The General, Sirius and the community [discussion]

[Emily]

You make me laugh. Don't lie to yourself. You were selling additional features on your Emulator and blocking other people from creating free plugins for them features.

- IMG DELETED IN QUOTE -

I understand your point; though I'll take an example of a Patreon I support. There's a tier in which I get full support and some other features. Normal people can also enjoy the MOD but not as much as me as a Patreon. Now, let's say somebody takes the MOD and adds those Patreon features to it and releases it, would you still think that's a good thing? I can understand The General wanting a little money and thus 2 features are paid. I don't think there's anything wrong with that personally.

[Bradley]

You make me laugh. Don't lie to yourself. You were selling additional features on your Emulator and blocking other people from creating free plugins for them features.

In some form you must be able to uphold something but I don’t want to sound shifty or off here but when people post boxed pictures like this with no actual linking to the poster of that, it makes it tricky to tell whether that was actually posted by the person; although I’m sure it probably was.

In the end sales wasn’t made over the forum and It was made an optional feature. My other question is was these payments forced?

[Emily]

In some form you must be able to uphold something but I don’t want to sound shifty or off here but when people post boxed pictures like this with no actual linking to the poster of that, it makes it tricky to tell whether that was actually posted by the person; although I’m sure it probably was.

In the end sales wasn’t made over the forum and It was made an optional feature. My other question is was these payments forced?

I can confirm this is actually something posted by The General. But that's besides the point. Unless I recall incorrectly.

[The General]

Even if whatever you think is wrong, it does not justify you being a dick and stealing peoples work.

In the end, don't be a hypocrite.



To explain it once more:

I did NOT intend to build the camera. People BEGGED for it and offered money. So I made a perk part of the donation rewards. People were still free to use the PHP Camera.
If people donate to me or whoever in the world, it does not give them a license to be a dick without any repercussions.
If people pay me for a plugin for them to be build, it does not give them a license to be a dick.

Camera is now free. So whats your next crappy argument?

Stop hating, dont be a dick, get a life and just accept Arcturus is closed source. If you're going to continue your conquest why it is okay to steal and leech, please gtfo. You're just part of the toxic side. I'm trying to provide something for free and all you're doing is hating.

[Bradley]

Even if whatever you think is wrong, it does not justify you being a dick and stealing peoples work.

In the end, don't be a hypocrite.



To explain it once more:

I did NOT intend to build the camera. People BEGGED for it and offered money. So I made a perk part of the donation rewards. People were still free to use the PHP Camera.
If people donate to me or whoever in the world, it does not give them a license to be a dick without any repercussions.
If people pay me for a plugin for them to be build, it does not give them a license to be a dick.

Camera is now free. So whats your next crappy argument?

The offers are optional correct and nothing is forced, therefore it’s not pay2play, right? If so then I think this is pretty much justified in my perspective and that this isn’t worth to go on about unless there’s anything else that additions to the reasoning of this thread.

It would also be nice to not use excessive language towards other or to at least describe other people’s actions via this thread considering that @Emily made it for the purpose of only discussing.

[The General]

In some form you must be able to uphold something but I don’t want to sound shifty or off here but when people post boxed pictures like this with no actual linking to the poster of that, it makes it tricky to tell whether that was actually posted by the person; although I’m sure it probably was.

In the end sales wasn’t made over the forum and It was made an optional feature. My other question is was these payments forced?

Its not sales. Its part of the donation rewards. I dont see people hating on patreon for doing the same thing...

Nobody forces you to donate. Arcturus is still free to use and there are plenty of alternatives to use, emulator and camera wise. PHP camera, embedded in your SWF. Nowadays camera is free anyways because of these crappy bullshit arguements. And guess what, people who donated got angry because it was a donators only perk.

Don't see people hating on MentaL for giving people who bought a subscription here having access to a subscribers only forum, bigger inbox etc.

- - - Updated - - -

The offers are optional correct and nothing is forced, therefore it’s not pay2play, right? If so then I think this is pretty much justified in my perspective and that this isn’t worth to go on about unless there’s anything else that additions to the reasoning of this thread.

It would also be nice to not use excessive language towards other or to at least describe other people’s actions via this thread considering that @Emily made it for the purpose of only discussing.

Its just recycled arguments over and over again. Nothing holds up; In the end I am the author and I decide. If people cannot accept it then move on. There is no single argument that justifies stealing, leeching and renaming other peoples work.

Inb4 you cannot close source open source software. Yes you can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Authenticator

[Shoelace]

At the end of the day if you want your software to be closed sourced then that's fair enough, if you want it open sourced then that's fine also, there positives and negatives to both. However you are never going to stop people taking your work and making it open. At RaGEZONE we have always allowed leaks and that's the way it has been from the start. I don't see why you care so much that your work gets leaks.

1. If you don't make any money from it, what matters if it is leaked or not, you aren't losing anything?

2. People will stay loyal to your development if you keep the development active and won't care for the leaks as they aren't going to be updated reguarly

3. People can learn from the open-source, improve it and adapt it to their own needs.

4. Even if we had a rule stopping leaks of work, people will just post it elsewhere and still get access to it if they want it so it would be a pointless rule, we can't stop it happening.

Just need to care less about it, and focus on yourself

[Emily]

I had a chat earlier with a friend of me. He was annoyed because The General made something free that was donation only. Now, this gets me. While 50% complains about The General making stuff that - in all fairness is kind of optional - a donation perk. Now he made it free and 50% complains about it now suddenly being free. This is 100% a "nobody is ever happy" situation. It's The General's product, and he does with it what he can. Hell, even if he made room entry a donation perk, yes it'd be stupid but still his choice.

[LeChris]

TG has retaliated in the past when people used the free alternative cameras he has mentioned by banning them from receiving support, took away their donor status or even deleted all the pictures stored on his camera server that they paid for.

The source code at one point also prevented the free alternatives I'm pretty sure.

At the end of the day keep it closed source, keep it freemium. It's not like "Patreon." You're blocking features from a 1:1 Habbo which is allegedly one of the goals of Arcturus, thus you are blocking a core feature for money.

Anyone want to pay $500 for a 1 hour phone call with him?

[Bradley]

At the end of the day if you want your software to be closed sourced then that's fair enough, if you want it open sourced then that's fine also, there positives and negatives to both. However you are never going to stop people taking your work and making it open. At RaGEZONE we have always allowed leaks and that's the way it has been from the start. I don't see why you care so much that your work gets leaks.

1. If you don't make any money from it, what matters if it is leaked or not, you aren't losing anything?

2. People will stay loyal to your development if you keep the development active and won't care for the leaks as they aren't going to be updated reguarly

3. People can learn from the open-source, improve it and adapt it to their own needs.

4. Even if we had a rule stopping leaks of work, people will just post it elsewhere and still get access to it if they want it so it would be a pointless rule, we can't stop it happening.

Just need to care less about it, and focus on yourself

I cannot disagree with this at all considering that loads of people have had their own sources and what not leaked once in awhile which they’ve put loads of effort into, however they’ve not caused such a commotion of and the fact that what you’ve stated is completely straight forward and as @TheGeneral has mentioned that this thread is just turning out to be back and fourth repetitive chat.

I don’t really see much use in this thread anymore in my opinion since most of the problematic issues with this is done off the forums and then it’s drawn upon the forum like some vendetta issue which is completely pointless and both sides had made their points and now it’s over with.

It just seems that grudges are being held within this thread since leaks or posts however no matter how old something gets, it’ll be eventually that it will be leaked somewhere.

It's pretty simple, don't want your stuff leaked? Don't give it to anyone.

I’m going to be honest that this is the most straightforward view.

[cmb]

It's pretty simple, don't want your stuff leaked? Don't give it to anyone.

[The General]

I'll just quit. Bye.

[ahmedprince22]

sorry if this doesnt add much to the conversation, here is one of my issues with wesley and his emulator, back when it was paid he had an option to get camera for free if you just asked him, which i did which didnt result in any response from him at all, 2ndly, when png camera came arround and people started using it, as said people got banned and photos deleted for using an alternative, 3rdly, when the camera became free, i tried it out, and it was just god aweful, it could not be used at all, and was completely horrid, id get a screenie but wesely shut his website down, so I decided to use png camera again, but since he obsfucated his source, it would not work, I asked him about it and he denied it that it should work, tho it did not, and to just deal with it. thank you.

[Emily]

sorry if this doesnt add much to the conversation, here is one of my issues with wesley and his emulator, back when it was paid he had an option to get camera for free if you just asked him, which i did which didnt result in any response from him at all, 2ndly, when png camera came arround and people started using it, as said people got banned and photos deleted for using an alternative, 3rdly, when the camera became free, i tried it out, and it was just god aweful, it could not be used at all, and was completely horrid, id get a screenie but wesely shut his website down, so I decided to use png camera again, but since he obsfucated his source, it would not work, I asked him about it and he denied it that it should work, tho it did not, and to just deal with it. thank you.

No worries, as long as it's on-topic and it's in a respectful manner it's all good.

I'll just quit. Bye.

Respect for walking out of the people attacking you.

[Beny.]

Arcturus started open source. I contributed to the open source project on the understanding that it would remain open source.. along with others. It was made closed source without any decision of the contributors. Our work is inside that Emulator too. It's not fully Wesley's and we should have a decision if it was to be made closed source.

He added a license to the project which made me and the other contributors know what to expect about sharing our code with the project. He violated the rules of the license, breaking our trust and now he claims our contributions are now his. He is a hypocrite because he is mad we stole his work when he did the same to us.

To the person asking if the "donator" features were forced. Yes. They were. Because when we tried to make a plugin which offers it for free, Wesley will add some code to INTENTIONALLY block it. At one point he made it block all plugins which contains the word camera.

This is not an attack on Wesley for fun or because we hate him. He changed the goals of his Emulator and ultimately we are his end users and we are not happy about it.

We use the leaked and decompiled version because Wesley does not give us (his users) the bug fixes and features we need. Not everyone is an experienced coder who can create an Emulator for themselves, so we edit the ones that are a best fit for our projects. It's always been like that and it will never change. This is a community of people who reverse engineer and modify games.