Subscriber-only content discussions - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Subscriber-only content discussions

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zombiegleemax
Oct 21, 2008 15:27:02 As a friendly reminder, the content of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines is subscriber-only and is covered by intellectual property and other laws. Please be respectful of other users when discussing this content. No spoilers, please! As a rule of thumb, do not copy or disclose more information than you would expect to see in a brief book or movie review. Violation of laws may result in termination of your account.
#2
drjug
Oct 21, 2008 15:44:31 lol
#3
Obsidianjaerc
Oct 22, 2008 13:47:03
As a friendly reminder, the content of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines is subscriber-only and is covered by intellectual property and other laws. Please be respectful of other users when discussing this content. No spoilers, please! As a rule of thumb, do not copy or disclose more information than you would expect to see in a brief book or movie review. Violation of laws may result in termination of your account.

Very reasonable. While I think that Leichenreiter may have stated his ideas in a harsh manner they do hold some merit. Consider the value to the community of havng a place where such discussion in-depth discussion was possible? Before I outline a more complex idea, is it something that would even be considered?
#4
MrCelsius
Oct 30, 2008 8:43:47 Oy, what a headache I see on the horizon. Either we segregate the forum into the 'haves' and the 'have nots', or we all play a silent guessing game about the magazine content. Sure, it'll be easy enough to set aside direct discussion of a feat or PP from the magazine, but what about CharOp builds that use exclusive content? If someone posts asking how a CO build can pull off Trick X and someone says '$Dragon_Feat does that.' how many persons involved will get suspended? What about class handbooks? Will they have to say '$Dragon_feat from Dragon #whatever is sky blue awesome! I can't tell you why, but you NEED IT for this build!'?

At the very least, this is going to lead to some aggravating situations. At its farthest extremity, I see a whole other set of boards being established just to keep verboten material separate from the unpaying masses, like having a whole cupboard of pots and pans kept separate for kosher cooking. This brings me back around to my original sentiment: Oy.
#5
mechascorpio
Nov 04, 2008 16:53:42 What's really funny is how Bill Slavicsek says in the latest Ampersand that what he's going to write about in this month's column is "secret and highly confidential", and that we're to be certain that we "only talk about this stuff with other Insiders".

I can't figure out if he's being facetious (because not only can we not discuss them in a specific fashion anyway, but we've never been told what the Secret Insider Handshake is), or if he's being serious.
#6
kythri
Nov 04, 2008 18:30:45 Am I going to get a spanking for telling my gaming group (who doesn't subscribe) what I read in the magazine?

Last I checked, it wasn't a violation of any law to discuss content, as long as the content wasn't being duplicated and distributed...
#7
seTiny
Nov 05, 2008 9:02:06 Here is another thread that Michelle posted in the D&Di General forum. In that thread Solice posted this to help clarify what they meant by the statement.

The purpose of this statement is to keep people from whole-sale copy/pasting of the articles. If someone is walking a line in terms of giving away too much content, we will poke them to let them know.

This is not a witch hunt, we do not want to hamper discussion, but we also don't want to give away content that our subscribers are paying for.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax Oct 21, 2008 15:27:02	As a friendly reminder, the content of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines is subscriber-only and is covered by intellectual property and other laws. Please be respectful of other users when discussing this content. No spoilers, please! As a rule of thumb, do not copy or disclose more information than you would expect to see in a brief book or movie review. Violation of laws may result in termination of your account.
#2 drjug Oct 21, 2008 15:44:31	lol
#3 Obsidianjaerc Oct 22, 2008 13:47:03	As a friendly reminder, the content of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines is subscriber-only and is covered by intellectual property and other laws. Please be respectful of other users when discussing this content. No spoilers, please! As a rule of thumb, do not copy or disclose more information than you would expect to see in a brief book or movie review. Violation of laws may result in termination of your account. Very reasonable. While I think that Leichenreiter may have stated his ideas in a harsh manner they do hold some merit. Consider the value to the community of havng a place where such discussion in-depth discussion was possible? Before I outline a more complex idea, is it something that would even be considered?
#4 MrCelsius Oct 30, 2008 8:43:47	Oy, what a headache I see on the horizon. Either we segregate the forum into the 'haves' and the 'have nots', or we all play a silent guessing game about the magazine content. Sure, it'll be easy enough to set aside direct discussion of a feat or PP from the magazine, but what about CharOp builds that use exclusive content? If someone posts asking how a CO build can pull off Trick X and someone says '$Dragon_Feat does that.' how many persons involved will get suspended? What about class handbooks? Will they have to say '$Dragon_feat from Dragon #whatever is sky blue awesome! I can't tell you why, but you NEED IT for this build!'? At the very least, this is going to lead to some aggravating situations. At its farthest extremity, I see a whole other set of boards being established just to keep verboten material separate from the unpaying masses, like having a whole cupboard of pots and pans kept separate for kosher cooking. This brings me back around to my original sentiment: Oy.
#5 mechascorpio Nov 04, 2008 16:53:42	What's really funny is how Bill Slavicsek says in the latest Ampersand that what he's going to write about in this month's column is "secret and highly confidential", and that we're to be certain that we "only talk about this stuff with other Insiders". I can't figure out if he's being facetious (because not only can we not discuss them in a specific fashion anyway, but we've never been told what the Secret Insider Handshake is), or if he's being serious.
#6 kythri Nov 04, 2008 18:30:45	Am I going to get a spanking for telling my gaming group (who doesn't subscribe) what I read in the magazine? Last I checked, it wasn't a violation of any law to discuss content, as long as the content wasn't being duplicated and distributed...
#7 seTiny Nov 05, 2008 9:02:06	Here is another thread that Michelle posted in the D&Di General forum. In that thread Solice posted this to help clarify what they meant by the statement. The purpose of this statement is to keep people from whole-sale copy/pasting of the articles. If someone is walking a line in terms of giving away too much content, we will poke them to let them know. This is not a witch hunt, we do not want to hamper discussion, but we also don't want to give away content that our subscribers are paying for.