[JScones]

Originally Posted by WEBSTER

asking permission to use the mod - forget it, your in fantasy land. a free mod for free download to the public carries no such obligation. asking modders to do this will discourage the sharing of new mods that didn't go to all that trouble.

This is rubbish. I release freeware which is used much wider than just the Subsim community. I have certain clauses in my licence agreements that state that contact must be made with me under certain circumstances.

Thus I receive much email, particularly from magazines, seeking permission to use my software. I've never said no, and now I have a nice selection of international computer magazines that have all featured my software on cover cds and the like.

My view is, if people really want what I offer, they will contact me as per *my* wishes. If not, then que sera sera, they don't use my product. Arrogant? Yes, but I stand by the quality of my product and have too much integrity to "sell myself out".

If a modder wants to be contacted each and every time, that's their call. If a modder doesn't want to be contacted each and every time, that's their call.

Just because something is free doesn't mean that you lose all rights as the creator.

Originally Posted by WEBSTER

as for a modder including an email addy for contact - get real, who wants tons of spam and repetative emails every day not to mention the occasional critic.

Never bothered me. My email address is plastered all through my releases. Spam is very minor (maybe two pieces a day).

Criticism comes too. And questions by the tonne-ful. Permission to use requests, regularly.

My point here is that you can not assume the voice of the community. Each modder can make up their own mind how, if at all, they want to be contacted.

And any guidelines must provide this flexibility.

Originally Posted by WEBSTER

as for mods without credits or read me i say anything out there is fair game and free to use without restrictions on how you use it. contrary to some views i have read, it is not my obligation to spend my time and effort searching for a modder who did not include the info i need to credit him when he made his mod download.

Agreed. For mine, no readme/credit file means it's released as PD.

Originally Posted by WEBSTER

i think we are going too far into the minutia of the credit issue where we should look more at helping the modders made their mods better with read me's that explain just what the mod does, any credits given as needed, and what i see lacking in most mods is a date and/or a version number for the mod.

I see the need for a set of mod-use guidelines and a helpful set of modder hints.

The latter being some suggestions for modders on how to compose their readme files. Mainly for the new guys, and not a template per se, moreso a list of points that they should aim to address. For this, a lot has been done in this thread by Ducimus and danlisa. All that's needed to be added is date and version quoting (leaving the *how* up to the modder) and an example of how best to list file changes and record change logs. Fortunately this wouldn't be hard to collate though, as I think *all* of the larger mods do this well.

This aspect will help address future mod releases by empowering the *modder* to decide use-instructions.

This part can be done in about 10 minutes. Just needs to state what should be included, such as:

-mod name
-mod version
-mod release date
-author's name
-mod description

-installation and other related use information (such as preferred settings and so on)

-changelog for each version, ie:
v1.1 (date)
- Added something... (list files changed)
- Removed something... (list files changed)
- Updated something... (list files changed)
- Increased something... (list files changed)
v1.0 (date)
etc

-use conditions and contact information. The stuff that Ducimus and danlisa has quoted in this thread.

(feel free to add/remove items)

That will then get the tips for modders out of the way and if adopted will alleviate a lot of the angst in subsequent crediting.

Perhaps if people find it easier to chunk the issue this way, this aspect can be finalised first and put into place whilst the crediting guidelines continue to be developed? At least the fostering of new modders can be separated from the crediting issue, which tbh I don't see as affecting new modders anyway.

Originally Posted by WEBSTER

don't get me wrong here kpt. i feel you are the injured party in the past drama that occured but as it seems now you are sounding like you want to go overboard and instead of guidlines to follow you want rules and punishments for not following these rules. the punishments and enforcing the rules part is where i disagree with you. that i fear will spell the deathnel here as it will turn off members new and old.

Yes. I must admit, I am uncomfortable with some of the "punishment" and "rules" talk.

Calling them rules, seeking punishment and all that kind of talk will do nothing other than turn people off quick smart. These are not rules. They are not enforecable. And nor is it up to the administrators of this board to determine guilt (outside of the forum rules that we all must abide by).

They are guidelines. Their adoption should be fostered by the community. The aim here is to avoid ambiguity, confusion and misunderstanding within the community, not provide a piece of paper that can be used to hang someone. People that see the positive result that the guidelines provide will adopt them.

Now people that choose to ignore the guidelines can do so, free from whipping, however, they must realise what doing so does to their credibility and social standing within the submarine simulator community. We've seen one guy kicked out of almost every forum. Another guy has now upset two of the major "supermods" and ends up with closed threads wherever he goes. At least with guidelines in place it provides some kind of moral high ground for the allegers to take over the perpetrators, thus making the allegers less of a target for abuse when raising their concerns.

Conversely, the guidelines will also provide protection for modders that do attempt to do the right thing, but still get "pinged" by a disgruntled modder at some point (ie if an original mod included no readme files or whatever).