Do Cathedrals actually exist?

[xrayy]

to follow the catherdral view and to agree with it is no problem at all.

 

to ignore all the valid arguments why a dogmatic cathedral view inevitably leads to legal problems is a huge problem.

 

it is a mircale to me how people can ignore valid arguments against a dogmatic cathedral approach. why this view is theoretical like ideal communism (which never existed) is self explanatory and it is proven not to work.

so it is proven that it can and it will never work in real world environment like communism never worked. at least the next 100 years there is no realistic chance for such an approach. i hope this is enough to understand the related problems and that it is a waste of time to discuss this kind of a theoretical approach.

 

and the "control over a mod argument for a mod author" is a simple to understandf argument for open minded people who are able to reflect real life situations of a mod author where it is a severe problem that he has not full control over his owned mod but he is - as an owner - also responsible for it. i can not help people who permanently refuse to understand this fact or even refuse to accept that these problems and responsibilities exist even if they are not the most common problems to solve. no problem or discussion at all as long as the author has the full control and rights and if no mod hosting service like nexusmods interferes.

 

as an example two years ago i was in a situation that some of my mods appeared as complete copies of my nexusmods mods on an asian site. i found out by coincidence googling some of my mods.

nobody asked me. it was a life saver for me i was able to hide all my mods during this time to be able to clear the situation with the site owner in the meantime and to prevent more illegal mod copies. maybe just a harmless but consequent communistic/cathedral approach of a chinese site... ;)

 

everything else based on false assumptions or an obvious ignorance of some people posting here will inevitably lead to a misinterpretation of related content, posts and topics.

the question is why these people are the most active ones in this forum without doing some self reflection first?

[WileCoyote68]

From my point of view, the biggest mistake in Wyre's assay is that he assumes everyone must participate for the benefit of all. But before I start thinking about building a cathedral with some folks around, someone should ask if I want to participate. If I can't make a free decision based on this simple question, I will never join the team or community which drives the construction of the cathedral. Just because someone expects something of me, it don't necessarily mean that I will do it too.

[Gruffydd]

Cathedral is a silly term for it anyway, I think. No cathedral was ever built by one person building something, then someone else coming over and building on that, and so on. A cathedral is a singular architectural vision. If anything what this builds is the Winchester house.

[frontaldnd]

I specially find the term cathedral silly when terms that apply to what is being talked about already exist on the software development sphere. For both ownership and licensing.

[Arthmoor]

I specially find the term cathedral silly when terms that apply to what is being talked about already exist on the software development sphere. For both ownership and licensing.

We're a much more tech savvy community today than we were when he wrote that. So part of the problem is that he was trying to explain technical licensing concepts to people who are more akin to artists.

[MarchinBunny]

to ignore all the valid arguments why a dogmatic cathedral view inevitably leads to legal problems is a huge problem.

I don't really think it would lead to many legal problems if it was done the right way. There are many ways to go about a cathedral view. For example, you can limit the licensing to a single site. So it would be a cathedral on that site, but anywhere else, it would be upheld all the same like any other copyrighted work. Meaning the mod author still retains pretty much full control over the work itself outside of the cathedral.

 

Now if we are talking about using other's work that isn't a part of the cathedral in a mod you want to include in the cathedral, obviously you would need to get permission for that. Which personally, I think is way more palatable when you know the licensing is limited to a single site. Whereas if there wasn't that limit, I suspect many would just say no.

 

 

 

and it is proven not to work.

As far as I am aware, it hasn't even been tried fully. So I doubt it's been proven not to work. I also don't think it's fair to compare it to communism, because communism is a similar system (would even argue a few step further) but in place where money is a part of it, which I already explained when money is involved ... things become way more complicated and don't think cathedrals work well in that situation. Making mods is a unique situation though where you can't make money off of it directly. The most you can do is put up a patreon and hope some are willing to support the work you do through donations, or get donations through a site like Nexus.

 

The only way you can ever say it's proven not to work is if this system was given it's fair chance within the modding community. Until then, it's just an assumption.

 

 

 

it was a life saver for me i was able to hide all my mods during this time to be able to clear the situation with the site owner in the meantime and to prevent more illegal mod copies.

Going to be honest, hiding the mods does absolutely nothing. Those who redistributed it already have a copy of it anyway, how else do you think they uploaded it in the first place? The only thing that hiding your mod does is prevents everyone from downloading your mod for that time period ... for pretty much no reason. At least I can't think of a single scenario where it makes sense. If you are afraid they may recruit more people to download your mod to reupload it to the site, they could do that with the copy they already have. If your concern is that some random person unrelated to the uploader would also upload it to that site, then you are being overly cautious. The chances of that occurring are really low, and to be frank can happen as soon as you put the mod back up anyway. If your concern was they would upload your other mods, if they were planning to they likely already have downloaded those mods too.

 

Maybe I am missing something and you can explain exactly what hiding your mods prevents in such situations. Cause to me it just comes off as a self perceived benefit that actually doesn't do anything at all, it's just something you convinced yourself does something like a placebo.

[DoctaSax]

I fail to see the rationale behind limiting Libre modding to a site - it's antithetical to the concept. Sites are only places of distribution in the end, and fleeting, while licensing is between creators, and quite permanent usually. Monetization is really a tangent to all this, as it's only one of many reasons why people would want to exercise control, and monetization isn't impossible with Libre either.

Libre works; dictating to people who don't want to release Libre that they have to doesn't.

[xrayy]

@brabbit: i'm sure you can fill 1000 pages and more without any meaningful content and you are not aware of. just filled with your guesses and "experiences" while ignoring valuable information, answers and people around you. you can do that your whole life and you seem to be happy with it. i do not care because you do not care or try to understand what others say. have a good day.

[MarchinBunny]

I fail to see the rationale behind limiting Libre modding to a site - it's antithetical to the concept. Sites are only places of distribution in the end, and fleeting, while licensing is between creators, and quite permanent usually. Monetization is really a tangent to all this, as it's only one of many reasons why people would want to exercise control, and monetization isn't impossible with Libre either.

Libre works; dictating to people who don't want to release Libre that they have to doesn't.

The point would be that if the site goes under, you still remain entirely in control. Given that most here prefer that control. As for those who don't want to do things that way, they don't have to. It's already been said time and time again, just don't use the platform you disagree with, it's not complicated.

 

Edit: Although this entire discussion really doesn't matter much since I doubt Nexus is even going the route of a Cathedral view anyway.

 

 

 

@brabbit: i'm sure you can fill 1000 pages and more without any meaningful content and you are not aware of. just filled with your guesses and "experiences" while ignoring valuable information, answers and people around you. you can do that your whole life and you seem to be happy with it. i do not care because you do not care or try to understand what others say. have a good day.

Great argument! :3

Edit: Also, hope you have a good day as well. Thank you.

[WileCoyote68]

It's already been said time and time again, just don't use the platform you disagree with, it's not complicated.

Your argument is only relevant if you want to make a decision as a new user. But not if you have been a member of this community for years and rejecting their new alignment. In this case one would expect that a dialogue is possible and is not suppressed in dictatorial manner.