OGC Wiki?

[jgbrowning]

I'm trying to find a middle ground here, and all anyone can say is "you're going to steal my stuff". And I say, "No, I won't steal your stuff", and everyone says "you're going to steal my stuff".

Nell.

I admit that I'm confused as to what your goals are. You may have stated them earlier but I lost them. If you could repeat what you want to do (with some concrete examples) and why you want to do them perhaps there's a way to find a middle ground.

joe b.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

\Oh god. I give up. You win.

Don't give up. Something earned without effort has no value. Seriously, man, I got in, and I'm mean, nasty, and drunk more than 1/4 of the time.

What wording would you like to see? PLEASE!

I want to see the EXACT terms. I want to be able to have mechanics snatched down if I'm reworking it for a new book.

I'm more than willing for a middle ground.

I believe that an OGC Wiki will happen, no matter what either side wants.

I'm trying to find a middle ground here, and all anyone can say is "you're going to steal my stuff". And I say, "No, I won't steal your stuff", and everyone says "you're going to steal my stuff".

Nell.

Read over my posts again, nieghbor. I keep repeating: "It will happen, we need to agree on it before the matter is just taken from our hands." to sum it all up.

I am completely AGAINST forcing publishers to give away mechanics that oftentimes have taken months of careful work to create.

I'm completely AGAINST taking away IP or copyright.

I'm for sharing and cross pollinization of work. I'm for an easily accessable resource for both gamers and publishers.

I understand BOTH sides of this arguement, BOTH sides have merits and points.

We need to civilly sit down and discuss this before it gets like the RIAA/MP3 full body combat.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Don't forget, I've been a LONG proponent of the "D20 Free Download Library" to the point where there was a knock down drag down fight about it in a forum that resulted in a lot of people angry at each other.

I'm still an advocate of it.

 

[BryonD]

Here's a good question for you...

Why should I support an OGC Wiki?

Brass Tacks? What's in it for me?

In my opinion, you should not support it.
I'm not asking you to.
I'm against it.



BUT
The OGL allows it and my opinion, your opinion, anybody's moral platitudes aside, anyone who wants to do it may and anyone who has put the OGL on a product they put out has given tacit approval of them doing so.

You SHOULD be opposed to the wiki but you also SHOULD be in favor of expecting ALL parties to fully respect the OGL completely. Thus, if someone does a wiki you SHOULD think poorly of it while fully respecting and acknowledging their priviledge to do so.

Those are all SHOULDs. I don't see any basis for you to feel awfully compelled by my SHOULDs. I'd hope you choose to. But that is all.

However, in this case, my shoulds are defined by the rules of the OGL, without emotional or subjective distortion. The rules will trump the distortions in the end.

But it is all academic because the "something for nothing crowd" will keep waiting for someone else to hand the free product over.

 

[Nellisir]

I admit that I'm confused as to what your goals are. You may have stated them earlier but I lost them. If you could repeat what you want to do (with some concrete examples) and why you want to do them perhaps there's a way to find a middle ground.

Goal: To create a public repository of Open Game Content that improves, enriches, and increases the pool of OGC content to the benefit and increase of RPG gamers and the RPG industry.

Belief: That the free interchange of ideas, criticism, and experience, facilitated by convenience and minimal financial cost (you have to own a computer and access to the internet), is the best method available for developing a robust, balanced, flexible, and enjoyable RPG game/mechanics, and multiple variants thereof.

Examples: Grim n' Gritty Rules, WotC's Spell Compendium (contents evolved & balanced in part through internet feedback & discourse).

NOT beliefs: That writers shouldn't get paid, that I'm not entitled to free merchandise just because it's OGC. Anyone who thinks I'm stealing stuff can reimburse me the $1,550.05 I've spent at RPGNow (and that's not the only online game store I shop at).

I'm sorry if that's rough; I hope it suffices. I have to run now.

Sincerely,
Nell.

 

[jezter6]

It wasn't asked for, but here's my copy of Nellisir's latest post:

Goal: I'd like to see an OGC repository as complete as possible with as much content as allowed by law (and within the ability of those involved creating the site) organized in a manner that allows me to lookup certain rules when I need them.

What I don't want to see: Crippled content. Some sort of 'preview' OGC that only has meaning if you have to buy it somewhere else. There's a preview page at all the PDF sites out there, and I can preview most books at the store, so I don't need another preview page.

A 3000 page document I have to download and sift through to find anything.

3000 1 page documents that I have to download and sift through to find anything.

Beliefs: It is the right of anyone to have this content. If I have to pay for it, so be it. But I'm not going to pay for previews or crippled content.

I believe the original publisher should be respected, but should not have absolute control of what they want to post and what they want to keep hidden. I'm afraid that if you can choose what to post, you'll only post less innovative content and hide juicy bits.

Publishers should come to some sort of license with the site to allow them to post the name of the product and even link to a purchase page on ENGS/RPGnow/DTRPG. That way publishers benefit if someone likes 1 feat from a book, they may go out and buy it. It won't happen 100%, but I bet it happens more than 0%.

NON-beliefs: Everyone should get to download all the free content they want. I want a resource that helps me find stuff, I'm not in this like a pokemon card collector. I don't need to catch em all, but I do want them all there in case I do want them.

We should destroy publisher business by posting the content immediately, therefore reducing possible sales. I will still buy stuff, and so will others. I just want a single place I can go to find stuff instead of searching my hard drive to remember what publisher or book a certain feat happens to be in. I don't think 4 years is appropriate, but 6 months seems fair to me.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

In my opinion, you should not support it.
I'm not asking you to.
I'm against it.



BUT
The OGL allows it and my opinion, your opinion, anybody's moral platitudes aside, anyone who wants to do it may and anyone who has put the OGL on a product they put out has given tacit approval of them doing so.

You SHOULD be opposed to the wiki but you also SHOULD be in favor of expecting ALL parties to fully respect the OGL completely. Thus, if someone does a wiki you SHOULD think poorly of it while fully respecting and acknowledging their priviledge to do so.

Those are all SHOULDs. I don't see any basis for you to feel awfully compelled by my SHOULDs. I'd hope you choose to. But that is all.

However, in this case, my shoulds are defined by the rules of the OGL, without emotional or subjective distortion. The rules will trump the distortions in the end.

But it is all academic because the "something for nothing crowd" will keep waiting for someone else to hand the free product over.

Thank you for cutting through all the , and just laying it out.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Oh, and for any of you who want to get into the publishing business, but feel that you are being kept out by a barrier, please refer to this...

General - EN World GameStore - "Good Faith" Signup for Startup Publishers!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We at the EN World GameStore understand that starting capital for a new company can be difficult to come by. As such, we offer you the optional ability to get started with us without the upfront $99 activation fee. Instead, your first $120 of earnings at the EN World GameStore will be withheld as comission to the store until your balance is paid off. There are also some additional restrictions, detailed below.

* Any proceeds from each sale in excess of your standard comission (as outlined in your publisher contract) goes towards paying off your $120 balance.

* On EN World, your signature, press releases, and forum post links should point to your EN World GameStore account rather than any other retail site.

* When linking back to your own website, we ask that all purchase links also direct to your EN World GameStore account.

* If you already have a Pick'n'Mix-Only activation paid, then your activation cost for this account will be subtracted from the $120 activation.

* We reserve the right to deactivate any publisher not making an honest effort to remove their acrued debt by following the above restrictions until they are cured.

How to sign up as a Good Faith Publisher

All you need to do is sign up as a publisher as normal - fill in your publisher details, even prepare products for release. When you get to the stage where you are asked for your $99 activation fee, simply click on the button beneath it which says "Good Faith". This will take you to the Good Faith Agreement, which you need to agree to. You will then be activated as a publisher at the EN World GameStore with a starting balance of -$120. Once your balance reaches $0, you will continue as a regular publisher at the store.

Straight from Morrus.

See, you can get in, the same way I did, and the same way many of us did. If you choose to go for it, all the luck in the world, nieghbor.

BTW-This isn't getting in a pissing contest with Nellsir, but rather, just providing a public service reminder for those of you who might not have known.

 

[Nellisir]

I want to see the EXACT terms.

I can't do that. I'm one guy. I know squat about computers. I take medicine for Attention Deficit Disorder. The EXACT terms would have to be hammered out between the people who make it happen.
And, I'm tired. Tomorrow night I have a game. Friday I'm out of town. Maybe Saturday or Sunday I'll whip up exact provisional terms.

I want to be able to have mechanics snatched down if I'm reworking it for a new book.

That's one thing I can't figure out how to make work. Lets say you give the OGC Repository permission to post your Walk Like An Egyptian feat. A month later, Yair comes along and likes it, but thinks the dodge bonus is too high, and posts the Walk Like An Etruscan feat. Three months after that, Phil, who loves us all, thinks Walk Like An Etruscan would work great in his "A Hundred And One Funky Walks" collection, that he's posting in the repository because he's gone insane.

Then you decide to pull Walk Like An Egyptian. With Walk Like An Egyptian unauthorized, Walk Like An Etruscan and "A Hundred And One Funky Walks have to be pulled, and anything that was built off of those. It becomes a mess. Anyone's work becomes liable to be removed at any time because of somebody's whim. It just doesn't work. It's not fair to the people who built on your work in good faith.

Permission would have to work just like declaring OGC - once it's declared, it's irrevocable. It's the only way anyone utilizing the repository can work with confidence.

I am completely AGAINST forcing publishers to give away mechanics that oftentimes have taken months of careful work to create.

Agreed, for purposes of this repository.

I'm completely AGAINST taking away IP or copyright.

Absolutely, 100%, utterly agree. EVERYTHING I have, am, or ever will propose is fully legal, in accordance with the OGL, and retains an owners copyrights and control insofar as they retain them under the OGL.

We need to civilly sit down and discuss this before it gets like the RIAA/MP3 full body combat.

I'm trying.

I'm wiped; my head hurts; it'll be colder tomorrow; and I'll be working outside.
G'night all.
Nell.

 

[Conaill]

That's one thing I can't figure out how to make work. Lets say you give the OGC Repository permission to post your Walk Like An Egyptian feat. A month later, Yair comes along and likes it, but thinks the dodge bonus is too high, and posts the Walk Like An Etruscan feat. Three months after that, Phil, who loves us all, thinks Walk Like An Etruscan would work great in his "A Hundred And One Funky Walks" collection, that he's posting in the repository because he's gone insane.

Then you decide to pull Walk Like An Egyptian. With Walk Like An Egyptian unauthorized, Walk Like An Etruscan and "A Hundred And One Funky Walks have to be pulled, and anything that was built off of those.

No, not really.

Walk Like An Egyptian would still be OGC, so Walk Like An Etruscan and A Hundred And One Funky Walks would still be 100% legal. Ralts just withdrew his permission to post Walk Like An Egyptian in the repository, but he has no right to tell other authors what to do with the work derived from that.

Anyone who volunteers his work to be posted in the repository should do so in full knowledge that others may reuse this work in their own OGC - over which the original author will have no control whatsoever (other than expecting to be listed in section 15 etc.)

For that matter, once the OGC has been posted in the repository, anyone could copy it from the repository and post it elsewhere, share it among friends, even distribute it through P2P networks - all legally. So withdrawing the original OGC from the repository doesn't necessarily mean it will no longer be available online *somewhere*.