Paired Resources Issue

[HappyCockroach]

It would be nice if in THW were implemented a system that makes this possible: (in order of priority)

• Shared Resource: Resources made by more than 1 user from THW appears in the resource profile of each of them
• Shared Reputation gift: Rep given to a resource made by more than 1 hive user is given to each of them. (If you can't spread more than 1 rep at this time, it is given to the user shown first.)

That's all, I guess. It's not that big of a deal, but sounds fair to me.
It would be nice that those big group maps showed in all the members' profiles also

 

[Boris_Spider]

I would be in support of this. Crabby_Spider and myself make all of our resources together. Generally we upload in accordance to whoever came up with the concept. (Not true for one of our maps, as he hadn't created an account here yet)

There are enough other resources made by multiple users, most of them being maps.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Revilo]

And it would encourage more modeling/texturing partnerships.

 

[Deolrin]

I support this, definitely! I have lots of resources I made in collaboration with 2D artists.

 

[Grey Nightmare]

This is actually an amazing idea, I'd love to see it in thw 2.0! (or sooner, if it's possible!)

 

[-Peper-]

I want IT!

 

[Linaze]

Your first point is valid, but your second one seems to be about rep, so meh.

 

[HappyCockroach]

Your first point is valid, but your second one seems to be about rep, so meh.

meh indeed
the second one is just for the sake of making everything equal to both authors
but I do care about resources showing in both profiles

 

[Linaze]

I don't think systems should be designed around rep-whoring artists, but why do I care?

 

[Goolygot]

I love this idea, and I hope it will be made.

 

[M0rbid]

I support this. In fact, both of the points, but with high priority on the first one!

 

[Zealon]

I support this. In fact, both of the points, but with high priority on the first one!

I agree with Morbids statment.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

I support the idea of having resources show up on each and every one of the contributing users' profile.

 

[D a w n]

That idea isn't new. That's why I wonder why it wasn't implemented yet

 

[Ironside]

I support both ideas, it's something that should be done.

 

[Miss_Foxy]

I support this, it's way more fair.

 

[Ralle]

Resource sharing is a good idea. But when you think about it. Everything could be shared, posts and threads as well. Where is the limit?

 

[D a w n]

resources should be the limit

 

[HappyCockroach]

Resource sharing is a good idea. But when you think about it. Everything could be shared, posts and threads as well. Where is the limit?

I agree with DonDustin, since resources show on the profile, so they're the most relevant to be shared.

but is it hard to implement?
i don't know shit about vbulletin and html, etc etc, but I believe that everything that should be done is replacing the 'Author' value that each resource have (that is in a string-like format) to a "string group" and separate them by a slash or 'and'

 

[General Frank]

Yeah, I also always asked why the secondary author is not click-able.
The way that Happy advised would be the best.

 

[Scythy Dervish]

I support this

so nobody needs GIANT-POSTS to ask for rep for the other modelers/texturers

 

[Boris_Spider]

Resource sharing is a good idea. But when you think about it. Everything could be shared, posts and threads as well. Where is the limit?

I don't see a reason for sharing posts and threads.
Resources however, are often worked on by two or more people. While they list each other in credits, only one is 'viewed' as uploader/owner. THW is all about providing access to resources. If you're using something, and would like to see who made it and what else that user has made, you only see what that user has uploaded. You don't see anything else s/he helped with unless you stumble onto a resource which states such.

While the current system may be fine for projects led entirely by one individual, there are cases where maps are co-made in all respects. There is no primary member. I'm not saying contributers should be given credit, but co-authors.

As far as the rep is concerned, rather than split the rep between multiple users, why not add full rep amount to each user? Ordinarily one person would get up to 4 rep, why not allow each user to gain amount given? It's just rep, it doesn't signify much, and it doesn't grant anything special.

//\\oo//\\

 

[The World Is Flat]

I could see a reason for sharing threads with co-authors of a dev project so they could individually go in and add images and edit content, in the same way happy said. ITs a pain of somones off for a week and you want to upload images, and you have to pester somone else to do it.

Maps are another good example, all art, packs ect.

With packs, people could make ultimate packs of similar resources together, or whatever the hell happpens.

Repsharing is fine too, if there are people who like rep, then let them have it, it doesent cost us anything.

 

[Hemske]

The first suggestion is all fine, and would make a fine addition to the site in my opinion.
The repsharing could need some tweaking though. If the rep would be shared that way Happy suggested, the second author of a paired resource would never get any rep at all from the people who give 1 rep. And that isn't really "sharing". I guess both authors could get the rep instead.

I personally don't really care about how the rep should be distributed between the both parts, but some users will care, and if we implement this paired resource system without any kind of repsharing, those people will go nuts and spam the forum with useless threads, whining about not getting their rep.

 

[Ralle]

I think all this could fit somewhat in the notion of creating a project. It'd be nice for people to be able to create a project, add members, write threads, whole-pages, links. Like a myproject.hiveworkshop.com where all the project stuff goes, and everyone I add become moderators and the project itself can get ratings and what not.

 

[The World Is Flat]

But would that be taxing? all projects getting their own subdomain and moderators/pages threads? like mini-hosted projects?

 

[Deolrin]

Eh, Ralle, I think that's going too far. All we ever wanted(afaik) is that a modeler and a skinner can submit a model together.

 

[The World Is Flat]

But its not a bad idea when you think about it, but it is a bit far out there..

Somthing like a single thread where the creator had priviledges to add thread owners or somthing...

 

[Goolygot]

But we already have something like that, but only a few forums are there. It is the hosted project. http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/warcraft-iii-hosted-projects-93/

 

[The World Is Flat]

Yes we know.

 

[Mr. Bob]

I think all this could fit somewhat in the notion of creating a project. It'd be nice for people to be able to create a project, add members, write threads, whole-pages, links. Like a myproject.hiveworkshop.com where all the project stuff goes, and everyone I add become moderators and the project itself can get ratings and what not.

Actually, thats a good idea. Just set up a basic application form (or something like that) to see what projects need to be allowed. That way you don't end up with a thousand failing projects weighing down the server.

But that would be incredibly useful for project development and all that crap.

 

[The World Is Flat]

Yes, like i said, it is a good idea...
There should be an expiration perod on projects not meeting a certain post quota per month.

 

[Jaret]

I think all this could fit somewhat in the notion of creating a project. It'd be nice for people to be able to create a project, add members, write threads, whole-pages, links. Like a myproject.hiveworkshop.com where all the project stuff goes, and everyone I add become moderators and the project itself can get ratings and what not.

This is actually a really great idea! Just like deviantart has for profiles:
Profilenamehere.deviantart.com. I like this idea a lot.

 

[The World Is Flat]

I've suggested this before, but ya, that is somthing we should do.

 

[shamanyouranus]

This is actually a really great idea! Just like deviantart has for profiles:
Profilenamehere.deviantart.com. I like this idea a lot.

Dear God no. dA has such a horrible layout and profile system. There's no way we're gonna implement that shit.

Anyway, I don't understand why we're blowing this so out of proportion. We're talking about paired resources. How did we get to paired threads and projects and profiles and fiddler crabs.

 

[Kuhneghetz]

HappyCockroach's layout idea is way better.

 

[The World Is Flat]

were not saying make it like dA's.

 

[Jaret]

Dear God no. dA has such a horrible layout and profile system. There's no way we're gonna implement that shit.

Anyway, I don't understand why we're blowing this so out of proportion. We're talking about paired resources. How did we get to paired threads and projects and profiles and fiddler crabs.

Dude... I just said for the links... You so overreact. The layout and style should stay the same way as they are now. And that's only for sub-groups. Hmm, now that i think of it, Maybe when clicking the maps link to the upper-left, you could get to maps.hiveworkshop.com, click icons, get to icons.hiveworkshop.com, and so on...

 

[Deolrin]

Uhh... Just a question. Why? :/

 

[HappyCockroach]

The resource thread/post don't even need to be posted by both users (as for showing on 'threads created by who') nor does it NEED to be editable/updateable by both users (althought it would be good)
sharing the post or the thread is another department

what I'm essentially suggesting is showing the resource posted by one of the authors in both/all resource profiles.

 

[Boris_Spider]

The resource thread/post don't even need to be posted by both users (as for showing on 'threads created by who') nor does it NEED to be editable/updateable by both users (althought it would be good)
sharing the post or the thread is another department

what I'm essentially suggesting is showing the resource posted by one of the authors in both/all resource profiles.

I argue for this case as well.

Threads shouldn't be shared, editing should be allowed for all co-authors, and it should be listed as a resource submitted by all co-authors.

Co-authors and contributors are different. Co-authors are responsible for designing all aspects of the resource and do so. Contributors help with ideas and some execution. The best example of this I have is maps, where contributors make models/spells utilized by the map, but have no other connection to it.

//\\oo//\\

 

[The World Is Flat]

Threads, resoures, even projects should be shared.

This is a mapping site, it needs support and functionality for map development, not just resources.

It makes sense to support multiple thread owners, ralles suggested project system makes perfect sense from a functionality standpoint on this site, which is based around map development. Resources are developed for use in maps, while in may ways it is an art site, its core purpouse is to support mapping, and these are useful tools in mapping, i've been dying for things like these for ages, it would be very helpful for development.

if theres good reason NOT to do it, such as server load or somthing like that, then lets stay away from it, but if ther isnt, ralle's idea is good. I can't see why not to do it for threads and projects aswell.

 

[Ralle]

Consider maps then.
Would a co-author be able to update the map?
Would the only purpose of a co-author be the fact that he is listed next to the author as an equivalent author?
What functionality?

 

[Deolrin]

A co-owned should be treated as though as he owns the thread. He should have all the privileges the original owner has.

 

[Raven0]

I agree, two people who create a map, model, or other resource together should be able to share the thread containing that resource. Both should be able to edit the thread and update the resource, both should get rep from the thread, and both should have the resource shown in their profile.

I also think this should work for more than two people. Take D3W for example, that map was created by like 5 people but Cloudwolf is really the only one who gets credit for it. The entire development team of that project should have control of that thread.

The same should be true if multiple people work on a model together. Some people can model but they can't texture or animate well so they get other people to do those aspects of the model. Thread control, credit, and the profile listing should be shared among everyone who worked on the model.

Obviously there would have to be some sort of moderator approval process for thread containing multiple authors so there would be no abuses.