Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pcgen] Re: [BoD Report]

Expand Messages
  • Michael Tucker
    ... Pardon me, but handled in a better way compared to what? A publisher released their material (at least some of it) under a public license. The PCGen
    Message 1 of 32 , Dec 1, 2003
      On Monday, December 1, 2003, at 12:40 PM, Steven Gilroy wrote:
      > ... To the skeptics it "appears" that PCGen's BoD is
      > not doing stuff like AU so that CMP can make money by doing so. I
      > know
      > this is not the case, but if stuff like this isn't handled in a better
      > way we are going to end up with another explosion on this board like
      > what happened several months ago and again 2 weeks ago.
      > I'm not bringing this up to start trouble, I'm bringing it up so that
      > it
      > can be considered and discussed to prevent future trouble.

      Pardon me, but "handled in a better way" compared to what? A publisher
      released their material (at least some of it) under a public license.
      The PCGen community began work on making it available as a free data
      set. Then the publisher evidently had second thoughts (either changed
      their mind, or clarified their original position). The publisher said
      "Please don't distribute that material freely, but you may distribute
      it for a fee". PCGen said "Ok, we won't distribute it any more" and
      pulled the data sets from distribution. CMP said "Ok, we'll distribute
      the fee-based material for you." The material was still available, just
      under a different arrangement than was originally expected. The BoD
      explained this to the PCGen community. Again. And again. And again.
      Yet, no number of explanations seem sufficient to satisfy "the

      So... how could this have been "handled in a better way"? I'm seriously
      curious. If a better way can be found than what was done, by all means
      lets do things differently in the future.

      With all due respect to you and others (on both sides of the issue) who
      have tried to discuss this in a civil manner, the die-hard skeptics in
      any such discussion seldom seem to be interested in the facts. They
      usually seem only to be interested in how things "appear" to *them*,
      from their very narrow and skewed point of view. They have their
      suspicions and doubts that they cling to (in lieu of facts), and no
      amount of logic or reason will *ever* sway them. They keep raising the
      same objections over and over again, apparently not listening at all to
      any attempt to answer their concerns.

      At a certain point, those who offer logic and reason recognize that
      they are fighting an impossible battle, and either loose their temper
      or yield the field. (Losing your temper is pretty pointless, especially
      via email, so that only leaves the option to give up the argument.) You
      cannot win a debate if your opponent will not, under any circumstances,
      concede that you might be right.

      I know that Bryan, et al, are still trying very hard to reach out to
      everyone and satisfy everyone's concerns. To say that I admire their
      patience and perseverance is a vast understatement. But I sometimes
      wonder if it's worth all the hassle just to try to please a couple of
      people whose minds are made up, who aren't listening any more (if they
      ever were), and who will seemingly *never* be pleased, no matter what.

      In any case... *sigh* I see that I've been sucked into this quagmire
      again. I apologize to the list, and make a pre-New Year's resolution to
      not rise to the bait again. I ask as strongly yet politely as I know
      how, that *anyone* who has such concerns, *please* address them to
      Bryan or the BoD *off list*. I think that the community has had quite
      enough of a beating on this subject. Can we just get back to discussing
      the PCGen software and data on this list, and leave paranoia and
      politics out of it?

      Java Kensai
    • Keith Davies
      ... I dunno. It sounds like you ve got a dihydrogen monoxide (http://www.dhmo.org) dependency; that could be a challenge. Keith -- Keith Davies
      Message 32 of 32 , Dec 3, 2003
        On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:48:13PM -0500, Charbeneau, Chuck wrote:
        > I can stop drinking (alcohol, Caffeine, whatever...) anytime I want.

        I dunno. It sounds like you've got a dihydrogen monoxide
        (http://www.dhmo.org) dependency; that could be a challenge.

        Keith Davies "Your ability to bang your head against
        keith.davies@... reality in the hope that reality will
        crack first is impressive, but futile"
        -- Geoffrey Brent, rec.games.frp.dnd
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.