Common Walls Debate

[LMNO]

Yuh kin hav bettur funnin wit da cabbages.

[Freeky]

I was about to commend you for your passable midwest accent, but then I remember you go to Montana sometimes.

 

[LMNO]

Annual recon with the enclave of Big Gay Cowboys.

[kingyak]

Annual recon with the enclave of Big Gay Cowboys.

IGRA?

[Freeky]

Annual recon with the enclave of Big Gay Cowboys.

During which time people go missing, and then turn up a week later covered in glitter? 

[LMNO]

Amateurs. We'd never be caught on camera.

[Freeky]

Amateurs. We'd never be caught on camera.

Ninjas have nothing on LMNO and his crowd. 

Just another reason why LMNO and his band of Big Gay Cowboys are a cut above the rest of us regular freaks. 

[EK WAFFLR]

I don't know anything about any of what most of this thread seems to be about, but I do know that I don't think it's cool to use or sell anyone's work without their permission. That should be the default community standard here.

So much this.

What I'm Feeling is getting people frustrated (at any cost, me) is that nobody is disagreeig with this.

It would have been so easy to say 'hey Cram, cool that you're keen but don't forget that this is LMNO/Nigels baby, and they really get to make the call on when it's ready.'

I mean even IF Cram was about to try to swoop in and take over (which I don't believe) would this have been any worse a way to say it? I think both halves of the ShrodingerCram (the half taking over the project and the half not) would have just backed off.

I know that maybe you could say that we should be able to understand  where people come from but we have a track record of being very very bad at that, and devolving into screeching when a little diplomacy would have gone a long way.

Nigel, I appreciate what your concerns are, and while I have different standards for how people use my work, I'm very aware of the need for autonomy a individual has over their own work. But theres a lot of ways to avoid this mess, and if you don't like PMing (which again is cool) then could you please maybe tone down the inflamitory factor in things like this?

Just to clarify. I don't know any of y'all enough to take part in this recent feast. I just wanted to echo the sentiment I quoted.

[AFK]

Here's my thing, and this is just me speaking,

Now that we've had this thing, perhaps now is a time to make a new list of current active authors laying out what they are okay with in terms of how their work is used.  So not just the usual stuff about whether or not we want attribtution, whether or not our stuff can be used in pamphlets, etc., but a new category of work being used in works that will be sold, whether they are sold to support pd.com or if the measly pittance of profits will be pocketed by the editor or editorial crew.

I would also suggest to anyone who has any notion that they would ever want to use their stuff in the future for commercial gain, perhaps not post it here.  ONe must remember, this site isn't only seen by all of us, but visitors as well.  I personally don't give a fuck.  My work here is under a pseudonym that I would never, ever publicly acknowledge or link to my real name.  I write this stuff because I enjoy it, I enjoy sharing it with y'all and whatever number of eyeballs see it when it is published.  I don't give a fuck if a spag makes a couple of bucks off of my stuff, it isn't any skin off of my back.

But, I do understand others not wanting that to happen.  So let's all lay it out somewhere in a reference thread and move on. 

In addition, when we start threads anywhere that we think might turn into a project, let's lay that out from the beginning.  "I think this will turn into something and I and I alone will put it together".  In other words, if collaboration isn't welcome from the rest of the gang, let's make sure we lay that out very explicitly.  That way, we don't stomp on people and dissuade people from wanting to engage in projects. 

Just a few cents, take them for what they are worth.  If you are Canadian, I guess they probably aren't worth all that much at all. 

[AFK]

And maybe that thread of who's comfortable with what should be in this forum where a lot of the source material tends to reside. 

[Placid Dingo]

Actually QGs done a good job of putting That all together in the kopyleft thread.

[Telarus]

I'd like to clear something up about Intermittens, as one of the first people to work on the thing as an actual collaborative product. I was layout editor for Issue 1.23, so while I had Cram's ear as content editor I saw an entirely different side of the monetization concept than everyone else, mainly because I had 'a stake' in Issue#1.23-as-an-item.

Whenever Cram discusseed possible monetization with me, it was always from the position that anyone who contributed content or skillset to Itermittens-as-a-whole would get exactly '1 share' (after costs) of any resulting income.


I'm still disappointed that Intermittens failed to become an income stream for the community.


Now, in my opinion, the public discussion was de-railed from the above by the fact that Intermittens was also going to be available free-for-no-charge on the website, and that there was really no way for the editorial-pirate-crew to functionally control third parties printing and making a profit from selling physical copies (which is what Lysergic assumed he could do, from the terms of the Intermittens license, which was "anyone can make one" flavored).

The two ideas simply weren't compatible. The fact that that blowback landed on Cram, as 1st editor, is really weaksauce, IMHO.

That said, I really like how we've moved on to discuss possible future works, and wanted to point out a past trap (as I saw it) with the incompatibility.

[AFK]

Actually QGs done a good job of putting That all together in the kopyleft thread.

It's kind of buried in that thread though, it isn't easy to find or decipher especially since there are so many inactive posters lumped into the list.  I'm just suggesting maybe a different, more easily accessed locale. 

[LMNO]

Or, we could ask the individual contributors of a thread at the time plans are being made.

I mean, I didn't remember what I said yesterday, much less several years ago when the Kopyleft Authors thread was made.  I'm glad QG bumped it though, because it needed revising.

I mean, posting "Are there any objections to collecting this into a non-profit printed collection? KOPYLEFT CHECK" with a follow up of direct PMs to the authors involved isn't that hard to do, and it allows the people who don't want their stuff used to say so in a simple and non-dramatic manner.  No assumptions are made, and permission is asked in the moment.

[AFK]

Or that.