Major announcement!!! Staff change!!!

[wolf bite]

Nevadacow,

First, you are way off topic.

Next Admins have posted, even in the post right above your, that it is disruptive and believed to be intentional.

Then you guys keep bring up your long dead arguments from years ago.

As far as no harming being done and my account accidentally deleted. That is an out right lie.


1. Before yesterday, Vera and I were talking about how bug-ridden RWL is and how obstinate RWL is. The classic phrase (congrats if you get the reference) "I'm So Bored With R.W.L." could be heard. In the evening, with truly nothing better to do, I downloaded and looked at the BAXX codebase. Hole found in 5 minutes. Tried it, it worked.
2. Yesterday, Vera and I improve on the hole. My account has some 1.5 million invisible acres, and 25000 turns. I can also be an admin, etc. etc. We do nothing harmful, except I kill Wolf Bite because he's been the emperor too long and I'm bored with him.

~Beatles


Because of Beatles downloading and reviewing our code did he find the bug. He did this because he was bored. With unknown changes that we could not verify how deep he had gotten we had a forced reset.

I don?t really want to discus someone?s corrupted viewpoint that hacking our system, doing unknown changes and being told to trust him as for our best benefit any more then you want me to kick down your home?s door to prove the lock could have been better. Not anyone?s choice to hack OUR system even if THEY think it is for our benefit.

General, I agree with most of what you say. And I was again opening the door to talks in this topic, as I have tried in the past, but we see their attitude to be demeaning. Almost like having a friendly hand put out and then slapped. How many times to I have to hear the same people?s opinion about how much better they and their code is in their opinion then anything we have? Frankly it is nothing but insults. Not that all the F&F people have come off that way, but they are following suit despite being asked politely not to.


Wolf Bite

[bjornredtail]

That is an out right lie.

That is an outright flame. I was unaware of the quote you posted. My error was in ignorance, not malace. THEREFORE I AM NOT LIEING. I AM NOT A LIAR!!!

Very well, I apologize for my outberst. Concider this post a testament to my stupidity.

[Gen. Volkov]

For the first time.. I have nothing truly productive to say other than to ask for everyone to calm down a wee bit.

Ok. A thought: FAFer's claim that RWL says it's code is better, RWLers claim that FAF says its code is better. Having been to both places, I have come to the conclusion that comparing the two is meaningless. They have diverged enough that it's like comparing an apple to an orange. The FAF codebase has three people working on it, so it's prolly a bit more streamlined, but RWL's codebase has features that FAFdoesn't have, and FAF has eliminated many (though not all) of the features that once made it distinctive. The only real difference is RWL's code has more holes, other than that they are basically two different codes that share a common ancestor. Code evolution if you will, FAF is one species, RWL another. So how about we stop all this nonsense about who's is better? I don't see what they have posted as pure insult, but I can see how it might be construed that way. But I think the spirit in which the comments are offered are benevolent, blunt, but not malevolent in nature.

[The Lady Shael]

This is what happens when you try to do RWL and homework at the same time........this was supposed to be posted 4 posts ago.



I love RWL too, and the reason that RWL has taken almost equal priority with my schoolwork right now is because I don't want to see it die either. I'd love to see this place as active as was in its prime, and even if it's not possible, there's no harm in trying.

But seriously, the prejudice between RWL and FaF has been going on for so long and for so many reasons, it's hard to tell who really started it all. While I completely understand we need more and better coders to really pull RWL back onto its feet, this is what I'm asking myself:

Why should we trust someone who has hacked RWL multiple times? Why should we let someone who has tried to put RWL down, who only seeks to bring out the negative qualities in the game, forum, members, and staff, help us bring RWL back to its former glory?

[Gen. Volkov]

Because he probably wouldn't have done so if not for some of Retto's policies? Because he has never hacked FAF, which he created? Because if we let him have a hand in creating a new RWL, he prolly won't have the same impulse to attack it? Because this is a chance to stop the prejudice between the two sites? And I don't think he seeks to only bring out their negative qualities. Do I or Neo show many negative qualities? We both frequent FAF.

I think the biggest argument for is: who else is going to help us that we have any chance of trusting besides people from FAF? Maybe you don't trust Beatles, but does that extend to all the FAF admins with coding ability? Why shut them all out for one person's past lapses of judgement? (Or whatever word you feel fits best)

[The Lady Shael]

You and Neo don't, but then you didn't create FaF.

The coders at FaF aren't the last coders on earth. As much as I hate turning down the idea of skilled coders willing to help RWL, it seems any time RWLers and FaFers get together, starting out as friendly, it ends in a heated argument (much like this one). And we tried, but this is what happens every time.

Even if Beatles has the ability to create a new RWL, he's done so many things against RWL and the RWL staff(even if was meant to be for our own good, it certainly didn't seem that way to us), that's just not something we can easily agree to.

[Gen. Volkov]

You and Neo don't, but then you didn't create FaF.

The coders at FaF aren't the last coders on earth. As much as I hate turning down the idea of skilled coders willing to help RWL, it seems any time RWLers and FaFers get together, starting out as friendly, it ends in a heated argument (much like this one). And we tried, but this is what happens every time.

Even if Beatles has the ability to create a new RWL, he's done so many things against RWL and the RWL staff(even if was meant to be for our own good, it certainly didn't seem that way to us), that's just not something we can easily agree to.

I was more pointing out that associating with Beatles hadn't brought out the negative qualities in us. But you are right, we did not create FAF, and did not have the falling out that has caused such animosity to spring up.

You are right, a heated argument over the same old stuff does happen, neither side can let the matter drop. Can there be no compromise? You tried yes, and the FAFer's tried, but obviously not hard enough. Can't we just let the past be the past? (I hate platitudes, see what I'm sinking too here? I really think you should at least give them a shot) If you wish, we can appoint a non-biased intermediary for awhile to help smooth out communications, so that these arguments don't keep happening. I just really really don't want to see RWL die, and I don't know of any other coders that would even be willing to help us.

(That's all for tonight, I've got homework too, and sleep to worry about, I'll pick this up tomorrow or tomorrow night.)

And as I pointed out before, bjorn wasn't around then, and has very little knowledge of what exactly happened when Beatles got into the RWL codebase, he knows it did happen is all, so please refrain from accusations of lying when simple ignorance is to blame.

[wolf bite]

I had written this before about General?s post 2 up. But this is faster passed then phone calls will let me handle. But I think my points still address the posts since this one. Mostly I want to add that a person should read this topic from the beginning and see how insults started flying, we asked them politely to stop. Apparently some people think they can overrule our Admins.


No one said all F&F people are negative, we have one on our staff. I could post all the negative comments, but then it would be easier just to read all the posts by some people.

Retto's code was open (as demonstrated by the fact that Beatles downloaded his code) before Beatles? attack. It was only after Beatles attack that the original maker of the code gave us special permission to keep it save because he agreed that any person managing a site that would use the code to hack another site should not have it released to them.

I fully refuse to discuses whether someone else has the right to attack us because they think it is best. Besides it was not for our own best interests at the time, it was boredom. The argument loses. The end. Done!

Further I refuse the idea of saying if you let someone with bad intent inside the bank then maybe they would not have robed it. The concept is black mail. Again a losing argument. Done. Over.

I never said all people at F&F have bad intent, I have constantly said many are good people. Nevada and I have even worked together a few times for the betterment of RWL. I was in favor and excited about working together before this topic was even started, up until the insults started flying in our direction. Some people just cant move on from years ago. Their continued actions reinforce our previous decisions.

And Nevada, I said it was a lie, one that has been repeated many times. Just because you heard the lie and it is a lie does not mean you made up the lie.


Wolf Bite

[Gen. Volkov]

You didn't have to say it was a lie like he was lying though. You could have just said that he was mistaken. And like I said, I can see how some comments might be construed as insults, but I don't think they were intended that way.

The rest, if I'm not pre-empted, will be addressed sometime tomorrow, as I really need to finish my bio homework.

[Devari Not Logged In]

Frankly, I would hazard a guess that this discussion is rapidly becoming somewhat pointless.

As for me, I came here to suggest an opening of the code to enable the contribution of "outsiders". I suggested, not too subtly (I hope!), that FAF coders could help in such a case. I personally do not see a reason for continued hostility and mistrust. I certainly do not see why I am apparently mistrusted as well. Perhaps mistrust is too strong a word...? Nonetheless, it does seem that way to me, at least to a certain extent.

Regardless, my "offering" here is complete. It has been (justly or unjustly, take your pick) rebuffed, and I see no reason for me to continue my presence here, and certainly no reason to continue this discussion. I earnestly hope things work out in the end for you all, and I certainly hope that, one day, everyone will not be painted with the same brush. I take my leave, sirs and ladies, hopefully with as little ill-will against me as possible.

Take care, and goodbye. :)

[windhound]

*blink*
this topic got bigger than it should have
but meh.  I can, really more than anyone, see this from both sides

I sugguest a compromise, which has more or less already been stated
rwl should go ahead and send the current code to faf
if faf would like to help rwl, they can go through the new code dump and look for errors, compile the full list and possibly suggest means of fixxing

note that this is nothin' against Shael, but 3+ pairs of eyes are better than 1

and, this may sound off, but people do change, and it has been about a year

lastly, the above is about the only way I see for faf to help rwl.  the old dump is what, 2 years old.  errors have been fixxed, and possibly new ones created
Microsoft just released its third patch for IE in about a month because the first two introduced new holes.  security flaws happen
if rwl does not want the help of faf, and I can see reasons why this might be, let it just be said by the admins.  there's no reason to give more reasons why help isnt wanted, just say bugger off

-oh.  Devari snuck in.  but I'll post this anyways-

[bjornredtail]

And Nevada, I said it was a lie, one that has been repeated many times. Just because you heard the lie and it is a lie does not mean you made up the lie.

This statement is still untrue. I made up my conclusion from my very much incomplete investagation of the matter. It is my conclusion, and given the evidance you have brought forth it is untrue. It was not created by anyone out of mallace, it was simple misinformation.

Retto's code was open (as demonstrated by the fact that Beatles downloaded his code) before Beatles? attack. It was only after Beatles attack that the original maker of the code gave us special permission to keep it save because he agreed that any person managing a site that would use the code to hack another site should not have it released to them.

I fully refuse to discuses whether someone else has the right to attack us because they think it is best. Besides it was not for our own best interests at the time, it was boredom. The argument loses. The end. Done!

Further I refuse the idea of saying if you let someone with bad intent inside the bank then maybe they would not have robed it. The concept is black mail. Again a losing argument. Done. Over.

By your analgy someone broke into your bank building, took very little and has already payed for his past crimes. Are you morally justified in buldozeing all the public roads around this bank as they allowed the bank robber easier access? These roads, like much of the code is not your properity. It belongs to the community at large. By refuseing to distribuate the modified and publicly run source you are effectively stealing from them in my opinion. Do two wrongs make a right? Reguardless of what Beatles, or anyone else did or did not do, I belive it is immoral to steal the code.

On a diffrent note, even if what Beatles did in the relatively distant past was wrong, is it really a reason to out right reject anything comeing form his text editor? Or for that matter mine (when I finally do learn to code), or that of anyone else who is affilated with him?

Some people just cant move on from years ago.

On this charge I claim innocence. All I stated was to redeem themselves from the sins of the past RWL must simply stop committing them. Give us, the community, what we rightfully diserve. The source code.


The debate on who flamed who first shall be continued... Elseware. It really isn't relivant to any of the technical and moral issues of this topic.

[wolf bite]

There are no moral or legal issues when the rights to keep safeties safe have been given to us but the original copyrighter. So that is a non issue.

I like how you reused my bank story. But I don?t think you got it quite right. It is unknown how much the robber took, thus the entire bank had to be rebuilt. The robber never paid for his sins and still to this day insists he had the right to do it. The robber has shown no remorse and spits at the bank each day he walks past it. For these reasons it would be pure stupidity to intentionally hand the floor plan of the rebuilt bank back to the robber. 

Going to windy?s post. Although Sheal is the keeper of the code, I would think releasing it would require a unanimous decision. At this point I would vote no to sending it out. After Sheal gets the big bugs fixed, I would consider having it reviewed by some trusted people. Then I would consider a full release with requests for any suggestions people may have.


Wolf Bite

[The Beatles]

NO, I don?t think that was the last, there have been many since then. The last was someone breaking in, then making themselves an admin. They went further into the code and gave themselves limitless turns. Then deleted of all people ME as a demonstration of their supposed superiority. Let me think, I believe that person used their own name, had their IP traced and further admitted the crime. Humm, who was that again ? let me think ? oh yes, it was Beatles, the ruler of Frost and Flame. The biggest advocate in us giving him our code when he himself says there is nothing in it that is worth his time to read. So why would someone want it so bad?

I would object to this slander and libel. I did not hide my activities, I made a post about it in GD in big letters /hours/ before you even logged on, Wolf. I was not covert about anything I did. So stop with the "was traced" and "admitted" language. Good gracious, your habits have not changed at all.

Now, all of you are talking about offers and suchlike. I have not in any way, shape, or form offered any assistance to RWL. Devari has, out of the kindness of his heart, made you an independent offer, not representing the FAF staff. If he were to help, it would not be on behalf of the FAF staff, and I have absolutely no intention of helping in any more than a cursory way. I also refuse roundly to look at the BAXX code and work on it. I have even stopped development of FAF, so do you really think I would offer to help RWL?

There's no need to bring up the old flame-wars. Some things are facts and some are not, so let's confine ourselves to the former.


Now, a more important issue for RWL is the question of the source. Legally speaking you are indeed obligated to release your source code. This is because it is based on QMT, which is under the GPL (as old Promisance versions were). The only right you have to change that is if you email ALL contributors to BAXX: i.e. PC Purgett, the QMT authors and contributors, and Retto and ask their permission. Until then it is under the GPL and you are under obligation to give the source to anyone who asks for it. Wolf knows this better than I do, as he's a lawyer and probably has an understanding of copyright law.

[wolf bite]

And I thought we were done with all this and that old stuff was no longer being brought up. Your last statement is untrue. And if anything you are making comments about me as in some attitude that you think is wrong. I frankly don?t care what you think.

Notice how we did not know who was the hacked until someone that could get on line saw your account as an admin. You are post 11 I believe. I just love proving things.


http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=6135.0

And may I remind you that is against our forum rules to make personal attacks against staff members.


Wolf Bite