Question of the century: why is it not allowed to discuss deprotecting?

[Mechanical Man]

I have seen protected singleplayer maps.

The.fuck

That is selfish, if it is a popular multiplayer map I understand but otherwise.. fuck you if you protect maps.

Yeah thats pretty retarded. Multiplayer is at some point understandable, also you must be constantly updating it, otherwise will end like an unplayable garbage anyway, so it forces the creator to be active. But in singleplayer, the creator can dump it, maybe active for a month to fix most gamebreaking bugs and then he can leave it. However with time more bugs are discovered, new versions of the game coming up that can break map/campaign and if it's protected no one can fix it (I'm looking at you, Helldoom) and the product can no longer be in approved section.

 

[deepstrasz]

However with time more bugs are discovered, new versions of the game coming up that can break map/campaign and if it's protected no one can fix it (I'm looking at you, Helldoom) and the product can no longer be in approved section.

Yeah, with the next patch, I have to set my Mana Shield spell to 2 again so it won't break gameplay for what I'm working on...

 

[Rui]

@Kyrbi0 that's actually what @VGsatomi always said all along

otherwise will end like an unplayable garbage anyway

Not sure what matter you're speaking of. Unplayable I'll condone, due to the instability brought about by recent patches. But outdated maps don't become garbage just because time passes by. One example is the map already mentioned here: "LotR: Battle for Middle Earth". The map was pretty much finished at version 2.5 in 2006, and it was excellent. The update that followed (v3.1) was actually what ruined it.

 

[Mechanical Man]

I'm speaking about cases old like Darky's campaign, which couldn't be played anymore after 1.15 patch (I think), since they added some functionalities, from what I remember, they added new keywords in jass like lightning and some variables had this name which caused errors in the code. I don't know aftermath though.

 

[PurgeandFire]

It is an old rule. And pretty much all the major English-speaking modding sites enforced it (wc3c, TH, THW, wc3search). It had to do with culture and the impression you give off, more than actually preventing deprotection. When we tell people we don't support deprotection, that isn't going to stop them. They're going to just google it and carry on. But it makes our views on deprotection loud and clear, which in turn built trust and legitimacy throughout the site. And hopefully it guided others' to respect authors' decisions.

Now it is a different story. But my only hesitation with reverting the rule is the fallout, culturally. That's difficult to gauge. I guess my question is: what do you guys think we benefit from by allowing the discussion of deprotection? And a question for everyone: would having resources/support/tools for deprotection change your opinion of the Hive?

 

[Rui]

@Mechanical Man If I recall correctly, you needed to open up the campaign in the campaign editor. Then, I don't remember which, either save the entire campaign, or the maps one by one. I think the latter is true. This is a different matter from the subject at hand, though. Or is it possible to protect a campaign? Has anyone done it?

@PurgeandFire Speaking for myself, I never analyzed the question in terms of age, culture, or impressions. I respect and support map protection because I think people are entitled to their property, especially when that property is product of their hard work. It's a moral principle, one I'm glad society upholds. The question here is, does the Hive see it the same way?

If it doesn't, and prefers to help robbing others, then yes, it would indeed change my opinion. Not that my expectations are high regarding such issues, but it'd definitely change for worse.

 

[Spodacus]

Wouldn't the smart choice be to allow people to appeal to a specific person to deprotect maps, such as an old map that has ceased development, then have that specific person deprotect the map in order to avoid software distribution/know how distribution?

 

[Xonok]

First of all, most people should not be discussing this. If you haven't produced any major work, then you should not be the one deciding what to do with others' effort.

It would be nice if there was a way to fix old maps, but that's also a pretty fine line to walk. For instance, at one point I wanted to take over the development of GoU. I didn't get permission, probably because the author is entirely inactive. In cases like this there is a clear benefit to having someone able to deprotect stuff, but then again that also comes with a lot of responsibility.
What if the original author would rather let their project die than let anyone else do it? If so, letting mods hand the project over to someone else would be detrimental and would drive off authors from the site.
I am against simply allowing free deprotection, even if we don't personally distribute those maps, because there are other sites that will. I am against it because if deprotection is too easy it will mean that the people taking over projects don't have to prove any kind of capability, so there would be a flood of bad and even more broken copies of those maps.
There might be some limited way that deprotection is good, such as to keep old projects alive. But if anyone on the staff can just freely give away that right, then that changes things a lot for us. It would mean that whatever you upload is no longer yours, because someone else can just decide to give it away once you stop updating it.

Thus, I don't think deprotection should be discussed here in most cases, because in most cases it really is just lazy people not willing to put in the effort. However, I also think there should be a way to fix existing maps if given permission by the staff. This would be limited to fixes only, because just handing the project over can go against the author's wishes.
If only for fixes, it would be fine, but then there's the question of difficulty. Properly protected maps can not be restored to a form that is as easy to update as the original, so it would take some serious willingness to fix the map. Chances are it would only be done for really popular maps, but then again those really popular maps usually don't get abandoned either.

If you just want to open up a map to learn, there are actually other way. Most of the time you can ask here on the forums and someone will explain how to achieve what you wanted. If it's something complicated, there might be specific people that know about them. For instance, there is this one person that knows how to make a UI out of units and make it work without lag in multiplayer.

All this said, it would be better if people ask the original author for permission and just deal with whatever the response is.

 

[chobibo]

One benefit I could think of is the improvement of already existing protection techniques. It's also not easy to deprotect maps so I doubt lazy people would be into the activity that much. Most likely they will beg other people who knows how to deprotect the map for them.

 

[GhostWolf]

You don't need to improve existing "protection" techniques. Nowadays they involve external DLLs and Lua, and you cannot open them in any way. People cried so much about the return bug allowing viruses with Jass, but the same people are fine with running corrupt maps that can so easily do the same.

Regardless, I thought the Hive community was about sharing and being open, i.e. a modding community, and not adding arbitrary rules about corrupting files, but seeing the general sentiment in all of the comments so far, I guess I was wrong.

 

[Rui]

I thought the Hive community was about sharing

It is. Just not about everything. Not your personal life or your house, for instance, but that's beside the point, which is: you get to decide what you share, and what you don't.

 

[disruptive_]

Because you need to have a clear (and preferably coherent among staff) stand on activities people carry out in your website that promise to upset others. Be it trolling, posting pornography or... deprotecting maps.

@disruptive_ you've nailed it with your first paragraph. "Selfish bastard" would, in fact, be a strawman.

Let me make it clear, though, that I do believe unprotecting is okay if the author is gone and it is certain (not straightforward when it is or not) the author is gone, and is not returning. Or doesn't care in case he is. Every other reason I've seen lacks validity. Free learning is one of them. There are plenty alternatives to looking into a map. You can even ask the author himself. Be it tips to implement your own system or resources you're looking for. I remember I once asked @NWG_Jonas or @lord_Turin for a copy of "Battle for Middle Earth", for example. It's a map I've played since 2005 and I wanted to create my own spinoff. It was denied to me. And I had to accept and respect their will. It's that simple.

In that post i just tried to make sense of this thread on a practical aspect. Under the "less deprotection policies" slogan there are some legitimate interests that could be discussed and that could potentially initiate a reformulation of the regulation, or even better, the creation of new programs, like contests, etc. I'm not an authority in this site, but i really had to atleast provide a, surprinsingly new and more practical, interpretation, because the thread had mostly abstract outlines.
But less deprotection restrictions in the end could be a tool to achieve these not so new interests, but also other kinds of tools (ie. you want to learn some specific map features? that's what the forums/spell sections are for). Less deprotection policy for it's own sake is exactly "regulation for it's own sake", something that simply doesn't happen. Unless time is suddenly worthless and actions don't have any meaning.
The thing is, if this issue is beign discussed, and has some importance right now ("question of the century", and 3 pages of different kinds of opinions), then MAYBE, just MAYBE (this is no sarcasm, i'm kind of new to this site), the current regulation and tools available don't cope up with all these not so new interests, or the value we are giving to each interest is disproportionated, let's say:

1.

Regardless, I thought the Hive community was about sharing and being open, i.e. a modding community, and not adding arbitrary rules about corrupting files, but seeing the general sentiment in all of the comments so far, I guess I was wrong.

v/s

2.

And I had to accept and respect their will. It's that simple.

The unrestricted respect of private interest v/s the public interest of social sharing and progress. Capitalism v/s Socialism? Freedom v/s Equality? Of course not. LOL.
But do the HIVE achieves a balance here? In general, i'm tempted to say that yes. What about the specific issue of maps and resources in general? I'm also tempted to say that there are healthy policies. Is there room for progress? This is the key in the end, and the answer is also yes.

In the end i became abstract myself so forgive me for that.

 

[Kyrbi0]

I'm very glad you have pointed out the distinct dialectical tension (or at least one of them) that lies at the heart of this debate; I think that's important.

Part of the question then becomes: Do we (as a community) like where we are currently? Do we (as a community) want to change?

Methinks a Site-wide Poll might be in order.

 

[deepstrasz]

Part of the question then becomes: Do we (as a community) like where we are currently? Do we (as a community) want to change?

What's there more to change? This is not general. It's a specific topic. I for one would not comply with popular demand just because democracy without proper reasoning.

 

[disruptive_]

If this thread can't help but turn abstract, it's because it has poor practicality or the subject is in fact abstract itself, at least right now.

You are also right, there are lots of interests, and we are limited in our time and possibilities, so only the more important ones should be taken care of. A proper practical reasoning should be atempted, before any action. On this reasoning, the real protagonists and the people that can provide more accurate insight, are those that have effective experience and responsability on the issue. Like you in fact.

A more useful thread name, in the practical aspect would be: "There are lots of maps that are casted unto the oblivion, what can we do to avoid this? Just to name a more concrete problem.

As i read my post again, what i really just did with some value worth mentioning, was just giving some vague sustenance for change and innovation (a possible outcome for all this).

So in the end, my opinion on all this issue, the "deprotection issue" is;
1. Is there an interest underlying this thread?
2. Is it worth our time and effort, giving the multitude of interests this community is actually dealing with, the personnel limitations and current resources, to even atempt to satisfy such interest?
3. Is it possible to satisfy reasonably well (let's define "well" tho) that interest with some of the tools and resources we have right now?

Keep in mind that all communities tend to petrify themselves for their own good/bad with their rules and such. There is inherent "conservativeness" in communities, a prejudice in favor of the "status quo". Is often just one guy/girl or group of people that initiates all the innovation alone (not only a vague idea, a proper execution), often having the burden of proof, on why changing things at all. If not for these people though, maybe we will still be painting bisons on caves, but also we will not be once in while in the verge of a freaking nuclear disaster or dealing with bullshit like facebook. I myself tend to welcome innovation almost blindly, specially in work, even if there is a current way of doing things effectively, but i'm aware that this not necessarily healthy or superior per se (as personal experience). I would be tempted to skip this phase altogether, discarding what we have in favor of something new.

Still, on this thread, people (including myself) didn't produce innovation at all regarding any of their interests, unless you are counting the consign "reduce the deprotection restrictions" without further elaboration or plan, or vague theories, as innovation.

What about using existing tools in different ways? That could result in innovation.
What about a "reproduce an ancient map polled by people and gain some green balls in the process" contest?. I'm aware that this kind of exists indirectly.
Tutorial section has some excellent information on general modding, but there could be a more direct nexus between that section and the recquest section. Not a forced "do what people like or don't use the forum", but rather some nice information here and there on what people like to learn so people that actually cares about that can help them better. The same could be said about Map Templates and recquest section.

 

[MeMeMe123]

If I read this next sentence in a post I'd probably be pissed, but since this thread already has 4 pages and long comments...

I barely read anything on this thread, but...

As for cheating, anyone motivated enough can do it. I found a forum (will not mention ofc) with instructions on how to add cheats without even fully deprotecting the map, and people with deprotection experience happy to do it for you).

Legally, map creators here do not own the copyright to their map - the disclaimers we agree to when installing are very clear on that. Personally, I get the desire to protect your map, not wanting to risk someone else taking credit for your hard work, or modifying it in a way that devalues your own work (e.x. by adding cheats)

But anyone motivated enough can deprotect a map. The ONLY thing that can't actually be done is reversing obfuscation I believe.

I don't think prohibiting talk about deprotection does much good in preventing it, but allowing it might make abuse all too easy (though with new users being moderated anyway, it might not happen all that often)

 

[Rui]

The unrestricted respect of private interest v/s the public interest of social sharing and progress. Capitalism v/s Socialism? Freedom v/s Equality? Of course not. LOL.

I wouldn't compare it to capitalism vs socialism; this is a website dedicated to a game. If an old map can't be recovered, it's sad. But one does not lose its life or life quality over it. Let's keep things in context.

Spoiler: unimportant

In everyday life, I find myself the sole defender of left-wing policies. Then I come to the Hive and defend positions that'd otherwise be liberal. Somehow it's the only occasion in which I find myself more liberal than anyone else. You guys must be really far-left, heh.

If this thread can't help but turn abstract

Not sure what you mean by this, but just because a question relates to principles/morals/ethics does not make it “abstract”. Your posture in life matters. What I've been trying to convey all along is: first and foremost, we have a cleavage of mores. My stand is: you own your property; you decide what portion of it you share; denying people this right for someone's hollow ambition is immoral. The majority disagrees. What is the Hive's stand?

Why's it important for us to know, you ask? Well, because a good negotiation attempts to satisfy all parties to the best extent possible. At the heart of satisfying all parties — or, rather, of even wanting to — is something very important called solidarity. The ability to place yourself in others' shoes, to feel for them. Life has shown me people, generally, are unable to do that. Not without going through stuff themselves. The majority here argues for deprotection, never having had their map, or other product of their hard work, stolen. I have, more than once. The fact perhaps you couldn't care less would be an example of my point. And, truly, a lot of people didn't.

It's my belief that solidarity and respect are the foundations of a healthy community. Once we all agree on that, instead of labeling “uncooperative” people as “selfish bastards”, then we can sit down once more, and start debating concrete measures (and turn the topic less “abstract”) that abide to the principles we agreed on. Otherwise, I'm wasting my time, as the outcome will hardly be anything better than objectionable. And that'll be due to an unsolved base issue.

 

[nedio95]

Methinks a Site-wide Poll might be in order.

Absolutely not.
"The best argument versus democracy is a 5 minute talk with an average voter."

A site-wide poll would be useful for something that nobody cares about (especially not Ralle & admins) and would not affect anything ground-breaking.

-Ned

 

[Kyrbi0]

Absolutely not.
"The best argument versus democracy is a 5 minute talk with an average voter."

A site-wide poll would be useful for something that nobody cares about (especially not Ralle & admins) and would not affect anything ground-breaking.

-Ned

Nutshell Rebuttal:
-A thread like this tends to continue to spiral into madness, rather than be able to definitively bring things to a conclusion.
-The issue is relatively binary, lending itself to a relatively simple FPTP Poll
-We need as wide as net as possible to be thrown.
-There are methods of ensuring a meaningful Poll (one easy way: delete any Votes that are not accompanied by a post in the Poll thread explaining the Vote.)

I think it's a good idea, and done right it can be useful to know Where The Site Stands on an issue.

How else would you propose to determine this?

 

[disruptive_]

The capitalism v/s socialism was some clearly pretentious line that just pop out of my mind while madly (think of the overly old german boy vide) writing that post. I don't even think that dicotomy exists in our social imaginary anymore, people just talk about it.

About abstraction or not, let me build this WALL of text.

Mexico is gonna pay for it

I think just discussing deprotection of it's own sake, or limitating the discussion on how each people is internally aligning with deprotection ("i think is good/bad/logically plausible w/e) is pure abstraction in the sense that is 1. a mere game of opinions, 2. a personal issue, and something that can change our inner convictions and overall stimulate our minds. I can't help but see this thread as game of human interests, a collective issue, something that can change the community, a reason to take immedite or atleast direct action.

Note that i tried to give some plausible (are they?) interests (learning, etc, but there could be more) that might or not (i just tried to see myself as a deprotector advocator and think on what i would get) be underlying on this issue. GhostWolf was the only deprotector advocator i think that gave some kind of interests, altough very general ("more sharing"). You could say that we got the "WHAT".

The only subject that can "act" for each and every (we, as mere individuals, all want to become the protagonist, but that is bullshit) human interest that you can think about is "the community" (be either your family, the classroom, this site, the Estate, the World), so mere opinions, justified with logic or ethical superiority, or not, will not help directly unto taking any action, hence that's why i called it abstract. You may only win in the realm of ideas i guess.
I'm pretty sure the authority here knows this all too well, in the end there is a lot of intellectual and moral relativism in politics and regulation, we want just to "function" after all, not becoming someone's omniscient and ideal "concept" of society. It's no wonder that those that are in politics, in the battlefield, are often more or less men and women of action, instead of raw intellectuals. They win in the tangible realm. They conquer.

We got the human interest thing. But "HOW" to satisfy those? And "HOW" to ponderate each and every one that exist with each other?. How to protect and respect the map authors will to protect it's LOAP2018withNudes.w3x masterpiece map, under its arbitrary conditions and overly pretentious exigencies (people can even deprotect it in the end, so why even bother, what you want to demonstrate to us map author?), while stimulating sharing among the users. But are these interests even contradictory actually? Can we, ie. stimulate sharing even more, or be more functional about sharing (read the final part of my previous post, the only thing worth mentioning) while protecting the personal will of people?. In the end all this is a matter of additional effort, as things are not that absolute and contradictory in the end. And if you continue including people interests, then even more people will be up to give that effort, as a self sustaining machine. I think the contest system here is a genius idea creating shared and efficient effort use among site moderators/authorities and the average "citizen".

As i see these things, i really think that the Hive achieves a decent balance (i said this also), but that's my opinion, and is also my opinion that, since your map is gonna be potentially deprotected, distributed, and even DESECRATED, then deprotecting in the end is a very worthless action, and in my life i hardly perform actions that won't result in something real, so instead of that i would just upload my map unprotected altogether, allowing people do whatever they want, i'm also aware that there are lots of people that are trustworthy and for me that totally compensates the fact that there is also miserable people. Then i will just live my life i guess. But that's me, and i won't even atempt to convince all of you.

All previosly said doesn't mean that people that complain about an issue are clueless (people that advocate protection can also look in the mirror here), in fact their apparent complains in form of absolute positions of "free the deprotection or die" or "gtfo deprotectors" that have an inherent interest in them, allows us to improve, to tinker with our existing resources, to develop even better rules, or to reinforce the existing foundations also, and in the end to channel efforts unto something more than an interchange of opinions. Ie. i don't have power here but, what about giving those deprotection advocators the responsability (formal or merely social) to make a catalog of deprotected (consented of course) maps and templates. The cost is a thread or a post, but also potential more work load for map reviewers, and the benefit are lots of useful information (for the thread starters also), at least, and maybe (surely) less uninformed deprotection atempts.

About a well directed Poll (they can tell you what people REALLY want, and not what you think they want, the truth may be terrible in the end but i'm pretty sure this can reduce bad expended efforts), i think the options have to be tinkered a bit. Those options are too general, and i'm even predicting (biased of course) that the status quo will express itself. We all love how things are just alright, but then we also love the delights of innovation and change.
Suddenly i'm became interested in the history of this site.

 

[nedio95]

The most use of a poll I see is to "Take your opinion in consideration", not to decide on anything, especially rules. If otherwise, the common result would be mostly anarchy.

-Ned