Darren,
<< > Write
> popular open-source freeware software, add said item to your portfolio,
> Company-X hires you for six figures.
You don't know how much I wish that were true. :-) >>
We should talk off list. No, this is NOT an employment offer or even a
feeler. You just bumped into a favorite topic of mine which is WAY off topic
for this list. If you're a developer and unhappy with your current
situation, I have some perspective from my own experience and from my
research for my UML classes that indicates you very likely can do a LOT
better.
<< Well, I think someone (whoever said unimaginative with leech) is reading
a bit
much into the leech definition. A leech is a person that takes what the
community gave for free and then uses it without adding any free stuff to
the
collective works of the community. >>
The term may have been co-opted to mean that term; but the actual definition
of leech is very simple:
"Any of various chiefly aquatic bloodsucking or carnivorous annelid worms of
the class Hirudinea, of which one species (Hirudo medicinalis) was formerly
used by physicians to bleed patients."
The co-opted usage carries strongly negative connotations, which will NOT
serve the community well. Just because it's commonly used slang doesn't make
it polite conversation. The term is rude, pure and simple. I suggest some
alternatives:
1. Creator. After all, the person is still creating works.
2. Derivative creator.
3. Closed-content creator.
And so on. You would be no happier if we co-opted a very negative term to
describe people who want to push their view of what should be open. While
you have not done so, others have used concepts such as coercion,
compulsion, scorn, force, etc. Thus, I don't think it would be at all
unreasonable to co-opt the term "Thug." But I won't do so -- certainly not
in your case -- because I understand that applying negative labels only
provokes negative reactions and division. And division contributes nothing
to the gaming community.
<< Also, I don't think anyone is saying that capitalism is wrong. I think
they are
saying that taking from the community without adding anything to it is
wrong. >>
But they are steadfastly refusing to consider that ANY contributions are
valid except for their own very narrow definitions.
Martin
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
