"I really don't see open licenses as a way to justify not asking for permission"
I don't remember when or where, but I'm pretty sure bart said one of the main points of how OGA is set up is so artists can release art without having to be constantly bugged by people asking them the same thing over and over: "Can I use your art for xyz?". In which case, open licenses here are very much intended to justify not asking for permission, no? ...assuming the person who would need permission is not violating any of the terms of the license.
I don't think people should avoid asking permission, especially when they are in doubt, but sometimes the point of the license is so people don't have to.
"If a third-party adds a "CC0" tag to my GPL work ... If a third-party adds a "Jesus-frendly art" tag to my work"
Assuming your work is nither CC0 nor Jesus-friendly, wouldn't those two types of tags be considered- if not malicious- simply inaccurate by the rest of the community? Such inaccuracies would be easy to correct by other members of this community- who would also be able to edit tags- and perhaps negatively impact the original tagger's reputation, which would eventually prevent them from tagging other's work at all, yes?
I guess I just don't think those scenarios seem like much of a problem, but then again I have zero experience dealing with crowdsourced metadata.
@Sharm: I gotta say, that avatar offer is a good motivator! I could only do $10 right now, but If there are still some tokens left when I get on top of my finances, I'm going for it!
I would also like to volunteer as a "curator". I look at every piece of new 2D art anyway (usually within a day of its submission), and I've already been through the entire archive of 2D several times now. Reviewing each new submission would not take much more of my time than I already commit.
I also have no problem sticking to community standards for consistent categorization, though it may take me a few attempts to understand the eccentricites of categorizing things consistenly with the rest of the community. :)
...This may not be within the scope of this thread, but how do you feel about a more normalized list of tags? Instead of allowing people to enter any-dang-thing as a tag, have a predefined (though always expanding and improving) list of tags. Or perhaps let the submitter type in tags, but then suggest normalized tags that seem to relate to the art or the tag text they submitted? user types "32 pixel squares", then submit form says "we suggest '32x32 pixel tiles'" or something. Could be too much work for not enough return.
Just noticed this doesn't include Henk Brouwer's "Xerathul's Revenge" tiles. Are they in a different collection?
EDIT: never mind. Just relized they may be licensed differently. I'll ask the artist about licensing.
I don't remember when or where, but I'm pretty sure bart said one of the main points of how OGA is set up is so artists can release art without having to be constantly bugged by people asking them the same thing over and over: "Can I use your art for xyz?". In which case, open licenses here are very much intended to justify not asking for permission, no? ...assuming the person who would need permission is not violating any of the terms of the license.
I don't think people should avoid asking permission, especially when they are in doubt, but sometimes the point of the license is so people don't have to.
This color vs. colorless theme reminds me of H.P. Lovecraft's "The Color Out of Space" story. Very fun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Colour_Out_of_Space
Chroma theif
Desaturater
Tone caster
OMG, thank you William.Thompsonj! I could not find a decent translation to save my life.
@Varkalandar: Looking good!
aw, I LOVE this kind of game!
Ortho:
Iso:
Hmm...
Assuming your work is nither CC0 nor Jesus-friendly, wouldn't those two types of tags be considered- if not malicious- simply inaccurate by the rest of the community? Such inaccuracies would be easy to correct by other members of this community- who would also be able to edit tags- and perhaps negatively impact the original tagger's reputation, which would eventually prevent them from tagging other's work at all, yes?
I guess I just don't think those scenarios seem like much of a problem, but then again I have zero experience dealing with crowdsourced metadata.
Cool. Used this to make a "stunned" status effect for my game.
@Sharm: I gotta say, that avatar offer is a good motivator! I could only do $10 right now, but If there are still some tokens left when I get on top of my finances, I'm going for it!
I would also like to volunteer as a "curator". I look at every piece of new 2D art anyway (usually within a day of its submission), and I've already been through the entire archive of 2D several times now. Reviewing each new submission would not take much more of my time than I already commit.
I also have no problem sticking to community standards for consistent categorization, though it may take me a few attempts to understand the eccentricites of categorizing things consistenly with the rest of the community. :)
...This may not be within the scope of this thread, but how do you feel about a more normalized list of tags? Instead of allowing people to enter any-dang-thing as a tag, have a predefined (though always expanding and improving) list of tags. Or perhaps let the submitter type in tags, but then suggest normalized tags that seem to relate to the art or the tag text they submitted? user types "32 pixel squares", then submit form says "we suggest '32x32 pixel tiles'" or something. Could be too much work for not enough return.
Pages