RC/ReC/ElC/CC Policy Changes

[Reika]

heh with minetweaker you need to use the annotation AND you need to register them with minetweaker, take a look at how modtweaker does it.

I did.

 

[Luke_Thompson]

Seems reasonable. I don't plan to make any modifications to mods in my modpack ('BattleCraft 2' on Technic Launcher - search 'BattleCraft 2 by Luke_Thompson' if you want to have a looksie) so it doesn't apply directly to my pack, but in case I do decide to, I would have no objections to complying. Keep up the good work, Reika! I look forward to v7.

On a side note, do you mind if I use the same or similar rules for my own mod (when I actually get around to making it)?

 

[Luke_Thompson]

You almost made enough steps forward for it to count, but then this:

• Someone representing the pack (usually the author) must come to me and explain all of the changes they wish to make. This allows me to allows me to inform pack makers that their changes may be detrimental, redundant, or similar, and to ensure the other criteria are met; I will only disallow a change if it violates one of the criteria. Any changes not disclosed to me are assumed to have been kept as such in order to avoid following the rules, and are strictly forbidden.

and this:

• Also for providing defence and reducing bug report count, I will be adding a functionality to my handbooks that adds a special config file that allows for a pack author to specify any changes they make, so that any pack-level changes can be documented in the handbook. All of the pack's changes must be documented here.

I was actually kind of hopeful to try out Chromaticraft to see if it would be worth putting in a future pack, but this simply isn't worth my time, and even if it was I wouldn't out of principle. Can you imagine if every single mod author did this? Even smaller packs have upwards of 50-70 mods easily. Documenting changes to each mod author would be silly.

You make cool mods, but to expect everyone to make exceptions in their entire pack development for YOU is outrageous. This feels like a kick in the jaw, did the mod pack community insult you or something?

Those rules only apply to CHANGES made to the mod in the pack, not just to have the mod exist in said pack. Unless you are doing something like JadedCat did in her Agrarian Skies pack and similar and you're editing every single mod to suit the playstyle, then I don't see the problem. If there is something I missed, please let me know.

 

[Reika]

Seems reasonable. I don't plan to make any modifications to mods in my modpack ('BattleCraft 2' on Technic Launcher - search 'BattleCraft 2 by Luke_Thompson' if you want to have a looksie) so it doesn't apply directly to my pack, but in case I do decide to, I would have no objections to complying. Keep up the good work, Reika! I look forward to v7.

On a side note, do you mind if I use the same or similar rules for my own mod (when I actually get around to making it)?

Go ahead. I am not going to (nor could I) copyright my rules.

 

[ljfa]

On a side note, do you mind if I use the same or similar rules for my own mod (when I actually get around to making it)?

I would advice against using such rules unless you really need to. I feel like in most cases it won't be useful and do more harm then good.

 

[RavynousHunter]

Honestly, it depends on what you want, Luke. A lot of mods do well with a more free-form license. However, I...have to wonder if the massive adoption of open licenses is due to pressure within the user community to conform to what they want, instead of what the mod authors want, either directly or indirectly. If I may be so blunt, if I made a mod half as complex as Reika's mods, I'd likely use a license similar to his. Why? Because I am the one that spent likely hundreds of hours crafting the mod from the ground up, setting up the tiers, tweaking mechanics, creating and/or sourcing assets, not to mention testing and debugging. I do not want some half-cocked moron to come in, crap out a few Minetweaker scripts, use those in a server, then come whining to me when his crap broke my mod. Though, I think my terms would be a bit more blunt, something to the tune of: "If you use Minetweaker, then don't come complaining to me when balance goes straight to hell or you outright break something."

 

[ljfa]

I...have to wonder if the massive adoption of open licenses is due to pressure within the user community to conform to what they want, instead of what the mod authors want, either directly or indirectly.

I don't think so. Some people sure feel pressured but those are likely not the ones who would bow to that pressure.

Because I am the one that spent likely hundreds of hours crafting the mod from the ground up, setting up the tiers, tweaking mechanics, creating and/or sourcing assets, not to mention testing and debugging.

Well yeah but that doesn't have to be the case for every mod. Popular open source mods get lots of contributions from others, for instance there were a few occasions where I was able to make Blood Magic a bit better. I can feel justifiably feel entitled for at least a small part of it
Of course you don't need that if you know exactly what you want and are dedicated to do it all on your own.

I do not want some half-cocked moron to come in, crap out a few Minetweaker scripts, use those in a server, then come whining to me when his crap broke my mod.

Yeah I guess that is true in any case.

 

[Pyure]

I don't think so. Some people sure feel pressured but those are likely not the ones who would bow to that pressure.


Well yeah but that doesn't have to be the case for every mod. Popular open source mods get lots of contributions from others, for instance there were a few occasions where I was able to make Blood Magic a bit better. I can feel justifiably feel entitled for at least a small part of it
Of course you don't need that if you know exactly what you want and are dedicated to do it all on your own.


Yeah I guess that is true in any case.

+1. And anyone who doesn't like having their work improved shouldn't be modding at all. I'm sure there are vanilla game(minecraft) devs who don't like people screwing with their creation too.

 

[RavynousHunter]

+1. And anyone who doesn't like having their work improved shouldn't be modding at all. I'm sure there are vanilla game(minecraft) devs who don't like people screwing with their creation too.

One man's improvement is another man's disaster waiting to happen. I'm just protective of my creations, within reason. I won't go and try to sue anyone if they break my shit with half-baked scripts or game-breaking addons. I will, however, gladly take it upon myself to either tell them that they've hosed something and, thus, have basically voided their warranty (in the case of scripts) or tell folks getting my mod that said game-breaking addon screws my progression and, thus, is highly unrecommended.

Some people want to be more proactive, some want to be less, thus is their right. Not their privilege, not their idea, but their right. They have the right to dictate how their creations are used. Its their content, their work, and they should have the ultimate say in what is done to their content. Mojang allows us to mod their game. If they didn't want to allow it, they would be well within their rights to do so. We wouldn't like it, sure, but we're not the ones running the show. Likewise, users should not have the ultimate say in what a mod developer does. Most folks are happy to take reasonable requests and answer non-idiotic questions. However, if I want to closed source my mod, I shouldn't have to worry about being metaphorically burned at the stake. Disagreement is okay, but the absolute vitriol with which non-FOSS mods are treated is, frankly, disgusting. Not everyone agrees with the likes of Richard Stallman. FOSS is not for everyone. Get over it, get over yourselves, and just enjoy the damn game.

 

[Pyure]

I think it affects some modders indirectly. I've personally been pressurized for my opinions about what modders can and cannot do, and I didn't exactly like it.

I strongly disagree with this. Anyone can mod, regardless of their opinions. This is the kinda attitude many of the "open source or die" people have. "You agree with me, or you don't make mods". That's what it boils down to.

As you can see, you and I have wildly diverging opinions on the matter. As a professional developer myself, I'm very comfortable with mine, particularly since an anti-modding position is subject to constant hassle and mine isn't

 

[Pyure]

One man's improvement is another man's disaster waiting to happen. I

I'm liking your argument cuz its well worded But this is the same argument people make when they're opposed to interracial/gay/etc marriage. The truth is its only a disaster if you let it bother you, otherwise it has zero impact on you. The worst case scenario is that the other version becomes way more popular than your version, and that's not a disaster, that's evolution.

 

[ljfa]

To each their own. If your general opinion of the community is rather bad, or if your ideas diverge from what most people would prefer then you're probably fine with doing everything on your own. This will generally result in a different kind of mod than a more community-driven approach.
Both have their place, but if you go for the first kind then you can't be surprised when people complain about wanting something different. The first kind can only be considered successful if you are actually able to produce high-quality content completely on your own.

 

[keybounce]

The worst case scenario is that the other version becomes way more popular than your version, and that's not a disaster, that's evolution.

Tell that to the better than wolves / better with forge dispute groups.

Or, the project red / red power dispute groups.

Or, the apparent new thing of project red / integrated circuits.

We've had plenty of cases of "Hey, you stole the idea / concept / entire mod from so-and-so". It's not treated as evolution, but as "blame the new person! Shame! Disgrace!".

 

[trajing]

Tell that to the better than wolves / better with forge dispute groups.

Or, the project red / red power dispute groups.

Or, the apparent new thing of project red / integrated circuits.

We've had plenty of cases of "Hey, you stole the idea / concept / entire mod from so-and-so". It's not treated as evolution, but as "blame the new person! Shame! Disgrace!".

IMO, there's a difference between using the same concept and executing it differently and outright copying. Copying is bad. Reusing concepts is okay.

 

[Pyure]

Tell that to the better than wolves / better with forge dispute groups.

Or, the project red / red power dispute groups.

Or, the apparent new thing of project red / integrated circuits.

We've had plenty of cases of "Hey, you stole the idea / concept / entire mod from so-and-so". It's not treated as evolution, but as "blame the new person! Shame! Disgrace!".

I'll tell that to anyone happy to listen.

I'm not interested in how its treated. That's a product of the negative part of the community, or the part of the community whose opinion I don't care about.

Handling flames and trolling is really simple: delete button. Yawn. Cup of tea. I stand on the ethical high ground as far as I'm concerned and I'm bored by arguments to the contrary.

 

[RavynousHunter]

Delete/ignore buttons are all well and good, and definitely have their place. However, you also run the risk of ending up like Reika, where people have an irrational hatred for you and/or your content based on nothing more than rumours with no actual basis in fact. Reputation matters, at least to some folks.

 

[SynfulChaot]

Delete/ignore buttons are all well and good, and definitely have their place. However, you also run the risk of ending up like Reika, where people have an irrational hatred for you and/or your content based on nothing more than rumours with no actual basis in fact. Reputation matters, at least to some folks.

Irrational hatred is, by definition, irrational. Rational dislike of policies and stuff is one thing, but no amount of changing policies or talking will do anything about the irrational folks. They'll be the same they always are, regardless of what one tries to do to appease them as their dislike is irrational in nature to begin with. All you *can* do about those folks is to ignore 'em.

EDIT:

I should also note that draconian policies can also adversely affect reputation, even if people understand why they came about in the first place.. Overly rude/aggressive responses to others, even if the others may 'deserve' it, can also adversely affect reputation. And again, reputation only matters to the rational. The irrational don't care.

 

[Pyure]

Delete/ignore buttons are all well and good, and definitely have their place. However, you also run the risk of ending up like Reika, where people have an irrational hatred for you and/or your content based on nothing more than rumours with no actual basis in fact. Reputation matters, at least to some folks.

Totally agree, but a lot of Reika's flames come directly due to his stubborn policies and stances. That's not so much irrational as realistic. And while his policies are his prerogative, the price you pay for that can be criticism, constructive and otherwise.

And again, reputation only matters to the rational. The irrational don't care.

Take a second look at this and review. I'm neither irrational nor particularly concerned with my opinion in the eyes of the masses. If I bother to appeal to anyone, its specifically to logically-minded individuals. Idiots can all go hang, and I can't waste my time worrying about how they feel about me.

edit: I don't want Reika getting pissed about my comments about his policies. As a reminder, I'm very pleased with the direction he's going. I also feel that as he gets a better feel for how his new policies are working, they'll become increasingly pro-community.

 

[SynfulChaot]

Totally agree, but a lot of Reika's flames come directly due to his stubborn policies and stances. That's not so much irrational as realistic. And while his policies are his prerogative, the price you pay for that can be criticism, constructive and otherwise.

Pretty much.

Take a second look at this and review. I'm neither irrational nor particularly concerned with my opinion in the eyes of the masses. If I bother to appeal to anyone, its specifically to logically-minded individuals. Idiots can all go hang, and I can't waste my time worrying about how they feel about me.

edit: I don't want Reika getting pissed about my comments about his policies. As a reminder, I'm very pleased with the direction he's going. I also feel that as he gets a better feel for how his new policies are working, they'll become increasingly pro-community.

Not talkin' about you there, Py. Anyone can see you've got your head about you. And it's your very stance of trying to appeal to the logically-minded instead of trying to control the irrational that predisposes people towards you instead of against you.

Like you I'm happy with the direction, even if I think it's still far too little.

 

[TomeWyrm]

Those rules only apply to CHANGES made to the mod in the pack, not just to have the mod exist in said pack. Unless you are doing something like JadedCat did in her Agrarian Skies pack and similar and you're editing every single mod to suit the playstyle, then I don't see the problem. If there is something I missed, please let me know.

Much like others have said already, be careful with policies like that. There are extreme consequences to choosing hardline stances, be sure that you're willing to deal with those. Policies like that are reasonably defensible (if generally disliked) for complex mods like Reika's, especially when people repeatedly prove they won't put in the required time/effort into not breaking the mods and then come running to berate him about how his stuff broke when it's actually their fault. But if you're making a more simple mod? People are going to dislike the policy even more.

The other thing is finding volunteers/help is much MUCH easier with open source, getting exposure is MUCH easier with open permissions, and you're also probably not going to upset the community by doing either of those things. Which are all reasonable benefits to consider in the pro/con column. Also you won't be able to use Reika's rules if you upload your mod to curse... well... sorta? If it's a curse pack (which are becoming swiftly more common), you can't restrict people's ability to include your mod. It's in the license agreement.