Darren (a.k.a whipping boy 22Aug00) said:
> Actually, I think I see your issue. You equate something being closed as
> not being of use to further development. To you, (since you're
developing)
> the only use in newly released products is in what they provide you to
"work
> from" in your developemnt.
That is fairly accurate. If something is closed, then it can't be used as
OGC by
others.
Which is not the entire point of the community. A major facet you're
ignoring is that we're also here to produce things for the players/consumers
. . . the goal is not for me to give you x new OGC items per supplement. It
is to provide something of use to others. You limit your definitions in
such a manner that you cannot see a product that has no new OGC as being
useful.
"Hadn't thought i was being that dense, but everything helps, one way or the
other. :-)"
I view anyone as being dense when they constantly ignore the fact that
people are trying to point out the huge glaring point, they they do their
best to stare into the light. :)
"Which I have no problem with. Just remember the Community that allowed you
the
opportunity to do so."
The mere inclusion of the license, and references to other information on
the OGL/community should suffice as proof that anyone producing content
(open or closed) is well aware of the community and it's value. You seem to
be equating the lack of contributing new OGC as a lack of care in the
wrll-being of the community as a whole, which is simply not the case.
"lways important, but could be served better if the person doing the
advertising
is setting the precedence of contributing (more than as just a side benefit)
to
the Open Gaming Community.
If all of those that are producing, contribute back. It will set a
precedence
that will allow the whole movement to expand extremely fast.
If the precedence is to use without though of contributing back, then the
Open
Gaming Community will be reduced to a fad and a novelty, as no one will be
contributing."
Again with your generalizations. You assume that because some supplements
introduce nothing new that this will cause the whole community to wither on
the vine. As if a number of products along these lines will all of the
sudden curse the movement in some manner. Precident is not set by any one
of us, but rather by the whole. If the community generally releases new OGC
fairly regularly, there is no problem. It is then by example that the
"Village" (the established open gaming community) shows the "Child" (the
newcomer to the movement) that making items "open" will be smiled upon just
as much as any other assistance they give the community.
"What is better for the players of the OG community. An adventure they can
do
nothing with besides use once or twice, or an adventure they can only use
once
or twice with a little bit of new OGC that may inspire them to contribute
there
own material to the OG Community."
Depends on how good the two are. If the one with new OGC is a wild romp
through seemingly meaninglessly connected scenes, yet includes a d20 feat
named "Rabbit Fury" which is merely a ripoff of Monty Python? I'd argue that
the other adventure (which happens to be an in-depth murder-mystery with
over 1000 different well-detailed clues) is far superior in value.
A lot of you folks demanding OGC are also screaming black and white, when
most of what goes on is gray.
"If you want."
Not really.
-Mathew Gray
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
