Cathedral"ism" vs Parlor"ism": An anolysis b : III

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:37 am

It has been a long time since I have posted here, but, due to recent events, I thought it would be good to post an article written a long time ago by the famous Wrye. Many of the old faces I saw during my Morrowind years are gone, and there are many new faces I have never seen before. I think the whole modding community would benefit from reading this.

I have quoted the paper here, but it is easier to read at his site: http://wryemusings.com/Cathedral%20vs.%20Parlor.html

Cathedral vs. Parlor
There are essentially two ways that modders view the place of their creations in the modding community: The Cathedral view, and the Parlor view.

In the Cathedral view, modding is viewed as being like a joint effort to build a cathedral. Individually, our contributions may be small – and may not be worth doing for themselves. But by each person contributing something, we construct something larger and more worthwhile than any of us could do on our own. Under this view, creations are contributions – and may not be taken back. (Just as in building a Cathedral, it would not be allowed for a person to contribute a stained glass window and then later take it back.)

The Parlor view in contrast, is the view that mods are more like privately owned works of art displayed in the modder's parlor. The modder invites others into the parlor to appreciate and enjoy the work of art – but may at any time close the parlor door and ask their guests to leave. And of course, the modder may be very selective about who they invite into their parlor. Under this view, our creations are never contributions; rather we continue to own and control them – takebacks are normal and accepted.

The Parlor view allows the creator to retain complete control of their work. But the Cathedral view creates a much larger, more enduring and more perfected body of work – and for that reason, I prefer it.

LGNPC Seyda Neen Redraft and Amulet of Scrye
To give an example... A year or two ago, Joe Stevens wrote a mod called "Less Generic NPC Seyda Neen", which fleshed out many of the characters in Seyda Neen by giving them non-generic responses to standard dialog topics. Joe eventually left the community, but another team took up the idea after him – creating LGNPC mods for a number of towns. But, after doing several towns, the LGNPC team had raised the bar considerably, and Joe's original work was looking pretty first draftish. At that point, I volunteered to redraft LGNPC Seyda Neen – fixing grammar, paragraph structure, logical inconsistencies and generally bringing it up to the current LGNPC bar.

By the Cathedral view, my redraft was a good thing – I took something that was good and made it even better. And as a result, Joe's original work is seen and appreciated more then before.

But by the Parlor view, my redraft was a bad thing, since I changed Joe's original work. According to the parlor view, I should have created a new LGNPC Seyda Neen from scratch. The result of this would have been two competing LGNPC Seyda Neen's. Not only would this have been a lot more work, but if mine were substantially better, it would have crowded out Joe's original – thus ensuring that even fewer people saw it.

Fortunately for all of us, Joe himself was more of a Cathedral sort of guy and had already given the LGNPC team permission to edit and redistribute his work. Hence, my edit had been pre-blessed.

However, not everything turned out perfectly. In my revision of Seyda Neen, I have the bard tell a ghost story related to one of my favorite mods: Ivza's Amulet of Scrye. If the player doesn't have Amulet of Scrye, then the ghost story is just an extra bit of non-generic dialog. But if the player does have AoS, then ghost story compliments it nicely, emphasizing the spookiness of that mod. However, a few weeks after I released the LGNPC Seyda Neen, Ivza decided to pull Amulet of Scrye from public distribution. To me, that felt like the glazier coming into the Cathedral, pulling out the stained glass window that he had put in earlier, and taking it home with him. But for Ivza, I think that it was just a closing of his parlor door.

It was this, combined with very vocal support for the parlor view on the forum, that led me to retire. I had several ongoing projects and there were several items that I would have liked to continue working on, but it seems like the Parlor view is predominant – and personally I don't find it that inspiring.

Contrasts and Consequences
Modding is a Joint Effort
Almost all of Morrowind modding is a group effort to one degree or another. There are very few mods that do not owe huge debts to earlier produced mods and/or to the expertise and tools provided by earlier modders.

New Work vs. Duplication
The Cathedral view vastly reduces duplication of effort – instead promoting either improvements in, or extensions of the original, or the creation of entirely new, complementary works. One doesn't have go far in reviewing one's mod library to see quite a few of these examples of mods that extend or fix earlier mods. E.g.: LGNPC, Adventure, Join All Houses, CharGen, Inferno's Island, Kivan's patches, alchemy sorters, etc.

Perfection vs. Stagnation
The Cathedral view tends towards perfection, while the Parlor view tends towards repetition and stagnation. Repetition, because earlier useful works that have been closed off have to be recreated. Stagnation, because this fails to lead to improvements, and more importantly because few modders are interested in replicating something that has already been done before. (Especially since, if they knew of the original, they probably have a copy of the original mod, and hence have no personal need to recreate it.

Integration vs. Isolation
The Cathedral view tends towards rich integration between mods. But under the Parlor view, there's not much point of integrating with another mod – since that mod can be removed at any time. Certainly, I would not have added the Amulet of Scrye references to LGNPC Seyda Neen, if I had thought Ivza might remove it.

Authorial Longetivity
Improved works are much more likely to give everyone credit. OTOH, if two works are independently created to do the same job, then it's likely that only one of them will "win" (i.e. be widely known/used) – and thus the effort and name of the loser will be lost. In competitions, there's little desire to mention your competitor in your readme; but in extensions and improvements, the norm is for the original author to get top billing.

Cathedral Effect
Many modders (such as myself) aren't interested in working in a non-Cathedral community. It's belonging to a community, creating something that outlasts our own efforts, that integrates and grows even when we're away that makes the community so interesting. But under the Parlor view, much of what has been built in the past just disappears.

Morrowind players and modders are already paying the price for the lack of prior action to support the Cathedral view. The loss of previous modding sites (Morrowind Files, Euro-Morrowind, Gamer's Roam, etc.) has meant the loss of many of the mods originally on those sites. Many of these mods are still available on people's hard disks, but without a clear re-uploading agreement, these have not been added onto new download sites. (Much of the recent dispute on the forum was on the topic of when and if these could ever be re-uploaded to new sites.)

Aside from just these lost files, other creations would likely have not been withdrawn if there were clear community standards and processes in support of the Cathedral view. I.e., if all upload and link sites had "no takebacks" policies, more of the old mods would be under no takeback licenses, and so could not have been removed.

At this point, Wrye continues into possible solutions he thinks could potentially solve the problem outlined above. If you wish to keep reading, please go to his website and read the whole thing there.

Additionally, this is something I have always wanted to post, but never got around to doing. I have been curious as to what the response is, as well as the new ideas you might have to express. With that said, What do you think? Agree? Disagree? Somewhere in between?

Remember, we keep this civil and under the rules.

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:44 am

I personally lean toward the "Cathedral" position. People are welcome to use the "Better Skulls" vanilla meshes in other mods however they like, as it says in the readme. Still, supporting the cathedral view isn't necessarily the same as wanting a no rules free for all. I wouldn't, for example, just zip up the contents of my data folder and release it as "tronvillain's Morrowind", despite the fact that it would probably produce quite a good initial install.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:20 pm

Interesting post.

As I read it here, what happened with LGNPC was a good example of modders working together to build a good mod, or series of mods. The original mod inspired others to create something similar for other cities, and then the original mod was improved upon by a new author to match the quality of the rest. Better grammar, dialogue structures, etc. It really made it better, even if it's not exactly the original work anymore.

I don't think you can compare this to 'recent events' though. There's a difference between taking a mod, polishing it and adding to it, and then sharing it with the community, and taking a mod regardless of the wishes of modders and dropping it in a compilation, even though those mods were already easily obtainable. Unless I'm misunderstanding 'recent events' here.

It's a real shame when modders take their mods down though, it doesn't do anyone any good.

If I'd disappear from the community, and my quest for for Oblivion turned out to have some serious bugs left in it somewhere, I would not mind at all if someone else would go through the trouble of fixing them.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:46 pm

My general view is and always has been that if I disapepar, I don't just take my content with me, but I'm also of the opinion that I'd like to be told about my work being used before it gets used, and ultimately, have the final say over whether or not it does (while I'm still here to ask, of course).

I do like the idea of people working on my mods to make them better, or working wih something I made to make something bigger and better, but that doesn't mean that I'd give a free licence regardless of everything. I fall somewhere in between, in what I like to think of as the "Private Church" area (Or, for the more accurate term, Privately [Funded] Church, but that's less catchy), where you have to listen to me as the original architect, but if the original architect disappears, someone else will move in in no time. You can't take stuff back, but can at least limit how people use it while you're around to do so.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:18 am

Still, supporting the cathedral view isn't necessarily the same as wanting a no rules free for all. I wouldn't, for example, just zip up the contents of my data folder and release it as "tronvillain's Morrowind", despite the fact that it would probably produce quite a good initial install.

I don't think you can compare this to 'recent events' though. There's a difference between taking a mod, polishing it and adding to it, and then sharing it with the community, and taking a mod regardless of the wishes of modders and dropping it in a compilation, even though those mods were already easily obtainable. Unless I'm misunderstanding 'recent events' here.

It's a real shame when modders take their mods down though, it doesn't do anyone any good.

Good points. Just wanted to add some of my opinion.

I feel it is still relate-able.

As a user, I personally take a very strong stand on the Cathedral side. For me, the most important thing in modding is to improve the experience of all its current members, as well as to try and bring in new potential members to the community. A great example of this is back a few years when I was involved in the Marathon community, A shooter Bungie made before Microsoft bought them. This game is ancient, being originally only released on MACs. Bungie released the game source, and a community of about 30 active people took it up and have been improving the code ever since. When I was involved, there were about two updates to the code every month. Looking at the site now, I see that there has been two updates this year, and nothing in the last 6 months.

During my time there, I found out that they had the ability to move from 2d-sprites and add 3d objects to the game. I was pushing, trying to get people to create and use these, but nobody seemed to be interested. I told them that if they wanted to revitalize the community, they should move and create new maps using these 3d models, as 3d is a larger draw to people than sprites. As the years have passed, the community has slowly dissolved, growing smaller and smaller. While Morrowind has a much larger community, parallels can be drawn.

Trying to be an outsider looking in, the claim that mods are easily obtainable doesn't fly with me (Gotta love Avatar!) I go to PES and see over 7000 mods listed. I go to the nexus and see over 2000 mods listed. Hell, I even go to Galahuat's list of mods and there are at least over 200. To get Morrowind to a level that I would want to play it would take at least a week of downloading and installing, ordering, fixing , etc. By then, the nostalgia has worn off, and I no longer feel like playing the game. It is easy to say they are easily obtainable by themselves, but the sheer number that you need and want to use makes it a very difficult and daunting task. Personally, the way I look at recent events, a way that could have strengthened and revitalized the community was blocked. Enough about that though.

All that said, I have released a few small mods here and there for various games, and I have felt (at least what I think they feel) the twinge of seeing your work used elsewhere. It is not a very nice feeling, that's for sure. As all of my mods were small and honestly, did not require the magnitude of work that many mods do. I'm am not sure how I would react to seeing a mod I spent a month of time on being used elsewhere. Regardless, it is very interesting to discuss, and I would like to see the replies of all the modders around here

My general view is and always has been that if I disapepar, I don't just take my content with me, but I'm also of the opinion that I'd like to be told about my work being used before it gets used, and ultimately, have the final say over whether or not it does (while I'm still here to ask, of course).

I do like the idea of people working on my mods to make them better, or working wih something I made to make something bigger and better, but that doesn't mean that I'd give a free licence regardless of everything. I fall somewhere in between, in what I like to think of as the "Private Church" area (Or, for the more accurate term, Privately [Funded] Church, but that's less catchy), where you have to listen to me as the original architect, but if the original architect disappears, someone else will move in in no time. You can't take stuff back, but can at least limit how people use it while you're around to do so.

This brings up another point I wanted to discuss. As I said, I am strong on the Cathedral side so:

Assume I were using someone elses resources to create a mod, and I messaged them and emailed them and never received any response. For me, this would be as good as if they had said, "Yes, you may use my work." I would take it, that, because they cannot answer No, it is better for the community that I use their work in the creation of my mod (with credits of course). However, I know that many would consider this sacrilege, and ignoring the authors rights. Any opinions?

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:57 pm

intresting points. But as with all papaers its a biased bit of rabble. Without a constant use of exmaples from both parties and raisng points of view for each side the article falls flat on its face. giving one example and then explaining all about "cathedralism" kinda makes those modders who opt for Parlorism as complete dikes.

Plus he has also left out three very important aspects in his anolysis: Those who fall into both categories (Westly for example helps out in a lot of mods but likes to keep his own work his own), those who mod for the hell or it be it extensions, recreations, joint efforts or personnal mods regardless and therefore do not fall into either category and finally the anomilies.

Anomilies can consit of people creating compiliations, one of mods and then dropped of the radar or those who come up with mod ideas that never get made. Modding is not just creating a mod together or showing off your work. There are many layers and elements that mod making has and trying to fit them into two categories and being biased against on of them really doesnt help to shed light at the complex nature of what it means to mod.

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:41 am

This brings up another point I wanted to discuss. As I said, I am strong on the Cathedral side so:

Assume I were using someone elses resources to create a mod, and I messaged them and emailed them and never received any response. For me, this would be as good as if they had said, "Yes, you may use my work." I would take it, that, because they cannot answer No, it is better for the community that I use their work in the creation of my mod (with credits of course). However, I know that many would consider this sacrilege, and ignoring the authors rights. Any opinions?

Ianol, But if there are no other permissions included, then I am fairly sure it is copyright infringement. In the current legal system, you can't just use other peoples property without permission.

Ignoring the legal side, as I doubt it would ever get that far. It isn't nice to use a modders work without permission. It also tends to rip communities apart. Please don't.

intresting points. But as with all papaers its a biased bit of rabble. Without a constant use of exmaples from both parties and raisng points of view for each side the article falls flat on its face. giving one example and then explaining all about "cathedralism" kinda makes those modders who opt for Parlorism as complete dikes.

Yes, but from some angles, it could be seen like that. If you look at the community as a whole, then you could view them as holding back progress. Or not holding back, but failing to do something that could assist progress. :shrug:

There are two related quotes, that sort of fit.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" -- Isaac Newton
"In computer science, we stand on each other's feet." -- Brian K. Reid

While the quotes are about science, I feel the same remains true in some cases of Morrowind Modding. Much more can be achived by building on the work of others who came before rather than rebuilding from scratch every time.

However. I am a programmer. While I would claim it is an art and is creative, it isn't as much as something like textures, character writing etc. I don't have quite that attachment to what I create or as much of a vision for it. If you have a vision of how something should be, what fits where, I can understand why you wouldn't want someone else to use the thing you created in a place where it doesn't fit.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:49 am

I don't like the labels created by Wrye and think they tend to simplify the discussion. I personally feel strongly attached to what I create and release, but I don't feel guilty about it. I am not damaging the community by releasing mods I feel I have rights over. I warn in most of my readmes that I have to be asked to be granted permission to use what I create. Because of that I suppose you could say I lean more on the "parlor" side. However, I have also released modders' resources in the past, and I have contributed to other people's mods by creating small meshes and textures for them (mostly in the French modding community but also here with swimwear ground meshes). Because of that, I also lean towards the "cathedral" position.
This is why I dislike these labels. None of them represents me.

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:39 am

There are two related quotes, that sort of fit.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" -- Isaac Newton
"In computer science, we stand on each other's feet." -- Brian K. Reid

While the quotes are about science, I feel the same remains true in Morrowind Modding. Much more can be achived by building on the work of others who came before rather than rebuilding from scratch every time.

throwing two quotes about science doesnt answer anything. I pointed out that labeling was biased not that it was wrong.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:50 am

Ianol, But if there are no other permissions included, then I am fairly sure it is copyright infringement. In the current legal system, you can't just use other peoples property without permission.

Ignoring the legal side, as I doubt it would ever get that far. It isn't nice to use a modders work without permission. It also tends to rip communities apart. Please don't.

I am not sure you completely read what I wrote.

If the modder replied and said NO, then I wouldn't do anything.

However, if they NEVER sent a response, I would go ahead and use it.

They never said no, so, to make a great improvement for the community, I would use it. That is why I lie on the Cathedral side.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:41 am

throwing two quotes about science doesnt answer anything. I pointed out that labeling was biased not that it was wrong.

It is hard to make it unbiased.

Cathedral tends to have positive connotations, while parlor negative connotations.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:51 am

throwing two quotes about science doesnt answer anything. I pointed out that labeling was biased not that it was wrong.

Sorry, I was in the middle of editing. I think it reads better (ish) now.

I am not sure you completely read what I wrote.

If the modder replied and said NO, then I wouldn't do anything.

However, if they NEVER sent a response, I would go ahead and use it.

I read exactly what you wrote and my response holds. It is far better (from a legal and ethical standpoint) to assume that work isn't open by default.

I hate to use anologies, but you can't just steal something from a shop because the shopkeeper didn't explicitly say you couldn't.

They never said no, so, to make a great improvement for the community, I would use it. That is why I lie on the Cathedral side.

Wrye was suggesting if your work was open, then you tended to be more on the Cathedral side. It has nothing to do with using other peoples work without permission.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:38 am

I am not sure you completely read what I wrote.

If the modder replied and said NO, then I wouldn't do anything.

However, if they NEVER sent a response, I would go ahead and use it.

They never said no, so, to make a great improvement for the community, I would use it. That is why I lie on the Cathedral side.

no he understood what you said - and its wrong. Already you've taken the idea of Cathedralism and completly distorted it. Look at the compliation mod that was made and now completly gone. The author used mods without permission and gave credit. That caused alot of anger here - alot of the forum people that posted would consider themselves Cathedralism but then they got pissed at that one bundle of mods - so does that make them parlorism?? no its a diffrent label altogether. The label Cathedralism is not a "free for all card" its a building a mod together, for everyone with the permission from the modders whos stuff we use.

As with you, already distorting the label cathedralism - it shows that the label is indeed a wrong label to give! soon we will mini factions all claimging to be the same thing but all diffrent. Its 15th century europe all over again.

It is hard to make it unbiased.

Cathedral tends to have positive connotations, while parlor negative connotations.

and the fact that parlorism has negative connations proves tha the label is biased! In a matter of a few hours of the label being posted here it has nothing but a bad vibe.

no ones put forth an argument for them and possibly if they do that will biased as well!

You do understand how to get a nonbiased opinion right? You get somebody who has nothing to do with anything modding/morrowind/elderscrolls and get them to observe, read, research and then post an anolysis 6 months down the line after going through shed loads of facts!

trying to label ourselves and each othr usually proves 99.9% wrong. And as just proven you've distorted your label in a matter of seconds.

lets look at it this way:

An artist can share his methods of painting, his techniques and his knowledge. BUT he wont allow reproductions or copies of his work and displays them in selective art galleries and only sells to the highest price. This is a combination of cathedralism and parloism as outlined in the first post. As the artist is both his is niether and therefore doesnt fit into the labels given. So what is he?

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:41 am

If you look at the community as a whole, then you could view them as holding back progress. Or not holding back, but failing to do something that could assist progress. :shrug:

Except maybe "progress" is not so important when it comes to modding. I'm sorry if that sounds dumb, but after all, this is just game modding we're talking about here. It's just a hobby some of us indulge into, and the future of the global economy is not at stake if we don't share our work with everyone. We're all just here to have some fun, talk about our passion, and share some of our work. Who cares if some of us don't want to see their mods re-used. After all, in the end it is not really important. So maybe some mods don't exist but they could have if some of us had been more cooperative. Again, I don't think it's a terrible situation. It's just not that important.

no he understood what you said - and its wrong. Already you've taken the idea of Cathedralism and completly distorted it. Look at the compliation mod that was made and now completly gone. The author used mods without permission and gave credit. That caused alot of anger here - alot of the forum people that posted would consider themselves Cathedralism but then they got pissed at that one bundle of mods - so does that make them parlorism?? no its a diffrent label altogether.

As with you, already distorting the label cathedralism - it shows that the label is indeed a wrong label to give! soon we will mini factions all calimging to be the same thing but all diffrent. Its 15th century europe all over again.

and the fact that parlorism has negative connations proves thath te label is biased!

no ones put forth an argument for them and possibly if they do that will biased as well!

You do understand how to get a nonbiased opinion right? You get somebody who has nothing to do with anything modding/morrowind/elderscrolls and get them to observe, read, research and then post an anolysis 6 months down the line after going through shed loads of facts!

trying to label ourselves and each othr usually proves 99.9% wrong. And as just proven you've distorted your label in a matter of seconds.

I agree 100% with that. You've expressed what I think about labels better than I could

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:20 am

Sorry, I was in the middle of editing. I think it reads better (ish) now.

@yacoby - yeah clears it up

- didnt mean to be snappy lol. You make a valid point and as a whole the community does come across like that.

based on the few posts already here I though I would share my anolysis ( its a bit of fun dont take it seriously):

so far I can see the following model with the following sub-factions:

Cathedralism

============ Stateism - building something together and controling it. No modders allowed to build upon/use the resources made (Wizard island)
now using the outline of cathedralism WI would fit in here. Yet its end decleration is parlorism....

============ Equalism - Using others resources without having prior permission even if an attempt 9but no response was got) to contact the author.
Using the outline of cathedralism this would be faction from forementioned ism. Its ideals would be the same of a building
something from the community for the community but they recieved no permission.

Parlorism

=========== Idealism - Coming up with an idea for a mod and seeing if its possible. Could possibly use suggestions from other modders but in reality
its there pet project. Usually nothing comes of the mod and it sits as an idea.

=========== Everyoneism - everyone requires some form of recgonistion or credit if their work is used in any other mod. While any mod made with everyoneism
would fall under cathedralism, the fact that it was born of Parlorism means it falls short of this title.

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:12 am

Except maybe "progress" is not so important when it comes to modding. I'm sorry if that sounds dumb, but after all, this is just game modding we're talking about here. It's just a hobby some of us indulge into, and the future of the global economy is not at stake if we don't share our work with everyone. We're all just here to have some fun, talk about our passion, and share some of our work. Who cares if some of us don't want to see their mods re-used. After all, in the end it is not really important. So maybe some mods don't exist but they could have if some of us had been more cooperative. Again, I don't think it's a terrible situation. It's just not that important.

I think, what I meant by progress is probably limited to a subset of mods, mainly the more programming ones. For example, if you want to add some new graphical capability to the engine, it is going to be far faster and probably lead to a better result to build on top of MGE.

A better example would be Emma's and Grumpy's companions. The base that was common to all companions, the scripts, were released allowing other people to build on them and allowing people who can't script to build companions. Progress being that it allows people who couldn't have made that sort of mod be able to make it.

However, the unique bits of the companions, the dialog, the quests all remain more "closed". Which is fine, as people are less likely to want or need to build on them.

[edit]
Second thoughts, not just the programming bits. For example, I made a companion and wanted a unique-ish head to go with it. The only way I could do that was to utilize modders resources as I can't texture anything (much). So people having released faces that I could use in my mod allowed me to better realize what I wanted my companion to be.

(In actual fact, I had a head made for me by Westly

, but I think the point still stands)
[/edit]

However, what you say is totally true. Who gives a flying [censored] if a mod is open or closed. As long as the modder had fun making it, then it is all good. People having fun playing it is a (large) added bonus and allowing others in the community is also (IMHO) a bonus.

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:16 pm

I think that Bethesda allowed us to use for the mods, the original Morrowind contents (textures, meshes, animations etc...) including them in the Construction Set Disk and in the other 2 disks. All the textures are about 5000, and the models are about 6500.
I think of how much artistic skills, experience and time required to make such works. And I think that someone made them (and they are professionists, and didn't it for hobby, but did it professionally)
So, I wonder, what would the original authors think, knowing that Beth let us use 5000 textures, and 6500 models, and we are so restrictive with our work, that maybe is based upon their? Maybe they could smile :blush:
I could never make mods, make models and animations without the many that shared freely their works, or their knowledge. So, the least I can do, is to do the same with others and it is an honor when someone uses something I made. That is the only proof that it was something worthy.

In the past, I communicated with some modders, asking why they were so restrictive about redistribution and reuse of their works.
We mod for free after all, so I believe, the more people can access our works, the better is.
The first answer was "because if I update my mods, then there will still be around an outdated version, maybe bugged, and I don't want players have it"
That didn't sound the true to me. I said "so, I presume you have track of the players who use your work, and when you make an update, you send an email to anyone who downloaded it informing that the version is outdated? I do not think so".
Finally, I get the answer "They are mine, and I do not have to justify. If people do not accept it, I'll remove anything I have uploaded".

I was disappointed of how little they wanted to discuss about it, and it reminded me of when I was a child. Usually, any other child wanted to use their toys to play with others, but there was always one child in each group, that said:"the toys are mine, and I decide who'll play and how, and if you don't like it, I'll take back them all and you'll not play with them anymore". :confused:

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:52 am

However, what you say is totally true. Who gives a flying [censored] if a mod is open or closed. As long as the modder had fun making it, then it is all good. People having fun playing it is a (large) added bonus.

see now if a modder makes a mod for themselves and then thinks on a whim I will upload it for others to see if they wanted something like that is that cathedralism or parlorism? The mod itself automatically falls into cathedralism for they are shariming the mod but as the fundemental base of the mod being built upon the idea that the mod maker is making it for himself tahts parlorism right?

See labels dont work. They confuse things, seperate and isolate people and worst of all create a means by which people can abuse others see scenario:

New , one off modder, "Oh hai! I just realsed a mod. I hope you enjoy it but dont re-use please"
New foundforum: "burn heathen! Your parlorism is not wanted" *now enjoy a ritual burning of the modder*

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:37 pm

Sorry, I was in the middle of editing. I think it reads better (ish) now.

I read exactly what you wrote and my response holds. It is far better (from a legal and ethical standpoint) to assume that work isn't open by default.

I hate to use anologies, but you can't just steal something from a shop because the shopkeeper didn't explicitly say you couldn't.

Wrye was suggesting if your work was open, then you tended to be more on the Cathedral side. It has nothing to do with using other peoples work without permission.

I like anologies

The way I look at it:

I create a cure for the common cold. However, part of the formula is copyrighted by Airborne. The creator of Airborne is nowhere to be found to give permission, or to strike a deal. For all anyone knows, he could be in Timbuktu, near death. Should I have to wait 7 more years to release this society-enhancing formula because of copyright issues?

Ethics question, obviously, so there are many answers. As I have said, I lean towards the side where building and helping the community is more important, so I would release it. If Mr. Airborne shows up a year later, we can work out a deal then.

I understand the way I think offends some people, but, sorry, I can't really change it.

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:31 pm

its not about ethics or right or wrong.

Its about labeling people.

Already you've made parlorism people out to be negative guys and cathedralism guys to be the chosen ones.

Look I made an image: http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w152/Wolfsbane_89/labels.jpg

I purposly made the cathedalist look holy over the revolting parlourist because thats how your makingthem out to be. Labeling one segment of the community as better than the rest is not going to go down well - so I repeat myself the whole thread and its purpose is biased rubbish. And what do with do with rubbish we throw it in the bin.

Last bit of food for thought though: There are modders out there that have a godlike ego. Their work is the best and only the best. They practice this and they preach this. even if their work is pure rubbbish and we point this out they are still like "hahaha no no no". Now they arent cathedralists because they dont give to jacks about the community only their work. BUT they are not parlourists because they dont withdraw their work, they dont have a select viewing of it either. Their godlike ego compels them to brandish their work like a cheap [censored] by having it everywhere.

So by your un-biased opinion where would they fit?

Now thats another "where would they fit" question that I have asked and I doubt I will get an answer as you havnt acknowledge the other examples I have given. So already your labeling fails because there are sections that dont fit into either and you've chosen to ignore them.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:53 am

I can catch the original intentions of the quoted text but it only works in some very few specific times.
The modding time belongs to that sacred time, the most personal and intimate, the time of leisure, of game, to love…
we can share our vision, our time, our effort but never we must fall in the side of responsibility cause all of us left behind this matters to the RL efforts.
Only in some special moments that more than one modder share the same interest, objectives and dedication we can think that the best option its to take advantage of a community work, a team work, but whichever times you have run into that opportunity?
Normally a modder try to share is huge idea and normally he finds a wall of suspicions, about his capabilities and real dedication cause no one want to fall into the unknown. Its normal, like I said before, people here stay only for pure pleasure but the majority knows that a huge project needs direction and this means that someone needs to follow directions from others. Humm, nasty. Ask in the big teams out there, it needs a lot of internal regulations.

I don't think so the community work don't grow directly from the work of his predecessors. Every modder make use of the knowledge from other mods. Its constant and a good way to make nice steps forward. Its a lego cathedral, every little piece of help here in the forums its a new lego brick to reach the final pinnacle.
But, a giant community dedicate exclusively to a only one objective to make the upper mega game? Then create a development business if you have the talent to maintain so disperse an eclectic community working together.

For my personal point of view all the time shared here in the forums are the only thing I need but im receiving direct help from modders doing other projects that send me meshes if needed, great??. I also asked for help and I received several people messages answering clearly this calling. I think its a beautiful gift from them. But in other side I feel bad cause I dont want to push they to a dark side of modding.
I myself try to help others explaining my techniques or sending textures for specific projects. I remember when Ostar contacted with me for his need of book textures for the LGNPC and I did happily. It agreed in the time, the capacities and the concept, many coincidences if you think of it.

Questioning the ownership of a work its not the good way to go. Respect must be the foundation of all the community. All can be done, from Compendiums to help people to ''plug and play'' the game to huge teams, to little personal running projects, but all of this must be done from INSIDE the community and the mod developers, not from any ''outlander''. I own the art material of my mods and I want total control of this material, not so that I do not want that everybody can use my mod but cause I want to take control of my own material that can be used in a unespected way.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:01 pm

I like anologies

The way I look at it:

I create a cure for the common cold. However, part of the formula is copyrighted by Airborne. The creator of Airborne is nowhere to be found to give permission, or to strike a deal. For all anyone knows, he could be in Timbuktu, near death. Should I have to wait 7 more years to release this society-enhancing formula because of copyright issues?

I like anologies too, but I don't think that this is a very good one.
A cure for cold has many implications social, moral, etc. It could change and save lives - have a huge and real impact on millions. Holding it back because of copyright reasons or because you don't want to offend Mr. Airborne is obviously wrong.

Whereas a mod is, typically, just a fun little doodad. It's not a comparable situation. No one needs it like they need a cure for cold, they only want it because it's shiny. The only moral/ethical concerns involved are just the copyright infringement or potential cause for offense. There's no great consequence of release that so overpowering as to negate those concerns.

Personally, my stance is "I don't actually care".
Nonetheless, I'm forced into paying attention to what happens to my stuff and into making my permissions clear. I'm not forced into this because I care for myself or my stuff, but because everyone else in the community seems to expect that I do. My only interest in watching my permissions is to make sure that some poor dude doesn't ever end up using them by accident and then having the community rip into him before I even have a chance to say "It was probably an accident" or "I don't even mind."

Edit: For clarity.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:33 pm

well put connary

so the ultimate question: Cathedrialism or Parlourism. You have to be one cause apprently theres no room for anything else.

p.s the picture is copyrighted by me. You may not reproduce or relink to it in anyway or from but you may mention it in comments nad produce similar works of art based upon my own. XD

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:10 pm

well put connary

so the ultimate question: Cathedrialism or Parlourism. You have to be one cause apprently theres no room for anything else.

p.s the picture is copyrighted by me. You may not reproduce or relink to it in anyway or from but you may mention it in comments nad produce similar works of art based upon my own. XD

Well my answer try to explain than that tirade dont have any sense at all for me taking in consideration the real nature of a modding community. I suppose the majority count of me like the paradigm of Parlourism (as if I knew that this word means).

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:08 am

Well my answer try to explain than that tirade dont have any sense at all for me taking in consideration the real nature of a modding community. I suppose the majority count of me like the paradigm of Parlourism.

I know, its a shame that we have to be labelled. Its not a nice feeling. I didnt mean to call you out connary - I dont want any anti-parloristic hatred to be thrown your way. But if society is dictating that we have to be labelled like some 15th century relgious scet ( and the same narrow mindeness that follows such strange cult harring barbrisms) then I supose we should confrom..... cause you know I am still wating to see why the op is ignoring all the other sub groups, modders and modding type that I and others have pointed out....so what was that about narrow mindness?

Cathedral&#34;ism&#34; vs Parlor&#34;ism&#34;: An anolysis b

Cathedral"ism" vs Parlor"ism": An anolysis b