http://forums.kc-mm.com/Gallery/BrawlView.php?Number=35657
False report, images are visible.
Edit: Wait, the images just changed. What the [censored]?
False report, images are visible.
Edit: Wait, the images just changed. What the [censored]?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: Albafika on November 26, 2013, 01:38:38 PMIt has been added.
Quote
I know this topic has been addressed countless times over the years, but I'll chime in my two cents anyway.
I think having to ask for permission from a creator to release an edit of a hack is just plain silly. I understand that it takes incredible effort to produce custom models and to also release a hack based on those models, and the community should certainly respect these efforts. That is why giving credit to the original author(s) whenever an edited work is released is usually taken very seriously (and rightly so). But having to ask permission to release a modified hack strikes me as completely unnecessary for a few reasons:Perhaps I can sum this up with an analogy - In the academic community, authors are required to cite/paraphrase/compile existing works when releasing their own academic papers. However, it would be exhaustively time consuming if authors also had to ask permission from the author(s) of every single source they ever cited in their papers. More importantly - if permissions were required to release any academic works, that would mean that permissions could be denied, and with enough permissions denied academic development would basically grind to a halt. It would also violate the spirit of academic research - to continuously learn and evolve from each other's knowledge and contributions over time. The key here is referencing contributions so that the original authors get all the credit they deserve, while the community as a whole benefits from the derived works.
- I understand that some creators see asking permission as a sign of respect. However, thinking this through logically, if one did ask permission, and permission was not granted - what then? Would the entire community then have to accept only the original released contribution, with no chance of it ever being improved upon or given a fresh perspective by someone else? That would very quickly shut down the ability for any Brawl hack releases to evolve creatively and for the whole community to enjoy a variety of Brawl hacks. I think crediting the original authors shows enough respect on its own.
- Many authors have given blanket permission for their works to be used as anyone would like. One such example is the incredibly prolific and inspirational StarWaffle who has put countless hours of dedication in providing several top-quality releases to the Brawl hacking community. If a creator such as himself can be totally cool with allowing anyone editing his works as they like, then I think it's only fair to him that the rest of the community responds in kind with their releases as well.
- It completely violates the spirit of sharing among fan-based Internet communities, which is most likely where the released work would have been posted in the first place.
Quote from: Nanobuds on June 26, 2013, 12:04:41 AMHow about you check the mod and see it follows the rules. Did you even do that?
1. No credit
2. He didn't make anything
3. Its not straight-to-SD
4. It uses Google Docs, which you need a Google Account to download. That breaks a totally separate rule.
So before you try to prove me wrong, check your own facts buddy.
Quote from: Nanobuds on June 25, 2013, 10:42:09 PMhttp://forums.kc-mm.com/Gallery/BrawlView.php?Number=32752
He uploaded 2 hack packs
QuotePacks must include some of the submitter's work (Be it CSPs/BPs*1 or anything of higher complexity).
Packs must include a README with credit to the submitters of all the included hacks and links to their Brawl Vault galleries (if they have one).
Packs must be straight-to-SD, meaning they include the private folder to be pasted into the root of the SD.
Quote from: Segtendo on June 25, 2013, 02:31:05 AMGood sir. PLEASE read the top of the page. It tells you how to fix the problem (temporarily).
Quote from: the_randomizer on June 06, 2013, 12:44:08 AMThere is no dialog box prompt, just save as .brstm. Nothing shows an option to make it multi channel or not.
Quote from: BlackJax96 on June 05, 2013, 11:31:23 PMThat'd be pointless; multichannel BRSTM encoding isn't even supported.
The BRSTM encoder has been exactly the same since like, v0.64d.
Anyway, I can't reproduce this BRSTM error for the life of me. Made a bunch of BRSTMS, mono and stereo, looped and unlooped, and they all sounded great in BB and in-game.
I'm going to need some examples.
Page created in 0.040 seconds with 12 queries.