I talked with Alenth today about people converting mods without permission. Here was the conversation.



Please do so.

Edit: He still doesn't believe me.

Hmm...
I agree with most of what you say.
People gone for a month should be fair game, if you give them credit >_>

Converting another's persons work does not make it your own.

Unless you ask the creator and get permission, or are asked BY the creator to do so, then you're just taking credit that could've belonged to the original creator(s).

I considered it, as you saw, but you don't know how long they've been gone. I don't think. Is there a "last logged in" thing? If so, then it's fine to convert it after a month. Or if you give credit, I suppose.

Look at a profile and see for yourself. There's something telling you when they last logged in.

On another note, how the heck are we supposed to enforce the idea of them needing explicit permission? Ban them unless the actual maker shows up and posts his consent within an hour? I think you should think things out a bit more. Sending things into action based on your whim and the opinion of whatever half dozen DRLFF members you are collaborating with isn't exactly a good plan.

Anyways, conversions are rare, most of the ones that are done are by the OP and/or are of expecially memorable mods.


While I advocate the idea that we promote crediting original creators, if someones going to actually be upset enough over misplaced credit for some changed variables and some bitmap files, they need some help. They should take pride in the fact that their mod was well-liked enough that people felt like updating it or using it's code for their own project.

And if they're gone, I'm not really sure what the big deal would be. The only issue might be people becoming famous for stealing the work of retired modders, but they would be found out and humiliated by someone.

All in all, self-regulation is probably just as good, if not better, than having it be an official rule enforced by the moderation staff.

I converted my own mod, and the SPANKY, because it's unbelievably awesome, and I always use them, and the original creator had long since left.

What part of that was wrong?

Your case is irrelevant, you gave credit to Charmless.

Exactly.

And yet Empyreal would have left the SPANKY to rot in the old mods section with his permission only rule.

See, this is what you needed to post BEFORE. Then I can reply.

No, not a ban. A warning, a whatever else, I don't know the options anymore, I'm not an admin. I was just saying that it should be added to the rules under the same constraints as the others, whatever they are. Conversions are not rare. Every five mods right now is an unauthorized conversion. I may be exaggerating a little, but I think that's about right.

And TD, obviously I said converting other people's mods without permission or giving credit. You GAVE credit. That's fine.

I think that you should be allowed to convert whatever mod you want as long as you don't claim it as your own

I want to know though. If you had a mod and I posted it, without giving credit, but not saying it's my own own, would that be fine?

I'm saying this: Credit. Give credit. Otherwise, don't do it.

And permission would be good too, because some people might get angry. But hey, credit at least.

Oh, I was confused.

Yes, that was another thing. How the heck are you supposed to get permission from someone who's gone? And again; how are moderators supposed to even know if you get permission?

...

"And TD, obviously I said converting other people's mods without permission or giving credit. You GAVE credit. That's fine."

But your new rules still state he is in the wrong, since he never contacted Charmless.

...

I like bans better, warnings are weightless.

You're exaggerating, a lot.

...

"I think that you should be allowed to convert whatever mod you want as long as you don't claim it as your own" Or for the wrong third party.

If you read up, you'll see that I said if they've been gone a month, that's fine. I also said the rule could be implemented with give credit, if nothing else.

Don't sit stagnantly and do nothing just because it could be the wrong thing to do. Anything can be fixed, and doing nothing is worse than SOMETHING.

And before you say I'm exaggerating, ask others. It's at minimum every ten mods.

I sense a Godwin's law coming...

Empyreal says:
Should there be an exception for mods made by people who have been inactive for a month? I don't think so.

I don't see anywhere where this statement was retracted.



I still don't see unattributed conversions tearing the community apart, or causing flame wars, or killing trees and causing global warming and the nuclear apocalypse. The only reason this is an issue is because you are playing the part of a lobbyist, though I have no idea how one can be a lobbyist without an actual lobby.

And no, it isn't murdering small children. Does that NOT make it a problem?