[CSDb] - User Forums - Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > C64 Pixeling > Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal

2023-12-22 18:03

Sander

Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 496

Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal

Dear fellow sceners,

This is an attempt to get more understanding among, and for, C64 demoscene pixel artists. It’s not written to limit anyone, but a prayer for more transparency.

Read the document here: ->Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal<-

We tried to give define and value different processes. Which is a result of discussion, where we saw mutual grounds and felt the need to write these down.
We will update the document periodically, when enough input has been gathered and sorted out.

We’d really love to hear your thoughts on the subjects in the document.
Please post them in this thread.

(Personally I will not always fully comply to these guidelines myself, but I will continue to be transparant about it. However, I do agree with the values communicated in this document.)

... 137 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....

2023-12-25 07:46

Hein

Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954

Yay, if you've read the opinions better, you'd know I oppose to making it mandatory. Hence the words 'is appreciated', which implies a voluntary sharing of sources.

2023-12-25 10:40

Scrap

Registered: Jan 2021
Posts: 20

Quote:

Oswald: please provide workstages for this piece of art… ;-)

2023-12-25 14:51

Deev

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206

Quote:

It's interesting to observe that, whilst graphcians may not all completely agree, they can usually appreciate why these things are an issue for some.

It's equally interesting to observe how, in the case of many coders, they seem completely unable to grasp the most basic points of the discussion.

2023-12-25 16:36

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Here's why this topic is sensitive, and ultimately why this document is a bad idea

The topic is really not about whether its ethical to provide work stages, or whether it's ethical to post references.

The crux of the matter is that theres (at the very least a perceived) push to change the baseline of what it means to create art, or rather, what is the least acceptable level.

To most its obvious that the base level is, and should remain, you made a picture, you release it, full stop.

The discussion as i see it isn't, like i said, is it good ethics to give credits ti influnces or references or a description of your process, which is sumple, yea its clearly ethical to do that.

The discussion, and the document, is clearly a push to make releases who do not provide any additional data to be considered sus, or to justify judging this on the basis of what basically amounts to 'suspicion on the basis of meta rules', as opposed to judging on actual evidence.

Basically it's eerily similar to what woke social justice people, or what that annoying backstabbing teachers pet did back in school, which is find ways to manipulate people through regulatory rules for self interest reasons.

So the real question is, is it unethical to _not_ provide workstages or _not_ provide credits or actually anything at all other than the picture itself, with no other information at all.

No... It is not. I maintain that it would however be unethical to imply that this isn't so.

2023-12-25 16:59

Krill

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980

Quoting Nim

So the real question is, is it unethical to _not_ provide workstages or _not_ provide credits or actually anything at all other than the picture itself, with no other information at all.

No... It is not. I maintain that it would however be unethical to imply that this isn't so.

As for credits, why, in a community where recognition and attribution are the primary currency, it's quite self-evidently unethical to deprive the original authors of works you've based your work on (if that's what you meant by "provide credits") of - a mere mention.

2023-12-25 17:03

Deev

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206

Quote:

So the real question is, is it unethical to _not_ provide workstages or _not_ provide credits or actually anything at all other than the picture itself, with no other information at all.

No... It is not.

If you've recreated someone elses artwork, it's just courtesy to give a credit to the original author. No-one is asking for in depth documentation of the process. Just a few words mentioning it.

Similarly if someone has based a competition entry on something generated by AI, or if they've wired across an image and fixed it a little, just mention that alongside the image. Again, a few words is all that's needed. In 2023 these processes are going to happen, but just be open about it.

I would ask _why_ some people are seemingly reluctant to provide this information if they don't feel keeping quiet is giving them some kind of unethical advantage?

2023-12-25 17:13

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quote: Quoting Nim
So the real question is, is it unethical to _not_ provide workstages or _not_ provide credits or actually anything at all other than the picture itself, with no other information at all.

No... It is not. I maintain that it would however be unethical to imply that this isn't so.
As for credits, why, in a community where recognition and attribution are the primary currency, it's quite self-evidently unethical to deprive the original authors of works you've based your work on (if that's what you meant by "provide credits") of - a mere mention.

Its the same mistake most people make when it comes to understanding positive and negative rights. Bare baseline should not be considered wrong simply for being baseline.

Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

2023-12-25 17:26

Deev

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206

Quote:

Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

This is not really practical when someone is deciding how to vote in a graphics competition, for example.

If someone has recreated another person's artwork and refused to include a credit to the original artist, why might that be?

2023-12-25 17:29

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quoting Deev

I would ask _why_ some people are seemingly reluctant to provide this information if they don't feel keeping quiet is giving them some kind of unethical advantage?

Because you should have a baseline of giving the benefit of the doubt, doing the opposite is destructive and antisocial, borderline narcissistic.

If you're being rude and demanding that i prove myself i'll tell you to fuck off gestapo, if you're curious and convince me of your sincerity i will gladly show and tell.

But just like when it comes to magic tricks, not always, sometimes an air of mystery is good for the soul.

Assuming ill intent as a baseline is what leads to socialism. Then everyone can pretend they're ruining the world for the greater good!

(Sorry, couldn't help myself 😎)

2023-12-25 17:35

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quote: Quote:
Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

This is not really practical when someone is deciding how to vote in a graphics competition, for example.

If someone has recreated another person's artwork and refused to include a credit to the original artist, why might that be?

First, were not talking about a competition, where the competition rules apply. You should judge accordingly.

Seccond, it may be assumed it's obvious?

Third, and most importantly, just how many "You dont know, do you?" can you apply to each and every one of your sneaky suspicions? Which is why i again, refer you to the text you quoted.