I checked this against the RMXP set and this set appears original to me. Unflagging license issue. Again, sorry for the trouble. When someone points out a potential issue with licensing, we have to look into it.
We're looking into it. This looks like an original set to me, but since someone told me it may not be, I have to check. I'm in the process right now, and I hope we'll have a word out in half an hour. Again, sorry for the inconvenience.
Flagged potential licensing issue. This is an amazing set, but if it's an edit of the RMXP set, we can't archive it here, since it's a derivative work of someone else's IP. I just assumed it was a drop-in replacement, since it looks pretty different from the RMXP set.
When people mention LPC tilesets, they're referring to tilesets that would be okay to use in the Liberated Pixel Cup, which is a game programming contest that's in progress right now. (There was an art contest too, but it ended at the end of last month.)
I don't see that single word change clearing up the confusion, honestly. As a user, you use content under the license of your choice, but as an author, you release content under all of the licenses of your choice. Since the checkbox is about the licenses the content is released under, using 'any' there doesn't really make sense. I'll see about putting some small descriptive text under the licenses to make it clear that users can choose which one they prefer.
More/most/all of the site code is copyrighted to quodop I believe (don't really know much about it) while art contributions are via the various artists under more or less progressive copyleft licenses.
Qubodup has access to the code and some of it is his, but the majority of the original site code is mine. :)
The site founder is me.
The admins (in no particular order) are Lunpa, Botanic, cwebber, kurt, p0ss, verbalshadow, Clint Bellanger, ceninan, and qubodup.
The editors are ctdabomb and CruzR.
I don't keep long-term activity logs, so I can't comment on who does more or less, except to say that I appreciate everyone's efforts to keep OGA up and running. Thanks also to the Drupal project and the countless people who wrote the various Drupal modules that OGA runs. :)
Well I think for the first problem a 'misc' category would be ideal.
For the second problem, a verbal description of what the pre-made sub category was intended for combined with an onscreen display of say three pictures would go a really long way to helping people understand what material to put in which sub category
If there's one thing I've learned with web development over the years, it's that people are as lazy as you allow them to be. If we have a "misc" category, people will just shove things in there without taking any time to label it. We don't want to encourage that. Secondly, even if we have textual descriptions of subcategories, very few submitters will actually take the time to read them.
Regarding your three step system in your following post, that's almost exactly how our tags used to work (it was two categories instead of three). It doesn't solve the problem above, and it makes the art submission form longer and more complicated, which I'm not willing to do.
To help you understand my hesitation with adding anything to the art form, consider the following. Two extremely common (general) complaints about the art on OGA are:
The art form is too long and confusing
We're not collecting enough metadata
Please understand that while it would be wonderful if we could collect lots of metadata about art submissions, that takes more time and makes the art form more intimidating, and there are a lot of people who already find it intimidating. Adding extra fields to the art submission form just makes this problem worse.
I will, as I said, consider adding something that shows common tags.
If you want to make something look metallic, one thing you can do is make the highlights tighter and add more of them. You'll also want to vary the highlight colors a bit.
I checked this against the RMXP set and this set appears original to me. Unflagging license issue. Again, sorry for the trouble. When someone points out a potential issue with licensing, we have to look into it.
We're looking into it. This looks like an original set to me, but since someone told me it may not be, I have to check. I'm in the process right now, and I hope we'll have a word out in half an hour. Again, sorry for the inconvenience.
Flagged potential licensing issue. This is an amazing set, but if it's an edit of the RMXP set, we can't archive it here, since it's a derivative work of someone else's IP. I just assumed it was a drop-in replacement, since it looks pretty different from the RMXP set.
Wonderful set, thank you for submitting it!
When people mention LPC tilesets, they're referring to tilesets that would be okay to use in the Liberated Pixel Cup, which is a game programming contest that's in progress right now. (There was an art contest too, but it ended at the end of last month.)
I don't know if I'd really call javascript rare these days. :)
I don't see that single word change clearing up the confusion, honestly. As a user, you use content under the license of your choice, but as an author, you release content under all of the licenses of your choice. Since the checkbox is about the licenses the content is released under, using 'any' there doesn't really make sense. I'll see about putting some small descriptive text under the licenses to make it clear that users can choose which one they prefer.
More/most/all of the site code is copyrighted to quodop I believe (don't really know much about it) while art contributions are via the various artists under more or less progressive copyleft licenses.
Qubodup has access to the code and some of it is his, but the majority of the original site code is mine. :)
The site founder is me.
The admins (in no particular order) are Lunpa, Botanic, cwebber, kurt, p0ss, verbalshadow, Clint Bellanger, ceninan, and qubodup.
The editors are ctdabomb and CruzR.
I don't keep long-term activity logs, so I can't comment on who does more or less, except to say that I appreciate everyone's efforts to keep OGA up and running. Thanks also to the Drupal project and the countless people who wrote the various Drupal modules that OGA runs. :)
Well I think for the first problem a 'misc' category would be ideal.
For the second problem, a verbal description of what the pre-made sub category was intended for combined with an onscreen display of say three pictures would go a really long way to helping people understand what material to put in which sub category
If there's one thing I've learned with web development over the years, it's that people are as lazy as you allow them to be. If we have a "misc" category, people will just shove things in there without taking any time to label it. We don't want to encourage that. Secondly, even if we have textual descriptions of subcategories, very few submitters will actually take the time to read them.
Regarding your three step system in your following post, that's almost exactly how our tags used to work (it was two categories instead of three). It doesn't solve the problem above, and it makes the art submission form longer and more complicated, which I'm not willing to do.
To help you understand my hesitation with adding anything to the art form, consider the following. Two extremely common (general) complaints about the art on OGA are:
Please understand that while it would be wonderful if we could collect lots of metadata about art submissions, that takes more time and makes the art form more intimidating, and there are a lot of people who already find it intimidating. Adding extra fields to the art submission form just makes this problem worse.
I will, as I said, consider adding something that shows common tags.
Thanks for clarifying. For the record (for people reading this), the license in the file is not current, and the one marked here on OGA is correct.
If you want to make something look metallic, one thing you can do is make the highlights tighter and add more of them. You'll also want to vary the highlight colors a bit.
Feel free to use my edit if you want. :)
Bart
Pages