Motherlode Peer Group Review

[Adirondack]

Bob,

let me point out some things here:

1. Jdou died in early 2007
2. 'spaceimaging.com' was a website that provided close ups of the Earth and so on
(and is obviously off line nowadays / replaced by an other site)
3. Maybe the included URL was a part of the licence

Nevertheless the URL made the add ons useless for Celestia and should be deleted.

On the other hand: Andrea's suggestion sounds usefully and meaningful.
@ Andrea: Do you want me to send the archives in question to you?


What has the CML to do with the reputation of Celestia?
Is Celestia a bad, bad software since the Celestia Motherlode (CML) exists?
Are you the elite and Gods of add ons and all others are inferior animals?
I can't stand the never ending hostilities to the CML anymore...
Do you all want Bob and me to quit our efforts there and close the CML to
"repair the reputation of Celestia" or what?

BTW:
Bob and me are only trying to keep up running the CML (and we are not the
owners of the CML) after guys like the Good Doctor scared away the owner and
initiators of the Motherlode and some other contributors from the entire community.
Wow, what a good reputation of Celestia.

Bye,
Adirondack

[rthorvald]

What has the CML to do with the reputation of Celestia?

The CML is the largest - by far - expression of Celestia?s user community, so it has everything to do with it.

Are you the elite and Gods of add ons and all others are inferior animals?
I can't stand the never ending hostilities to the CML anymore...

Oh, please, Ulrich, there is no hostility here. Everybody appreciates greatly the job you and Bob are doing. Neither is there any superiority complex, as you seem to hint at. This is merely an attempt at a suggestion for how to make the CML simpler to both use and maintain. If you don?t like it, then ignore it, but don?t get so riled up.

Do you all want Bob and me to quit our efforts there and close the CML to
"repair the reputation of Celestia" or what?

Are you having a very bad day? What on Earth is wrong with discussing a policy change for the CML? It does NOT belittle your efforts in any way. Let me repeat, we are all very appreciative of your contribution here - which, as i know very well, is substantial. It takes a lot of dedication and time to run that site - more than most people realize.

Bob and me are only trying to keep up running the CML (and we are not the
owners of the CML) after guys like the Good Doctor scared away the owner and
initiators of the Motherlode

Sorry, but that is not true. I am one of the three original "initiators". Don Goyette quit because of health problems, Joe quit because he moved abroad and started work after his studies, and i quit because i found myself wanting to do something else. There were two others that came along very quickly - you and Harald. I don?t know why Harald is not aboard anymore, but i doubt he got scared off - and you are still here, thankfully not scared either.

Stop posting nonsense, run the site if you care to, and remember that we are thankful that you have done it so far! If you don?t want to listen to ideas, then don?t, but don?t make accusations just because we discuss it out of interest.

- rthorvald

[BobHegwood]

Okay,

I have calmed down a bit, and apologize for my behavior earlier.

I am very much in favor of Runar's proposal which would allow the discussion of any add-ons which you people would like to see deleted from the ML.
I have absolutely NO problems removing add-ons which the collective Celestia Users do NOT wish to see listed on the site.

Please just understand where I'm coming from here...
I'm trying to do the best job I can do with almost NO direction from anyone except Ulrich. I would be very happy to remove any add-ons, including my own, if that is what
the collective here wishes me to do.

I really do not understand all this hostility though. Are we not ALL devoted to this superb program, and all that can be done with it?
Like I have stated on many occasions, I prefer realistic add-ons myself, but I really see no need to remove add-ons just because they deal
with the Star Trek Universe. This area also has a large (and very devoted) group of users who depend on the ML to get their preferred add-ons too.

At any rate, I will abide by whatever you people would like to do.

Again, sorry for the grief I have caused here. Selden? You may feel free to ban me at any time.
I do think, however, that a little tolerance of other (less publicly vocal) users' wishes would be indicative of the kind of users who do enjoy this software though.

That's it. I will shut up now.
Thanks and sorry once again.

Brain-Dead

[Adirondack]

Oh, please, Ulrich, there is no hostility here.

Unfortunately, I have the impression. The "hostility" is scattered in the forums.
I'm not talking only about this thread.
See also: viewtopic.php?t=11812
or viewtopic.php?f=4&t=11797&p=97466&hilit=cml#p97466

Are you having a very bad day?

Yes!

What on Earth is wrong with discussing a policy change for the CML?

Oh, I didn't mean to refer to the discussion of a policy change.

Sorry, but that is not true. I am one of the three original "initiators".

Yes, you are right. But besides Bob (who make a hard job since December 2007) I'm doing
pretty much all the work these days.
So I obviously simply did not have you in mind. Sorry.

Former and active members are listed here: http://www.celestiamotherlode.net/credits.html

Don Goyette quit because of health problems

Yes. I didn't talk about Don though.

Joe quit because he moved abroad and started work after his studies.

Well, that's the 'official' version.

I don?t know why Harald is not aboard anymore.

Hm, I do! As I said ...


Adirondack

[ANDREA]

On the other hand: Andrea's suggestion sounds usefully and meaningful.
@ Andrea: Do you want me to send the archives in question to you?

Yes,Ukrich, plase, send me the images at the following address:
contatti@palatinumclub.it
I'll correct them and upload again to Motherlode.
And no credits on what I'll do, please.
Bye soon

Andrea

[ElChristou]

...What has the CML to do with the reputation of Celestia?

Ulrich, as pointed by Runar, ML is indeed very important. It's the place N°1 to get addons for a newbie.
Now, IMHO (and seems it's a consensus), some addons are really not representative of the qualities of Celestia (note, qualities -> plural).
Perso I think we should think in a "new" ML but not only from the addons point of view, but as a real platform of distribution working with the upcoming addon manager.
I'd like to see a real partition between scientific material (principally data sets), educational material and fantasy. In theory the 2 first areas would not need any quality classification because the quality there should be ok. Now the only "work" should be to review and classify the addons in the fantasy section. For this we do need some directions about what is quality and what is not. The aesthetic point of view should be the last criterion; first, one could see if the addon use or not Celestia at best (use of cmod instead of 3DS, use of dds instead of jpg, number of poly of a model etc...). This IMHO should be the priority to sort out what is good or not. Then of course, the aesthetic should be taken in account. If the ML staff on this point need help, we can discuss this in the forum. Best, a forum dedicated to ML could see the day.

To resume, keep cool and let's see if we can think in something to help with your hard job...

[rthorvald]

I have absolutely NO problems removing add-ons which the collective Celestia Users do NOT wish to see listed on the site.

If i can offer one concrete suggestion for how to begin, i?d say;

1. create the Sandbox directory
2. Move everything, regardless of author, quality, usefullness, whatever, that is not 1.5 ready, into the Sandbox.

... Please start with moving all my own old stuff over - if it is not 1.5 ready, it is just noise to the average user. When i find time to update it to 1.5, you can consider listing it again. Treat everything this way, and we are off to a flying start.

- rthorvald

[ElChristou]

Joe quit because he moved abroad and started work after his studies.

Well, that's the 'official' version.

Ulrich, I was part of the ML mailing list a moment before Joe leave and I know perfectly what you are referring to and I must disagree. The problems between Fridger and the old ML team is not for nothing. The ML team took publicly position against one of the pillar of Celestia, so even if Joe had left for this reason (which is not the case, if I recall well Runar is right) there would be nothing to say at this level.

[ElChristou]

...Treat everything this way, and we are off to a flying start.

A "Work in progress" message should then be displayed on the main page...

[fungun]

I have only been a member here a short time. I must say this discussion shocked me. I thought Celestia and the Motherload was for all people passionate about space and space travel, be it realistic or fictional. I have shown many of my friends this program and the kind of addons that can be had and made. They are not scientists, teachers, or NASA employees. They do love seeing things they would otherwise never see. To tell ya the truth, the "real" addons only comprise about 2% of the addons I have downloaded. It's the fictional ones, IMHO, that are much more fun and interesting to watch and play with. Life is just too dam short be to be so serious all the time. So if the Trek addon days are gone so be it. I just hope it doesn't come to that. Bob if you ever need help with scifi stuff, I would love to pitch in. I have more refs on scifi and esp. Trek than you can shake a stick at.
Tim

[BobHegwood]

I have only been a member here a short time. I must say this discussion shocked me. I thought Celestia and the Motherload was for all people passionate about space and space travel, be it realistic or fictional. I have shown many of my friends this program and the kind of addons that can be had and made. They are not scientists, teachers, or NASA employees. They do love seeing things they would otherwise never see. To tell ya the truth, the "real" addons only comprise about 2% of the addons I have downloaded. It's the fictional ones, IMHO, that are much more fun and interesting to watch and play with. Life is just too dam short be to be so serious all the time. So if the Trek addon days are gone so be it. I just hope it doesn't come to that. Bob if you ever need help with scifi stuff, I would love to pitch in. I have more refs on scifi and esp. Trek than you can shake a stick at.
Tim

Thanks very much for at least voicing your opinion here Tim. Much appreciated, since most of the time, only *I* hear from the people who enjoy the "other" side of Celestia.

[rthorvald]

So if the Trek addon days are gone so be it. I just hope it doesn't come to that. Bob if you ever need help with scifi stuff, I would love to pitch in. I have more refs on scifi and esp. Trek than you can shake a stick at

It is not a question of removing Trek add-ons or any other spesific type. If a spesific Trek Add-On is good, it will be in the catalog, but if not, it stays in the Sandbox. Either way, it will be listed for people to download. Since you, as you say, know a lot about Star Trek, you would naturally be one of the authorities that helped decide which - which, incidentially, would also help the author making it better...

- rthorvald

[BobHegwood]

Here's a thought suggested by one of my friends in the Celestia Community...

Would it be acceptable to add to the ML upload page a requirement that any textures submitted should be
original works?

The reason I ask this is because there a vast number of add-ons currently available on the ML which contain modified
versions of someone else's original textures. Now, this has been acceptable in the past, but I'm wondering if this
might go some ways toward creating more unique add-ons.

Any thoughts here?
We could also allow modifications if the original authors give their permissions to include these textures in a
new add-on too, if that is what is desired here.

Again, any thoughts?

[t00fri]

Bob,

I don't think the crucial request here is for texture originality, since this is very hard to achieve AND trace. It's not even required formally in an OpenSource/GPL2 context. For example, many texture creators use and modify some scientific NASA/ESA textures in some way or another. So their textures would never be "original".

++++++++++++++++++
The point is rather to insist that add-on creators adopt a MUCH better moral in citing ALL work that was used in SOME way by them!!!
+++++++++++++++++

Fridger

[BobHegwood]

Bob,

I don't think the crucial request here is for texture originality, since this is very hard to achieve AND trace. It's not even required formally in an OpenSource/GPL2 context. For example, many texture creators use and modify some scientific NASA/ESA textures in some way or another. So their textures would never be "original".

++++++++++++++++++
The point is rather to insist that add-on creators adopt a MUCH better moral in citing ALL work that was used in SOME way by them!!!
+++++++++++++++++

Fridger

Well, we can certainly get that accomplished I think. Thanks very much for your thoughts.
Anyone else?

[Adirondack]

I do agree with Fridger.
We can't control this in detail and such a requirement bursts like a bubble.

Adirondack

[BobHegwood]

Okay,

As a first step in the right direction then, and since I always check EVERY add-on before it gets placed on the ML, I
will begin using this policy on my own initiative. If I run into a texture which I know has been modified from someone else's
work (including those textures which are included with Celestia) I will suggest to Ulrich that these add-ons NOT be placed
in the catalog unless their readme files identify the source(s) of the copied textures.

Is this a good first step here? In this manner, newbies can submit whatever they like as long as the proper credits are
given for all objects which have been copied and/or modified from other sources. Is this reasonable to everyone?

Thanks, Brain-Dead

EDIT: If a new work contains a texture which I know to be someone else's, the add-on author will also have to get a
permission from the original author in order to get this work published too. Agreed? By the way, I am very familiar with
most of the various authors works too, so this is not simply an idle promise.

[BobHegwood]

Now for another question concerning this topic. Should I now go back and review all of the works on the ML,
once again, in order to enforce this policy? I would be happy to do so, and would contact authors in those cases
where I believe that someone else's work has been used without credit.

Anyone have any thoughts concerning this approach to cleaning up the ML?

Thanks again, Brain-Dead

EDIT:
In those cases where I actually miss the use of someone else's work without credit in an add-on, please note that I can
always be contacted via either PM, or my e-mail address which is listed on my web site. Either of these two means of
contact is okay by me. If you feel that something is wrong with an add-on, please feel free to contact me personally,
and I will get to the bottom of it.

[Reiko]

Only if you want to reduce the ML to a handful of addons.

[BobHegwood]

Only if you want to reduce the ML to a handful of addons.

Are you certain that you understand what I'm proposing here? Not the deletion of add-ons using other people's textures, but the
addition of the appropriate credits for the textures which were modified for inclusion in an add-on. I would delete an add-on
only if the appropriate credits were not applied to a package in this category.