Penalisation of non-free content in ContentDB [Split]

[PolySaken]

PolySaken, I was not responding to you in my post.

Oh. Sorry, It was a little ambiguous.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

freegamer nope
the human exchange is not hampered by applying a non commercial licence to content
. what your are doing is hampering creators who wish to share and the end user with your ideals . fair enough labeling the content licence to make users aware or even listing them in a seperate catagory , but penalising and hiding content from the end user over ideals is plain wrong and petty . give the people the choice to decide for themselves.

[v-rob]

It seems to me that most people are under the impression that Minetest is a democracy. It's an oligarchy. The devs have decided on the policy, and that's that.

Don't start screaming about this instead because it won't do any good. Honestly, if Minetest was a democracy, nothing would get done at all, as can be seen by this argument.

Numerous discussions (if you can call all of them that) have been made about this, and I think the devs have had plenty of time to change their mind if they were going to. So can we stop wasting C55's disk space and stop the argument?

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

freegamer . i have no interest in eyecandy if i did i would go and buy the lastest version of minecraft and not bother with minetest . IMO the whole point of free software to me is not to be reliant on having an internet connection to play and not having upgrades forced upon me . i gave up consoles 20 years ago and i have never purchased a game since. i am not paying for polished poo . there is very little innovation in the gaming industry now other than eyecandy . they are all just regurgitations of the classics.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

. So can we stop wasting C55's disk space and stop the argument?

i have been keeping my posts short and to the point .not qouting all the waffling which is often a sign that a person does not have a very strong point to make in the first place if that have to over elaborate to defend themselves . i felt it was better to discuss here than taking it up on reddit .

[FreeGamers]

cuthbertdoublebarrel, thats not an argument or a point. You've simply just said: "freegamers you are wrong. your ideals are wrong". Have you ran out of points to make? It sounds like it.

What is wrong with having ideals or principles? You can say its unrealistic but yet free software exists and is successful in many places. I function just fine without non-free software. I simply don't use it. I hope more people stop using software and agreements that inhibit your freedom. For example, any software and assets with non-commercial assets... just don't use them. Wow, so hard to enact this "ideal". No one is being penalized for not using non-commercial software. Content is not being hidden. It is simply replaced with freer content. Yet you are doing what you accuse me of. You are penalizing people for using your creations. With non-commercial, you are telling people they cannot participate in commerce in any form with your software. Why would they use it when a better alternative exists?

rob, do you have a point? If you don't like an argument why interject yourself into one and add an obtuse subject? As far as the minetest software distribution goes, you can just take the software and fork it and the services, they are all shared... Sure they have the core tools used to control the software distribution and the biggest platform but you could easily create alternatives. Its been done before. Just because its hard doesn't mean its not possible. In some ways its a meritocracy with some favoritism. Who cares anyways? If the software is improved its improved. Contribute or don't. That's all that really matters. I don't want to talk to coredevs about social issues and schmoozing. I'm here for the software. They've left me alone. I don't understand why it would move to a democracy, what is there to vote on? Software and git is more like a distributed ad-hoc system anyways. You can just clone and code. We don't need a thousand people voting on minor things like what font to use. I'm sure useful contributions get merged regardless. If you feel like there is personal prejudice against you, make an alternative anonymous account and submit code.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

cuthbertdoublebarrel, thats not an argument or a point. You've simply just said: "freegamers you are wrong. your ideals are wrong"

never said your ideals were wrong i stated it was petty how the team were trying to force those ideals onto others

[PolySaken]

cuthbertdoublebarrel, thats not an argument or a point. You've simply just said: "freegamers you are wrong. your ideals are wrong"

never said your ideals were wrong i stated it was petty how the team were trying to force those ideals onto others

They're only being forced on you in the sense that if you want people to see your content you have to follow those ideals. Publish them on some random site and have no-one see them, problem solved.
/s by the way, I partially agree with you.

[v-rob]

rob, do you have a point? If you don't like an argument why interject yourself into one and add an obtuse subject?

My point is that the argument is worthless. It will go back and forth forever with no one getting anywhere. It's a waste of effort, and it won't change the core dev's minds because their minds are already made up, and they are the people that really count in this situation. All this argument is doing is breeding dislike between people.

All I want to do is cool things down. It seems to have only added fuel to the fire if anything, so I suppose I'll have nothing more to do with this.

[FreeGamers]

I really don't feel any animosity towards anyone involved in the discussion. I'm not afraid of having disagreements with people. It's good to have rationale discussions about different opinions, even in the face of fear of disdain or disagreement. Would we all rather get along perfectly all the time but say nothing substantial and learn nothing; never scrutinizing ourselves or our beliefs? Being exposed to conflict and conflicting opinions will expose one to new ways of thinking, new arguments, and new reason. Its valuable to read what others write and think in order to learn and scrutinize different positions on issues. At the end of the day, we all have our projects, we collaborate and work together. A bit of heat from an argument is not cause for a freeze on communication.

Others will probably read these discussions aside from some core devs. It could be meaningful to people. I wanted to point out some of the limitations noncommercial licenses and copyright have. It could make sense for copyrighted projects to be avoided on ContentDB as well. For users or creators looking to incorporate content licensed under NC, it can have some debilitating caveats that make it good to avoid. It might be painful to do so in the short-term but can end up being a good decision in the long-term for the possibilities of your projects.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

cuthbertdoublebarrel, thats not an argument or a point. You've simply just said: "freegamers you are wrong. your ideals are wrong"

never said your ideals were wrong i stated it was petty how the team were trying to force those ideals onto others

They're only being forced on you in the sense that if you want people to see your content you have to follow those ideals. Publish them on some random site and have no-one see them, problem solved.
/s by the way, I partially agree with you.

i simply can not understand why the two ideals can not coexist together equally without one bieng penalized by the team .after all it is user content not the engine itself ,really does seem very petty .
as for random sites i am really surprised there is such a distinct lack of fansites
for such an indepth game that been around awhile .

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

I wanted to point out some of the limitations noncommercial licenses and copyright have. .

unfortunately the weak examples you portrayed actually convinced me that you really had nothing at all . and undermined any point you had .

[FreeGamers]

ok bro

Omae wa mou shindeiru

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

ok bro

ok sis

[LMD]

never said your ideals were wrong i stated it was petty how the team were trying to force those ideals onto others

They're only being forced on you in the sense that if you want people to see your content you have to follow those ideals. Publish them on some random site and have no-one see them, problem solved.
/s by the way, I partially agree with you.

i simply can not understand why the two ideals can not coexist together equally without one bieng penalized by the team .after all it is user content not the engine itself ,really does seem very petty .
as for random sites i am really surprised there is such a distinct lack of fansites
for such an indepth game that been around awhile .

As I have already explained, being free is an advantage and thus deserves to be rewarded. Allowing commercial use is an advantage as well and also deserves reward. This is indisputable: the more rights the author grants the users, the better for the users. Well, users nowadays like to have the "best" content at the top. And accordingly, free content gets a score bonus.

Whether 10x is appropriate - who knows. It should probably be more fine-grained - NC-content should probably only get it's score divided by half (as it isn't as bad as absolute nonfree content with ND clauses etc).

As for the "penalty": we should probably host a vote. Everyone can name a number > 1 and <= 10. In the end we take the average and call it a day. I'd name 5.

But that being NC is a disadvantage for users (which might want to make money with YouTube videos, for example) and needs to be penalized and show a warning is obvious.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

But that being NC is a disadvantage for users (which might want to make money with YouTube videos, for example) and needs to be penalized and show a warning is obvious.

no it is not at all obvious, this is a poor example and a weak excuse for a petty penalty system
there has not been one valid point made here as to why NC is a disavantage for users .in the context of user contributed content that is additional to the engine .
as i already stated to you previously
a non profit vid its fair use of non comerical content youtube automatically checks the creative commons and matches the content to the licence .
those utubers who have monetized channels will often have an additional non profit channel to cater for the exact example you have just given .

[LMD]

But that being NC is a disadvantage for users (which might want to make money with YouTube videos, for example) and needs to be penalized and show a warning is obvious.

no it is not at all obvious, this is a poor example and a weak excuse for a petty penalty system
there has not been one valid point made here as to why NC is a disavantage for users .in the context of user contributed content that is additional to the engine .
as i already stated to you previously
a non profit vid its fair use of non comerical content youtube automatically checks the creative commons and matches the content to the licence .
those utubers who have monetized channels will often have an additional non profit channel to cater for the exact example you have just given .

Are you reading our posts thoroughly? "There has not been one valid point made" is plain wrong. Many examples have been given. As I already assumed and wrote, it might be illegal as YouTube obviously makes money by showing ads. I wouldn't want to risk fighting over this at court.

Another good example of NC-issues is education:

The NC licenses may not permit some uses of your work that you would like others to make. For example, not all educational uses are necessarily NonCommercial uses, so your use of an NC license may preclude use of your work in some educational contexts.

(from the CC wiki)

NC licenses impose restrictions and limitations on the user regarding the ambiguously defined term of "commercial use." As such content finds it's way into dependency trees, the entire work is NC in the end. Congrats. To prevent this from happening, users need to be warned and the content needs to be penalized.

We are making valid points, you just seem to not be reading (and/or understanding) them.

Besides, are you really the one to have a say here? May I ask how much you already have contributed?

[u18398]

This sounds like a new religion. openSource isn't the solution to everything.
What you need is qualtity.

People just do not believe when it is closed source. Too much lies, too much promises.
But that is a general problem in life nowadays.

But when you ask me, that does not mean OpenSource is always a win to qualtiy.

[FreeGamers]

Freedom, security, privacy, control, quality.

Can you have them all?
FOSS can give you all of them.
Closed software cannot.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

might be illegal as YouTube obviously makes money by showing ads. I wouldn't want to risk fighting over this at court.

you state above that YouTube is making money by showing ads
you are not YouTube so why would you be fighting over this at court on thier behalf ?
once agian you have presented a flawed example that has further undermined your arguement

[LMD]

might be illegal as YouTube obviously makes money by showing ads. I wouldn't want to risk fighting over this at court.

you state above that YouTube is making money by showing ads
you are not YouTube so why would you be fighting over this at court on thier behalf ?
once agian you have presented a flawed example that has further undermined your arguement

You don't seem to understand some things. Youtube is not responsible for your content. Also, you're not arguing and just saying we're "undermining" our arguments just because we're going into details.

And the entire YouTube thing set apart, I actually told you that educational use is often considered commercial use. Isn't that a valid point, and an obvious downside of NC-licenses?

How about you read up on the subject before commenting any further?

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

Youtube is not responsible for your content.

you are just being silly now of course Youtube is responsible for your content . you can not put what you like on there without observing copyright laws . otherwise you get a copyright strike .

[Linuxdirk]

otherwise you get a copyright strike .

Yes, exactly. “you get a copyright strike”, not YouTube.

[cuthbertdoublebarrel]

otherwise you get a copyright strike .

Yes, exactly. “you get a copyright strike”, not YouTube.

who issues the copyright strike Youtube . youtube has an autocheck on copyrighted content .so this only applies if you abuse copyrighted content for commercial gain , ie getting paid by youtube ,

[Linuxdirk]

who issues the copyright strike Youtube .

Please get at least a minimum of copyright laws knowledge. This is getting ridiculous.