Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgbrowning" data-source="post: 2774871" data-attributes="member: 5724">I don't understand this comment.I'm puzzled by this comment. If all publishers attempt to limit their new OGC to the minimum, then where would the the majority of new OGC come from if not from non-publishers?This is not degrading or condeming anything put out by anyone. This isn't egotistical or insulting. This just a statement of what would happen.Oh, you think I'm insulting non-publishers work? I'm not: any opinion of quality valuation is what you've read into this thread as I have have not stated any opinion concerning the value of non-publisher OGC.I find it, ironic however that you'd get insulted because you think I think poorly of non-publisher OGC when the creation of an OGC wiki would most certainly contain a majority of publisher OGC.Why? Because most of the OGC has been put out by publishers and not non-publishers.If you believe non-publisher OGC to be appropriate for the OGC wiki, just go out and find the OGC that people have put out on their websites for free and start compiling it. They won't mind a bit since they've decided what they did is fiscally worth nothing to the creator (FREE of cost) and they'll get a kick out of being included.I have not "pissed" on anyone unless pointing out how publishers would probably react is viewed as pissing on someone.I don't think I have antagonized, insulted or intimidated anyone. I have said what the probable outcome of a certain action will be and how that action is probably counter to supporting an OGC community because it will cut out the largest section of the contributing community (publishers). More OGC has been made by publishers for sale than has been made by non-publisher and not for sale. If an action is taken that cuts out publishers in the community (which a massive FREE OGC wiki would do) that action removes the part of the community that has been the most productive in creating material the community uses. This doesn't mean non-publisher OGC is crap. It just means that there will be a whole lot less OGC and of that a greater % will be non-publisher OGC.It looks like you don't like that outcome so have decided that I'm a mean person. Seriously, WTF? I've been a nice guy througout this conversation, it's just what I'm saying means that what people would like to happen"A FREE source of public OGC" can't happen without hurting the very publishers who will have created the majority of the OGC, created the material around which the OGC community has been built, and in the long run will hurt the very people who want the OGC to be FREE by limiting the future production of OGC to those with the least amount of experience in creating OGC.This isn't pissing on anyone. This is the reality of what will probably happen when someone decides to follow the letter of the OGL and release OGC for FREE (of cost). These negatives won't go away. No matter how much legal right someone has to do something.Ever wonder why WoTC in general only releases NON-OGC products? One of the reasons is because of people who believe that anything OGC means that it should be free of cost.Talk about insulting. Your comment is very insulting. I guess my taking a fiscal risk (unlike the people asking for stuff for free) to produce and allow others to use the entire breadth of my production (1500+pages) means that I wouldn't have ever supported the OGL at its inception? I've backed up my support of the OGL with money, time, and effort. I think I deserve a little more respect than this.I'd like an apology.joe b.</blockquote>

Verification