods took down their work, but still it is bad to be operating on a system of honor instead of clear-cut rules on this one.
By the way, most derivatives look worse than the original work. Unless we are talking about the unlikely case of a better artist improving parts of a good work (which can happen, but it is rare) it is mostly a personal touch on the old work, which tends to ruin most of its aura. In cIV people can just take a ready model that took hours to make, and add their own stuff on it, which would be fine if the creator allowed it, but should not be deemed as what is the norm- nor what the norm should be, in my view.
In CivIII we use 2d renders, but most of us have moved to 3d modelling for them anyway. And while people cannot use my models from a 2d render, they still can alter them using 2d techniques. They should ask me first, is all i am claiming, and it seems perfectly reasonable to me.
DRJ
Hedonist
even if he wouldn't have used work from here as a base and even if he wouldn't brag about it here and getting attention by linking it here i would say grab it and run - as long as its for the good of the collective and not used for commercialization efforts without giving him his fair share for his work (what seems to be his real fear).
after all, the base of this is a political question individualism vs collectivism (like in compulsory acquisition). nevertheless don't forget that no collectivism can work without individuals contributing to it and doing so wholeheartedly because they believe in its benefits - of which one is that the collective can exercise better progress even if some oppose and fight for their privileges (or all land would still be in the hands of few landlords -- wait. it is again. or has always been :/ )
regarding the vagueness i mentioned and also endorsed: such a policy is usually closer to the reality as such political questions are always in flux and continuously negotiated.
the non commercial rule is everything we need imho, anything else should go, even without the permission.
after all, the base of this is a political question individualism vs collectivism (like in compulsory acquisition). nevertheless don't forget that no collectivism can work without individuals contributing to it and doing so wholeheartedly because they believe in its benefits - of which one is that the collective can exercise better progress even if some oppose and fight for their privileges (or all land would still be in the hands of few landlords -- wait. it is again. or has always been :/ )
regarding the vagueness i mentioned and also endorsed: such a policy is usually closer to the reality as such political questions are always in flux and continuously negotiated.
the non commercial rule is everything we need imho, anything else should go, even without the permission.
Blue Monkey
Archon Without Portfolio
Scanning this & the other threads again it appears that the vast majority of creative people who have posted and who have no problem with the policy are the ones don't care how their work is used. This is a situation where it is very important to protect and serve the minority. some of the best creators are the ones who want to be particular about their work.
Those who don't think the policy or its rescindment will have much affect on them are well advised to think about those to whom it does make a difference. If either outcome doesn't affect you now and isn't likely to affect you in the future why would you take sides against another modder who would be affected?
Those who don't think the policy or its rescindment will have much affect on them are well advised to think about those to whom it does make a difference. If either outcome doesn't affect you now and isn't likely to affect you in the future why would you take sides against another modder who would be affected?
DRJ
Hedonist
the real debate is over this: can individual modders stop the development of larger mods simply because they want to? in the sense of reason i'd say no. for example: in real life a city needs a certain ground to build something like a street benefiting all its people - it takes it even if the owner is not agreeing, paying him a lump sum (it doesnt only happen in china). of course there are situations when i would say it is not ok, for example if that what the politicians think the people need is like a compulsory acquisition for a nuclear plant (->commercialization). so if i could vote on that particular compulsory acquisition i would vote no, but on another one that fits my principles more i'd vote yes (like getting rid of the eroding monoculture and having a national park established ->free share). thats why a certain vagueness in policy is better and having direct democracy focusing on the situation is best, imho
A very poor parallelism in my view. I have nothing to gain from protecting the cIV modder in question, since i differ fundamentally from his case. However it should be allowed that any modder can agree or disaggree on having derivatives of his work. You don't seem to be a creator (?) so wouldn't know how it feels to work on some model and then have someone else ruin it with their bright editing. I have, again, controllably allowed some people in the community to edit my works, but they clearly asked me first, and would have accepted my decision. Moreover i knew their work would find use in people's mods, even if it was based on an edited version of an existant graphic by me.
To just claim that it should be allowed for anyone to copy anything and alter it, without any consent from the original creator will, in the long run, lead the better creators (or some of them) to leave the site.
To just claim that it should be allowed for anyone to copy anything and alter it, without any consent from the original creator will, in the long run, lead the better creators (or some of them) to leave the site.
kiwitt
Modern Earth Modder
I believe, quite simply if you are using another modder's work/content, you should give credit if possible.
As to ownership, it is created on Firaxis engine, the ultimate owner of all derivatives.
It would be different if you created your own completely different game and did not use the Civ engine.
As to ownership, it is created on Firaxis engine, the ultimate owner of all derivatives.
It would be different if you created your own completely different game and did not use the Civ engine.
I think you've raised a slightly different point about editing - totally agree that if we're running a policy of 'all's fair to use fairly', there needs to be a caveat that you must use somebody else's work intact. Otherwise, it harms their reputation if you're not all that good, bluntly put - unless it's something specific like 'can I use that helmet on one of my units?', in which the edition in question is clearly defined.
Not valid since we are talking (i at least, and the discussion is partly about that too) about 3d models. They can be used virtually everywhere. Even 2d renders of them can be used in potentially thousands of other games.
Well by now i have no problem of others using my work intact, provided that they credit me. But derivatives is a main issue in this thread, and i restate that they should only be allowed on a case-by-case basis, with the expressed consent of the creator of the prototype.
DRJ
Hedonist
Or, from another perspective more people will contribute since they don't have to care about the egos of some "VIPs", just allowing what they want to. And what may be the real reason that you would not want someone using your work in a worse way? Because you fear that it could draw attention away from you? so after all you want to soft-patent the work, simply based on what you think is good/bad usage, denying the collective the right to experiment with it freely.
Its kind of protectionistic and arbitrary and even if i would agree with you in certain situations that your work has been abused i would always argue for the right to do so (RIP Voltaire)
Doesn't really make sense, since my point was that those who want to allow their work have derivatives by others, will obviously give consent. Those who do not, won't. If the latter are such an insignificant minority why bother changing what they like? Surely in the grand scheme of things according to that belief it won't matter at all 
DRJ
Hedonist
If the latter are such an insignificant minority why bother changing what they like? Surely in the grand scheme of things according to that belief it won't matter at all
As I said in a previous post it DOES really matter and thats why the debate is cooking. The case was that C2C came to a bottleneck in implementing certain mechanisms with multimaps that are possibly to be overcome if merged with another's work.
Because he refused we call for compulsory acquisition to progress with the most ambitious mod there is for civ, imho. No need to invent the wheel twice.
We Are The Borg. You Will Be Assimilated Moderator Action: Please do not use other member's names in the thread.
Similar threads
