From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Infinite
Possibilities
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 2:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] "Open" Debate
<< > << What would
> you call someone who has put out 50 adventures based on the work that the
> community has done, possibly your own work in some cases, but yet has not
> contributed a single thing to the community, to you? >>
>
> A savvy designer who is leveraging the existing content base to provide a
> lot of value to the gaming community (in the persons of his customers) for
> very little extraneous effort. Also, very, very smart.
Martin, I really hope you don't mean that. Are you telling me that if I did
the
work on a net Montrous Manual, you would have absolutely no qualms about
taking
it printing out as-is, make lots of money, and then not contribute any open
content back to the community? That would be cool to you? >>
Now wait a minute! You just equated two VERY different examples. In the
first example, the creator is making a lot of new, clever investment to use
what has come before to make something no one ever imagined. In the second
example, the packager has packaged. I view the first example as an innovator
(assuming it is quality work), and that was the one you asked about.
The second one is a thornier issue, especially in the days of the net. In
the old days, I could show some clear cases where the packager performed a
service to everyone -- yourself included, since it would give you more name
recognition -- if he radically increased the exposure of your work. Today,
with the net, your hypothetical reach is farther with net distribution, even
though a well-crafted physical release still reaches farther than a typical
net release. So the service is less clear cut. Yet there's still a large
chunk of folks who want a physical book, and a large chunk who may be
attracted by his cover design, and so on. Your visibility will be further
increased if he gets copies into game stores, etc.
The bottom line on this one is: no, I don't want people to do nothing but
"packaging". But there can be service even in packaging, and you are
explicitly allowing this by agreeing to produce OGC.
<< We are talking about the open gaming community here right? Not the D&D
network
community. >>
I am talking about the gaming community, period. I think focussing on the
"open" subset leads us into the sort of closed subculture mentality that
drives folks away from open source. If Open Gaming doesn't produce works of
value to the gaming community as a whole, then I have no interest in it
either way.
Martin
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
