"J. Michael Looney" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > However, it is for logistical reasons that ideas _have_ to go through
> > Dunandralis-l and then the Content team and then the Editing team. Some
> > online world creation projects seem to think quantity is quality and they
> > rush to get everything they can up on their web sites. We want everyone to
> > contribute to Dunandralis, but not at the risk of sacrificing continuity,
> > quality, legitimacy, and peace.
>
> VERY Not Open.
>
And this is part of why the OGL allows for 'closed' content, and why a
license which works for gnu C++ won't work for Ravenloft.
Gameworlds are not computer programs. Rules are somewhat objective, but
worlds are not. A 'shared world' project not run under fascistic control
will rapidly degenerate to an unholy mess. You can 'fork' a software
project, but not a world. The value, to the end user, of a predefined
world is consistency and utility -- it has one history, with one set of
rules and assumptions. It's very good to have a world developed by
multiple contributors -- Traveller prospered by this -- but without a
strong central authority, you don't have a shared world -- you have a
thousand alternate histories that share a few names.
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
