Inicio

Upcoming Events

There are no Upcoming Events

Distribuir contenido

Chat/Forum Rules Site Rules

121 respuestas [Último envío]
Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

1- At the time, there was only one option available, to delete !
(forum moderator priviledges bug again ??? )

2- the idea of a "Trash forum" is excellent.

That's ok. What is done is done. Let's leave this accident on the road.

With the Trash we shouldn't have this kind of problems again, we can move a thread back to its original place if we make a mistake.

semplerfi
Imagen de semplerfi
Desconectado/a
se unió: Ene 5 2008
I have done nothing wrong here. Apologies accepted. I understand growing pains.
 
I posted here in the hopes that the Guild of Messengers could authenticate the news tip with your liaison to Cyan, which ended up happening elsewhere. 
 
I thought such a bold statement had some validity to it. Cyan has not always been the first source of something being released. Look to your own guild’s history for that.
 
I also feel dialogs in people’s secondary language lead to miss-understandings of what is really being said. Ergo here we are...

[edit1]

 IMHO, labeling anything 'Trash' says judgment has past, how about a label less judgmental.

Nanouk_Metal
Desconectado/a
se unió: Mar 1 2008

.

Hi Semplerfi,

I now beleive that our biggest mistake was to have
approved your post for publishing before checking with Cyan.

I agree that the Trash forum could be renamed with a less
offensive title.

Suggestion: Messages to be reviewed B4 Re-Publishing
(even if it was meant to be seen by Administrators, Moderators or other officials only)


Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

well, Nanouk we didn't approve anything. Semplerfi's post wasn't published on the NewsFeed, and Forum Posts doesn't have an approval procedure....not before they get published. For approval after the publishing there are you and the other Mods 

Uhm, yes Semp thanks for the suggestion on Trash. I'll think about another name

I posted here in the hopes that the Guild of Messengers could authenticate the news tip with your liaison to Cyan, which ended up happening elsewhere.

Yes, we sent a PM to Chogon and he replied, but at the same time he also posted on the MOUL forums

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

Done, it is now called "Archive of deleted posts"

semplerfi
Imagen de semplerfi
Desconectado/a
se unió: Ene 5 2008

Sounds good.

On a humorous side I was thinking "Trash & Treasures" coming from Idiom "One man's trash is another man's treasure."

Szark
Imagen de Szark
Desconectado/a
Magazine moderatorMagazine teamMessenger
se unió: Ene 12 2008

and in the 13th State it is often said "Where thes muck thes muney" (Yorkshire accent) :)

Al'Kaera
Imagen de Al'Kaera
Desconectado/a
se unió: Jul 6 2008

I like your new draft Leo and yes, I agree with Nanouk, the trash  "Archive of deleted posts" forum = good idea.

Now I have a place to post where noone is so offended.

again KI 102324  ancient KI 5969479

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

Posted the rules in their respective pages

Thanks everyone for your contributions

Szark
Imagen de Szark
Desconectado/a
Magazine moderatorMagazine teamMessenger
se unió: Ene 12 2008

YIPEEE great work. I have a warm fuzzy feeling inside now. Nice to see things finally coming together.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

in relation to the recent facts happening at the GoW (discussions about Copyright theft and publication of a Public Shard) how do you think we should behave if someone comes here posting News about the Public Shard (be it UAM Shard or Deep Island Shard)? Reject or approve?

I know there is a precedent (with the Pelishard) but that time there were things clearly illegal, and times are changing. This time the matter concerns more a grey area than a completely illegal thing. So real question is "how do we behave with News concerning things in the Grey Area?". For what I have seen, Cyan's position is to ignore it as long as it doesn't come knocking at their door (i.e. they don't do anything agaist, but you can't post about it in the MOUL forums), do we want to follow Cyan's example (=reject news) or something else?

These questions are related to our Site Rules (i.e. News, Events and public Pages) and not Forums and chat Rules (We have clearly stated there that discussions about these things are allowed)

EDIT: ok this is no longer just a "what if", we really have a News waiting for approval/rejection

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

/takes off GM hat

from a personal point of view, I would change our policy to approve this kind of News. The future of Uru may really stand in those shards, now in particular that they are going Public. Considering our Guild history, we have always tried to stay under Cyan's wishes, and Cyan's wish in this case is "please don't make (public) shards", but this history refers to a period when we still thought MORE could really happen (meaning, Uru run by Cyan) and we were seeking Cyan's ok to our Guild to be officially recognized.

Now times have changed a bit, Uru's future is clearly no longer under Cyan's control and this time probably we should seek the Community's approval more than Cyan's, and this would mean accepting News coming from the Grey area.

Just my 2 cents

Marten
Imagen de Marten
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMessenger
se unió: Nov 8 2007

The specific site rule says:

* The GoMe won't publish any content related to illegal activities (e.g. copyright infringement, underground Uru shards/servers, etc)

Hindsight is 20/20, but now I see that there are some flaws with this rule.  First, it makes an assumption that underground Uru shards are inherently illegal.  Second, it refers to "underground" shards, but that term is never defined.  What makes a shard "underground"?  Is it underground if it isn't authorized by Cyan?  Or is only underground if it isn't publicized?  Pelishard was not authorized, but was publicized.

I think Pelishard was something we didn't want to help promote for a few reasons, and we need to admit to these reasons and find a way to non-subjectively incorporate them into our rules.  So we need to do some thinking about that.  The person that ran Pelishard deliberately lied to and misled people on numerous occasions, including making claims that his shard was authorized by Cyan when it was not, and he violated the copyright not only of Uru content but also that of Myst V, Crowthistle, and I believe Hex Isle too.

The new GoW shard might not cross so many lines....  but an unauthorized use of any of Cyan's content is still a copyright violation.  (Remember that Cyan never said they would open source the Age data.)  Is the GoW shard using entirely their own properties, or does it include Relto, the City, and Bevins?  If it includes Cyan content, then we need to decide if we are going to look past such violations, and we need to be clear in our rules about what is acceptable and what is not.

As for the current submission sitting in the queue, there is no question in my mind that it needs to be rejected.  While we think about changing the rules, the rules as they are currently still need to be enforced.  It is not fair to everyone who has abided by our rules to bend the rules specially for this posting.  The submitter could have asked us about the rules before posting the content for publication, which would have been a far better way to address the problem, but the person did not and so I think he should expect we'll reject it.  If we do not change the rules in time before the event, well that is unfortunate, but we were not the ones that chose this confrontational approach to our rules.

Lunanne
Imagen de Lunanne
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMagazine moderatorMagazine teamTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Ene 17 2010

It also says "Delivering uru news to the community" on the front page

I think we should approve it for now, but reformulate the rule and make it also clear(er) towards the GoW. And then enforce it

but that is just what I think.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

yes Marten, what pushed me not to reject directly is exactly the fact that the rule is spelled out badly and doesn't cover the current situation.

Now, thinking of what we really meant when we wrote it, rejection is the only answer. So, as much as I'd like to approve it (and probably a similar post would be approved when we re write that rule) the best thing is probably what you suggest: enforce the current rules, because "It is not fair to everyone who has abided by our rules to bend the rules specially for this posting", and then try to re write that rule.

Luna, what you suggest is what I wanted to do initially, but we have to keep a bit of formality, with the rules at least, or they will no longer be rules.

I'll wait a bit more though, I want to hear more voices

Re: editing the rule. I agree with Marten, but I can't find a way of practically writing it. Any suggestion?

Lunanne
Imagen de Lunanne
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMagazine moderatorMagazine teamTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Ene 17 2010

Leonardo escribió:

Luna, what you suggest is what I wanted to do initially, but we have to keep a bit of formality, with the rules at least, or they will no longer be rules.

Re: editing the rule. I agree with Marten, but I can't find a way of practically writing it. Any suggestion?

Yeah, I know that it is just that I don't really like rules, although I know they are necessary.

Maybe we should say that we'll only bring news about shards when they don't break any rules ( apart from that one). The pelishard wouldn't come through ( so far I know) but other family friendly ones and all would.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

Marten escribió:

The new GoW shard might not cross so many lines....  but an unauthorized use of any of Cyan's content is still a copyright violation.  (Remember that Cyan never said they would open source the Age data.)  Is the GoW shard using entirely their own properties, or does it include Relto, the City, and Bevins?  If it includes Cyan content, then we need to decide if we are going to look past such violations, and we need to be clear in our rules about what is acceptable and what is not.

I was going to reply to Luna that probably her suggestion for writing the rule wasn't viable because the shards however break the copyright rule...but thinking of it it's not true. Pelishard allowed everyone to download the full contents (Cyan Ages included with crowthistle and MQO), but these shards don't, they require Uru:CC and (optionally) a copy of Crowthistle, MystV and MQO. So they make no copyright infringement....good. This is the best thing I've realized today XD

So, as Luna said we could just say nothing....that means saying that the News about the Shards must follow all the other rules but are not disallowed by their nature. Now...are all the other rules good enough? XD

Marten
Imagen de Marten
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMessenger
se unió: Nov 8 2007

Taking Lunanne's point into full consideration, our rules should support us in our primary objective - to report the news.  The rules we have may clarify to an extent what news we are willing to report on.

If we are all willing to report on this news... then the challenge is how can we fairly and reasonably respond to this situation where the rules may no longer match up to what we want to do.

There are really two ways forward - we approve the article and then change the rules, or, we reject the article, change the rules, and invite the article to be reposted under the new rules.  In the end the result is the same; the latter approach seems nitpicky and pedantic, but at the same time, could be seen as the more "professional" approach.

I wrote what I did before Lunanne's response, to try to help encourage thinking on the issue.  Please don't consider me to be too strongly tied to one solution over another.  Sometimes, my words are just my own process of thinking through a problem, and I can't guarantee my thoughts are complete or fully formed.

EDIT - added section below

Regarding how to reword the rule itself... if you want to permit ANY shard other than a Cyan-authorized one, then as a technicality, know that we cannot use "copyright" as a blunt and nonspecific rule.  Using a software program in a manner not authorized by the creator is considered to be a copyright violation in the United States, because to run the program, a copy of it is made into the memory of your computer - and this copy is unauthorized if you are using the program in an unauthorized manner!   (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDY_Indus._LLC_v._Blizzard_Entm%27t,_Inc.  While I despise MDY, I'm not happy with how Blizzard argued their case and the precedent it has set.).

Also, it can be argued that fan ages are copyrighted to the creators of those Ages.  So... here is my attempt at creating a rule:

* We have chosen to only report on shards that incorporate copyrighted content that is either (a) already in the end user's legal possession OR (b) used with the permission of the author.

The way the above rule is worded, a Shard could incorporate Myst V content - but we'd only report on that shard if the shard isn't providing the Myst V content to people who don't possess Myst V.

Thoughts?

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

ah I didn't know of all of those things with copyrights, thank you Marten ^^ That's why I call you the Wise Guild Master

mmh, I must say I still like the professional approach, but if you others want to approve it's ok.

Dustin
Desconectado/a
se unió: Ago 23 2010

Well, the situation isn't as simple as just the copyright question, unfortunately.  As you guys probably know, I started helping Age makers share their work in 2005, right after Almlys made the plugin that permitted the creation of fan Ages.  (Dustin=ddb174, by the way.)  And I continue to do that; that's how people get the fan Ages: through UAM.  (Indeed, I made this list specifically with you guys in mind: http://www.the-ancient-city.de/uru-ages/uam.updates.htm)  Well, after waiting for a long, long time for someone to make a public shard, I finally did so, though I hate being in charge of things.  I just called it Uam shard, because why not?^^  Unfortunately, some people got wind of it, and the following drama resulted: http://forum.guildofwriters.com/viewtopic.php?f=87&t=4593.

I assumed that you folks did not want to deal in this sort of thing, because I had (perhaps mistakenly) thought you guys did not want to report fan Age releases and updates, since the list was not made use of.

There are already a lot of hurt feelings and bad blood, and there is a tenuous calm at the moment, and by reporting this, you are in effect taking sides, though I know that is not your intention.

Anyway, I just don't want to see this blow up any more :)

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

ah....how does the saying goes? "Don't blame the Messenger" XD That actually sounds better in Italian

However by deciding a policy we ARE taking sides and I'm conscious of that, as we previously took the safe side of not allowing anything from Shards. What I'd like is just not get into any inner war among the Writers, and we are not, we intend to allow everyone to post news, provided they follow some simple rules.

mh..that's a bit offtopic here but your list is actually among our weblinks....well the weblinks list is also a bit long XD but you're right we may focus a bit more on Ages, maybe placing a link to your list somewhere more visible

Marten
Imagen de Marten
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMessenger
se unió: Nov 8 2007

I appreciate the additional insight, and I am certain everyone else here does as well, Dustin.

It is probably inevitable that someone will accuse us of having taken a side, but that's just what happens when media reports on a story that someone doesn't want published at all.  The best we can do is try to be neutral in our own tone, and in reporting the news, neither endorse nor put down someone's efforts.

Lunanne
Imagen de Lunanne
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMagazine moderatorMagazine teamTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Ene 17 2010

I think it doesn't really matter what we say/do on this subject, the GoW will be agitated anyway. I would be worried if they weren't, they seem to like .... rows arguments. It is more important that we feel comfortable with the rule.

And if we start to report about shards we should report about Drizzle and fanages too. In fact I thought we already reported about drizzle. It is in rel.to after all.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

Right

So I've thought a bit to the rules that Marten wrote:

The new rule doesn't exclude other sources of illegal activities news, we could add something for that:

  • The GoMe won't publish any content related to illegal activities, exception taken for Uru Shards that incorporate copyrighted content that is either (a) already in the end user's legal possession OR (b) used with the permission of the author.

or something along those lines

or we could just post Marten's rule replacing the current one and take advantage of the rule "The Guild Council reserves the right to not publish new that go against general moral or ethical laws or general Guild policy."

Probably the first one is better.

Lunanne
Imagen de Lunanne
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMagazine moderatorMagazine teamTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Ene 17 2010

I would go for the first one. Clear rules are better and then no one can say it is something personal or so

Polgara
Imagen de Polgara
Desconectado/a
Magazine teamTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Abr 24 2010

To me the formulation is a bit unfortunate.
"We don´t link to illegal activities, except...  "  - with this we say a) the Uru shards are illegal and b) we know it and nevertheless link to them.

I would change it to:

The GoMe won't publish any content related to illegal activities.
The GoMe do publish content of Shards that incorporate copyrighted content that is either (a) already in the end user's legal possession or (b) used with the permission of the author.

So we still say clearly that we don´t publish anything about illegal stuff and have a rule about what to publish.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

sounds good to me

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

It seems the new rule is almost done.

for the existing node, what are we going to do?

I wanted to make a decision by seeing what was your ideas but I don't see your ideas XD Marten and Lunanne posted their ideas and then seeing each other's post they changed their mind XD

Or maybe you are all thinking like me that it would be nice to approve, but the most professional thing would be rejecting and you can't find a solution just like me XD So what?

I must also consider that, still having rules, we often are soft on using them in a strict way.

Approve?

Marten
Imagen de Marten
Desconectado/a
Rel.to MaintainerMessenger
se unió: Nov 8 2007

I like Polgara's wording.

The submitter of the article is an IC alter ego, so I don't know who we'd want to contact.  Maybe Whilyam, as I know he's one of the persons "behind the scenes" of SR?  If the alter ego isn't his, he should at least know who to talk to.

Maybe for timeliness, and because of the difficulty in identifying the actual submitter, we could make a decision that:

* Generally we'll contact the submitter to re-submit in future scenarios similar to this one, BUT
* We reserve the right to make an exception and go ahead and approve once the rule is changed, and we're doing so in this case

I think that we should attempt to contact the submitter even if we go ahead and approve, to let them know of the rules change.

Leonardo
Imagen de Leonardo
Desconectado/a
WebmasterLiaisonTranslatorMessenger
se unió: Jun 19 2008

Nice approach Marten :)

I had already talked with Kaelis to let them know that we were discussing their article, I'll talk with him again