> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of The Sigil
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 11:27 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Ogf-l] OGC Designation (Rant)
>
> Creature Collection I - quite closed.  One of my "useless OGC" examples.

Thank you for being specific. I think we can communicate better now.

Not to be ungracious, but could you be specific on WHY you see it as
useless? From the discussions I recall, the only significant closure that
bothered folks in CC I was the creature names (which, let us not forget,
Clark will license pretty generously). And I think the significance there
varies a lot by perspective:

1. If you believe that open is a virtue in itself -- if you believe there is
some moral obligation to be as open as possible -- then I certainly
understand where you would see this closure as significant.

2. If you believe that open is good because it encourages people to fine
tune and tweak the rules and to verge on the "best" solution for a given
problem -- i.e., if your goal is good, useful rules by whatever means --
then the name is ALMOST irrelevant to that. You don't need the name to reuse
a creature, nor to improve upon it. The only relevance I see is that it's
easier for everyone to recognize when the creature is being reused of
improved upon if there is a recognized and accepted name.

3. If you believe that open is good because you want people who like the
creature to see that it's in your work and thus look favorably on your work:
well, SSS may choose to give you that sort of marketing boost (and again,
Clark has made it clear they'll do so pretty generously), but it's hardly an
obligation.

My view of OGC leans heavily toward 2. If yours is different, that explains
our difference over the definition of "useless".

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

Reply via email to