Message Redacted?

[ZURI]

@dendwaler

I'm in complete agreement with you. The silence and delays on behalf of Cyan still really irritate me. Last night I was in Todelmer (sp), and cringed everytime i looked around at all the fancy animations. I'd like to have things of that nature in my ages, but can't do it yet.... Ultimately, it forces me to over-compensate with models, larger textures etc, to add /life/ to my ages.

Along the same lines, I'm very grateful to our devs for all their hard work - and am sure they're chomping at the bit for the source code too. However, like many things in life, I've found that no matter how much I want something..... it doesn't mean I'm going to get it.....

[I.Brattin]

I gave up on Cyan ever releasing the source code, quite some time ago. Shoot I have given up they will ever put fan ages on their servers. Thats alright though, I'm happy to have them shared through Drizzle or DI and I'll settle with that being it.

[Chacal]

When I started to put "member of mesage redacted" in my signature on the MOUL forums I didn't do that because I was feeling childlish, but because I honestly felt/feel that I am "redacted" there and cannot speak my mind. This is also one of the reasons I don't visit it anymore

I completely agree with this kind of action. You felt wronged by moderation on the MOUL forum, so you altered your signature - on the MOUL forum. I don't agree with the defacing of our forum, which is not related to Cyan's. It was funny at first (if somewhat childish, yes), but the joke is getting old.

[Rabbit]

I don't agree with the defacing of our forum, which is not related to Cyan's. It was funny at first (if somewhat childish, yes), but the joke is getting old.

Agreed. I don't suppose anyone is going to change Cyan's mod policy by doing this. Yes, the point has been made so perhaps its time to put the name back?

However, I have noticed since then, less postings have been moderated or deleted, so maybe our point has been made.

Just my $0.02

[Tweek]

I don't agree with the defacing of our forum, which is not related to Cyan's. It was funny at first (if somewhat childish, yes), but the joke is getting old.

Agreed. I don't suppose anyone is going to change Cyan's mod policy by doing this. Yes, the point has been made so perhaps its time to put the name back?

However, I have noticed since then, less postings have been moderated or deleted, so maybe our point has been made.

Just my $0.02

Don't kid yourself, very little has changed over there.

Very little posts are being modded because everyone got sick to death of it and left, so there are no posts to be stupidly modded.

[semplerfi]

Don't kid yourself, very little has changed over there.

Very little posts are being modded because everyone got sick to death of it and left, so there are no posts to be stupidly modded.

TY -

[Whilyam]

I'm getting to the point where I wouldn't mind if we took the sign down. However, I think the issue is one we as a Guild should still protest. I thought perhaps adding some text either at the top of the browser window or just underneath the logo that says something like "Report all HAX to the local authorities" or "Guild of Something we can talk about". In short: The sign is getting confusing, but the protest should continue.

Furthermore, I think JWPlatt's branding of the logo as "childish" or somehow "anti-mature" is an attempt to devalue and censor a view contrary to his own interests. Since JWPlatt has connections to getting MagiQuest Online published by Cyan, he has an interest in keeping Cyan happy, not in encouraging Cyan to make beneficial changes. Additionally, since JWPlatt has his own forum dedicated to the open source project, he has an interest in degrading this forum so people will use his. Furthermore, he talks about "those currently inhabiting the name of The Guild of Writers". The obvious analogy this brings to mind is that "we" the people in the Guild are parasites who are inhabiting a host. This is a continuation of the argument started by Dustin that this forum isn't the Guild of Writers. This is an attempt to try and control this forum and to stop protests against Cyan's mistreatment of this community. If this forum does not represent the "real" Guild of Writers, then someone else can make a "real" Guild of Writers that will just happen to fall in line with whatever Cyan says. JWPlatt's open source forum is one such place.

That JWPlatt can come in and say these things is fine. The open-ness of this forum in comparison to MOUL is one of the many benefits it has. But people viewing the forum need to understand that those posts are not made just for fun and that, because of the stances members of this Guild have taken against Cyan's treatment of the community, people are looking for reasons to silence and/or remove this Guild.

I am encouraged by Rand's reaction to the "haxing of Ae'gura" and I am hopeful that Cyan's stance on "hacking" is based more on Rand's detachment from daily operations than from a company hesitancy.

[Pavitra]

I've felt for some time that leaving the sign up implies that Cyan has more power over us then they do or should. They try to pretend this site doesn't exist, and yet the site is still here.

[Branan]

The sign is gone now, after a discussion about it in IRC. This was not done because we all suddenly came to our senses that it's immature, or anything like that. Hopefully the reason will become clear within a couple of days - and if it falls through, the sign may go back up, or it may be replaced with some other form of protest.

If the sign still shows up for you, hold down the SHIFT key and press the refresh button. That will force your browser to reload the image.

[Chacal]

Thanks, PoK. I appreciate it.

However, in the future this whole kind of things could be done better.

The idea of defacing our forum header, which could have a huge impact on the GoW public image, was not submitted to the guild members, nor was the decision to remove the sign. A few unknown people had "a discussion about it in IRC", and now you are simply communicating this decision. None of the people who have the necessary technical access to the forum (which doesn't necessarily mean the authority to approve of such changes) bothered to participate in the discussion here. I sent a PM about it to the forum administrator, to which I never received an answer or even an ackowledgment.

One gets the feeling this is a private forum owned by its operators, instead of the GoW's forum.

We gave ourselves a charter, a structure, a decision-making process. Why not use them?
Transparency is always better.