I actually had not remembered what Falkoner had suggested be done to a person's map until just now. He told someone to manually delete strings using SCMDraft 2 and to use some kind of volatile program (OSMAP2 I think?) to remove strings automatically. The actions he suggested would corrupt any map's string section beyond repair of even the most talented user or programmer.
Any editing program has the possibility to corrupt someone's map if they are stupid enough. That's like saying 'we should put a warning on everything you could kill someone with.'
Asking people to put up disclaimers is a little ridiculous. However, telling someone to use a specific program in such a way that it is GUARANTEED to corrupt their map beyond recovery, as Falkoner did, is clearly overstepping the line. You are right however, and I do not really know where the line should be drawn.
Does anyone have any ideas where the line should be placed?
No, it isn't. It still doesn't have a better trigger editor.
That joke is getting mighty old.
--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
Yoshi this topic has absolutely nothing to do with protection or unprotection. Falkoner merely mentioned OSMAP as a ruse to confuse people into thinking I was breaking rules, when actually I was just deleting shitty posts of his that had nothing to do with anything of the sort. That having been said...
Unprotectors don't force all maps to be open either. OSmap has a wonderful compression ability (which ironically will "protect" the map as you say). Your opinion is that unprotectors should be not be allowed, okay, but the same should apply for protectors, because the people who like unprotection feel strongly about this too.
As long as I'm not a mod at the moment and cannot simply delete your posts I'll go ahead and respond, everyone should hear this anyway. SEN has a very clear cut policy about these things in the rules* and I don't think things are going to change any time soon. That policy is quite simple: not protecting your maps is perfectly fine by us, but taking people's protected maps and then breaking that protection is not something we are going to stand for under any circumstances. You can throw around a lot of talk about how some people support it or all the wonderful uses breaking protection has, but that is a load of bullshit to us and it is only going to get your posts deleted and your account suspended. And hiding behind "open source" is the biggest fabrication of them all, the whole point of using that term was to confuse people into thinking you may be on to something. In the real world there is a big difference between open source and copyright infringement. You have been using 'open source' to describe the map making equivalent of the latter.
Hopefully I am properly conveying the administration's wishes and not stepping out of line by using terms like "we" and "us".
*
http://www.staredit.net//?p=faq&do=view&id=2
None.