405th.com -- Costuming Wiki -- Tutorials

[TheRob]

Well I know you don't trust us but I can confirm that it woundn't be going any faster that way. This was more of a yes/no option on several items, and we still had issues with wording. The charter is all wording.. and will therefore likely go through similar difficulties when it goes live. We'll cross that when get to it. Maybe we'll do something similar to the poll.

I'm sorry that you don't approve of how the charter is being done, but imagine a hundred people all wanting their version represented, and trying to appease them in the drafts.. versus 9 mods.. would it would have gone any faster?

Ok Enough about that, I know what is going on and its taking its time and what not. What about my suggestions up there, come on comment on what you think.

 

[Walter Spase]

We have the questionnaire because we want to know how everyone feels about it. Because this is a forum issue.

The charter is not... Charter Updates... this is my discussion on the matter.

As for the public use of the 405th information on the 405th wiki... I would assume, as has always been done, that information presented on the 405th forum, for use by its members, could be represented in a 405th hosted wiki... for use by its members... and it's done so because it can be protected by the 405th community directly, vs indirectly on an open site Wiki... I suspect though that some members may still withhold some information, which is well within their rights. But I do not assume to speak for everyone that ever posts information on this forum. Knowledge is public property... we should always share knowledge.... what you create with your knowledge is your private property, to do with as you please.

 

[TheRob]

What I am asking is that if it is posted publicly on the forums, it is also allowed to be posted on the wiki. Less hassle, it should be a common rule

 

[UNSC Leatherneck]

What I am asking is that if it is posted publicly on the forums, it is also allowed to be posted on the wiki. Less hassle, it should be a common rule

So the question is one of Fair Use. I think that a blanket rule that allows content posted on the forums to be transferred to the wiki without the explicit permission of the original author runs counter to accepted Fair Use rules. The information may be for public consumption but the way it is presented is. There needs to be some controls in place to ensure that the content on the wiki is there legally and everything is properly credited. As for whether it should be an internal wiki or an external one I think that the subject has been covered already.

 

[23Magnum]

I've tried to stay out of the wiki vs. 405th information issue. In some ways, this is dealing with Intellectual Property.

These are the first words you see when you hit that register button on this site.

Forum Terms & Rules

Please take a moment to review these rules detailed below. If you agree with them and wish to proceed with the registration, simply click the "Register" button below. To cancel this registration, simply hit the 'back' button on your browser.

Please remember that we are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message.

The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this bulletin board. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this bulletin board.

Copyright is a tricky road because you only need proof it's yours by practically just saying you did the work first. The only time you'd need legal proof is usually if you were to take legal action, and sometimes not even then. If you can prove the work is yours, that's all you really need. This is not to be confused with MS's ownership of the Halo franchise. There is a difference, but it doesn't need to be discussed here.

What does all this mean?

Basically, it means that it is really up to the person who posted the information here to dispute it's reposting or display in it's entirety elsewhere.

I know it's a pain in the butt to ask every single person's permission to repost their work, but unfortunately that's what should be happening with the wiki, where ever it may end up. As I understand it, that is occurring now anyway yes? Giving credit is also necessary, and I know that's being done as well.

What you could do, is instead of asking every single person to have permission to display their work(in the wiki or anywhere for that matter) in the effort to inform only, then have a rule where if the OP of any thread wishes to allow others to redisplay their work/information offsite, they put a quick note in the original post giving such permission. A note such as, "I give permission for my work to be displayed off this site in an informative capacity only". If no such note is shown, don't repost the information. You would still need to also give credit of course.

Now of course for this to work everyone would have to know about it and use it. I know that might take some time, but it would take a lot of guess work out of what anyone can or cannot put in the wiki or anywhere.

This wouldn't of course keep you from linking back to the forum's topics that didn't want to be displayed offsite. There is nothing to stop you there. You're just directing someone to a person's original piece of work.

I say offsite because reposting information within the site is near pointless when you can merely direct a person to the source of which you speak.

This sort of brings me back to the stickies. Everyone's gotten a little lazy about answering the infinite repeat of questions by new members. I'm guilty as charged here too.

Welcoming new members who ask "I want to make this helmet, using the paper stuff. How do I do it? Where do I start? What do I use?" These requests are usually meet by "Welcome to the site. Read the stickies." I've done it, and I've seen many others do it as well. I think if one of the 7 people who say that, actually post a link to the actually sticky(s) that pertain to their request, then the hopelessness of finding information in the stickies will start to diminish in new users. Especially after all that information is finally sorted out to allow the more important information to shine through.

I'm going to make a personally effort to carry out this last part. I would ask that anyone else that is going to respond to a new members thread, while welcoming them to also take the time and at least direct them to the particular sticky they may find useful.

I hope all my points are clear enough. If not, let me know(nicely), and I'll try and explain it further as best I can.

 

[Sean Bradley]

It sounds like we're starting to find some new things to include in the next poll:

Do you think that any file or work presented at the 405th forums should be considered public, and subject to fair use?

Ouch.. get ready to have to hunt for stuff again guys... this is going to scare off the file makers and tutorial authors.. maybe. I really think should be left up to the individual creator.. telling them to share it or don't post it here is pretty harsh.. thats gonna put a cork in the free exchange of pep files.. again we shouldn't dictate something like this to members, but as democracy goes.. it should be put to vote I guess.


So... after arguing so much about giving credit where it is due we're just going to turn around and remove the creators rights to protecting their creations?

 

[TheRob]

Fair Use within the site yes. Say there is a file publically on the forums, then it should be allowed on the 405th wiki. Doesn't separate knowledge and information. If we got tutorial writers that don't want to have things published on the wiki, what good is the wiki going to be? It will just have bits of things here and there, and the tutorials will be partly there, partly on the forums, different works on the forums than what is shown on the wiki. Unity remember?

I'm not saying take away the rights of the creator, doesn't change the fact its their IP.

 

[Vrogy]

So... after arguing so much about giving credit where it is due we're just going to turn around and remove the creators rights to protecting their creations? dry.gif

Oh, the lulz. Surely you can't see it that way- if the 405th forums will never be closed to 405th members only- information is publicly posted there, and a wiki is to be a better-organized repository of halo costuming information- wherever it is- how can making sure that information flows freely between the two do any harm at all?

I see it this way- if someone posts something here, they obviously want to share it with people who make halo costumes. If nothing else, make it a policy to allow reposting to our wiki(wherever it's hosted), by default, with the option to opt-out.

Honestly don't understand how you can see a policy which aims to increase the effectiveness of an open book, so to speak, on halo costuming, as a bad thing.
Isn't one of the goals here to spread what we're doing to others?

Ouch.. get ready to have to hunt for stuff again guys... this is going to scare off the file makers and tutorial authors.. maybe.

The file makers and tutorial writers are right here. With a few exceptions, whose work we already have to seek out now, like Nugget, it's all armor-builders. Why would they suddenly not want to have their work in an easily-accessible format?

 

[23Magnum]

I see it this way- if someone posts something here, they obviously want to share it with people who make halo costumes. If nothing else, make it a policy to allow reposting to our wiki(wherever it's hosted), by default, with the option to opt-out.

I still believe default should be non-display, and people who post can give out permission if they choose. Without permission you can't assume that they wish for their work to be displayed/shared elsewhere without their knowledge of it first.

I don't totally disagree with your reasoning because it would be easier to complete such a thing as the wiki that way, but it's the simple fact you can't assume that someone wants to share just because they post on this site.

Like I said it's a very tricky road when dealing with IP.

 

[Sean Bradley]

Still it's something to put to vote. I didn't mean to sound so negative about it. Personally I have nothing to lose, my tutorial are ment to be re-distributed as long as my name is on it somewhere, but I know that some Pep makers are hesitant to allow stuff to be posted to the wiki fearing that it's a vehicle for dissemination and re-hosting across the web. But clearly I shouldn't be speaking for them.

What I mean about removing their protection rights is that is if we implement the common rule that any file or tutorial work posted here must accept the terms of being hosted at the internal AND external wiki will simply translate to some people never posting things that they would otherwise share if they were given control to set their own rules for their own files.

True I know it is the internetz.. and people will do what they do either way, but I think some creators would feeel better being able to set their own rules.. and not having the rules dictated to them.

The more rules we implement here, the less freedom the individual members has... and some will surely see it as that.

I dunno, like I said I have no stakes in this issue, just interest in not alienating anyone here.

 

[Walter Spase]

Knowledge should be for public use.... someone's creation is for their use. If you read someone's tutorial, and gain knowledge from it, and you want to rewrite the tutorial, I would say thats fine... just don't rewrite that tutorial unless you have used it and are experienced with it.

I posted alot of pictures of my helmet being built, from the steps and process. I answered questions, I still give advice. But I never typed a full tutorial. However, if someone wanted to go back and follow my example, take their own photos, and create a tutorial from the knowledge they gained thats fine by me.

But please make it your original work, with your original thoughts, and give credit to where you learned the information. Don't copy and paste my advice, my pictures, and present it as if you were the original creator and assume that I am ok with that. I don't want to be misrepresented and possibly give bad advice through association. So permission with credit is the way I would go. My opinion though. If you asked me for permission to copy and paste something I wrote and gave credit for the knowledge... I'd be fine with that.

The model makers, thats their property. The created it, its their creation, they do with it what they want to. They don't have to share it for free, they can charge for it, they can trade for it. But it is their model. To choose who gets it... and under what terms.

 

[Deadguy]

I personally think a lot of this discussion is a moot point.

I feel that as long as the Authors of articles are directly credited on the title of an article, and still hosted on the 405th site, there's nothing worng with it, as long as the act of having it on that wiki, or new thread, or whatever, doesn't put the article into an "altered" copyright situation.

In brief.. if anyone wanted to, at the current time, they could take any and all tutorials from the public wiki, publish them in a bound book, and sell them. Or simply copy them to Disk and resell the crap out of it. That's because the copyright license is different on the public Wiki.

On an internal semi-private Wiki, that legal ability to commercially or non-commercial distribute the material can be stopped. To me, that's an absolute "must do" in terms of knowing that I would avoid contributing anything to the Wiki that might be of value to someone monetarily.

As far as concerns regarding dividing the community by splitting material between the forums and wiki, that's a non-issue, in practice, because it would be much like linking to a webpage. On each of those webpages there is also a discussion page, where changes and questions could be discussed, AND/OR users could ask their questions on threads in the forum. In other words, the WIPS and stuff are still here on the forums as is normal, but there could be a single sticky in that forum that links to the relative section of Wiki that would act as an index for the contents in there.

----------------

Here's an example of an integrated Wiki in action:
The Single sticky in a forum links to the wiki-section that deals with that topic. Click the button on the Weapons/Prop section and get a list of ALL WIP's in that section in Alphabetical order, listing weapon types, authors, and mediums used in the WIP, plus the date the WIP was introduced to the board.

Each entry has a link to the WIP thread which is still on the forum itself, a Link to the Creator's profile on the forum, and possibly a small picture (either a member picture of a project picture). There could also be (at the option and work of the creator) a link to a Wiki User-page that could have things like links to other projects, a personalized profile, a blog of what they're doing now, or a link to it on the forum, etc.

It get's better.. you're still at the Weapon/prop link page, where you scroll past no less than like 8 assault rifle WIPs created in various mediums, and you can tell what the medium is before you even GO to the article, and perhaps we could add a "Percentage Done" to that list.

Meanwhile.. Any WIP that the creator wanted to be displayed in a format that they wanted more control over with no threads, could opt to make a wiki page for the WIP, or they could just leave their WIP on the forum. If they chose a Wiki WIP, they could advertise and discuss it on the forum.

This is not division, or duplication, it's organization at it's finest.. I, for one would never want to lose something like Link's Assault Rifle WIP, we can't sticky it, but why let it get lost in the sea of what.. 13 pages of topics in that forum?

The other option, of course is to ignore that Wiki sticky in the forum, and sort through all the threads in the old-fashioned way. The only difference being that folks are sometimes making references to things that are linked to the thread. (Some intregrated wiki systems even automatically add wiki links into the forum itself whenever you say specific phrases).

------------

A search function? well, it'd still be the one you remember, but why would you use it ? See the word EVA in a post? just click on it.. and you've suddenly got links to pep files, reference shots, EVA WIPs collections, and "show-off" collections that involve it. Now imagine that for words like Assault Rifle, Sniper Rifle, Endoglassing, Bondo.. (Where to get it at a decent price based on what part of the world you're in, what safety precautions/warnings should you be aware of, how do you use it, is there something else preferred?)

Sure.. it takes time to build it all up, but like I mentioned.. some integrated Wiki systems will AUTOMATICALLY link that kinda' stuff straight to phrases found on the forum if they match a page name or category on the Wiki. Make an EVA page and put on all the links you think are relavent, and from that point forward, everyone gains from that little bit of effort you put out.

In terms of the massive tutorial ideas.. essentially if you do that with a Wiki, it will come together easily and clearly, without minimal hassle, with full credit for sections being something that is REQUIRED when it's entered. No bunch of stickies will equal the Wiki in this regard. Author credits can accompany links to User pages that could optionally include lists of other stuff that author has done, and/or projects they are involved with. It would also link to the board profiles and related threads as determined desirable.

You could go directly to specific tutorial sections that you're currently using, perhaps with WIP links thrown into appropriate sections so you can see how the work relates to what you're doing.

See the clutter in the Sigs on here talking about their Press appearances, Percentages done on various costumes, links to galleries and all that? Three words.. "WIKI USER PAGE"

BIG POST, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS....

The forum usage wouldn't change from how it's being used now, it merely expands to allow access to referenced material that you can opt to look at, and/or add to, or choose to ignore.

I'm almost convinced that nay-sayers at this point aren't wiki users at all and are merely mildly fearfull of what they don't understand. Trust me in the fact that if someone does NOT want to make a page, or do any work regarding adding stuff to the Wiki at all, they are more than welcome to click on the links that help them get to what they want to see, and have nothing further to do with it. Most links will point to further links or threads/subforums, the other links will go to Wiki content, such as tutorials, (reference and non-reference) images, pep files, and possibly various documents such as forum rules/ettiqute, etc. Possibly some Wiki hosted user profiles and WIPs may show up there too, but the conversations are pretty much over here in the forums except where discussions of wiki editing for specific pages will be accessible to those that want to participate in wiki editing decisions.

If it confuses you, rest assured that it won't be neccessary to do anything beyond clicking on clearly defined links to get you to whatever wealth of data awaits you from the more pro-active Wiki users that beleived links were possibly desired in those areas. Your actual level of involvement with the Wiki itself is up to you.

Nothing put on the wiki will have credits removed as long as credits are availible for any piece in-question, and on an integrated wiki, they aren't leaving the site you posted them on in the first place. If you spot something you wrote that somehow missed getting a credit marker.. add it or get someone else to. All credits should be immediately under the title of the page or section where they get prominent placement, including links to that user's PM. If a significant alteration to a credited section is planned, the credited author is to be consulted before doing so.

It's my opinion that this is an informational Utopia who's abilities have merely been touched upon in the existing Wiki.

 

[UNSC Leatherneck]

Still it's something to put to vote. I didn't mean to sound so negative about it. Personally I have nothing to lose, my tutorial are ment to be re-distributed as long as my name is on it somewhere, but I know that some Pep makers are hesitant to allow stuff to be posted to the wiki fearing that it's a vehicle for dissemination and re-hosting across the web. But clearly I shouldn't be speaking for them.

What I mean about removing their protection rights is that is if we implement the common rule that any file or tutorial work posted here must accept the terms of being hosted at the internal AND external wiki will simply translate to some people never posting things that they would otherwise share if they were given control to set their own rules for their own files.

True I know it is the internetz.. and people will do what they do either way, but I think some creators would feeel better being able to set their own rules.. and not having the rules dictated to them.

The more rules we implement here, the less freedom the individual members has... and some will surely see it as that.

I dunno, like I said I have no stakes in this issue, just interest in not alienating anyone here.

With all due respect, this is not something that can really be put to a vote. This is an issue of copyright and fair use. It would be improper and possibly illegal to institute a rule allowing the content of the forums to be reposted elsewhere without the author's consent on a case-by-case basis. On top of that, it is not enough to simply cite the source, permission is required. Mind you, what I am referring to here is a copying of a forum post to the wiki without consent. Now, what Spase is saying is correct. The expression of an idea is protected, not the idea itself. This is how copyright law works. As a disclaimer, I am not a lawyer. As a writer, non-published, but a writer nonetheless, I make it a point to understand the protections available to me under the law. There are certain rules that are necessary to ensure that the 405th, forums and club, is held to the standards of a professional organization.

 

[Vrogy]

In brief.. if anyone wanted to, at the current time, they could take any and all tutorials from the public wiki, publish them in a bound book, and sell them. Or simply copy them to Disk and resell the crap out of it. That's because the copyright license is different on the public Wiki.

On an internal semi-private Wiki, that legal ability to commercially or non-commercial distribute the material can be stopped. To me, that's an absolute "must do" in terms of knowing that I would avoid contributing anything to the Wiki that might be of value to someone monetarily.

Actually the GNU makes sure stuff stays free- here's a passage from the preamble:
<div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'>The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other functional and useful document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a way to get credit for their work, while not being considered responsible for modifications made by others.
This License is a kind of "copyleft", which means that derivative works of the document must themselves be free in the same sense. It complements the GNU General Public License, which is a copyleft license designed for free software.</div>
So, basically, if someone started selling a booklet with all the information in it, people could legally scan and copy that booklet, and redistribute it. Everything stays available, and the license and authors' credit is always attached. If not, we get the pitchforks and go to town on 'em, just like recasts on ebay or dumb kids taking credit for Belakor's armor on bungie.net. Might be able to use something like the DMCA, too, I'll have to read up on it.

 

[UNSC Leatherneck]

I'll play devil's advocate here. What you say about the GNU stuff is true, but it assumes that anyone who posts a tutorial, to use an example, automatically wishes the tutorial to be covered under the license. Some people may not be comfortable with releasing the rights to their work so easily.

 

[Vrogy]

I'll play devil's advocate here. What you say about the GNU stuff is true, but it assumes that anyone who posts a tutorial, to use an example, automatically wishes the tutorial to be covered under the license. Some people may not be comfortable with releasing the rights to their work so easily.

Well, if they're posting it here, they're sharing it with lots of people anyways- why not a linked wiki? Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's not going to be any profit made from it. It's all about cooperating as a community and helping others, in theory.
Also, I don't think anyone would object if a prolific author decided to package all his stuff up and sell it- might be pointless, but it might also reach an offline audience at conventions, too.

 

[UNSC Leatherneck]

Well, if they're posting it here, they're sharing it with lots of people anyways- why not a linked wiki? Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's not going to be any profit made from it. It's all about cooperating as a community and helping others, in theory.
Also, I don't think anyone would object if a prolific author decided to package all his stuff up and sell it- might be pointless, but it might also reach an offline audience at conventions, too.

I agree that it is a short step from posting on a forum for public consumption to linked wiki, but there is a step there. For that short step to be taken the permission of the author must be obtained. What you say about the author is also true. He is free to package his stuff and sell it in hardcopy. But you make an important distinction: the author. In the example presented the creator of the material is the one packaging it. However, if some other person were to package the material and sell it at a convention, that would likely violate the rights of the original author. I would like to add that if someone were to take the ideas from one or more tutorials into a new document posting on the wiki would be fine. I just have a problem with a "copy and paste" from the forms to the wiki without permission of the author. I don't want to be arguing over simply having a wiki, which would be a good thing, just the appropriation of posts verbatim into a wiki.

 

[Deadguy]

That's why I pointed out that an integrated Wiki can keep the material under the same license it's always been under.
It's the same license, same everything, the only difference is how it's linked.

Vrogy, I have no interest in writing a tutorial or WIP that can be scanned and added to anyone's book where they make money off of it. It's not the credit, it's the time spent lining someone else's pockets with my efforts for no compensation. Maybe that makes me a greedy punk or something, but if anyone's going to paid for my work, it's me.

Currently, I justify my efforts as part of a hobby I enjoy that I never expect to receive payment for/profit on. If I suspect that something I'm writing is of value, it merely reminds me that I should be publishing rather than freely giving it away.. Tht's not an attitude I want to take with my hobby, nor encourage on the forum.

 

[TheRob]

So umm.... what's the difference in posting for distribution on the public forum, and having a page on the internal wiki? Same site and all....

 

[UNSC Leatherneck]

So umm.... what's the difference in posting for distribution on the public forum, and having a page on the internal wiki? Same site and all....

The internal wiki allows a better organization of information. In essence, it takes the ideas presented in the forum and organizes and cross references the information. So that means you don't have to wade through hundreds of posts to find the information you want.