| |
Perff
Administrator
Posts: 1677 |
Rules and behaviour on CSDb.
Over the years that CSDb have existed, there have been some unsertanty what kind of behaviour is allowed at CSDb.
Because of this we have now written down some rules. As it says at the bottom, the rules can be updates/changed at any point, and if this happens it will be posted in this thread.
Any comments to the rules are welcome.
The rules can be found here: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/help.php?section=rules
Read it! :) |
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
i see a lot of things unanswered here (and a bunch of completely unnecessary crap mentioned instead). eg the "what belongs into csdb and what doesnt" question. oh well. i just hope the v2 will solve the moderation and noobs issues - its getting tiresome to have to lock entries only to be sure some lameass doesnt go berzerk on them. |
| |
V-12
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 206 |
I agree with those rules, especially about on-topic stuff. Because alot of people treats "user comment" field for his own discussions with others. |
| |
Wanderer
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 478 |
Having seen flame wars break out in CSDB crack entry comment fields, I also agree with the rules and will abide by them.
There is protection for deleted releases as well as for all members of the CSDB community. |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
The rules are ok with me.
What I am more interested in,is the designation of releases.
Most are clear enough. 8)
But what troubles me a bit is e.g. the Music-rips.
Some label them "Music" ,which I prefer for party-entries.
Others call them "One-file-demos", which is totaly wrong,IMHO.
I use "C64 misc",as I do for ranks/notes and other small releases..
Maybe we should set a standard here? |
| |
Zyron
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2381 |
I think "Music" is fine if it's just a tune with a simple textscreen...or a compotune, as is "Graphics" if it's just a ripped picture...or a compopicture.
But, a ripp can also turn into a "One-file demo" if it contains f.ex. a scroller, some moving sprites etc...it wouldn't be right to just call it "Music" any longer.
I do agree though that we should set a standard to follow for some consistancy in the database. |
| |
Zyron
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2381 |
For ranks you should use "C64 Charts" btw :) |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Hehe,I did get the "Charts" right,it has been a while since I´ve added one of those. ;)
Still,I don´t think a Music-ripp ought to be labelled "One file demo".
It is about the music and mostly the code is of no consequence,often re-used.
"One file demos" are something different entirely.
Maybe an additional label "Music Ripp" could be nice? |
| |
Zyron
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2381 |
Many music-ripps had the same ingredients as the onefilers; rasterbars, logo, scroller(s) & music so in that sence they could very well be labeled as One-file demos, at least that fits better than Music imho.
And a release like this can only be filed as a Onefiler according to me: Armalyte Rip
I believe an additional type called "Ripp" or similar could be useful, it's better than "Music Ripp" since it would cover all kinds of ripps. |
| |
Mason
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 461 |
Usually I dont bother answering on the forum after what happend a month ago, but this is a step into the right direction.
About adding releases and so I think theres a few things missing. Like what happends when someone wants a release removed which is locked and the guy who lockde it got responsibility for? We have seen Facist Moderator abuse here. Such things havnt been taken care for, but I hope it will be handled in some way for version 2 of csdb - until then I must admit I dont wanna bother uploading anything except if a friend asks. |
| |
V-12
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 206 |
I totally agree, alot of releases are hard to describe. I think that "C64 Ripp" is proper name for releases, where are only ripped music and added some text on the screen.
The same with Contact Notes for example. |
| |
Wanderer
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 478 |
Also what about uploading of previews. I used to upload these under Game Preview but was advised that it should be under Cracks. I notice a lot of previews go under "c64 cracks".
To further muddle the issue, if you read the scroll text of many previews it says it was "cracked". I can't imagine someone releasing a non-working game with any sort of copy-protection.
I just follow the lead and use c64 cracks but in hindsight, I wonder is it not better left as a game preview??
Opinions/
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
if the preview was released by a cracker group, then it goes under cracks. if it was released by the producer themselves (like eg protovision does) then it goes under previews. just my 10ct. |
| |
V-12
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 206 |
Well it's really hard to describe again. Something what wasn't cracked it's wrongly called "crack". But then how to call these releases? Morever, alot of groups in the 80's was importing cracked games to their countries, linked only intros and released again. And how to call those games? C64 Import ? ;-)
I think that for those hard to describe releases we should add just "C64 Release" option.
|
| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1570 |
Quote: if the preview was released by a cracker group, then it goes under cracks. if it was released by the producer themselves (like eg protovision does) then it goes under previews. just my 10ct.
Yeah, what Groepaz said.
---
-= Silicon Ltd. =-
http://forum.siliconlimited.com
Commodore 64 Scenemusic Podcast
http://8bitmayhem.blogspot.com/ |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
@murdock: if its a game and has an intro infront, its a "crack". doesnt really make sense to discuss wether it had a copyprotection or not or if any cracking was involved at all. ofcourse in the v2 version of csdb it would be nice to drop those few cathegories alltogether and instead tag each release with one or more cathegories ([x]game [x]crack [x]import [x]preview) |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
Also, what exactly IS a copy protection? This is not always clear. Are hidden files a copy protection? Is V-Max a copy protection? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
hehe good point :) most so called "copy protections" strictly speaking arent, since they only prevent the copied program from running, not copying itself. that said, i think vmax actually IS a copy protection :=P |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
The author of V-Max said it is no copy protection, just a fastloader :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
yeah, but one thats hard to copy :=P |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1085 |
Quote:3. If any person who "owns" information doesn't want the information in CSDb it is totally their rights to remove it, and should be respected. This means that if you have any doubts that the person who owns the information does not want it in CSDb, you must not add it, and also that this person have the right to delete the information at any time.
I disagree, information cannot be handled like that, only the copyrighted data itself. For example, if a software company doesnt want their game on here, only the downloads (and possibly screenshot) should be removed, not the information about who did the actual release. Nobody owns the rights to that type of info.
Burglar |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
Well, I have the right for privacy. And if you publish my current home address here it will surely collide with my pursue for rest, peace and privacy. See it that way. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
yes, private info (adresses, phone numbers, real names) are an exception and shouldnt be entered by anyone but the "owner" itself in the first place. (i somehow doubt that certain "old" sceners would like seeing all their info here).
however all other info should be more or less "public". if it has been released to the scene, it belongs here and i cant really think of a good reason why it shouldnt be added. |
| |
V-12
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 206 |
yup I thought about privacy long time ago and when I'm adding new scener to the database I'm not adding his whole address without his permission.
|
| |
Zyron
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2381 |
I usually add all info I can find, it has proven handy many many times when trying to connect a scener's all different handles to the same person.
Most of the old addresses, phone numbers & PLK's aren't valid today anyways and only serve the purpose of identifying possible duplicate entries. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
@Zyron: however, its (more or less) easy to track down a person, even if you know an old address. that said, in many countries disclosing such private info to the public can be considered illegal. |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1085 |
Quote: Well, I have the right for privacy. And if you publish my current home address here it will surely collide with my pursue for rest, peace and privacy. See it that way.
well, duh. |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
As far as addresses go, if someone has made their address part of the public domain (by releasing it in a note file or demo) then it shouldn't be a legal issue i think...? Just a matter of the audience being *shitloads* bigger now. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
@tmr: thing is, that the majority of scene release can not be counted as "public domain". (its not public domain unless explicitly stated). also private information is under special protection in many (most) western countries. |
| |
Stan
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 187 |
Quote: Quote:3. If any person who "owns" information doesn't want the information in CSDb it is totally their rights to remove it, and should be respected. This means that if you have any doubts that the person who owns the information does not want it in CSDb, you must not add it, and also that this person have the right to delete the information at any time.
I disagree, information cannot be handled like that, only the copyrighted data itself. For example, if a software company doesnt want their game on here, only the downloads (and possibly screenshot) should be removed, not the information about who did the actual release. Nobody owns the rights to that type of info.
Burglar
From a legal point of view, Burglar is right. One might answer in a differerent way in terms of a generally code of conduct. But I see no reason for that, either. |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Quote: @tmr: thing is, that the majority of scene release can not be counted as "public domain". (its not public domain unless explicitly stated). also private information is under special protection in many (most) western countries.
But if they're in the database, then the information is already there in one form. |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Privacy is such an illusion.
Even I got tracked down and I was very careful not to leave a trace..
Thought I had escaped my C64-addiction,but here I am..
Again a f#&$ing junkie. ;)
Welcome to Planet Orwell! |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
After all 1984 was not a bad year, C64 scene was beginning to rise :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
Quote:
But if they're in the database, then the information is already there in one form.
yes ofcourse, but from a legal viewpoint that doesnt matter. noone except yourself has the right to publish that kind of private info - and you'd easily win a court case on that matter. |
