Major announcement!!! Staff change!!!

[The Beatles_notloggedin]

Your very credits page admist you use QMT code. So please disprove my last statement if you think it is untrue.

And kindly point out where I am abusing you or any member of the staff. Thank you.

[Gen. Volkov]

Just browsing through that topic... what a difference two years makes huh? Not. We are still arguing over the same old stuff we were back then. The only one who has changed is me. (And really not all that much, but enough to know when to give something up as a bad apple or whatever the silly phrase is) Bugger it. I give up. Round and round it goes...

Wierdness... something I can't remember must have happened to me in between the two posts that Holby hated and the next series, cause in them I suddenly sound alot more like my current self. Irrelevant, but something I noticed.

One last point, is that watchlist.txt still around? Last I remember, it was and I was on it because I happen to like Beatles.

[Devari]

It seems this discussion has gotten a wee bit nastier. This seems to be some sort of twisted continuation:

http://faf.staronesw.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2878&hl=

[Peace Alliance]

We got permission from the writers of the original code not to make our code public untill it was made secure.

The arguement is over, you're not getting anywhere with this. It was over years ago.

[wolf bite]

I don?t think it got meaner at all.  I had simply acted similar on the F&F server as they are acting here. Seems they think it is rude, had the staff ganging up on me, and originally censored me. Here is a post from that topic:

Let me help you out and catch you up a bit. In the first post I made a statement which had many meanings. Some of those meanings were within the rules of this forum and some were not. Thus I was on the line between good member and evil flame.

Then I found a way to get around my first censorship by saying the same questionable statement again, and not breaking the rules. Thus I was between the lines of disobeying an order to stop by staff members.

And finally, although my simple original request had been directly indirectly answered I kept asking it as if I did not understand the answer. Thus on the line of spamming this server.

At no time have I actually broke any rules of this forum.

Our staff at RWL feel that all the above actions are being done on our site by staff members of F&F. Our staff members know better not to do on someone else?s site what we don?t want on ours. I would assume F&F feel the same also. This whole topic is not about libel or lost codes, but about mutual respect.

The first step to creating an understanding is to drop weapons. Respect of other?s property must be understood. If I am posting on this forum I am a guest, I should act like one. And this goes even more so since I represent as an ambassador of a different site. Under the same reasoning when ambassadors come to my home site I expect the same respect for my authority and not having to deal with people walking the lines mentioned above.

See, simple! People can close their eyes. People can find minor differences in my actions and disregard the greater point. People can find more reasons to argue. But also there is room for people to make a mutual agreement of being a polite guest in the other?s home.

Wolf Bite
Edit: fixed quotes only

[bjornredtail]

Minor diffrences? What you was done to make us angery. What we did (and continue to do) is not intended to harm or anger the fine staffers and posters here at RWL. This diffrence is rather inportant in my view.

In any case, you were not censored. Your posts were returned to thier origional content within minuates of being edited in the first place.

We got permission from the writers of the original code not to make our code public untill it was made secure.

The arguement is over, you're not getting anywhere with this. It was over years ago.

I belive this argument contradicts itself, if given the fact that the origional writer only gave that premission on a tempoary basis.

In fact...

now, after receiving an e-mail from Retto and reading it in it's entirety, I further explained my intentions with the "Promisance Public License". The reason it is the way it is, is to allow everyone and equal chance to look at and work on it ("it" being the Promisance source code). However, there have been some (and I will not point any fingers, though I could easily use both hands to count how many times I've seen it) individuals that have taken the source code, altered all the credits and other identifying information and made it their own.

That is theft. But, the way I see it, downloading the open source code, making your own alterations, then making your alterations public, then they have been completed (or at least to your best ability) (Example: Code is "pushed live", that's when), making the source code available, I have NO troubles with.

To my understanding, the devs of Redwall: Warlords have an expansion in the making and intend on making the source available when it's ready to go live, while I highly encourage sharing beta code (find bugs/problems faster, occasionally), I merely enforce that the "stable code" be made open.

Since license agreements are all about enforcement (and technically, I hold more "enforcement weight" than anyone over at QMT does) and the way I've just explained, is how I enforce it... that's the way it is.

My 2 biggest concerns when I made Promisance open source -- theft (as described above) and the credits being altered to remove my work done on the project.

That is how I enforce the Promisance source code... sure, there's ways to abuse the way I enforce it, but I tend to be notified of them in fairly short order and have it taken care of. Sometimes all it takes is a simple asking and it's done.

Clearly this applies only to beta code and then only temporarly. That message was posted over 2 years ago. For a while RWL cleaned up its act and relased BAXX. But then development just shut down... Now the fine developers here at RWL claim that that post gives them the right to hold on to the source code forever under all cirmstances.

http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=3989.msg58313#msg58313

[Scarwake]

If you look on the Downloads section of the Main Page of RWL there is a BAXX source code that can be downloaded.  It is from last january and I am pretty sure it was even before then that Retto had started to fade away and there were no more changes to the code.

So, the BAXX code is therefore open as it has been for quite sometime as I've noticed its been there for months on time.  As for a new code we do not have a fully complete new code even being written at this time, we are merely attempting to fix bugs in the current code & the I'm sure due to the legalities of the QMT Prominance Code once the bugs are fixed the updated code will be open.

[The Beatles]

There are differences between the download page code and new code, I have that on information from Retto IIRC.

Also, you got permission from Purgett. However, you did not obtain permission from the authors of QM, so the justification was invalid, as your code is based on QMT Promisance as well.

[wolf bite]

Warning!

Note this topic is about the retiring of an admin. All other discussion is off topic and the Admins have stated so with many pre-warnings.

Your points have been stated in many other places. Posting continuously about the same thing is SPAM.

Comments as your our opinion that we are braking some law is FLAME.

You are in violation of the forum rules.

Wolf Bite
(Admin Duties)

[The Beatles]

Thank you. Hum, Retto left. Interesting. Whee, I suppose. Or boo.

By the way, I'd like to point out who started spamming (by your definition): White Fang.
http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=7794.msg117946#msg117946

Since nobody pointed out that that was spamming at the time, we assumed it was on topic. The topic of the code (flaming?) openness was brought up by Scarwake.
http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=7794.msg118137#msg118137

And the person who started flaming by the generally accepted definition is wolf bite.
http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=7794.msg118148#msg118148

[bjornredtail]

Wolf Bite: In fact you are incorrect. This topic is about happy pony raiseing. Anyone who says otherwise will be hunted down my legions of trained attack Weasals!!! *que evil laugh*

Seriously, are you really going to shut down discussion beacuse the topic has drifted?

[The Beatles]

I believe it's his prerogative by the RWL rules, although very rarely enforced.

[wolf bite]

Warning number 2 for both of you.

Same exact reasons as above.



Wolf Bite
(Admin Duties)

[bjornredtail]

Okay then... Shall we create a new topic to discuss this then?

[Devari]

Then I assume that if, for the sake of argument, the posts that you term as "off topic" were merged in to a new discussion thread, none of this would be "spam"? Perhaps that would be a good step then, no?