Starting to think about Community Rules. And write them out.

[tommyboy]

So, we still need to start putting together whatever rules we as a community have.
I hope that we've all calmed down enough to discuss and debate it reasonably.
If you haven't calmed down enough, then don't post yet. I'm thinking we should take a few weeks to debate and think about it anyway, so everyone should get a chance to have an input, unless you plan to be mad forever..
If you think it's Too Soon, then don't post. Clearly I want to start now, if you don't, then don't. But I'm going to. And I hope others will also have an interest in expressing their views.
I am not in charge. I am not a moderator, my opinion holds no special weight. Everyone is welcome to join in as far as I am concerned, provided that they are civil to others.

What I was thinking is that we already have some rules I think that we mostly know about, and mostly agree with.
It may help to break the rules down into categories pertaining to (in no special order);General, Mods, Meshes/skopes/Hexxing/Animation, Skins, FX, Sounds,and Scripting.

They might go something like this;

GENERAL

1. We are a Family Friendly community. No explicit sex or horrific violence. No swearing. No Nudity.
2. We respect our fellow community members, and try not to insult, flame, troll or make their life in the community unpleasant.
3. We respect and abide by the wishes of our creative contributors. If they say "please don't do X", we don't do X.
4. On this website, we are guests, and explicitly and implicitly agree to and abide by the rules of our hosts.
5. Public distribution or alteration of some stuff is forbidden, but if it's just for your own private use and will not be publicly distributed, some things are your own business.
6. We believe in giving credit where it is due. Do not claim other peoples' work as your own, do not strip out readmes or credit.txt files.


MODS
1. Please check for permission in the appropriate threads, or by email or PM, if you are using someone else's work in your Mod.
2. The Creator(s) of the Mod get final say as to how or where it is distributed, same as other content creators.


MESHES/SKOPES/HEXXES/ANIMATIONS
1. The creator(s) of a mesh get final say as to how or where it is distributed, and whether it can be 'skoped or hexxed. We have permission threads for all these, (links to be added).
2. The creators of 'skopes and hexxes have similar rights to their creations, provided that they have all the necessary permissions for any parts used in their work.
3.The creator(s) of any Keyframes, or Animations get final say as to how or where it is distributed.



SKINS
1.The creator(s) of a skin get final say as to how or where it is distributed.
2. No Kittbashing of skins, unless specific permission is granted by the person who made the original is obtained. Base skins are assumed to be for public use unless otherwise stated.


FX
1.The creator(s) of an FX get final say as to how or where it is distributed.
2. Do not edit, kittbash or otherwise alter an FX without the permission of the original creator.


SOUNDS
1.The creator(s) of a Voicepack, Song or other Sound get final say as to how or where it is distributed.



SCRIPTING
1.The creator(s) of a Script, or piece of Code get final say as to how or where it is distributed.


Now, I think those are fairly uncontentious, but if anyone wants to debate any of them, please post here.
Obviously these are not necessarily Final, nor are they the Only rules. These are just my immediate thinking on what we already know and have.
I very much would like others to add to, amend, contest or discuss these, and I hope over the coming weeks that we can together thrash out something together.

[BentonGrey]

Good idea Tommy, I think everything looks good so far. 

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

I can think of nothing really that needs to be added, except for one note.

Irrational skins, meshes, keyframes, scripts, and FX's can be safely modified or used as the based for other such things, as permission to do so comes with the games.

Not everyone reads readme and such, you know.

[BentonGrey]

Well, we do need to add a rule addressing the definition and disposition of content torrents, or agree that there are no boundaries other than individual artist's wishes.

[BentonGrey]

I don't believe that quite covers it.  We obviously have need of more specifics, since no one can agree on what defines a content torrent, if such a rule was ever agreed upon by anything resembling a majority of the community (creator or otherwise), nor if such an agreement is in any way binding.  I do not wish to discuss my mod, I believe that has been done quite enough, but I do wish to protect the rights of others in the community against one individual or small group interpreting nebulous "rules" to enforce an agenda, whatever it may be (either beneficial or harmful to my own projects).  We have an pressing need to hash out the details here.  If we don't all agree that a rule even exists, then there are some fairly fundamental problems that need to be addressed.

I suppose that I may as well suggest what I am in favor of, which is an idea that I know many others are in favor of as well.  That is that we define a content torrent as art assets of whatever variety being distributed without permission, and without any type of frame of work having been done on the part of the creator.  Thus, releasing a big bundle of meshes and skins of various artists is forbidden, but Tommy's Avengers special is within the rule. 

[BentonGrey]

I don't believe that quite covers it.  We obviously have need of more specifics, since no one can agree on what defines a content torrent, if such a rule was ever agreed upon by anything resembling a majority of the community (creator or otherwise), nor if such an agreement is in any way binding.  I do not wish to discuss my mod, I believe that has been done quite enough. [snip]

we don't need to agree on the definition of content torrent. it's not part of the rules. instead, it #5 clearly covers it. rule #5 says no to (re)distribution without explicit permission. period. it doesn't make exemptions or allowances depending on anyone specific's need or agenda.

torrents happen to be a form of distribution that is their nature. so are websites. so is the hub. if you host someone else's work on your site without their express permission you are in violation of #5. if you host and redistribute someone else's work on vuze or any kind of peer2peer network without their express permission to redistribute their work you are in violation of #5.

if you would like to argue what the nature of your "mod" is please discuss it in another thread. it can then be determined in that discussion whether or not it violates any rules that end up being 'agreed on' here.

I do wish to protect the rights of others in the community against one individual or small group interpreting nebulous "rules" to enforce an agenda, whatever it may be.

good then we agree on that much.

You've been hinting that Tommy needs to add in the "rule" concerning content torrents, and I was pointing out that no such rule exists in any quantifiable form.  Yes, #5 covers the need for permission, but that doesn't cover everything, as you have spent the last month arguing that permission is not necessarily the only factor in the acceptability of a mod.  Thus, with permission, everything is...well, permissible.

[Gremlin]

i haven't been hinting anything benton. he made a statement about including only the rules everyone agrees with. if there are any he can think of that he may not agree with they should be included also. i haven't added anything myself because i think so far everything is very clear.

and ... i'm quite happy with #5 just the way it is.

there is no rule against content torrents and never has been. the rule is against re-distribution in general without explicit permission (to redistribute) by the authors. this is regardless of the method chosen to redistribute. it means that i can torrent my own stuff if i want to and it means i have to have permission to redistribute (just like if i was trying to host someone's stuff on my website) someone else's work via torrent.

I'm with IPS here. We don't need a specific torrent qualifier if the only criteria for redistribution is the agreement of the original creator. Torrents, mods, whatever are golden if the creator gives their say-so.

GENERAL
1. We are a Family Friendly community. No explicit sex or horrific violence. No swearing. No Nudity.
2. We respect our fellow community members, and try not to insult, flame, troll or make their life in the community unpleasant.
3. We respect and abide by the wishes of our creative contributors. If they say "please don't do X", we don't do X.
4. On this website, we are guests, and explicitly and implicitly agree to and abide by the rules of our hosts.
5. Public distribution or alteration of some stuff is forbidden, but if it's just for your own private use and will not be publicly distributed, some things are your own business.
6. We believe in giving credit where it is due. Do not claim other peoples' work as your own, do not strip out readmes or credit.txt files.

1, 2 , 4 are not community rules. they are forum rules. there is a difference and any discussion had here is not binding to the forum moderator team or titans and not open to debate. although i do think #2 should be a forum rule when it currently is not. if it was, a lot of behaviour would be punishable around here. this is something for everyone to think about

Again, with IPS. FR is outside the "jurisdiction" of the community proper. 1 and 4 are included in the current FR rules anyway, if I recall correctly.

[Xenolith]

Yeah, "guidelines" is a better term. 

I would also agree that "distribution" should mean any type of outlet.

Sheesh!  Next thing you know we will need a "definitions" section for our guidelines.

Are we the Federal Government now?  j/k

[Gremlin]

3. When contacting a creator and requesting permission, clearly state what you are asking permission to do. It is your responsibility to clearly understand how you are using someone else's work and be able to communicate how you will use it when asking for permission so that the creator can fairly give their permission. Failure to do this (understandably) implies permission is not given and rescinded.

This was probably one of the biggest issues of contention, and I hate to open a can of worms again, but I think the last sentence is a little off. I agree it is "your" responsibility to communicate your intentions clearly. However, I don't think that being unclear immediately implies that permission is stripped once the creation is released. That wording seems to imply that being unclear automatically makes the product invalid, even if the creator would've been comfortable with the idea had it been explained clearly. Rather than that, I think it should be that any creator has the right to retroactively rescind permission for use of their work should they feel uncomfortable with the final product.

Other than that I think these guidelines are clear and succinct.

[tommyboy]

Well, some interesting stuff so far.

I split the rules/guidelines/whatever up into sections because different people make different things. And the rules are not the same for skins as they are for meshes, and Mods are different from keyframes. So I believe that we need a separate section for each. That to me is less confusing than trying to describe everything in one long convoluted sentence with a half dozen sub-clauses. My way, if someone wants to find the rules pertaining to skins, they look in the skins section, rather than try to work out which parts of some general blanket statement might apply to skins.
Frankly, less is not more in these matters. Less is less. General blanket statements and assuming "everyone knows that" have only gotten us some very bitter arguments to date. If that is what you want, by all means be brief, truncate, hint rather than state. We should know that road only too well.

As for the rules that may appear to be needless because they are rules at FR, let's remember that the community is not FR, (though it has largely been the community's primary 'home' for the last few years), nor is FR the community. Which is why I felt that we needed to cover some of the same rules as FR does, but as the community. Just because I post on MeshMatters, or 4ColorExplosion, or elsewhere, doesn't mean I'm not part of our community there. So I think that as a community we need to decide on rules like 1, 2 and 4, regardless of their presence or absence here at FR.
There are ways I can insult someone here on the FR board that break none of it's rules. Perhaps there should be community rules to encourage me to keep my dislike offline.
Maybe it is redundant to strive for politeness and respect when we've done so well with backbiting, infighting and staying just under the rules which stop out and out flaming.


On content;
For me, the Permissions Threads are the backbone of the rules about content, and what can be done with it, or not done with it.
If those threads are worded clearly, each creator may make it very clear what their policies are. And that has worked for nifSkope. It means that I'm not constantly bombarded by PM's or emails requesting permission to skope or hexx any given mesh, because I've made it clear. So I see no reason that everyone be constantly PMing/emailing everyone else to check permissions if all the permissions are already clearly given. If something arises not covered by the rules or permissions threads, checking makes sense. Otherwise it's a waste of time and effort to PM me to ask if you can skope my meshes or use them in a Mod if I've already said "yes, anyone can" in the Permission Threads.
If the permissions threads are linked to in the rules/guidelines, and are clearly stated, there is little scope for ambiguity or misinterpretation.

On rules as opposed to guidelines.
If you say to someone this is a rule, you clearly expect them to abide by it. If you say it's a guideline, then you are saying it's entirely optional, in their discretion, a matter of choice, negotiable. Of course, either way we have little way of enforcing anything, but I favour making it clear that this is what we expect of our community members, not what we suggest. These are our Rules. Not our Suggestions, or Hoped Fors or If You Feel Like Its, or Guidelines. But, if enough people want guidelines as opposed to rules, then I suppose I'll take that as a guideline..

Plus, let's try to refrain from telling each other what is, or is not, a proper subject for discussion here. If someone wants to discuss additional rules about Mods, here is exactly the right thread to do so, no other thread need be started for now.
Maybe we will need a different thread for mods, meshes, skins to debate and discuss the rules of each, but for now, we can do it here.

[DrMike2000]

I'd also disagree with a Community rule on NO swearing, nudity or explicit sex, if we're talking about the content of mods.

Al Kemyst's BB mod was a great piece of work, sharp and a bit edgy but not beyond the bounds of good taste. The superhero genre has always had a sexy fetishistic side to it, he just decided to make a conscious nod to that rather than pretend it was all about violence.

And is it really that horrific when King Zero uses the word "bloody"? That's swearing, and also somehow crucial to his character and speech patterns.
The Strangers also contained some comical nudity, in the form of a male streaker who appears in a couple of episodes, disrupting a football match and then later on in the human assault on their base. The Teen Titans Mod has a brief bit of comical nudity in a cutscene with StarFire getting out of the bath didn't it?

Strangers also contains a graphics scene of sexual reproduction between energy entities, but I'm just being facetious mentioning that.

I have no problem with rules about no excessive swearing on the boards, or keeping the contents of these discussions family friendly. But if someone wants to make a more adult mod and label it so, I'd hate to see this community ignore it - its not like there's anywhere else to go to publish FF mods these days.

[tommyboy]

I'd also disagree with a Community rule on NO swearing, nudity or explicit sex, if we're talking about the content of mods.

Al Kemyst's BB mod was a great piece of work, sharp and a bit edgy but not beyond the bounds of good taste. The superhero genre has always had a sexy fetishistic side to it, he just decided to make a conscious nod to that rather than pretend it was all about violence.

And is it really that horrific when King Zero uses the word "bloody"? That's swearing, and also somehow crucial to his character and speech patterns.
The Strangers also contained some comical nudity, in the form of a male streaker who appears in a couple of episodes, disrupting a football match and then later on in the human assault on their base. The Teen Titans Mod has a brief bit of comical nudity in a cutscene with StarFire getting out of the bath didn't it?

Strangers also contains a graphics scene of sexual reproduction between energy entities, but I'm just being facetious mentioning that.

I have no problem with rules about no excessive swearing on the boards, or keeping the contents of these discussions family friendly. But if someone wants to make a more adult mod and label it so, I'd hate to see this community ignore it - its not like there's anywhere else to go to publish FF mods these days.

Agreed.
A labeling system for Mod content works for me.
I vote for it.

[Gremlin]

the reason i worded it that way, was because the permission is initially given for what the creator understands as the purpose of the permission. if (accidentally or intentionally) the explanation is inaccurate for permission being requested, i think it should be automatically rescinded and then the requester should be obligated to proactively remedy the situation by re-requesting permission properly. i'm going to justify my position on this because otherwise, you get into a situation where the permission remains as implied because the creator may not have been keeping current with the project. unless the original creator is actively following the community and intervenes, their work will be used then. for example, they may not be involved in the community any longer and may not have wanted their permission implied or they may just be only a casual visitor and have given their permission for something they thought they understood and while they are away, it turns out the project was not what they may have permitted. but because they are not active, their work gets used in their absence until they contest it - if they ever become aware of it.

permission should never be implied. we have always assumed permission is not given unless specifically stated it is given (maybe that should be another rule to be discussed?). my thought process is about trying to teach the person the responsibility intrinsic to using others' work and being clear or upfront (not making any statements - simply covering all possibilities) in your intentions. obviously, this can make or break a permission being granted.

i thought about the idea of retroactively rescinding permissions... i don't know where i stand on it. in principle it's not cool but practically speaking the threat of it guards against misuse or being mislead etc. so i can see it as useful. what are other people's thoughts on it?

For the purposes of my post I am going to use the term creator to mean anyone who first creates the content, and designer to mean anyone who uses a creator's content in another form, i.e. a mod, mesh, etc. A player is one not involved with the creation but cn download the files in question.

The biggest problem I see with that is there is no way to judge whether or not the creator was confused when the designer outlined their project. Say a designer asks Creator A and Creator B if they can use their meshes in a mod and they say yes, then it is revealed that the mod in question has a lot of sexually explicit dialogue. A doesn't like that and feels the designer was unclear in their intent, while B thinks they were clear enough and has no problem with it. Creator A can call foul, but with the qualifier that all permission is then rescinded, permission for B's work is assumed to be gone too. Let's say in the intervening time, B has left the community and the designer cannot get ahold of them. That complicates the issue even further, and the designer may be unable to release their mod.

I think there's something of an impasse here. I say it is bad if a designer had permission from a creator and then cannot regain it. You say it is bad if a creator would rescind their permission but cannot. I believe the former is worse, because then it ultimately puts the entire project at the whim of a creator. Say a creator gives a designer permission to use their creation, but between that time and the project's release they get into an argument. Once the project is released, the creator can cry fowl and force the designer to jump through the tedious hoops of re-acquiring permission from every creator involved. Should the latter occur, and a creator would find something objectable but wouldn't be keeping up, then frankly, they won't have the opportunity to be offended, so why should it matter as much? I know that sounds terrible, but there is no way a compromise can be attained while both of these possibilities are an option. Retroactively rescinding permission can be unpleasant, but it's a way around the mess I've described above. Rather than attempt to re-seek and re-acquire all that permission again, they only need to remove and/or replace the content of a single creator.

I'd also disagree with a Community rule on NO swearing, nudity or explicit sex, if we're talking about the content of mods.

Al Kemyst's BB mod was a great piece of work, sharp and a bit edgy but not beyond the bounds of good taste. The superhero genre has always had a sexy fetishistic side to it, he just decided to make a conscious nod to that rather than pretend it was all about violence.

And is it really that horrific when King Zero uses the word "bloody"? That's swearing, and also somehow crucial to his character and speech patterns.
The Strangers also contained some comical nudity, in the form of a male streaker who appears in a couple of episodes, disrupting a football match and then later on in the human assault on their base. The Teen Titans Mod has a brief bit of comical nudity in a cutscene with StarFire getting out of the bath didn't it?

Strangers also contains a graphics scene of sexual reproduction between energy entities, but I'm just being facetious mentioning that.

I have no problem with rules about no excessive swearing on the boards, or keeping the contents of these discussions family friendly. But if someone wants to make a more adult mod and label it so, I'd hate to see this community ignore it - its not like there's anywhere else to go to publish FF mods these days.

Agreed.
A labeling system for Mod content works for me.
I vote for it.

Agreed. I vote for the ESRB system for simplicity.

[Podmark]

Rules is incorrect, guidelines not strict enough. I'd like to suggest the title Expectations.
If you want to be part of our community, you are expected to follow these guidelines.

I'm with Tommy on the organization of the list. Divided it up makes it easier to read. Easier to read is always a good idea. Remember we have people in this community who don't have English as a first language and younger members. Being clear here is infinitely important.


I'd also like to point that as far as I can tell we haven't listed any rule that would have forbid Benton from releasing his mod. #5 from Tommy's original list wouldn't have effected his work as he had permission, although he may have had to recheck with people to be clear about what he was doing.


Also I think we need clarification on permissions.
Say I'm making a mod, am I expected to directly check with everyone whose content I'm using to make the mod? Do I have to pm Ink, C6, Renegade, AA, etc etc etc before I even get started? Personally I think that's ridiculous. Permission threads should be the primary check. If what you want to do clears that permission you're good, if it doesn't you contact. If you can't contact and/or they're not on the permission list you check readme's. If the readme doesn't clear you in a clear manner then it's a no good.
If the permission thread isn't the primary check they basically serve no purpose.

Entries in a permission list should be as clear as possible. Keep in mind that permission lists can use "please contact for permissions" for a creators rule, and they can be easily updated. Once again I'd like to say that I'm willing to maintain any and all permission lists as I have with the nifskope list. Also a creator can always veto their work being used.


Also how would the newly codified rules on distribution affect email and short term linking usually used in the requests section?

[Vertex]

I totally agree that you can't go beyond "guidelines" or "expectations" on this. Honestly we can all agree to whatever we like but if someone violates a guideline there's really nothing anybody can do about it. This is a "gentleman's agreement" of sorts. We all agree on our honor to follow what we agree to, and anybody joining our little club agrees simply by joining. We all have to understand that if someone does break these guideline the only real action the community can take is to kick the person out of our community.... but that certainly can't stop someone from still releasing things so it's all a matter of honor.

[Podmark]

Regarding the veto clause:

Again I think the permission lists should be the primary check. If a creator fails to make their wishes clear in the permission list then that's their fault. However they would be protected by the veto clause. If it comes to their intention that something is being made with their work that they disagree with for whatever reason they can simply contact to have it revoked.

However, if something has been released for a significant period of time (a few months? a year?) the veto clause should be revoked.



The reason I'm pushing the permissions list as the primary check is that it's easier for everyone involved. This way C6 does need to get a pm for every mod that uses his work when he's already stated his intention in that matter. Tommy doesn't get dozens of pms regarding skoping his work. On the other side, if I'm making a mod or a skope I don't need to be sitting around waiting for responses for stuff that is clearly laid out in the permission list.

All we need to do is make sure the permission list clearly states the creator desires. If they don't want their skins etc used in a R-rated mod then they state that in the list, etc. If we're clear on the list there shouldn't be a problem.

[BentonGrey]

I'm sorry, I know I said that I didn't want to talk about my mod, and I still don't....but I'm just well and truly confused. 

I'd also like to point that as far as I can tell we haven't listed any rule that would have forbid Benton from releasing his mod. #5 from Tommy's original list wouldn't have effected his work as he had permission, although he may have had to recheck with people to be clear about what he was doing.

That's right Podmark.  Interestingly enough, I did check with everyone who didn't seem to understand, and retained (I use the word retain intentionally) their permission.  I only had one person ask me not to use his stuff, and I agreed.  As I stated many times, I had permission for everything I was releasing, and that state of affairs continued, even after the two or three skinners who didn't realize what I was doing had figured it out.  However, for some strange reason, that didn't seem to matter.  And I quote:

how does removing my content address the issues that i've raised? he is still providing content he shouldn't be. it still keeps other artists work from being discovered. it's still something our community agreed not to do. etc etc etc.

So....if that was all that mattered to him, why did he waste a month of the community's time?  Demand that I take out the content that I had permission to release, or take the mod down altogether?

I do not agree that permission should be automatically revoked if there is a misunderstanding.  If the artists doesn't want his or her work used in a specific way, they have every right to ask that it be removed, and the whole weight of the community is behind any such request.  We should all endeavor to make our intentions clear, but Gremlin makes a good point, just because a misunderstanding occurs, that doesn't mean that it will have the same effects in all quarters.

The adult content thing....well, I'm very happy with the way the boards work, but I agree that it shouldn't really effect a mod (other than the decision of an artist whether they want their work used in whatever "adult" way).  A ratings system would be fine by me, but, as I don't have kids, I'm not terribly worried about it.  In my experience, most mods that have that kind of thing are fairly upfront about it.  The one Dr. Mike mentioned definitely was frank about it.

[Vertex]

since I play these mods with my 5 year old son.. yes a ratings system would be ESSENTIAL to me if we're gonna include adult content.

Or perhaps more to point a warning or advisory..... telling me THIS mod..  is a no no.

[Podmark]

Yeah I'm in agreement that profanity and nudity has nothing to do with what we're doing here.

That said I think a content rating should be established, but really I'd only use for 'mature' content levels. If you use profanity, nudity, excessive violence, sex, and anything I'm missing then you flag it as mature.

[Vertex]

yeah I really don't wanna see Podmark nude.. I really don't.

[Podmark]

yeah I really don't wanna see Podmark nude.. I really don't.

Dude you're missing out then 

[deano_ue]

#125:  the ultimate evil is king you will all bow and respect him and provide him with any mesh he desires and eliza dushku on a harley

[tommyboy]

I'm sorry, I know I said that I didn't want to talk about my mod, and I still don't....but I'm just well and truly confused. 

I'd also like to point that as far as I can tell we haven't listed any rule that would have forbid Benton from releasing his mod. #5 from Tommy's original list wouldn't have effected his work as he had permission, although he may have had to recheck with people to be clear about what he was doing.

That's right Podmark.  Interestingly enough, I did check with everyone who didn't seem to understand, and retained (I use the word retain intentionally) their permission.  I only had one person ask me not to use his stuff, and I agreed.  As I stated many times, I had permission for everything I was releasing, and that state of affairs continued, even after the two or three skinners who didn't realize what I was doing had figured it out.  However, for some strange reason, that didn't seem to matter.  And I quote:

how does removing my content address the issues that i've raised? he is still providing content he shouldn't be. it still keeps other artists work from being discovered. it's still something our community agreed not to do. etc etc etc.

So....if that was all that mattered to him, why did he waste a month of the community's time? 

don't worry benton, we know you want to keep bringing up your mod. we're just covering forum rules here for now. we haven't even gotten close to grey zone stuff that will address your "mod" and any effect it may have on the community.


Anyhow, staying on topic...

Again, Benton is on topic.
The whole point is to clarify matters like his Mod, and anything else we as a community might argue over.
The reason we haven't listed any rule that would have forbidden Benton's Mod is that there never was one. Anyone in any doubt on that check the Poll out which I made about his Mod:
http://freedomreborn.net/forums/index.php?topic=49300.0
Please note that, to date, not one person has voted that the Mod broke any rule.

no one wants to read a huge list of rules or guidelines. and it shouldn't be necessary. most of those rules say the same thing about different disciplines in the community. it can be shortened and will be more effective AND the primary resource can still be permissions threads. that's no problem, but, the longer the list of these rules, the more likely it will be ignored or accidentally misunderstood. keep it short and simple for everyone including non english speakers. that's just how people are.

No one wants to read a list of rules of any length. Unfortunately we now have to.
Since we have yet to hear from many people who make FX or Script, I leave them each a section where they can specify their own rules and preferences, and I do not presume to speak for, or dictate to, them.
As Benton rightly reminds us, the impetus for doing this is your attempt to "interpret" the non-specific rules we've had up until now. We had a vague general agreement about one thing which you interpreted as pertaining to something different, because we lacked specific rules spelling it out. We need specific rules for each section to prevent your "mistake" recurring. I would have thought it pretty obvious, but am happy to explain my point of view.
But, if no separate rules are mooted for all the sections, I suppose we can have a blanket rule covering more than one type of content, though I honestly don't feel what I laid out, (one or two lines per subject) to be that long.

also, creating a rule for things like profanity and nudity? way outside our rights to dictate as a community. i'm not on board. what kind of family friendly environment are we talking about here? the average age of the community members here is 30 or something like that. 6 years ago that was reasonable but not anymore. we probably have less than a handful of under 20s but they *are* over 16.

We probably need a ratings system for Mods, and maybe for some individual skins and meshes. There are kids out there, and there are people who play the game with their kids, or give the game to their kids. We have a duty to label clearly.
That's the sort of rule I'm OK with on this subject, one that states we must label clearly.

also, trying to make rules against any sort of discord or disagreement amounts to censorship. as tommy points out people can be hurt by more than just outright insults and flaming but that would open a door for popularity contests resulting in bans and more people leaving. if the drama that's gone on this month doesn't lead to an empty forum that sort of strongarm leveraging will remove anyone left.

Actually, I have nothing against discord or disagreement, they can be healthy. I simply think that if a person is hurtful to or destructive of a community then perhaps its better if they do leave. One person can make a place unpleasant for many others. If they do so, the others should have some recourse to asking them to stop, or go. I don't want witch-hunts, or a mob mentality, but I do not see why a vocal minority should be able to make life unpleasant for others without the community being able to deal with that.

anyhow, a rating system would be great for mods if modders would like to take part. i don't think a rating system should be part of our community "rules" (or expectations) discussion but it is something modders may want to consider.

I think it should be a rule that stuff is labeled clearly if its of an adult nature.

[Spring Heeled Jack]

Unless there's some system of consequences deterring an individual from doing something unsuitable, everything we come up with here is going to be entirely voluntary. And what's more, it'll just be voluntary among those who've actually read the agreement to begin with.

I'm not a contrarian by nature, but I have to say that I don't see any of this going anywhere. And really, I don't see why it should be necessary now after all the years we've been here. Bear in mind, I missed the big fuss that was made a few months ago (or whenever it was), so I'm not as personally invested as some of you may be. So believe me when I say I really just don't see this amounting to much more than another pretext to heated arguments.

If the community as a whole wants to formalize a set of guidelines for creating, distributing and redistributing content, perhaps a panel can be appointed. They could confer with one another privately and hammer out a broadly defined set of guidelines.

Again, I'm leaning toward this all being unnecessary, but if it's insisted upon, it should be done fairly and dispassionately by a group of community members we all respect and trust. This could never work any other way, and certainly not the way it's being done now.

[BentonGrey]

Ha, I believe you've proved that this is quite necessary IPS.  However, from the beginning I have been suggesting that the matter be handled by some authority, be it established (mods and titans) or elected.  SHJ, because of the lack of written rules we had a very nasty debate in which one person tried to dictate right and wrong to the community.  I'm afraid that this is very much necessary.

IPS, I'd be careful about throwing around accusations of hidden agendas and pretexts.  You still haven't given a halfway decent reason as to why you continued to attack a project after it had the exact kind of permission that you keep pointing to here. 

I don't agree with what Tommy said about someone who may be damaging the community.  As much as I may dislike an individual, I think we can ill afford to lose anyone at this point in our community's life.  Instead, I think we need to address the issues that this person used to create strife, and get life back to normal around here.

Forgive us for bringing the discussion back to my project, but your statements here simply haven't made sense.  I would like to understand why you are saying something different now than you said last week, but what I'm really interested in is making sure something like that doesn't happen again.

If this wasn't so maddening, it would be funny.

[BentonGrey]

I did not talk about attacking a person, I specifically said project.  As for your claim...it is enough that I did not say that, whatever the truth may be.  Your explanations simply don't make sense, but you are right, that really isn't the matter at hand here.  I just couldn't help asking for clarification of something so baffling.  This is too important to waste time arguing semantics with you.  I would support an elected group solving this problem. 

I would nominate Podmark for the skinner slot, Vertex for that of mesher, and Premon for mod maker (but I don't think he'd care to do it).

[Spring Heeled Jack]

It is important. So IPS, Benton, no offense, but maybe you should give this thread some space and see what develops? I'm not saying either of you are wrong or right, nor that you're unwelcome, but your disagreements are pulling us far, far away from the task at hand.

Whatever the original cause of all this discord, it's best to put it in the past and think instead of what can be done to keep something similar from happening again.

[BentonGrey]

You are right, SHJ.  I had intended to steer clear of this discussion, because I knew that my presence would do more harm than good.  I'm afraid that reading something that so confounded me overcame my good judgment.  If IPS will also take a step back, I will try to let events continue unimpeded.

[The Hitman]

i also suggest that nominations should be restricted to people who are active in the community both by leading and participating in freedomforce specifically related discussions and by showing progress of production or releasing produced content for the freedomforce community within the last 3 months. these will be the people with a vested interest in the community.

I kind of resent this. Not saying that I should have a part in the "official" discussions, because what I think rarely matters around here, but saying that I do not have a "vested interest" in this community just because I havn't had the time to release anything lately is ridiculous.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Since we have yet to hear from many people who make FX or Script

I knew I was transparent.  Didn't think I was invisible.

But seriously, the scripters of this community pretty much steal from each other constantly.  Nobody minds much, nor does anyone try to hide the fact.  Plus we all go to each other for help, correct each other's coding a lot of the time, so any finished work often ends up containing bit of quite a few people's work.  C4 may be an exception there, but then again he may not.  I simply cannot say.

Me personally I've only ever stolen from FFX or Irrational for coding, both of which sources are allowed anyway.