Origin Ultima Pages
Lady Whisper
As far as the supposed censorship of the Ultima pages that Origin
bought from Fallible, they have not only the right, but the legal
obligation to remove certain materials from the pages. If they had
retained anything involving cheats to their games, they would be
legally liable if someone used one of the cheats and something
happened to their computer (i.e., hard drive crash, etc.). Other things
that they removed, such as the information about U9, was probably
removed because it was inaccurate.
With regard to the issue of giving credit and/or having received
permission from people who had contributed to the materials on the
purchased pages, that isn't their responsibility, that was the
responsibility of the person who sold the material to them. Minstrel,
if you didn't receive any notice of your work being sold to Origin, then
that's something you should take up with Fallible. In addition to the
fact that he should have gotten everyone's permission to sell their
materials, he should also share the profits that he received for the
pages of yours, and anyone else's, that he sold.
Removing the links to Excalibur and other people's Ultima pages
makes little difference since they are listed on Origin's "Cool Links"
webpage. I personally think they should have purchased Excalibur's
World Of Ultima pages instead of the other Ultima pages, but I guess
its too late for that. What they have on their Ultima pages now are
legal and relatively thorough information about the Ultima games.
If you want cheats, don't expect the company to provide them, look
elsewhere.
Lady Whisper
http://www.execpc.com/~grignard
http://www.io.com/~jgould/bmanor/bmanor94.html
LB'S QUEST! http://www.ea.com/origin/english/ultima/quest/index.html
Linards Ticmanis
Good job EA!
Together with the U2 fix , they kicked out my humble Akalabeth port too!
Small miracle the updates I sent in after March all went straight
"> NUL" without me ever getting a notice from Origin, Fal, or whomever.
The Emulator FAQ link is gone too. Bravo. Sorry I am not a lawyer, but
what's illegal or hurting about DLing the games if you bought the U1-6
CD? Otherwise it's of course illegal, and the FAQ clearly states this.
It's not quite gone though, it is still at vienna, at:
http://stud1.tuwien.ac.at/~e9127487/ultima/FAQ.html
Info about (good) ultima Music (midi) & more can now be found at:
http://www.biochem.mpg.de/~brenner/
Wasn't there a blue ribbon not too recently on the Archive's main page?
They were honest enough to remove that, too.
Hey, if you want to know what I think about this whole thing, look at
u5/data.ovl with a hex editor or such. Search for 'ELECTRONIC ARTS' !!
Visit http://www.linux.org/ for a better way of doing things.
Who will set up the new *Dragons* Web server. ??
--
Linards Ticmanis
-=UDIC=-
Finire Dragon
<A HREF="mailto:tic...@reze-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de">
tic...@reze-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de</A>
<BRIBE> me. I'll leave.
Dax Omni
tas...@hawk.phantasy.com [Lessthan Ladylike Whisper] wrote:
>bought from Fallible, they have not only the right, but the legal
>obligation to remove certain materials from the pages.
True.
>legally liable if someone used one of the cheats and something
>happened to their computer (i.e., hard drive crash, etc.).
What are you talking about? Anytime I have some sort of problem with
any OSI game, they tell me to re-load and start over. They never
seemed to care if I lost the use of my computer or if any external
files were corrupted. Any legal consequences relating to condoning
so called "cheat" modes have yet to be established. Luckily, that
precedent has yet to be set.
>that they removed, such as the information about U9, was probably
>removed because it was inaccurate.
I doubt that was the case with ALL of it, but I’ll save my irritation
for more important matters.
>With regard to the issue of giving credit and/or having received
>permission from people who had contributed to the materials on the
>purchased pages, that isn't their responsibility, that was the
>responsibility of the person who sold the material to them.
BS!!! It is the responsibility of BOTH parties!!! There is NO way
you’ll convince me that Origin thought Fallible had done all that
work! And if that’s not the excuse, what is? I just think that large
corporations [EA] have more than enough resources to follow-up on who
did what for who, and credit those who deserve such. If OSI is so
damn worried about getting it’s due credit, it should show the same
respect for its UNWILLING contributors!!! Few things are worse than
commercial hypocrisy.
>if you didn't receive any notice of your work being sold to Origin, then
>that's something you should take up with Fallible. In addition to the
Are you OSI’s Public Relations Spokesperson or what? Look, OSI
doesn’t need the help - and I doubt your fellow Dragons need such
unnecessary criticism. It’s O.K. to find fault with OSI, cause NOBODY
is perfect!
>webpage. I personally think they should have purchased Excalibur's
>World Of Ultima pages instead of the other Ultima pages, but I guess
Does EVERYTHING need an OSI slant?
Zoroastrian Dragon
Markus Brenner
In article <4q48tc$k...@homer.alpha.net>, tas...@hawk.phantasy.com wrote:
>As far as the supposed censorship of the Ultima pages that Origin
>retained anything involving cheats to their games, they would be
>that they removed, such as the information about U9, was probably
>removed because it was inaccurate.
I guess I shouldn't have blamed Origin for removing certain stuff from
the Archive. I guess I overreacted there *sigh*.
However, I still consider it a bad thing this transfer happened in the
first place, and indeed I blame this on Fal. But hey, he did all the work
of maintaining the site originally, I know of that argument. The thing which
bothers me is that the authors of all that stuff kind of trusted Fal to take
good care of their stuff in respect to the *Ultima Dragons*, and thus the
site grew to be something more than just some links Fallible compiled on
some html documents. I think the recent selling of the pages and the new
copyright claims together with the omission of important documents
and programs in the archive can't be considered as 'taking good care'
anymore.
So, no hurt feelings towards Origin, the only thing which *might* apply
are Honourable's earlier suspects of them taking over UDIC central
to put themselves in the middle of fan-organization. I guess we can't
even blame them for such an attempt, after all, it's good to stay in
contact with them in a way.
>With regard to the issue of giving credit and/or having received
>permission from people who had contributed to the materials on the
>purchased pages, that isn't their responsibility, that was the
>responsibility of the person who sold the material to them. Minstrel,
>if you didn't receive any notice of your work being sold to Origin, then
>that's something you should take up with Fallible. In addition to the
>fact that he should have gotten everyone's permission to sell their
>materials, he should also share the profits that he received for the
>pages of yours, and anyone else's, that he sold.
Whisper, we had this discussion for *months* now, and Fal never answered
my emails about requests regarding his selling the Ultima pages. I don't
want to fall into F-15's way of complaining about Fal, but asking for credits
from Fal is pretty useless. IMHO this whole deal wasn't any good idea,
simple as that.
>Removing the links to Excalibur and other people's Ultima pages
>makes little difference since they are listed on Origin's "Cool Links"
>webpage. I personally think they should have purchased Excalibur's
>World Of Ultima pages instead of the other Ultima pages, but I guess
>its too late for that. What they have on their Ultima pages now are
>legal and relatively thorough information about the Ultima games.
>If you want cheats, don't expect the company to provide them, look
>elsewhere.
Sure. What's left over is information about the Ultima games. 'Our'
(Fal's) web pages used to be more. It included fixes, patches, helpfiles,
well, in a way the whole knowledge and experience (as well as some fan
stuff) of a Dragon's clan of Ultima fans. Selling this 'Dragons' treasure' off
and stripping it to a mere 'information' site IMHO really is a shame and
a wast of efforts.
So, originally, I wasn't blaming Origin for their actions, of course they have
their reasons. More or less I was mourning our beloved Ultima pages, which
now are slightly less informative and which I can't identify with like I did
before.
-minstrel
----
_ no matter how - how hard you try
Markus Brenner ( ) in your own life, and through the years
--+-- with every up - must come a down
-==(UDIC)==- | enjoy the laughter and the tears
Minstrel Dragon | of happiness (Roger Taylor)
email: bre...@biochem.mpg.de * WWW: http://www.biochem.mpg.de/~brenner/
William Herrin
>Removing the links to Excalibur and other people's Ultima pages
>makes little difference since they are listed on Origin's "Cool Links"
>webpage.
Just to clarify this: Origin took a snapshot of the site several months ago,
so most of the "removed" links were not removed, but rather were added to the
UDIC site after Origin made the copy. In other words, if you politely point
out the oversight, I suspect they'll be added in.
-Fal
--
William D. Herrin her...@why.com her...@ultima.cms.udel.edu
Why? InterNetworking her...@crosslink.net her...@scienza.onr.navy.mil
6857 Lafayette Park Dr. Fallibl...@udic.org whe...@gmu.edu
Annandale, VA 22003 Web: <http://www.why.com/herrin/>
BlackMage Dragon
William Herrin wrote:
>
> In article <4q5je0$5...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> dax_...@ix.netcom.com (Dax Omni) writes:
> >>With regard to the issue of giving credit and/or having received
> >>permission from people who had contributed to the materials on the
> >>purchased pages, that isn't their responsibility, that was the
> >>responsibility of the person who sold the material to them.
>
> >you’ll convince me that Origin thought Fallible had done all that
> >work!
>
> categories:
>
> Yours -- OSI already holds the copyrights to these
> Ours -- Both OSI and I had some copyright interest in them (e.g. the Ultima
> logos... The stylisitic Ultima is definately copyrighted by Origin, but I made
> those particular ones.)
> Mine -- I held the copyright and was selling it to them.
> Shareware -- These were owned by someone else but there was every indication
> that they were freely redistributable. Since I didn't own these I couldn't
> sell them... In these instances what I was selling was the service of having
> collected and indexed them, and in some cases converted them to some other
> format.
> Unknown -- There were something like 4 files that I never really did know if
> they were copyrighted, so I labeled them as such. I don't recall offhand what
> they were, but they were in the web portion not the FTP portion.
>
> And if you look at their site, the material contains the same indications of
> authorship that it has had.
>
> If I had a nickle for every time I've read a post from a software author
> begging for a free server to put his software on, I'd be a rich man. Origin
> has taken the bold step of standing behind their fans by providing free space
> on their server for the free distribution of quality Ultima related shareware.
> That's nothing short of praiseworthy, and as far as I'm concerned anyone who
> thinks it ill-motivated has something missing upstairs.
>
> -Fallible Dragon
>
>
>
> --
> William D. Herrin her...@why.com her...@ultima.cms.udel.edu
> Why? InterNetworking her...@crosslink.net her...@scienza.onr.navy.mil
> 6857 Lafayette Park Dr. Fallibl...@udic.org whe...@gmu.edu
> Annandale, VA 22003 Web: <http://www.why.com/herrin/>
Well, I think you did what any of us would have done had we been
presented with the same opportunity. This is the USA, capitalism rules,
and that is the bottom line. I for one enjoyed the pages, and the peer
group that it allowed me to be in. I have heard criticism about you from
the beginning, but have not seen anyone close to your effort (unless it
was Xcaliber Dragon) Anyway, no hard feelings here. No guts, no glory.
William Herrin
Nathan Cocks
> >obligation to remove certain materials from the pages.
>
>
> >legally liable if someone used one of the cheats and something
> >happened to their computer (i.e., hard drive crash, etc.).
>
> any OSI game, they tell me to re-load and start over. They never
> seemed to care if I lost the use of my computer or if any external
> files were corrupted. Any legal consequences relating to condoning
> so called "cheat" modes have yet to be established. Luckily, that
> precedent has yet to be set.
>
>
>
Sorry it is just the above point I'd like to elaborate on. OSI is indeed liable
for supplying cheat modes or whatever that may cause system damage. The correct
legal term is vocarious liablity in conjunction with duty of care. With these
things present OSI can quite happily become liable for any damage as result
of them supplying these cheats through the webpage. They could possibly avoid
this through the placement of an exclusion clause (ie: We do not accept responsibility
for damage arising from the use of these cheats... etc) but they are notoriously
unreliable in a court room. So its better for OSI from a purely legal stand point
to just get rid of them and save the hassel. Now wether you think that is right or
wrong that is up to you but if I was OSI I would have done the same thing.
of law.
Lestat Dragon
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Lestat - Nathan Cocks (1st year law rep at Deakin Burwood)
E-Mail :- les...@netspace.net.au
H/Page :- http://netspace.net.au/~lestat
See me as Knight on:
DARK WEB MUSH:telmaron.com 6250
http://www.best.com/~gazissax/darkweb.html
Member of:
-==UDIC==- <Lestat Dragon>
HTML Writers Guild
@}---'---,--- Happiness is not something experienced,
It is something remembered. ---'---,---{@
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Dax Omni
her...@usenet-user.why.com (William Herrin) wrote:
>That's nothing short of praiseworthy, and as far as I'm concerned anyone who
>thinks it ill-motivated has something missing upstairs.
I consider it neither "ill-motivated" or "praiseworthy." In my
opinion, the move was a bit sloppy, but I’m not seriously irritated at
you or OSI.. In all honesty, I have absolutely no quarrel with either
of you. Whisper, however, has managed to bother me for some time. I
guess her constant, excessive, and generally blind praise for OSI has
really managed to ‘get my goat’. My irritation was directed solely at
Whisper, and I sincerely apologize for any misunderstanding.
Zoroastrian Dragon
Lady Whisper
In article <4q5je0$5...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
dax_...@ix.netcom.com (Dax Omni) wrote:
> BS!!! It is the responsibility of BOTH parties!!! There is NO way
> you’ll convince me that Origin thought Fallible had done all that
> work! And if that’s not the excuse, what is? I just think that large
> corporations [EA] have more than enough resources to follow-up on who
> did what for who, and credit those who deserve such. If OSI is so
> damn worried about getting it’s due credit, it should show the same
> respect for its UNWILLING contributors!!! Few things are worse than
> commercial hypocrisy.
I doubt that Origin thought Fallible created everything there, but what
about the possibility that Fallible might have lied to them and told them
that everyone is okay with him selling their stuff? OSI isn't a large
corporation and EA had nothing to do with the purchase. OSI is a
relatively small company and no, they probably don't have enough
resources to spend time following up every little thing. How can they
show respect for "unwilling contributors" if they don't know that the
contributors are unwilling. Gee, isn't it just possible that they were told
one story and we were told quite another? Guess that couldn't possibly
have happened, could it? Because if it did, it would remove the reason
that you have to bitch at them.
> Are you OSI’s Public Relations Spokesperson or what? Look, OSI
> doesn’t need the help - and I doubt your fellow Dragons need such
> unnecessary criticism. It’s O.K. to find fault with OSI, cause NOBODY
> is perfect!
No, I'm not their spokesperson, but that doesn't mean I don't have a
right to defend them if I see someone accusing them of something
unfairly. What, only OSI-bashers are allowed to voice opinions and
comments now? I don't have the right to say anything unless I'm an
OSI-basher as well? Sorry, if that's the way you feel, you can kiss my
hiney because I happen to like OSI and a great many of the people that
work there and I'll speak up anytime I see them being unjustly accused
of something.
LB'S QUEST!! http://www.ea.com/origin/english/ultima/quest/index.html
saebaryo
..................................<<SNIP>>...................................
> > If OSI is so
> > damn worried about getting it’s due credit, it should show the same
> > respect for its UNWILLING contributors!!! Few things are worse than
> > commercial hypocrisy.
Or hypocrisy in general???
..................................<<SNIP>>...................................
> How can they
> show respect for "unwilling contributors" if they don't know that the
> contributors are unwilling. Gee, isn't it just possible that they were told
> one story and we were told quite another? ^^^ ^^^
|||GOOD POINT YES???|||
> > Are you OSI’s Public Relations Spokesperson or what? Look, OSI
> > doesn’t need the help - and I doubt your fellow Dragons need such
> > unnecessary criticism. It’s O.K. to find fault with OSI, cause NOBODY
> > is perfect! ^^^ ^^^
|||ONCE AGAIN REVERT TO 'GOOD POINT'! |||
> No, I'm not their spokesperson, but that doesn't mean I don't have a
> right to defend them if I see someone accusing them of something
> unfairly. What, only OSI-bashers are allowed to voice opinions and
> comments now? I don't have the right to say anything unless I'm an
> OSI-basher as well? Sorry, ..................................<<SNIP>>...................................
Perhap's my comment's here are unwarranted, but it seems to me that until
you get more reliable stories from both sides (which you may not!). I think
that the lesson here is 'BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT'.
I nevertheless beg you to conisder this..Whom had the most to gain? (the
losers being obvious) to aid in this I have taken an exerpt from 'Christian
Counts' post:-
<<<Origin has the right
to do what they did. A great many of us feel the Fal did not have a
right to do what he did. THAT is what the stink is about.>>>
It seems to me that F.D. has a little more to add to this discussion so
that a resolution to this can be achieved and *ALL* parties appeased.
Justice of this kind is never done at the end of a sharp tongue, but rather
by careful and patient mediation. Lest members overstep the boundries of the
patience of others...
Well done Lady, justly spoken....
Reguards...
PALADIN the wanderer...
Lady Whisper
In article <4q5pur$68...@sat.ipp-garching.mpg.de>
bre...@biochem.mpg.de (Markus Brenner) wrote:
> So, no hurt feelings towards Origin, the only thing which *might* apply
> are Honourable's earlier suspects of them taking over UDIC central
> to put themselves in the middle of fan-organization. I guess we can't
> even blame them for such an attempt, after all, it's good to stay in
> contact with them in a way.
I believe they bought them because they were under the impression that
if they didn't, the pages would be lost in their entirety. Since there was
a good deal of quality information on those pages, they probably felt that
it would be better to buy them than to have them lost forever.
> from Fal is pretty useless. IMHO this whole deal wasn't any good idea,
> simple as that.
Agreed.
> Sure. What's left over is information about the Ultima games. 'Our'
> (Fal's) web pages used to be more. It included fixes, patches, helpfiles,
> well, in a way the whole knowledge and experience (as well as some fan
> stuff) of a Dragon's clan of Ultima fans. Selling this 'Dragons' treasure' off
> and stripping it to a mere 'information' site IMHO really is a shame and
> a wast of efforts.
> So, originally, I wasn't blaming Origin for their actions, of course they have
> their reasons. More or less I was mourning our beloved Ultima pages, which
> now are slightly less informative and which I can't identify with like I did
> before.
>
> -minstrel
Unless I'm mistaken, I believe a good deal of the information is still on
Excalibur's Worlds Of Ultima pages. I'm not exactly sure, though, since
I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to what was originally on the UDIC Ultima
pages as I didn't need help with any of the games at the time. Yep, I just
checked and a great deal of what Origin removed from the Ultima pages they
purchased is still available on Excalibur's pages (cheats, patches, etc.) so
all is not lost. :) http://www.emanon.net/~redjr/world_of_ultima Guess we need
to start pointing people with questions to his pages now rather than the others.
saebaryo
>
> Removing the links to Excalibur and other people's Ultima pages
> makes little difference since they are listed on Origin's "Cool Links"
> World Of Ultima pages instead of the other Ultima pages, but I guess
> its too late for that. What they have on their Ultima pages now are
> legal and relatively thorough information about the Ultima games.
> If you want cheats, don't expect the company to provide them, look
> elsewhere.
issue.Now those that wish to take it up further, can do so with F.D.
, hopefully _*OFF*_ this NG. :)
<<wistle wistle>> Now if we could only do something about that
Rancid(oops!!) Ranzer sprite (he would take offense to being called
a CHARACTER) we could help those that are truely in need,(ie. the
many posts for tech help) Rather than waste our time...
[A] Enlightening someone whom does'nt want to be!!!.
[B] Talking to someone who's only intention is wasting our time for
whatever reason it is!!!.
Reguards...
PALADIN the wanderer...
William Herrin
>I doubt that Origin thought Fallible created everything there, but what
>about the possibility that Fallible might have lied to them and told them
>that everyone is okay with him selling their stuff. OSI isn't a large
>corporation and EA had nothing to do with the purchase.
The truly amusing thing about this is that the sale was held up for a month
or so because the contract had to go back to EA legal. The first one did not
adequately express the fact that I held no rights in the set of files I marked
as "shareware."
-Fal
Allan Wellings
BlackMage Dragon <ae...@vm.cc.olemiss.edu> wrote:
>
>Well, I think you did what any of us would have done had we been
>presented with the same opportunity. This is the USA, capitalism rules,
>and that is the bottom line. I for one enjoyed the pages, and the peer
>group that it allowed me to be in. I have heard criticism about you from
>the beginning, but have not seen anyone close to your effort (unless it
>was Xcaliber Dragon) Anyway, no hard feelings here. No guts, no glory.
This is the USA!!!!!!!!!!
Oh no it bloody well isn't.
It's err, well I dunno really, but it's not the USA. Definitely not.
's Britannia or somewhere, probably.
And selling stuff that somebody gives you might be capitalism but its
definitely not cricket. Or Ultima. Now if Fal went round and killed
all the other contributors that would be alright.
As long as no one saw him.
Oh Avatar!!
Dogrot Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>William Herrin (her...@usenet-user.why.com) wrote:
>> I provided a list months ago of the files which put them in several
>> categories:
>
>Hmm, all I can find in my archive is something similar to what is given
>below. Maybe it missed my server. Care to repost this list? Or atleast
>the message ID? ;)
>
>> Yours -- OSI already holds the copyrights to these
>
>Oh, OSI already held the copyrights to the things we did? Could
>you explain this a bit more?
He was selling the entire archive which contained stuff like the
documentation for the Encore CD, which was already owned by Origin.
>> Ours -- Both OSI and I had some copyright interest in them (e.g. the Ultima
>> logos... The stylisitic Ultima is definately copyrighted by Origin, but I made
>> those particular ones.)
>
>Oh. OSI did not already hold the copyrights to the things you did?
>Why the difference?
While Origin held the copyrights to the logos, it was Fal's work, similar
to how someone in Origins art department would be paid for creating
something similar.
>> Mine -- I held the copyright and was selling it to them.
>
>Ok.
>
>> Shareware -- These were owned by someone else but there was every indication
>> that they were freely redistributable. Since I didn't own these I couldn't
>> sell them... In these instances what I was selling was the service of having
>> collected and indexed them, and in some cases converted them to some other
>> format.
>
>Yes, freely distributable. Not freely sell'able. OSI claims to OWN that stuff
>now.
Well OSI is wrong. Fal didn't sell these:
>> Since I didn't own these I couldn't
>> sell them... In these instances what I was selling was the service of having
>> collected and indexed them
>> Unknown -- There were something like 4 files that I never really did know if
>> they were copyrighted, so I labeled them as such. I don't recall offhand what
>> they were, but they were in the web portion not the FTP portion.
>
>Hmm, maybe.
>
>> And if you look at their site, the material contains the same indications of
>> authorship that it has had.
>
>The first thing I see when I look at their site is their legal warning claiming
>that they can do with the stuff as they see fit. Thats a bit worrying.
Well it's a little easier to just write one message than to classify what
is what.
--
____/\___ | _O_ Erraticus _O_ |"In THIS house we
___/__\__) | | -==(UDIC)==- | | obey the laws of
(__/ \__ | mailto:char...@ihug.co.nz | thermodynamics!"
/ \ |http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~charlton/andrew/| --Homer Simpson
Markus Brenner
Well, it's the Internet, isn't it? :) After all, we call ourselves
-== Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter ==-
I'm certainly *not* part of the USA :)
Cheers,
William Herrin
In article <4qp91f$r...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Andrew D. Charlton (char...@ihug.co.nz) wrote:
>> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>>
>> >Oh, OSI already held the copyrights to the things we did? Could
>> >you explain this a bit more?
>>
>> He was selling the entire archive which contained stuff like the
>> documentation for the Encore CD, which was already owned by Origin.
>He did sell the entire archive. It contained not only the 55 kilobytes
>of Encore docs but megabytes of stuff the dragons contributed.
What's the matter, can't handle the answer to your question? The note was
addressed to Origin, so things classified as "yours" (i.e. Origin's) meant
that the Dragons had no part in them. Things like the Ultima 8 patches, which
were copied from ftp.ea.com or from some other release Origin made such as the
Underworld demo.
> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Ok, why does he make a difference between the stuff *he* created (claiming
>it not to be under OSI copyright) and the other Dragons stuff (quote:
>"yours"), claiming it to be under OSI's copyright?
I prefer to believe that you're one of those obnoxious characters that
deliberately misinterprets everything someone he disagrees with says, rather
than someone who's ignorant enough to read a "yours" in a letter addressed to
Origin and believe it to refer to someone other than Origin. Maybe I'm giving
you too much credit, though. Maybe you are that dumb.
> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>You mean OSI prefers to put a lie onto their public website than to simply
>put up that list Fal supposedly wrote?
What lie?
"The original Ultima software is copyrighted by ORIGIN Systems, Inc.
Individual game-play scenarios and characters are the works of individual
authors who are not affiliated with ORIGIN Systems, and may be protected by
copyrights owned by those individuals. Anyone submitting characters or
scenarios for inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to
use the submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
The original Ultima software is copyrighted by Origin. Well, that's true.
Some other stuff on the site is by folks not affiliated with Origin and is
protected by those author's copyrights. Well, that's certainly true. If you
(now) submit something for inclusion in the site, you grant Origin full
non-exclusive rights. That's neither true nor false; its a statement of what
they want in order to include something additional on the site.
I'm unimpressed by your inability to comprehend the difference between past
and present tense.
William Herrin
>William Herrin (her...@usenet-user.why.com) wrote:
>> >He did sell the entire archive. It contained not only the 55 kilobytes
>> >of Encore docs but megabytes of stuff the dragons contributed.
>>
>> What's the matter, can't handle the answer to your question? The note was
>> addressed to Origin, so things classified as "yours" (i.e. Origin's) meant
>> that the Dragons had no part in them. Things like the Ultima 8 patches, which
>> were copied from ftp.ea.com or from some other release Origin made such as the
>> Underworld demo.
>This is simply not the truth (if not a lie). You made that statement in
><herrin.101...@usenet-user.why.com> which was a direct follow-up
>to <4q5je0$5...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> posted by dax_...@ix.netcom.com
>(Dax Omni).
>A letter addressed to Origin? Look again.
Okay, lets look again:
(From <herrin.101...@usenet-user.why.com>)
I provided a list months ago of the files which put them in several
categories:
Yours -- OSI already holds the copyrights to these
Ours -- Both OSI and I had some copyright interest in them (e.g. the Ultima
logos... The stylisitic Ultima is definately copyrighted by Origin, but I made
those particular ones.)
Mine -- I held the copyright and was selling it to them.
Shareware -- These were owned by someone else but there was every indication
that they were freely redistributable. Since I didn't own these I couldn't
sell them... In these instances what I was selling was the service of having
collected and indexed them, and in some cases converted them to some other
format.
(...)
Now lets see... I provided a list of the files months ago... Hmm. Now who
might I have provided the list to? Did I provide the list to F15 Dragon? No,
frankly its none of his business and he's been going out of his way to get on
my nerves for months now. Did I provide it to that shoe salesman in Chicago?
No, no I don't know any shoe salesman in Chicago. Did I provide the list to
Origin systems? Why yes, there's something that makes sense. I provided them
with a list because I wanted them to fully understand what they were and
weren't buying.
So, if I provide a list to Origin, and in it I expand the reference "Yours"
to mean "Origin already owns these" who might that yours be refering to? F15
Dragon? No, he doesn't seem to have any part in this. That shoe salesman in
Chicago? No, like I said I don't know any shoe salesman in Chicago. Maybe the
"yours" meant Origin systems'. Gee, that would make sense... I used a word and
then provide a phrase to narrow its meaning. The phrase said Origin. The note
was to Origin. I'll bet the "you" in there meant Origin too!
But then you already knew that when you misread the post. You must think the
Dragons are really stupid to believe that you can mislead any of them into
thinking that the "you" in that note to Origin didn't really mean Origin.
>> "Anyone submitting characters or
>> scenarios for inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to
>> use the submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
>And you didn't submit all of the stuff to them? For money?
You want to play semantic games, do you? Well, no, as Origin defines
submitting characters and scenarios (above) I did not submit a single thing.
>And I am very impressed how you say "white" to the left and "black"
>to the right :)
I would be impressed by how you read "white" and quote "black" except that I
generally bore of the misinterpretation game after about 10 minutes.
>BTW, check order has been given to my bank. You'll have to wait until Citibank
>in NY (I think) issues it to you.
Now, if this is true and it doesn't bounce, I will be impressed.
Andrew D. Charlton
>William Herrin (her...@usenet-user.why.com) wrote:
>> "The original Ultima software is copyrighted by ORIGIN Systems, Inc.
>> Individual game-play scenarios and characters are the works of individual
>> authors who are not affiliated with ORIGIN Systems, and may be protected by
>> copyrights owned by those individuals. Anyone submitting characters or
>> scenarios for inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to
>> use the submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
>
>And you didn't submit all of the stuff to them? For money?
That notice reflects the situation NOW, not when the sale was made. It
would be rather unethical of Origin to apply a notice put up after the sale
to the sale itself.
It would be like me borrowing a book from you, and then me saying: All
paper objects submitted to Erraticus become the sole property of Erraticus.
My saying that AFTER you give me the book says nothing about the status of
the book.
William Herrin
>Andrew D. Charlton (char...@ihug.co.nz) wrote
=>> It would be like me borrowing a book from you, and then me saying: All
>> paper objects submitted to Erraticus become the sole property of Erraticus.
>> My saying that AFTER you give me the book says nothing about the status of
>> the book.
>I'd say that OSI has 'bought the book'.
You can say anything you want, as long as you've no objection to spreading a
lie. Which judging from the last while, means that you can say anything you
want.
William Herrin
>For the record, in this case you provided *us* (or Dax Omni) with a list.
>Not to anybody else.
(...)
>Fal posts a direct reply to a persons post and expects the 'yours' to
>be read as 'Origin's'. You're not thinking across three corners, maybe?
>If you wanted to say 'Origin's' then why didn't you write 'Origin's'?
>I guess your hubbub above is just a poor attempt to change what you said
>afterwards.
(...)
>I think that the Dragons are intelligent to read 'yours' as 'yours' and
>'Origin's' as 'Origin's'.
You know, I'm really tired of your deliberate misinterpretation game. Your
whole line of reasoning is a farce, and you know it. So screw you.
Congratulations, you're the first person ever to earn an entry in my killfile.
And before you manage to misinterpret that one, I mean my usenet reader's
killfile, not a list of people to hire a hitman for.
Christopher A. Tew
>In article <4qvnom$h...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>>For the record, in this case you provided *us* (or Dax Omni) with a list.
>>Not to anybody else.
>(...)
>>Fal posts a direct reply to a persons post and expects the 'yours' to
>>be read as 'Origin's'. You're not thinking across three corners, maybe?
>>If you wanted to say 'Origin's' then why didn't you write 'Origin's'?
>>I guess your hubbub above is just a poor attempt to change what you said
>>afterwards.
>(...)
>>I think that the Dragons are intelligent to read 'yours' as 'yours' and
>>'Origin's' as 'Origin's'.
> You know, I'm really tired of your deliberate misinterpretation game. Your
>whole line of reasoning is a farce, and you know it. So screw you.
>Congratulations, you're the first person ever to earn an entry in my killfile.
>And before you manage to misinterpret that one, I mean my usenet reader's
>killfile, not a list of people to hire a hitman for.
>-Fal
Actually, F-15 was right in this. You should have made an attempt to
clarify terms in the original post; the "yours, mine, shareware" thing
was a bit confusing.
And putting F-15 in your killfile signifies a surrender, an
unwillingness to keep responding to the accusations. You live in
Washington D.C., or near enough, so you should know that doing that's
a no-no.
-Abstract
--Christopher A. Tew----------------
"A silver tongue for the chosen one
Heavy magnum in your side or a bloody thorn..."
-Siouxsie & the Banshees, "Dazzle"
---------------------chri...@eden.com
William Herrin
>Actually, F-15 was right in this. You should have made an attempt to
>clarify terms in the original post; the "yours, mine, shareware" thing
>was a bit confusing.
Reread my post. Consider it in the context of a sequence of posts where my
central claim is that no, unlike F15's claim, I did not sell anybody else's
stuff. Reread it carefully. If its not perfectly clear who is "you" in the
context of the labelling, then it is at the least completely obvious.
>And putting F-15 in your killfile signifies a surrender, an
>unwillingness to keep responding to the accusations. You live in
>Washington D.C., or near enough, so you should know that doing that's
>a no-no.
This is a game to him, and I won't continue to play it. If anyone has real
concerns (i.e. if anyone other than F15 has concerns) I'll be happy to answer
them.
As to the politic nature of accusations, I'm well aware of how they work. I
also know that no matter who the accuser is, if he keeps at it long enough
then you reach a point where everyone who's going to believe you does, and
everybody who isn't doesn't. At that point, short of your opponent suddenly
finding honor and retracting his statements, there's nothing to be gained by
further discussion.
Case and point is Clinton's alleged Girlfriend, who was it, Gennifer
Flowers? She never once offered substantive proof of an affair, and her own
sister called her a liar. Yet because she said it enough times, some people
still believe it happened, and there's nothing he can say and no proof he can
offer to change that.
If F15 wants to be a Gennifer Flowers and claim he got screwed, well, I
can't stop him. But I don't have to give him the time of day either.
bout...@razor.wcc.govt.nz
In article <herrin.103...@usenet-user.why.com>, her...@usenet-user.why.com (William Herrin) writes
>And before you manage to misinterpret that one, I mean my usenet reader's
>killfile, not a list of people to hire a hitman for.
>
>-Fal
Whaaaat!!! Fallible's hired a hitman? Oh, no! My name must be on his list, I
just know it is - all those bad jokes - I'm soooorrry! I'm too young to die. Is
that a knock at the door...
DragonSpawn
-==[UDCI]==-
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Your poor nerves. How can somebody ever critisize an angel-like person
>like you are ;)
>For the record, in this case you provided *us* (or Dax Omni) with a list.
>Not to anybody else.
In which case? You mean the list quoted below? The list quoted below was
a cut down version of the list supplied to Origin. In every instance it
was perfectly clear that the list was supplied to Origin. If not
explicitly stated in the introduction to the message, then certainly made
clear enough as the list was explained.
The post being responded to was saying that Origin now claimed to own ALL
the stuff on the site. Fallible was stating that he had supplied them with
a list similar to the one below to clarify which things were whose BEFORE
the transaction. It stands to reason that Fal was only selling those
things which were listed as belonging to him.
>Fal posts a direct reply to a persons post and expects the 'yours' to
>be read as 'Origin's'. You're not thinking across three corners, maybe?
>If you wanted to say 'Origin's' then why didn't you write 'Origin's'?
>I guess your hubbub above is just a poor attempt to change what you said
>afterwards.
It was PERFECTLY CLEAR!
Lets have a look at the list again, shall we?
>> Yours -- OSI already holds the copyrights to these
If "Yours" in any way meant a Dragon, why would OSI hold the copyrights to
them? This should have been the first clue that the list was in fact
supplied to Origin, and thus, the "Yours" meant Origin.
>> Ours -- Both OSI and I had some copyright interest in them (e.g. the Ultima
>> logos... The stylisitic Ultima is definately copyrighted by Origin, but I made
>> those particular ones.)
Ours meaning "Yours and Mine" Now I hope you aren't going to say that I
mean me, the "Mine" means Fallible, and the "Yours" means Origin. This is
clarified by the statement "Both OSI and I had some copyright interest in
them". How could this POSSIBLY be interpreted as meaning anything else? I
DEFY you to show how it is possible. How is your mind processing the
information to come to the conclusions you do?
>> Mine -- I held the copyright and was selling it to them.
Mine again meaning Fallible.
>> Shareware -- These were owned by someone else but there was every indication
>> that they were freely redistributable. Since I didn't own these I couldn't
>> sell them... In these instances what I was selling was the service of having
>> collected and indexed them, and in some cases converted them to some other
>> format.
I would say the above seems obvious too, but who knows how you will
interpret it?
>> But then you already knew that when you misread the post. You must think the
>> Dragons are really stupid to believe that you can mislead any of them into
>> thinking that the "you" in that note to Origin didn't really mean Origin.
>I think that the Dragons are intelligent to read 'yours' as 'yours' and
>'Origin's' as 'Origin's'.
I think you are intelligent enough to be able to infer context. I ask you,
do you think Fal is stupid? Would he deliberately post a message that
would suggest he had done exactly what you say he had done? Fal is no
Ranzer L. Averon.
>> >> "Anyone submitting characters or
>> >> scenarios for inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to
>> >> use the submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
>>
>> >And you didn't submit all of the stuff to them? For money?
>>
>> You want to play semantic games, do you? Well, no, as Origin defines
>> submitting characters and scenarios (above) I did not submit a single thing.
>How does Origin define submitting characters and scenarios? Any more
>info on that on OSI's site, maybe?
>For the record again: so far you have submitted everything on OSI's site,
>the walkthroughs, the editors, the text files, images.
Well, Origin says that "Anyone submitting characters or scenarios for
inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to use the
submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
This will serve as a definition of submit. And under THIS definition of
submit, Fal submitted nothing, because he did not grant OSI permission to
use them any way they saw fit. This notice applies to anyone wanting to
make any submissions NOW, it is not a retroactive notice.
Andrew D. Charlton
>In article <4qvms8$h...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>
>>Andrew D. Charlton (char...@ihug.co.nz) wrote
>=>> It would be like me borrowing a book from you, and then me saying: All
>>> paper objects submitted to Erraticus become the sole property of Erraticus.
>>> My saying that AFTER you give me the book says nothing about the status of
>>> the book.
>
>>I'd say that OSI has 'bought the book'.
Actually, it's more like Origin has bought a library. Some of the books in
the library are publicly owned (And freely photocopiable), and others were
specifically owned by the previous owner of the library. The publicly
owned bits are no less publicly owned just because the building they are in
is now owned by someone else.
Now the new owner decides he can't be bothered by any more of these
publicly owned books, so he puts up a notice saying that in the future, the
library can do what it wants with any books sent to it. This notice in no
way affects the publicly owned books currently in the library.
Joel E Slovacek
>>> Mine -- I held the copyright and was selling it to them.
>
>Mine again meaning Fallible.
Perhaps it's silly of me to join this argument, seeing as I'm not involved,
but what the heck! I'd just like to point out here that what Fal wrote COULD
be alittle misleading because he all of a sudden used the word "them" to
indicate Origin, instead of "you". However, for the record I do agree with
just about everything both you and Fal said in the post.
>do you think Fal is stupid? Would he deliberately post a message that
>would suggest he had done exactly what you say he had done? Fal is no
>Ranzer L. Averon.
Ouch! ;)
>Well, Origin says that "Anyone submitting characters or scenarios for
>inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to use the
>submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
>
>This will serve as a definition of submit. And under THIS definition of
>submit, Fal submitted nothing, because he did not grant OSI permission to
>use them any way they saw fit. This notice applies to anyone wanting to
>make any submissions NOW, it is not a retroactive notice.
This is the part that I would take exception to. In what context does
Origin make this statement? If, according to them it is the definition
of a submission, then yes, you and Fal are perfectly correct. But until
you interpreted it that way, I (a neutral party) read that phrase as
"When something is submitted, we reserve the right to use it in any way
we see fit." (we being Origin), and not "We consider things submitted when
we are given permission to use them as we see fit." Come to think of it,
I highly doubt it could be interpreted any other way.
Which makes more sense? Which is more of an issue? In order for the
latter interpretation (yours and Fal's) to be valid, then the fact that
these materials were considered an official "submission" would have to be
a significant point. Perhaps if there is another clause involving official
submissions then it is, but rationality points me toward the first
interpretation, which is an extremely common disclaimer, and the more
appropriate one in this case.
Of course, until I know what context OSI's statement is made this issue
remains unclear. Still, I think the first "disclaimer" interpretation is
about 90 times more likely to be right.
--
-=-=-
"Everyone should believe in something ..
I believe I'll go fishing!" -- Sam & Omie's
William Herrin
>>Well, Origin says that "Anyone submitting characters or scenarios for
>>inclusion in this web site grants ORIGIN Systems permission to use the
>>submissions in any way that ORIGIN Systems sees fit."
>>
>>This will serve as a definition of submit. And under THIS definition of
>>submit, Fal submitted nothing, because he did not grant OSI permission to
>>use them any way they saw fit. This notice applies to anyone wanting to
>>make any submissions NOW, it is not a retroactive notice.
>This is the part that I would take exception to. In what context does
>Origin make this statement? If, according to them it is the definition
>of a submission, then yes, you and Fal are perfectly correct. But until
>you interpreted it that way, I (a neutral party) read that phrase as
>"When something is submitted, we reserve the right to use it in any way
>we see fit." (we being Origin), and not "We consider things submitted when
>we are given permission to use them as we see fit." Come to think of it,
>I highly doubt it could be interpreted any other way.
>Which makes more sense? Which is more of an issue? In order for the
>latter interpretation (yours and Fal's) to be valid, then the fact that
>these materials were considered an official "submission" would have to be
>a significant point.
Ah, but that's the problem. Its not a fact. It was supplied as a "fact"
by F15 who does not appear to be in full possession of his faculties let alone
the facts. The claim that the Ultima archive was a "submission" under the
terms above is nothing more than a hypothesis put forward by F15 who A) wants
very badly for you to think I did something crooked, and B) has no contact
with the folks at Origin who worked on the site and put the above quote on it.
Were F15's hypothesis correct, I'd consider it significant too...
Particularly since in that case it would directly contradict the contract I
signed. But they don't contradict, because F15's hypothesis that the Ultima
archive was a "submission" under those terms is not correct. Unfortunately for
me, F15 is operating under the rule that if you say it enough times it becomes
indistinguishable from fact.
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>It is my understanding that Origin is willing to cooperate
>with any author who wishes to have the software removed from the pages.
Issue closed.
--
Want to find some Ultima information? Have some Ultima or Dragons info
to provide? Check out the Ring of Dragons.
http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~charlton/andrew/ring.html
***
____/\___ | _O_ Erraticus _O_ |"I'm so hip, I
___/__\__) | | -==(UDIC)==- | | have difficulty
(__/ \__ | mailto:char...@ihug.co.nz | seeing over my
/ \ |http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~charlton/andrew/| pelvis." --Z.B.
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Well, would you buy a library to 50% full of public books knowing that the
>public hasn't been consulted before as to the transfer into a now private
>library?
Not a private library, a privately owned library. The public can still get
in to read those books, photocopy them, do whatever they want. And after
all, it's only one copy of the book that's in the library.
William Herrin
>boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>>Well, would you buy a library to 50% full of public books knowing that the
>>public hasn't been consulted before as to the transfer into a now private
>>library?
>Not a private library, a privately owned library. The public can still get
>in to read those books, photocopy them, do whatever they want. And after
>all, it's only one copy of the book that's in the library.
I think that what F15 doesn't understand is that the library always was
privately owned. It existed because I found and/or provided the resources for
it when no one else could or would. I like Ultima a lot, and I wanted to share
that with other fans of the game. For the year and a half that I ran the
Ultima Archive, I believe I accomplished that.
Last November when it reached 20% of the usage of my ISP's web server and
stubbornly stayed there despite my ISP's growth, I decided it was time to get
rid of it. As I saw it, there were two options: 1) Sell it to Origin, or 2)
Give it (or pieces of it) to others to run. So I did two things: I asked a
contact I had at Origin if they'd be interested in buying it, and I posted a
message on the newsgroup asking if anyone would be willing to take over pieces
of it.
Exactly one Dragon was interested in taking over a piece of the archive on
their server... And only the Ultima 7-8 set of documents, nothing else. On the
other hand, Origin was willing not only to provide a home for just about all
of it, they were willing to pay me in the process. Deciding what to do was not
especially difficult.
Having decided to get rid of it, and having found the best offer, I did
exactly that. End of story, except for one thing: F15 has decided for some
reason to attempt to destroy my reputation, and by circulating misinformation
he's built himself a nice big mudball he can throw.
Now granted, I've done everything from calling F15's understanding of
statistics imperfect to disobeying him during the r.g.c.u-d CFV, but I'm
dismayed to see his sense of honor and honesty crumble the way it has during
his continuing inuendo. I guess he must think that the ends justify the means.
William Herrin
In article <4s4n5j$g...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
>> Last November when it reached 20% of the usage of my ISP's web server and
>> stubbornly stayed there despite my ISP's growth, I decided it was time to get
>> rid of it. As I saw it, there were two options: 1) Sell it to Origin, or 2)
>> Give it (or pieces of it) to others to run. So I did two things: I asked a
>> contact I had at Origin if they'd be interested in buying it, and I posted a
>> message on the newsgroup asking if anyone would be willing to take over pieces
>> of it.
>Hmm, I haven't seen that post. I might have overlooked it. But it isn't
>in my archives either. Since Fal is archiveing the UDIC newsgroups as
>well it won't be hard for him to disprove my claim that such a post
>doesn't exist.
You're right for a change: its not. Message ID <herrin.73...@why.com>
posted November 22, 1995 subject: Wanted: Folks to take over segments of the
Web and FTP archives. I can understand how you might have overlooked both it
and the other posts I made on the subject, however, since the accuracy and
truthfulness of your claims does not seem to be one of your overriding
concerns.
>> other hand, Origin was willing not only to provide a home for just about all
>> of it, they were willing to pay me in the process. Deciding what to do was not
>> especially difficult.
>I wouldn't have expect Fal to do anything else ;)
Especially since the lines you deleted indicated that I was unable to find
homes for most of the stuff anywhere but Origin. But then you've proven time
and time again that you're intimately familiar with the concept of "lies of
omission."
>> Now granted, I've done everything from calling F15's understanding of
>> statistics imperfect to disobeying him during the r.g.c.u-d CFV, but I'm
>Let's call it disobeying the rules set by the CFV, hmm?
Lets not, since A) the rules in the CFV were set by you as the primary
proponent, B) the rules in question (regarding web notifications of ongoing
CFVs) are set by the UVV, not the individual CFV's, and C) had I disobeyed the
rules set by the UVV as opposed to thumbing my nose at your orders, the vote
would have been invalidated. But while a question was raised about my
advertising the vote on the web site, no votes were invalidated, which makes
you once again a liar.
>As to the statistics (which were a result of your attempt to install a
>government - I know you have a better sounding word for it - in this
Two more lines, one more lie. I attempted to discuss the concept of a club
government and how to make it work, nothing more. At no time did I propose
moving forward and actually implementing the ideas that were put forward. You
have an archive of the posts and if its not complete enough you can download
mine from the udic web site, but you will not be able to find a post where I
so much as suggested that it was time to move past the discussion stage and
into implementation.
>club), I haven't seen anything from you than "that isn't what I want". ;)
Well, you seem to have a reading comprehension problem: You only see what
you want to see, regardless of what's actually there. I guess you lie to
yourself as much as you lie to the rest of us.
Lawrence Deneault
On 15 Jul 1996 18:02:27 GMT, boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk
Bochmann) wrote:
>William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
SNIP
> F-15 Dragon aka Henryk Bochmann boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de
> -==[UDIC]==- F-15@IRC F15_D...@udic.org
> Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter http://rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de/~bochmann
> *** f u cn rd ths, u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgrmng ***
With all due respect to both Fal and F-15, their sniping and bickering with
one another should have been taken to e-mail long ago.
_) (_
_) \ \ / /(_
_) \ \ \ /\__/\ / / / (_
) \ \ \ (o_ o) / / / (_
\ (oo) /
=====oOo==| \==oOo====
mar...@interport.net
=========| \=========
| \
( )
( )
(_________)
Sith Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Well, would you buy a library to 50% full of public books knowing that the
>owned library?
I don't see any problem with that, as long as that the public books remain
accessable to the public (hence the distinction between private and
privately owned). Even THAT is not an issue in this case, since there can
only be a finite number of books, but there can be infinite copies of
software etc. (Given that the software is freely copiable)
William Herrin
In article <4s7uvu$6...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>One could get the impression that you released me from the grip of
>your killfile (killfiles are for cowards anyway <g>).
If I had any sense, I'd put you right back in. There's nothing I can say
that you won't massage into meaning something equivalent to your viewpoint.
The fact that most of your claims are the dead opposite of what I actually
said just doesn't seem to phase you.
>> Especially since the lines you deleted indicated that I was unable to find
>> homes for most of the stuff anywhere but Origin. But then you've proven time
>> and time again that you're intimately familiar with the concept of "lies of
>> omission."
>No, I didn't expect you to do anything else than taking money because
>I got to know you over the time.
>Right. Set by the UVV. And the UVV said no to WWW distibution. The vote
>wasn't invalidated because of your innocence. Your guilt was claimed by
>the votetaker. The vote wasn't invalidated because your action's impact
>was neglecteble.
So you claim, but since Warren never explained his decision not to pursue
the matter, you really have no idea. You could accuately say that you think
the impact was negligible, and you think that's why Warren didn't pursue it,
but instead what you're doing once again is representing your opinion of
someone else's motives as a fact. The only facts here are that a question was
raised and that no action was taken.
>You didn't propose it? Don't remember your "Proposal" and Savant's
>funny paraphrasing. I'll have to quote from it when I'm home :)
You'll have to do better than that. You'll have to find a place where I said
we should go ahead and implement it. And while searching for it, you'll have
to ignore the messages where I objected to voting on it on the grounds that it
wasn't ready for implementation regardless of the outcome.
>> Well, you seem to have a reading comprehension problem: You only see what
>> you want to see, regardless of what's actually there. I guess you lie to
>> yourself as much as you lie to the rest of us.
>Did you provide a statistical analysis back then? If yes, then it should
>be available on the Usenet archives :)
No, I didn't. I browbeat you with the subject until you did an analysis, and
then I pointed out that your analysis was incorrect because you assumed the
wrong preconditions. You built a table for a system that was symetric when the
system I was talking about wasn't, among other glaring errors. The point of
the excercise was to show that you didn't know what you're talking about, and
if I hadn't gotten bogged down in the details, I'd have done just that.
William Herrin
In article <4s8hp2$g...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
>> You're right for a change: its not. Message ID <herrin.73...@why.com>
>> posted November 22, 1995 subject: Wanted: Folks to take over segments of the
>> Web and FTP archives. I can understand how you might have overlooked both it
>> and the other posts I made on the subject, however, since the accuracy and
>> truthfulness of your claims does not seem to be one of your overriding
>> concerns.
>Hmm, I wasn't able to retrieve that post, neither from Altavista nor from
>Dejanews.
Gee, really? You mean they don't have a copy of posts made to obscure alt
groups 8 months ago? I'm shocked. I was so sure they had the couple terabytes
of online disk storage necessary for such an endeavor, not to mention a
machine capable of parsing through that much information.
> Since you are a CS student you certainly have more experience
>with such engines. I am looking forward to see the URL of the post :)
If you can't find it in your archive, I'm afraid you'll just have to settle
for mine: http://www.udic.org/ftpud/udic/usenet/
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
>> You're right for a change: its not. Message ID <herrin.73...@why.com>
>> posted November 22, 1995 subject: Wanted: Folks to take over segments of the
>> Web and FTP archives. I can understand how you might have overlooked both it
>> and the other posts I made on the subject, however, since the accuracy and
>> truthfulness of your claims does not seem to be one of your overriding
>> concerns.
>
>Hmm, I wasn't able to retrieve that post, neither from Altavista nor from
>Dejanews. Since you are a CS student you certainly have more experience
>with such engines. I am looking forward to see the URL of the post :)
Alas, it would seem that dejanews never archived AGUD (It does, however
seem to archive config, and all the AGUD cancel messages...), and altavista
only has articles in AGUD from the end of May (When RGCUD was created?).
Not to mention the fact that a message id is only required to be unique for
a few weeks (The expected life of a post), not several months. (Although it
is recommended)
--
Aum Dragon
Just ignore him, man, he's an idiot and doesn't listen.
Aum Dragon s...@beavis.u-net.com
-= U D I C =-
http://www.u-net.com/~beavis/renstimp.htm sig0.1
William Herrin
>With all due respect to both Fal and F-15, their sniping and bickering with
>one another should have been taken to e-mail long ago.
You are, of course, correct. Here's the problem though: Uncontested claims
made by someone with at least a shred of credibility become facts. So, as long
as F15 insists on posting his trash, and as long as he has any credibility at
all, I have to at least periodically call him a liar so that as new folks join
us, they don't come to believe him by default.
I've tried several times to take this to E-Mail or let it drop, and each
time F15 has simply opened up a new topic. I tried again last night, emailing
my latest responses to him, along with the following statement: "You know
what, I'm going to take Sith's advice and take this to mail. Lets see if
you can handle not playing to an audience, or if you end up having to drag
this back out into public again."
The essence of F15's response is that he's not going to take it to mail
because that's what I want. What am I to do? Maybe you can do a better job of
convincing him than I can.
Addison Godel
Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
: William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
: > If you can't find it in your archive, I'm afraid you'll just have to settle
: > for mine: http://www.udic.org/ftpud/udic/usenet/
: You mean I should trust you.
Well, yes, I assume that was thrust of the statement. Since I've never
seen Fal do much of anything untrustworthy, it doesn't seem that
incomprehensible to me.
--
*****************************************************************
* ---Atticus Dragon of the Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter--- *
*****************************************************************
* __| _______________ | / \ | ______________ |__ *
* <__||_______________/ -|| UDIC ||- \_____________||__> *
* | SAILOR MOON RULES! | \ / | HAIL ALANIS! | *
*****************************************************************
Sith Dragon
On 17 Jul 1996 05:27:38 GMT, boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk
Bochmann) wrote:
SNIP
>Certainly. Everything can be taken to a private dispute. The question,
>though, as always, is, "cui bono". Who has to gain something when a matter
>is taken out of the public? Of course always the person who has an
>interest in less publicity.
Granted.
>I personally prefer to discuss publicly, because a) a uncomfortable
>question has a better chance to be answered in public than in a private
>correspondence, where it can be easily ignored, and b) because that answer
>remains in the public for a long time.
I'll give ya that one, too.
>What you are witnessing, between Fal an me, is, atleast IMHO, club
>politics. I am convinced that Fal leads this club into a wrong direction,
>into commercialization.
The politics of anarchy, eh? :) UDIC has always seemed -- at least to me
-- to have no political hierarchy at all. In fact, I would be
uncomfortable if it did. I think the minute that someone claims he/she
speaks for all the Dragons, I'll walk.
>Maybe I am totally wrong, but his actions
>throughout the last year make me perceive him this way. He proposed a
>committee that should work with the computer games industry
In theory, what's wrong with the committee idea? If we help Origin write a
kick-ass Ultima IX I'm all for it.
> and he sold
>out one of the Dragons biggest assets to OSI. He threatened he could turn
>the club into anything he wants using his server resources and, last not
>least, he is the one who has the ultimate and sole control over the
>Dragon's roster (the greeters can write to it, but as long as Fal wants.)
I feel that the Roster has no importance whatsoever. I'm not a Dragon
because the roster said I joined on 7 May 1995 -- I'm a Dragon because I
like Ultima. If you co-opt the importance of the Roster it no longer has
value as a bargaining chip. Much of the same can be said of the server
sold to OSI.
>In cases of such coincidence I am just cautious. Would I take the matter
>to mail, the issue would be closed by non-responding within a very short
>time. This way Fal atleast has to give answers.
Granted, as always. You should be a reporter. :)
>You are perfectly entitled to be not interested. If that is the case,
>then there is nothing that could force you to read it.
It's not that I'm uninterested, it that I'm beginning to feel that people
are losing the forest for the trees.
> F-15 Dragon aka Henryk Bochmann boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de
> -==[UDIC]==- F-15@IRC F15_D...@udic.org
> Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter http://rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de/~bochmann
> *** f u cn rd ths, u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgrmng ***
Jason Hardt
On 16 Jul 1996 09:11:53 GMT, Henryk Bochmann <boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de> wrote:
>Andrew D. Charlton <char...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>> Alas, it would seem that dejanews never archived AGUD (It does, however
>> seem to archive config, and all the AGUD cancel messages...), and altavista
>> only has articles in AGUD from the end of May (When RGCUD was created?).
>
>there and it starts to show up in rgcud (along with crossposting) starting
>March 19th.
>
>Check the advanced search methods. You can search for Group: *dragons*,
>author: herrin@*, date:1995/11/*.
>
FWIW, I remember Fal making the post in question. I don't remember when,
save that it was a long time ago, and I can't find it at Dejanews either,
but that can probably be explained by agud's troubled propegation. I
recall many times reading a reply to a reply to a post I never saw.
But I do clearly remember Fal asking, a long while ago, for someone to
take over the archives.
-Mithril
--
Jason Hardt "The crows be pickin' at your flesh,
to...@exo.com And you got no control of the
Team OS/2 Sitshiation."
Mithril Dragon - Ted Nugent, _Terminus Eldorado_
-==(UDIC)==-
Toma's OS/2 Game Page - http://exo.com/~toma/os2games/index.html
Addison Godel
Aum Dragon (s...@beavis.u-net.com) wrote:
: Just ignore him, man, he's an idiot and doesn't listen.
Mind telling us who you're talking about?
Bryan Christian
This is one thing that should go to mail because it seems only two
people are poasting anymore and I'm sure more than a few people are just
skipping past the thread like I am and don't care about the remarks
going back and forth(sorry to both Fal and F-15 for being blunt but it's
true).
Brimstar Arknstone Dragon
-==<UDIC>==-
PS All who agree with this should post telling F-15 to move this topic
to mailx I know Fal's already made the suggestion.
William Herrin
In article <4shtka$l...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Certainly. Everything can be taken to a private dispute. The question,
>though, as always, is, "cui bono". Who has to gain something when a matter
>is taken out of the public? Of course always the person who has an
>interest in less publicity.
>...
>What you are witnessing, between Fal an me, is, atleast IMHO, club
>politics.
Politics. An art of manipulating others through carefully crafted (and
often underhanded) public discourse. I'm amazed that you've retained enough
honesty to openly admit that what you are in fact doing is playing politics.
> I am convinced that Fal leads this club into a wrong direction,
>into commercialization. Maybe I am totally wrong, but his actions
>throughout the last year make me perceive him this way.
Therefore, you (naturally) will lead the dragons in the proper direction,
thus combatting my attempts to lead them astray.
>He proposed a
>committee that should work with the computer games industry and he sold
>out one of the Dragons biggest assets to OSI. He threatened he could turn
>the club into anything he wants using his server resources
Liar. You turned that discourse on its ear. "You tried to install a
government in the UDIC." "Idiot, if I were trying to install a government in
the UDIC, I'd do this, this, and this." "Oh, so now you're threatening to use
your influence to establish a government in the UDIC."
> and, last not
>least, he is the one who has the ultimate and sole control over the
>Dragon's roster (the greeters can write to it, but as long as Fal wants.)
Shocking.
>In cases of such coincidence I am just cautious. Would I take the matter
>to mail, the issue would be closed by non-responding within a very short
>time. This way Fal atleast has to give answers.
Well gee Congressman, I hope you're pleased with yourself, you've forced the
issue to the floor.
William Herrin
>>What you are witnessing, between Fal an me, is, atleast IMHO, club
>>politics. I am convinced that Fal leads this club into a wrong direction,
>>into commercialization.
>The politics of anarchy, eh? :) UDIC has always seemed -- at least to me
>-- to have no political hierarchy at all. In fact, I would be
>uncomfortable if it did. I think the minute that someone claims he/she
>speaks for all the Dragons, I'll walk.
Oh my gosh, where have you been? Havn't you heard? Our illustrious
leader, F-15 Dragon, is going to show us the light.
>>Maybe I am totally wrong, but his actions
>>throughout the last year make me perceive him this way. He proposed a
>>committee that should work with the computer games industry
>In theory, what's wrong with the committee idea? If we help Origin write a
>kick-ass Ultima IX I'm all for it.
Shh! Watch thy tounge! F15 has declared that any Dragon who openly discusses
issues of government is an enemy of the state, and subject to summary
execution.
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Lawrence Deneault <mar...@interport.net> wrote:
>> With all due respect to both Fal and F-15, their sniping and bickering with
>> one another should have been taken to e-mail long ago.
>Certainly. Everything can be taken to a private dispute. The question,
>though, as always, is, "cui bono". Who has to gain something when a matter
>is taken out of the public? Of course always the person who has an
>interest in less publicity.
SHUT UP!!!! YOU STUPID WHINING GERMAN!!! SHUT UP!!!! NOW
DaKaren
Aum Dragon wrote:
>
> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>
> >Lawrence Deneault <mar...@interport.net> wrote:
> >> With all due respect to both Fal and F-15, their sniping and bickering with
> >> one another should have been taken to e-mail long ago.
>
> >Certainly. Everything can be taken to a private dispute. The question,
> >though, as always, is, "cui bono". Who has to gain something when a matter
> >is taken out of the public? Of course always the person who has an
> >interest in less publicity.
>
> SHUT UP!!!! YOU STUPID WHINING GERMAN!!! SHUT UP!!!! NOW
>
> Aum Dragon s...@beavis.u-net.com
That was mature Aum...
--
DaKaren Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
>Empire of the New Reality<
Order of the Etheral Ankh
Minoc, Britannia
(@GO #2228 on the MOO)
.--.
/ /\ \
/ / \ \
| | | |
\ \ / /
|\______\ \/ /______/|
| _______ _______ |
|/ \ / \|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
/ \
/______\
Lady Whisper
In article <herrin.105...@usenet-user.why.com>, herrin@usenet-
user.why.com says...
> In article <4sjakl$f...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
> >Jason Hardt <to...@exo.com> wrote:
> >> FWIW, I remember Fal making the post in question. I don't
remember when,
>
server.
> ^^^^^^^^
> >Now Fal can truly claim he did everything humanly possible to keep
> >the site in Dragon's hands ;)
>
> Folks, we have in this post two little words which really tell
you
> everything there is to be said about this thread. According to F15,
its "Too
> Bad" that I tried to find Dragons to take over the Ultima archive.
Its not
> that he guesses he was wrong about me, and its not that he's not
sure he
> believes that I really did it. It is instead, "Too bad" that
because someone
> corroborates my claim, he has less mud to sling.
>
> I nominate F15 first UDIC politician. Anyone care to second it?
>
> -Fal
What I find particularly humorous about this exchange is that F-15
refuses to believe that some people, including myself, never saw the
RFD for this newsgroup's creation. He kept claiming that it wasn't
possible that I never saw it, and yet he now claims not to have seen
a note himself.
BTW, I do recall seeing Fallible's note asking for help, too.
Unfortunately, I didn't have the facilities available to help.
--
Lady Whisper
tas...@hawk.phantasy.com
http://www.execpc.com/~grignard
LB'S QUEST: http://www.ea.com/origin/english/ultima/quest.html
William Herrin
In article <4sjakl$f...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Jason Hardt <to...@exo.com> wrote:
>> FWIW, I remember Fal making the post in question. I don't remember when,
>Hmm, if you confirm it. Too bad, that means it has escaped my server.
^^^^^^^^
>Now Fal can truly claim he did everything humanly possible to keep
>the site in Dragon's hands ;)
Folks, we have in this post two little words which really tell you
everything there is to be said about this thread. According to F15, its "Too
Bad" that I tried to find Dragons to take over the Ultima archive. Its not
that he guesses he was wrong about me, and its not that he's not sure he
believes that I really did it. It is instead, "Too bad" that because someone
corroborates my claim, he has less mud to sling.
I nominate F15 first UDIC politician. Anyone care to second it?
-Fal
bout...@razor.wcc.govt.nz
> Shh! Watch thy tounge! F15 has declared that any Dragon who openly discusses
>issues of government is an enemy of the state, and subject to summary
>execution.
>
>
>-Fal
>
Yeah, I'd like a summary execution - winter's just too cold on the old neck.
DragonSpawn
-==[UDIC]==-
"This has been a poorly diguised test post"
William Herrin
In article <4skn5i$h...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>> Shh! Watch thy tounge! F15 has declared that any Dragon who openly discusses
>> issues of government is an enemy of the state, and subject to summary
>> execution.
>I find it most interesting, that Fal bases its claim for a government,
>ie. a structure that would *regulate* the Dragons, on the fact that the
>Dragons want good Ultimas
Liar. I have not at any time proposed regulating the dragons in any way,
shape, or form. Quite the contrary, I have opposed all proposals for imposing
rules, regulations, rankings, etc. on the dragons, save one: I agree that
Dragons should have to have played an Ultima to join.
Aum Dragon
>: Just ignore him, man, he's an idiot and doesn't listen.
>Mind telling us who you're talking about?
F15. He just goes on and on and on about the same old points, putting
up these "moral dilemnas", asking stupid questions and putting fake
smileys in as if to diffuse his obvious bitching. When it comes down
to it we don't see him offering us any free web space. I'm sure
nothing irreplaceable was sold to Origin, so when this "Ring of
Dragons" is going strong we'll have all the same resources again.
He has no real point, he's just bitching and carrying on a personal
argument on a public forum. God knows where he gets his venom from
anyway, just what did Fal do to deserve him?
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
>> Shh! Watch thy tounge! F15 has declared that any Dragon who openly discusses
>> issues of government is an enemy of the state, and subject to summary
>> execution.
>I find it most interesting, that Fal bases its claim for a government,
>ie. a structure that would *regulate* the Dragons, on the fact that the
>Dragons want good Ultimas ;)
<RANT>
WHAT are you TALKING about?? I know reality-checks are off topic, but
here's mine.
1. We're not really dragons. We're just people who think it's fun to
pretend we are. At least *I'm* not really a dragon, I haven't seen the
rest of you.
2. The dragon "organisation" is virtually worthless. It's a roster. A
list of names. It has no power over our personal lives.
3. This usenet group is open to anyone.
4. So's the IRC channel.
How on earth, then, would this "government" matter a bit? A load of
people who like playing computer games is not a political force, and
Origin are a private company who, while they may value their
customers' opinions, can write what they damn well please. So why are
you arguing? You are making an issue of nothing.
</RANT>
And now back to my pleasant personable self.... :-]
Aum Dragon
>Do they allow guns in US kindergartens? If yes, I'll be afraid ;)
I'm not American. And yes they do.
Andrew Toth
On Jul 17, 1996 01:15:59 in article <Re: This Should Go To E-Mail (was Re:
Origin Ultima Pages)>, 'Bryan Christian <bryanch...@citynet.net>'
wrote:
<Total silence(crickets chirping in the background)>
All in favor of moving it to E-Mail raise your hand.
<Thousands of hands go up, like 'the wave' at a baseball game>
--
Beyowulf
Beyo...@pipeline.com
-==(UDIC)==-
Steely Blue Dragon
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
> *** f u cn rd ths, u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgrmng ***
Or composing vanity plates...
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Andrew D. Charlton <char...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>> Alas, it would seem that dejanews never archived AGUD (It does, however
>> seem to archive config, and all the AGUD cancel messages...), and altavista
>> only has articles in AGUD from the end of May (When RGCUD was created?).
>
>Well, Dejanews definitely archives (ed) AGUD. The government debate is
>there and it starts to show up in rgcud (along with crossposting) starting
>March 19th.
>
>Check the advanced search methods. You can search for Group: *dragons*,
>author: herrin@*, date:1995/11/*.
I tried newsgroup: alt.games.ultima.dragons , date: 1995/11/* and came up
with:
Filter size:21 documents
Newsgroup(s): alt.games.ultima.dragons
Date(s): 1995/11/*
<Picture: Change><Picture: Clear>Author(s): All
21 posts in AGUD last November? Gee, perhaps they didn't all get there!
I won't bore you with the details of those 21 posts, but they are all
either message cancels, or cross-posts.
This was under "Power Search".
DaKaren t'Acor Dragon
Aum Dragon wrote:
>
> >Do they allow guns in US kindergartens? If yes, I'll be afraid ;)
>
> I'm not American. And yes they do.
>
> Aum Dragon s...@beavis.u-net.com
Well, I *AM* American. And NO they most certainly do not allow gun in US
kindergartens, or in any other grade level, in ANY school. Unfortunately
some less then reputable students do bring weapons into the classrooms,
are eventually caught, and then expelled/arrested.
Addison Godel
Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
: William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
: > Liar. You turned that discourse on its ear. "You tried to install a
: > government in the UDIC." "Idiot, if I were trying to install a government in
: > the UDIC, I'd do this, this, and this." "Oh, so now you're threatening to use
: > your influence to establish a government in the UDIC."
: Should I repost that statement? You threatened with it and then you said,
: you would never do it ;) "I could kill lots of things with my big paw,
: if I wanted", said the bear, "but, of course, I'd never do that".
Uh...this only works if one automatically views government discussion as
a threat, which most normal people don't.
Robert S. Gregg
>Do they allow guns in US kindergartens?
No F15, but apparently they allow email in German kindergartens. :(
UW
Finnish Dragon
In article <31F1A9...@pacifier.com>, DaK...@pacifier.com says...
>
>Well, I *AM* American. And NO they most certainly do not allow gun in US
>kindergartens, or in any other grade level, in ANY school. Unfortunately
>some less then reputable students do bring weapons into the classrooms,
>are eventually caught, and then expelled/arrested.
>
feel him/her-self safe, somethings not right. Not too motivating to get
education if you know you there's a chace getting shot/robbed/beat up in
school... Some say it's like winning in lottery to be born in Finland and
I'm beginning to agree. It just seems that you need another one to live here
also...
Finnish Dragon
Aum Dragon
>> 2. The dragon "organisation" is virtually worthless. It's a roster. A
>> list of names. It has no power over our personal lives.
>If its worthless then why did you join?
I thought it might be a bit of fun talking about Ultima.
>You haven't read the FAQ, have you?
Yes I have, what part in particular?
>> </RANT>
>> And now back to my pleasant personable self.... :-]
>Sure.
Yup
Aum Dragon
>That might change sooner than you think.
Well go on then. I'll have 5 megabytes please, and then I'll
apologise.
>> nothing irreplaceable was sold to Origin, so when this "Ring of
>> Dragons" is going strong we'll have all the same resources again.
>Well, nothing is irreplacable, even if something gets stolen,
You CAN'T steal digital information. It's infinitely replicable. As
none of the material seems to have been under copyright, it wasn't
even pirated. What are you talking about? You anal pedant.
Minerva Cymru Dragon
Actually, F-15, he's UK not US, and the last time they let someone
with a gun in a playground here, it resulted in the Dunblane Massacre,
please think before you write. His remark was a bit off, but I agree,
can't you have your lover's tiff elsewhere, I suppose being a dragon
elder you can make up your own rules, as Fal and yourself seem to have
the copyrights to everything else connected with Ultima/Dragons. I'll
ask nicely, please put a sock in it, Diolch yn fawr!
Minerva Cymru Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
"I know a place where dreams are born and time is never planned,
Just keep an open mind and suddenly you'll find,
Never-never Land" Todd Rundgren
Andrew D. Charlton
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Sith Dragon <mar...@interport.net> wrote:
>>boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>> >Maybe I am totally wrong, but his actions
>> >throughout the last year make me perceive him this way. He proposed a
>> >committee that should work with the computer games industry
>
>> In theory, what's wrong with the committee idea? If we help Origin write a
>> kick-ass Ultima IX I'm all for it.
>
>Well, I think that we can help write a kick-ass Ultima (and UOL or whatever)
>without any committee. We're doing it, right now. Or do you think OSI isn't
>reading RGCUD? They are gathering the various viewpoints, I'm convinced.
>The negative aspect of such a proposal is of course the one of a precedent.
>Once you have a committee for the industry, you might want to use it for
>control. And you need to control something to commercialize it effectively.
But when you consider Fal's reasons for wanting a government/committee, it
at least makes sense without casting Fal as the bad guy.
Fal believes that government will come along eventually whether we want it
or not. Based on that premise, attempting to guide that inevitable
government into something good is clearly a sensible course of action.
You may disagree with the initial premise (I do myself), but I find it
difficult to see how you can question his motives.
>> > and he sold
>> >out one of the Dragons biggest assets to OSI. He threatened he could turn
>> >the club into anything he wants using his server resources
It wasn't a threat, it was a hypothetical. You don't seem to believe this,
but I was present at the same debate, I am just as much of an independant
observer as you, and I believe it. Shouldn't that make you at least
question the way you view the events?
>> > and, last not
>> >least, he is the one who has the ultimate and sole control over the
>> >Dragon's roster (the greeters can write to it, but as long as Fal wants.)
>
>> I feel that the Roster has no importance whatsoever. I'm not a Dragon
>> because the roster said I joined on 7 May 1995 -- I'm a Dragon because I
>> like Ultima. If you co-opt the importance of the Roster it no longer has
>> value as a bargaining chip. Much of the same can be said of the server
>> sold to OSI.
>
>If the roster is of no importance whatsoever, then why people ask to be
>on it? Why on earth do they fill out the form, then? Couldn't they as
>easily put UDIC into their sig, then? And if yes, would this club still
>be something special? Would it be anything at all?
The roster is currently important because it is run in a fair and honest
manner. If the roster ceases to be run in such a manner, then the Dragons
can disregard it. It's certainly better to have a roster than not, and
it's better to have one than two conflicting ones, but the club COULD
function without one.
Given that pretty much anyone who wants to join can, the club would be no
less special without a list of the members.
Addison Godel
Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
: Addison Godel <lgod...@netcom.com> wrote:
: > Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
: > : William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
: > : > Liar. You turned that discourse on its ear. "You tried to install a
: > : > government in the UDIC." "Idiot, if I were trying to install a government in
: > : > the UDIC, I'd do this, this, and this." "Oh, so now you're threatening to use
: > : > your influence to establish a government in the UDIC."
: > : Should I repost that statement? You threatened with it and then you said,
: > : you would never do it ;) "I could kill lots of things with my big paw,
: > : if I wanted", said the bear, "but, of course, I'd never do that".
: > Uh...this only works if one automatically views government discussion as
: > a threat, which most normal people don't.
: That's debatable. Under the context of what GVT has done to this club once
: (and what it is doing to the Net in RL) I prefer a bit of paranoia to the
: belief in Big Brother (whoever might try to be that).
I'm not talking about government. I'm talking about DISCUSSION of
government. *sigh*
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Aum Dragon <s...@beavis.u-net.com> wrote:
>> >Do they allow guns in US kindergartens? If yes, I'll be afraid ;)
>> I'm not American. And yes they do.
>You're not? Japanese maybe? Wasn't there the Aum sect that tried
>to gas the Tokio subway or something?
Obviously I could dig up the stereotype and point out that that is
just the sort of racism I'd expect from a German, and that "Aum" is
also an Indian word. I could also pick you up for not being able to
spell "Tokyo". But I won't,
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Aum Dragon <s...@beavis.u-net.com> wrote:
>> >Well, nothing is irreplacable, even if something gets stolen,
>> You CAN'T steal digital information. It's infinitely replicable. As
>> none of the material seems to have been under copyright, it wasn't
>> even pirated. What are you talking about? You anal pedant.
>Your claim is absolutely untrue, of course. Before you make such
>statements you should inform yourself.
How's that then? You're very keen to call people wrong but you're a
bit shy with the facts.
>As to your friendly language, show us a bit more of your
>personality :)
What you want a smiley while I insult you and call you a liar? Seems
to work for you, anyway.
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Minerva Cymru Dragon <sjtu...@cyberstop.net> wrote:
>> Actually, F-15, he's UK not US, and the last time they let someone
SSShhh. Oh now you've given it away. I was playing Rumpelstiltskins
with him. Actually I'm in the "Here be dragons" directory so all he
had to do was read the damn newsgroup.
>Well, his ISP has an Internic-distributed domain. If he's in the UK,
>well.
What, you mean you recognise .com as a generally US address? How
_cyber_ of you.
>I don't have copyrights to everything connected with the Dragons, not
>to speak of Ultima. Neither has Fal.
So stop mewling.
Robert S. Gregg
> s...@beavis.u-net.com (Aum Dragon) wrote in article
<4t11se$a...@nuntius.u-net.net>...
> You CAN'T steal digital information. It's infinitely replicable. As
> none of the material seems to have been under copyright, it wasn't
> even pirated. What are you talking about?
What utter crap.
Here's lesson one about copyrights: They give you the RIGHT to control
who COPIES your intellectual property. Hence the name - COPYRIGHT. If
you copy my intellectual property without my permission or being granted
the right to do so, you have stolen from me - period. Both international
courts and (more particularly in this case, since Origin is an American
company) American courts recognize copyrights. And under American law,
ANY item of intellectual property (anything you create) is AUTOMATICALLY
considered copyrighted, whether the person explicitly claims it to be so
or not.
So if Origin COPIED my materials without being granted the RIGHT to do so
by me, then they have broken American copyright law. PERIOD.
Of course, they *didn't* copy anything of mine, I'm just making the point.
:) Additionally, most people 'round here probably wouldn't care if Origin
did do so, unless they tried to make money off it illicitly or something,
which Origin has never shown an inclination to do. So 99% of us think
this whole F15-whining-about-the-Web-site business is ridiculous, pedantic
and annoying. If the authors of the materials don't care - which they
apparently don't - then what the hell business is it of F15 to whine about
it? NEVERTHELESS.. you making *ridiculous* and patently false statements
like "You can't steal digital information" doesn't help things one bit.
:(
Underworld Dragon
--=(UDIC)=--
Markus Brenner
In article <4t7bn0$1...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>, boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de wrote:
>Aum Dragon <s...@beavis.u-net.com> wrote:
>> just the sort of racism I'd expect from a German, and that "Aum" is
>> also an Indian word. I could also pick you up for not being able to
>> spell "Tokyo". But I won't,
>
>looking at *your* initial contributions to this thread. As to Tokyo, you
>are right. I spelt it in german. Happens. Now lets see a few post from you
>in a foreign language, kid (if you speak one at all).
> F-15 Dragon aka Henryk Bochmann boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de
Will you please stop this crappy flamewar, both of you!!!
It really hasn't *anything* to do with the dragons anymore, it is only about
bashing each other. I usually bear this kind of stuff, but it hurts me to see
two reasonable and usually friendly people getting mad on each other about
nothing. Both of you stopped discussing the former topic for a long time now
in both of these threads, this is just stupid trashing each other.
-following are *personal opinions*-
F-15: Please try to realise that your attacks at Fal are pointless at the
moment. You said all there is, you are only repeating yourself. Do something
useful for the club and the people will respect you. It's pointless to try to
force your opinions about Fal on all the readers of the newsgroup, when most
of them don't even know Fallible Dragon personally. The only way of doing
something for the Ultima Dragons is doing something *constructive*, not in
trying to wreck somebodies else's reputation. - You know, we are supposed to
be friends, within the club.
Aum: Fal is neither overlord over UDIC nor is the club independent of him
(think about the roster, and the sale of the Ultima pages. Both topics are
important for the club, though some people don't want to recognize it.) F-15
had his reasons to criticize him, if he can't stop it, it isn't *your*
business to try to stop him by flaming him into ashes (this *never* worked,
you know?) - You know, we are supposed to be friends, within the club.
-seesh. Did I really write such a naive post, again?-
-markus (German, but no racist)
----
Markus Brenner _ no matter how - how hard you try
-==(UDIC)==- ( ) in your own life, and through the years
Minstrel Dragon --+-- with every up - must come a down
o o | enjoy the laughter and the tears
o Ring of Dragons o | of happiness (Roger Taylor)
o o o
email: bre...@biochem.mpg.de * WWW: http://www.biochem.mpg.de/~brenner/
William Herrin
In article <4sn59a$m...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Wasn't your committee proposed to make changes, like for example to the
>MOO admission procedure? Look it up.
The exact quote is: "The team may recommend a structure to the MOO or a
change in the admission procedure." It was one of my examples intended to
clarify what the proposal meant.
Now maybe the difference between making a change and recommending a change
is too subtle for you to comprehend, but its like the difference between night
and day to me.
But that's really beside the point, because it was never anything more than
a centerpiece for discussion. I could have been talking about establishing a
grand poobah of the UDIC, and it would have been the same: Something to talk
about. A rough draft of an idea.
>As to the "played an Ultima", right. The problem is, as discussed before,
>that we cannot (and don't want to) enforce it.
Again, you misrepresent what was said. What was said was that it was
counterproductive to install mechanisms intended to enforce it, and that it
was not a hard and fast rule anyway, since exceptions (like Whisper's young
son whose middle name is "Dupre") are made when there are very good reasons
to.
> Since we don't have any rules to enforce we don't need any structure to do
> that. Create a GVT, and it will start right away to create rules that it
> can enforce.
So you have claimed. Over and over, ad infinitum. And maybe you're right;
maybe it would even if its charter said it couldn't. But you've offered
nothing to back up this claim, and besides it's all really beside the point,
because it was simply a discussion.
William Herrin
In article <4srmfk$n...@nuntius.u-net.net>,
s...@beavis.u-net.com (Aum Dragon) wrote:
>He has no real point, he's just bitching and carrying on a personal
>argument on a public forum. God knows where he gets his venom from
>anyway, just what did Fal do to deserve him?
I dumped the RGCUD RFD in his lap, and then when it came time for the CFV, I
had the utter gall to disobey him by putting a note on the web page. I
explained to him that I felt that being ordered to restrict that information
from the web was tantamount to censorship and that I'd have none of it. It was
something of an epiphany for him, because it was then that he realized that my
sense of honor was warped by being based not on what anybody around me thought
was right, but instead on what I thought was right.
He never quite got over it, and several months ago when I contradicted his
understanding of what I had been saying in that committee argument last year,
he finally snapped and began to act like a junkyard dog.
Lady Whisper
>I consider it neither "ill-motivated" or "praiseworthy." In my
>opinion, the move was a bit sloppy, but I’m not seriously irritated at
>you or OSI.. In all honesty, I have absolutely no quarrel with either
>of you. Whisper, however, has managed to bother me for some time. I
>guess her constant, excessive, and generally blind praise for OSI has
>really managed to ‘get my goat’. My irritation was directed solely at
>Whisper, and I sincerely apologize for any misunderstanding.
>
>Zoroastrian Dragon
Then my mission is complete. <LOL> Strange how you call my praise for OSI
"generally blind" when that's got to be about as far from the truth as
possible. Neither is my support for OSI excessive, either. Odd how you
don't call those that constantly moan and complain about them "excessive",
eh? What exactly is the problem that you have with me supporting OSI? I
happen to like many of their games and have had the opportunity to get to
know many of the employees there that make up the company. Just because
they are a company doesn't mean that one automatically needs to trash them.
I am lucky enough to count some of them as my friends and see OSI not as a
corporation but as a group of PEOPLE, most of whom have feelings and are
hurt by constant unwarranted criticism but are unable to defend themselves
or the company they work for. My "blind" support for OSI isn't for the
company as much as it is for those I consider my friends. Would you do any
less if you saw one of your friends constantly under attack for mostly
groundless things? I doubt it.
--
Lady Whisper
http://www.execpc.com/~grignard
"A nod's as good as a poke with a sharp stick to a deaf camel."
William Herrin
In article <4t874b$4...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>> >As to your friendly language, show us a bit more of your
>> >personality :)
>
>> What you want a smiley while I insult you and call you a liar? Seems
>> to work for you, anyway.
>
>As I said, display a bit more personality ;) I am convinced that your
>explicit invectives reflect it perfectly <g>.
I've become quite convinced that F15's smiley is the computer equivalent of
the little giggle that escapes the mouth of an utterly insane person as he
explains his motives for burning the house down.
William Herrin
In article <4t7cug$2m...@sat.ipp-garching.mpg.de>,
bre...@biochem.mpg.de (Markus Brenner) wrote:
>In article <4t7bn0$1...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de wrote:
>
>Will you please stop this crappy flamewar, both of you!!!
>It really hasn't *anything* to do with the dragons anymore, it is only about
>bashing each other. I usually bear this kind of stuff, but it hurts me to see
>two reasonable and usually friendly people getting mad on each other about
>nothing. Both of you stopped discussing the former topic for a long time now
>in both of these threads, this is just stupid trashing each other.
This thread (and the associated ones that preceeded it) havn't had anything
to do with the Dragons for months now. F15 has taken exception to my existance
in and role in the club. He's decided that he will keep the issue in public
until he wins, regardless of little things like the truth, and at whatever
cost the "war" may exact from the club. Other than getting mad at him, there's
really not a whole lot any of us can do about it.
Aum chose his words poorly, but don't fault him for his anger at F15.
William Herrin
In article <lgodeljrD...@netcom.com>,
lgod...@netcom.com (Addison Godel) wrote:
>
>Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
>I'm not talking about government. I'm talking about DISCUSSION of
>government. *sigh*
No you're not. F15 has read and understood your post, and its quite clear
that you were talking about implementing a government in the Dragons. Who the
hell are you to disagree with F15's understanding of your post? (note:
sarcasm)
William Herrin
In article <4t2bl9$6...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>The Official UDIC FAQ, currently in version 5.1, afaik. Read about
>The Dragon's history to find out about what GVT has done to the
>Dragons.
The past exists to be learned from, not feared. If the lesson of the "GVT"
on prodigy is that the Dragons should not have a government, then we should
follow that. But we should not follow it blindly or fearfully, and we
shouldn't put the cart before the horse by assuming it to be a Bad Thing (TM).
First off, understand that according to everyone I've spoken to who was in
the Dragons then, the GVT did not destroy the club: The change in Prodigy's
prices did. The GVT caused all manner of mischief and mayhem, but in the end
that wasn't what destroyed the club.
Second off, realize that the Prodigy GVT wielded considerable regulatory
powers. They assigned status and ranks to members, gave out titles and awards,
and decided when and under what circumstances you made it into the higher
"circles" in the club.
Its plausible that the Prodigy GVT's trouble came from the power it wielded
and the covetous nature of mere mortals.
On the other hand, its plausible that the "real" trouble was disagreements
between well known members in the club, and because they were often part of
the GVT, it got labeled as GVT trouble.
And its also plausible (although IMHO unlikely) that any sort of structure
in a club like this is self destructive, and any good done by that structure
will be quickly surpassed by its damaging nature.
But regardless of what the true problem with Prodigy's GVT was, and
regardless of whether or not constructed structure/government in this club
would be healthy, I feel one thing is very clear: assumptions are dangerous.
We should not assume that club government is bad any more than we should
assume that its good. We should instead consider the matter periodically and
determine whether or not our reasoning (for or against) still makes sense.
Robert S. Gregg
> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote in article
<4t0859$8...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>...
> Robert S. Gregg <rgr...@scott.net> wrote:
> > >Do they allow guns in US kindergartens?
>
> > No F15, but apparently they allow email in German kindergartens. :(
>
> Yes, and apparently they don't teach the difference between email
> and Usenet in US colleges... ;)
Guess they spent the time teaching common courtesy, personal honesty and
integrity, and respect for others instead.
A thoroughly disgusted
Underworld Dragon
--=(UDIC)=--
Markus Brenner
In article <4t9k7r$7...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>, boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de wrote:
>Markus Brenner <bre...@biochem.mpg.de> wrote:
>> F-15: Please try to realise that your attacks at Fal are pointless at the
>> moment. You said all there is, you are only repeating yourself. Do something
>> useful for the club and the people will respect you. It's pointless to try to
>
>> force your opinions about Fal on all the readers of the newsgroup, when most
>> of them don't even know Fallible Dragon personally. The only way of doing
>> something for the Ultima Dragons is doing something *constructive*, not in
>> trying to wreck somebodies else's reputation. - You know, we are supposed to
>> be friends, within the club.
>
>does, he lets out a bit more of his ideas.
>As to the others not knowing him, well, they'll get to know him this way.
>Wreck Fal's reputation? You overestimate my interest in Fal as a person.
>I am critisizing his actions, and these are what might ruin his reputation.
So what makes you think you are the one to make Fal tell anyone his ideas,
ideas he might even have reconsidered, or you interpret into him? Give him a
break, you aren't the head-inquisitor of the udic, are you? Fal has a right to
have his own views as much as you do. You accused Fal of forcing his ideas on
the club, right now you do exactly the same.
anyway, last word from me on this thread.
-minstrel
Aum Dragon
Ich bin ein Binliner.
Parlez-vous Franglais?
Mathias Kimmich
(...) you aren't the head-inquisitor of the udic, are you?
*No-one* expects the UDIC inquisition!
As our three chief weapons we count spamming, gouvernment threads,
OS flame wars, and Ranzer.
No, wait a minute, that's four... among our four chief weapons...
Thirith Python
William Herrin
In article <4t7bn0$1...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Aum Dragon <s...@beavis.u-net.com> wrote:
>> Obviously I could dig up the stereotype and point out that that is
>> just the sort of racism I'd expect from a German, and that "Aum" is
>Racist? Boy, I don't take that accusation from you, especially after
>looking at *your* initial contributions to this thread. As to Tokyo, you
When you addressed Aum as, "Boy," just now, did you do it with or without
the knowledge of just how strong a racial epithet that is in the US?
William Herrin
In article <4t9kqo$7...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>> But that's really beside the point, because it was never anything more than
>> a centerpiece for discussion. I could have been talking about establishing a
>> grand poobah of the UDIC, and it would have been the same: Something to talk
>> about. A rough draft of an idea.
>I have no problem with your proposals as long as they don't bear the
>risk to inflict a regulatory structure on the UDIC.
Ah, I see. I'm free to talk as long as its not dangerous talk. And
naturally, you sit in judgement over what talk is dangerous.
>> Now maybe the difference between making a change and recommending a
>> change is too subtle for you to comprehend, but its like the difference
>> between night and day to me.
>Linguistics. Only the final result counts. And that'd be a change in the
>MOO admission procedure.
Brilliant logic. On the same token, if I personally suggest to WizT that he
do something a little differently, and he takes my suggestion, then obviously
I'm behaving as if I were Grand Poobah of the UDIC.
William Herrin
In article <4ta1a7$2f...@sat.ipp-garching.mpg.de> bre...@biochem.mpg.de (Markus Brenner) writes:
>In article <4t9k7r$7...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
>boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de wrote:
Actually, its become abundantly clear that F15 is.
> Fal has a right to have his own views as much as you do. You accused Fal
>of forcing his ideas on the club, right now you do exactly the same.
Of course. Wasn't it just a post or two ago that F15 said that the method is
not important; only the end result counts?
William Herrin
In article <4t9jno$7...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Dumped is the right word. You had no time nor interest to do it.
>As to disobeying, you didn't disobey me. You disobeyed the rules set
>by those who run the CFV, ie. the UVV.
Were that true, there's every likelyhood that some or all of the votes would
have been invalidated as a result, and Warren certainly would have spoken to
it when the results were posted. That neither of these things happened makes
your claim unsupportable. That you represent it as a fact rather than as your
opinion makes you a liar.
>Your sense of honor? It probably was egomania rather than honor that drove
>you to fight the established rules set for the newsgroup creation process
Bah. You wouldn't know honor if it hit you in the face.
William Herrin
In article <4tcrtn$r...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>No, its a claim he made. He claimed that he could force the club into
>anything he wants using his server resources.
Liar. Again.
The conversation you refered to followed this flow: F15 - Fallible's trying
to force the UDIC into a club government. Falible - Idiot, I'm doing nothing
of the sort. If I were trying to force the UDIC into a government I'd do
something like this, this, and this. F15 - See! See! He even has a master plan
for doing it!
> I believe he can and I
>find it dangerous that he plays with such ideas.
F15 Dragon. Judge, jury, and executioner.
Robert S. Gregg
> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote in article
<4tcs27$r...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>...
> > And the fact is, reading the one word "aum" and assuming it is
> > obviously some link to Japanese terrorists, IS racist, arrogant, and
> > an insult to millions of Hindus. It betrays your narrow mind and
> > self-centric way of thinking.
>
> I thought you said Indians. Now its Hindus? ;)
Many Indians *are* Hindu. The majority, even. Whatta racist doofus.
Daniel Dejeu
"Robert S. Gregg" <rgr...@scott.net> wrote:
>What utter crap.
>Underworld Dragon
> --=(UDIC)=--
Well personally I don't like the idea of UDIC being sold over(and I
don't mean as money,but as hmm,how shall I say ,betrayed?)to Origin.
I don't imply that anyone got any money out of it,but I do not like
the idea of UDIC being part (in any form )of Origin.We are fans of
Ultima and not fans of Origin.
But as far as coyrights go,I think all the work that's in the UDIC
homepage violates Origin's coyrights a LOT more than Origin violates
the work there.
Daniel Dejeu
Carpatian Dragon -=UDIC=-
William Herrin
>Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
>: William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
>: > The exact quote is: "The team may recommend a structure to the MOO or a
>: > change in the admission procedure." It was one of my examples intended to
>: > clarify what the proposal meant.
>: > Now maybe the difference between making a change and recommending a change
>: > is too subtle for you to comprehend, but its like the difference between
>night
>: > and day to me.
>: Linguistics. Only the final result counts. And that'd be a change in the
>: MOO admission procedure.
>Huh? If I walk up and say, I represent the Government of the State of
>Radishfelt, and we think it would be neet if you spraypainted your bus
>yellow, does this mean you WILL spraypaint your bus yellow? It's not
>playing with linguistics, it's recognizing what "recommend" means.
Exactly. And furthermore, systems based on voluntary compliance tend to be
self balancing. If the system gets out of line, the compliance rate falls.
Normally this provides sufficient encouragement to get the system back on an
even keel, but if it doesn't, the system simply breaks and goes away, rather
than succeeding in forcing its views on anyway.
But you know what? F15's has succeeded in diverting us way off topic here.
Because he isn't accusing me of proposing a committee, and he isn't accusing
me of thinking its a good idea. What he's accusing me of is trying to ram the
proposal down everyone's throats, and that's a bald faced lie.
Robert S. Gregg
> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote in article
<4t9k7r$7...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de>...
> Wreck Fal's reputation? You overestimate my interest in Fal as a person.
> I am critisizing his actions, and these are what might ruin his
reputation.
Bollocks.
You claim you are not attacking Fal personally? That you're only
criticizing his ideas? What cojones you have. In the last 48 hours
*alone* you've referred to Fallible in these ways:
* an "utter lack of humor"
* full of "paranoia"
* possessing "egomania"
* a "naive" person
* implied he was without honor
This is not criticizing his actions! These are direct personal attacks on
his character! And everyone here knows it, including you! You've proven
quite adequately that if you are interested in anything, it is in
belittling the character of another particular human being. And everyone
here is DAMN tired of it. Since you're so keen on calling names, here's a
few: Petty. Vicious. Lying. Manipulative. Self-serving. Yes, YOU. And
that's just for starters. For four MONTHS this thread has gone on.
Remember the time you claimed you'd never called Fallible names, and I
produced a lengthy *list* of the personal attacks and invective you had
used? You never denied calling him the names later - on the contrary, you
claimed that it wasn't namecalling, because it was all true! Things very,
very similar to the above, yet here you are, again claiming to be on some
selfless crusade to expose another Dragon's malicious intent. The TRUTH
is, there IS no malicious intent, you have merely used our newsgroup to
vent personal invective against another individual you didn't like. Even
Aaron never carried on this long! I can't even *think* of words strong
enough to express my DISGUST at watching one human browbeat another the
way you have done. And whenever anyone questions you or, even more
reasonably, asks you to take your personal crusade to personal mail, you
respond with the most hateful, even (yes) racist of remarks, insulting
their personality, their nationality, their name, whatever your small mind
finds most convenient. Sickening behavior. Thoroughly sickening. What is
most upsetting is that you delude yourself into thinking this garbage is
somehow "good" for the rest of us, that you're doing us a favor, or
looking out for *our* interests, or whatever twisted logic it is you use.
So many sick minds in history have used this same line of self-delusional
thinking ("But honey, I killed your best friend because she came between
us! I did it for you!") to justify all manner of terrible things. You
should really, really look into seeking some psychiatric help. This kind
of hatred and antisocial behavior is not normal. Think for a moment, do
you see other people dealing with interpersonal conflict in these ways? If
this is how all your personal relationships are, my god, you must be a
very unhappy person.
Underworld Dragon
--=(UDIC)=--
Addison Godel
Henryk Bochmann (boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de) wrote:
: William Herrin <her...@usenet-user.why.com> wrote:
: > The exact quote is: "The team may recommend a structure to the MOO or a
: > change in the admission procedure." It was one of my examples intended to
: > clarify what the proposal meant.
: > Now maybe the difference between making a change and recommending a change
: > is too subtle for you to comprehend, but its like the difference between night
: > and day to me.
: Linguistics. Only the final result counts. And that'd be a change in the
: MOO admission procedure.
Huh? If I walk up and say, I represent the Government of the State of
Radishfelt, and we think it would be neet if you spraypainted your bus
yellow, does this mean you WILL spraypaint your bus yellow? It's not
playing with linguistics, it's recognizing what "recommend" means.
: Its charter prevents it from doing so <eg>. If you really *perceive* it
: that way then I have to call you naive. If you *present* it that way,
: then what are your motives? You should know that things like that govern-
: ment you proposed have a development of its own. This "charter" wouldn't
: be of any more value than any other "unenforcable" rule in this club. Its
: the nature of people in a GVT to remove/ignore things that prevent them
: making themselves more powerful than the rest.
Um, didn't Fal SAY this?
--
*****************************************************************
* ---Atticus Dragon of the Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter--- *
*****************************************************************
* __| _______________ | / \ | ______________ |__ *
* <__||_______________/ -|| UDIC ||- \_____________||__> *
* | SAILOR MOON RULES! | \ / | HAIL ALANIS! | *
*****************************************************************
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Racist? Boy, I don't take that accusation from you, especially after
>looking at *your* initial contributions to this thread. As to Tokyo, you
>are right. I spelt it in german. Happens. Now lets see a few post from you
>in a foreign language, kid (if you speak one at all).
Ich bin ein Bin Liner.
Parlez-vous Franglais?
And the fact is, reading the one word "aum" and assuming it is
obviously some link to Japanese terrorists, IS racist, arrogant, and
an insult to millions of Hindus. It betrays your narrow mind and
self-centric way of thinking.
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
> But Fal certainly had not the right to do as he pleases with things he
> doesn't own.
What did he sell that he doesn't own? The HTML he wrote? The links and
various files? I think you will find that Origin _don't_ own any of
the stuff Fal didn't write, therefore he didn't sell them. He sold, as
he and Origin have said, the work he had done collecting it all
together.
Why aren't any other dragons complaining? Specifically, the ones whose
stuff he "stole"? You are the only person who is so extremely
bothered, and yet I don't see anything at all by you on the site.
> And last not least, I didn't accuse Fal of forcing his
> ideas on the club, but of threatening to use his resources to force
>his ideas on the club. A significant difference.
Is this (and I'm really trying here) a reference to the RFD stuff he
put on his web page ? So now the WWW "forces" people's ideas onto
others? Duuuuuuh. Well you know I've already subscribed to 15 long
distance telephone operators, simply because they mailed me. And I'm
waiting for the cash for my new Ferrari, I sent the five bucks off
last week.
You see, this thread has been ridiculous for months. Nobody has a clue
what you are talking about. What are your opinions on this
"Government"? What are your reasons for being against it? I have no
idea, because you spend all of your time making the same stupid
accusations ad nauseam (Hey that's _3_ languages so far).
And furthermore...
SHUT UP
Aum Dragon
>>
>> > No F15, but apparently they allow email in German kindergartens. :(
>>
>> Yes, and apparently they don't teach the difference between email
>> and Usenet in US colleges... ;)
>Guess they spent the time teaching common courtesy, personal honesty and
>integrity, and respect for others instead.
Yowch! Nice one.
Aum Dragon
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>You mean noone owns digital information? You mean, if you take it
>and make a profit off it, you are not stealing?
No, and that's not what I said. How did he "take" it? He made a profit
from collecting the site together and writing the HTML he did. He
never sold other people's work. Himself and Origin have both stated
this (often enough). If anybody (that is, anybody who's business it
is) objects to Origin using _THEIR_ stuff, they can let them know and
they will remove it. Where is the theft?
>> >As to your friendly language, show us a bit more of your
>> >personality :)
>> What you want a smiley while I insult you and call you a liar? Seems
>> to work for you, anyway.
>As I said, display a bit more personality ;) I am convinced that your
>explicit invectives reflect it perfectly <g>.
Kiss my arse. Oh no! Now the secret's out. I'm nought but a
potty-mouthed gutter-snipe with no brain. Damn and I'd kept it a
secret for so long.
And I see you're using <g>s now as well. Is that the new tag for the
Netscape insincere smiley? Is your normal smiley on sick-leave?
Barry L. Moore
boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) wrote:
>Daniel Dejeu <Dej...@thenet.net> wrote:
>> But as far as coyrights go,I think all the work that's in the UDIC
>> homepage violates Origin's coyrights a LOT more than Origin violates
>> the work there.
>Sure, possible. I presume, though, that OSI thinks it is the rightful
>owner of all that stuff on the site because it paid Fal for it.
Wouldn't it be more prudent to contact OSI and ask them exactly what
they DO think in regards to this matter, rather than presuming to know
without asking?
Enigmatic Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
b...@worldnet.att.net
===================
Law of Probable Dispersal:
Whatever hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.
William Herrin
In article <4tdiu5$c...@irz401.inf.tu-dresden.de> boch...@tudurz.urz.tu-dresden.de (Henryk Bochmann) writes:
>Hmm, why don't you look up your own posts before you post such nonsense.
>You have admitted publicly that your action (which was in violation of the
>UVV rules - clearly readable for everyone) was put aside either
>a) for lack of impact
You said that. I disagreed. And if that's so, then the result post would
have said just that. Others have.
>or b) unimportance compared to the huge vote fraud occuring parallel to it.
My how you twist things. What I said was that I believe the huge vote fraud
occuring in the other newsgroup CFV that Warren was running had him jumping at
shadows. If you want to believe something else, that's your problem, but don't
claim as fact a view that you've made no attempt to verify. Repeatedly stating
it as a fact as you have, is nothing short of lying through your teeth.