|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Alex Polimeni wrote:
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
All you guys want to do with CW is turn it into a game forum, and CW was
NEVER about gaming. That’s what I don’t understand.
CW was NEVER about gaming. Never!
|
We arnt TRYING to turn it gaming! Long ago, i had wanted to. No, we want to
take the community to the next level, instead of keeping it just a little
story-board basically.
Why not have tips-n-tricks? Helpful articles? On-Line displays? Role Playing
Game section? Archives of the past? A bigger, better CW type thing, with the
Flux storys that are worlds by themselves (ikros perfect example) and maby a
pre-created map realm that you could have citys and buildings storys etc in?
Also, you may want to note that i replyed to Pawels post. I guess you just
like ignoring me, then, since im the one what came out with the RPG idea in
the first place. As i have said before, with you its “my way or the high
way.”
|
Why not do it on your own? You and the others have already attacked Richard and
Pawel enough to illicit this kind of reply. Were I Richard, I’d feel the same
way. Instead of unifying the community, you (and some others) are the ones
dividing it by hurtling insults at the CW admins and thus souring them to your
cause.
Like I say here: http://news.lugnet.com/castle/org/cw/?n=1837 and like Jojo
says here: http://news.lugnet.com/castle/org/cw/?n=1836 ...
CW =/= the castle community!
The castle community > CW.
You can either break out of your current frame and do cool stuff nicely, or
continue to destroy relationships by whining and insulting. Your choice.
-Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
All you guys want to do with CW is turn it into a game forum, and CW was
NEVER about gaming. That’s what I don’t understand.
CW was NEVER about gaming. Never!
|
We arnt TRYING to turn it gaming! Long ago, i had wanted to. No, we want to take
the community to the next level, instead of keeping it just a little story-board
basically.
Why not have tips-n-tricks? Helpful articles? On-Line displays? Role Playing
Game section? Archives of the past? A bigger, better CW type thing, with the
Flux storys that are worlds by themselves (ikros perfect example) and maby a
pre-created map realm that you could have citys and buildings storys etc in?
Also, you may want to note that i replyed to Pawels post. I guess you just like
ignoring me, then, since im the one what came out with the RPG idea in the first
place. As i have said before, with you its “my way or the high way.”
Anyway, i have to get off here. Seeya
Aramir
|
|
| |
All you guys want to do with CW is turn it into a game forum, and CW was NEVER
about gaming. That’s what I don’t understand.
CW was NEVER about gaming. Never!
I also personally find it annoying that no one has responded directly to Pawel’s
post here: http://news.lugnet.com/castle/org/cw/?n=1822 Y’all would rather
just gripe about how I am just not going to hand off CW to someone who doesn’t
care at all about the original spirit of the project. Um, well -- duh! Pawel,
the creator of CW, is basically being blown off. Y’all and can rail against me
as pleases you, I more or less don’t care. But snubbing Pawel shows your true
colors, at least to me if not to him (and I speak only for myself in this post).
Frankly, I think there may be too much bad blood to do anything with the project
now. I will let Pawel decide what he wants to do in terms of his own
involvement, as is befitting since CW is his baby and always was. As for
myself, I don’t intend to do a stitch of work to help any of you. Certainly,
not very much more work if anything at all.
I am sadly reminded of how many of you basically hated Craigo’s ingenious map
idea. It was modular, it was infinitely expandable, everybody could have what
sections pleased them, etc. -- it should have been prefect! Instead, I seem to
remember lots of posts about land-grabs and resistance to the use of Lego motifs
and animal shapes for the land masses. What a tedious lot y’all can be...
I was open to new ways to move forward, but no one ever offered either the
necessary skills (very separate from enthusiasm for castle stuff -- HTML, CSS,
FTP, image manipulation, etc) or made a suggestion that didn’t just sound like
D&D style gaming straight off. When Anthony Sava made his suggestion (and while
I liked some of his ideas) he was knowingly stepping on my and unknowingly
stepping on Pawel’s toes. It was something like a coup attempt to appoint
himself de facto admin. That was a rather obnoxious thing to do, don’t you
think? Even under a Parliamentary system, there is a Prime Minister -- and at
least for a time that person has been me. The funny thing is that if he had been
just a little more patient he could have done whatever he wanted under Pawel’s
Guild plan and I would have gladly given him the keys to his Guild. Then he and
his fellows could have done whatever they wished with it. Maybe that will still
happen, I don’t know.
Pawel and I were implementing something that was intended as being VERY
hands-off in nature -- pointedly so because I wanted to have to do as little
work as possible. There was just a surface hint of organization so that things
wouldn’t just careen madly every which way and without at least some vague sense
of direction, but that’s about it. Some genius suggested that I would then with
minimal effort be claiming authorship of CW -- I ask you: precisely how and why
would I try to claim the work of other individuals or groups as my own? If some
group had organized a Guild called “The Annoying Jerks of Castle World,” believe
me when I assert that they would have gotten full credit for their project.
What’s funny to me is that I wanted to enable something close to the original
spirit of CW, but also providing considerable autonomy to individuals and
Guilds. Through lack of patience and what amounts to little more than the
heckling of yours truly, you have managed to rebel against the autonomy Pawel
and I were going to provide. We had read your posts and ideas and were in the
act of distilling those many desires into a usable system. Even gaming Guild’s
were going to be possible because when Pawel and I discussed the Guild idea on
the phone I argued for it recognizing that lot’s of people wanted that to be
possible (however little I understand it).
In sum, this is what we have instead:
Sava -- dictatorial, without any right to be. Pile on lots of sour grapes. And
many of the rest of you have been little nicer than that.
That’s not much to work with in my view. Why should I even try?
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Johannes Koehler wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
>
> > I actually find it nice to see so many people involved over
> > this discussion. It jus’ means that the Castle-Community
> > is thriving and that different directions are being explored!
>
>
> Of course the 'Castle World community' must not be confused with the 'LEGO
> Castle community'. There *may* be people out there who build castles, churches,
> medieval towns, chariots and battle machines or even just collect LEGO Castle
> sets who are not at all interested in Castle World. Not everybody who builds
> castles and keeps and so on wants to create a complete kingdom or wants to join
> any 'guild'. And even if one creates a complete kingdom it does not
> automatically mean that this kindgom shall be situated in 'Castle World'. No
> matters who claims to be webmaster/dictator/emperor of this castle world.
This is one of the most sensible posts of this entire thread, IMO. I'm not a
Castle-head, but I've been following the discussion here -- half entertained,
half annoyed by the level of whining I'm reading.
In my view, Jojo's point makes so much sense. Castle World =/= The LEGO Castle
Community.
Nothing requires the CW admins to cede power to anyone. Sure, I believe in "s---
or get off the pot," and from my vantage point it certainly would be *nice* of
the CW admins to allow new people to revive the project if they aren't going to
do anything. However, when it all boils down, they own CW. Period. If the
sandbox owners aren't going to play the way you want them to play, go start your
own sandbox. For the sake of your own community, don't limit your scope to the
confines of one (stale) collaborative project!
> This is why I think that Castle World is not THE site for a LEGO Castle
> community. It's not even the portal, it's just one site amongst others.
Exactly! No one is confining you to the idea of Castle World but yourselves.
-Tim
|
|
| |
Hello!
> I actually find it nice to see so many people involved over
> this discussion. It jus’ means that the Castle-Community
> is thriving and that different directions are being explored!
Of course the 'Castle World community' must not be confused with the 'LEGO
Castle community'. There *may* be people out there who build castles, churches,
medieval towns, chariots and battle machines or even just collect LEGO Castle
sets who are not at all interested in Castle World. Not everybody who builds
castles and keeps and so on wants to create a complete kingdom or wants to join
any 'guild'. And even if one creates a complete kingdom it does not
automatically mean that this kindgom shall be situated in 'Castle World'. No
matters who claims to be webmaster/dictator/emperor of this castle world.
This is why I think that Castle World is not THE site for a LEGO Castle
community. It's not even the portal, it's just one site amongst others.
I've said before (in broken English, as usual) what I think would belong to an
overall community site. And that's more than just Castle World.
Bye
Jojo
|
|
| |
Richard, Alex and all: I think you all have valid viewpoints of these issues.
I do not think that arguing will benefit lugnet at all. People have made up
their minds on what they will do. Arguing back and forth does not change this,
it only clutters this newsgroup. Unless of course we are trying to outpost
space today! :)
Ben E.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Noeckel wrote:
> > In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Alex Polimeni wrote:
> > > In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard wrote:
> > > _It doesn't belong to you!!!
>
> > > Create your own Castle World type community.
>
> > Just leave, right, then? Go make a new board.
> > Let this one rot in memorys of "good old days."
>
> I don’t really care what you do.
> But it just might be easier to create
> your own if they won’t let you in.
Its a community! How can we be a community when there are cheifs that make
everyone else wait on them? You cannot run a community by going by your leisure!
> > > !!!If you don’t like what McDonalds is serving, you
> > > don’t talk to old’ Ronald, you jus’ go over to Burger King.
> >
> > well, actually, they both stink, so you make your own food.
>
> And thus, “so make your own [website].”
We had wanted to try to re-format what groundwork was already layed. Ihop said
that we could work with it, and then said we couldnt, and so on.
> > > Let them do their thing…stop makin’ demands from them.
> > > Do your own thing…be creative…
>
> > Do their thing? Its suppost to be a community.
>
> !A community created by them...
> That gives them precedence, and control.
Over the entire community? Were the community, and we have no power? I think
that WE, the community, should have control over it. Ihop keeps an entire
community waiting, not telling them what hes doing for a website etc. How is
this a nice community?
> > And no skills? No skills, eh? I suppose knowing how
> > Mythologies are made, how castles are built, how towns thrived, how online
> > communitys work, how websites are made and maintained, how projects get off the
> > ground and keep going is no skills? If you arnt a has-been you dont have any skills, i
> > guess.
>
> I wasn’t aware that this ‘open-letter’ to the community was addressed
> specifically to you. It appears a bit neurotic to defend yourself in
> regards to a generalized statement I made to the group.
I was also reffering to other people. I dont have skills in some of those areas
i stated. But you were suggesting Ihop was really skilled and nobody else was.
And, if we are skilled enough, why dont we take over it?
> > Oh well, i guess im just not skilled in anything. *Siiigghhh.
>
> Sure, if that’s what you think…
> But from what you wrote you sound like a pretty talented guy.
> Perhaps even talented enough to create your own castle community.
Why? Why not use the one that already exists? Why splinter?
> > > You have as much control over Castle World as you do
> > > over Lugnet TM. Just because you really like and use the
> > > medium doesn't entitle you to it’s direction. If Todd or Suz
> > > choose to let Lugnet go…or KILL it completely they can do
> > > so without recourse. Castle World doesn't have publicly
> > > listed stocks, you are actually lucky these people readily
> > > read and reply to what you write.
> >
> > Its an arrowed COMMUNITY! We all are suppost to go under one person?
>
> You can go under who ever you like. ;-)
Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttttttttttttttssssssssss nooooooooooooooooooot
traaaaaaaaaaaademaaaaaaaarkkkeeeeeeeeeeeeedededdd!
> > What makes hop-frog so great?
>
> What difference does this make?
> It doesn’t matter to me.
> I'm talkin' about their creation!
Their creation that they said we could use, then when that challenged them they
denied it. If you make something for the community you have to do something with
it. And its not like they even tried to keep CW alive- its been dead since 01!!
> > Were all members, and were all inthusiests of lego.
> > This kind of behavior is total Orcgutz.
>
> Yes, members of Lugnet.
> And members of an AFOL Castle enthusiast Internet society,
> but not really members of a defunct castle web-site!?!
CW was meant for this community. its OURS!
> > > Essentially, whatever you say about dictatorship and
> > > whatnot is true, if not irrelevant.
> > > Don’t make demands of others and their creative works.
> > > Make your own path, and ‘choose your own adventure.’
>
> > well, Sava is called a "dictator" and then you yourself say that Hop frog has
> > total dictatorialship over the CW project and everything!
>
> I, myself, did not say "total dictatorship."
> My above statement clearly states" "whatever you say about..."
"Whatever you say about dictatorship is true. Ihop is dictator. You should all
bow down and wait for him to get his brown goop together." thats what your
saying, right?
> > If he doesnt want to update it in a century, well, we can just wait, right?
>
> ...Wait... do something... it doesn't matter!
> That's your choice, and it's also his.
Well, i guess it is his choice to doom CW for the rest of eternity.
> > We dont have rights to make demands.
>
> !!!Not on his time or creation!!!
> But you can feel free to throw around as many demands
> as you feel like if you believe it'll make things better.
The community should have control over its own fate! Not some dude that never
does anything!
> > We cant do anything.
>
> You could start your own Castle World TM
> instead of taking another’s pet-project?
A pet project meant for the COMMUNITY! its a COMMUNITY in ITESLF! Dos thou not
understand that you have to keep a community updated, listen to the members if
you want to keep it running? Ihop does not do that!
> > Their lucky we even CARE about that crummy
> > old world they dont do anything with!
>
> If it’s so “crummy” why do you want it?
> Obviously it means something to you.
> Why then do you demean it?
Its dead currently. With new blood we could probably ressurect it and do MORE
with it. Which would you prefer, actually? A new community somewhere else
entirly or just a replacement of CW?
> > But its all squish because we have no power and Hop-Frog is dictator.
> > All hail Rich!!
>
> Yup, you have no power over Hop-Frog.
> But you have power over yourself…power to create something new.
As i said, it would be nice to work on groundwork that has been laid. But if we
have to work in the air, i guess Ihop can just muddle about his website for the
rest of eternity.
> > > In essence, Castle World is a ‘privately-created-website’
> > > that aims to foster the development of the Lego Castle
> > > community.
>
> > Why should we not have power of CW?
>
> Perhaps because you didn’t create it and it does not belong to you.
RRRRAAAUUUGHHHH! If its a COMMUNITY the MEMBERS have CONTROL! YOU DO NOT FOSTER
A COMMUNITY WITH A SITE SUCH AS CW THAT IS NEVER UPDATED AND NEVER HAS NEW
BLOOD!
> > What the heck kind of community is this? You contridict yourself.
> > So, we should fall in line or make our own community,
> > but we have to fall in line- augh!
>
>
> I did not say: “fall in line.”
> I'm simply talkin’ about the rights of an individual
> or individuals to their time and creative works.
> It’s a matter of personal choice about what one does with their creations.
> If Pawel chooses to be lethargic and differs responsibility to Hop-Frog
> then it’s their choice. They didn’t choose you… so the choice is not in you
> hands.
Yes, and Hop-Frog cant TAKE responsibility! He doesnt try to do anything with
it! If were a community, were all equal.
> > Your incomprehensible.
>
> Perhaps you miss understood then.
> Hope it’s better now!
Actually, you failed in that. As far as i can tell, were the community, we
should either leave entirly or wait about for a dead project to become undead by
the hand of someone who cannot ressurect the dead. CW keeps claiming to be
alive, and really is not.It would be with fresh blood running through it. New
people. Then add to it. Branch it out more. Create a real, a great community on
the old groundwork.
If were all members here, then Hop-Frog has no special powers. I understand its
his pet project, but he shouldnt keep an entire community waiting simply because
he is lazy.
>
> --==Richard==--
Aramir of Uldeseen. And by the way, IIIITTTSSS NOOOOT TRADDDEEEMARRKKEDDD!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Noeckel wrote:
| |
At one point the professional artwork was created and owned by Craig Hamilton.
I believe between the ‘group’ of them, they owned the artwork and existing
sketches of TIOM’s intended map, and other aspects of their creations.
Registered Trade Mark or not, the art/concepts and creative works are still
property of their owners/creators and are shared with the community. But
nonetheless, are still in the possession of its creators, and thus they are
entitled to do what they want with their works.
It’s their trade mark… weather registered or not.
|
No, it’s not.
I think you have some confusion between trademarks and copyright.
The term “castle world” would not be covered by copyright. It has never been
claimed (let alone registered) as a trademark until today, when you’ve tried to
use it as a big stick to scare people.
I agree wholly on the maps and artworks. Property of their creators (unless
assigned or released) for sure - individually though, not collectively.
But castle world (the name, NOT the site) is not protected by copyright, and it
is not a trade mark.
Adieu
Richie Dulin
| | Port Brique
Somewhere in the South Pacifique
| | 
| | Misérable
Building a safer South Pacifique
|
|
|
| |
> In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Alex Polimeni wrote:
> > In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard wrote:
> > _It doesn't belong to you!!!
> > Create your own Castle World type community.
> Just leave, right, then? Go make a new board.
> Let this one rot in memorys of "good old days."
I don’t really care what you do.
But it just might be easier to create
your own if they won’t let you in.
> > !!!If you don’t like what McDonalds is serving, you
> > don’t talk to old’ Ronald, you jus’ go over to Burger King.
>
> well, actually, they both stink, so you make your own food.
And thus, “so make your own [website].”
> > Let them do their thing…stop makin’ demands from them.
> > Do your own thing…be creative…
> Do their thing? Its suppost to be a community.
!A community created by them...
That gives them precedence, and control.
> And no skills? No skills, eh? I suppose knowing how
> Mythologies are made, how castles are built, how towns thrived, how online
> communitys work, how websites are made and maintained, how projects get off the
> ground and keep going is no skills? If you arnt a has-been you dont have any skills, i
> guess.
I wasn’t aware that this ‘open-letter’ to the community was addressed
specifically to you. It appears a bit neurotic to defend yourself in
regards to a generalized statement I made to the group.
> Oh well, i guess im just not skilled in anything. *Siiigghhh.
Sure, if that’s what you think…
But from what you wrote you sound like a pretty talented guy.
Perhaps even talented enough to create your own castle community.
> > You have as much control over Castle World as you do
> > over Lugnet TM. Just because you really like and use the
> > medium doesn't entitle you to it’s direction. If Todd or Suz
> > choose to let Lugnet go…or KILL it completely they can do
> > so without recourse. Castle World doesn't have publicly
> > listed stocks, you are actually lucky these people readily
> > read and reply to what you write.
>
> Its an arrowed COMMUNITY! We all are suppost to go under one person?
You can go under who ever you like. ;-)
> What makes hop-frog so great?
What difference does this make?
It doesn’t matter to me.
I'm talkin' about their creation!
> Were all members, and were all inthusiests of lego.
> This kind of behavior is total Orcgutz.
Yes, members of Lugnet.
And members of an AFOL Castle enthusiast Internet society,
but not really members of a defunct castle web-site!?!
> > Essentially, whatever you say about dictatorship and
> > whatnot is true, if not irrelevant.
> > Don’t make demands of others and their creative works.
> > Make your own path, and ‘choose your own adventure.’
> well, Sava is called a "dictator" and then you yourself say that Hop frog has
> total dictatorialship over the CW project and everything!
I, myself, did not say "total dictatorship."
My above statement clearly states" "whatever you say about..."
> If he doesnt want to update it in a century, well, we can just wait, right?
...Wait... do something... it doesn't matter!
That's your choice, and it's also his.
> We dont have rights to make demands.
!!!Not on his time or creation!!!
But you can feel free to throw around as many demands
as you feel like if you believe it'll make things better.
> We cant do anything.
You could start your own Castle World TM
instead of taking another’s pet-project?
> Their lucky we even CARE about that crummy
> old world they dont do anything with!
If it’s so “crummy” why do you want it?
Obviously it means something to you.
Why then do you demean it?
> But its all squish because we have no power and Hop-Frog is dictator.
> All hail Rich!!
Yup, you have no power over Hop-Frog.
But you have power over yourself…power to create something new.
> > In essence, Castle World is a ‘privately-created-website’
> > that aims to foster the development of the Lego Castle
> > community.
> Why should we not have power of CW?
Perhaps because you didn’t create it and it does not belong to you.
> What the heck kind of community is this? You contridict yourself.
> So, we should fall in line or make our own community,
> but we have to fall in line- augh!
I did not say: “fall in line.”
I'm simply talkin’ about the rights of an individual
or individuals to their time and creative works.
It’s a matter of personal choice about what one does with their creations.
If Pawel chooses to be lethargic and differs responsibility to Hop-Frog
then it’s their choice. They didn’t choose you… so the choice is not in you
hands.
> Your incomprehensible.
Perhaps you miss understood then.
Hope it’s better now!
--==Richard==--
|
|
| |
At one point the professional artwork was created and owned by Craig Hamilton.
I believe between the ‘group’ of them, they owned the artwork and existing
sketches of TIOM’s intended map, and other aspects of their creations.
Registered Trade Mark or not, the art/concepts and creative works are still
property of their owners/creators and are shared _with_ the community. But
nonetheless, are still in the possession of its creators, and thus they are
entitled to do what they want with their works.
It’s their trade mark… weather registered or not.
--==Richard==--
And Trade Tark is essentially a moot point…
They can still do whatever they wish with Castle World TM…it’s theirs!
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richie Dulin wrote:
> In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Noeckel wrote:
> > What’s wrong with those of you who
> > think you’re entitled to Castle World TM.
>
> Castle World [TM]?
>
> Since when?
>
> I don't recall 'Castle World' being claimed as a trademark on LUGNET before.
>
> It [is not] claimed as a trademark on the website.
>
> It [is] a term now in common use to denote a sort of castle community thing.
>
> It [is] generally still capitalized, so that's a plus for the claim.
>
> If it [is] a valid trademark, who owns it (legally), and what is the
> ownership structure?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Noeckel wrote:
> What’s wrong with those of you who
> think you’re entitled to Castle World TM.
>
> _It doesn't belong to you!!!
>
> It was created by a group of old-skool
> Lugnetters, and it’s their baby.
>
> If you don’t like it…too bad.
>
> Create your own Castle World type community.
>
> !!!If you don’t like what McDonalds is serving, you
> don’t talk to old’ Ronald, you jus’ go over to Burger King.
>
> Let them do their thing…stop makin’ demands from them.
> Do your own thing…be creative…
I think this stems from the fact that there was discussion about
allowing the evolution of Castleworld, but different people with different
ideas about what should be done next, with their own individual pre-concieved
ideas.
You are right that CW is a creation of the Old Skool Castle Community.
But I think the overlying point is that if they wanted it dead, then they
should have killed it. I don't have the problem about wanting to keep an
archive of what's been said and done in the past, actually I want a resource
like that.
It was discussed that we should work with the existing structure first.
If that didn't work out, then start a new organization. We wanted to
unify the community, not further fragment it.
So to have a new Castle World and say a new Castle community organization
would both further divide the community, and waste efforts. A ILTCO-type
organization would be embracing of other projects, but there should be
a high degree of co-operation between the different projects, so as to
keep the community united.
This may seem like Fantasy, but I don't think I'm wrong when we want to
bring it back to the level of 2001 or better, when the collaberation in the
community was very strong.
Just my 2 cents,
Benjamin Medinets
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Pawel Nazarewicz wrote:
> Ok - most of the discussion in the other post is getting away from the real
> point - the need for a new site. As Dave said - we need to figure out what
> Castle World will be. Here is one idea. If people like it, we could then worry
> about who will put up a site and such (volunteers?).
>
> *************************************************************************
>
> Why have Castle World?
>
> The main reason for Castle World is inspire people to create. While the
> lugnet.castle community certainly does that, often the smaller contributions are
> lost in light of the massive ones. Castle World would be a collection of all
> those – none really being more important than others.
>
> On top of that, it would be a nice central place for a beginner to check out
> what kind of creations are out there.
>
> Main Page
>
> The main page would contain an explanation of how to participate in Castle
> World, links to the different guilds, as well as some history. It will be more
> of a crossroads to the different guild pages.
>
> Guild Pages
>
> The reason to have guilds is to match people up by interests and to maximize the
> freedom that people have in creating. Forming a guild will be pretty easy as
> long as it fits into a few guidelines that are laid out.
>
> A guild is basically a theme. A guild needs to have a purpose around which the
> participants can work. Below are two examples of what could constitute a guild.
> You could get as creative as you choose to though.
>
> Purpose: Setting
>
> If I decide to build a town, I can create a guild that will focus around this
> town. If someone wants to be involved in the development of the town or the
> story surrounding the town, they can e-mail me and request to be involved. If
> our interests match up, then they can join. The people within the guild should
> cooperate to make sure everything runs smoothly.
>
> Purpose: Profession
>
> Another example of a guild could be the guild of merchants. People can build
> specialty shops and form a guild around that.
>
> Forming your guild
>
> First thing you need to do is to submit an application for your guild to the CW
> admin. After you get the thumbs up, design your page and upload it to your
> designated folder. You should also come up with a button or banner (size?) for
> your guild. Send that to the admin as well. You will then receive the username
> and password to the ozbrick.net site. Please be respectful of it and don’t give
> it out. You yourself should handle all submissions to your guild page.
>
> After that, it’s up to you. The admin will link to your guild from the main
> page and you have the green light to do whatever you want to.
>
> If you choose to form a guild, you are expressing a willingness to work with
> others. You need to have a minimum proficiency with HTML – enough to design and
> update your own guild page. You also need to have a theme that unifies the
> efforts of those in your guild.
>
> You also need to specify whether your guild is a Virtual one or an Existent one.
> A virtual guild might not have all the structures built at the time of the
> viewing. On the other hand, if you visit the web page of an Existent guild, all
> structures you see on that page are currently built and could be used in a
> story.
>
> Joining a guild
>
> To join a specific guild, contact the person in charge of that guild – they will
> have their own guidelines for membership. You can join more than one guild at a
> time. If you have a blacksmith shop in the Kumbayashi kingdom, you can be a
> member of both the blacksmith guild as well as the Kumbayashi guild.
>
> Does CW have to be real time?
>
> This is up to the individual guilds. When you join a guild, make sure you look
> at whether the guild is a Virtual one or an Existent one. There are perks to
> both.
>
> *************************************************************************
>
> Let me know what you think - please be specific and constructive, and let's make
> this happen :)
>
> -- Pawel
Your idea is good in theory, but i dont know if it would work in practice. I
think more has to be built then a couple of guilds. I think a guild should be
for one specific type of Castle (Forestmen, Knights Kingdom, etc). In it would
be storys, mocs, etc having to with JUST THAT GUILD. This would only work,
though, in a larger pre-fabricated world you could go around in making storys.
In that realm you could make armys, have battles, go on quests for gold,
wahtever.
That is the only way i could see a Guild thing working, to tell you the truth.
What you have proposed, as i said works good in theory, but it really needs a
more general community to work in.
Aramir son of Deremir.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Richard Noeckel wrote:
| |
What’s wrong with those of you who
think you’re entitled to Castle World TM.
|
Castle World TM?
Since when?
I don’t recall ‘Castle World’ being claimed as a trademark on LUGNET before.
It is not claimed as a trademark on the website.
It is a term now in common use to denote a sort of castle community thing.
It is generally still capitalized, so that’s a plus for the claim.
If it is a valid trademark, who owns it (legally), and what is the ownership
structure?
In the discussion on the future of castle world, there hasn’t been mention (from
those who should know) that there was a question over the rights to use the
Castle World name.
And there are other users of Castle World too. A quick Google found such gems as
this toy, this
poem and an
inflatables company in
England. All happily using what you think is your trademark. You’d better get
out there and take out injunctions against them! After you figure out who it is
that owns the trademark, of course.
LEGO fans to tend to go a bit berserk with ‘tm’s left right and centre, and
Larry’s been jumping up and down about them for years... so it is odd that
Castle World doesn’t seem to have had one claimed. But even if one had been
claimed, well, if you don’t enforce them, you stand to lose them. Here we are
years down the track, and hear the first mention of the ‘tm’.
Adieu
Richie Dulin
| | Port Brique™
Somewhere in the South Pacifique™
| |
| | Misérable™
Building a safer South Pacifique™
|
|
|
| |
_It doesn't belong to you!!!
>
> It was created by a group of old-skool
> Lugnetters, and it’s their baby.
They said if someone else was interested in it, they could take control of it.
When someone tried, they refused.
> If you don’t like it…too bad.
Oooh, what if we went back on something?
> Create your own Castle World type community.
Just leave, right, then? Go make a new board. Let this one rot in memorys of
"good old days."
> !!!If you don’t like what McDonalds is serving, you
> don’t talk to old’ Ronald, you jus’ go over to Burger King.
well, actually, they both stink, so you make your own food.
> Let them do their thing…stop makin’ demands from them.
> Do your own thing…be creative…
Do their thing? Its suppost to be a community. How do we keep a community going
with a couple old administrators who only show up when their position is
challenged and never update their site?
> And once you’ve created your own project, and in a
> few years later loose a bit of momentum, I hope some
> bright-eyed individual whose greatly enthusiastic but
> completely devoid of skills come up to you and wants
> to change the direction, make their own updates,
> and replace you.
Lose a bit of momentum? Momentum? Hell, at least we would try to keep momentum
going. Castle World is dead, Hop-frog gives the impression hes trying to keep it
going, and does nothing. And no skills? No skills, eh? I suppose knowing how
Mythologies are made, how castles are built, how towns thrived, how online
communitys work, how websites are made and maintained, how projects get off the
ground and keep going is no skills? If you arnt a has-been you dont have any
skills, i guess. Oh well, i guess im just not skilled in anything. *Siiigghhh.
> _Just something to think about.
Already did.
> You have as much control over Castle World as you do
> over Lugnet TM. Just because you really like and use the
> medium doesn't entitle you to it’s direction. If Todd or Suz
> choose to let Lugnet go…or KILL it completely they can do
> so without recourse. Castle World doesn't have publicly
> listed stocks, you are actually lucky these people readily
> read and reply to what you write.
Its an arrowed COMMUNITY! We all are suppost to go under one person? So i should
pay ten bucks to become a member just so i can have my remarks discarded. Dont
you see what your saying? What makes hop-frog so great? Were all members, and
were all inthusiests of lego.
So i guess hop frog and the rest are kings, and were the lowly peasants, and
they can do whatever they please, kill the community, whatever, and if they
listen to us were lucky? as i said, were all members. This kind of behavior is
total Orcgutz.
> Essentially, whatever you say about dictatorship and
> whatnot is true, if not irrelevant.
> Don’t make demands of others and their creative works.
> Make your own path, and ‘choose your own adventure.’
well, Sava is called a "dictator" and then you yourself say that Hop frog has
total dictatorialship over the CW project and everything! If he doesnt want to
update it in a century, well, we can just wait, right? We dont have rights to
make demands. We cant do anything. Their lucky we even CARE about that crummy
old world they dont do anything with!
> I actually find it nice to see so many people involved over
> this discussion. It jus’ means that the Castle-Community
> is thriving and that different directions are being explored!
But its all squish because we have no power and Hop-Frog is dictator. All hail
Rich!!
> In essence, Castle World is a ‘privately-created-website’
> that aims to foster the development of the Lego Castle
> community.
And does not foster anything exept conversations like this. How can you foster a
community when you dont do anything exept sit on it forever?
> Thus, if you want to foster development or create unanimity
> in your own way go ahead, just don’t ask others to do the work for you!
> If you cared soooo much you’d have created your own Castle World-esk community.
Why should we not have power of CW? It was great in its time. However, hop-frog
is blocking development of anything new, promising that which he never comes out
with and then treats everyone like mindless pesants! What the heck kind of
community is this? You contridict yourself. So, we should fall in line or make
our own community, but we have to fall in line- augh! Your incomprehensible.
> Thanks for listening,
Reading.
>
> --==Richard==--
Aramir, son of Deremir, Paladin King of Uldeseen.
|
|
| |
What’s wrong with those of you who
think you’re entitled to Castle World TM.
_It doesn't belong to you!!!
It was created by a group of old-skool
Lugnetters, and it’s their baby.
If you don’t like it…too bad.
Create your own Castle World type community.
!!!If you don’t like what McDonalds is serving, you
don’t talk to old’ Ronald, you jus’ go over to Burger King.
Let them do their thing…stop makin’ demands from them.
Do your own thing…be creative…
And once you’ve created your own project, and in a
few years later loose a bit of momentum, I hope some
bright-eyed individual whose greatly enthusiastic but
completely devoid of skills come up to you and wants
to change the direction, make their own updates,
and replace you.
_Just something to think about.
You have as much control over Castle World as you do
over Lugnet TM. Just because you really like and use the
medium doesn't entitle you to it’s direction. If Todd or Suz
choose to let Lugnet go…or KILL it completely they can do
so without recourse. Castle World doesn't have publicly
listed stocks, you are actually lucky these people readily
read and reply to what you write.
Essentially, whatever you say about dictatorship and
whatnot is true, if not irrelevant.
Don’t make demands of others and their creative works.
Make your own path, and ‘choose your own adventure.’
I actually find it nice to see so many people involved over
this discussion. It jus’ means that the Castle-Community
is thriving and that different directions are being explored!
In essence, Castle World is a ‘privately-created-website’
that aims to foster the development of the Lego Castle
community.
Thus, if you want to foster development or create unanimity
in your own way go ahead, just don’t ask others to do the work for you!
If you cared soooo much you’d have created your own Castle World-esk community.
Thanks for listening,
--==Richard==--
|
|
| |
I
> With that said, I see that we need a little less conversation and a little more
> action please...
Trying trying!
>
> I see how a square-grid map would be easier to administrate, but it sometimes
> makes a game seem more rigid in its style. Or perhaps each realm is not limited
> to one square. Then realms could sprawl over many miles, or sit quietly on a
> single square.
Grid map would not be used for big lands, but for movement. Say, in a single
turn, a person could do just so much stuff and move just so far.
> How would war and conquest be managed? Probably by good storytelling. Each
> side could have two or three "turns" at telling their response to a battle. The
> overall administrator ("Archbishop"? "King"?) would hear each side's story and
> give a verdict as to who won the war/battle/skirmish and award land as he sees
> fit. If a realm desires only peace and quiet, it could be said that it lies in
> a magical invisible valley, is protected by ancient magic, etc. I think I would
> find CW wars fun!
I dont like the report thing. One side says that they win, and the other side
says that they win. Then you decide which happened? It just doesnt sound
right...
Then there could be the GM being sided to one party he likes.
> The map need not be a "Finite World" map. Whenever there is a need for more
> land (for expanding or new kingdoms/realms), the administrator (or Image Cleric)
> would create a new map to be added on to the side of the existing map. Here's a
> little more clarification:
Again, somone contributes that wasnt even trying! What i was going for was this:
Map of the MM, map of the MMs surrounding town, and then maps of varios outlying
areas. In CastleQuest you start out from the IOM, travel around, and then go
into the wild.
>
> CW starts with a map of the land. It might be 20x20 with fairly small squares
> (to better manage warlike activities). General terrain is shown, as well as the
> borders of realms. Now say, in two years, this map is full of realms and has no
> unexplored areas; or a realm has explored a square that is adjacent to, but not
> on the map. The Image Cleric now makes another map to be placed adjacent to the
> existing one. Mountain ranges, bodies of water, and coastlines must be
> consistent, but otherwise the land is wild, new, and unexplored.
This is more like another alternate idea i was going for, which was lands that
would have stuff happening in them, but you could have adventures in. In other
words, more like a plot you play in rather then an RPG.
> Towns, forts, and castles must be "built" by the admin. of each realm
> ("Lords"/"Ladies"? "Barons"?). Services and public works projects would be
> constructed in-character.
I was thinking more like the person who wants a town build the buildings, rather
than an admin.
>
> Players need not have their own realm. A person might have a small party or
> single adventurer to wander through the other realms and create stories. The
> possibilities for this kind of playing are infinite.
What i was thinking was either you could make a kingdom of your own or do as you
said and wander around through others and explore by themselves.
>
> Of course, the system outlined above requires commitment similar to that of
> Starship. If .castlers are willing to put in the effort, however, this could be
> a very fun and productive game!
I dont have much time, and tommorow is virtually killed for me. But i will give
the commitment. It will take the commitment of others, too.
Anyway, seeya round!
>
> Andrew
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Andrew Engstrom wrote:
> How would war and conquest be managed? Probably by good storytelling. Each
> side could have two or three "turns" at telling their response to a battle. The
> overall administrator ("Archbishop"? "King"?) would hear each side's story and
> give a verdict as to who won the war/battle/skirmish and award land as he sees
> fit. If a realm desires only peace and quiet, it could be said that it lies in
> a magical invisible valley, is protected by ancient magic, etc. I think I would
> find CW wars fun!
I recall an idea similar to that one surfacing with the earlier CQ/ DraKen
discussions a few months back. The idea I recall, though, deals with reports of
the actual encounter between both sides and the strategies used to
reach the resolution. (scenarios could be conducted through IM, sort of like
chess, but more convoluted. I'm drafting out a way to create a faster version
for online playing, but I have my share of doubts.)
Still, my description was at best, sketchy.
http://www.lugnet.com/~1112/Syndication/
A review of your ideas presents some very interesting concepts, though...
I'll try to get back to you on the rest of them.
Osprey, over and out
{M. Aaron Hein}
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Alex Polimeni wrote:
> >
> > First of all, I get the general impression that CW is supposed to be freeform,
> > fun-oriented system, am I right? That's great. Though Starship has a more
> > defined system of play, I think this approach would work well for a
> > castle-themed game. However, if you really wanted to, CW might mirror Starship:
> > an overall Game Mediator controls travel between "Realms" and individual people
> > administer individual Realms. This system doesn't even need a square-grid map.
> > (I've seen this idea suggested before, and I really liked it. So I "re-present"
> > it.)
>
> I proposed the square-grid map. Im the one trying to get a whole starship-thing
> going. Ive already got rules that are re-written- just not on the site.
>
> Your "administrating realms" sounds like a good idea. You travel out, and what
> you have explored is your realm, and you build and adventure in it, and travel
> out, etc.
>
> Great idea, youve helped me out alot! It would still require a grid-map, but it
> helps my "town building" section.
>
> Aramir son of Deremir
I had several ideas the other night, just after I posted my previous message.
Now, I don't want to get into the argument over CW -- heck, I can't even discern
what the hubub is about. I just want to see a fun, relaxed community having
some fun. And since I am getting more and more indoctrinated in castle, I hope
to maybe, someday, think about joining CW.
With that said, I see that we need a little less conversation and a little more
action please...
I see how a square-grid map would be easier to administrate, but it sometimes
makes a game seem more rigid in its style. Or perhaps each realm is not limited
to one square. Then realms could sprawl over many miles, or sit quietly on a
single square.
How would war and conquest be managed? Probably by good storytelling. Each
side could have two or three "turns" at telling their response to a battle. The
overall administrator ("Archbishop"? "King"?) would hear each side's story and
give a verdict as to who won the war/battle/skirmish and award land as he sees
fit. If a realm desires only peace and quiet, it could be said that it lies in
a magical invisible valley, is protected by ancient magic, etc. I think I would
find CW wars fun!
The map need not be a "Finite World" map. Whenever there is a need for more
land (for expanding or new kingdoms/realms), the administrator (or Image Cleric)
would create a new map to be added on to the side of the existing map. Here's a
little more clarification:
CW starts with a map of the land. It might be 20x20 with fairly small squares
(to better manage warlike activities). General terrain is shown, as well as the
borders of realms. Now say, in two years, this map is full of realms and has no
unexplored areas; or a realm has explored a square that is adjacent to, but not
on the map. The Image Cleric now makes another map to be placed adjacent to the
existing one. Mountain ranges, bodies of water, and coastlines must be
consistent, but otherwise the land is wild, new, and unexplored.
Towns, forts, and castles must be "built" by the admin. of each realm
("Lords"/"Ladies"? "Barons"?). Services and public works projects would be
constructed in-character.
Players need not have their own realm. A person might have a small party or
single adventurer to wander through the other realms and create stories. The
possibilities for this kind of playing are infinite.
Of course, the system outlined above requires commitment similar to that of
Starship. If .castlers are willing to put in the effort, however, this could be
a very fun and productive game!
Andrew
|
|
| |
Ok - most of the discussion in the other post is getting away from the real
point - the need for a new site. As Dave said - we need to figure out what
Castle World will be. Here is one idea. If people like it, we could then worry
about who will put up a site and such (volunteers?).
*************************************************************************
Why have Castle World?
The main reason for Castle World is inspire people to create. While the
lugnet.castle community certainly does that, often the smaller contributions are
lost in light of the massive ones. Castle World would be a collection of all
those – none really being more important than others.
On top of that, it would be a nice central place for a beginner to check out
what kind of creations are out there.
Main Page
The main page would contain an explanation of how to participate in Castle
World, links to the different guilds, as well as some history. It will be more
of a crossroads to the different guild pages.
Guild Pages
The reason to have guilds is to match people up by interests and to maximize the
freedom that people have in creating. Forming a guild will be pretty easy as
long as it fits into a few guidelines that are laid out.
A guild is basically a theme. A guild needs to have a purpose around which the
participants can work. Below are two examples of what could constitute a guild.
You could get as creative as you choose to though.
Purpose: Setting
If I decide to build a town, I can create a guild that will focus around this
town. If someone wants to be involved in the development of the town or the
story surrounding the town, they can e-mail me and request to be involved. If
our interests match up, then they can join. The people within the guild should
cooperate to make sure everything runs smoothly.
Purpose: Profession
Another example of a guild could be the guild of merchants. People can build
specialty shops and form a guild around that.
Forming your guild
First thing you need to do is to submit an application for your guild to the CW
admin. After you get the thumbs up, design your page and upload it to your
designated folder. You should also come up with a button or banner (size?) for
your guild. Send that to the admin as well. You will then receive the username
and password to the ozbrick.net site. Please be respectful of it and don’t give
it out. You yourself should handle all submissions to your guild page.
After that, it’s up to you. The admin will link to your guild from the main
page and you have the green light to do whatever you want to.
If you choose to form a guild, you are expressing a willingness to work with
others. You need to have a minimum proficiency with HTML – enough to design and
update your own guild page. You also need to have a theme that unifies the
efforts of those in your guild.
You also need to specify whether your guild is a Virtual one or an Existent one.
A virtual guild might not have all the structures built at the time of the
viewing. On the other hand, if you visit the web page of an Existent guild, all
structures you see on that page are currently built and could be used in a
story.
Joining a guild
To join a specific guild, contact the person in charge of that guild – they will
have their own guidelines for membership. You can join more than one guild at a
time. If you have a blacksmith shop in the Kumbayashi kingdom, you can be a
member of both the blacksmith guild as well as the Kumbayashi guild.
Does CW have to be real time?
This is up to the individual guilds. When you join a guild, make sure you look
at whether the guild is a Virtual one or an Existent one. There are perks to
both.
*************************************************************************
Let me know what you think - please be specific and constructive, and let's make
this happen :)
-- Pawel
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, Anthony Sava wrote:
> I am officially looking into creating an entirely new website, one for the
> castle community, not for a museum. A place where anyone can come in and
> share their knowledge for the rest of the group.
On that note:
It was always my feeling that Castle World was doomed from the get-go. It was a
great idea, but having static HTML pages that are editable by 1 or a small group
of admins just won't live forever. Eventually, you'll have to cut through the
swaths of community input, and it'll get to be too much to handle. There are
simply too many people out there with great castle ideas that want to contribute
and showcase their efforts. And having some admin manually enter everything into
a site is much too painstaking.
The key (I've always thought) is having dynamic content. Users who can update
their own things at their own pace. And, for a time back in 2000/2001, I worked
on such a solution; where the site could be maintained by the members of Castle
World, not by some admin.
Unfortunately for me, I found that I didn't (and still don't really) have the
hosting means for such a potentially wide volume of traffic (at least without
paying for it). The idea and code I produced was similar in nature to the
current MOCPages site, with a few more features involved that could associate
creations with each other in various ways (like using maps that could have
associated buildings at designated locations), and in general a little more
complex system of cross-user ownership. Makes me wish I had the time and finance
to designate to that undertaking again.
If Castle World continues to be what it's tried to be in the past, I think it
either needs a group (3+, preferably 5+) of admins who can constantly update the
site, and are cycled as needed, OR a dynamic content site as I mentioned above.
The problem being that any dynamic content site needs to be supported
financially, since, even though *general* webspace is free, server space isn't
(unless someone out there *can* support a site of this nature).
I guess my question to the CW community is: What does Castle World want to be?
Is it merely a glorified "links" page that points to various people's creations?
Is it an interactive system where people's MOC's join together? Is it merely a
group of people who design standards and challenges for castle themed builders?
All of the above? None of them? What does a Castle World admin/committee member
do? What *don't* they do?
Hopefully we won't see a drastic fissure in the castle community. I'd like to
think that there's hope for "Castle World" or whatever it is the castle
community needs.
DaveE
|
|
|
