> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christina
> Stiles
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:26 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] I'm Game
>
>
> Steve, I see what you're saying, but Ryan made some mention of scanning
for
> sites and persons in violation of the OGL & D20STL to warn them to change.
> That takes time and effort, too. What's the difference between the time
> spent on pre- and post warnings?
Pre-warnings have many problems:
1. The flood. The requests all come in at once.
2. The time wasted. A good chunk of the flood will have no violations.
3. And the biggie: it puts them in the position of advising you of what is
proper and what isn't, making them potentially liable. They won't be in the
advice business, particularly not the legal advice business.
On the other hand, post-warnings:
1. Go out only at whatever rate Ryan can handle.
2. Waste little time, since Ryan only applies what time he can spare.
3. And most importantly, put Wizards in the position of notifying you of a
violation, rather than advising you of a non-violation. The distinction may
seem subtle, but it's important.
Martin L. Shoemaker
Martin L. Shoemaker Consulting, Software Design and UML Training
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.MartinLShoemaker.com
http://www.UMLBootCamp.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
