[Discussion] VonCin Staffers

[Septentrionalis]

I don't have any data, but it does seem there are less active members online. I didn't take any data but it does seem that it is lower. Unregistered users I have to same feeling. Again, no actual data and I do not check often.

If someone is interested, I have some data that I could compose into a post. But it is only about general posting public that excludes accounts with zero posts and doesn't take any specific area of activity, such as the Curia, into account. It is going to be a long post and I'd hate to see it deleted right away as off-topic, so I await some kind of okay.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Surely if they reach out to him and produce a letter with him giving consent then the issue would be resolved.

Surely it would, but alas he has been unreachable. Could be he simply doesn't care any more, could be he has moved onto a hippy commune and renounced use of all technology. God forbid, could be he has passed away. He certainly has not withheld consent for the work product to be used.

I would propose a pragmatic solution that instead of requiring express consent for use of work, in light of changing circumstances on TWC, the hosting of a mod on TWC carries implied consent for other modders to use their work (short of outright plagiarism). Consent may be expressly denied by a modder for use of their work and at that point we can revert to the current approach on an as needed basis. In order to qualify, a modder purporting to use the work of another should be required to disclose their intention, ask for express consent, but if no response is forthcoming within a reasonable amount of time they should be allowed to proceed without express consent.

[lolIsuck]

Surely it would, but alas he has been unreachable. Could be he simply doesn't care any more, could be he has moved onto a hippy commune and renounced use of all technology. God forbid, could be he has passed away. He certainly has not withheld consent for the work product to be used.

General sub-mod guideline
You are allowed to edit any content of TATW and to release it as a sub-mod, under following conditions:
- You do not claim edited original content as your own created work
- You stick to the rules that apply to LL's High Elves
- You don't release your sub-mod as a stand-alone mod that doesn't require the installation of TATW.

I hope that this guideline answers the most questions and I think it makes pretty clear what you can and what you cannot do with your sub-mod. If there are still open questions please pm me (with a clear title that it is about permission issues) and I will see to update this guideline then.

There isn't really any ambiguity there. I don't personally like modders stopping or limiting the use of their assets, I'm a big fan of everything being free to use if credits are given, but this convention has existed for a long time on TWC and there certainly is no concensus on it. It's also questionable to retroactively apply any potential change to old mods.

I would propose a pragmatic solution that instead of requiring express consent for use of work, in light of changing circumstances on TWC, the hosting of a mod on TWC carries implied consent for other modders to use their work (short of outright plagiarism). Consent may be expressly denied by a modder for use of their work and at that point we can revert to the current approach on an as needed basis. In order to qualify, a modder purporting to use the work of another should be required to disclose their intention, ask for express consent, but if no response is forthcoming within a reasonable amount of time they should be allowed to proceed without express consent.

Your pragmatic solution has basically been the rule for several years now.

[Alwyn]

I would propose a pragmatic solution that instead of requiring express consent for use of work, in light of changing circumstances on TWC, the hosting of a mod on TWC carries implied consent for other modders to use their work (short of outright plagiarism). Consent may be expressly denied by a modder for use of their work and at that point we can revert to the current approach on an as needed basis. In order to qualify, a modder purporting to use the work of another should be required to disclose their intention, ask for express consent, but if no response is forthcoming within a reasonable amount of time they should be allowed to proceed without express consent.

Thank you for the suggestion. As lolIsuck mentioned, it sounds like you're suggesting something very similar to the modding permissions policy adopted in 2020 when, after this discussion and this second discussion, Hex announced a new policy. This policy now appears in paragraph 1.5 of the Terms of Service.

[PikeStance]

If someone is interested, I have some data that I could compose into a post. But it is only about general posting public that excludes accounts with zero posts and doesn't take any specific area of activity, such as the Curia, into account. It is going to be a long post and I'd hate to see it deleted right away as off-topic, so I await some kind of okay.

It would be a waste of time by now. It is beating a dead horse to death. I posted a ton of data for months and still people refused to accept the decline of the site. It wasn't until AL posted some data that people sort of accepted it. The problem now isn't believing it, it is the notion that there isn't anything to do about it.

Surely if they reach out to him and produce a letter with him giving consent then the issue would be resolved.

This is true and I had agreed with him, the point I had made is that there are community forums and websites such as icy veins which do still do well because they adapt and modernize, TWC has not adapted enough to keep people coming when the Franchise it complements has arguably grown in the same time period (Warhammer).

The real issue is the lack of concern or input from the owner of the site. I have made a few threads on how to improve the site, but without the owner to actually approve it, it is just academic.

In these threads, it isn't just that the website/ forum is archaic. The approach is also outdated. For example, I suggested we might want to switch from content creators to being a content hub. A place where fans of the genre can come here and be able to find the content they want. Obviously, nothing came of this discussion. There is also a common misconception regarding modders. Modders felt unsupported and unappreciated. I am not just referring to ordinary modders, but major modders who lead development teams. This was the inspiration of my "Modding Staff." A group that would have been dedicated to working with each modder facilitating discussion and cooperation. What happened is that the entire thing got "reduced" to the archaic thinking this site has been stuck in. Instead of the prioritizing developing a relationship with modders, they wanted to organized the entire site after years of neglect with a project that would had taken years to complete. Predictably, a bunch of modders just gave up and left. There was also another issue, but that's just a symptom, not the disease. Lastly, (but I actually came up with it first) was the creation of a strategic planning committee. Again, without the owner, it is a waste of time. The admin are essentially "water carriers." I don't mean that as an insult, but rather a description of the status and power that they actually have when it comes to innovative thinking. However, the handling of the Modding staff is an indication, they may not be up to the task.

[Flinn]

IMHO because consequences are explicitly stated for curial officers, it is already implicit that there are no consequences for other staff members. I'd support making it explicit. I don't think there's any harm in allowing non-binding VoNC against staff. It's pretty theoretical though. For one to pass would require some serious rift opening up between Hex and Curia which would probably make the Constitution a dead letter anyway. Allowing a VoNC discussion to start could provide an early warning.

Yes that's pretty much it, I agree.

[Flinn]

Archived as per the usual protocol