Maybe it would be enough to deactivate submissions where the case is unclear, only when a (maybe-)copyright holder shows up and asks to take it down? Being too defensive in advance just doesn't look that good.
Well thanks but I didn't want to distract the thread in the direction of explaining the issue. Let's rather think about constructive ways to solve it, for example: Instead of guessing about potential threats and issues, maybe someone could just ask the copyright holders how their stance is to art that aims at extending their own work? Or whatever else might be fruitful, I came here to share my suggestion.
Thx for the "recent comments" change, it is so intuitive now, I didnt even realize until I went from /latest to mainpage and thought "Oh you have seen the comments already"
Not exactly an issue, but: As someone who likes to use the /latest page as entrypoint, I would like to have the "recent comments" box on left sidebar, preferably under "active forum topics" and above the 2 collection boxes. On the start page, I think this order (pulling the recent comments a bit up) makes more sense too.
Also, not sure if intended or not: On latest art page, main block, why is the order: 3D - 2D - all mixed - Music - Sounds - Textures? I would find it more systematic if the mixed box is either on top or bottom.
Also, what Surt says, images wider than the main block could maybe resized and turn into a link that would open the image in full size in next tab on click (I'm doing that manually with context menu now, to circumvent the problem). Or surts solution, but then, I dont have that empty space on right side (1024x768 here). So not sure where the real root of the problem is - or which fix is easier.
Let's have the tagging work done in hierarchies. (Re-)tagging stuff could be done by the majority of people (some points earned, some medals, member since X, etc.). These changes are immediately published, to avoid (most of the) version conflicts. Then there are curators, they are able to see a list of recent retagged items: a preview image that serves as link as usual, and with kind of a "diff" display (added tags in green, removed tags in red). It should not take much time to go through that list and check for mistakes (at least significantly less time then actually doing the work!). Then, the change can be marked as "verified" and won't show up in that list again. Or, there is a option to view verified ones too, if one wants to doublecheck.
To help keeping the tagging consistent and structured: Tag the tags! In other words, categorize them. Instead of a single tag input field, there would be one per category. This adds more managing work in first place, but the advantages are:
the suggestion list per category becomes smaller, it is not the sum of all tags anymore; easier to hunt typos, doubles, misplaced ones etc.
consistency because taggers are encouraged to fill in at least one tag per type. This way there are no more "forgotten aspects" anymore
by defining the categories, it can be focused on the question "What kind of tags do we want to apply anyway?" Otherwise, people come up with ideas, that get applied to a small fraction of submissions, but since other taggers dont pick up the concept, it will be half-assed and thus not useful, and add just noise. Examples of what I mean: somebody decides to tag things by their dominant colour, or: somebody decides to tag beings by the impression they leave (sad, frightening, shady and such). For sure it might be useful here and there, but only if the majority of content is tagged with this in regard. By using categories, it can be decided if there should be a "dominant colour" category or not. Of course, there can be a "misc" category where you put in tags that dont fit in categories, and of course taggers can add tags to a certain category if it isnt there yet.
Also, there is the thing with hierarchies. We have a sword, and add the tags "weapon, melee, sword" - would be nice if one adds just "sword" and the other two get automatically added. But then, hierarchies are kind of inflexible, and there might be occasions, where you dont want it. Because you invented the throwing sword, that is not a melee weapon :P Here should probably be a way to override the auto-adding. Maybe they appear in a separate field (so much fields! I know I know) below the input field with a [X] prefixed, and can be deleted if inappropiate.
(This is all written with complete ignorance to technical doability.)
The problem is, it isn't a bot at all. Moderating the first post of a new user is the only thing I can think of that would help here.
That of course means, the spammer tries to write a somewhat proper, link-free first post to get a foot in the door. But I would consider most of its posts (even if they are somewhat on topic) at least "weird" for a newcomer, even without link.
If some posts look suspicious, the approval can get delayed by 12 or 24 hours. It will go away, if the hoops to jump-through hang uncomfortable high, I hope:)
I am aware that I am asking for more work on moderators shoulders, I'd volunteer for this task, if help is needed. (Drupal hopefully has a pre-made solution for this?)
__
Dear Spammer: Learn to make art, it is not that difficult to earn some money from it.
Each to its own, I am out of here, bye.
Maybe it would be enough to deactivate submissions where the case is unclear, only when a (maybe-)copyright holder shows up and asks to take it down? Being too defensive in advance just doesn't look that good.
Well thanks but I didn't want to distract the thread in the direction of explaining the issue. Let's rather think about constructive ways to solve it, for example: Instead of guessing about potential threats and issues, maybe someone could just ask the copyright holders how their stance is to art that aims at extending their own work? Or whatever else might be fruitful, I came here to share my suggestion.
So the rpgmaker guys have copyrighted a particular way of how to draw an eye? Is that so?
I am just picking the most obvious example from the gif in the post above, of course.
Also, are they interested in going to court to clarify officially how far copyright in pixel art goes? Or not?
Maybe this should be evaluated, there are a lot of potential similar conflicts of interest, IMO.
Oh well, I missed the comments, sorry for that! Thanks to all you guys for making the things that go into here :)
Thx for the "recent comments" change, it is so intuitive now, I didnt even realize until I went from /latest to mainpage and thought "Oh you have seen the comments already"
Not exactly an issue, but: As someone who likes to use the /latest page as entrypoint, I would like to have the "recent comments" box on left sidebar, preferably under "active forum topics" and above the 2 collection boxes. On the start page, I think this order (pulling the recent comments a bit up) makes more sense too.
Also, not sure if intended or not: On latest art page, main block, why is the order: 3D - 2D - all mixed - Music - Sounds - Textures? I would find it more systematic if the mixed box is either on top or bottom.
Also, what Surt says, images wider than the main block could maybe resized and turn into a link that would open the image in full size in next tab on click (I'm doing that manually with context menu now, to circumvent the problem). Or surts solution, but then, I dont have that empty space on right side (1024x768 here). So not sure where the real root of the problem is - or which fix is easier.
Hi xier,
I would go for "effects" or "FX", but not sure if there is a more official term for it.
Going to the collections and used browser search for "eff" and "fx" gave me:
http://opengameart.org/content/platformer-sidescroller-items-effects-misc
http://opengameart.org/content/isometric-items-effects-misc
http://opengameart.org/content/2d-effects
Hope there is something useful for you.
A few ideas, not sure if practical or not:
Let's have the tagging work done in hierarchies. (Re-)tagging stuff could be done by the majority of people (some points earned, some medals, member since X, etc.). These changes are immediately published, to avoid (most of the) version conflicts. Then there are curators, they are able to see a list of recent retagged items: a preview image that serves as link as usual, and with kind of a "diff" display (added tags in green, removed tags in red). It should not take much time to go through that list and check for mistakes (at least significantly less time then actually doing the work!). Then, the change can be marked as "verified" and won't show up in that list again. Or, there is a option to view verified ones too, if one wants to doublecheck.
To help keeping the tagging consistent and structured: Tag the tags! In other words, categorize them. Instead of a single tag input field, there would be one per category. This adds more managing work in first place, but the advantages are:
Examples of what I mean: somebody decides to tag things by their dominant colour, or: somebody decides to tag beings by the impression they leave (sad, frightening, shady and such). For sure it might be useful here and there, but only if the majority of content is tagged with this in regard.
By using categories, it can be decided if there should be a "dominant colour" category or not. Of course, there can be a "misc" category where you put in tags that dont fit in categories, and of course taggers can add tags to a certain category if it isnt there yet.
Also, there is the thing with hierarchies. We have a sword, and add the tags "weapon, melee, sword" - would be nice if one adds just "sword" and the other two get automatically added. But then, hierarchies are kind of inflexible, and there might be occasions, where you dont want it. Because you invented the throwing sword, that is not a melee weapon :P Here should probably be a way to override the auto-adding. Maybe they appear in a separate field (so much fields! I know I know) below the input field with a [X] prefixed, and can be deleted if inappropiate.
(This is all written with complete ignorance to technical doability.)
The problem is, it isn't a bot at all. Moderating the first post of a new user is the only thing I can think of that would help here.
That of course means, the spammer tries to write a somewhat proper, link-free first post to get a foot in the door. But I would consider most of its posts (even if they are somewhat on topic) at least "weird" for a newcomer, even without link.
If some posts look suspicious, the approval can get delayed by 12 or 24 hours. It will go away, if the hoops to jump-through hang uncomfortable high, I hope:)
I am aware that I am asking for more work on moderators shoulders, I'd volunteer for this task, if help is needed. (Drupal hopefully has a pre-made solution for this?)
__
Dear Spammer: Learn to make art, it is not that difficult to earn some money from it.
Pages