GSL Updated status on the revised GSL

[Scott_Rouse]

Originally Posted by Orcus

Hey Scott, I hope I wasnt speaking out of school in describing that process generally. I just couldnt take the misinformation any more. Not sure why it bothers me. You're a big boy and can handle it yourself

You know I am hoping big time that you can pull this off... I am dying to support 4E.

Clark

No Prob.

I will pull this off.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Originally Posted by Scott_Rouse

No Prob.

I will pull this off.

Or die trying?

Mustrum "plays too much RPGs and watches to much action movies* Ridcully

[Voadam]

Originally Posted by Corjay

Anyway, back on topic, or maybe to settle the topic, the GSL is being worked on, and apparently it won't be much longer

If you define "not much longer" as "at least weeks from Sept. 11 for the Rouse stage of it to be completed." I don't expect anything in September.

[Corjay]

Originally Posted by Voadam

If you define "not much longer" as "at least weeks from Sept. 11 for the Rouse stage of it to be completed." I don't expect anything in September.

When we're talking about WOTC time, LOL, yeah. Several people were expecting six months and more.

[pemerton]

Originally Posted by Corjay

Anyway, back on topic, or maybe to settle the topic, the GSL is being worked on, and apparently it won't be much longer (with the exception that we still don't know if Legal will resolve it by committee or by simple approval; maybe someone would like to inform us).

I don't fully understand why you think the committee issue is so important.

I have worked for an Australian parliamentary committee, I have sat on high school policy committees, and I currently sit on a number of academic administrative committees. In all cases the general method of decision-making was for the chair to express a preliminary view, seek input from the table, and then for the matter to be resolved by the consenus that the chair took to have arisen out of the discussion. Only a handful of times in 20 years have I ever seen a committee put a matter to the vote, whether that involved making a decision or revisiting a previous decision.

I'd be surprised if US business practice is all that different from my Australian public sector experiences.

[Corjay]

My experience with such committees is much slower than that. I've been in a union and I've been a part of a private committee. Both took forever to get anything approved because every little issue required a vote. For most committees that I've heard about, they meet once a weak, even for businesses. My union would get about 2 issues of any significance acheived (by vote) on each week. Then there's the senate and congress. Watching both of those committees work, it's a little faster, but still pretty slow.

It's fairly limited experience, but when I studied the ROR, it seemed pretty slow if you follow the letter of the rules. But the ROR is merely guidelines. A committee can choose its own rules or modify the ROR for their committee at will. So if a committee wants to streamline things, they could change it.

[Scott_Rouse]

Originally Posted by Corjay

Anyway, back on topic, or maybe to settle the topic, the GSL is being worked on, and apparently it won't be much longer (with the exception that we still don't know if Legal will resolve it by committee or by simple approval; maybe someone would like to inform us).

RACI

I am the R

Legal is the A

There are C's and I's too.

[Corjay]

Thanks for the info, Scott. So it all works on verification and signature (simple approval). So it should be faster than committee.

[Ranger REG]

Originally Posted by Scott_Rouse

RACI

I am the R

Legal is the A

There are C's and I's too.

I hope we the public are not the Informed. I don't like the one-way communication part, as mentioned in Wikipedia.

[Brown Jenkin]

Originally Posted by Scott_Rouse

RACI

I am the R

Legal is the A

There are C's and I's too.

So that would be Conspiracy and Inure.

[Najo]

Corjay,

I think you are still not understanding how you are coming off or in what way you were rude to Clark (Orcus).

You made some statements that are assuming alot, and your last statement to Scott is like this too. All Clark did was correct your false assumptions.

Clark is the owner of Necromancer games, a lawyer and has a direct connection with Scott. Scott and Clark have spoken about what the 3pp want from the GSL, which as a 3pp and lawyer, Clark is qualified to do so.

Basically you came in here and slammed two key industry people trying to make the GSL work, and then when they spoke out about it you came back at them with no respect or apology.

The other posts by members are passively saying your being rude. I am going to come out and just say it because I think your attitude is negative still and Scott and Clark deserve respect. So please mind your place, both those guys are working hard to make 4e a good thing for WOTC and the 3pp together, which we all want.

Peace

[Corjay]

I slammed one industry person for what I perceived to be his own rudeness (I never said one rude thing to Scott). Drop it.

[Najo]

Originally Posted by Corjay

I slammed one industry person for what I perceived to be his own rudeness (I never said one rude thing to Scott). Drop it.

Corjay,

You have half the people posting in this thread saying your coming off wrong, you have Scott telling you himself that your shooting the messenger and Clark is having to react to your attacks. Then when I try to point this out to you, you reply with the same venom in your post. Please step back from the situation, and take a look at how you are coming off to people. If you don't intend to be rude, then consider how some of your curt answers seem like arrogance.

Likewise, a think a more friendly tone and an apology or two to the right people (Clark and Scott for one) would be welcomed, but you come in here and the only response my post gets (pointing out those issues) is "drop it". We are not trying to offend you, many of us are asking you to stop the offensive tone in your posts is all. Please show some respect.

Again, peace to you.

[Corjay]

The conversation is over. Everyone's stepping back.

You come in here, having participated zilch in this discussion, acting all high and mighty, arrogantly demanding an apology, respect, and "a more friendly tone" for someone else. I tell you what, when you can prove yourself morally superior enough not to pick other people's fights, nay, not to pick any fights at all, I'll step back a moment. I think that's a fair trade. — The rest of everyone else on this site who have viewed the exchange have proven themselves morally superior enough not to get into it.

Until you came in here sporting a crankfest, this discussion was back on track. The only apology any of us here need is yours for fanning the flames after it was all over, but I don't care if you do or don't. Just stop your moaning about me and let this discussion return to its previous state.

EDIT: removed "half" rant.

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by Corjay

EDIT: removed "half" rant.

There should have been no rant at all.

Thread closed.