Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yair" data-source="post: 2765155" data-attributes="member: 10913">:nods: A more sensible plan. I bet you will still get flack from publishers that don't want their 4-year-old OGC published (evergreen products and all), but I'm not inclined to agree with them.I would personally like to add a "d) is so crippled that releasing it into the open will serve the community and publishers". But that would take you into very murky legal water.How do you intend to fight accusations of breach and legal actions against the site/you?Where do you intend to set up the wiki, and with what program? Who will maintain it technically? I believe the best solution would be setting up a dedicater server with MediaWiki installed, but that costs money, a significant amount of money, as well as some know-how.Since you are going with a member-only editing policy, I recommend setting up an "In Production" section which only members can see so people could comment on the material and compliance with the OGL and OGC designation before it is published.No offense, but I've seen a fair number of such attempts go nowhere. I wouldn't believe someone can succesfully pull it off until they, well, do.Yair</blockquote>