GlynG wrote:
This thread concerns and disappoints me. If member X produces a model (either by CAD or sculpting) explicitly for their own personal use and enjoyment and shares photos of it, then, even if it looks similar to a model in another scale, surely no harm is done in practice or would result from it? Honestly such threads are the most inspiring and awesome things on the site and one of the biggest draws for me – they inspired me to get back into epic some years ago after years of no wargaming at all. I’m unclear quite what you intend but I strongly hope you aren’t considering outright banning threads including such miniatures people have designed for themselves e.g. E&C's 'My Painting Blog' because over time this would likely have a considerable negative impact on traffic on the forum and the amount of epic being played.
I fully appreciate there should be absolutely no discussion or references to buying, selling or trading any such models however, not even obliquely, as this could potentially get the forum in trouble (though nothing bad has come of anything up to now). You have made your desire on the subject clear and stronger and more widespread moderation on any public offers or requests should be sufficient to prevent any problem. I have no desire to moderate in other ways but would offer my help/eyes to police such threads to remove any such discussion, if that would help save such threads, whilst keeping the forum safer and you happier?
In response, yes and no. These actions are primarily geared towards the sale and trade of miniatures created off designs and IP not held by the seller. This is the core aim of these measures, and the most critical outcome. People are able to scratch build and create their own minatures, and I agree that this should be encouraged. CAD designs for personal use is a very new and very grey area currently. Scratch building your own minis out of plastic is clearly fine. Designing and casting a set of miniatures based on other peoples IP for sale and distribution is clearly not. CAD for personal use occupies a middle ground, since these files can be easily shared and reproduced.
In addition, to be very clear, I have zero intention on stopping new designs and miniatures being produced, shown off, discussed and sold. I enjoy watching this aspect as much as anyone. But we simply have to respect other companies IP and designs, and this includes 40K designs downscaled.
Although we have not had any bad outcomes at this point (personally, directed at this site alone), it is clear that this issue is escalating and at some point we simply have to face it and work out the best way forwards. I open this up for comment and feedback so that we can navigate a path as a community and find the best solution possible. However, ignoring the issue will simply result in problems - next week, next month or next year.
The line is pretty clear and well defined in other ways. Production of (for example) GW designs in any scale for sale, trade or distribution cannot happen. The issue on miniatures produced for home use alone is something that I am going to need to take advice on.
GlynG wrote:
Please could you reconsider the outright ban on PMing other board members about trades? Make it a suggestion or a recommendation if you like, but to outright ban it is unreasonable and serious overkill. I don't wish to discuss trades publicly and since such conversations take place in private not in public no harm or effect on others practically results.
Well, to start with, I fully accept that 'banning' trades through PM is not only unreasonable, but is unenforcable. I don't read peoples PMs, and although I have the ability to do so, its a lot of hassle and I have no intention of doing this. What I am trying to avoid here is two things:
1. Simply driving the sale and distribution of IP infringing miniatures 'under-ground'.
2. A lack of visbility in sales. When a sale is advertised and all communication happens in PM, it is impossible to what the situation is, and how is transpires. In an ideal world, I would like every trade or sale to have a visible component. Even if it is just a post saying 'I have just bought the 12 Land Raiders for xxx amount'. A simple post such as this informs everyone the state of the trade, the date at which a sale was made, what is still left in the trade and a lot of other details.
GlynG wrote:
Incidences of one board member ripping off another are extremely, extremely rare in the first instance and there is already a longstanding and well-working public feedback mechanism for trades with the ‘Good Trader’ and ‘Bad Trader’ threads. It’s indicative that there are 108 pages worth of good trades and only 4 pages of bad trades, most of which is discussion or about bad ebayers, with only 3 individual unresolved bad traders in 8 years.
Indeed, and I very much value the honest, open and excellent community that we have. I will always remember an episode of the D6 Generation podcast, Craig was getting into Epic and he remarked how the Epic community (not just this site) were just offering him miniatures and great deals, and this was echoed again on Worlds End. Bottom line is that the Epic community is awesome, friendly and more concerned about miniatures going to a player and the game growning, than a financial reward. But, what about people who see this as an opportunity? In the end, increased visibility isnt going to affect most people who trade here.
I am not attempting to introduce draconian measures, and I would like to see is take miniature creation to a new level. It is indicitive of the quality and growth of this aspect of the forum that we are even having this discussion, and that we do need to plan out route forwards.
I am more than happy to take suggestions, comments and feedback.