Romhacking.net

General Category => News Submissions => Topic started by: RHDNBot on September 30, 2008, 07:10:33 am

Title: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RHDNBot on September 30, 2008, 07:10:33 am
Update By: Nightcrawler

This is an announcement regarding a policy change I thought was important enough to warrant a news item on. On the disclaimer at the bottom of this page you will now find revised wording concerning our previously long standing removal/deletion policy.

Our previous policy allowed unconditional removal of files, and in many cases entries, at the request of an author of any material on our site. One of the primary missions of Romhacking.net is the preservation of the files and information circulating in the hacking community. However, we have to balance this mission with the wishes of the authors. Our previous unconditional policy was starting to significantly conflict with goals of the site pertaining to archiving and preservation of data.

In the past several months our unconditional policy has been abused. Staff members became upset with requests resulting in:


These types of requests became more frequent resulting in additional wasted time and effort by staff and unfair consequence of removal of information from others. Furthermore, removal of project information is a detriment to the community. Removal of such information and project acknowledgment only hurts the community as a whole.

In meeting both the interest of staff duties (ultimately staff should only be screeners here) and best interest of the community, staff has agreed to change the policy to no longer be unconditional.

We feel we have come up with a reasonable policy that is fair to site, authors, and community. The new policy:

Quote

In the event a third party, in good faith, submitted your work without consent, you may request deletion via the Contact Staff Form. First party submissions imply permission to archive said work permanently and deletion requests without critical reasoning will be denied. The term ‘deletion’ guarantees file removal only. Entry information is considered RHDN public content and not included in removal.


In summary, we still respect unconditional deletion requests on material submitted to our site in good faith by third parties that an author may not have wished to appear here. However first party submissions by the author themselves will not be allowed to be deleted without very strong reasoning such as critical bug/s or something that will generally result in negative consequence by being available to the community.

Also of note is the fact that deletions only include files and do not include entry information or related RHDN public information in interest of data preservation, preventing redundancy, and best community service.

Feel free to discuss the new policy in the topic created by this post.

Relevant Link: (http://www.romhacking.net)
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tc on September 30, 2008, 07:24:55 am
I have to agree. Asking to content deleted for little or no practical reason, isn't beneficial to the community at large.

Not that I've submitted anything here myself (my projects tend to stall due to lack of technical abilit)y. But I did submit an item I'd want it shared and enjoyed. Or usually even improved on, if someone wants to.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: dshadoff on September 30, 2008, 12:45:18 pm
This policy is coherent, but doesn't appear to address the situation where authorship is shared among several people, and a dispute occurs between them.

But perhaps you have not yet experienced that situation yet ?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: DaMarsMan on September 30, 2008, 01:01:46 pm
As former staff. I completely agree with this decision. Once something is released...It's out in the open. Generally, requests for removal were based on issues with members here and had nothing to do with content itself.

If they don't like it, too bad.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on September 30, 2008, 01:43:03 pm
This policy is coherent, but doesn't appear to address the situation where authorship is shared among several people, and a dispute occurs between them.

But perhaps you have not yet experienced that situation yet ?


Let's hope that situation doesn't come up.

Those arguments need to be handled by those involved, and not spill over here. They have to make a joint decision to determine what they want, even if others in their group disagree.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: radorn on September 30, 2008, 02:34:53 pm
First post.

Just wanted to say that I completelly agree that once things are made public they should stay where they are, unless for really important reasons. If someone wants to mantain control over something, host it yourself so you can pull the plug yourself, but don't give something out to a third party to publish it for you and for free and later come saying you changed your mind and have them remove it as it never existed.

I'm sad to hear that things have been lost this way in the past. I'm not sure if I want to know how big the loss has been so far, but I'm happy to know it won't be happening any more.

About the problem of shared authorship, I agree with dshadoff in that it's their problem, not RHDN's.
Shared authorship is an "internal affair" and should not be adressed by RHDN. This is a hacking community, not a court of justice.
The most RHDN should do is allow the group's members to name one of them as a voicer who will speak in the name of the group and whose decission is not to be "officially" contested by the other members. If they chose a bad voicer and conflict ensues, too bad for them. Better luck next time.
In any case, that voicer's decission is only to be submitted to the ruling authorities (RHDN) who will have the last word and executive power over the matter of the removal, which will be, of course, uncontested.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on September 30, 2008, 04:18:56 pm
This policy is coherent, but doesn't appear to address the situation where authorship is shared among several people, and a dispute occurs between them.

But perhaps you have not yet experienced that situation yet ?

Thankfully that actually hasn't come up. Though for this to be a problem, you'd have to have the condition where someone with part ownership decided to release something to RHDN against the wishes of the other authors or some type of internal drama like that. From the past few years that would appear to be something that doesn't happen much anymore (+1 for ROM hacking community societal evolution).

If something like that did occur, we'd probably remove said item until the group's internal conflict was resolved. I think it's unlikely that this will happen though. You aren't planning on such activity are you? :P

As a secondary thought, the person who did this rogue releasing would probably fall under poor community ethics which we don't support anyway.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: dshadoff on September 30, 2008, 04:20:02 pm
Er, I meant that one of the members of the group decides to publish it here, but without the consent or approval of the others.
Happens all the time, I would expect.

De-facto, if they disgree among themselves, then none of them is the "voicer", and none of them can be trusted to be telling the whole story.

I would recommend to treat this type of squabble as a 3rd-party posting, rather than become embroiled in a dispute.

Quote
You aren't planning on such activity are you?
Heh, no.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on September 30, 2008, 04:26:05 pm
Happens all the time, I would expect.

It does? Examples please. I'd like to be know about these things if I'm ignorant enough not to know of any of them!
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: dshadoff on September 30, 2008, 04:32:47 pm
I'm happy to say that I don't have any examples of people taking arguments too far beyond the boards.

Generally, the disputes happen over whether somebody actually did enough (insert measure here) to claim partial authorship in the first place.

I have never been embroiled in one of these (thankfully), but I've seen flamewars on messageboards over this sort of thing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it bleed over to released materials.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: radorn on September 30, 2008, 05:17:38 pm
In the scheme I'm suggesting, one can't selfproclaim himself the voicer, of course.
For a group to publish something under these terms, the voicer (or lack there of) would need to be backed by all interested parties at publishing time, but once one is named it means that all members that are not the voicer accept to give up their right to ask for removal or to stand against it. Of course, all removal requests are to be submitted to RHDN staff to decide if it is applicable or not.

Rogue submissions of works that belong to more people than the person submitting it or don't belong to the submitter at all, and the original authors have not given explicit permission for it to be submitted, are a completelly different matter.
In these cases, where authorship rights have not been respected, a removal is due, undoubtedly, but the case presented above is different because it depicts what I would call "whimsical behavior" by the very authors of something they submitted themselves.

If you are, say, a painter and voluntarily donate a picture you painted yourself to a museum that takes care of all the work and costs of showing it to the public and even listens to your suggestions and demands about how it should be presented and many other details, it's quite egoistical and unfair to everyone involved to come later and say "no no, remove my pictures, I'm taking them to another museum" or "I don't want them on public display any longer, so take them out".

Then again, all that "voicer" stuff was just a suggestion of a way to mantain order while keeping a reasonable amount of respect to the authors' will. In the end, if you voluntarily publish something of your own in a community which you aren't responsible for and/or fully pay for it, you have no right to remove something just for the sake of it. It needs to be a real good reason.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on September 30, 2008, 05:47:03 pm
So can we have any examples of what was lost but now is found?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tc on September 30, 2008, 07:34:09 pm
Some of the removed things can probably be found elsewhere with a search engine. Don't know if that's true for all.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Bongo` on September 30, 2008, 09:16:00 pm
Update By: Nightcrawler

This is an announcement regarding a policy change I thought was important enough to warrant a news item on. On the disclaimer at the bottom of this page you will now find revised wording concerning our previously long standing removal/deletion policy.

Our previous policy allowed unconditional removal of files, and in many cases entries, at the request of an author of any material on our site. One of the primary missions of Romhacking.net is the preservation of the files and information circulating in the hacking community. However, we have to balance this mission with the wishes of the authors. Our previous unconditional policy was starting to significantly conflict with goals of the site pertaining to archiving and preservation of data.

In the past several months our unconditional policy has been abused. Staff members became upset with requests resulting in:
  • Spending time fixing up and processing an author's entry only to have them ask it be removed days later.
  • Getting mass deletion requests for all material belonging to an author with no reason or weak reason given.
  • Getting random deletion requests for material on the site for years with reasons cited as “don't feel like having it hosted here anymore”.
  • Unfair deletion of other related material submitted by others such as reviews, descriptions etc.

These types of requests became more frequent resulting in additional wasted time and effort by staff and unfair consequence of removal of information from others. Furthermore, removal of project information is a detriment to the community. Removal of such information and project acknowledgment only hurts the community as a whole.

In meeting both the interest of staff duties (ultimately staff should only be screeners here) and best interest of the community, staff has agreed to change the policy to no longer be unconditional.

We feel we have come up with a reasonable policy that is fair to site, authors, and community. The new policy:

Quote
In the event a third party, in good faith, submitted your work without consent, you may request deletion via the Contact Staff Form. First party submissions imply permission to archive said work permanently and deletion requests without critical reasoning will be denied. The term ‘deletion’ guarantees file removal only. Entry information is considered RHDN public content and not included in removal.

In summary, we still respect unconditional deletion requests on material submitted to our site in good faith by third parties that an author may not have wished to appear here. However first party submissions by the author themselves will not be allowed to be deleted without very strong reasoning such as critical bug/s or something that will generally result in negative consequence by being available to the community.

Also of note is the fact that deletions only include files and do not include entry information or related RHDN public information in interest of data preservation, preventing redundancy, and best community service.

Feel free to discuss the new policy in the topic created by this post.

Relevant Link: (http://www.romhacking.net (http://www.romhacking.net))

 :huh: Are you guys serious!? This is a joke, right!?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on September 30, 2008, 09:31:08 pm
Well, since you're publicly stating that you have no intention of following copyright law, I would recommend that you also unlock the "Where To Get ROMs Thread".

There's also a possible side effect to this new policy that you failed to take into consideration. I, for one, will not be submitting any of the new translations, documents or utilities that I'll hopefully have completed by the end of the year. I might be the only one who feels this way, but based on Bongo`s reaction in this thread and a couple of well known hackers comments via IM, I'm guessing I won't be.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: creaothceann on September 30, 2008, 09:52:36 pm
Once something is released...It's out in the open.

If someone wants to mantain control over something, host it yourself so you can pull the plug yourself

Seconded.


:huh: Are you guys serious!? This is a joke, right!?

It's a compromise. And when will you actually need to remove stuff?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: FranMichaels on September 30, 2008, 10:19:38 pm
I think for one it's a rockin' policy.

The rom hacking.net community as a whole should not be at the mercy of the whims of those submitting patches, translations, documentation, etc. If you don't like the policy, don't agree to host your things here in the first place. That's the point.

If there are really good reasons to keeping the older policy, how about a time limit?
Does it make sense that anyone can just have something pulled from the site after years have passed just because?

Also, is the new policy retroactive? If so, then I can see the objections as being valid. Just make the policy apply to newly submitted work, so those submitting content know what;s up...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Spikeman on September 30, 2008, 10:53:32 pm
I, for one, will not be submitting any of the new translations, documents or utilities that I'll hopefully have completed by the end of the year.

:'(

Where will you be releasing them?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on September 30, 2008, 11:04:19 pm
There is no copywrite on patches made that use other copywrited material. While this place does have an honor system don't bring the word copywrite into it.
Lets not pull a mugen on this community where everyone will not let anyone host their stuff anywhere but their own sites. Its just stupid. Why would you want it pulled anyway? I thought people released these patches to get them to a wider audience and let more people play these great games.
I thought the design docs were there to help others not to get epeen from documenting your findings.
Please tell me why you would want to remove these files.
Please tell me why you would be against this policy.
So far you two have only mention you don't like it not why.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: KaioShin on October 01, 2008, 03:04:25 am
Well, since you're publicly stating that you have no intention of following copyright law, I would recommend that you also unlock the "Where To Get ROMs Thread".

There's also a possible side effect to this new policy that you failed to take into consideration. I, for one, will not be submitting any of the new translations, documents or utilities that I'll hopefully have completed by the end of the year. I might be the only one who feels this way, but based on Bongo`s reaction in this thread and a couple of well known hackers comments via IM, I'm guessing I won't be.

Do you flip polarity every week, just so you can always complain about anything we do? First you're all for "everything I release is free for everyone to modify and distribute as much as he wants since it wasn't legal to begin with" (Hacks of hacks topic) and now it's "Oh you bad guys don't honor our hosting rights so I won't submit new stuff anymore"? Ever since you left staff you post nothing but whining and backstabs on every comment we give. If you don't like it here then leave. If you plan to do your own grand romhacking site for everyone and their brother then DO SO and see how it works out. Oh wait, whining is easier than doing something productive yourself, I totally forgot.

The rest that wasn't happy with the change: I've yet so see a good reason given why you don't like this. A simple "Oh noes" won't help anyone. I'm sure we can discuss things if you give us at least something to work with. A simple "Are you serious?" isn't helpful. As we stated, we will files if a good reason is given. We just had too many bullshit requests recently, there is no reason to get panic now thinking we'd rob everyone.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 10:44:14 am
There's also a possible side effect to this new policy that you failed to take into consideration. I, for one, will not be submitting any of the new translations, documents or utilities that I'll hopefully have completed by the end of the year. I might be the only one who feels this way, but based on Bongo`s reaction in this thread and a couple of well known hackers comments via IM, I'm guessing I won't be.

Bongo's reaction is still unclear. You can't derive a context that hasn't been actually been written..

My initial reaction to this thread is...

"WTF? Ok?" - I don't care, but did it have to come to this?

It's unlikely the reaction is more like... "What the heck are you guys doing? Are you guys nuts?"


I don't see this as a big deal. It seems to me people want to remove stuff "just because", and that has to be the lamest argument ever. When you submit stuff, technically you are agreeing to let everyone have at it. It's not something you should do "to get the word out". So, if the hack was ever submitted by the/any author, you are effectively agreeing (though, it should be written out in the submitting section) that everyone is able to access it (at minimum, it suggests preservation). Other than major bugs or something important along those lines (at least some legitimate argument), it shouldn't be pulled.


Quote
Spending time fixing up and processing an author's entry only to have them ask it be removed days later.

This screams of "don't waste our time".

Quote
Getting mass deletion requests for all material belonging to an author with no reason or weak reason given.

Is that from the author or from others? If its from others, just simply ignore it. It shouldn't be rocket science.

Quote
Getting random deletion requests for material on the site for years with reasons cited as “don't feel like having it hosted here anymore”.

By submitting, you implicitly imply you wanted it archived/hosted forever... in theory. Really, that should be a written policy so that everyone understands what they are getting into.

Quote
Unfair deletion of other related material submitted by others such as reviews, descriptions etc.

The most important issue is demonstrating you've played the hack/translation, w/o just criticizing it outright on the surface (it's fine having some initial reaction, but that's it). Maybe I'm have absolutely no enthusiam with all the retranslations of CT that I'm indifferent (I like the original translation as is for the most part, since noone is actually hacking the Jap version of the game), enough to say nothing because it's not worth the effort to dig a hole for myself.

The descriptions should definately be kept, as long as it's fair. The simple fact is that once it exists, it's there, and it can't really be forgotten or removed off the face of the Internet.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: DarknessSavior on October 01, 2008, 11:18:06 am
I've been meaning to add to this thread anyway:

Maybe I have absolutely no enthusiam with all the retranslations of CT that I'm indifferent (I like the original translation as is for the most part, since noone is actually hacking the Jap version of the game), enough to say nothing because it's not worth the effort to dig a hole for myself.

Yet. Give it time, my friend. All within good time.

Back on topic, I think that is rule is good for everyone in the community. I really don't see how anyone can suffer because of it. I don't see what "possible side effect" could happen because of this. It all sounds like a power-trip to me, really.

And uh, if you don't submit your stuff to RHDN, isn't it possible for other people to submit it anyway? >.>

~DS

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 11:23:25 am
And uh, if you don't submit your stuff to RHDN, isn't it possible for other people to submit it anyway? >.>

The whole original topic explains this. If the author's website was meant to be the only distrubution point, then the author has full rights to ask the file to be removed.

However, the author does not have the same leeway when the author submits a hack. That's the only actual distinction.

Although, I do think there needs to be a month's time to allow the author to pull their hack back for whatever the reason (changed their minds or "didn't read the fine print" excuses). Past that point, that's should be it unless there are legitimate reasons.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 01, 2008, 11:28:35 am
Ok, calm down guys. Emotions are heating up. I knew this would be a bit controversial hence why I put it up for discussion. Discussion really should be constructive though. If you don't agree with the proposed change, please give some supporting reasoning and way to improve it. And keep in mind we've got three parties of interest; staff (vested interest in undue wasted time and effort), general community (what's best for everyone as far as information preservation and archiving), authors (respecting author wishes). Clearly neither of the three can have it 100%. ;)

Piotyr:
I don't have records of deletions (well technically I have an action referencing a deletion and it's id number, but no way to know what the entries were for those ids since there not there anymore). Unfortunately I was somewhat of a flip-flopper when it came to entries. In many cases only files were removed, so entries are still up on the site. However in other cases entries were removed as well. I think that's primarily with hacks though because for awhile the system had no provisions to function with entries without files. The original mentality when I coded the site was there should never be entries without files, though we've seen through the past few years there are valid reasons that these conditions needs to be allowed.

InVerse:
Copyright? What copyright? Most content on this site can be assumed to be public domain unless license states otherwise (occasionally we have missed this kind of thing and release license is of course still a valid reason for deletion). Further submissions are giving us permission to host it here. What you've said is the general idea. We don't want you to submit your material here if you don't want it here. Why submit it to an archive site only to remove it later? Save everybody the time and effort. Secret IM's again?  ::) How about these 'well known hackers' have a mature conversation here instead?


Deathlike2:
Yes, you've pretty much understood our viewpoint. As for the mass deletion requests, they are from authors. Most recent I can think of was from The Komrade aka $Avenger who submitted all of those Phantasy Star Hordes of Nei hacks wanting to erase them from the Internet. We've had people who want everything deleted because they quit ROM hacking and want to erase their existence. And of course we've had people who threw fits when they no longer liked the site. C'mon, this is the Internet. You can't erase anything... It's been a real time waster.

You're right, this stuff shouldn't even need to be written. It should be implied. You submit it here, you are consenting to have it archived here. If you don't want it archived here, why submit it? It seems simple enough.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 11:35:03 am
Deathlike2:
Yes, you've pretty much understood our viewpoint. As for the mass deletion requests, they are from authors. Most recent I can think of was from The Komrade aka $Avenger who submitted all of those Phantasy Star Hordes of Nei hacks wanting to erase them from the Internet. We've had people who want everything deleted because they quit ROM hacking and want to erase their existence. And of course we've had people who threw fits when they no longer liked the site. C'mon, this is the Internet. You can't erase anything... It's been a real time waster.

You're right, this stuff shouldn't even need to be written. It should be implied. You submit it here, you are consenting to have it archived here. If you don't want it archived here, why submit it? It seems simple enough.

Well, the policy needs to be spelled out for authors submitting their work (primarily that their work will be archived and whatever is important), at the very least. What you should do as part of the process is display the policy at submission, and for whatever confirmation e-mail make sure to post it (at least link to what the policy is) to prevent any confusion. I do like my idea for submission leniancy (1 month after submission or after it goes through), in the case that they didn't pay attention or decide that they don't want their stuff hosted after they clearly understand what they are getting into. It doesn't really seem like they understand...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lashiec on October 01, 2008, 12:41:44 pm
Um, guys, why is the "Contact Staff Form" linky in yellow?

As for the policy, I think it's a good change. Certain files were deleted in the past whose authors did not wish to have them hosted here due to various reasons, and now they're impossible to find anywhere. Considering the mentioned mission of Romhacking.net as an archive, I found it a bit baffling to see them removed as perhaps they should have not been submitted in the first place.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RedComet on October 01, 2008, 12:49:09 pm
I do like my idea for submission leniancy (1 month after submission or after it goes through), in the case that they didn't pay attention or decide that they don't want their stuff hosted after they clearly understand what they are getting into. It doesn't really seem like they understand...

If they're not going to bother reading the disclaimer before they submit something, what makes you think they will a month later? I really don't see how this would do anything but encourage people to not read any of the guidelines before submitting things and later request that their work be deleted, wasting our (staff) time in the process. :-\
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 12:55:03 pm
I do like my idea for submission leniancy (1 month after submission or after it goes through), in the case that they didn't pay attention or decide that they don't want their stuff hosted after they clearly understand what they are getting into. It doesn't really seem like they understand...

If they're not going to bother reading the disclaimer before they submit something, what makes you think they will a month later? I really don't see how this would do anything but encourage people to not read any of the guidelines before submitting things and later request that their work be deleted, wasting our (staff) time in the process. :-\

It doesn't have to be a month, but a shorter period of time. Let's just say the simplest term to call it is "submitter's remorse". Even I miss reading stuff once in a blue moon... it happens.

Otherwise, most authors would be reluctant to submit stuff in the first place for fearing that they can't remove it immediately afterwards (for such circumstances as I've expressed). Then again, you would see more 3rd party submissions of the file instead.

It's not an improvement, but it changes how this system is perceived and how some things would change as a result. I'm not saying it's better or worse.. it's just the likely scenario/situation.

See, the workaround "policy" for file submissions by authors is to get someone else (not affliated with the project) to submit the hack. If the hack has a readme, and you don't contact the author, what you've effectively done is set an unknown date of removal for the hack, which is effectively what you are trying to prevent. Then again, the file submission might have the readme not included intentionally for all I know...

If things were the simple... if all hack makers actually had a website, so some form of contact could be made.. it would make life easier... somewhat.

Note: Editing this post multiple times is getting to me.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: DarknessSavior on October 01, 2008, 01:02:26 pm
I do like my idea for submission leniancy (1 month after submission or after it goes through), in the case that they didn't pay attention or decide that they don't want their stuff hosted after they clearly understand what they are getting into. It doesn't really seem like they understand...

If they're not going to bother reading the disclaimer before they submit something, what makes you think they will a month later? I really don't see how this would do anything but encourage people to not read any of the guidelines before submitting things and later request that their work be deleted, wasting our (staff) time in the process. :-\

It doesn't have to be a month, but a shorter period of time. Let's just say the simplest term to call it is "submitter's remorse". Even I miss reading stuff once in a blue moon... it happens.

Otherwise, most authors would be reluctant to submit stuff in the first place for fearing that they can't remove it immediately afterwards (for such circumstances as I've expressed). Then again, you would see more 3rd party submissions of the file instead.

It's not an improvement, but it changes how this system is perceived and how some things would change as a result. I'm not saying it's better or worse.. it's just the likely scenario/situation.

We could do a one-time deal for this. Perhaps if the person is a new submitter to RHDN, they get a 1-month submission leniency for whatever they submit in their first few weeks/month they start submitting. Anything after that, is subject to normal rules.

A compromise. =D

~DS
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 01:08:04 pm
We could do a one-time deal for this. Perhaps if the person is a new submitter to RHDN, they get a 1-month submission leniency for whatever they submit in their first few weeks/month they start submitting. Anything after that, is subject to normal rules.

A compromise. =D

~DS

I guess, but some may reconsider that on a per-hack basis, making it difficult and annoying at the same time.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: DarknessSavior on October 01, 2008, 01:15:20 pm
We could do a one-time deal for this. Perhaps if the person is a new submitter to RHDN, they get a 1-month submission leniency for whatever they submit in their first few weeks/month they start submitting. Anything after that, is subject to normal rules.

A compromise. =D

~DS

I guess, but some may reconsider that on a per-hack basis, making it difficult and annoying at the same time.

My point in that being that the new-submitter would have a certain amount of time to learn the rules, and if they didn't do so, it's their loss.

Or maybe we should just put up a big warning message to relay the rules, in case some people don't actually read them. Bold, and flickering (that last part was a joke). >.>

~DS
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 01:15:39 pm
I'm a little late to the game here, so I didn't read the last few posts in this thread.. but hopefully this idea wasn't covered already.

Personally I don't see why anyone would really have a problem with this new policy... but then again I went a few rounds about a similar topic in another thread before... so I guess I just don't understand peoples' mentality sometimes.

Anyway... unless I'm misreading... according to this new policy the only time a removal request won't be unconditionally honored is if the same person that submitted it is the one requesting its removal.  Requests made by the author will still be unconditionally honored if someone other than that person submitted the file.

The reason for the new change seems to be largly because of the waste of staff's time due to flip-floppers concerned about their releases.  If this is the case... why not simply take this job out of the staff's hands?

4chan has something like this for image deletions.  A random password is generated based on a user's IP or something-or-other for every file uploaded, and any user with that password can delete the image from the boards.  Couldn't this same idea be applied to file submissions here?  Simply assign a password to each uploaded file, then any user (that has the password) can remove the file at their leisure, without having to bother staff about it.

If you don't have the password, you weren't the one that submitted the file, and thus would have to go through staff for removal as you would have to normally (but since the policy change doesn't seem to impact people that didn't submit files themselves, this is a nonissue).

If passwords per file aren't good enough -- you could go a step further and require people to login to the site to submit things.. but that might be somewhat of a deterrant for some submitters.

Anyway this idea not only eases the burden off of staff, but also allows for more immediate results for the user (if someone wants their file removed, they don't have to wait for staff to see and respond to their request).


EDIT - maybe as a security measure to prevent malicious mass file deletions with this method... perhaps you could simply make the files unavailable for downloading immediately, but don't actually delete them until like a week or so later so the staff can restore them should something go horribly wrong.  Or maybe you can do some kind of capcha (sp) that needs to be filled to delete files.  Or both.


EDIT2 - I should mention I'm speaking about file removals only.  I think request for full database entries (and related user reviews and other things) don't need to be unconditionally honored in any event.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 01:35:33 pm
Anyway... unless I'm misreading... according to this new policy the only time a removal request won't be unconditionally honored is if the same person that submitted it is the one requesting its removal.  Requests made by the author will still be unconditionally honored if someone other than that person submitted the file.

The reason for the new change seems to be largly because of the waste of staff's time due to flip-floppers concerned about their releases.  If this is the case... why not simply take this job out of the staff's hands?

I think that is because the files/hacks are not meant to be removed at will by the authors. They need a legitmate reason other than "I/we want the hack removed" when they are the submitters of said hack.

RHDN is meant to be an archive of hacks, not a personal hack hosting service.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 01:46:35 pm
Even if that means we're hosting files against the author's wishes?  InVerse and others bring up a good point... people might think twice about hosting their work here if they might not be able to take it back later.  The site's not going to be very successful as an archive if everyone is too afraid to submit their work.

As ridiculous as these requests may seem (well, really, they are ridiculous and stupid, IMO -- who the hell cares where your work is hosted) the site still has to cater to authors if it wants to have their support.  A harsh "submit it and it's ours" policy will put a lot of people off.  Ideally the site would want to make everyone happy -- I don't think this policy accomplishes that.  Looks to me like its only function is to make the staffs' jobs easier.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 02:00:40 pm
Even if that means we're hosting files against the author's wishes?  InVerse and others bring up a good point... people might think twice about hosting their work here if they might not be able to take it back later.  The site's not going to be very successful as an archive if everyone is too afraid to submit their work.

As ridiculous as these requests may seem (well, really, they are ridiculous and stupid, IMO -- who the hell cares where your work is hosted) the site still has to cater to authors if it wants to have their support.  A harsh "submit it and it's ours" policy will put a lot of people off.  Ideally the site would want to make everyone happy -- I don't think this policy accomplishes that.  Looks to me like its only function is to make the staffs' jobs easier.

It is the issue that I think is being addressed specificly. I agree with Nightcrawler that hacks can't just disappear at the whim of the author "just because they said so". I don't think this site is meant to be a personal hack hosting site like say SMWCentral is for SMW hacks. On the other hand, I completely understand InVerse wanting some control... (you can't have it all for sure though)

I think there can/should be a limit to being able to remove your own hacks. The question ultimately is where you draw the line. The policy is there to make the staff's job easier, but it doesn't properly address some legitimate issues...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 02:12:10 pm
True.  This is actually an interesting problem.

Perhaps there could be a way to flag some submitters as 'abusive' and apply these more strict rules to them?  Like if a certain percentage of an author's submissions are removed or something.  That only solves the problem retroactively though (can't deal with abusive behavior until after you've been abused).  But I don't see how you can preempt something like this without getting on a lot of people's bad side.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: KaioShin on October 01, 2008, 02:19:05 pm
But I don't see how you can preempt something like this without getting on a lot of people's bad side.

That's the sad part. No matter what we do, there will always be people who disagree with it. If there is a site as big as this one there are going to be negative feelings towards it from some people. If we are too lenient some people will say we are spineless idiots who accept everything. If we are too harsh we'll be the evil dictators. There is really nothing we can do about it. That's why we have to focus on having a policy that is the most effective for what we envision for the site. Pleasing as most people as possible can only be a secondary problem here.

We want to discourage deleting of files. We think everything released to the internet should be archieved. Of course the "everything" part is what will alienate a lot of people again. So many propably that it becomes a problem again. We most likely won't have completely free deletion capabilities in any case. We have to draw the line somewhere else I think. But where? We're certainly for every input you guys give us.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 02:21:24 pm
True.  This is actually an interesting problem.

Perhaps there could be a way to flag some submitters as 'abusive' and apply these more strict rules to them?  Like if a certain percentage of an author's submissions are removed or something.  That only solves the problem retroactively though (can't deal with abusive behavior until after you've been abused).  But I don't see how you can preempt something like this without getting on a lot of people's bad side.

I don't think that's normally an issue on the submitting side... I'd say this manifests itself most of the time as "screw RHDN, I don't want my hacks hosted here anymore" or "screw this, I don't want anyone to find/have my hacks anymore".

That seems to be the case with a lot of the "politics" that are around here. Luckily I don't make those decisions.. cause I'd suck.  :D
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 01, 2008, 05:06:54 pm
Well, since you're publicly stating that you have no intention of following copyright law, I would recommend that you also unlock the "Where To Get ROMs Thread".

There's also a possible side effect to this new policy that you failed to take into consideration. I, for one, will not be submitting any of the new translations, documents or utilities that I'll hopefully have completed by the end of the year. I might be the only one who feels this way, but based on Bongo`s reaction in this thread and a couple of well known hackers comments via IM, I'm guessing I won't be.

Why do you always do a drive by post on big issues like this? Why take the time to make a smartass comment and disappear instead of, you know, an actual discussion?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 01, 2008, 05:58:01 pm
Even if that means we're hosting files against the author's wishes?

What about the fans? Its not our faults that internal politics got an author pissed off and then we are suffering for it. The point of these hacks and translations in the first place are so people can enjoy them no? If every author started deleting his stuff at their random whims more people like me would be downloading everything on the site and taxing the servers so we don't lose anything unlike now where I trust that the files will be there and download them when I need it to play.
There are a lot of translated games and hacks on this site I want to play sometime and will be downloading when I finish the games I am currently playing or when I have time to play them. Are you telling me I should go download them now "Just in case" so I don't miss my chance or have to search the net for them later?
This opens a lot of issues such as the afore mentioned taxing of the servers, people having archives of outdated hacks/translations and spreading those around when people ask for them.

You have to think of the fans as well as the authors because they are the same community.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 06:34:08 pm
Even if that means we're hosting files against the author's wishes?

What about the fans? Its not our faults that internal politics got an author pissed off and then we are suffering for it. The point of these hacks and translations in the first place are so people can enjoy them no? If every author started deleting his stuff at their random whims more people like me would be downloading everything on the site and taxing the servers so we don't lose anything unlike now where I trust that the files will be there and download them when I need it to play.
There are a lot of translated games and hacks on this site I want to play sometime and will be downloading when I finish the games I am currently playing or when I have time to play them. Are you telling me I should go download them now "Just in case" so I don't miss my chance or have to search the net for them later?
This opens a lot of issues such as the afore mentioned taxing of the servers, people having archives of outdated hacks/translations and spreading those around when people ask for them.

You have to think of the fans as well as the authors because they are the same community.

The users are always screwed here, no matter what policy you put in place. That's why you can't have the "just because" excuse for authors wanting hacks removed. It's hard to strike that proper balance.

A more reasonable, yet imperfect expectation is that if the author wants their stuff removed, that they should have a reasonable website available to download their hack (well, one that they have control over anyways). This is generally the case, except for those who want their stuff "removed from the Internets"... which is wishful thinking at best. Then again, stuff happens. You can't account for every possibility that comes up.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 01, 2008, 06:42:32 pm
Where will you be releasing them?

I've been calling several dialup BBSes as of late and keep thinking I might do something with one of them, though I doubt I'll go that route exclusively. Most likely, I'll do it like I did in the old days, release on my own personal site and then make the rounds of the various forums.


There is no copywrite on patches made that use other copywrited material. While this place does have an honor system don't bring the word copywrite into it.

Technically, patches don't contain copyrighted information from the source material. Whether said patches can legally be copyrighted may be questionable, but until it's actually taken to court and decided, you can't say definitively. Chances are, if a patch author files a DMCA complaint with a site's host, the host is likely going to side with the patch author for safety's sake. And original documentation that is included with a patch is indisputably copyrighted unless the author states otherwise.


Copyright? What copyright? Most content on this site can be assumed to be public domain unless license states otherwise

The (U.S.) law states that material is presumed to be copyrighted unless stated otherwise, a copyright notice is not required.


Why do you always do a drive by post on big issues like this? Why take the time to make a smartass comment and disappear instead of, you know, an actual discussion?

I apologize. The next time that a controversial thread is created, I'll see if I can't take a day of from work so I can sit at my computer and instantly respond to any questions.  I made my post at 8:30pm. The first reply to address my post came at 9:30pm, which is about the time I normally go to bed, seeing as how I have to wake up at 5:30am to get ready for work. I get off at work at 4:30pm, it's now approximately 5:30pm, less than 24 hours after I made my initial post. How does that qualify as disappearing?

Here's the reason I have a problem with the new policy. If I submit my work under said policy, I have absolutely no right to request that my material be removed. If Nightcrawler suddenly decides to start running porn ads and charging people $5/month to use the site, my material would be contributing to his immoral (IMO) profiteering and I would have no right to complain. Do I believe something like this will actually occur? No. But I won't put myself in a position of potential helplessness.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Neil on October 01, 2008, 06:51:35 pm
Here's the reason I have a problem with the new policy. If I submit my work under said policy, I have absolutely no right to request that my material be removed. If Nightcrawler suddenly decides to start running porn ads and charging people $5/month to use the site, my material would be contributing to his immoral (IMO) profiteering and I would have no right to complain. Do I believe something like this will actually occur? No. But I won't put myself in a position of potential helplessness.

Read the last sentence of the policy again. "without critical reason". What you outlined there, in my opinion, would be. What wouldn't be would be something like "I just submitted my patch last week but someone on some forum somewhere called me an idiot and so now I'm quitting the scene and I want you to remove all my work because I don't want that idiot who called me an idiot to have access to my work because he's an idiot"

What I will never understand is why people spend tens of hours creating things and then want to erase them from the internet, but I guess that's a discussion for another day.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 01, 2008, 07:02:40 pm
Why do you always do a drive by post on big issues like this? Why take the time to make a smartass comment and disappear instead of, you know, an actual discussion?

I apologize. The next time that a controversial thread is created, I'll see if I can't take a day of from work so I can sit at my computer and instantly respond to any questions.  I made my post at 8:30pm. The first reply to address my post came at 9:30pm, which is about the time I normally go to bed, seeing as how I have to wake up at 5:30am to get ready for work. I get off at work at 4:30pm, it's now approximately 5:30pm, less than 24 hours after I made my initial post. How does that qualify as disappearing?

Here's the reason I have a problem with the new policy. If I submit my work under said policy, I have absolutely no right to request that my material be removed. If Nightcrawler suddenly decides to start running porn ads and charging people $5/month to use the site, my material would be contributing to his immoral (IMO) profiteering and I would have no right to complain. Do I believe something like this will actually occur? No. But I won't put myself in a position of potential helplessness.

Now, that's something I can respect.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 01, 2008, 07:06:08 pm
Read the last sentence of the policy again. "without critical reason". What you outlined there, in my opinion, would be. What wouldn't be would be something like "I just submitted my patch last week but someone on some forum somewhere called me an idiot and so now I'm quitting the scene and I want you to remove all my work because I don't want that idiot who called me an idiot to have access to my work because he's an idiot"

If the unlikely situation I described above were to occur, chances are deletion requests would be ignored regardless of reasoning. I prefer to keep my legal rights available, regardless of the unlikeliness of actually using them.

Quote
What I will never understand is why people spend tens of hours creating things and then want to erase them from the internet, but I guess that's a discussion for another day.

It's the journey, not the destination, that matters. Also, you'll understand one day, when word leaks out about those pictures with the emu and the peanut butter.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: creaothceann on October 01, 2008, 07:07:49 pm
I won't put myself in a position of potential helplessness.

*shrug* The only way to do that is to not release anything.

Digital material, just like scientific formulas, can't be owned like physical objects. You can't really control how it's used; you can only have your name attached to it.

[/offtopic]
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 01, 2008, 07:25:00 pm
*shrug* The only way to do that is to not release anything.

Digital material, just like scientific formulas, can't be owned like physical objects. You can't really control how it's used; you can only have your name attached to it.

You can still maintain your legal rights. It might be a pain in the ass to put them to use, but the option is still there.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 01, 2008, 07:40:40 pm
The fact is you are talking about your legal rights when you are completely ignoring the legal rights of the publishers of the original game. Hypocritical is the word I see going here.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 01, 2008, 07:47:02 pm
There is no copywrite on patches made that use other copywrited material. While this place does have an honor system don't bring the word copywrite into it.

Technically, patches don't contain copyrighted information from the source material. Whether said patches can legally be copyrighted may be questionable, but until it's actually taken to court and decided, you can't say definitively. Chances are, if a patch author files a DMCA complaint with a site's host, the host is likely going to side with the patch author for safety's sake. And original documentation that is included with a patch is indisputably copyrighted unless the author states otherwise.

Uh, it depends on what the patch contains. If it's got material from the game, hell yes it's illegal. A script translation sure as hell is.

I think it was byuu that explained that. Can someone else here confirm this?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 07:53:54 pm
You guys are assuming hacks/translations which is admittedly a grey area.  But for purposes of utilities/docs, legal rights are a valid issue and are not in any grey area whatsoever.  Therefore I think we should just assume the files in question are legal and legitimately copyrighted.

Let's avoid this "is romhacking illegal" sidetrack and get back on point.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 01, 2008, 07:59:31 pm
You guys are assuming hacks/translations which is admittedly a grey area.  But for purposes of utilities/docs, legal rights are a valid issue and are not in any grey area whatsoever.  Therefore I think we should just assume the files in question are legal and legitimately copyrighted.

Let's avoid this "is romhacking illegal" sidetrack and get back on point.
We can't avoid that because its one of the biggest parts of inverses argument. If we have to avoid it on this side then inverse has to and thus has no argument.
I still have had no comments on my post about the fans side of things.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 08:02:43 pm
Inverse was also talking about documents, which are not in a grey area -- thus trying to defeat his argument by these means is pointless, because it doesn't apply.

Unless RHDN is planning on treating hacks/utilities/etc all differently (of which there was no indication of), the legality debate is completely moot, because the files in question are legal.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 01, 2008, 08:11:23 pm
Inverse was also talking about documents, which are not in a grey area -- thus trying to defeat his argument by these means is pointless, because it doesn't apply.

Unless RHDN is planning on treating hacks/utilities/etc all differently (of which there was no indication of), the legality debate is completely moot, because the files in question are legal.
HALF the files are. So you are saying that because half of the things are not in a gray area we ignore the other half? Also note he mentioned his translations in his argument thus giving my the ability to rebut that.

Heck you saying we should stop getting sidetracked is sidetracking this more than the side track because we've said just about everything there is to say about the sidetrack.
Lets get back to the topic at hand.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 08:14:36 pm
HALF the files are. So you are saying that because half of the things are not in a gray area we ignore the other half? Also note he mentioned his translations in his argument thus giving my the ability to rebut that.

You're missing my point.

RHDN's policy doesn't differentiate between file types.  The policy applies to docs and translations alike.  So unless the policy is changed to treat these files differently, it doesn't make any sense to argue against InVerse's stance with these means, because his argument will still be valid even if you prove that romhacking is illegal.  Therefore this tangent you want to start serves absolutely no function unlil the policy is applied differently between file types

Quote
Heck you saying we should stop getting sidetracked is sidetracking this more than the side track because we've said just about everything there is to say about the sidetrack.

Your argument about legality is nonproductive.  The goal here is not to squabble over the legal technicalities, but to establish a policy that the community can agree on.  InVerse is saying why he doesn't approve of the new policy -- do you really think arguing with him about whether or not he has any legal grounds to make that stance is going to change his opinion?

Quote
Lets get back to the topic at hand.

Agreed.  The topic on hand is the RHDN policy and ideas to improve it.  So stop dicking around with meaningless theortical law.  Either propose a solution that addresses InVerse's concerns, or drop it.  Bickering will get us nowhere
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 01, 2008, 08:16:52 pm
Hell, my documents are the only thing of any value on this site. I don't think I've ever gotten a comment about one of my translations outside of the immediate release but I was surprised at how many people brought up old documents after I returned to this site.

And I don't entirely ignore the legal rights of the original owners, though I won't claim to always do so. However, I was the one who obtained permission from Galoob to legally release the Game Genie ROM (I had nothing to do with dumping it, simply got permission for it to be distributed on ZD) and I'm currently in negotiation with ADV's legal department to obtain the legal right to reprint several translation related articles from PiQ magazine on this site. (I've already obtained permission from two of the authors, though they sold all rights to the magazine, so from a legal standpoint, ADV has to grant permission.) I'm also once again attempting to obtain legal rights to Crystalis.

And you can quote whatever laws you want, until it's actually tested in court, no one can officially state that patches are or are not legal. I recall byuu's posts on the subject and his arguments appeared logical, but I recall someone else years ago linking me to the text of some treaty that the U.S. had signed which specifically stated that translations of software that were intended to increase usability were legal.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 01, 2008, 08:43:52 pm
Read the last sentence of the policy again. "without critical reason". What you outlined there, in my opinion, would be. What wouldn't be would be something like "I just submitted my patch last week but someone on some forum somewhere called me an idiot and so now I'm quitting the scene and I want you to remove all my work because I don't want that idiot who called me an idiot to have access to my work because he's an idiot"

I certainly see what you're saying, but "without critical reason" is purely subjective.  There's nothing stopping the site from saying a perfectly valid reason isn't good enough just because they don't want to remove the file (not saying this would happen -- but I believe this is part of the point InVerse is trying to make).

I'm still a fan of a submitter-controlled removal system I suggested earlier.  But rather than remove the whole database page, just remove the file, leaving other parts in tact.  Perhaps if a file is removed, have the reason for its removal listed on the page so that people can see just how much of a goon the author is being  XD

In all seriousness, though.  InVerse's concerns are starting to concern me.  The people who would have issues with this policy are most likely going to be heavy contributors of quality content.  On the other hand, the people that throw a drama tantrum and fade from "the scene" are usually people the community won't really be hurting without.  So you're alienating a handful of quality contributors in order to embrace a truckload of mediocre hacks.  Up until now this site has always taken a "quality before quantity" approach with its policies -- which is why hacks have to be of some significance or else they get rejected.  It seems strange that a policy which indirectly accomplishes the exact opposite is now in effect.


We want to discourage deleting of files. We think everything released to the internet should be archieved. Of course the "everything" part is what will alienate a lot of people again. So many propably that it becomes a problem again. We most likely won't have completely free deletion capabilities in any case. We have to draw the line somewhere else I think. But where? We're certainly for every input you guys give us.

As admirable as the goal of being a full, unabridged archive is, it's impractical and impossible for a site like this.  By design, the users are in control of the content, so they should at least be partially responsible for removing content as well.

Existing internet archives (like archive.org) don't even take this approach.  Even they respond to author's request for removal (which sucks when you're trying to look for that specific site, granted).

I don't know... I guess I can see why the policy has been instituted, and I don't personally have any problem with it because I share your ideals.  It still seems like a backwards step for the site.

What about the fans? Its not our faults that internal politics got an author pissed off and then we are suffering for it.

Without the authors, there are no fans.  As cruel as it seems, this relationship is a one-way street.  If we don't embrace the authors, we lose the files, and by chain reaction lose some fans.  Conversely if we lose some fans, we probably won't lose any authors, and thus will gain files, and thus gain/replace fans we may have lost.

It's all about the authors, IMO.  I'm not saying the casual userbase of the site isn't important.  I'm just saying the contributors are much more important.  (Of course I might be biased a bit since I consider myself more of a contributor   ;D )
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 08:51:54 pm
I certainly see what you're saying, but "without critical reason" is purely subjective.  There's nothing stopping the site from saying a perfectly valid reason isn't good enough just because they don't want to remove the file (not saying this would happen -- but I believe this is part of the point InVerse is trying to make).

That clearly needs expanding to remove some of the unnecessary subjectivity. There should be a number of clear cut cases that can keep this simple (perhaps I'm a little naive though).

For utilities and docs, unconditional removal should be allowed. This is the kind of stuff that tend to have legal issues that are clear cut and frankly shouldn't need much debate on. Hacks have too much fuzzy legality though...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 01, 2008, 09:16:11 pm
It's all about the authors, IMO.  I'm not saying the casual userbase of the site isn't important.  I'm just saying the contributors are much more important.  (Of course I might be biased a bit since I consider myself more of a contributor   ;D )

That is a total lie. A lot of people wouldn't do it if there were no others to use their work. I am betting a lot of people don't even play their own hacks/translations (I know there are exceptions to this but I know from experience with community's that have modders and such that once they get deeply into modding a game and finish said mod you don't really want to touch it afterwords.)

It is not a one way street and I am insulted by that being a user myself.
If most authors on this site thought like you did I wouldn't help at all such as getting some rare games off the internet for others and showing my support for a job well done. If you are much more important then you surely don't need me and you surely don't need our thanks and support in your endeavors which a lot of people enjoy.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 01, 2008, 09:24:53 pm
It's all about the authors, IMO.  I'm not saying the casual userbase of the site isn't important.  I'm just saying the contributors are much more important.  (Of course I might be biased a bit since I consider myself more of a contributor   ;D )

That is a total lie. A lot of people wouldn't do it if there were no others to use their work. I am betting a lot of people don't even play their own hacks/translations (I know there are exceptions to this but I know from experience with community's that have modders and such that once they get deeply into modding a game and finish said mod you don't really want to touch it afterwords.)

It is not a one way street and I am insulted by that being a user myself.

You have to look at this both ways.

Most users here want to play hacks (whether it is an actual hack or a translation, it's something to do) or find some way to hack the game (which in turn, become authors...). This isn't rocket science..

On the other side, the intention of the author making the hack is a whole different business. Although whatever they produce is for the world to play with, it is not necessarily true that they want their work used in a derivation.. some do. Some hacks are literally, "hey, here's what I found, anyone can use it for their hack". Some aren't. Whether or not you agree with it (let alone the legal ramifications of what they want), it's not something users have control over.

Besides, I get weary when some authors don't test their own hacks...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kitsune Sniper on October 01, 2008, 11:14:51 pm
Meh. This doesn't really concern me. The only reasons I'd request a patch be removed would be:

A) It's really buggy and I don't want people to get it until it's been properly fixed up;
B) I want to replace the readme file for an updated one (I've been meaning to do this since I got my own domain, and left vice.parodius behind).

Meh.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: creaothceann on October 02, 2008, 02:19:35 am
That is a total lie. [...] It is not a one way street and I am insulted by that being a user myself.

Oh please. ::) Disch was just stating his point of view.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 02, 2008, 03:20:55 am
That is a total lie. [...] It is not a one way street and I am insulted by that being a user myself.

Oh please. ::) Disch was just stating his point of view.

Nazis stat their opinions but they are usually lies.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tc on October 02, 2008, 06:27:38 am
What happen? Someone set up this thread the bomb? :D

Anyway. As I pointed out... Removing files for idiotic, pointless, or non-existent reasons, is not beneficial to the community. It's perfectly fine to ask if the reason truly is legitimate.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: akadewboy on October 02, 2008, 08:06:31 am
I always wondered why the Neugier (http://www.romhacking.net/trans/398/) translation was nuked. I couldn't find a reason anywhere (not even on the boards). It would have been nice to know WHY the author wanted to erase all existence of it. It took me forever to find the 2.00 patch on another website but I finally found it after hours of searching. It makes me very sad to know that a complete translation almost disappeared off the face of the earth without a reason.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Dragonsbrethren on October 02, 2008, 08:37:25 am
Meh. This doesn't really concern me. The only reasons I'd request a patch be removed would be:

A) It's really buggy and I don't want people to get it until it's been properly fixed up;
B) I want to replace the readme file for an updated one (I've been meaning to do this since I got my own domain, and left vice.parodius behind).

Meh.

A would be a completely reasonable request, it would be better to just submit an edit with your new readme in the case of B though.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 02, 2008, 10:48:21 am
We're derailing this thread again.  Let's stay on point.

see here (http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php/topic,7249.0.html) for my thoughts.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Near on October 02, 2008, 01:18:54 pm
Just throwing in my two cents, feel free to disregard this post. Otherwise, go and get some coffee. This will be a long one.

I'm not a lawyer, and I have no formal education in case law. However, I've read the actuals texts of US Copyright Law, the Berne Convention, a lot of case law (Sega v Accolade, Lexmark v SCC, etc), lots of [citation needed] stuff on Wikipedia and various articles from others on copyright. While I may not have a good enough understanding to win a court case, I do believe I understand the issue fairly well.

That said, my understanding is that by simply translating the work of someone else and releasing it, it is a violation of copyright. Recent court cases suggest to me that we would not be very successful with even hacks. Especially when you consider the role expensive lawyers play in court cases.

In response to:

Quote
I recall someone else years ago linking me to the text of some treaty that the U.S. had signed which specifically stated that translations of software that were intended to increase usability were legal.

Pics Links or it didn't happen :P

---

But this is mostly irrelevant. Regardless of whether or not a translation / hack / document is legal, the work put into it is still copyrighted by the owner. It does not become public domain just because it's not legal. Nor is it PD just because no license was specified. The default state of a work means all rights are reserved, not the other way around. An author has to manually give up his rights, eg with a license agreement.

Think about an example: someone makes Chrono Trigger 3D. It's wildly popular, and Square-Enix sues to stop it, because it violates their copyright. Now what? Does it go public domain, meaning that since Square-Enix owns the copyright and trademarks, that they can take the 3D game and sell it as their own? Of course not, the creator still owns the copyright. But since it's illegal, he can't distribute it. However, Square-Enix can in turn buy his rights to the 3D game, and then sell it. But they don't get the rights for free. By default -- if it's illegal, then nobody has the right to distribute it.

If the patches aren't legal, then the rights holders could demand you take things down as well. They could take legal action against you too, if they don't mind bad PR.

And if it is legal, RHDN is in the same predicament. Either way, by ignoring an author's takedown request, you are making yourselves liable for copyright infringement claims. If this concerns you in the least, and you even slightly doubt me on this, you should consult a real lawyer.

Now, to play the devil's advocate ... what ROM hacker out there has the resources to issue a valid DMCA takedown notice, and/or to take you to court, with lawyers, court fees, and all that? And all for work distributed free of charge to begin with (eg little to no monetary damages)? Not going to happen.

The translation scene has always came off to me as extremely uninformed regarding copyright law. From someone threatening to sue me because my font looked like his (fonts are not copyrightable -- TTFs and such are a gray area, as they are claimed to be "software", but raw pixel fonts are not for very justified and obvious reasons), to not even knowing that the Berne Convention exists, to never specifying a license for their works anywhere, to calling it "copywrite". And on and on.

Essentially, it comes down to two choices:

1. If you don't care about copyright:

... you accept that the files you're hosting are, at the very least, questionably legal in the first place. So why start respecting the rights of those in the community, but not the companies who created the games in the first place? It's a double standard to do so. Shield yourself using the DMCA, and require that end users, not staff members, upload all new content. Now you only legally have to remove it upon receipt of a DMCA takedown notice, and you will not be held liable.

2. If you do care about copyright:

... and you believe the files hosted here are legal, then you really should demand a valid license to the work you host. Licenses such as the GPL exist for a reason: they guarantee that distribution rights cannot be retroactively revoked. As it stands, I don't know of any fan translations (apart from ones I've worked on) that have actual licenses specified. Without specifying, the copyright owner retains all rights. Including the right to distribution. Even if the work itself is a copyright infringement in the first place!

This really shouldn't be hard. Require future content, starting from now, to be under a list of acceptable licenses. Anything here already, leave the old rules in-tact. If they ask for removal, take it down. If they ask for removal, but explicitly placed the work; tell them to go fuck themselves, or something to that effect.

There are lots of nice software licenses: BSDL, LGPL, GPL, etc; and lots of nice creative licenses, eg Creative Commons. Make a list of acceptable ones, and start including a license field with each new hosted file.

---

As for the issue itself -- my personal opinions are irrelevant. But for what it's worth, I'm quite happy with the presentation of my works on this site. Nightcrawler was very quick to remove a now-useless Snes9X bugfix patch for me when I asked. I'm (hopefully) mature enough at this point to not go demanding all my work be pulled because Nightcrawler or someone else here hurts my feelings, so it doesn't really affect me.

Sadly, people already host my emulator on various porn sites to get click-through revenue. So I doubt even if RHDN went that route, that it would really bother me much.

I don't know what I'd do if I were in charge of this site. I have nothing but respect for those staff here subjecting themselves to this endless drama for no profit whatsoever.

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 01:35:04 pm
Sadly, people already host my emulator on various porn sites to get click-through revenue. So I doubt even if RHDN went that route, that it would really bother me much.

Priceless.  :D
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: creaothceann on October 02, 2008, 01:40:04 pm
Probably with some hentai slideshow ROMs!!1
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 02, 2008, 02:22:28 pm
General Summary:

So, we've had some support and some disagreement. We've only heard three proposed options of improvement:

1. A leniency period (to be determined) for unconditional removal after which the new policy stands -Deathlike2
2. Full user controlled deletion. Users can delete any work submitted at any time themselves. -Disch
3. Complete unconditional deletion for any reason at any time must stand. -InVerse

Option 1 doesn't seem like it will make many happy from what I've seen here.
Option 2 doesn't sound like it will make many happy either, specifically the majority of general visitors.
Option 3 is complete unwillingness to compromise between the three parties of interest or respect our time and effort as staff.

What a lovely set of options we have here! 5 pages of discussion and only 3 proposed solutions if you can even call number 3 a solution.

How about I add a few more:

4. Allow unconditional deletion for any reason EXCEPT explicitly spelled out invalid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.

5. Allow unconditional deletion for ONLY reasons explicitly spelled out as valid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.

6. All deletion request must go to community vote to determine reasoning validation and approval! This would be interesting.

7. Keep things as they are proposed currently.


If no other viewpoints are given, we'll probably have to choose one of these 7 options in a poll. Thoughts?


Deathlike2:
Pertaining to your 'submission leniency' idea; I'd rather focus more effort into making sure the policy is seen and understood before submission, however if your leniency period idea would be perceived as a better compromise I wouldn't be opposed to it. However, judging by the posts in this topic, it doesn't seem like that's going to be enough to satisfy some people...

Disch:
I think a big point of this site and what the community at large wants (we can take a poll if your view gets some support) is for the data to not be meant to be removed or deleted from this site at people's fickle whims. People 'trust' that data (both files and information) on this site will still be here tomorrow and won't be here one day, gone the next etc.. It's really a loss of control if everything is freely removable. Then what's the point of this site? You can just use Megaupload or Rapidshare. I have to agree with Deahlike2 that we're not aiming to be a glorified personal file hosting service.

As for people being too afraid to submit here. What do we have three people who think it's too scary? Just have a valid reason for removal and don't waste our time and try to hurt the community with the 'I don't want it here anymore' or 'I changed my mind' or absolutely no reason at all. That's what we're attempting to eliminate. If you want to be able to remove your work in the future for those reasons, then you should be too scared to submit here. I don't think it's going to be a problem for most.

If you don't think the policy makes everyone happy, then please propose an improved policy and respect our positions and time as people who work for free servicing this site. I'm not being sarcastic. An alternative  proposed change that still strikes to be fair to the three parties is what is sought after here. Without proposing a better change or willingness to compose, the discussion can't have resolution.

How about explicitly spelling out what constitutes non 'critical' reasons which would be denied? Would that make you feel more comfortable. All the deletion requests staff has received that were upsetting can all be put under probably 3 different reasons to be outlawed. Then any other reason would become acceptable. Thoughts?

InVerse:
Apologies for the copyright/public domain quibbling. I'm somewhat out of my realm discussing such things with authority. However, isn't it immaterial? You, the copyright holder, by submitting your work are agreeing to our terms which are archiving your work indefinitely allowing removal only for substantial reasons. And let's clear the speculation air... A 'substantial' (or 'critical' as I have it in policy) reason is virtually anything other than 'I don't want it here anymore', 'I changed my mind', 'I'm erasing my work from the Internet', or no reason at all. Nobody is willing to do extra work for you (submitter)  being an ass about things you yourself submitted here. We're all for working with people whom have mature reasoning, but we're not going to waste our time with the immaturity of such reasoning I've stated above. We wish to achieve some mutual respect. We'll respect your requests if you respect our time and effort. It's a two way street.

You think we should entertain such immature reasons for work removal after you personally agreed to allow us to host things here? I'd hardly call it helplessness...

If you're so concerned about us ignoring the critical reasoning portion of our policy, why aren't you concerned about us ignoring any policy we had? Why do we have to follow any policy at all? We could choose to ignore you regardless of policy if you have that line of thinking. But we don't because we run the site with good faith efforts. I don't see how what policy we have makes any difference if you don't trust we'll follow it...

akadewboy:
Neugier was removed because the author had a moral crisis, changed his mind that all ROM hacking was wrong, and wanted all his work gone. Let's not revisit that.

byuu:
Does copyright matter at all when by submitting, you're agreeing to grant permission by our terms? I don't see any violation of copyright when the author agreed to give us permission and agreed to our terms first hand.

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Near on October 02, 2008, 02:43:53 pm
Quote
byuu:
Does copyright matter at all when by submitting, you're agreeing to grant permission by our terms? I don't see any violation of copyright when the author agreed to give us permission and agreed to our terms first hand.

It does when you realize that I've never once submitted a single file to this site, yet you have eight things by me hosted here. So I haven't explicitly given you permission to host anything of mine. But for what it's worth, I don't mind that you guys host any of that stuff. All of my stuff is licensed for public distribution anyway, so I can't legally tell you to take it down even if I wanted to.

That is a good idea, though. How about this for a solution?

Encourage people to submit work themselves. Give the incentive of giving such submissions their own articles on the front page (otherwise it gets added silently or something), with links to homepages for free "advertising" and such; and ensure much faster hosting (eg delay 1-2 weeks before staffers will upload new stuff.)

Whenever you submit a file, there's a checkbox where you can assert to being the copyright owner, and that you are granting RHDN an exclusive, non-transferrable (eg only giving RHDN permission, nobody else) license to host the file here indefinitely. Again, require that for some sort of "perks / rewards" program. Maybe larger avatars on the forums, or some neat special title or something.

Whenever that box is checked, store a flag in the database to say that it was. Deletion requests will be honored then only at your discretion, and you reserve the right to reject them.

In the event someone wants something deleted, and that wasn't checked (eg it's an older "legacy" file, or someone else submitted it without their permission), or in the event someone fraudulently claimed to be the author of the work, then delete the work unconditionally. Make deletion more serious to discourage it. Eg, "if you request deletion, we will never host this file (or worse, anything from you) again." And force them to use a hot pink RHDN theme for their IP / account in the future.

For those who simply don't want to submit stuff themselves, and for the older works, maybe allow logged-in users to click a button under each entry to authorize RHDN to host it indefinitely.

I realize doing all of that is a lot of hard work, and thus may not be feasible.

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 02, 2008, 03:10:04 pm
It does when you realize that I've never once submitted a single file to this site, yet you have eight things by me hosted here. So I haven't explicitly given you permission to host anything of mine. But for what it's worth, I don't mind that you guys host any of that stuff. All of my stuff is licensed for public distribution anyway, so I can't legally tell you to take it down even if I wanted to.

Yeah, but that's not even up for discussion right now. You're free to delete all your work unconditionally since you didn't submit it yourself. No objections were assumed when it was submitted by whomever in good faith, but permission was not explicitly given and we recognize that. The only policy change applies to those who submitted their own work and change their minds later for poor reasons or no reasons or hissy fits.

Though you've just given us written permission with that post, so you're screwed now! :P
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 03:15:14 pm
Encourage people to submit work themselves. Give the incentive of giving such submissions their own articles on the front page (otherwise it gets added silently or something), with links to homepages for free "advertising" and such; and ensure much faster hosting (eg delay 1-2 weeks before staffers will upload new stuff.)

I don't think that will resolve the issues InVerse has with the idea. Not all incentives matter when you "give your rights up" as it is bluntly termed.

You have to give back to get back.. as they say. What would be a fair trade to get some limited rights to remove content you have produced? That's technically the question.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Spinner 8 on October 02, 2008, 03:52:39 pm
Meh. This doesn't really concern me.

Spinner 8 Thanks Kitsune Sniper For This Useful Post.

With this discussion, I'm more concerned with the nature of the internet itself than with the author's wishes. Once a patch gets publicly released, it's out there, whether a person changes his or her mind about it later or not. It goes on to translation sites, it gets (unlikely) indexed by archive.org, later on it goes into a Goodset, where it then goes on to hundreds of Top 50 ROM sites with tons of porn, banner ads, and likely malicious software. And there's not really anything you can do about it. Even taboo patches like Neugier can be found with minimal searching, even less once the new GoodSNES is released.

I guess you've got to ask who the site's here for. Do you make this a resource for the contributors, and tell all the users to go away and find it somewhere else? Or do you make these things available to everyone, since they're already available to everyone at so many places and sites that don't care about the author's wishes? Personally, I'd rather have a site where you can have everything in one place. I'm really interested in hearing Bongo's and Inverse's thoughts on this though, in PM or otherwise.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Near on October 02, 2008, 04:00:35 pm
Quote
You're free to delete all your work unconditionally since you didn't submit it yourself.

Ah ...

Quote
In summary, we still respect unconditional deletion requests on material submitted to our site in good faith by third parties that an author may not have wished to appear here.

That's much better. Now how the hell did I miss that? Sorry x.x

So long as your upload submission has a disclaimer that by uploading, it's an agreement to allow you to continue to host the file, then I'm completely okay with the change.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 04:06:49 pm
Quote
You're free to delete all your work unconditionally since you didn't submit it yourself.

Ah ...

Quote
In summary, we still respect unconditional deletion requests on material submitted to our site in good faith by third parties that an author may not have wished to appear here.

That's much better. Now how the hell did I miss that? Sorry x.x

So long as your upload submission has a disclaimer that by uploading, it's an agreement to allow you to continue to host the file, then I'm completely okay with the change.


You know, I actually think my idea to have a 3rd party to submit it is a great idea, although I'm not sure if Nightcrawler likes this idea. Since 3rd party submissions are ultimately removed at the request of the author regardless of the reason, this paranoia is actually unwarrented as the current policy stands. The issue does then become those that submit said patch... sure they are linked to the forum... but I doubt that has actually stopped them from working around the system behind the scenes....  :-\


Meh. This doesn't really concern me.

Spinner 8 Thanks Kitsune Sniper For This Useful Post.

With this discussion, I'm more concerned with the nature of the internet itself than with the author's wishes. Once a patch gets publicly released, it's out there, whether a person changes his or her mind about it later or not. It goes on to translation sites, it gets (unlikely) indexed by archive.org, later on it goes into a Goodset, where it then goes on to hundreds of Top 50 ROM sites with tons of porn, banner ads, and likely malicious software. And there's not really anything you can do about it. Even taboo patches like Neugier can be found with minimal searching, even less once the new GoodSNES is released.

I guess you've got to ask who the site's here for. Do you make this a resource for the contributors, and tell all the users to go away and find it somewhere else? Or do you make these things available to everyone, since they're already available to everyone at so many places and sites that don't care about the author's wishes? Personally, I'd rather have a site where you can have everything in one place. I'm really interested in hearing Bongo's and Inverse's thoughts on this though, in PM or otherwise.

It has nothing to do with the Internets having it, it has everything to do with RHDN hosting it. That's the difference.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Spinner 8 on October 02, 2008, 04:16:27 pm
Meh. This doesn't really concern me.

Spinner 8 Thanks Kitsune Sniper For This Useful Post.

With this discussion, I'm more concerned with the nature of the internet itself than with the author's wishes. Once a patch gets publicly released, it's out there, whether a person changes his or her mind about it later or not. It goes on to translation sites, it gets (unlikely) indexed by archive.org, later on it goes into a Goodset, where it then goes on to hundreds of Top 50 ROM sites with tons of porn, banner ads, and likely malicious software. And there's not really anything you can do about it. Even taboo patches like Neugier can be found with minimal searching, even less once the new GoodSNES is released.

I guess you've got to ask who the site's here for. Do you make this a resource for the contributors, and tell all the users to go away and find it somewhere else? Or do you make these things available to everyone, since they're already available to everyone at so many places and sites that don't care about the author's wishes? Personally, I'd rather have a site where you can have everything in one place. I'm really interested in hearing Bongo's and Inverse's thoughts on this though, in PM or otherwise.

It has nothing to do with the Internets having it, it has everything to do with RHDN hosting it. That's the difference.

I don't see the difference. If the "Internets" has it, why shouldn't RHDN have it? That's kind of my entire point.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 04:21:12 pm
I don't see the difference. If the "Internets" has it, why shouldn't RHDN have it? That's kind of my entire point.

That's up to the person submitting the work. Consider Gamefaqs. They have a policy IIRC for unconditional removal by the author/creator of the material posted there. The law agrees with the person submitting said work to remove it at their discretion. That's the problem that's being argued around here.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lleu on October 02, 2008, 04:26:25 pm
Some thoughts:

RHDN is a service, and to use the service you have to agree to the policy.  It's the same with any site you visit on the internet.  Do you have an email account? Try reading the fine print on the terms of service.  Basically it always includes "You can't sue us if you use the services" to avoid frivolous legal battles.  Second, if it's a site with public content to share with others, then it's quite common to say that once you submit content to the site, the site has legal permission to host it from then on.  Some even go further and acquire full distribution rights to whatever content is submitted.  If you're not used to this by now, what internet have you been using? :huh:

Along with that, nothing will guarantee that the site won't 180 and change it's policies.  Nothing guarantees ninja assassins won't drop from the ceiling, either.  It's the same with any site that you visit on the internet.  Hotmail/Gmail/Yahoo/Flickr could change their TOS and start modifying your content, archiving it, selling it, packaging it with porn, etc, and the most you could do is stop using the service.  From a legal standpoint, most have TOS that state that you implicitly agree by using the service, so if you do anything but stop visiting the site immediately and contact the administrators for removal, you've already given them permission.  RHDN doesn't do that, and it's not stuffed with legalese.  I really hope the issue doesn't heat up enough to start requiring pages of legal speak in order to use the service.  I like that the site rules in general are "don't be an ass".

People come here for the community.  All of us are users.  None of us were born from the head of Zeus as full Romhacking Gods.  We all learned from others and profited from conversations and others' submissions, in addition to our own experience.  I think the idea of posting here is to share and benefit others, and people choose this site because it's well-known and attempts to archive all of the data.  I really don't think it's too much to ask that the people really think before submitting.  You really shouldn't submit things to an archived site if you don't want them to be archived.  You can't take back the internet.  And please consider when making new things that we've all benefited from the community.  Be a contributor, in one form or another.  Give back to the orphanage.  :D

I support options 5, 6, and 7.  I would also ask that the submission page include a notice that submitting give license to distribute the work on this site for the express purposes of benefiting the community and maintaining an archive of valuable data.  People will know that once they submit you have a legal right to host it here.  Screams of copyright will mean little then.  They'll maintain rights to the data itself, but RHDN will have license to distribute here for its stated purposes without fear of reprisal.  It also gives the authors a foothold if hell freezes over and we become a porn pay-per-click community.

Finally, I don't think trying to erase traces of your past in order to appear more legit for business purposes is a valid excuse to take things down.  Why are you using your real name on the internet?  If you're worried, I'd go further and state that it's beneficial to have a different user name here than you use on other sites.  Maybe a compromise where legal names can be removed from the submissions and instead only have the user's board name would be sufficient for those who weren't thinking about employment opportunities when they posted.  That way they can at least get plausible deniability.

Pretty much the only valid excuses I see are "the patch is buggy/infected" and "I never wanted it hosted here in the first place" when someone else submitted it.  Can we get an auto-mailer in the system to send emails to the supposed author for confirmation?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 04:41:31 pm
Along with that, nothing will guarantee that the site won't 180 and change it's policies.  Nothing guarantees ninja assassins won't drop from the ceiling, either.  It's the same with any site that you visit on the internet.  Hotmail/Gmail/Yahoo/Flickr could change their TOS and start modifying your content, archiving it, selling it, packaging it with porn, etc, and the most you could do is stop using the service.  From a legal standpoint, most have TOS that state that you implicitly agree by using the service, so if you do anything but stop visiting the site immediately and contact the administrators for removal, you've already given them permission.  RHDN doesn't do that, and it's not stuffed with legalese.  I really hope the issue doesn't heat up enough to start requiring pages of legal speak in order to use the service.  I like that the site rules in general are "don't be an ass".

In the end, they have to be spelled out for legal reasons and alleviating concerns. That's why there are privacy policies and the like...


Quote
I support options 5, 6, and 7.  I would also ask that the submission page include a notice that submitting give license to distribute the work on this site for the express purposes of benefiting the community and maintaining an archive of valuable data.  People will know that once they submit you have a legal right to host it here.  Screams of copyright will mean little then.  They'll maintain rights to the data itself, but RHDN will have license to distribute here for its stated purposes without fear of reprisal.  It also gives the authors a foothold if hell freezes over and we become a porn pay-per-click community.

If the policy changes, it should always be made known to everyone involved even if they don't like the revised policy to allow for removal.. which I think most policies follow this in the first place. I doubt anything drastic would change (seriously, this isn't going to be a porn site overnight, but if it were, I'd still like to know  :D ) That's usually standard practice AFAIK.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Near on October 02, 2008, 07:22:10 pm
Quote
Basically it always includes "You can't sue us if you use the services" to avoid frivolous legal battles.

And those clauses are almost always rejected by the courts.

Example:
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20080831104451947

Quote
"Courts, not arbitrators, decide the validity of arbitration agreements," the court wrote ... "Courts will not be easily deceived by attempts to unilaterally strip away consumer protections and remedies by efforts to cloak the waiver of important rights under an arbitration clause."

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: FranMichaels on October 02, 2008, 07:31:14 pm
Here's the reason I have a problem with the new policy. If I submit my work under said policy, I have absolutely no right to request that my material be removed. If Nightcrawler suddenly decides to start running porn ads and charging people $5/month to use the site, my material would be contributing to his immoral (IMO) profiteering and I would have no right to complain. Do I believe something like this will actually occur? No. But I won't put myself in a position of potential helplessness.

Ah, I completely understand this. I recently read an article about how Cloud computing is a trap, and it follows this reasoning. You've given your data to someone else, and you have no choice but to trust 'em.
With patches and such, it's not so severe as credit card info, or personal info, but still...

As a mostly user (I have one rom hack on here, and posted under a pseudonym I don't use anymore and submitted some screencaps for utils... heh). My perspective is simply: a romhacking archive where content can just disappear, isn't much of an archive then :( (romhacking depository?)

Would those who have objections based on what "might be" feel more at ease with a social contract?

Here is an example from debian
http://www.debian.org/social_contract

and gentoo
http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml

Not an advertisement for the distros themselves (Ubuntu user...) one document is under SPI and the other under CC licensing. Perhaps it would be a good base for romhacking.net to make one.

This place already has my trust though. I like the way things are done here, much more open than any romhacking site I've ever been to.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 02, 2008, 07:40:15 pm
I don't see the difference. If the "Internets" has it, why shouldn't RHDN have it? That's kind of my entire point.

That's up to the person submitting the work. Consider Gamefaqs. They have a policy IIRC for unconditional removal by the author/creator of the material posted there. The law agrees with the person submitting said work to remove it at their discretion. That's the problem that's being argued around here.

GameFAQs is owned by CNET, runs advertisements, makes money, and has paid employees...

RHDN is owned by a single person, makes no money, runs no advertisement, and has limited people who work for free.

If we had all that, I doubt we'd be having this discussion. ;)
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 02, 2008, 08:04:40 pm
I don't see the difference. If the "Internets" has it, why shouldn't RHDN have it? That's kind of my entire point.

That's up to the person submitting the work. Consider Gamefaqs. They have a policy IIRC for unconditional removal by the author/creator of the material posted there. The law agrees with the person submitting said work to remove it at their discretion. That's the problem that's being argued around here.

GameFAQs is owned by CNET, runs advertisements, makes money, and has paid employees...

RHDN is owned by a single person, makes no money, runs no advertisement, and has limited people who work for free.

If we had all that, I doubt we'd be having this discussion. ;)

You know, I wasn't really thinking too hard about my comparison to be nitpicked at.

Anyways, there is one thing worth pointing out.. submitted FAQs can't be removed if they are used to win their contribution contests...
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 02, 2008, 08:52:54 pm
Quote
I recall someone else years ago linking me to the text of some treaty that the U.S. had signed which specifically stated that translations of software that were intended to increase usability were legal.
Pics Links or it didn't happen :P

I'm going to spend some time this weekend looking for it. I'm really hoping that said link was sent to me via IRC instead of AIM and that I happen to have logs of said conversation stuck away on some random CD somewhere. Whatever it was, and I'm positive that I'm not imagining it, it made enough sense that we contemplated contacting a lawyer to obtain a professional opinion on the matter.

 
If you're so concerned about us ignoring the critical reasoning portion of our policy, why aren't you concerned about us ignoring any policy we had? Why do we have to follow any policy at all? We could choose to ignore you regardless of policy if you have that line of thinking. But we don't because we run the site with good faith efforts. I don't see how what policy we have makes any difference if you don't trust we'll follow it...

I think my entire point has been that you're not required to follow any policy, which is why I feel obligated to do everything possible to protect my legal rights. Submitting files to the site under the new policy would be doing exactly the opposite of that, so I choose not to do it. (And in case anyone is confused on the matter, I've never once stated that I was going to request that my files be removed or that I would refuse to allow future releases to be hosted here, I simply said that I would not be submitting them myself.)

to calling it "copywrite".

Thank you for pointing that out in a way that was actually highly relevant to your post. I avoided doing so because I couldn't come up with a way to do it that wasn't trolling. By doing so, you gain back nearly all of the points you lost due to my disappointment at not mentioning Godwin's Law when relevant!
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RetroProf on October 03, 2008, 03:47:55 am
Late to the topic (and maybe slightly off topic), but why were Nightwolve's translation patches removed? I'm thinking of Ys IV here on PCE. I went to his site.... and it's a political blog now? And he started ranting about people not paying him for his translations. I'm sure I probably just misunderstood the whole thing, but it was rather odd.

Anyway, I eventually had to dload a prepatched copy of the game. I find it very odd that anyone would want to withold their work from the community/world.

Is RHDN's mission to collate information on everything related to romhacking and translations, globally? I only ask because browsing forums, it seems that the MSX community (which I love btw), seem to be off in a world of their own, doing interesting stuff, but not making much hoo har about it beyond their own smaller forums. I'm not hugely into it enough to post about stuff, but it seems that not everyone is aware of what RHDN does.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Spinner 8 on October 03, 2008, 04:06:55 am
Late to the topic (and maybe slightly off topic), but why were Nightwolve's translation patches removed? I'm thinking of Ys IV here on PCE. I went to his site.... and it's a political blog now? And he started ranting about people not paying him for his translations. I'm sure I probably just misunderstood the whole thing, but it was rather odd.

Anyway, I eventually had to dload a prepatched copy of the game. I find it very odd that anyone would want to withold their work from the community/world.

Is RHDN's mission to collate information on everything related to romhacking and translations, globally? I only ask because browsing forums, it seems that the MSX community (which I love btw), seem to be off in a world of their own, doing interesting stuff, but not making much hoo har about it beyond their own smaller forums. I'm not hugely into it enough to post about stuff, but it seems that not everyone is aware of what RHDN does.

Quoted for when you write an article about this later and delete your post.

Now that I've had some time to think, I'm not really sure what point I was trying to make. It's very clear that this site caters pretty exclusively to the hackers and translators themselves (hence the "community site" atmosphere that everyone stresses pretty heavily). So, my argument doesn't make much sense for a website like this. RHDN basically bends over backwards to make everyone happy and avoid "drama", accessibility be damned. That's cool.

I'm more thinking of a hypothetical website that caters more to the end-user, a website that's there for that dude who just wants to play some damn games, and this website would have all patches, by everyone, for everyone, no matter what. In that case, the "if it's on the internet, it may as well be here" rule is pretty applicable.

Because really, it's the internet, and people who want complete control of their property do not really get along well with the internet. If you give out your Ys beta to a bunch of people saying "hey don't give this out" and then you're shocked to discover that someone gave it out, well, that sucks, but it happens. I'm not saying that patches like that should be supported here, but I'm not saying it's a valid reason to call all your fans scum and quit forever either. I'm just saying that whoever wants to put your patch on their site, can, and there's probably no legal ground available to you whatsoever. And if that's the case, then why not have everything on one easily accessible website? :D

Anyways, I'm just having fun with my completely hypothetical and non-applicable argument over here.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 03, 2008, 04:13:50 am
Ok, NO MORE NIGHTWOLVE/YS BETA LEAK TALK.

Sorry for the caps, but this always leads to big trouble. If you want to discuss it, PM people.

I don't know the exact specifics of what went down, exactly, so would someone mind PMing Szczepaniak and explaining what happened?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tc on October 03, 2008, 06:41:00 am
Well, I did manage to find it thanks to Google. That's one seriously rare translation patch! :o
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kitsune Sniper on October 03, 2008, 09:45:15 am
Quoted for when you write an article about this later and delete your post.

Now that I've had some time to think, I'm not really sure what point I was trying to make. It's very clear that this site caters pretty exclusively to the hackers and translators themselves (hence the "community site" atmosphere that everyone stresses pretty heavily). So, my argument doesn't make much sense for a website like this. RHDN basically bends over backwards to make everyone happy and avoid "drama", accessibility be damned. That's cool.

I'm more thinking of a hypothetical website that caters more to the end-user, a website that's there for that dude who just wants to play some damn games, and this website would have all patches, by everyone, for everyone, no matter what. In that case, the "if it's on the internet, it may as well be here" rule is pretty applicable.

Because really, it's the internet, and people who want complete control of their property do not really get along well with the internet. If you give out your Ys beta to a bunch of people saying "hey don't give this out" and then you're shocked to discover that someone gave it out, well, that sucks, but it happens. I'm not saying that patches like that should be supported here, but I'm not saying it's a valid reason to call all your fans scum and quit forever either. I'm just saying that whoever wants to put your patch on their site, can, and there's probably no legal ground available to you whatsoever. And if that's the case, then why not have everything on one easily accessible website? :D

Anyways, I'm just having fun with my completely hypothetical and non-applicable argument over here.

Your proposal thing is reminding me way too much of Mugen warehouses. And THAT never worked out very well for anyone involved. Just saying.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 03, 2008, 11:29:52 am
I think my entire point has been that you're not required to follow any policy, which is why I feel obligated to do everything possible to protect my legal rights. Submitting files to the site under the new policy would be doing exactly the opposite of that, so I choose not to do it. (And in case anyone is confused on the matter, I've never once stated that I was going to request that my files be removed or that I would refuse to allow future releases to be hosted here, I simply said that I would not be submitting them myself.)

And we want to do everything possible to prevent wasted time, effort, and resources for us and the site and ensure the users who come here get the service they want which is an archive and non volatile files and information they can trust will be here tomorrow. As has already been discussed, it's a three party ordeal. You need to hit middle ground. You can't have it 100% your way. We're clearly willing to bend, hell we were bending all the way over previously. I'm sure the end users are certainly willing to bend respecting REASONABLE author's wishes that don't directly attack them. But you are somehow not willing to give an inch.

It's impossible to reach a compromising conclusion unless all parties involved are willing to give. You're willing to give nothing. I view willingness to compromise as a show of respect for the other party's position.

We have six other proposed solutions now and you're not willing to consider any nor propose any others. What more is there to say?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RetroProf on October 03, 2008, 01:44:15 pm
Quoted for when you write an article about this later and delete your post.

I can't tell whether you're playfully joshing me, or whether you're actually quite angry at me having deleted that stuff. PM'd you a longer response.

Anyway, I retired from games journalism nearly 2 years ago.  :D
And damn, am I glad. Never been so happy. I've now got double the pay for half the work. Games journos are paid nearly as little as people who translation patches.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tcaudilllg on October 03, 2008, 05:33:19 pm
I think my entire point has been that you're not required to follow any policy, which is why I feel obligated to do everything possible to protect my legal rights. Submitting files to the site under the new policy would be doing exactly the opposite of that, so I choose not to do it. (And in case anyone is confused on the matter, I've never once stated that I was going to request that my files be removed or that I would refuse to allow future releases to be hosted here, I simply said that I would not be submitting them myself.)

And we want to do everything possible to prevent wasted time, effort, and resources for us and the site and ensure the users who come here get the service they want which is an archive and non volatile files and information they can trust will be here tomorrow. As has already been discussed, it's a three party ordeal. You need to hit middle ground. You can't have it 100% your way. We're clearly willing to bend, hell we were bending all the way over previously. I'm sure the end users are certainly willing to bend respecting REASONABLE author's wishes that don't directly attack them. But you are somehow not willing to give an inch.

It's impossible to reach a compromising conclusion unless all parties involved are willing to give. You're willing to give nothing. I view willingness to compromise as a show of respect for the other party's position.

We have six other proposed solutions now and you're not willing to consider any nor propose any others. What more is there to say?

In my experience people, like InVerse, who make such claims cannot be budged from their positions. Think of the wikipede on Wikipedia who prunes articles looking for various points which may be controversial from some conceivable standpoint, and builds up a reputation for "edits" doing only such work. If you try to contest the point, then they edit war you. My point is that he knows its unreasonable without your telling him, and to tell him, like you are, that he is being unreasonable just seems to him like an echo of his own conscience. He's good enough already at suppressing that, so whatever you say shouldn't make a difference. He does seem to be attempting to put himself into a position, conceivably, of power. (this I can gather from his industry contacts). I don't really have anything to say about that, but it does stand to reason that his goal will be to persuade you of his viewpoint from here forward, or alternatively he'll just leave. But I think the reason he's trying to elevate his "power" is so that he can be more convincing. He's already made the claim that the site exists soley because of him. I just don't think you should make your decision based on his opinion alone. I've had a lot of experience with these people, they are a minority, and they have no real influence save what you allow them to have in your own mind.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 03, 2008, 05:46:12 pm
Don't flame Inverse.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tcaudilllg on October 03, 2008, 06:15:14 pm
I wasn't flaming, just stating an experienced opinion. I genuinely believe that inVerse is unconducive to compromise as a factor of his nature. My point is that if inVerse is the lone voice of opposition then whatever RHDN staff conclude should not be relented upon for his sake. I believe a poll is the best solution because it will let the (rational) majority determine the situation.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Disch on October 03, 2008, 06:20:29 pm
He's already made the claim that the site exists soley because of him.

I call BS.  When did he say that?

Closest I can think you mean is that he said the site exists solely because of ROM hackers (though, really, he never even said that).  You're twisting his words way too much.

Anyway -- I agree with Nightcrawler.  Potential solutions are on the table -- if InVerse is unhappy with the current situation, rather than simply stating why he is unhappy he should try to provide a possible solution.  It's easy to complain that things are broken -- it's much harder to try and fix them.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tcaudilllg on October 03, 2008, 06:32:42 pm
Page 4, middle:
Quote from: inVerse
Hell, my documents are the only thing of any value on this site. I don't think I've ever gotten a comment about one of my translations outside of the immediate release but I was surprised at how many people brought up old documents after I returned to this site.

And I don't entirely ignore the legal rights of the original owners, though I won't claim to always do so. However, I was the one who obtained permission from Galoob to legally release the Game Genie ROM (I had nothing to do with dumping it, simply got permission for it to be distributed on ZD) and I'm currently in negotiation with ADV's legal department to obtain the legal right to reprint several translation related articles from PiQ magazine on this site. (I've already obtained permission from two of the authors, though they sold all rights to the magazine, so from a legal standpoint, ADV has to grant permission.) I'm also once again attempting to obtain legal rights to Crystalis.

I agree with you, Disch, that inVerse should offer his own fair solution. But I'll bet he doesn't. He could prove me wrong, but I'm not counting on it because I've seen this thing before, and experienced too many disappointments.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Near on October 03, 2008, 06:46:50 pm
Quote
Hell, my documents are the only thing of any value on this site.

Context, people. He was obviously meaning to say that his documents were the only thing of value belonging to him on this site.

I don't think there's anyone out there with enough vanity to think that his contributions alone are the only thing of value at RHDN as a whole.

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 03, 2008, 07:59:03 pm
And we want to do everything possible to prevent wasted time, effort, and resources for us and the site and ensure the users who come here get the service they want which is an archive and non volatile files and information they can trust will be here tomorrow.

As I've stated before, you and I have completely opposite ways of looking at pretty much everything. I believe I'm a fairly open-minded guy. I can generally understand both sides of an issue. That doesn't mean that I AGREE with both sides or that I don't think that one side or the other is populated by complete fucking morons (speaking in general terms, not directing it at this particular issue at all.) but at least I can understand why those morons believe what they do. For instance, I fully understand the beliefs of George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden, I can see where their points of view come from. (And if they managed to double fatality each other, I'd donate my X-Box 360 to Toys for Tots to thank whatever God I didn't realize existed was responsible for it.)

But when it comes to you, I am at a complete loss. That's why any time I bring up an issue or ask a question, I generally fail to follow up. I flat out don't get it. Even something as simple as computer code. I look at someone who codes something in a different way from myself and at least I understand their reasoning, even if I disagree with it. But the few times I've tried to discuss the coding of this site with you, I'm left so dumbfounded that I can't even respond. That's not to say you're wrong, I just don't get it.

And if I can't fathom your reasoning on something as relatively concrete as code, there's no hope when it comes to abstract concepts.


Quote
We have six other proposed solutions now and you're not willing to consider any nor propose any others. What more is there to say?

Okay, here's what I propose. Keep the new policy and those of us who disagree with it simply won't submit our work ourselves. I hadn't bothered considering or proposing other solutions because I figured that would work just fine.


Don't flame Inverse.

But if you do, please spell my name right! The V isn't capitalized purely for stylized reasons!


Quote
Hell, my documents are the only thing of any value on this site.

Context, people. He was obviously meaning to say that his documents were the only thing of value belonging to him on this site.

Exactly. I was beginning to freak out for a second there, because I *did* make a comment about being the reason this site exists, but said comment only exists in a text file on my hard drive and is made in an extremely tongue-in-cheek fashion in what will basically be a combination comedy release/brief history lesson. I thought for a second that one of you fuckers hacked my computer and released the source code to Nesticle!

Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Neil on October 03, 2008, 08:01:25 pm
Can we all take a step back and talk about the issue at hand rather than nitpicking? Nightcrawler requested feedback into alternatives that take everyone's wishes into consideration. Rather than picking on InVerse, can we discuss those?

Quote
1. A leniency period (to be determined) for unconditional removal after which the new policy stands -Deathlike2
2. Full user controlled deletion. Users can delete any work submitted at any time themselves. -Disch
3. Complete unconditional deletion for any reason at any time must stand. -InVerse
4. Allow unconditional deletion for any reason EXCEPT explicitly spelled out invalid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.
5. Allow unconditional deletion for ONLY reasons explicitly spelled out as valid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.
6. All deletion request must go to community vote to determine reasoning validation and approval! This would be interesting.
7. Keep things as they are proposed currently.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Spikeman on October 04, 2008, 01:41:22 am
Quote
4. Allow unconditional deletion for any reason EXCEPT explicitly spelled out invalid reasons (yet to be written out)

I think this is the best solution. It's nice to have things spelled out.

Quote
6. All deletion request must go to community vote to determine reasoning validation and approval! This would be interesting.

I do agree that this would be interesting, but it'd be hard to come up with a system that is both fair and easy to implement.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Guyver on October 04, 2008, 04:23:41 am
The Well-timed idea! Well that you this has done...

6. All deletion request must go to community vote to determine reasoning validation and approval! This would be interesting.

And as this will work?  :huh:
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 04, 2008, 04:29:05 am
1. A leniency period (to be determined) for unconditional removal after which the new policy stands -Deathlike2
This sounds best. Give a password and a week to delete you files after that its perma there.
Really no matter the system I think we should at least put something like this in place.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 04, 2008, 10:10:05 am
Okay, I have the absolute best solution.

Any file can be deleted by anyone IF they donate $500 to a charity to be determined by the "community". Anyone else can re-add that same file if they donate an amount equal to the deletion fee + an additional $250. Then anyone else can delete said file for an amount equal to the addition fee + $250. If a war breaks out over a particular file, we could end up funding a cure for cancer!
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RedComet on October 04, 2008, 11:22:30 am
Okay, I have the absolute best solution.

Any file can be deleted by anyone IF they donate $500 to a charity to be determined by the "community". Anyone else can re-add that same file if they donate an amount equal to the deletion fee + an additional $250. Then anyone else can delete said file for an amount equal to the addition fee + $250. If a war breaks out over a particular file, we could end up funding a cure for cancer!

I like this alternative. :laugh:
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 04, 2008, 12:01:47 pm
Okay, I have the absolute best solution.

Any file can be deleted by anyone IF they donate $500 to a charity to be determined by the "community". Anyone else can re-add that same file if they donate an amount equal to the deletion fee + an additional $250. Then anyone else can delete said file for an amount equal to the addition fee + $250. If a war breaks out over a particular file, we could end up funding a cure for cancer!

I like this alternative. :laugh:

I hate to see the complaints being "I can't pay for removal/readding" the file from/to RHDN.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 04, 2008, 01:31:50 pm
I hate to see the complaints being "I can't pay for removal/readding" the file from/to RHDN.

Those people would be flamed for refusing to help their fellow man and damned to hell for their selfishness!

It's like Chris Rock's old take on gun control. Let everyone have guns but make bullets $5,000 each. If someone gets shot, they probably deserved it.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lenophis on October 04, 2008, 01:48:30 pm
I don't care if you are being sarcastic, but I really hate the fact that those in control are those with the money.

"It's not that much money!"

Then by all means, share the wealth.

1. A leniency period (to be determined) for unconditional removal after which the new policy stands -Deathlike2
2. Full user controlled deletion. Users can delete any work submitted at any time themselves. -Disch
3. Complete unconditional deletion for any reason at any time must stand. -InVerse
4. Allow unconditional deletion for any reason EXCEPT explicitly spelled out invalid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.
5. Allow unconditional deletion for ONLY reasons explicitly spelled out as valid reasons (yet to be written out) based on the aforementioned problematic reasons in the first post of this topic.
6. All deletion request must go to community vote to determine reasoning validation and approval! This would be interesting.
7. Keep things as they are proposed currently.
Assuming there is a change, I personally like numbers 5 and 6.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 04, 2008, 04:01:02 pm
Can the charity be me? :D.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 04, 2008, 05:35:38 pm
Can the charity be me? :D.

Sure, but we'll have to give you AIDS.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tcaudilllg on October 04, 2008, 06:20:03 pm
@InVerse:
That's the most twisted observation of progressive mentality that I've seen.

I can tell you're the very desire self-conscious type who likes to rely on impulse.... In any case, your problem with Nightcrawler is that you and he are what people who study the socionics theory of relationships call "quasi-identicals". Your relation can be broken down into two parts, a "contrary" relation based on erroneous projections of intention, and a "mirror" relation in which the partners tend to pick up on the negative connotations of each the other's arguments. What this means, when both relations are together considered, is that the two of you are interpreting each other's arguments as matters of belief -- which they are not -- and observing the negative aspects of these "beliefs" besides. It's an endless cycle of misinterpretation of basis which creates a nearly impenetrable wall of misunderstanding.

My advice is to find common ground in a mutual goal and agree to work independently, without even proposing unification of efforts. I've got friends who I have this relation with and their arguments get more difficult to understand the more I study them; and I feel that I must study them because from the get-go I get a negative impression. Fortunately we have shared beliefs and can agree to state solidarity of intention if not intention to collaborate.

Because Nightcrawler is on the more social side of the spectrum and you're on the more... shall we say anti-social side (and psychologists do use that term) the misunderstandings are even worse: you're want to see the very worst in each other, and that's troubling. My advice to you, InVerse, is to ask yourself how much you really want to gain from the community over the long term. Nightcrawler is defending the interests of himself and his staff, and a lot of people are looking at him and saying to themselves "if I support Nightcrawler now, then when I'm in a similar position I can take the same kind of stance without facing social ostracism from anyone". That means they see it in their interest to support him over you. Is it really in your self-interest to try hurting the community, and risk demonization? Do you really want that, because you have a choice over whether you do or do not face it.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RedComet on October 04, 2008, 06:25:22 pm
I never thought I'd see the day when teh scene had its own shrink. I'll be damned. :huh:
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Deathlike2 on October 04, 2008, 06:42:19 pm
I never thought I'd see the day when teh scene had its own shrink. I'll be damned. :huh:

No, the guy overthinks stuff, to no end and to incomprehensive babel.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Pennywise on October 04, 2008, 06:47:44 pm
I think the whole shrink thing is kind of funny.

Anyway, I've got a suggestion along the lines of something InVerse might have suggested. If someone wants something to be removed from the site, turn the process into a bureaucratic process. That is create a form for them fill out and make sure it is an ardous task. When and if the form is finished charge them a nominal fee. Something along those lines. I think it would discourage people from actually getting stuff removed from the site due to the effort and time it would take, but it wouldn't stop them.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tcaudilllg on October 04, 2008, 06:49:28 pm
I never thought I'd see the day when teh scene had its own shrink. I'll be damned. :huh:

No, the guy overthinks stuff, to no end and to incomprehensive babel.

Over-think... is that like double-think?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RedComet on October 04, 2008, 08:00:54 pm
I never thought I'd see the day when teh scene had its own shrink. I'll be damned. :huh:

No, the guy overthinks stuff, to no end and to incomprehensive babel.

Over-think... is that like double-think?

Kinda, but it's more confusing and Oceania doesn't have it trademarked.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kitsune Sniper on October 04, 2008, 08:25:45 pm
I never thought I'd see the day when teh scene had its own shrink. I'll be damned. :huh:
We've had one for years, he just never says anything. :P
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kiyoshi Aman on October 04, 2008, 09:58:38 pm
Here's a solution: require takedown notices as specified by the DMCA; those are the only variety you're legally compelled to obey under current US law.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 04, 2008, 10:18:59 pm
Here's a solution: require takedown notices as specified by the DMCA; those are the only variety you're legally compelled to obey under current US law.
If we followed the law we wouldn't be hosting translations or patches. Really this site is not legally compelled to do anything once it hosts something. This is all an issue of respect not the law.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 05, 2008, 12:10:45 am
@InVerse:
That's the most twisted observation of progressive mentality that I've seen.

I can tell you're the very desire self-conscious type who likes to rely on impulse.... In any case, your problem with Nightcrawler is that you and he are what people who study the socionics theory of relationships call "quasi-identicals". Your relation can be broken down into two parts, a "contrary" relation based on erroneous projections of intention, and a "mirror" relation in which the partners tend to pick up on the negative connotations of each the other's arguments. What this means, when both relations are together considered, is that the two of you are interpreting each other's arguments as matters of belief -- which they are not -- and observing the negative aspects of these "beliefs" besides. It's an endless cycle of misinterpretation of basis which creates a nearly impenetrable wall of misunderstanding.

My advice is to find common ground in a mutual goal and agree to work independently, without even proposing unification of efforts. I've got friends who I have this relation with and their arguments get more difficult to understand the more I study them; and I feel that I must study them because from the get-go I get a negative impression. Fortunately we have shared beliefs and can agree to state solidarity of intention if not intention to collaborate.

Because Nightcrawler is on the more social side of the spectrum and you're on the more... shall we say anti-social side (and psychologists do use that term) the misunderstandings are even worse: you're want to see the very worst in each other, and that's troubling. My advice to you, InVerse, is to ask yourself how much you really want to gain from the community over the long term. Nightcrawler is defending the interests of himself and his staff, and a lot of people are looking at him and saying to themselves "if I support Nightcrawler now, then when I'm in a similar position I can take the same kind of stance without facing social ostracism from anyone". That means they see it in their interest to support him over you. Is it really in your self-interest to try hurting the community, and risk demonization? Do you really want that, because you have a choice over whether you do or do not face it.

...I said stop flaming him.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: InVerse on October 05, 2008, 12:47:24 am
...I said stop flaming him.

Where exactly is he flaming me in that post?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Lilinda on October 05, 2008, 01:18:00 am
He's passive aggressively calling you a selfish, impulsive twat who doesn't care what anyone else thinks, and someone who just wants to hurt the "community". At least, that's how I read it. If I'm wrong, I apologize.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RetroProf on October 05, 2008, 05:16:31 am
Wow, now I understand what people meant when they said fan translating is full of drama.

I've only read a few things, but my iron-fisted totalitarian view is this:

If you make a translation patch and make it available anywhere online, then it's a free target for people to archive and collect it. RHDN should make its goal to seek out every translation patch, do a write up on it, host it online, and the rest be damned. None of this "it has to be submitted by the author" or "we need their permission", or "we'll host it until someone asks us not to". The site should aim to archive information in case it's lost. Other sites host this stuff and don't give a damn (several patches that RHDN doesn't carry are carried by Zophar, or pirate communities), so I find it strange that the central hub of the translation community is short-changing itself for ridiculous reasons. Do you think the national library archives remove books if the author asks? If you've made it public (as opposed to having only given to a select few friends privately), you should no longer have any rights over its distribution - with the caveat that it isn't changed from the original work. Rather than relying on authors to submit, staff should keep abreast of releases on authors private sites/forums, grab them, and put them up. 

And hell, if people start selling the patches privately, have a few insiders, a few crazy moles who buy the patches, maybe crack em or rip the identification code out of them to make it anonymous, and then distribute those for free, in effect undermining the whole notion of selling patches.

Take a hardline, uncompromising stance: You don't want us to host your patches for free? Then don't make patches. Or at least don't let them leave the space on your harddrives. If it's out there, we'll get it, host it for everyone to enjoy, and never lose it. Simple as. If it exists, we'll have it, regardless of people's whining.


I realise this would never work because the community would rip itself to shreds, and there'd be splintering, and maybe some people in their paranoia might not make patches anymore, so really it's just a utopian vision which exists in my mind. In which case, if it's not here, I'll just take what I want from the various reservoirs of illicitly stockpiled internet guff.  ;D

Thank God for megaupload is what I say. Or Bhudda, if you're that way inclined.


Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kitsune Sniper on October 05, 2008, 11:35:25 am
Here's a solution: require takedown notices as specified by the DMCA; those are the only variety you're legally compelled to obey under current US law.
That involves lawyers. And money. And actually owning a copyright over the patch contents.

And it's been said that none of us have any copyright over the patches themselves, so we can't use the DMCA, or at least we shouldn't be able to.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Gohanks on October 05, 2008, 10:10:43 pm
Wow, now I understand what people meant when they said fan translating is full of drama.

Really, fan-anything is full of drama.  I'm surprised at the similarity of this to the MUGEN situation way back when, which was mentioned earlier in this very thread.  Hopefully things don't turn out as idiotically as they did there, with all the creators demanding their works only appear at their own homepages, and sometimes if they found their work elsewhere they'd take it off the web entirely!  Plenty of drama in all sorts of fan-communities, especially when the questionable legality of ROM translations and so on comes into play.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Piotyr on October 05, 2008, 11:02:12 pm
Wow, now I understand what people meant when they said fan translating is full of drama.

Really, fan-anything is full of drama.  I'm surprised at the similarity of this to the MUGEN situation way back when, which was mentioned earlier in this very thread.  Hopefully things don't turn out as idiotically as they did there, with all the creators demanding their works only appear at their own homepages, and sometimes if they found their work elsewhere they'd take it off the web entirely!  Plenty of drama in all sorts of fan-communities, especially when the questionable legality of ROM translations and so on comes into play.

This will never become as bad as mugen. I swear that is the worst set up ever.
Mugen could of been a great system too even without elecbyte.



Wow, now I understand what people meant when they said fan translating is full of drama.

I've only read a few things, but my iron-fisted totalitarian view is this:

If you make a translation patch and make it available anywhere online, then it's a free target for people to archive and collect it. RHDN should make its goal to seek out every translation patch, do a write up on it, host it online, and the rest be damned. None of this "it has to be submitted by the author" or "we need their permission", or "we'll host it until someone asks us not to". The site should aim to archive information in case it's lost. Other sites host this stuff and don't give a damn (several patches that RHDN doesn't carry are carried by Zophar, or pirate communities), so I find it strange that the central hub of the translation community is short-changing itself for ridiculous reasons. Do you think the national library archives remove books if the author asks? If you've made it public (as opposed to having only given to a select few friends privately), you should no longer have any rights over its distribution - with the caveat that it isn't changed from the original work. Rather than relying on authors to submit, staff should keep abreast of releases on authors private sites/forums, grab them, and put them up. 

And hell, if people start selling the patches privately, have a few insiders, a few crazy moles who buy the patches, maybe crack em or rip the identification code out of them to make it anonymous, and then distribute those for free, in effect undermining the whole notion of selling patches.

Take a hardline, uncompromising stance: You don't want us to host your patches for free? Then don't make patches. Or at least don't let them leave the space on your harddrives. If it's out there, we'll get it, host it for everyone to enjoy, and never lose it. Simple as. If it exists, we'll have it, regardless of people's whining.


I realise this would never work because the community would rip itself to shreds, and there'd be splintering, and maybe some people in their paranoia might not make patches anymore, so really it's just a utopian vision which exists in my mind. In which case, if it's not here, I'll just take what I want from the various reservoirs of illicitly stockpiled internet guff.  ;D

Thank God for megaupload is what I say. Or Bhudda, if you're that way inclined.




The reason why the library doesn't take books out is because they are published books. Once you sell someone something they can do just about anything they want with the product beyond making a copy(And you can even do that if its for yourself only.)

Second of all this is not just a translation warehouse this is a community. People not only come here to get patches they also come here to talk about translations, get ideas, and help.
If we alienate either side of this community be it fans who use these patches or fans who make them we are ruining this site.
Without this site we wouldn't have a lot of patches or at least a lot of the patches as soon as we do because of this set up.

This site is truly the biggest success of the romhacking community and the fact it try's to please everybody equally (As in it try's to make compromises to make sure everyone is the same level of happy, I mean ya can't please both party's 100% of the time) is what makes it so great.

I have never seen a site so well run. The staff doesn't cater to elitism or peer pressure and it try's to keep everyone happy without making everyone else pissed.
I hope you don't take this as brown nosing but it took this topic to make me really understand how great this site is. Hats off to nightcrawler and crew.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: RetroProf on October 06, 2008, 03:12:56 am
I agree it's a great site - I love the RHDN community. I wasn't criticising, I just think the staff who run it are too nice, and I mean that in a complimentary way.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Kiyoshi Aman on October 06, 2008, 11:20:44 am
Here's a solution: require takedown notices as specified by the DMCA; those are the only variety you're legally compelled to obey under current US law.
That involves lawyers. And money. And actually owning a copyright over the patch contents.

It does not require a lawyer or money, and copyright is automatically conferred to anything you create. You own the changes you've made, even if the modified ROM itself is not copyrightable. (Though, in the case of extensive hacks like DXOII, the modified ROM is also copyrightable; without the original authors' consent, however, you can't pursue legal remedies against unauthorised distribution (e.g., eBay'd cartridges).)

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

Quote
And it's been said that none of us have any copyright over the patches themselves, so we can't use the DMCA, or at least we shouldn't be able to.

Yes, you have copyright over the patches themselves. IPS patches only contain the data that has been changed, and copyright is clear (with source code, at least) that changes you make to a product are copyrightable.
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: tc on October 06, 2008, 12:31:19 pm
Don't changes have to be made by legal means for a copyright on them to be enforceable?
Title: Re: Site: Revised RHDN Policy
Post by: Nightcrawler on October 06, 2008, 12:54:01 pm
Back on topic please... Non compromising solutions from either side will not be entertained. So, please either discuss the proposed solutions or a new compromising solution.

It seems productive discussion is dying down here, so we'll probably move this to Site Talk with a community vote on which solution is desired.