ScreamingDingo 16728 Share Posted July 4, 2020 cant blame muffins tbf Got the warning sorted w/ the ‘falsifiying’ monk items because many staff members don't know the actual history of the Wilven Monks. 501 essentially rebranded the term mid-late 2018 by having the order be called Wilven and taking the same approach as the player orientated group. It’s just people misunderstanding and believing that they’re trying to invalidate and retcon the past of certain character, which will assuredly not happen. Do remember that the original monks were basically removed in multiple iterations from player hands because people kept either abusing the ‘protection’ aura or erp’ing openly on cloud temple grounds in front of newer players. You shouldn’t have been banned but this issue is blown WAY out of proportion. It’s not some weird copy-right plagued thing, it’s people just not approaching the correct members of staff and rumors flying into a meaningless shitfest. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frill 2276 Author Share Posted July 4, 2020 1 hour ago, ScreamingDingo said: It’s not some weird copy-right plagued thing, it’s people just not approaching the correct members of staff and rumors flying into a meaningless shitfest. Yeah, I originally had little to no issue with it because Muffins joined relatively recently in the life-span of the server, so hasn’t experienced a CT that hadn’t co-opted the Wilven monks (and thus the player-ran group was something that she’d have to actively research to know even existed). The contention I do have is that “uh read the terms of service” was the immediate excuse. It just don’t fit. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 12826 Share Posted July 4, 2020 wilven monks were ******* gross anyway, as dingo already got into. not sure why anyone would even want to co-opt that. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeatonUnbeaten 1101 Share Posted July 4, 2020 (edited) The pros of a volunteer staff team... they arent inclined to give a **** +1 for the defense of intellectual freedoms! Edited July 4, 2020 by KeatonUnbeaten Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xDK 387 Share Posted July 4, 2020 Is it illegal. No. Is it ethically correct. No. What do you expect to happen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnomemancy 983 Share Posted July 4, 2020 Very sad to see this, I’ve had my monk for many years, when staff started to interfere into the Order they led to its collapse and left a few people stranded after Spike left. They’ve gone too far. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeypoacher 6991 Share Posted July 4, 2020 On 7/4/2020 at 4:35 AM, ScreamingDingo said: Do remember that the original monks were basically removed in multiple iterations from player hands because people kept either abusing the ‘protection’ aura or erp’ing openly on cloud temple grounds in front of newer players. You shouldn’t have been banned but this issue is blown WAY out of proportion. It’s not some weird copy-right plagued thing, it’s people just not approaching the correct members of staff and rumors flying into a meaningless shitfest. Regardless of whether the wilven monks were good (most lore, throughout lotc history, has been ****) we shouldn’t set the precedent that some rando staffmember can take your creative work (lore, characters, etc.) and claim that they own it “because the ToS says so.” LoTC should not be in the business of stealing people’s writing or artwork through a loose interpretation of autogenerated language. Even in the stingiest possible interpretation of LoTC’s terms of service Keldrith still has legal ownership of his lore/characters, but Tythus LTD. has a license to use it. We can either let Muffins and Keldrith use wilven monk lore, or let neither of them use it (and it becomes an editorial issue, not a copyright issue). Both of these options will let the CT keep their new player guides (under the auspices of a different sect of monks) and Keldrith maintain ownership of his work. But lotsofmuffins having a temper tantrum and banning people for wanting ownership of their work is not a solution 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan_Barnett36 1546 Share Posted July 4, 2020 Hope you aren’t expecting a response Frill 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milenkhov 4425 Share Posted July 5, 2020 zzz i sleep Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banned 343 Share Posted July 5, 2020 Hasn’t the uwu-squad locked this post yet? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statherian 3281 Share Posted July 5, 2020 hello 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shezept 304 Share Posted July 5, 2020 Nice VIP Frill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
osumanduas 1436 Share Posted July 13, 2020 (edited) The argument is concrete, a concept concocted by players should not be abused and bastardized based on ill-concocted policy or shortsighted staffing. Edited July 13, 2020 by methuselahs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xDK 387 Share Posted July 14, 2020 7 hours ago, methuselahs said: The argument is concrete, a concept concocted by players should not be abused and bastardized based on ill-concocted policy or shortsighted staffing. This is literally a description of democracy... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts