Faust wrote: >Lets not be an ass and rip them up too badly based on one of their >first products. When the CC I was released (the volume you are quoting) >there was a tremendous amount of uncertainty about the OGL and its uses. >Their follow on "Relics & Rituals" is a treasure of open content, clearly >labelled, with almost no strings attached.
1. I specifically stated all of that in my message, so what's your point? 2. SSS could easily rectify the CC 1 issue by simply releasing a "goodies" license for the appropriate PI on their website. >You seem to be speaking from a *very* uninformed standpoint on several >issues here. To put it politely: Bullshit. I've noticed you have a penchant for accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being "uninformed" or "ignorant". Your bullet has gone tragically wide of the mark here: I've been involved in the OGL movement since early 2000, reviewing OGL/D20 material since August 2000, and actively producing OGL/D20 material for nearly a year. If you can't actually refute my points, please refrain from throwing around ad hominems as a last resort. >I would not overly criticize a very early adopter from trying >to err on the conservative side. This would be a more convincing argument if it wasn't for the fact that the very *first* adopters (WotC, Green Ronin, and Atlas Games) all featured far more open content than Sword & Sorcery Studios. Justin Bacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
