Me and IP have decided on that we will not host OSmap or allow direct links within public view.
Aww. Just had to take some credit didn't you?

We are also going to put in a rule that you cannot debate protection/unprotection unless the topic is specifically about debating the two due to the actions of some people.
This is quite possibly the most
vague rule ever made. What the hell does that even mean .. "unless the topic is ...". What do you think this topic is?! "Actions of some people"?! That can apply to
anyone about
anything. You're basically saying "Only the admins can allow what they want." Of course, this is perfectly reasonable, but if you're going for that, fucking say it.
The reason for doing this? Honestly some of the bullshit arguments (morality and whatever, which doesn't apply at all to the issue) we're hearing honestly was making us lean more towards hosting OSmap because they're just so stupid.
You should take some logic classes because the two do not follow
at all. Here's another bullshit argument: The invisible pink unicorn exists. By your logic, then, I am made of cheese (which is possible...) because the previous logic is "just so stupid". Honestly, you have no goddamn idea what the hell you're even talking about.
This topic was intended to be how we handle discussion on these issues, not to actually discuss it, but for some people that's simply too much to ask. People keep insisting on completely distorting and warping the issue with carefully chosen words.
Let's
assume this is the case. You
still fail simply because you obviously cannot read, or understand, the arguments presented to you. Can you explain Espeono's analogy ("Either way it is not the sort of belief that successful nations like the United States are based on.")? Or how about
my arguments ("Now, let's go back to what's really important. Should SEN host VB programs? Answer: no. So stop arguing.")?
So then what do we have? An obvious attempt to provoke a debate that is totally worthless (this was my argument). So really, the fault here lies in you for starting something that would obviously get no where except cause much spam and hatred in a barely functioning society. Thanks for screwing over something that was
just brought back from death.
So we looked at the facts. There is already one site with OSmap that supports it, so we'll keep SEN the way it is for the time being.
What facts? That OSMAP exists? Oh wow, some big fact.
Everyone knows. Not everyone
cares. The only reason that I can think of that would possibly make you start something like this here is because you want OSMAP to gain publicity. If you can give me another legitimate reason, go ahead. I'll acknowledge that I was wrong and you were right if I cannot refute it.
Also, what's with this "we" crap? Who is "we"? You? You and IP? You and the community?
Not you?!
Although a lot of the community has changed their views to the point where it would actually be okay to host it, two different sites with two different policies sounds much better.
Yeah, it's a good thing the Confederates won the civil war. Unity sucks.
I will still be spreading Open Mapping. Just so you people know:
Protection = Mappers corrupting maps to prevent other people from learning or editing them.
Open Mapping = Mappers leaving their maps as open and allowing people to edit or learn from them.
Unprotection = Mappers unprotecting or "fixing" corruption on maps so they can edit or learn from other mappers maps.
Nice choice of words. "Corruption" instead of "Lock" and "Learning" instead of "Steal" or, since that argument is so horrible, "making a million copies of the same damn map despite the fact that they all suck and are rigged in some way." Once again, good job on the word choice; and of course, secretly deceiving most of the people here who cannot decipher it.
Really, the mapping community gives so much to you with free information like tutorials and downloads. I've been with the community for years and I don't usually ask for much, but leaving your maps as open is giving back to the community that gave so much to you. Consider it, if you will.
If I gave you a hug, would you stop caring about this "leaving your maps open please" bullshit? I mean, I did give you something back for all you've done. Wait, wait. What if I donate some money? Then can I lock my maps whenever I want and prevent people from editing them no matter how crappy it is?! Yes?! Thanks!
If the map was originally protected and the author did not come on and mark their map and "do not edit" on SEN, it will still be free to edit if the person who wishes to edit it can unprotect it. Most battle.net maps have been edited and then reprotected, so it makes no sense to limit people unless the authors are still around to "protect their investment" as "time is money" as some people say.
Does IP know that if he agrees to this, he will be supporting opening maps even though it was protected for a reason? It doesn't even matter if it was a shitty reason; the fact that it's locked means the author intended it to be locked. If I locked my bike somewhere and went away, does that give someone (besides the police for legal reasons...) the right to take the bike away? Well, in your mind, yes. But for the rest of us, we would acknowledge that there is a lock there and, therefore, we should not take it.
Now you're probably thinking maps are not bikes. Yeah, but you're the one who conceded the argument "time is money"; since time is spent on a map, it is worth money, by
your (
not mine) logic. Now you're probably (or should be) thinking that authors have to be around to "protect their investment" so my argument is wrong. Once again, not true as I could leave a bike locked for years and years and come back get it anytime I want. How unlikely this event is is irrelevant; the fact that this can happen makes it a valid argument.
The discussion on protection vs unprotection is now basically over and going nowhere. You can now discuss these policy changes we'll be implementing.
Based on what has been discussed prior to this post, it shows that you don't actually care about what has been said so any discussions from here on do not actually matter as you will be implementing these policy changes regardless. Thanks for showing you care!
None.