Yair
Community Supporter
I have decided not to pursue the MassiveSRD at this point, but let me answer you first.
Perhaps I wasn't clear on the matter, but the point of my suggestions wasn't that such a project needs a publisher's approval, but rather that the publisher's needs and wants should not be altogether ignored. I wasn't suggesting doing whatever the publisher wants, rather I was basically saying that he should be contacted so we'll hear what he has to say on the matter.
And I was putting forth guidelines on what I thought was important to include, and what wasn't - for example, I am generally unimpressed with most fluff and am amiable to cutting it, especially if this leaves room for the actual product to be superior (as I DO want publishers to sell books, in general). I wouldn't do the same for crunch. That's my opinion, so I offered it as a criterion, but I ain't married to the idea.
I did NOT intend to say one must acquire the publisher's approval for the extraction. I do wish to get his approval to post links and names that will properly idenitify the work and authors (something I can't do without his consent), which may come with its own terms (post a link to his store, an ad, whatever). His approval of the final text would also be nice as a legal safety net. And I was also suggesting not publishing major fluff without his approval, but that's just because I don't think highly of it on one hand but want to support publishers making fluff OGC on the other. That's all the approvals I can think of, none of them are actually needed.
As for why I won't be doing it, it comes down to several reasons: a) I don't want to curtail future OGC publications from certain publishers, and I was convinced such a project might do that, and b) I decided a proper format has to be established prior to extraction or else much of the work would be in vain; my attempts to settle on one haven't been quite succeful, the most extensive project seems to be here, but it's moved well beyond my ability to contribute, and c) I decided small non-exhaustive extracts of useful stuff, updated and revised for my taste, would be something I want more, so I'm moving in that direction. And d), I don't have much time to work on non-work anyways, so it's kind of on the back burner due to all of the above.
I tried to set upa wiki here, but decided it isn't really comfortable.
Perhaps I wasn't clear on the matter, but the point of my suggestions wasn't that such a project needs a publisher's approval, but rather that the publisher's needs and wants should not be altogether ignored. I wasn't suggesting doing whatever the publisher wants, rather I was basically saying that he should be contacted so we'll hear what he has to say on the matter.
And I was putting forth guidelines on what I thought was important to include, and what wasn't - for example, I am generally unimpressed with most fluff and am amiable to cutting it, especially if this leaves room for the actual product to be superior (as I DO want publishers to sell books, in general). I wouldn't do the same for crunch. That's my opinion, so I offered it as a criterion, but I ain't married to the idea.
I did NOT intend to say one must acquire the publisher's approval for the extraction. I do wish to get his approval to post links and names that will properly idenitify the work and authors (something I can't do without his consent), which may come with its own terms (post a link to his store, an ad, whatever). His approval of the final text would also be nice as a legal safety net. And I was also suggesting not publishing major fluff without his approval, but that's just because I don't think highly of it on one hand but want to support publishers making fluff OGC on the other. That's all the approvals I can think of, none of them are actually needed.
As for why I won't be doing it, it comes down to several reasons: a) I don't want to curtail future OGC publications from certain publishers, and I was convinced such a project might do that, and b) I decided a proper format has to be established prior to extraction or else much of the work would be in vain; my attempts to settle on one haven't been quite succeful, the most extensive project seems to be here, but it's moved well beyond my ability to contribute, and c) I decided small non-exhaustive extracts of useful stuff, updated and revised for my taste, would be something I want more, so I'm moving in that direction. And d), I don't have much time to work on non-work anyways, so it's kind of on the back burner due to all of the above.
I tried to set upa wiki here, but decided it isn't really comfortable.
).
