Project dependency structure

What do you want to see in Armagetron soon? Any new feature ideas? Let's ponder these ground breaking ideas...
User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

On a central repository: I think that if we host a central repository at which we want to encourage server admins and players to place their content then we need to have a mechanism where each item can be rated. I'd suggest, personally, that we adopt some guidelines similar to the MPAA movie rating system. That way, we're not saying "This is bad, that's good" or whatever, we're just giving it a rating. Then players or their parents can configure their client to accept content that is rated up to and including a certain rating. I'd say PG-13 (if we borrow the exact ratings from the MPAA) is probably where we're at right now. Occasional swear words, occasionally offensive content, but hey, we're mostly adults here, right? So we're friendly to teens and preteens, and liberal parents, right now without any controls on the content we have right now (which is personal moviepacks on each client's machine and the in-game chat). Also, at a certain level, chat should be stopped, say at "G" chat is not sent to the client, and if it is, the client discards it.

If we just host a central repository as a resource for server admins to use so they can quickly setup a server and start using the content, then I don't think we have an obligation to deal with any sort of judgement of the content. In that case, we're providing a service of convenience. We can also enforce strict rules like "No porn, nothing that's illegal in EU/US/AUS, otherwise anything goes". (I pick those jurisdictions for example, but it does cover pretty much all the content-associated laws we might encounter)

On client vetos: The real issue here isn't whether or not the client can veto content, it's how will it do it. I think there should be an opt-in mode where all content that isn't specifically approved by the player is discarded and replaced. There should also be an opt-out mode (which I'd suggest as the default) where all content is accepted unless the player says "Not that one". As a basic system to release in aardvark, I think that just those two modes would be suitable. Gives us the ability to determine what the community will actually need after its released. Before we make the release, we're really just guessing, albeit with guesses that are well-informed and so forth, but guesses nonetheless. So the bottom line is, I think we need a system that's simple and easy to use from teh starting line that doesn't restrict future options. Hell, even just a generic opt-out system would work for the first release of this stuff, then let the community beat it around a bit and determine what they need. Since such a system is all client-based, then we dont' even have to deal with how the repository deals with the stuff, instead we can just see what people upload to it.

Experience > guesses :)

And for the record, as soon as Your_mom or someone sends us a map that shows a top-down view of a spelled out swear word or naked lady or something, then we'll know that we're already at a point where we need to be thinking about it. :) These issues don't need custom models and/or textures to come up, and with in-game chat we already have some of these problems. (Search the forums, several parents have posted from time to time about wanting to have their kids play because it's a great game for kids, but can't because of how in-game chat tends to go)
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden
Luke-Jr
Dr Z Level
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: IM: [email protected]

Post by Luke-Jr »

philippeqc wrote:
Luke-Jr wrote:If we start to declare certain repos "safe", we get into judging content... not something I think anyone here wants to start doing.
You build a contradiction between this and your black/whitelisting. I think we agree on a need for some mecanism of control.
I think it should be kept seperate from the repository itself, though, and determined by the server.
philippeqc wrote:Ok, my definition of "safe" repository is only abstrart. Maybe "safe" isnt the proper description for it. "Sanctionned", "official", "associated to this forum" or something else might be a bit better. Sadly, I dont have anything more concrete at the moment.
We have the official repository, but what I think we want to avoid is any vague or subjective guidelines for content-- including those that would involve judging what is 'offensive' or 'deceptive'.
philippeqc wrote:But I feel there is a need for some set of repositories that have rules similar to "content store here is avaliable to all players, so we control what get posted".
There is no need to control what is available to all players. Do web browsers only allow images from certain domains?
philippeqc wrote:Instead, if you rely on a "official/etc" repository, it is easy to deny abusive texture and items, and preserve valid ones.
But then someone needs to judge what is abusive or valid. There is really no way to do this properly. For example, a huge tank model is easily abusive on the default arena, but may be well fitting in another.
philippeqc wrote:
philippeqc wrote:
Indeed, but it should also be possible for servers to adopt the player selection as their own-- particularly if on a whitelist.
Could you explain this differently, I dont think I understand what you'r saying here. Do you mean that the players visiting a server could be able to "decorate" it by changing the textures?
I think that if a player-chosen texture is on the server's whitelist, the server should be able to say "I vouch for this texture-- treat it as something I suggested"
If I've interpreted this correctly, your doubling the repository role and the repository string to whitelist.[/quote]
Nope. The default respository list tells you nothing about who suggested content.
philippeqc wrote:Now, it a player makes a new model, not only does he need to have it on a repository, and have player loading it, he also need to have all the server admin whitelist it.
Only for that server to adopt it.
Lucifer wrote:On a central repository: I think that if we host a central repository at which we want to encourage server admins and players to place their content then we need to have a mechanism where each item can be rated. I'd suggest, personally, that we adopt some guidelines similar to the MPAA movie rating system. That way, we're not saying "This is bad, that's good" or whatever, we're just giving it a rating.
That's mostly what I was suggesting, except I suggest leaving the duty of rating content to players/admins/etc instead of having us do it all. The other option would be to have the submitter rate it and rely on their honesty.
Lucifer wrote:Then players or their parents can configure their client to accept content that is rated up to and including a certain rating. I'd say PG-13 (if we borrow the exact ratings from the MPAA) is probably where we're at right now. Occasional swear words, occasionally offensive content, but hey, we're mostly adults here, right?
There is nothing acceptable about swear words or porn for adults any more than it is acceptable for children (not at all).
Lucifer wrote:If we just host a central repository as a resource for server admins to use so they can quickly setup a server and start using the content, then I don't think we have an obligation to deal with any sort of judgement of the content. In that case, we're providing a service of convenience. We can also enforce strict rules like "No porn, nothing that's illegal in EU/US/AUS, otherwise anything goes". (I pick those jurisdictions for example, but it does cover pretty much all the content-associated laws we might encounter)
Who defines "porn"? I would define it as people dressing (or lack thereof) in a way to incite lust. I'm not sure everyone can agree on one definition.
Also, disallowing illegal content will likely be problematic. How many current moviepacks are derived from some technically-copyrighted image? BTW, there goes all possibilities for anime/movie/cartoon-based textures...
We would also likely be required to prohibit illegal content as soon as we begin doing any content filtering-- which kinda throws porn filtering out the door also.
As far as repository regulations, I think any more than a simple per-user quota system (where submitted content can be reviewed and approved of more quota) will be troublesome for us.
Lucifer wrote:On client vetos: The real issue here isn't whether or not the client can veto content, it's how will it do it. I think there should be an opt-in mode where all content that isn't specifically approved by the player is discarded and replaced. There should also be an opt-out mode (which I'd suggest as the default) where all content is accepted unless the player says "Not that one".
But then we need some kind of UI for the black/whitelists-- not something I see as simple :\
Lucifer wrote:As a basic system to release in aardvark, I think that just those two modes would be suitable.
None of this is targetting aardvark or even the release after it, AFAIK...
Lucifer wrote:Gives us the ability to determine what the community will actually need after its released. Before we make the release, we're really just guessing, albeit with guesses that are well-informed and so forth, but guesses nonetheless. So the bottom line is, I think we need a system that's simple and easy to use from teh starting line that doesn't restrict future options. Hell, even just a generic opt-out system would work for the first release of this stuff, then let the community beat it around a bit and determine what they need. Since such a system is all client-based, then we dont' even have to deal with how the repository deals with the stuff, instead we can just see what people upload to it.
Good idea about the experience > guesses :)
Why not simply have a blanket "disable custom textures" option and save the more detailed options for a future release when we know what (if anything) is needed?
Lucifer wrote:And for the record, as soon as Your_mom or someone sends us a map that shows a top-down view of a spelled out swear word or naked lady or something, then we'll know that we're already at a point where we need to be thinking about it. :)
Exactly my point that we're incapable of doing such filtering ourselves ;)
User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

I wouldn't mind working up a slashdot-like moderation system for content and let the community rate it. That's probably the best way to do it anyway.

What I meant about illegal content wasn't actually copyright infringing work. I was actually more concerned about things like the fact that swastikas are illegal in some jurisdictions (even though it's a fact that the Nazis 'borrowed' a benign and more or less beautiful icon), and that players could get in big trouble for things like that. So, no content that would send one of our players to jail in their home country, basically.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree about porn and swear words. I don't have any problems with either by itself, although I do have problems with conditions in the porn industry (like the fact that to be a porn star you pretty much have to be anorexic/bulemic and if you snort coke you're doing pretty good). Anyway, it's not for me to judge if that stuff is wrong for other people, rather it's for me to acknowledge that people have problems with it and hopefully suggest ways that they can deal with that sort of content should it appear in-game. :)

We do have to consider copyright infringing works, though. I'm sure there's a reasonable solution out there somewhere, but we definitely don't want to get sued for hosting something someone else ripped.

I think the blanket "disable custom textures" option would work and could even be coded in now. Do we already download textures for any reason, or are we just downloading maps? If all we're downloading right now is maps, then there's probably no hurry.

Something else I was thinking about, actually. It would be nice if we could somehow generate a code for each server that marked it as unique. Then we could build a UI to allow people to block access to specific servers. So we could allow parents to block specific servers they have problems with. It would be easy to get around for the kid, but we're not trying to solve the family's human problems, just provide them a technical way to approach those problems and still be able to play the game. The reason for the unique key is that if you depend on the IP address, the server admin can probably change that (most of us are on dynamic IP addresses). If it's the server name, same. Anyway, just an idea I had to deal with maps that parents might have a problem with. (ironic that I don't censor my kids but I'm willing to code in ways for other parents to censor theirs. I guess it's not my place to tell other people how to parent)
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden
Luke-Jr
Dr Z Level
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: IM: [email protected]

Post by Luke-Jr »

Lucifer wrote:What I meant about illegal content wasn't actually copyright infringing work. I was actually more concerned about things like the fact that swastikas are illegal in some jurisdictions (even though it's a fact that the Nazis 'borrowed' a benign and more or less beautiful icon), and that players could get in big trouble for things like that. So, no content that would send one of our players to jail in their home country, basically.
That would include the Taiwanese flag, FYI. In some countries, the words "freedom" and "democracy" are also forbidden in the same way.
Lucifer wrote:We do have to consider copyright infringing works, though. I'm sure there's a reasonable solution out there somewhere, but we definitely don't want to get sued for hosting something someone else ripped.
"If you have a problem with some resource, take it up with the submitter"
Lucifer wrote:I think the blanket "disable custom textures" option would work and could even be coded in now. Do we already download textures for any reason, or are we just downloading maps? If all we're downloading right now is maps, then there's probably no hurry.
Just maps right now.
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

About illegal content: I don't know how it is handled in your countries, but in Germany, if you run a place where users can upload content (like a forum), the admin is not directly responsible for the things the users put there. The only obligation is to remove illegal content when you're made aware of it, you don't even have to scan for it yourself.
Just rambling as I don't have any useful thing to say...
User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

Luke-Jr wrote:
Lucifer wrote:What I meant about illegal content wasn't actually copyright infringing work. I was actually more concerned about things like the fact that swastikas are illegal in some jurisdictions (even though it's a fact that the Nazis 'borrowed' a benign and more or less beautiful icon), and that players could get in big trouble for things like that. So, no content that would send one of our players to jail in their home country, basically.
That would include the Taiwanese flag, FYI. In some countries, the words "freedom" and "democracy" are also forbidden in the same way.
DOn't start getting circular on me, Luke. :) I already mentioned specifically limiting such actions to specific jurisdictions that take care of 99% of players, and proper notification lets the rest know that they may need to take a closer look at the situation if they're at all concerned.

And also, I was only suggesting it as a way to establish guidelines, not necessarily a solution to any problems. :)
Lucifer wrote:We do have to consider copyright infringing works, though. I'm sure there's a reasonable solution out there somewhere, but we definitely don't want to get sued for hosting something someone else ripped.
"If you have a problem with some resource, take it up with the submitter"
We won't always have that option. Now, the way I hear it, if you show up into court and say (with proof, of course) "They didn't even talk to us, we didn't even know we were infringing their copyrights until we got served notice of the law suit", then the judge usually throws you both out and says "Come back if you can't work it out". I don't know, I'm not a lawyer, but I do know the DMCA doesn't give protections for people hosting copyright-infringing stuff (but it does provide a procedure that the copyright holder has to follow to get any action through it, and that procedure gives us some protection).

But like I was saying, we have to consider it, but we don't necessarily have to do anything about it. We just need to know what we *are* going to do when/if some copyright owner comes along with a complaint, whether we think it's legitimate or not.
Lucifer wrote:I think the blanket "disable custom textures" option would work and could even be coded in now. Do we already download textures for any reason, or are we just downloading maps? If all we're downloading right now is maps, then there's probably no hurry.
Just maps right now.
Then we've got a fair bit of time before the thing starts really bugging. Realistically, I don't think we're going to have a lot of problem servers/users, but I tend to think that the few we will have are going to make themselves big headaches. And man, when people get offended, they're about as irrational as they get. (/me avoids getting off on a rant about wussies getting offended)
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden
Post Reply