GateWorld 2.0: Official Discussion Thread

[tiamut]

You know whats so great about that, they were designed by the SAME PERSON! I dont think that people get that.

Believe me, I GOT it. That's why I asked about an intentional coordination of all sites. But, as I pointed out, down the road, there will be people NOT knowing that, and it does open up both sites to accusations of rip-offs.

I think the design should have the designer's fingerprints on it, myself.

So do I. But (shrugs) I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between Scifi World and Gateworld right now.

As I stated before, I know the amount of work that goes into designing this sites. I'm just. . . disappointed.

[Wallpaperman]

So do I. But (shrugs) I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between Scifi World and Gateworld right now.

As I stateted before, I know the amount of work that goes into designing this sites. I'm just. . . disappointed.

Well, I did my best to make a difference, but maybe as being all my works I can see BIG differences that can maybe not been perceived by all.
Maybe, being partner websites, it isn't so bad to look "similar", that could be a sign of recognition of being part of a network.

Well, this said, I will try to do my best in the next headers to make them look different in a way or another ...

[Adria]

So do I. But (shrugs) I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between Scifi World and Gateworld right now.

As I stateted before, I know the amount of work that goes into designing this sites. I'm just. . . disappointed.

if you don;'t like it to bad there was a thread asking for suggestion a while back

[tiamut]

if you don;'t like it to bad there was a thread asking for suggestion a while back

I am expressing opinions and concerns. Just like every one else here. I don't recall that Gateworld has an express rule that says one MUST agree with popular opinion in order to post here.

As for the suggestion thread, gee, you're right. I should have been able to read the minds of Darren and the others on the design team, and imnmediately posted the suggestion, "Don't make it look so much like Scifi World that people will think you ripped them off."

Yah, sure, you betcha.

[Darren]

All opinions are welcome.

The discussion is fairly moot, though. For the first couple of design iterations, my first comment to Gilles was "It looks too much like Sci Fi World." It was certainly at the forefront of our mind. How well we executed is, in the final analysis, a matter of personal opinion.

[Lord Zedd]

For those of you that constantly ask when the Forum will adapt that visual look, too, Darren has said numerous times that it will be done later this year.

If Darren would approve, I would like to try to create a skin for GateWorld. But than I need to know a part of the code. I made my own skin on the Stargate Omega forum. What you think of it ? Perhaps you want also new buttons ? So Darren would you let me know if I may try?

[Tiret]

Well, I did my best to make a difference, but maybe as being all my works I can see BIG differences that can maybe not been perceived by all.
Maybe, being partner websites, it isn't so bad to look "similar", that could be a sign of recognition of being part of a network.

Well, this said, I will try to do my best in the next headers to make them look different in a way or another ...

I say, if it looks good, don't sweat the similarities. An artist's work is generally recognizable. Mine is. What's the big deal? I can't believe that people would complain someone ripped off or "stole" a design style. Actors, writers, directors, artists...they all borrow from and build off one another. That's how these great styles evolve with time. A certain "look" becomes popular and gets fleshed out in all its possibilites by different artists picking it up and tweaking it with their own flavor and uses. Even better if you're the one who originates a certain style or "perfects" it. But anyways, I think you're doing an awsome job on these sites and I wouldn't make any drastic changes unless you yourself are worried about becoming redundant. I leave that to your own discretion. You've got a good thing going here, and I look forward to seeing more of your work. Great Job! To all artists in general: I say, if you can visually pull it off...you're entitled to use any look or style combination you can come up with.

[Wallpaperman]

Actually, after my first website "Staragte Ultimate" (may rest in peace :-p ), I saw numbers of other new websites using parts of my artworks, or using the same color scheme, same style, etc ... but as Bruce Woloshyn said "copying is the sincerest form of flattery"

BTW, I think I'm becoming a bit redundant, but let's see how I can evolve ...

[Darren]

_Anubis, I don't think it would be worth the time and effort at this point. The new forum skin will conform to the new site design, and I don't have any plans to offer a choice of skins.

Beyond that, I think that the bulk of the work for me may actually lie in implementing / integrating the new design.

[Lord Zedd]

_Anubis, I don't think it would be worth the time and effort at this point. The new forum skin will conform to the new site design, and I don't have any plans to offer a choice of skins.

Beyond that, I think that the bulk of the work for me may actually lie in implementing / integrating the new design.

Of course I would do the exact thing ! Making the forum skin conform with the new site design. That was my plan. But I'll guess I'll leave it up to you.

[tiamut]

What's the big deal? I can't believe that people would complain someone ripped off or "stole" a design style.

Umm. . . that little "c" in a circle? You know, the one that looks like this - "©"? It's called a "copyright"? You can see it at the bottom of Gateworld's pages, followed by a couple of dates, and the words ""All rights reserved."

That says that people can complain about someone ripping off, aka "stealing" intellectual property--whether it is writing, painting, music, or a "design style". And people DO make a "big deal" out of it. http://community.livejournal.com/stop_plagiarism


And while that isn't the case here, I do know of several authors who are getting tired of explaining that they didn't plagerize themselves.

[PG15]

Slight nit-pick guys, the episode "Reckoning" is misspelled (both parts) on the pics that introduce each episode page:

http://www.gateworld.net/sg1/s8/816.shtml

It's spelled "Recknoning" in that pic.

[Lord Zedd]

If I read a couple of posts here it bothers me that they don't like the new site because it was designed by Wallpaperman. TSW and GW are not the same. They don't look the same. It is just being build by the same guy. Now I happen to know him ! And he does a wonderfull job. So you should be greatfull he does it because it ain't easy building a webdesign ! We have a saying here in Belgium. "De beste stuurlui staan aan wal." It has to do with the crew of boats. The best ones are always off shore ! The clue is that it is always the people who do nothing are the ones who are complaining. So the ones who don't like the site should back off ! The site is there. It is great ! Most of the people like it. Darren obviously likes it ! And Gilles did a wonderfull job !!!

[Tiret]

Umm. . . that little "c" in a circle? You know, the one that looks like this - "©"? It's called a "copyright"? You can see it at the bottom of Gateworld's pages, followed by a couple of dates, and the words ""All rights reserved."

That says that people can complain about someone ripping off, aka "stealing" intellectual property--whether it is writing, painting, music, or a "design style". And people DO make a "big deal" out of it. http://community.livejournal.com/stop_plagiarism

I know about copyright. The thing is, where does it end? I mean, how do you "define" a design style down to an exact line that people can cross? For certain, one man painted the Mona Lisa, and lots of people have copied it, but I've never even heard of people getting upset about that. The original retains it's almost ridiculous "mystique," and is worth more in its popularity than so many other things that are never copied. But anyhow, that is one particular "piece." Do people actually get in trouble just for "imitating," say, Picasso's style? Aren't there plenty of cases where this is done on purpose? (Including in film?) Shouldn't everyone get to enjoy in some way, the fruit of an artist's labor? Isn't "incorporation" a compliment, in a way? And can you divide art & craft from itself so that it never builds upon what came before?

I do know what you're referring to, but I also do think that people get carried away with the "copyright" issue. I just don't hear about all the cases where it actually helps someone, maybe. But as they say, there's "nothing new under the sun," and there are only so many notes you can use to use to write a piece of music. You're bound to always be making something similar to something that somebody made somewhere! So I must ask you, where do you draw the line? And can you really legislate something like that? It's hard even to describe a person's "style" in words, and come anything near "concise"...so just whose "eyes" get to determine for us when something is too close to a particular look? I mean it...whose?

Now when it's an issue of two works in the same context, and the case of one party obviously trying to play "parasite" off others' success (really, trying to dodge the risk of coming up with something unique themselves) and "stealing word for word," as it were...in that case I can shake my head along with you and say, "That copying was in poor taste." But still, "intellectual property" is a sticky word, and I personally have qualms with it. I'm afraid it's impractical...and easily abused. I worry that the "copyright" issue has a tendency become a terrible nuisance and a restrictive presence in art (if it hasn't become that already)...and is barely really worth the trouble to achieve the intended benefit. I say this as an artist, who plans on making a living in the entertainment industry. But maybe I'm just not seeing the silver lining to the cloud.

Just in case you're thinking it: I am not a big "copy-cat." I do borrow from others occasionally, but mostly I try to be unique, and even when I do borrow I always put my own spin on things -- as a matter of inner compulsion. But who even knows? Someday, somewhere, someone may accuse me of "copyright infringement," when some person comes along and "sees too many similarities" between something I made and something someone else did. I wouldn't get that hysterical about it if someone copied after me...it can be annoying, yes, but the only thing that would truly bother me would be if someone were to steal a concept that I had in the works, and then "slip" their version in ahead of mine. I would call that stealing...intentional stealing of an opportunity. But I veer off topic, perhaps.

I guess I'm just ill at ease with "copyright." Maybe because it's never done anything to help me personally, and I can't help but recall that, for better or worse, it didn't used to be such a big deal. For thousands of years, we had nothing like "copyright laws." Our present idea of copyright is actually a very modern concept, from what I understand. It does its best to protect the individual artist's livelihood, but how often does it hinder instead of help artists in general? Or the people merely trying to appreciate art? (I guess my experiences with choir music have already scarred me as far as that goes.) The cold, strict, monetary way in which the rich material of art is sometimes treated...I'll admit, it's enough to make me squirm just a tiny bit at the word "copyright." But then, maybe I'm just too idealistic. Maybe you could point out lots of benefits to the copyright laws, I don't know. It just doesn't sit right with me for some reason. And I would never slight an artist...I consider myself to be among the creative, after all. But something about the system doesn't sit right with me.

So anyhow, I guess since I've never done a proper study on the subject, my opinion doesn't carry that much weight...and we could possibley argue all day long about the pros and cons of "intellectual property" laws. But we may never persuade one another...and especially since I can only sum up my arguement with: There must be a better way! But I hope I haven't come across as rude...I tend to worry about that when I get on a "soap-box" rant. Your reply did take me aback there a bit. (I obviously know what the little "c" means. ) But I meant no harm, I just had to say it for once: I don't really think the current state of copyright is making the world a friendlier place.


...as an afterthought, maybe that's why I like "acting." They haven't yet figured out a way to accuse actors of copying off of one another (which they do constantly!) Good! Because we thrive on that...or maybe, just maybe, it's that nobody cares? They can't see any way around it, or perhaps people realize that every Hamlet is different, and they shouldn't sweat the similarities...

[David]

Slight nit-pick guys, the episode "Reckoning" is misspelled (both parts) on the pics that introduce each episode page:

http://www.gateworld.net/sg1/s8/816.shtml

It's spelled "Recknoning" in that pic.

Crap, I did not see that. I will fix those later today!