Revision of the Playerworld Rules

[Tyhm]

Before I rip into this - good job on the rules (for the most part), particularly Reviving a Playerworld Project and the catchall disclaimer.

But-

1) Limiting the Level4 RCs, etcetera - this falls under Advice. It's a good idea to limit the number of people that could sabotage your world; the PWA reserves the right to refuse to fix things if you're dumb, but I don't think the PWA's got the time or energy to go around deleting servers in anticipation of that stupidity.
2) Maybe say not "All your files are belong to us", but rather "We will protect the copyright/intellectual property rights for your files as long as your server is hosted. If for whatever reason your server is no longer using said files, they become fair use for whatever other Graal server chooses to use them." Something like that, put a positive spin on saying the same thing.
3) Live Updates - it's gonna happen, and it's just fuzzy enough to cause problems. I'd suggest "If you update a level with players in it, you are responsible for solving any conflicts arising from that - pulling players out of walls, etc. - before logging off." Which is not to say the players that logged off there are any safer...
4) Nitpicking: "And if they are not followed some corrective actions include:"

Really, my only big gripes with it are that the same issues I have had, I still have - "It's my playerworld, I paid for it, I do what I want" vs "I paid $100 to GIVE Unixmad a server?". But perhaps that's beyond the pale.

[Skyld]

Originally Posted by Tyhm

2) Maybe say not "All your files are belong to us", but rather "We will protect the copyright/intellectual property rights for your files as long as your server is hosted. If for whatever reason your server is no longer using said files, they become fair use for whatever other Graal server chooses to use them." Something like that, put a positive spin on saying the same thing.

I disagree here. It is better to ensure that users recognise that the ownership of levels, scripts, etc uploaded to GraalOnline servers will be transferred to Cyberjoueurs, otherwise people could say "I don't want to be involved anymore", remove their files from popular servers and then Cyberjoueurs have to suffer because of it. At least this way, Cyberjoueurs have a case against people who cause damage to their property like that.

[Tyhm]

Originally Posted by CheeToS2

Many servers also don't keep their own backups and rely on Stefan to provide them when needed. Stefan's pretty busy and it can take days to restore a server sometimes, which results in a lot of lost productivity and angry players.

Servers should have the ability to keep - and restore - their own backups. There should be a .gpack filetype, even if it's just a customized Zip file, that stores all a server's weapons, serverconfig, graphics, ganis, etc. - and playerdata for preference - then you should be able to push a button on RC to backup to GPack, restore from GPack, create update file for GPack (just the changes from last backup to make for faster backups - update files can be daily, with monthly or weekly Main Backups), an option to schedule it so the admin can just turn on RC and it'll automatically backup his server on his harddrive...ideally the GPack filetype would be resistant to transferring (maybe a backup GPack has a password equal to/based on the servername, so it's absolutely useless on a server with a different name...but there should be a GPack option for "share these files", when you want to send your little nephew your movement script, level/graphics/ganis and all.) Then Graal could start people out with better than an utterly blank server - you register a server and Poof, here's a handfull of Server Template GPacks to play with - restore the ZeldaClone GPack to have an approximation of Classic, restore the MegaMan GPack to have an approximation of that...

Originally Posted by Skyld

I disagree here. It is better to ensure that users recognise that the ownership of levels, scripts, etc uploaded to GraalOnline servers will be transferred to Cyberjoueurs, otherwise people could say "I don't want to be involved anymore", remove their files from popular servers and then Cyberjoueurs have to suffer because of it. At least this way, Cyberjoueurs have a case against people who cause damage to their property like that.

I agree totally, but in more flowery language - and with a different target. Graal should be able to ressurect a server's levels, scripts, etc, just not by the hand of Unixmad. If I made a crappy server, deleted it, then Unixmad brought it back and started marketing it, I'd be upset - and I'm one of the guys that LIKES the corporate masters. But if I made a crappy server with Com013, I deleted it, HE resurrected it and started marketing it...well, hell, it was half his server anyway, good for him. I might rail against Unixmad anyway for letting it happen, and he can point to the part saying "I never said I'd stop anyone from resurrecting it." And that's my point, Graal needs to say "I won't stop someone from using your discarded server (backup)" and not "I will use your stuff, like it or not."

[Tyhm]

Originally Posted by Tyhm

Graal should be able to ressurect a server's levels, scripts, etc, just not by the hand of Unixmad. If I made a crappy server, deleted it, then Unixmad brought it back and started marketing it, I'd be upset - and I'm one of the guys that LIKES the corporate masters. But if I made a crappy server with Com013, I deleted it, HE resurrected it and started marketing it...well, hell, it was half his server anyway, good for him. I might rail against Unixmad anyway for letting it happen, and he can point to the part saying "I never said I'd stop anyone from resurrecting it." And that's my point, Graal needs to say "I won't stop someone from using your discarded server (backup)" and not "I will use your stuff, like it or not."

Weird, but it seems like this Long Buried Comment is quite applicable in view of Zodiac's recent loss. Since this is neither a discussion of any recent admin actions nor an opportunity to bash the admins for what they have or haven't done, perhaps we can discuss what the PWA should ideally be empowered to do when a server owner goes rogue?