AssaultCube Reloaded Forums

This feature is a pain in the ass. gg

This prevents spammers.. gg

No, it prevents people from disagreeing with you.

Totalitarianism, nice. And you said we resembled the Axis.

It's because you do.

You can now spam out this forum if you wanted to, since you reached 1 post and waited 20 minutes (this is enough to remove most spammers, but you might prove me wrong).

Proof:
via http://indie-resource.com/forums/viewtop...=59&t=1518

hallsofvallhalla via his site Wrote:...
I decided to put up my own server and it was hacked within 2 hours. I went to the forums to find a resolution and learned it is incredibly common. They don't seem to care. Their resolution is to make a blacklist for server owners to ban IPs. It is 187 pages long!!! I posted and inquery and a admin posted this nasty message to me. The forums are a joke.
...
[next few posts]
...
I did not write half the things in my post on that community. They edited it like 15 times.
...

I think you are referred to us by the admins... You must comply with that letter and tell us why AC hates ACR, tell us the remaining copyright issues that we missed, etc., before the deadline of June 24, 2012.

EDIT: You may send all your complaints to http://forum.acr.victorz.ca/forum-16.html so that we can ridicule you.

Nope, not referred here by the admins, not a moderator, none of that. But if you insist to know why the AC community is so against you, aside from copyright infringement (which you seem to like handling in an ornery way,) a large part of it is how you have been going about doing this project. As far as I know, you never even asked the AC developers if you could actually make a fork of their game. AssaultCube may be open source, but it's not uncopyrighted. And please don't compare this fork to how Cube and AssaultCube are related. Remember, the developers of Cube actually support AssaultCube, something we cannot say about you.

tl;dr: a lot of the problem is your attitude. If you maybe complied for a change and (gasp!) apologized, you might get somewhere. I can't guarantee this (I am, again, nothing more than an AC community member,) but damn.

Summary: What do I have to apologize for?

You are acting like an idiot. Let me annotate your message.

(2012-06-17, 12:34 PM)VenteX Wrote: [ -> ]you never even asked the AC developers if you could actually make a fork of their game. AssaultCube may be open source, but it's not uncopyrighted.

There is no need to ask them. Their code is licenced under the zLib licence.
What does that mean?
1) "The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not
claim that you wrote the original software. If you use this software
in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be
appreciated but is not required."
Our name does this.

2) "Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be
misrepresented as being the original software."
Once again, our name does this.

3) "This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution."
Yep, added to SVN @ source/Readme.txt

4) "additional clause specific to Cube:
Source versions may not be "relicensed" under a different license
without my explicitly written permission."
Well, that only applys to Cube, so it doesn't apply to AssaultCube. That's why our relicencing to the GPL v3 is okay.

(2012-06-17, 12:34 PM)VenteX Wrote: [ -> ]And please don't compare this fork to how Cube and AssaultCube are related. Remember, the developers of Cube actually support AssaultCube, something we cannot say about you.

Cube -> AC
AC -> ACR
They are both mods/forks!
Does it matter if the previous developer supports the fork?

(2012-06-17, 12:34 PM)VenteX Wrote: [ -> ]If you maybe complied for a change and (gasp!) apologized, you might get somewhere. I can't guarantee this (I am, again, nothing more than an AC community member,) but damn.

I would immediately apologize, if it were the case that I need to.
*If this isn't obvious enough, "it were" is past subjunctive. It shows counterfactuality.
Also can be stated this way:
Were it the case that I need to apologize, I would immediately do so.

I like what you're doing: calling us the Axis, calling me an idiot, throwing anything AC's devs say to you in a section of your forum labeled "unimportant"...

Then demand to know why we hate you.

This is why we hate you.

Their false accusations are unimportant.

But yes, I can understand why you dislike being called what you are, but that doesn't completely justify why you dislike this project.

Just because I dislike your community, does it necessarily mean that I dislike your game?

Anyways, I could remove/change the text that offends you, iff they were to become false.
*non-past subjunctive this time! This one shows "doubtful possibility" about the future.

As the title of the thread says, whatever Victor. Disrespect copyrights, be an asshat to everyone, fine. For what it's worth, AC's devs aren't hastily responding to your questions because they know your game will inevitably fail on its own, although it's not like you listen to anyone (let alone them) anyways. You could call it ignoring, but in a more eloquent way than you are doing (i.e. passive, not creating a separate damn forum section so you can be like "HAY GUISE I'M IGNORING AC'S COPYRIGHT CONCERNS AM I COOL NOW?!".)

CORRECTION:
I am respecting copyrights, and being an asshat to only asshats. I listen to everyone. If I didn't, how could I be replying?

All AC's copyright concerns are posted here:
http://assaultcuber.codeplex.com/SourceC...233#156628

We shall immediately remove any copyright-infringing asset if its owner complains.

Since the AC devs were complaining about the entire project, which they don't completely hold the rights to, no action was taken. We would remove if they complain about parts they actually own.

Example:
Brahma comes and complains about the "logo artwork, the name, the textures (which are not under the same z-lib licence)" (https://acrf.victorz.ca/thread-2.html).

Okay, fine:
Logo artwork -> AC 1.1.0.4 found /source/vcpp/cube.rc (thus zLib with all of the /source files)
In the startscreen*
Name -> We include your name to show it is a modification
Look at Debian GNU/Linux. GNU and Linux aren't complaining about Debian.
Textures -> Read the file above! Not even 1 texture violates copyright.

*He's right about the logo artwork in the startscreen (except the executable icon, which is zLib). It's copyrighted by makkE.

But he isn't makkE, so we won't do anything about it yet. makkE, the copyright owner, must complain to us, not someone else.
If makkE complains to us, we remove the logos created by him wherever he names it.