OFPEC Forum

Editors Depot - Mission Editing and Scripting => OFP - Editing/Scripting Multiplayer => Topic started by: Terox on 01 Feb 2003, 12:03:34

Title: Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 01 Feb 2003, 12:03:34
The multiplayer Map Filename convention discussion, which has been going on for approximately 3 months now, has finally reached its goal


Basically, its a universal system by which mplayer maps could be named by

The actual system is posted on the following link

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard301/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=2;t=24344 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard301/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=2;t=24344)

Very briefly its aims are
1) To create an easily navigable and organised map listing system
2) To be simple and informative
3) To reduce multiple downloads of the same map from various server due to a small filename differences
4) To set a standard map filename for future mappers to use
5) To be used throughout the OFP Community


Note to OFPEC Admins
Would it be possible to either place this as a sticky at the top of this forum or somewhere where it will remain prominent, and lock it

Note to MPlayer Mappers
To help the dedicated server admins, could you please try to name your maps using the convention
(This is only a request)



Thanks

Terox (Zeus & Zeus addon server)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 02 Feb 2003, 03:34:52
Without any offense, i really don't care about the
mp file name discussion (been goin on at BIS forum for 3
months now).

I want to give my mission my touch, and this is also the
name, i'm givin it.

This game lasts now nearly 2 years, and now there's
a filename convention  ::)

I understand all, why you want to get all map makers
into this direction, but i still will give my maps the filename,
i want (still no offense meant here, but it's my thing).

Quote
Note to MPlayer Mappers
When naming your maps please follow the guidelines set down by the convention

This is the only critism i have now: At least you could post
this order in kind of a request than an order.
OK, there is a little please in it, but it still looks like an order
to me, and i really don't like orders, when creating maps
for others to play during my free-time.

Please don't get my reply as an offensife critism, it's just
that i really don't care about how somebody else would like
to name MY maps.

sorry for the negative feedback

~S~ CD
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 03 Feb 2003, 04:29:17
You dont have to follow anything you dont want too, however if your map is hosted on a dedicated server that has affiliated itself to the filename convention, then they will rename it, try reading the convention. Its designed for the good of the community
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 03 Feb 2003, 11:57:52
Quote from: Terox on 01 Feb 2003, 12:03:34
Note to OFPEC Admins
Would it be possible to either place this as a sticky at the top of this forum or somewhere where it will remain prominent, and lock it

No.

This is a topic for the editors depot, not for the forums. And don't you think we would read your request if you would use your normal font?

#admin hat off

In my personal opinion I don't think there is a need for such a convention. I never had any problems with mission types.

Quote
if your map is hosted on a dedicated server that has affiliated itself to the filename convention, then they will rename it, try reading the convention.

If anyone dares to violate my copyright by renaming one of my missions I'll force him to either change the name back or to take the mission from the server. I would strongly recommend not to rename any mission without the explicit consent of the author. You infringe copyright laws doing that. Don't try to accomplish your goals in an illegal way.

I'd strongly recommend to change your "convention" to:

3) It is the admins responsibility to modify map names on his server. The admin has to seek the explicit permission of the author to change the mission name. If the permission is not explicitly given (which includes the case that the author doesn't react to the request), the mission name may not be modified.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 03 Feb 2003, 12:22:56
it would be nice to be able to contact every map maker, unfortunately, not many put a contact email address somehwere in the map, eg the notes.
This is also a requested inclusion in the convention


I really dont understand the hostility
If the maps were being Depbo'd, then this i could understand and fully agree with.

For nearly 2 years now different servers have already been renaming maps to conform to their specific naming convention. Which basically means putting the various subgroups in a set order, the name of the map doesnt change.[/size]

instead of
ctf 2_24 Mymapname version (Including weird tags and numbers brackets etc)
or
2_24 mymapname ctf etc etc

it simply becomes
for existing maps
ctf 24 mymapname (existing version number)


for new maps
ctf 24 mymapname (recommended version number)

This is for the good of the community


The convention discussion has been going on for over 3 months and now when its over, folks start posting disagreements


However if any map makers feel this is unjust and they dont want server admins to find it easy to locate their maps in the hundreds of map listings we have on dedicated servers,  then

Please post the name of all the maps that you dont want amended, and i will pass this information on ;)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 03 Feb 2003, 12:33:24
Terox,

Great idea, but you're lacking in the approach. :)

Looking over your discussion in the official forums, it appears you've left out the single biggest component to this convention ... the map-making community.

The discussion seems to me to have taken place between a dozen people, and remained with that dozen, not spreading to anywhere/anyone else.

So when you suddenly turn up all over the place saying "Do this now" when noone has seen or heard of the convention till now, of course you're going to get 'hostility' in the form of resistance to the idea.

You need to open this to the community more, before trying to enforce it.
People need to feel like they've been asked before they're willing to accept the rulings of others.

Education is the key to acceptance, not dictation.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 03 Feb 2003, 12:46:26
i came on this site and posted a link to the discussion 3 months ago, i tried my damdest to get everyone in on it, mailing dozens of sites, i tried, folks didnt respond.


I cant seem to find the post for some reason

What more could i have done


There is nothing enforced here, (How on earth could there be) this is a completely voluntary convention to follow
The list of servers supporting the convention is growing

Either join in or not,  everybody's choice
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 03 Feb 2003, 13:06:33
The other thread is here (http://www.ofpec.com/yabbse/index.php?board=7;action=display;threadid=3884).

Just give it time and don't expect it to be accepted without debate from those outside of the the original thread.
This convention will take time to sink in, as OFPEC's TAG system did.

Don't forget, it may have been debated for 3 months, but this the first time the community is really seeing it.
Bear that in mind, and it should ease the process for you. :)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 03 Feb 2003, 13:18:07
Quote from: Terox on 03 Feb 2003, 12:22:56
it would be nice to be able to contact every map maker, unfortunately, not many put a contact email address somehwere in the map, eg the notes.

You're missing the point. The question is not if it is possible to contact the authors. It's also not if renaming maps has been done in the past. The question is if you are allowed  to change the name of a map (where it doesn't make a difference if it's "only" the file name).

Wether you agree or not, there are only two ways to change a mission name: a legal way and an illegal way. The legal way is to do it with the permission of the author and the illegal way is to do it without the permission. This is not open for interpretation or opinion. These are the facts. And you're simply acting illegal if you don't have the explicit permission of the author. The author hasn't included an e-mail address in the readme? He hasn't included a readme at all? He doesn't react to your request? That doesn't matter, if you change the mission name without his permission, you infringe copyright law.

And can't you understand what's the origin of my "hostility" (I don't think that you're my enemy, so I don't think I am hostile)? You come and say: "If you don't use our convention we'll make you use it. It's for the best of the community." My missions are my intellectual property no-one tells me how to name my mission. Most mission makers put much thought in their mission names and so do I. I won't accept that someone changes it without my permission. You say it's for the best of the community. I'm a member of the community. Do you want to to tell me what's best for me?

I have nothing against your convention. But what you do is to force mission makers into that convention. That's nor legal neither decent. Of course you can have your own naming rules. But they only apply to the ones who accept them. That includes players, server admins and mission makers. Take our addon tagging system as an example. While we think that all addons should be tagged to avoid conflicts (no conflicts will happen if an MP mission doesn't apply to the convention - a big difference), we don't force anyone to use our system. We don't rename addon submissions that are not tagged, we reject them. Simply because we go the legal way.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 03 Feb 2003, 13:20:08
Terox - there's really no hostility in here

Fact is:

As i already said above, i understand why you want
to get things goin into this direction.

Oh yeah, it's a great idea;

...BUT...

Discussions about filename conventions were going earlier,
and will be there in futur.

It wasn't and it will not be possible to lead the mission makers
into the direction, you want.

I've also had a few looks into your discussion thread at BIS-forum every now and then (just to have a laugh about how
far the discussion went this time) :plz don't take this offense,
rather take it sarcastic to the whole theory.

There will be never a way to get map-makers to name their
files different to than what they want.

I for myself like to see a story in my filenames and not a
coding, telling me details about it (i know my maps).

Also i wouldn't like to see a whole list of clone like maps,
when selecting on a server:

ctf 24 riverdance v1
ctf@ 32 armourgheddon beta 1.1
c&h 30 one road v2
tdm 12 deathvalley beta 1.6
c&h@ 24 deliverence v1
c&h 24 efl malden v1

When having 100 of those named maps i would feel a bit
borrowed, and the more i would not have my overview
in my user-mission folder.

I name the files in my style like i've ever been doing it
(i know my style and my style knows me).

And SEFE got it exactly to the point aswell.

You don't have the right to rename any not_by_you_made_file.

Well, if it belongs to single player, nobody would care as long
as you wouldn't publish the name changed file, but when it
comes to multiplayer, we're talking about publishing the
map. Everytime a player loads a map with a filename, he
didn't load, he'll get it on his harddisk.

What i really wouldn't even tolerate is: downloading
dozens of my own maps just because somebody got the
great idea to rename it.

For some map-makers even the filename is some kind of
personal touch (at least for me).

ChrisDeath_over_and_out.pbo
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Shrike_Z on 03 Feb 2003, 14:33:35
my 2 cents:

I don't see how someone could not name maps according to his style and gusto...the naming convention does not change the map name itself, it just puts the map parameters in an easy to read and easy to sort way.
So your map name would alway include <insertburstofcreativityhere> while making it a lot easier for admins - especially voted in admins - to navigate on any given public server. That's all. The quicker you are able to choose a proper map, the quicker the game will start, the happier the players will be...
I fail to understand how 2 digits and a maptype tag can spoil the creativity and style of the name you gave to your maps... ::) Maybe it's just because I am not very creative myself...

I totally understand, however, if some of you do not want anybody to change their mapname, since it's your intellectual property. No problem, but your map would probably have to be removed from the server and therefore not be played...

I run 2 very busy public servers (one of them is a pure addon server) and I am very grateful for Terox' approach to clear the chaos of the 100+ maps currently on. Again, the name is still the same as before, we just put the 3 tags in front of it (type,addon yes/no, player number).
If anyone here fears we illegally changed their mapname: I have no problem mailing/posting a text file containing all mapnames on my server. If you find your missions on it and feel offended I will apologize and delete the map, promised!
Peace
Shrike

PS: I know my English is a bit rusty, I hope you still get my point!

Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 04 Feb 2003, 08:27:19
Quote from: Chris Death on 03 Feb 2003, 13:20:08
What i really wouldn't even tolerate is: downloading
dozens of my own maps just because somebody got the
great idea to rename it.
And exactly that will be reduced by the convention. It is one of the main reasons why it is sensible to try a community wide approach.

Most big servers already have a naming scheme of their own - with 100+ (our server has about 260 missions) you really can't know all of them and you need to be able to select maps fast when the server is full instead of either restricting yourself to a handfull of missions everybody has already played to death or using trial&error until you find a mission that fits the type (ctf,coop,tdm,...) and the number of players you need. So wether you like it or not, if your mission is to be hosted on a big server it will be renamed.

Now if every server has its own naming scheme you would have to download the same mission again and again, just because of the different filename. When there's a common naming scheme (or convention), then this will not be nescessary.

Nobody is talking about dictating people how to name their missions - but lets be honest - the filename is hardly your mission and changing it does in no way hurt your creativity or intellectual property - which, as you said yourself, should be in the mission and not in the filename.  The convention (I rather prefer the word 'scheme') gives basic rules on how to add information to the filename so it is easier for other people to use. In no part does it say anything about changing the missions name.

Now I'm a mission maker myself, making mp missions, and I really appreciate this effort (having participated myself heavily in the discussion at flashpoint1985). To me it only has advantages: players do not have to download duplicates of my missions (I like to use music in them, so they are usually a few hundred kb in size) and admins find it easy to select them thanks to the additional info provided by the tag. As a mission maker I like to see my missions played and hosted, so this is good.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 04 Feb 2003, 14:15:16
Quote from: joltan on 04 Feb 2003, 08:27:19
lets be honest - the filename is hardly your mission and changing it does in no way hurt your creativity or intellectual property

You're wrong. You're not only hurting someone's intellectual property. You are commiting a crime. In Germany, according to the German Copyright Act, publishing a work - which also includes OFP missions (which technically are computer programs) - or an edited version of the work without the permission of the author can be punished with a prison sentence of up to three years or a pecuniary punishiment. The instigator is punished in the same way as the perpetrator. Additionally the proprietor has the right to take prohibitory action and/or claim for compensation. Copyright law is subject to European harmonization and international treaties. So you can expect to have similar rules in your country.

There is absolutely no questioning that the title is a part of the work and is protected in the same way as the work itself. When the author publishes his mission he gives the implied permission to publish the work as it is. However, you can not imply the permission to publish a changed version of the mission without the consent of the author.

You don't seem to be aware about one thing: the rights of the author don't stop to be prevalent just because you think you're doing something for the good for the community (I'm asking myself where a few people take the right to define what's best for the community - how can urging server admins to commit crimes and damage the trust of the mission authors in the integrity of their published missions be for the good of the community?). Fact is: when you deal with missions, you're dealing with intellectual property of others, hence modifying them (it doesn't matter if it's 'just' the filename) without permission is legally and morally wrong. And, wether you like it or not, it's a crime.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 04 Feb 2003, 15:27:51
Quote from: Sefe on 04 Feb 2003, 14:15:16
You're wrong. You're not only hurting someone's intellectual property. You are commiting a crime. In Germany, according to the German Copyright Act, publishing a work - which also includes OFP missions (which technically are computer programs) - or an edited version of the work without the permission of the author can be punished with a prison sentence of up to three years or a pecuniary punishiment. The instigator is punished in the same way as the perpetrator. Additionally the proprietor has the right to take prohibitory action and/or claim for compensation. Copyright law is subject to European harmonization and international treaties. So you can expect to have similar rules in your country.
Renaming a file is not altering the content or the title. In what aspect is your work (the content of the file and the mission title - both saved inside the pbo, and not in the filename) infringed by changing the filename. That is like suing a store for selling a product in a different packaging. That is at best hilarious, at worst a horrible waste of time.

Jez... get a life.

BTW: I'm familar with German copyright laws. ;)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 04 Feb 2003, 19:31:17
You're missing the point, joltan.

The resistance you are all experiencing is simply because the "attitude" of the convention is one of "we'll change what we want with or without permission".

There is a fundamental difference between a system that requires a certain standard PRIOR to submission, instead of enforcing that standard without permission AFTER submission.

Compare the OFPEC TAG system and the MP Filename Convention, as they were both created to serve the community...

OFPEC TAG:
- Came into existence to meet a community need to avoid conflicts with addons
- Ideas and methods produced privately
- Community consulted and asked if they like it, and if not what can we do to improve it?
- Adopted by OFPEC and community as a prerequisite for OFPEC Addon submission

MP FILENAME CONVENTION:
- came into existence to meet a community need to avoid conflicts with MP filenames
- Ideas and methods produced privately ...
- Adopted by Servers

Note the missing steps.
- You haven't consulted the community about this standard.
- It hasn't been adopted by the community yet

All you've done is thought it up, plan it out and then started forcing people to use it.
No consultation, no adoption by the mapmaking community in general.

Terox states that we don't have to adhere to it ... but if we don't, its still going to be used on our missions.

Thats the fundemental difference thats preventing widespread acceptance.

OFPEC TAG: "This is our system, this is why we want you to use it. If you don't, we won't force you but will suggest how you can implement it for use with us, but if you refuse you unfortunately cannot host the addon with us"

MP FILENAME CONVENTION: "This is our system, this is why we want you to use it. If you don't, we will make you use it anyway"

Spot the difference?
In the TAG system, the changes are made prior to submission, or voluntarily by the author after consultation with us.
In the MP system, the changes are made prior to submission, or involuntarily by the server without consultation with the author.

I'm not saying its a bad idea, I think its a good one.
But you need to make on very simple change .... your approach to the community.
Take a similar stance to ours, and no doubt you'll very quickly enjoy the success that we have with the TAG system.
Keep up the "you have no say" approach, and this will take a very long time to bring into acceptance.

Hope this helps your campaign for community acceptance.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Ranger on 04 Feb 2003, 19:54:36
Quote from: joltan on 04 Feb 2003, 15:27:51
Renaming a file is not altering the content or the title. In what aspect is your work (the content of the file and the mission title - both saved inside the pbo, and not in the filename) infringed by changing the filename. That is like suing a store for selling a product in a different packaging. That is at best hilarious, at worst a horrible waste of time.

Jez... get a life.

I know I shouldn't be getting into a debate when I hate debating, but I just found the above comment to be rather ignorant.

Copyright lawsuits occur because a third party took a product, changed the label and package, and put it out on the market.  It's not a waste of time; it's protecting the rights of the original author (in the case of OFP missions).  If the author does not want his or her product to be changed in any way, including the label (i.e., file name in the case of missions), then that is the author's choice, and no one else's.  As Sefe said, you have no legal nor moral right to change someone else's work, no matter the reason.

For the record, I support the idea of a convention.  However, as the others have said, I do not support the way that this convention is being marketed.  Ask, and you shall receive.  Force, and you shall face fierce opposition to even the most beneficial idea.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 04 Feb 2003, 19:57:08
Oh I have a life. And in my life I'm a lawyer (with the focus on computer law in the first and economy - which includes IP law - in the second exam). I've been working in an IT division of a big law firm. Do you really want to teach me about copyright law?

Your comparison with the packaging is way off. Apart from the fact that the lawsuit for changing the packaging could well be successful (packings usually are protected as trademarks), a better comparison would be changing the title of a novel, which of course infringes copyright law. The filename is part of the file, which is covered by copyright law in all of it's parts. The rule is that you are not allowed to publish missions from anyone except yourself - wether you change the file name or not. You need the permission of the author to do so (that's what's the subject of the license). However, the author's act to submit the mission to an OFP site implicitly allows you to publish it (and only to publish it - you could even argue if the right to publish is limited to the OFP site you have submitted it to, which, at least for multiplayer missions, does not seem plausible). You can hardly interpret it as a permission to anything else (ie. you can't imply the permission to publish a modified version).

You simply have to accept the fact that the law is on the side of the mission makers in this case.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
Quote from: Sefe on 04 Feb 2003, 19:57:08
You simply have to accept the fact that the law is on the side of the mission makers in this case.
Tell you what - sell your mission for a hundred bucks and it may sound less silly. Also I want to recommend you going to our server site (http://www.suicidesquad.co.uk), checking our missions list (all missions are available for seperate download, so its easy to check) and point out any mission that belongs to you. I will be happy to delete them on the spot.

Same goes for anyone else having problems with it. You do not want your missions on our servers, just tell us what missions you made. As it would interfere with running our server we can not accept missions that we may not rename.

BTW: To me the file name is the wrapping around the original packaging (the pbo). A very good comparison might be a public library that changes a books binding to make it more sturdy and then attaches a code to it so it can be registered with their database - that would be illegal according to your definition. You might have another interpretation of that - and maybe the legal experience to know better. That does not mean I have to share your view.

It's nice to see people fight so aggressively for principles - but it's always very sad to see them forgetting what's important. The filname isn't, people playing your missions are. Shoot yourself in the foot to prove you are right is ok with me, tough. It's not my foot.

You people had 3 month time to participate in the discussion (just telling no, we do not want that would have been participation, too). Terox asked for your input and nobody got his ass up to do so. Excuse me, but what more could anyone do?

As far as the convention having been concluded privately by a few: the discussion took place in a public forum - the official one for this game btw. - and you have been asked here in this very forum to take part in it. The discussion was open to everyone, and just because you were to lazy to participate does not make it any less a community wide effort. Terox post was to inform you of the discussions result, asking for support of it. Oh, btw: does OFPEC accept addons that do not have an authors tag? I do not think so.

Nobody is forced to follow the convention - its a proposal that you may use or not. But no, you act like we just stole all your creative work.

As I said above - tell me what mp missions you made, and we will remove them. This discussion is extremely silly, so I will end it now for my part.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 05 Feb 2003, 02:20:40
Joltan,

You're not doing yourself, Terox or the convention any favours by "firing up" and getting angry or personal. Remember, you started the "angry" tone in some of the posts when you got started insulting those trying to help.

People are offering their viewpoints (whether you agree with them or not) .... which from memory (and correct me if I'm wrong here), is what people do when you ask people what they think of something.

Since you state the intention of Terox's posting is to find out what we think, why are you getting upset at us for offering responses?

Quote
This discussion is extremely silly, so I will end it now for my part.

How is it silly? We raise valid points about how this convention is being implemented, and offer help on how to resolve the points we raise, and you brandish a flaming torch at us...

Quote
You people had 3 month time to participate in the discussion (just telling no, we do not want that would have been participation, too). Terox asked for your input and nobody got his ass up to do so. Excuse me, but what more could anyone do?

As far as the convention having been concluded privately by a few: the discussion took place in a public forum - the official one for this game btw. - and you have been asked here in this very forum to take part in it. The discussion was open to everyone, and just because you were to lazy to participate does not make it any less a community wide effort. Terox post was to inform you of the discussions result, asking for support of it. Oh, btw: does OFPEC accept addons that do not have an authors tag? I do not think so.

The 21 pages (and 3 months) of discussion on the official forums are about the methodology for the convention, not about how to implement it into the community, which is focus of this discussion.

Read what we're saying: We are not debating that the intent behind the convention is a bad idea.
The points being raised here, are that it is your methods for implementation that are generating the resistance, not the convention itself.

Quote
(just telling no, we do not want that would have been participation, too).

Given what I read in that thread (yes, I read it through front to back), a negative response wouldn't have been greeted ... politely.
Especially given your demonstrated attitude now.

Quote
Oh, btw: does OFPEC accept addons that do not have an authors tag? I do not think so.
No, we don't. But we would let the author know why, and advise them how they can implement the TAG system into their work if they want to be hosted with us.
If they still do not wish to use the system, then we won't host it. Simple.

What we will not do is take the author's addon and just change it to meet the TAG's requirements just to suit our system.

So the author still has the final say and choice.

Read what I said earlier:
Quote
OFPEC TAG: "This is our system, this is why we want you to use it. If you don't, we won't force you but will suggest how you can implement it for use with us, but if you refuse you unfortunately cannot host the addon with us"

MP FILENAME CONVENTION: "This is our system, this is why we want you to use it. If you don't, we will make you use it anyway"

Spot the difference?
In the TAG system, the changes are made prior to submission, or voluntarily by the author after consultation with us.
In the MP system, the changes are made prior to submission, or involuntarily by the server without consultation with the author.

OFPEC has experience in implementing something like this into the community (which is why I use the TAG system as an example), why not draw upon that experience rather than destroying 3 months of hard slog for the sake of ego?
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sui on 05 Feb 2003, 02:25:41
Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
...Also I want to recommend you going to our server site (http://www.suicidesquad.co.uk), checking our missions list (all missions are available for seperate download, so its easy to check) and point out any mission that belongs to you. I will be happy to delete them on the spot.

Fair enough. But how does one know if it's their mission when you've gone and changed the file name? ;D

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
Same goes for anyone else having problems with it. You do not want your missions on our servers, just tell us what missions you made. As it would interfere with running our server we can not accept missions that we may not rename.

And that's the point right there... it's YOUR responsibility to ask to change the names of missions, not the map makers. If you can't accept missions which you can't change the name of, it's up to YOU to ask the maker if it's ok to change the name. Not for the map maker to:I think having a universal file naming convention is a good idea. I don't make MP maps (not as yet anyway) so this issue doesn't effect me in the slightest.
However the method to which you've gone about implementing this is why people are so pissed off at you. What gives you the right?

The reason you're getting so much hostility is because you've trampled over everyone's intellectual rights, and you're expecting everyone else to go to the trouble of asking you not to.

Technically you've breached copyright law. Realistically... this is the internet and there's no money involved, chances of you getting sued are pretty much zero. However you don't seem to care at all that you're pissing all over people's hard work here.

I suggest you get your head out of the sand, and start messaging people asking them for a bit of permission. Just because a mission is posted up on a mission site does not give you permission to modify it... and you are modifying it, there's no question of that in the author's minds.

Please take this as friendly advice, I'm not directly involved in this (as I have no MP missions in circulation) and I have nothing against you guys. It was a great idea, but to think you've consulted the whole community about this is just naive
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 05 Feb 2003, 08:30:29
Well spoken SUI - exactly what i was thinking here.

As for the apologise: some maps do not show information
about their Author to ask him -> then there are three reasons:

a) the Author doesn't want to be contacted

b) the Author forgot to mention, where to be contacted

c) you did not receive the complete mission.zip, including the
readme file (probably by ingame download)

None of these gives anybody else the right to modify the
mission (even if it's just that filename).

In my case: ask me for permission and i would say YES
don't ask me and do it without permission and i would
probably say nothing because not being aware about it

...BUT - always keep in mind: finally Death's gonna get ya  ;D

It's so simple to ask, that there's no reason to heat up
the discussion that way.

~S~ CD
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 11:22:19
Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
BTW: To me the file name is the wrapping around the original packaging (the pbo). A very good comparison might be a public library that changes a books binding to make it more sturdy and then attaches a code to it so it can be registered with their database - that would be illegal according to your definition. You might have another interpretation of that - and maybe the legal experience to know better. That does not mean I have to share your view.

That proves that you have no knowledge about the subject. This comparison doesn't need a comment. Just inform yourself before you try to teach people about things you obviously know nothing about. To make it perfectly clear: Your opinion in that matter is not relevant. Relevant are the facts, which you won't change by ignoring them.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
You people had 3 month time to participate in the discussion (just telling no, we do not want that would have been participation, too). Terox asked for your input and nobody got his ass up to do so. Excuse me, but what more could anyone do?

Here's what else you can do: Ask the authors before you change their mission names. I don't really see a problem here except your lazyness. Most authors wouldn't say no to changing their names if you'd only ask them.

And the participation in the discussion is not a fact that is valid in the discussion. No-one loses his rights just because he doesn't participate in the discussion. My personal interest in the discussion about a file name convention is close to zero. That's a subject for server admins, not for mission makers. However, I will not stop to defend my intellectual property. I'll always step in in a discussion that violates my fundamental rights. When you are having that discussion you should make sure that you don't tread on others who either don't know about the debate or who (for any possible reason) don't want to participate. I couldn't care less what you do with your convention as long as you make sure that you don't violate my rights or the rights of all others who weren't part of the discussion.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 00:34:04
This discussion is extremely silly, so I will end it now for my part.

Thank you. I don't think the discussion is silly. You want to know what's silly? It's silly not to inform yourself before you try to argue about things you lack the expertise for.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 05 Feb 2003, 11:28:33
Apologies for any violation on your rights


1) If you do not want your map filename changing.

Then simply post the names of those maps in the thread linked too below

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard301/ikonboard.cgi?s=3e40e1cc4538ffff;act=ST;f=2;t=26817 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard301/ikonboard.cgi?s=3e40e1cc4538ffff;act=ST;f=2;t=26817)

and we will endeavour to remove the maps from our servers if they do not conform, in their original state, to the convention that we use

Unfortunately without this information, we may not be able to resolve your issues


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

I find it politically beuracratical that some folks, having been given ample oppurtunity to comment on the 3 month discussion, decide to voice their opinion now, after the convention has been completed.

I find it even more odd, that they find having the filename changed, is against their principals, yet they dont encrypt their pbo, to stop hackers ripping into them, changing their content and reproducing a different version
Nor do they refrain from posting scripts, which are then more than likely going to be changed and renamed

So i am beginning to think, this is just typical beuracratic rubbish i am hearing here.

So, if it really does bother you that much, then rather than discuss this anymore, simply go to the link on this thread and post the filenames of you maps and we will endeavour to meet your wishes

The actual name of the map will not have changed, for those that have been edited to conform to the convention

eg
2_24 warcry ctf
2_24 warcry
warcry

doesnt become

ctf 24 geronimo

it becomes

ctf 24 warcry

So finding your map on our servers is not a problem
I cannot however comment on any previously hacked versions of your maps
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 05 Feb 2003, 11:38:19
Terox,

Please read what's been written on this subject first, before you put yourself into the same hole that Joltan has dug for himself, which was the argument that what's best for the mapmaker is your decision to make, not his or hers.

The resistance is not due to the convention itself. Hell, everyone has voiced that its a good idea and they're all for it.
[size=2.5]The resistance is arising because of the approach you've all taken towards integrating this into the community.[/size]

The points raised and discussed by myself and the others here need to be addressed and understood by you and the others pushing this convention, before you will get any large scale recognition of this convention.

Please read what we've posted first, and only then make a judgement on whether you think our points are purely political, as I don't feel like quoting endlessly the same points over and over.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 11:57:14
Terox, that's the wrong approach. You have to contact the map makers, not vice versa.

And how do you think I would react if someone would publish a modified/hacked version of my mission? I would react extactly the same if not more determined.

And calling this debate beurocratical reveals the attitude which pisses off so many map makers. Without them, you could dump all your servers. How come you are able to host hundrets of missions on your servers when there are comparably few official missions? Because there are map makers who publish their missions. So you can have attractive servers with many missions. They have no obligation to spread the missions but they do it for the community. Now you come and say: "There was a thread where a dozen people defined what's for the good of the community. That involves you mission makers giving up your rights. And don't expect us to ask you."

Aren't you missing something? Especially you server admins should defend the interests of the mission makers, not attack them. It's in your vital interest that each and every mission maker can be sure that the server admins will respect their intellectual property. That's the only way how both sides can benefit. The mission makers will have the trust that the integrity of their missions will be respected by the server admins. And the server admins will benefit because this trust will make the mission makers continue publishing missions.

With your approach you're acting against these interests of the community. That's why it annoys me that you claim to act for the good of the community.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 13:16:04
Quote from: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 11:57:14
And calling this debate beurocratical reveals the attitude which pisses off so many map makers. Without them, you could dump all your servers. How come you are able to host hundrets of missions on your servers when there are comparably few official missions? Because there are map makers who publish their missions. So you can have attractive servers with many missions. They have no obligation to spread the missions but they do it for the community. Now you come and say: "There was a thread where a dozen people defined what's for the good of the community. That involves you mission makers giving up your rights. And don't expect us to ask you."
Ok, one last comment - I'm a mission maker myself (Daddldiddl - for those that have played one of my missions), and only help in the administration of our squads server. Most of our maps are our own creation or shared with other servers (Vetserver, Gameplanet) who also have most maps created by their own members (Junker, Harkonin, ACT, Lolsav, December...). These servers have all used some kind of naming convention for a long time. It has always been our policy that everyone submitting a mission would know that we have to rename them - be it the mission maker or whoever. And we never accept a mission if we can't.

As a mission maker myself I could not care less if somebody renames any of my mission files to fit on their server. I'm happy if people enjoy the missions, and I'd rather not be bothered with emails asking me for my ok on that (and yes, my missions all contain contact information). I got enough other emails to read and too much spam to delete each day. I can understand getting angry about people changing the content of a mission (and would not accept that for my own missions either without being asked first), but everything else is in my opinion really a waste of time and energy (both better invested in creating/improving missions).

If you do not want your missions renamed, do not submit them or state it clearly in a readme or the mission notes. Most missions do not even come with any contact information - neither in the mission notes nor do they come with a readme (which will not be transmitted anyways if we get the mission because one of our members got it by playing it on another server and liked it).

BTW: about the law issue - no, I'm not a lawyer - I call it "gesundes Rechtsempfinden". And yes, I definitely think you all clearly overreacted - claiming very aggresively a breach of fundamental human rights when its all about adjusting (not completely changing) a filename...

I'm sorry if you felt my reaction insulting, that was definitely not my intention - in the contrary, I was trying to keep it reasonable, while feeling insulted myself by your harsh comments. You should read your comments and ask yourself if you could not have reacted in a more mature way than flaming right away (which is exactly how I see your reactions). I cannot see the reactions we got as constructive comments, not in the way they were presented.

If you feel left out, I'm sorry about that, too. But after three months of hard discussion - finally having reached compromise everyone can be happy with - I don't intend to start from scratch again.

At least we tell you that we use this naming scheme, and why we are forced to use it. If you were running a big server yourself, you would see that it is not possible for us NOT to rename the missions, and you would also understand how hard/impossible it is to contact every mission maker about such a small change. We do all this without being paid for, on the contrary paying our money for running a fast server where you could have your missions hosted. We play with open cards, but in the end you just have to accept that we run our servers that way.

Edit: I'd also like to apologise if the way the convention was presented hurt your feelings - this was meant as constructive contribution that the community may accept and use or discard, as you like. We are not inventing something new, but rather trying to find a common standard for something that is already reality on most servers.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 13:59:21
Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 13:16:04
If you were running a big server yourself, you would see that it is not possible for us NOT to rename the missions, and you would also understand how hard/impossible it is to contact every mission maker about such a small change.

Don't make the mission makers suffer for the fact that you have a big server. The OFPEC is a big internet site. It's our responsibility to run it in a way that doesn't violate the rights of others. That's why we have a comparably big staff and an organisation structure that allows us to work effectively. And none of us gets paid for what he does. When you have a big dedicated server, then you have to make sure that it comes with the administration that's requred for such a project. It's not anyone's fault except yours if you are not capable fo doing what you have to do to avoid braking the law. Don't take your lack of organisation out on the back of others who can't do anything about it. You would be pissed off, too, if we at OFPEC would do the same with you. If you think writing one template of an e-mail and sending it to all the guys with maps on your server is so much work, then get a staff that does that for you.

As for your "gesundes Rechtsempfinden" (which freely translates to "healthy approach to the law"), you should probably rethink it. What you're doing with the convention is a "Vertrag zu Lasten Dritter" (="contract to the disadvantage of third persons") which is unanimously considered to be "sittenwidrig" (against good morals). Even if the convention is not a contract in the legal meaning of the word, it still is "against good morals" for the same reasons. When you're doing it against better knowledge, you're commiting something that's called "sittenwidrige vorsätzliche Schädigung" (deliberate damage against good morals), which makes you liable for compensation and forbearance. How can it be a "healthy approach to the law" not to consider the rights of the other side?

As Sui has pointed out, the legal side is not the most important aspect. Important is that you "are pissing all over the hard work of others" with your approach. Respect the mission makers and I don't think anyone would not allow you to change the name. The payoff will be trust in you and a continuos stream of new missions. It's a win-win. Your approach is a lose-lose.

As for everything else you said: Read what's written above, I also don't feel like repeating myself all the time.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: WhisperOFP on 05 Feb 2003, 16:57:07
Hi,
I just jump on the discussion to raise a few points


Quote
Don't make the mission makers suffer for the fact that you have a big server.
That basically means "do not run a big server."
You can add : "do not run a big server, unless you have a big staff", which is very rare (using you're example, there is only one OFPEC, should there be only one big server).
Facts : Having a big server means having many missions (on my mid sized one, there are 211 missions), and having a way to sort them for the admins is required.
Facts : Often, file access to a OFP server is not easy (once more, I'm the only one allowed to access my server and for example change names, so my staff is.... me)
I just CAN'T ask permission to every mission makers of the maps on my server, missions which where given to me by users for 80%, in the form of a .pbo.
Please, tell me, ooooh experienced community members  8) , what should I do?
Renaming? Well, it is forbidden, I delete the missions (80%), do not have any mission left, ok, I shut the server and do something else.
Let the missions as it is? big server for 3 mns where pple are coming, after what they disconnect 'cause they were waiting hours for the admin finding a correct mission. 3 pple stay.... Why running a big server? Ok, I shut the server and do something else.
Keep in mind that pple able to manipulate files on the mpmissions directory of an OFP server are usually few, for obvious security reason.


Second point :
Name changing on servers has been done and continues to be done WITHOUT MAPMAKER CONSENT NOR ASK FOR CONSENT since the first dedicated server appeared. I've never seen ANY complaint.
1 guy tries to says it to the community, to say that it is done and having a convention would simplify everything. All of a sudden map makers (well, some of them...) go in hostile mode  :o . They did not say anything when they saw their missions renamed on servers, but do not wan't them to be renamed "officially"  :o  :o  :o

I fail to understand.

Whis'
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
Quote from: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 13:59:21
You would be pissed off, too, if we at OFPEC would do the same with you.
With an addon yes - because it would lead to incompatibilities. With missions that is a non-issue, so as I already stated, I don't care if someone changes the filename of my own missions - be it OFPEC, or any server.

Quote
How can it be a "healthy approach to the law" not to consider the rights of the other side?
How can it be to his disadvantage ("zu Lasten")? See, that's the point where we will never agree - the creative work of the mission author is not reduced in any way, he does not 'suffer'. He is given a plattform for his creativity for free, it does not lead to incompatibilities (as it would with addons), and if the author states that he doesn't want us to rename them (just stating 'any changes to my mission require you to ask me first at myname@somewhere.dot' in the notes section would suffice) we don't host the mission. No mission gets changed or credits taken of anybody, so we assume to act in the interest of the author - unless we find an indication that he wishes differently, in which case we respect that and remove the mission asap.

Unfortunately your only argument so far has been the legal aspect, presented in a way that can only be considered agressive and insulting (I consider this a friendly forum and not a courtroom) - and it is the one point where we unfortunately can only agree to disagree.

Quote
As Sui has pointed out, the legal side is not the most important aspect. Important is that you "are pissing all over the hard work of others" with your approach. Respect the mission makers and I don't think anyone would not allow you to change the name. The payoff will be trust in you and a continuos stream of new missions. It's a win-win. Your approach is a lose-lose.

As I stated before, it was never anyones intention to 'piss over' (nice language you're using) anybody. Missions being renamed on servers is nothing new and definitely didn't start with us or the convention. And mission makers participated in the discussion (for example Blake/Kegetys of the Kylikki squad, and myself). OFPEC is not the only forum for mission makers in the whole world, and you were all invited to comment and didn't. Seems most mission makers don't see the issue as a problem.

What approach would you have taken, how could we possibly not have 'pissed you off'? You ask us (actually you threaten us with a lawsuit if we don't) to inquire each mission maker before we rename the missions, but you do not answer what happens if we can't reach them... Well, should we scrap 50% of the old missions, just because the authors have long left the ofp community (email addresses not working anymore) or they never left us a way to contact them? That would be a loss for the community. You see, we know how to contact 'Lolsav' or 'Act' (or many others of our mission makers that are not active anymore and whose maps we still use), but what other server/squad would know that?

About the staff matter - we are a squad, i.e. our main goal is to play the game, not to provide a public service (unlike this website). In addition we make a lot of missions, have jobs, etc. It is not that we reject trying to contact the authors, but if you do not put your email/url somewhere where it can be seen, we will not start searching for you either.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 19:10:31
Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
How can it be to his disadvantage ("zu Lasten")? See, that's the point where we will never agree - the creative work of the mission author is not reduced in any way, he does not 'suffer'.

I don't expect anyone to agree or not to agree. The simple facts are: the mission authors have certain rights. Their copyright does include commercial utilization. No-one wants to sell his missions or make money with them. But at this point the copyright doesn't end. The copyright includes the right to make any changes to the mission, the right to be quoted as the author, the right not to have his mission defaced etc. And this rights reside at the side of the copyright holder. If you agree that the server admin has the right to rename missions without the consent of the author, you agree about violating rights of the copyright proprietor. This is - by any meaning of the word - to the disadvantage of the proprietor. It doesn't matter if you think that the advantages overweight the disadavantages. The proprietor has the right to be irrational (a decision to burn your car may be irrational, yet no-one has the right to forbid that) and if you're only violating this right, you act to his disadvantage.

But the legal aspect is one point. There is also another aspect: Respect.

The basic question is: How do you treat the ones that enable you to keep your server running by creating missions? The filename may be a little detail for you but it sure as hell aint a detail for me. And I'm sure it isn't a detail for many other mission makers. Is it so hard to understand that mission makers want to be sure that their will is respected? It doesn't matter if anyone thinks that things like the filename are unimportant. However, it does matter if the mission maker thinks it's important. Not only is he the only one to decide about the filename, he's the one who puts you in the position to host the missions. It's this attitude which causes the resistance. You owe the mission maker respect. And even if you think it's irrational or "for the worse of the community" to insist to be asked about renaming files, it's a matter of decency to seek the author's permission. Otherwise you act like you're free to do what you want with other ones' properties. As soon as the rights of others are concerned, you have to stop acting like you were the only one who has a valid point.

Just realize what you are doing (legal aspects aside): You're taking another one's property and change it without his permission. Then the other one comes and says: "Hey, could you ask me before you do something with my property?". You answer: "No I can't be arsed to ask you before I do something with your property because I'd had to ask 100 people more then." Is it so hard to understand that the obvious reply is: "That you have to ask 100 people more is your problem. I want you to treat me with the respect I deserve."? And is it so hard to understand that the owner of the mission feels offended or at least gets the impression that he's in a kafkaesque dream? It simply is impudence to treat other one's property as your own.

Do you realize what you're doing? You take a fact that makes things worse (that you disrespect a hundret people more by violating their rights) as an excuse. Is this allright considering your "gesundes Rechtsempfinden"?

I see your practical difficulties. Let's assume you fail contact the author. That leaves you two options: take the mission from the server or leave the mission unchanged. You may want to rename the mission but you simply can't. That may be bad for you. But sometimes we simply have to accept that some things in life are not going the way we would like them to go. If you want to keep the mission on the server, just leave it unchanged and everything is allright. If you stubbornly want to follow your convention to the letter, take the mission down, 'cause it's the only option you have.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
And mission makers participated in the discussion (for example Blake/Kegetys of the Kylikki squad, and myself).

And if you'd asked all mission makers but one, you'd still have to ask this one if you may rename his mission. Blake, Kegetys, Kylikki and you are not speaking for me and you are not deciding about my copyright.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
What approach would you have taken, how could we possibly not have 'pissed you off'?

Simple answer: The approach to always ask the author before you rename his mission. That's the only point I and the others in this thread are having.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
(actually you threaten us with a lawsuit if we don't)

Nobody has done that.

Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 17:06:52
you ask us ... to inquire each mission maker before we rename the missions, but you do not answer what happens if we can't reach them... Well, should we scrap 50% of the old missions, just because the authors have long left the ofp community (email addresses not working anymore) or they never left us a way to contact them?

Scrap them or leave them unchanged. You don't have any other options.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Terox on 05 Feb 2003, 19:15:51
I may be speaking out of line here, but as a mission maker, i can certainly make some educated guesses

1) As far as i am aware, any c&h map, is not a creation of any individual, merely a revamped version of a map made by Tactician

So C&H actually belongs to tactician

CTF, these could be made from a BIS Template, but probably more likely to be made from a version of Karillions CTF or somebody elses

Vehicle respawns, how many of you use somebody elses respawn script ?

Reload Guy,Ammocrate.sqs  etc etc god knows how many more scripts created by gifted scripters we use

So all this "My Map, my creation" i find quite hipocritical

They are basically copies of somebody elses idea, with slight changes of flag positions etc


Nobody profits from this, so why all the commotion


WE Aren't telling anybody that they must do anything.

With hindsight, we could have come in with a better approach, warranted however not many of us are gifted with crystal balls.

The convention is implemented on a number of servers,
map names have been changed

This cant be undone, as, speaking for the server i work on, we didnt make backup copies

So the damage is already done, water under the bridge.

There is now a sytem in place, as i previously posted, for you to post the names of your maps (If its really that important to you) which we can then delete from our servers.

I really have nothing more to say about it.

Seems folks are making a mountain out of a molehill,   discussing ethics and law rather than practicalities

I am an engineer by trade
I work on a practical level and normally have the job done while the beurocrats are still discussing whether to have tea or coffee

Jobs done, end of shift for me ;D
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 19:38:40
Ideas are not protected. However, the implementation of the idea is protected. So you're simply missing the point. Nice attempt, but, I'm sorry that doesn't help you out of your responsibility.

And as for not being able to change the names back, that's your problem. If you want my advise (I'm sure you'll ignore it but I'm a nice guy and so I'll give you the advise anyway): If the briefing contains information about the author, contact him and ask him for his permission. For all other missions, try to track back who has made it and contact them, too. If you fail to track back the author or the author denies the permission, take the mission from the server, download it again and add it to your server without changing the mission name. Then try to contact the author and ask him for his permission. If the author doesn't give you his permission, decide if you want to keep the mission on the server or if you want to take it down.

I know there is a lot of work involved but I think the mission makers deserve it. And you don't have any other options except the one to be a software pirate.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 05 Feb 2003, 22:17:02
Oh well, you don't seem to understand that it's your
job to ask for changing anything not made by you,
instead of the author asking you not to change it.

As Joltan posted in here: the author needs to inform
you that he doesn't want his work to be changed -
that's not true

You have to ask him for permission.

What if somebody decides to change all the server
names (because he might have a clue how to), for the
reason: it's easier to find the decent servers out of the
list, without asking the server owners.
hmm it's just a servername, who could care about that
And then he would say: every owner of a server who doesn't
like that should post his server here or there, but don't
expect the old servername to be back because i haven't
made backups of the original server names.

I know this example goes way deeper than renaming
a mission file, but in general it's the same.


Now to those CTF and C&H or scripts being used in missions

In most of the cases, a script author adds some lines to his
script (or by a readme), that it can be used in other's
missions, as long as it won't be sold as the new creator's
work. Or if, then the author shall be informed.

Those remade CTF or C&H missions mentioned by Joltan above,
may be pre-done by someone else, or may not.
In no case this gives anybody else the right to change it.

You are not allowed to do "Selbstjustiz" (selfjustice??).
I mean: you do not have the right to do something illegal to
someone else, just because he did.

One more interesting thing i found:

Joltan you were posting a link to your Server List where i
found renamed BIS missions (hell i really don't want to speak
for BIS now, it's not up to me).

..BUT - if this renaming procedure was done the same way
like Terox wrote above (without keeping original backups),
then this may lead into troubles when installing the next
patch. Remember BIS is always doing some updates on older
missions, and if the original mission isn't present anymore,
the patch might not be installed succesfull.

e.g: co 07 oil war.eden
        co 09 return to eden.eden

Again and one last time i say: if somebody would ask
me to rename a mission of mine for reason that makes
sense - :note: the filename convention makes sense -
then i would prompt answer with YES.
If somebody would do it without asking me, i'd really be
bothered (*sends out his Fox Terrier and shouts: "go for
his balls*) - sorry if that last word was too heavy - couldn't resist  ;D

~S~ CD
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: sseagle on 05 Feb 2003, 22:43:15
This is why OFPEC has gone downhill, the worthless arguments about legal BULLSHIT that no one that lives outside of Germany applies to.  Just attempt to properly document your maps WITH A WORKING EMAIL ADDRESS.  If you cannot be contacted, then I say your map is public domain.  I can make the exact same beachhead mission that has been made before, and that isn't breaching any laws.  NONE OF YOU HAVE (LEGALLY) COPYRIGHTED ANY OF YOUR MISSIONS, and further more, they are all technically property of the makers/publishers of the game, due to your use of THEIR software and editing tools.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 22:51:09
Quote from: sseagle on 05 Feb 2003, 22:43:15
NONE OF YOU HAVE (LEGALLY) COPYRIGHTED ANY OF YOUR MISSIONS

You're wrong. Everywhere in the world you have the copyright on all of your works. You don't need to "copyright" it. And as I said, this isn't just "legal shit". What you're doing is seriously damaging the trust of the mission makers in the integrity of their mission. The idea that's behind copyright protection is that no-one would publish or even create his works if he can't be sure that no-one can just rip off his work. By simply ignoring the mission author's copyright you'll seriously damage your reputation as server admins which can't be in your interest.

The rest of your post is so extraordinarily stupid that I won't comment it. It's wrong in literally each and every sentence (no kidding I've checked it). I suggest to inform yourself before claiming some expertise you don't have.
Title: Re: WE HAVE A RESOLUTION!
Post by: Noon416 on 05 Feb 2003, 23:16:12
Terox & Joltan,

Read back through what you've posted .... you almost had it right there, and then you moved away again.

Joltan, you stated in reference to the server he assists with:
"It has always been our policy that everyone submitting a mission would know that we have to rename them - be it the mission maker or whoever. And we never accept a mission if we can't."

BINGO!![/color]

This is the point we've been trying to make, and I'm surprised it was so easily missed.

In my examples where I compared the OFPEC TAG system with the Convention, that was the point I was clarifying.

Put simply, if the Convention can have that single sentence added (or one to that effect), you wouldn't have had to have gone through this entire "discussion" to have people accept the convention in the spirit it was intended.

Hopefully, with this revelation and simple resolution, we can all resolve and put this discussion to bed. :)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 23:30:18
Quote from: Chris Death on 05 Feb 2003, 22:17:02
I know this example goes way deeper than renaming a mission file, but in general it's the same.
You know this example is not relevant as first it would be more like changing the name of the mission (as defined in the mission.sqm), not the filename, and second there is no way to do that.
;)

Quote
Those remade CTF or C&H missions mentioned by Joltan above
Mentioned by Terox - get your quotes right, I'm not the only one participating in this discussion. I think if you use a mission/script/function/whatever by some other author in one of your missions you should credit him in your notes, just putting it in there is not really the way to do it.

Quote
Joltan you were posting a link to your Server List where i
found renamed BIS missions (hell i really don't want to speak
for BIS now, it's not up to me).
..BUT - if this renaming procedure was done the same way
like Terox wrote above (without keeping original backups),
then this may lead into troubles when installing the next
patch.
No, there is no trouble, as we are running a linux server and thus are not doing any patches directly on the server. We are forced to patch a clean Win32 install locally and then copy the updated files to the server. Also all missions have to be renamed anyways, as the server will not accept any mission containing uppercase chars (converting to lowercase is renaming, too - and might change some mission names illegible - like "BlackOpHALO" to "blackophalo" - very nice, better change it to "blackop halo" then).
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 23:36:05
Quote from: joltan on 05 Feb 2003, 23:30:18
Also all missions have to be renamed anyways, as the server will not accept any mission containing uppercase chars (converting to lowercase is renaming, too - and might change some mission names illegible - like "BlackOpHALO" to "blackophalo" - very nice, better change it to "blackop halo" then).

As long as renaming is dictated by unavoidable technical requirements, no-one can really say anything against renaming. But that ends exactly at the point where you put in your own "creativity". So converting names to lower case is ok. Any other changes (and if it's only to make it 'sound' or 'look' better) require the consent of the autor.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sui on 05 Feb 2003, 23:44:45
Awww Gawd, this is just getting worse and worse ;D

Terox, as an engineer would you start building a project without getting permits and resource consents?
Of course not! What would happen if you did? This situation is the same sort of thing... the attitude:

"Well no one complained when I started doing it, so I assume everyone is all right with it"

Would get you into court faster than you can say Environmental lawsuit...
Is just simply ignorant and arrogant.

Look, there is simply no threat of any sort of legal action here. It's about attitude and respect. You are disrespecting others rights, and have the arrogance to know you're doing this but to decide you have the right to do so.
I use strong language because I feel it requires strong language... you're not just disrespecting people here, you are pissing on their work!

Your line about "this isn't the only OFPEC forum in the world" highlights another point I would like to make... Neither are the official forums. To get a discussion thread in one forum going and feel the you've consulted the whole community is ludicrus! Have some common sense! Of course you haven't talked to everybody! The only way to talk to everybody is to message all mission makers involved and say "Is it ok to change your file name?"
It would not be such a big deal... it's just you don't want to do it. 200 template emails... how hard is that?

Bottom Line: You can get away with this with out any real percussions... but I would appeal to your decency and your common sense here. You have two options:
How hard a call is that? Not very I would have thought.

All you need to do is find details for maps you're not sure about (a search on some map sites should pull up the author's name) and send them a template email.
I guarantee 99% of responses will be "Sure, go ahead and change it".

Anyway, this is getting to be a very circular discussion... if we don't see some resolution soon I'm going to lock this thread, as it is getting polarised and pointless ;)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 05 Feb 2003, 23:46:17
I noticed a sligth confusion so it's time to clear some things up.

1. When you modify another one's mission, you have the copyright on the changes (provided they are substantial), while the original author still keeps his copyright on the mission (which is the reason that the editor of the mission needs the permission of the creator to publish it).

2. When  you use tools that create files (like the OFP mission editor), the proprietor of the tool indeed has a copyright on the created files. However you have a copyright on the files, too. This has the practical consequnce that you can decide if you want to publish the mission, allow changes etc. But also the proprietor of the tool has those rights. According to the license agreement, BIS has allowed you to publish your mission for non-commercial purposes. Hence, selling your missions would infringe BIS' copyright. But as long as you are publishing your missions for free, you can decide who is allowed to do what with them. On the other hand, BIS can't just take your missions and publish them because you also have a copyright on them. And if you create your mission files with a text editor or a self-created tool, that's another story...
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 06 Feb 2003, 01:34:02

(http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/bandapar/smilies/banghead.gif)
Did you all just not see what I posted?
[/b]

Either read my last post, or see the summary below...

1. Joltan posted that
Quote
"It has always been our policy that everyone submitting a mission would know that we have to rename them - be it the mission maker or whoever. And we never accept a mission if we can't."

2. This means that we have a solution to this whole argument, a solution that has been there from the start.

THE SOLUTION TO THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION
Add a sentence to the Convention, that states "Servers have to make acknowledgement of this Convention a pre-condition for submission".[/size] Then you just have to make adhering to the convention a pre-requisite for submitting a mission to your server

Just like OFPEC's successful TAG system.

For feck's sake people, don't trash three months of hard work for the sake of your ego. ::)
The solution is staring you in the face...[/b]








And yes, I felt it necessary to make it unnecessarily large and colourful, as the solution has been missed twice now, due to endentured viewpoints.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: joltan on 06 Feb 2003, 02:17:21
Quote from: Noon416 on 06 Feb 2003, 01:34:02
For feck's sake people, don't trash three months of hard work for the sake of your ego.
The solution is staring you in the face...
Thank god finally someone read that.

Our messages must have crossed - as I read your previous post only now, long after I posted my response.  I only entered this thread after Sefe started with his legal stuff, acting like he was in court, fighting for the life of his client. I tried to explain how we handle stuff, and I never said, no we will not ask for permission - I rather explained that we are not always able to and therefore request anyone submitting a mission to accept our naming scheme.

I hope this is settled now, and we can return to talk with each other as normal people without further resorting to insults and arrogant behaviour (yes, that includes myself - sorry, but I can be short tempered, too).
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 11:03:31
Ok, this is too freakin hilarious.

Who was forcing anybody anyway? Who gave "orders" instead of asking nicely? Who did not give the ample possibility to voice opinions? Jeez...

However, I've contacted all the mission makers providing maps for my server. Most were just giggling about my request and said "sure, do whatever you want"
Non-responders will get their maps deleted as will  those of mission makers who oppose a name change. I wish them luck in hosting their hard work on their home DSL line or on the countless non-organized and therefore empty dedicated servers.

Note to admins: Please delete my account on OFPEC.
Shrike out.

PS: Sefe, I am German and a lawyer, too. I see and understand your approach from a legal point of view however I fail to understand your motivation. Can you say "typisch deutscher Spiesser"?
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 06 Feb 2003, 11:05:46
Quote from: joltan on 06 Feb 2003, 02:17:21
I only entered this thread after Sefe started with his legal stuff, acting like he was in court, fighting for the life of his client. I tried to explain how we handle stuff, and I never said, no we will not ask for permission - I rather explained that we are not always able to and therefore request anyone submitting a mission to accept our naming scheme.

Don't you get it? It's not about about law. All we are asking for is

RESPECT

What you are doing is arrogantly ignoring

OTHER ONE'S PROPERTY

What about stepping down from your high horse and realize that you're an the best way to kill the cow you're milking. Treat the mission makers with the respect and you'll earn respect in return. Tell them "Fuck off and fuck your property, we're doing what we want because your property has only a worth for us to keep our servers running. Now shut off and let us do what we want with your property." and you'll reveal what kind of egocentric person you are. At least you can't expect respect when you lack the respect for other one's work.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 06 Feb 2003, 11:07:30
Quote from: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 11:03:31
PS: Sefe, I am German and a lawyer, too. I see and understand your approach from a legal point of view however I fail to understand your motivation. Can you say "typisch deutscher Spiesser"?

LMAO

Another person who knows me so well.

Feel free to delete your OFPEC account yourself.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 11:32:14
I never claimed I knew you. Your behaviour implies it. I actually thought you were a very nice and thoughtful guy considering your posts in POLWAR and other forums.

Noone was showing disrespect for mapmakers, I have the highest respect for them. How can you say, without knowing anything about how we run our server and how we handle things (except our tyrannical approach with the naming convention...) that we stomp on their rights without any respect?
The highest sign of respect is that their maps are on the server....
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 06 Feb 2003, 11:59:23
Quote from: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 11:32:14
I never claimed I knew you. Your behaviour implies it. I actually thought you were a very nice and thoughtful guy considering your posts in POLWAR and other forums.

You mean I stop being the person I am as soon as I have a different opinion and dare to express it?

Quote from: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 11:32:14
Noone was showing disrespect for mapmakers, I have the highest respect for them. How can you say, without knowing anything about how we run our server and how we handle things (except our tyrannical approach with the naming convention...) that we stomp on their rights without any respect?
The highest sign of respect is that their maps are on the server....

It's not about you. You're asking the map makers before you rename their mission. That's a sign of respect. A sign of disrespect is to do what you want with other one's property. That's what annoys me. Some people think they can do whatever they want with what doesn't belong to them.

Just go back to my first post. I've made a suggestion how to change the convention. I wasn't suggesting to change it all over. I was suggesting to add two sentences. I did this because I was trying to help. The key to acceptance of the convention is to give it a foundation that respects all sides and doesn't simply ignore a side because the other side is too lazy to do the few hours of work that comes with it. Every map maker has invested more work in his missions than the work involved in contacting the mission makers. Is it so unfair to ask the server admins to do that little extra work?

Two sentences. No big thing I thought. But the reaction was simply ignorance and arrogance. That people were trying to teach me the law was a sign if this arrogance. That's why the discussion was focussing at law at a point. But it was never really about law. It was about the attitude that people are showing. It's about the basic question how we treat each other in the community. Do we want that some dozen people define what's good for the community and ignore the rights of others doing that or do we want a fair consideration of the rights and interests of everyone.

I see the interests of the server admins. I never said anything against the convention except that it doesn't concern me (as long as you don't tread on my interests). Sure, make your convention. Hell I'm even supporting you. Ask me if you can change mission names and I won't say 'no'. But I want to be asked and I want to keep track about the names that are used. I never said anything else. Am I asking for too much? You may think it's "spießig" but I think I deserve to be asked.

And sorry, I can't see anything that keeps the server admins from asking except their lazyness. Just imagine the mission makers were that lazy and you'd have no missions to host.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 12:44:55
Quote
You mean I stop being the person I am as soon as I have a different opinion and dare to express it?
My intention is not to judge you nor anybody else. So I will cut it here.
Quote
The key to acceptance of the convention is to give it a foundation that respects all sides and doesn't simply ignore a side...
I am pretty damn sure Terox never meant to ignore anybody. I know him for some time now, he is one of the most considerate and "democratic/diplomatic" guys I've met in the OFP community.
 He felt that everything had been said end everybody who had an opinion had voiced it. The naming/copyright problem could've been adressed on the first page of the discussion a long time ago, if people weren't just dropping by to have a laugh at the server admins efforts like Chris seemed to do.
Quote
because the other side is too lazy to do the few hours of work that comes with it. Every map maker has invested more work in his missions than the work involved in contacting the mission makers. Is it so unfair to ask the server admins to do that little extra work
Calling server owners lazy is a punch in the face. Sorry to put it like this. You should know better then everybody else how much work is involved in creating and adminning a site/server for public access and keep it running properly.
Little extra work? Lol, maybe for me because I only host maps from5 or 6 mapmakers. I dont want to even think about me having to mail 50+ mission makers. After I found out who they are anyway...
Quote
And calling this debate beurocratical reveals the attitude which pisses off so many map makers. Without them, you could dump all your servers
This was in an earlier post Sefe.
What kind of attitude is that? In my opinion the relationship between map-/addon makers and server owners is symbiotic,  at least for multiplayer.
Who do you make your maps for? For yourself or for the players?
Who do we run our servers for? For our personal glory? Because we have too much money? Or because we want to push the success and popularity of this great game?
We both contribute in our own way, don't try to make me feel like a leeching bastard!  :'(

Quote
Am I asking for too much? You may think it's "spießig" but I think I deserve to be asked.
It's not WHAT you're asking. It's WHEN and HOW you brought up what you thought was problematic. You and your fellas could have done that a long time ago.
And it's the mood of your first reply to Terox' post. I remember when I read your reply the 1st time I was thinking "wow this guy seems to have had a really bad day".
It was not a suggestion how to improve the naming convention and the approach to it, it was just offended ranting.

Ok, I hate argueing, I am a softie and try to be a peaceful guy. I hope we can get this on the road considering and satisfying all opinions involved. It would be sad if not because from a server owner point of view a clusterf*ck of all kinds of different mapnames  on the server would be impossible to handle.

Peace


Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: nwo on 06 Feb 2003, 14:41:13
This discussion is kind of sad...

The mapname convention is going on for over 3 month (many ppl putting time and energy into it) in the official boards, some mappers (Hi Chris ;)) say they looked into it and had a good laugh, Terox said he announced the discussion here, but all of a sudden, after it's done, every missionmaker claims to "never have heard of that discussion" and to have been "left out" when they never bothered to give input before.

Missionnames have been changed all the time, but when server admins want to do not to suit THEIR whims (i for one couldn't care less what other servers call their maps i only play on my own server) but to make life easier for the players on those servers the mission makers go crazy, threaten legal actions and try to order the server owners to delete the maps from their servers.

IF it is really illegal (at least in some countries) to rename the missions then the consequence is clear: most missions will have to be deleted from the servers, many servers will shut down. Or the admins will get servers in countries where renaming is legal.

The fact is: the ADMINS made compromises, they chose not to rename the missions as THEY saw fit for THEIR server but after some convention which does NOT help THEM but the PLAYERS playing on those servers. And all of a sudden they get threatened by the missionmakers which knew of and tolerated mission renaming for nearly 2 years. Oh, and btw: some d/l sites do rename the mission, how do i know the REAL name of a mission when i don't get it from the mapper himself? Can i only run it on windows servers? Cause i have to change it to lowercase on my linux server. Maybe you should sue BIS cause they force linux admins to use "tolower"?!?

One could nearly get the impressions the mission makers don't want their missions to be played at all or only by an "elite ofpec crowd". If renaming missions is really ruled illegal in court i will shut down my server. And i think many more admins will do the same. I spent my time and my money for that server. If i only get to choose between an unmanagable server and a server empty of maps i can as well shut it down.

Maybe people should all sit back and think what they really want... do you mission makers want your missions to be played at all? Is the FILENAME (which most player don't really see at all during gameplay) so important that you would rather deny all big servers the right to rename your missions to keep the server managable? Do you think all the PLAYERS that download your missions do NOT rename them? Frankly, i know of no one that doesn't, after some hundreds maps it's not possible to find specific ones otherwise. If not changing the filename is more important to you than the mission actually being played by a big audience and if Sefe's claim about changing the filename being a copyright infringement then the consequence is clear: i would have to delete ALL missions not made by our own mission makers from the server. I would have to, cause i don't know what the original name of most missions is, many sites and mission makers are gone for good and even if i download it somewhere i can't be sure of the filename cause EVERYONE could have changed it before it got to THAT site. If that's the kind of climate you prefer in the "community"...

I just got into this forum because of a link in the official board and i must say that this "community" has made a really sad first impression on me :(
It sounds to me like: "We knew about your silly discussion but we did not bother to contribute any input. But this is MY map so i can dictate you how to run your server and make your admin life miserable and you are only allowed to play it on Saturdays at 8pm or else i sue the shit out of you, you fucking stupid admin. Pay your server, play our maps as we see fit and shut up"
Well, that was a little exaggerated ;)
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 06 Feb 2003, 16:19:39
Quote
some mappers (Hi Chris ) say they looked into it and had a good laugh

@nwo - Seems you did only read half of the post, where
i wrote that.

I did not mean to have had a laugh about the idea, but about
how far it has gone this time (for the reason that such
discussions already have been going on earlier and never
came to an end). Also i added there that this was not meant
hostile, instead it was meant sarcastic way.

And the reason why i did not give my input there is:

As i already said - i don't care about the filename convention
when i give my missions my choosen name.
You have to accept that because it's my free decision how i
name my maps.

Also as i already said above that i would allow others to
rename my maps, as long as i would be asked for that, so
what's the problem here then?

@Joltan - sorry for quoting you for what Terox said  ;)

And for the server name example, i know and already said
that it's not exactly the same but in general it is.
It doesn't matter, wether this is possible or not, i just thought
to give an example to the filename changing. So i was in
the meaning, if it comes to server names it might bring
us into the same way of thinking (as server owners are
talking about changing filenames here).

For the explanation that maps uploaded to your server
will be renamed - that's ok, but only in the case somebody
who uploads a mission to your server is able to accept that
or not. In case of maps uploaded by the staff of the server
it's still an open question.

quick summary:

As long as you (server admins, staff, owners) do not touch
my rights (changing filenames with my permission) i will
not have anything against the filename convention.
If i would upload a map to a server, where i would have
to accept the fact that it will be renamed, it's up to me to
decide, wether i will upload it or not.

If any map of mine will be renamed without permission
it's the wrong way - and then  my Fox-Terrier enters the
scene  ;D

~S~ CD
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Chris Death on 06 Feb 2003, 18:29:51
Ah yes, forgot some things:

The following quotes are taken from the thread linked below
at BIS forum, where the map-makers are invited to post
a request for not to get their maps renamed  ::)

Quote
http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard301/ikonboard.cgi?s=3e428fe23e0fffff;act=ST;f=2;t=26817

Joltan sayz:
Quote
Read the thread at OFPEC and have a good laugh...

Very serious comment, which is not really a constructive
invitation for a participant from the actual thread here.

Terox sayz:

Quote
So i have created this thread, to allow them to post the names of these maps here

We're allowed to post there? - thank you very much  :-\

Quote
Odd, i was expecting those that took part in the ongoing ofpec discussion to have posted their map names by now,  its obviously not that important to them

No Terox - it's your job to ask, not the map-maker's job.
Why do you want to carry a discussion from one forum over
to another one? - "hmm we can't win here, let's take the
battle over to our area"

:note - don't see it as a battle, just see it as a request for
respect

Point is: ask for permission - get permission/or not - do what
you were permitted to do ==> very easy to understand i think.

Quote
Just wondering how anybody could prove who's map is who's anyway

See it that way: if it wasn't you, who made the map, it must
have been somebody else then.

Quote
So if i made the statement,
"All the maps that have no contact name or author name are mine and you can do with them as you like"

Would this stop the babble!


You don't really believe this, do you?

Quote
Have they decided on tea or coffee yet?

THEY have already decided and you are invited to read
here in this thread how THEY did.

~S~ CD
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 06 Feb 2003, 19:04:05
Quote from: nwo on 06 Feb 2003, 14:41:13
The mapname convention is going on for over 3 month (many ppl putting time and energy into it) in the official boards, some mappers (Hi Chris ;)) say they looked into it and had a good laugh, Terox said he announced the discussion here, but all of a sudden, after it's done, every missionmaker claims to "never have heard of that discussion" and to have been "left out" when they never bothered to give input before.

Just because someone hasn't taken part in a discussion doesn't mean that you can step on his rights. And I kindly refuse to justify myself for not taking part in your discussion. It indeed is your discussion, not mine. If you leave my interests alone you can continue it for three years. But tread on my rights and you'll get a reaction, simple as that.

I'm asking myself where we would be if you'd just followed my suggestion istead if reacting with a wave of ignorance. In the time you spent on attack the missionmakers you could have:

1. Selected some volunteers who ask the mission makers for their permission.
2. Had all server admins who follow the convention send in a list of missions that need to be renamed.
3. Had those volunteers sending a template e-mail to all mission makers in question.
4. Had a positive reaction from most of them.
5. Would have a reliable list of missions you could use without pissing anyone off.
6. Would know which missions can stay on the server and which ones have to be taken down or remain unchanged.

But instead of that, you decided to stay on your concrete point of view and poison the atmosphere by flaming us (we've been called silly, we've been called beurocrats and sseagle's post was really a high point). We would be much further now if you'd just opened up a little bit for our concerns. You still think two sentences that won't even change the core of our convention - the naming system - are too much.

I haven't read what's written in the official forums about this discussion and I don't feel like doing it now. But if there's written that the thread is a good laugh, then you should start laughing about yourselves. Because with a little bit more understanding for our concerns we would not talk, we would already see some action. Isn't that what Terox wants the most? You could already have a list of missions where you are allowed to change the names. And, you may like it or not, there will be no way around such a list. You're just blocking your own progress. You want a broad acceptance for your convention? Then start and earn that acceptance. Because you have to earn it, you simply can't force it.
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Sefe on 06 Feb 2003, 19:30:26
Quote from: Shrike_Z on 06 Feb 2003, 12:44:55
Calling server owners lazy is a punch in the face. Sorry to put it like this.

As server admins you have the choice. No-one has forced you to run a server. But when you don't ask the mission makers, you don't leave them a choice. That's a punch in their face. If I punched in your face, I apologize. But you started punching (not you personally but the server admins). So, unlike you I can claim to have acted in self defence. ;D
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: eisa01 on 06 Feb 2003, 21:00:26
calm down sefe, its just missions for gods sake! dont tear teroxs works apart because of some stupid "legal" issues. like anyone gonna sue someone if they rename theyre map. now get this thing done so i wont have to dl a new HALO version everytime i play  :-\
Title: Re:Mplayer Map Filename Convention
Post by: Noon416 on 06 Feb 2003, 22:50:32
Okay people,

This argument is literally going nowhere, as even though a solution has been supplied FOUR times already, people refuse to acknowledge it... (with the exception of Joltan, who's posting is the basis of the suggestions I gave).

So rather than let people continue the pointless abuse of several valid standpoints, I'm going to lock down this thread, and re-post the suggested solutions that can end this "discussion".

The following suggestions, if actioned, will very quickly, efficently and simply address and alleviate the concerns of ALL involved in this discussion, and allow the Convention to be safely and happily adopted by all concerned (including server admins)


Suggestion 1, by Sefe ... "Simply add the following single sentence" ...
Quote
3) It is the admins responsibility to modify map names on his server. The admin has to seek the explicit permission of the author to change the mission name. If the permission is not explicitly given (which includes the case that the author doesn't react to the request), the mission name may not be modified.

Suggestion 2, by Noon416 ...
Quote
Joltan, you stated in reference to the server he assists with:
"It has always been our policy that everyone submitting a mission would know that we have to rename them - be it the mission maker or whoever. And we never accept a mission if we can't."

BINGO!!

This is the point we've been trying to make, and I'm surprised it was so easily missed.

In my examples where I compared the OFPEC TAG system with the Convention, that was the point I was clarifying.

Put simply, if the Convention can have that single sentence added (or one to that effect), you wouldn't have had to have gone through this entire "discussion" to have people accept the convention in the spirit it was intended.

Hopefully, with this revelation and simple resolution, we can all resolve and put this discussion to bed.  

Suggestion 2, by Noon416 ... REITERATED BECAUSE PEOPLE MISSED IT, LIKE THEY HAVE DONE AGAIN ...
Quote

Did you all just not see what I posted?

Either read my last post, or see the summary below...

1. Joltan posted that
Quote:"It has always been our policy that everyone submitting a mission would know that we have to rename them - be it the mission maker or whoever. And we never accept a mission if we can't."

2. This means that we have a solution to this whole argument, a solution that has been there from the start.

THE SOLUTION TO THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION

Add a sentence to the Convention, that states "Servers have to make acknowledgement of this Convention a pre-condition for submission". Then you just have to make adhering to the convention a pre-requisite for submitting a mission to your server.

Just like OFPEC's successful TAG system.

For feck's sake people, don't trash three months of hard work for the sake of your ego.
The solution is staring you in the face...


To which Joltan replied (in acceptance) ...
Quote
Thank god finally someone read that.

Our messages must have crossed - as I read your previous post only now, long after I posted my response.  I only entered this thread after Sefe started with his legal stuff, acting like he was in court, fighting for the life of his client. I tried to explain how we handle stuff, and I never said, no we will not ask for permission - I rather explained that we are not always able to and therefore request anyone submitting a mission to accept our naming scheme.

I hope this is settled now, and we can return to talk with each other as normal people without further resorting to insults and arrogant behaviour (yes, that includes myself - sorry, but I can be short tempered, too).

And yet again, the solution to this whole "discussion" was overlooked by others ...

So I'm locking this down simply because people are turning this into a "Lets Bash Sefe" thread, rather than seeing and using the solutions presented (including Sefe's).


So once again (for the fifth time!):

THE SOLUTION TO THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION

Add a sentence to the Convention, that states "Servers have to make acknowledgement of this Convention a pre-condition for submission". Then you just have to make adhering to the convention a pre-requisite for submitting a mission to your server.[/b][/size]

Surprisingly easy, isn't it...

*Topic Locked*