the thing is all repo anims are f2e
so you can just reference the original credit.txt, after you have edited the animation. you dont need to ask perms in order to edit a repo anim, you only need to credit them. That’s the whole point of the f2e tag
2 Likes
Lose the attitude. No one is obligated to respond to you in whatever you determine is a “timely manner”. Some people are on daily, some people are on monthly.
There is no misjudgement here, this is a clear lack of care for the predesignated rules. You knew you needed to get permission due to it not being posted in the repository, but their own thread.
You knew you didn’t have it. And you decided to go about it regardless.
Don’t try and redirect the conversation, this had nothing to do with the repository outside of the fact that you ended up posting the result in it.
The sprite in question is here. Not in a repository thread.
6 Likes
I’m sorry. I wasn’t trying to have an attitude. I have already removed the animation as requested.
2 Likes
Em… so yes, to address one thing here.
“Some folders are a mess”
Yes. Yes they are. A major chunk of the repo is very old stuff. Assets that were created in the early days on FE hacking. Some never had credit attached. Some were made by people that have long left the community without any way to contact them nowadays. I’d love nothing else but to have everything neatly categorised. But in some places, it is not possible.
However, if you see such an asset and KNOW how it should be credited, or have ANY way of contacting the creators, please, by all means do notify.
And yes - animations are F2E, everything else is F2U unless stated otherwise. I tried to add the [F2E] tags to a bunch of portraits recently to reinforce this, and I’m thankful to everyone that dm’d me about it. But alas - read the above. Sometimes there’s a random slice that I feel should be F2E but there’s absolutely no way of confirming it. So it stays in a limbo.
15 Likes
So basically we’ve been discussing about the repository when the problem was the animation was only posted on a personal thread.
Though i guess it’s still insightful commentary on how to improve the crediting system in the repo.
6 Likes
I’m always amazed how, regardless how many years pass, this place continues to be one of the most un-friendly forums I know of.
Sometimes I just can’t help but laugh. Thanks for the chuckle!
14 Likes
I beg to differ this is not Alice’s first time doing this if my memory serves me right (no offence Alice it is what it is ). Yes it is harsh but people wont know the severity of things they do unless you are harsh sometimes. Plus imagin having to say same thing time and again, it becomes annoying.
3 Likes
I’m not defending Alice’s actions, but your memory does not serve you right.
8 Likes
Then its my bad I apologies, but still i do remember her getting into beef with mods often way back must be another reason then
8 Likes
Think there was a curfufle with editing some mugs for comms, though If i remember correctly it was f2e, just had minimal modifications which rolled into a whole discussion about whether or not f2e mugs can be used in a comm context, how much edits is justifiable for it to be a comm and stuff.
5 Likes
Dancer could be more professional, regardless of how annoying it is I feel site mods have a responsibility to act professional in disputes, if someone goes to a restaurant and destroys a table that doesn’t make it ok for the chef to yell at and slap that person, of course you can be kicked out or bared but in that scenario the chef’s actions are unnecessary and reflect poorly on them.
What Alice did was stupid, really stupid she obviously should have waited for smirks to respond or asked site staff or even other site members to clarify the rules first but to say she didn’t assume it was ok to animate stills based on a misunderstanding and instead imply she acted either maliciously and/or knowingly is frankly assumptive and bad faith sometimes people misremember rules or just think something’s within the rules when it isn’t
Perhaps she asked even if she didn’t believe she needed to, just to be nice? that is a thing people do see Weird Al who always asks for permission to make parodies or people who still ask for their in-law’s blessing to marry, despite not needing to.
Now I don’t speak for Alice, nor do i think she was in the right here, but this post is not measured.
I concede that Dancer’s interpretation with just her comments on FEU is more Valid but as a mod Dancer should consider this possibility when making public statements, presenting the worst possibility is not nice and can make other users view the individual poorly, regardless of how justified it is, as a mod Dancer represents the site as such he has heightened responsibility to speak neutrally and clearly with no sass or uncertain terms when addressing issues to make sure these kinds of things don’t happen.
further more the fact Dancer responded after the issue was mostly resolved, seemingly in part to “um aktually” Alice on rules after many others told her she was wrong, and she conceded, and apologized comes off a bit childish.
I agree that clarifying the origin of the post and the issues is important, based on his post I think Dancer agrees, I think he should have DM’d Alice or spoken about it less like an epic own post style, I say as someone who has made a few of those.
Last note, this isn’t Alice redirecting, she was explaining her [frankly baffling] reasoning for thinking it was ok to make the animation. she even says it was wrong in the second post.
It was also after OTHER USERS had began talking about repo policy, so even from that angle it’s not changing the topic either.
[Tbh this is a case of FE fans can’t read, it was mentioned earlier that Smirk’s still is from another thread Alice could have been more clear though when responding]
In short I agree with Dancer broadly but dude seriously this post is bad.
Like you could have said something like this:
“I’d like to make it clear that the still in question came from the artist (Smirk)'s creative thread, further more Alice already asked for permission however, she posted the animation before receiving said permission.
[LINK TO THREAD AND POST QUOTE]
Furthermore you should understand Repo and site rules are different, site rules are clear that you can’t use someone else’s work broadly
[POST ONLY YOUR OWN STUFF SITE RULES QUOTE]
These rules are clear and apply to ALL Assets even those that are close to, or reskins of Vanilla ones”
And it’d be a million times better Levin’s responses were better like this, concise and appropriately worded for the issue and for someone in his position.
To be clear I’m not saying you need to be robotic modbot 5000, you can have fun and be human, but when commenting on user behavior or site issues, concise, clear, well worded statements are better for the community and the site’s image.
11 Likes
My god, a mod decides to enforce the rules and everyone gets bent out of shape. Did she get permission to post it? No, than she shouldn’t of posted it. It’s quite than simple.
2 Likes
It’s probably fair to assume someone posting in the forums read the rules.
5 Likes
can we just, idk, move on from this debacle?
3 Likes
Bit odd that this is “the” thread for any issues like this, when I think this time the issue isn’t even related immediately to the repo.
The problem wasn’t that person took an animation still from the repo that’s just f2u but that they took it directly from an artist’s thread. The debacle’s only here because it’s submitted to the repo thread.
I also agree a bit with furious haunter. I think DM’s a better place to remind or enforce cite policy instead of a public thread. I’m pretty sure there was an instance where an animation wasn’t up to policy and the animator was given a shot to edit the animation and resubmit it through dms.
4 Likes
exactly!
not what I said please read things before you complain
my point was that I AGREE with dancer on the core issue but he could have worded it better if it needed to be public or calmly talked about it in DMs instead.
Fair, I was more thinking of it as she interpreted the rules in a way where it was ok to make/post the animation without explicit permission*, and asked out of kindness, but that’s rather unimportant since well she shouldn’t have made/posted the animation before getting permission.
My argument was that Dancer’s supposition was while the most likely one not the only possibility and as a mod he should have been more impartial
*based on this post this is what Alice seems to have believed
Also as a side note my main issue with Dancer’s hostility is that the situation was dealt with, if he wanted to clarify stuff he could of in a better way, he also misread Alice’s explanation as changing the subject when it clearly wasn’t, he spread missinfo in a clarification post.
11 Likes
Sorry to distract from whatever discussion is going on, but Chrome is giving me a warning whenever I hit the ‘download’ button on battle animations in the repository. Is anyone else getting this?
7 Likes
that’s normal Github just be like that, if you’re worried scan for viruses with windows defender [anti-virus of choice] after download
3 Likes
and i also get a error server failure or wrong url when i try to download a battle animation, what do?
Sometimes, GitHub can lead you to a wrong url; you can kinda try clicking the url to download the animation. I encountered a similar issue before, I tried to click the download button again and it worked. I think the problem was because of the third-party download thingy since it both compresses the folder and downloads it. cmiiw tho
Related to Alice’s things, I want to clarify several things.
- Alice was posting the animation on a thread in FEUniverse website. So technically, FEU rules still apply even though we are talking for repo assets. Repo anims policy will only apply in the repository website and should not be considered as to nullify the policy in FEU; which means animations which are NOT hosted in the repo should be considered as NOT F2U/F2E. Animations in repo will adhere to repo’s policy (and yes, animations in the repo are F2E).
- The reason I brought this up was it was originally a still and not an animation package. Just like what Contro said, the animation still was hosted on Smirks’s thread and there was no indicator about F2U/F2E in Smirks’s thread. Similar to portrait edits (splices nor customs); stills should not be considered as “F2U/F2E by default” so please always assume all creative works as not F2U/F2E by default unless clearly stated otherwise.
- Coincidentally, Alice mentioned that the still is an edit from a vanilla animation. Regardless of the work was originally from a vanilla animation or not, people should or maybe must respect the work because even then; the edit is still an original effort from the artist themselves and are considered their intellectual property. And so, please refrain from using someone else’s work without their permission.
I hope this post can answer question both asked and unasked. If you have more questions about the rules, please read the rules thread here. And if you still even have more questions after reading it, feel free to reach me via DM.
Thank you!
12 Likes