• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

What happened to the old UGM thread?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Supplement Four

SOC-14 5K
Whelp, there were two comparisons made in two different posts I wrote detailing the differences between the UGM and a certain-I'm-not-gonna-name-it-CT-like-playtest that's going on.

I guess instead of deleting the two offenending posts (or asking me to do so), The Laughing Policeman decided it would be easier to just delete the whole dernned thread.

So, if you were following that thread, it's gone. Zip-zoom. Nadda-zilch. Bye-bye.

But, I've reposted all the UGM rules, sans any not-gonna-name-it-CT-like-playtest comparison, for those of you who are keeping up with it.

That's it.

TTFN,

-S4
 
Whelp, there were two comparisons made in two different posts I wrote detailing the differences between the UGM and a certain-I'm-not-gonna-name-it-CT-like-playtest that's going on.

I guess instead of deleting the two offenending posts (or asking me to do so), The Laughing Policeman decided it would be easier to just delete the whole dernned thread.

So, if you were following that thread, it's gone. Zip-zoom. Nadda-zilch. Bye-bye.

But, I've reposted all the UGM rules, sans any not-gonna-name-it-CT-like-playtest comparison, for those of you who are keeping up with it.

That's it.

TTFN,

-S4
 
It sounds like excessive censorship for a ruleset that is

1. NOT COPYRIGHTED..my copy is a simple word document.

2. NOT OFFICIAL..it claims to be houserules, other than having a Traveller License it doesn't have any official status unlike CT, MT, TNE, T4, GT, T20.

3. Is in the public domain...according to my friend who gave me my copy he wasn't asked to agree to any non disclosure

4. Is almost completely derivative IMHO, ripping off large portions of MT as well as wholesale copying of CT. There is little if anything new there.

Unless someone is unable to take fair comparisons I don't see any problem with the posts.
 
It sounds like excessive censorship for a ruleset that is

1. NOT COPYRIGHTED..my copy is a simple word document.

2. NOT OFFICIAL..it claims to be houserules, other than having a Traveller License it doesn't have any official status unlike CT, MT, TNE, T4, GT, T20.

3. Is in the public domain...according to my friend who gave me my copy he wasn't asked to agree to any non disclosure

4. Is almost completely derivative IMHO, ripping off large portions of MT as well as wholesale copying of CT. There is little if anything new there.

Unless someone is unable to take fair comparisons I don't see any problem with the posts.
 
UGM is a fully legitimate set of house-rules (and a good one whlie at it)... No one should delete it. Deleting the offending posts would be enough if the moderators thought they violated the NDA. Deleting a whole thread of houserules was completely unescery.
 
UGM is a fully legitimate set of house-rules (and a good one whlie at it)... No one should delete it. Deleting the offending posts would be enough if the moderators thought they violated the NDA. Deleting a whole thread of houserules was completely unescery.
 
the issue wan't the comparison per se, but as I have been told the inclusion of elements of ACT in doing so.

ACT is privileged playtest material, and is therefore copyrighted. UGM is open source, in effect,whereas ACT is not.

This is apparently the reasoning why they were dropped.

While I had my issues with S4 and his posts on TAS, this was a matter of courtesy- I didnt feel then ( and dont now) that his posts were approriate in the venue in question.

CoTI is another matter, its his system, and he can post to his hearts content so long as hes reasonably polite about it and doesn't break forum rules - then he should go for it.

of course, if there are questions as to the Mods reasoning, the simple solution is to simply ask what they were.

S4's obvious bitterness has no place here IMO and although his attitude doesnt impress me much, he's not overstepped his bounds otherwise, so I have no issue with him here.
 
the issue wan't the comparison per se, but as I have been told the inclusion of elements of ACT in doing so.

ACT is privileged playtest material, and is therefore copyrighted. UGM is open source, in effect,whereas ACT is not.

This is apparently the reasoning why they were dropped.

While I had my issues with S4 and his posts on TAS, this was a matter of courtesy- I didnt feel then ( and dont now) that his posts were approriate in the venue in question.

CoTI is another matter, its his system, and he can post to his hearts content so long as hes reasonably polite about it and doesn't break forum rules - then he should go for it.

of course, if there are questions as to the Mods reasoning, the simple solution is to simply ask what they were.

S4's obvious bitterness has no place here IMO and although his attitude doesnt impress me much, he's not overstepped his bounds otherwise, so I have no issue with him here.
 
I disagree.

A word document downloaded from a web site is not copyright unless it specifically says as much. What is more it is hardly a secret.

From what I am told there are no disclosure agreements in place nor any mention of privileged information. I checked in as a guest to look and found this;

If people want to review and make useful contributions to the Avenger Classic Traveller Project, please PM me and I will make the forums available for you to see. Note that you can feel free to criticise, but if you do please make some decent alternative suggestions.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to imply any copyright or agreeing to non-disclosure. In fact they seem to openly inviting criticism. If they are upset that people are talking about their "unofficial house rules" they should perhaps be less open about their huge commercial secret.

EDITED DUE TO PERSONAL THREAT
 
I disagree.

A word document downloaded from a web site is not copyright unless it specifically says as much. What is more it is hardly a secret.

From what I am told there are no disclosure agreements in place nor any mention of privileged information. I checked in as a guest to look and found this;

If people want to review and make useful contributions to the Avenger Classic Traveller Project, please PM me and I will make the forums available for you to see. Note that you can feel free to criticise, but if you do please make some decent alternative suggestions.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to imply any copyright or agreeing to non-disclosure. In fact they seem to openly inviting criticism. If they are upset that people are talking about their "unofficial house rules" they should perhaps be less open about their huge commercial secret.

EDITED DUE TO PERSONAL THREAT
 
obviously you are seeing what you want to, BR.

If you must PM someone to be granted access, thats NOT public. It DOES invite critique in a PRIVATE venue.

and, yes, they are copyrighted.Distributing them outside the playtest is a violation of copyright.

Now, you don't have to agree with it, but thats the legal definition, so take that for what its worth.

and thats AVENGER Classic traveller, not ********* Classic Traveller which is just plain silly.


<shrug>
 
obviously you are seeing what you want to, BR.

If you must PM someone to be granted access, thats NOT public. It DOES invite critique in a PRIVATE venue.

and, yes, they are copyrighted.Distributing them outside the playtest is a violation of copyright.

Now, you don't have to agree with it, but thats the legal definition, so take that for what its worth.

and thats AVENGER Classic traveller, not ********* Classic Traveller which is just plain silly.


<shrug>
 
I will also refer you to thye following statement in the materails :


Copyright ©2006 Avenger Enterprises in association with Comstar Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Traveller is a trademark of Far Future Enterprises and is used under license.
This file is for playtest only and cannot be distributed in any form.
Click to expand...
in other words, yes, it IS copyrighted. As a professional ( my own work with comstar/Avenger aside) I would suggest you drop the matter, NOW>

You are not on any firm footing, and illegal distrubution of materails will probably result in your'e being banned from these forums at a minimum, as per the COTI usage rules.
 
I will also refer you to thye following statement in the materails :


Copyright ©2006 Avenger Enterprises in association with Comstar Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Traveller is a trademark of Far Future Enterprises and is used under license.
This file is for playtest only and cannot be distributed in any form.
Click to expand...
in other words, yes, it IS copyrighted. As a professional ( my own work with comstar/Avenger aside) I would suggest you drop the matter, NOW>

You are not on any firm footing, and illegal distrubution of materails will probably result in your'e being banned from these forums at a minimum, as per the COTI usage rules.
 
The quote you have is not on the WORD document I have and as such I feel free to discuss the matter. If you want I'll e-mail them as proof.

Now quite frankly I will discuss what Traveller matters I want on this forum and will not distribute the material if asked not to. I received it second hand as have many of my friends.

Thank you for feeling you have to threaten me with banning. But since there is no copyright on my document I'll quote the following from the intro

Nothing in this rules set is in any way official, except in that Avenger Enterprises has a license to publish Traveller materials. These rules can be considered nothing more than a published version of our own house rules, based on CT but with ideas borrowed from other versions of the game. Any and all rules are open to being dropped, replaced, bent or ignored by Referees as they see fit. Rules are there as a guideline, not a straitjacket, and these rules should be viewed in this light.
Click to expand...
Unofficial.

House Rules.

Now to the original point. Someone has requested that a fair comparison of one set of house rules be compared to another set of house rules be removed. No copyright was breached in comparing and if Avenger don't want discussion outside of their own board they should say so.
 
The quote you have is not on the WORD document I have and as such I feel free to discuss the matter. If you want I'll e-mail them as proof.

Now quite frankly I will discuss what Traveller matters I want on this forum and will not distribute the material if asked not to. I received it second hand as have many of my friends.

Thank you for feeling you have to threaten me with banning. But since there is no copyright on my document I'll quote the following from the intro

Nothing in this rules set is in any way official, except in that Avenger Enterprises has a license to publish Traveller materials. These rules can be considered nothing more than a published version of our own house rules, based on CT but with ideas borrowed from other versions of the game. Any and all rules are open to being dropped, replaced, bent or ignored by Referees as they see fit. Rules are there as a guideline, not a straitjacket, and these rules should be viewed in this light.
Click to expand...
Unofficial.

House Rules.

Now to the original point. Someone has requested that a fair comparison of one set of house rules be compared to another set of house rules be removed. No copyright was breached in comparing and if Avenger don't want discussion outside of their own board they should say so.
 
Gentlemen, from the CoTI Boards here some clarification. Just got this from member and fellow mod Sigg Oddra:

Here's a copy of what we all signed up to to join these boards:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the CotI Discussion Forums to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you, QLI, or Far Future.

Although QLI and Far Future do not and cannot review the messages posted and are not responsible for the content of any of these messages, QLI and Far Future reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think para 1, sentence 2 covers the use of copywrit materials. As for "censorship", para. 2 covers this matter.
 
Gentlemen, from the CoTI Boards here some clarification. Just got this from member and fellow mod Sigg Oddra:

Here's a copy of what we all signed up to to join these boards:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the CotI Discussion Forums to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you, QLI, or Far Future.

Although QLI and Far Future do not and cannot review the messages posted and are not responsible for the content of any of these messages, QLI and Far Future reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think para 1, sentence 2 covers the use of copywrit materials. As for "censorship", para. 2 covers this matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
The UGM Task Library
2 3
Replies
59
Views
4K
Golan2072
G
Back
Top