I've repeatedly heard comments about how nobody wants to share their work between communities because some have shown themselves to be untrustworthy or disrespectful. I used to think those were the usual exaggerations (like the "SFC hates BC" chestnut that's often brought out when nothing better will suffice). Of course, that opinion changed once my own work suffered the same fate.
It's not very trust-inspiring to have one's site usurped, their files reposted somewhere else, and their explicit wishes outright ignored by individuals who had no involvement whatsoever in their creation or conversion. It's even less trust-inspiring when they are the leader of a major community hub that has it's own explicit rules meant to prevent such things. If the people in charge can't be trusted, it doesn't set a good example for anyone else in the community. It's a small group of individuals who openly represent the community that are giving it a bad name and are seemingly oblivious to how they are perceived by outsiders. "Doing it for the good of the community" or to "bring attention to a modder's work" is a smokescreen that is often conveniently used to help with one's own agenda or to help cover themselves from any open challenges.
I know for a fact that BCers are a reasonable group, even if they are more openly critical and "gimme, gimme" about some things. I also know that SFCers used to be (and somewhat still are) just like that. We used to have no organization or rules when it came to credits or the sharing of work, and even less respect regarding an author's wishes. That has since changed and SFC has matured - we have fewer people around and less rampant egotism and stupidity than we used to (I think). Part of the reason things in SFC are more smoothly handled is because we don't have a lot of outright rules or strict guidelines that can conflict or confuse people. Lots of rules also tends to breed lots of rebellious attitudes since people will want to find ways around them - humans are naturally rebellious and don't like authority. SFC is also site-oriented, with most modders having their own personal sites for distributing their work and expressing themselves more freely.
BC, on the other hand, is inherently and unavoidably going to be a lot less stringent. They have a larger group of people and a wider range and a lot more diversity. They are also focused mainly around just two sites (BCU and BCFiles), so everything is going to be more abundant and centralized. With so much going on and so many people centered around a small area, there is a lot less personal interaction and understanding going on. Naturally, they aren't going to hold the same standards regarding credits and author permissions. This isn't helped by the fact that some individuals promote the unwritten rule of "if the author can't be contacted, then just post it anyway with his name listed", which is definitely going to be corrupted and misused as an open invitation to do whatever one wants.
That is the underlying reason why there are so many perceived inter-community conflicts. Each side has their own way of doing things and takes different approaches and viewpoints regarding how credits and management are concerned. Until that issue can be smoothed over, there are doubtlessly going to be a lot more arguments and model restrictions.
...
We can all toss around new ideas for credit control, ship management, distribution methods and so on. The simple fact of the matter is, the only sure way to avoid any problems is to keep the ships to yourself. Exclusive model access? File format encryption? Password protection? Long drawn out decompiling methods? It all suffers from a key flaw - if it's online and open for download, then it can and will be gotten around. Paramount may own anything converted to .mod, it may not - quite frankly, that point is moot. The odds of them coming down on the community and taking away our little ships and cracking us over the head with them for being impudent are slim to nil. It's bad publicity and the moment they alienate the modding community, they ruin any chance of Trek games living on past their normal lifespan. As long as we don't make money off the things, then we should be in the clear.
The same goes for anyone who takes that "mod files aren't the author's anymore" bit as a free ticket to do whatever they want. The moment someone starts doing that, is the moment modders will stop releasing anything and cutting everyone out of the loop wholesale. Anyone who doesn't respect the author's creations will get found out sooner or later and will be dealt with accordingly. That's the one constant in the modding world.
I've made suggestions to others to start experimenting with their own "mod use policy". Not necessarily because it's fool proof (far from it), but because it does tend to work. I've found that people pay more attention to well-written rules and jovial threats of poodle...er...wolf feeding frenzies than simply putting one's name in a text file. Give someone a loud and over-the-top statement, and they'll be more inclined to at least consider the rules and at most, respect them. I also tend to restrict where my ships are posted for the very reasons that have been plaguing others so much that they end up leaving. You really only have three options - either don't release anything, release ships as free-reign, or be restrictive about where your work is posted and what is done to them and to limit who is involved. Anything else is detrimental to the community as a whole and in the end, is just so much wasted time and effort.
Topic: As my old 1SG used to say... (Read 13974 times)