Forum:RuneScape Model Viewer = Against the rules

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
(Redirected from Forum:RSMV)
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > RuneScape Model Viewer = Against the rules
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 19 March 2010 by Azaz129.
Shortcut:

Notice - I have archived a large part of this forum, as it is over 150kb and dicussion has no signs of slowing. The archived part is at Forum:RuneScape Model Viewer = Against the rules/archive. YGVRYDBucket detail.pngrwojy 09:07, March 1, 2010 (UTC)


Summary of the arguments for/against model viewer images

I'll try to be as neutral as possible... Please help by correcting any error or bias you encounter, and expand this summary table by including other information I may have missed. Hopefully, the above discussion is summarised concisely and adequately.   az talk   09:41, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

For Against
Jagex
  • The models are obtained using open-source third party software
  • The files are compressed and stored by Jagex in our computers using standard compression algorithms
  • They is no effort by Jagex to protect these images
  • It is perfectly legal to publish these model images under "fair use"
  • If legal, reverse engineering is not against the terms and conditions.
  • The model viewer may fit the definition of the "interoperability" exception permitting legal reverse engineering.
  • Reverse engineering is against Jagex's Terms & Conditions if illegal "You must not reverse-engineer, decompile or modify any Jagex Product client software in any way (except to the extent allowed by applicable law)"
  • Jagex has claimed that the models are a form of reverse engineering
  • The images (and other RuneScape-related content) are copyrighted by Jagex Inc.
  • J-Mods have advised against discussing these images in-game or in their forums
Graphics
  • Provide better angles which may be impossible in-game
  • Possible to obtain detailed and zoomed-in images
  • 3D images
  • Not High Detail images.
  • No animations.
  • Some images may be incomplete models.
  • Gaps in models, for hands etc.
  • Colors, shading, and textures may be off or wrong compared to images in the game client
Speculative nature
  • Creates a discussion topic of future content
  • Provides an opportunity for new players to participate in
  • Speculation leads to new ideas for Jagex to improve upon
  • Possibly Easter eggs and leaks planted by Jagex
  • Speculation about images found in the model viewer will be mentioned on other fan websites, why not here?
  • Some images are hard to identify
  • Images are not named canonically
  • Images may have become obsolete (i.e. no longer part of the game)
  • Images may have been superseded by newer images in development
  • Difficult to distinguish fanart from genuine model viewer images
  • Images might not actually be implemented in the game.
Existing wiki policies
  • The wiki is not... Jagex. We are an independent wiki.
  • If it is to improve the wiki, ignore all rules.
  • Granularity: The wiki is for all things about Runescape, including features Jagex does not want revealed.
  • Neutral point of view: Factual image based on a verifiable source.
Thanks Az. 14:13, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
some still seem to neglect the fact that legal reverse-engineering is not against the jagex terms and conditions as per "You must not reverse-engineer, decompile or modify any Jagex Product client software in any way (except to the extent allowed by applicable law" quoted from http://www.runescape.com/terms/terms.ws ---Tortilliachp 19:08, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Nice summary (clear, concise, and neutral), thanks Az. I think we have discussed this pretty thoroughly. At this point I'd like to suggest that we see where the community is in terms of whether or not we allow these images on the wiki. I don't see much of a compromise (either they're allowed or they're not) but I'd be happy to be proven wrong there. So, after this lengthy discussion, where do people stand? Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 07:51, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - As per my own moral arguments above. [1] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 07:59, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support All images taken from the viewer should be tagged as such. If we can't figure out what it is for that is fine, we will say that then. I see zero arguments against these pics that we should be concerned with. We will be sure not to discuss these pics on their forums. These are not against any rules (that Jmod needs to learn word definitions), and allowing them here isn't promoting rule breaking. I really don't like that one in the list at all as it implies that this is rule breaking. As for not being a crystal ball, we do discuss announced upcoming updates. Having a pic in the viewer is pretty close to an announcement.--Degenret01 08:10, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Because I'm a wimp an I don't want to break Jagex's Terms and Conditions. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:57, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per every supporter, Az's summary and Degen's points above. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 03:42, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Oli (Exact same reason) scoot4.pngscooties 04:11, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - We are an information resource and this model viewer could perhaps add hundreds of previously unseen images to our database. Jagex has no legal base to exclude us from using images we obtain and there is no risk to this wiki, its users users, or their game accounts. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 06:05, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - as per my comments already on this thread.

Bonziiznob Talk

06:37, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I appreciate the summary by Azliq7, where it at least tries to address the significant issues involved here. My above comments speak for themselves. I did modify the above list slightly, but I tried to keep the spirit of the page and keep this strictly to the bullet points. BTW, I do agree with Degenret01 that if images are allowed on this wiki, that they should be clearly labeled as coming from a model viewer and not the user client. I am also supportive of significant restrictions on the use of images from the model viewer that would be much more restrictive than images from the user client, which is the middle ground I was hoping to achieve. That is, permitting some model images, but keeping it to a very limited few that can't be obtained elsewhere. --Robert Horning 09:07, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Robert, Degen and the other supporters. Also, we may need to tally the votes as the community is utterly divided on this issue. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  09:01, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - If there are more users that support, we can base it on "rough consensus" and pass the images. Chicken7 >talk 12:40, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - As part of the overall RuneScape Community, I believe it is important to respect Jagex wishes. The advantages really don't outweigh the disadvantages. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 09:12, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - The disadvantages don't outweigh the advantages, either. Chicken7 >talk 12:40, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Per the reasons against model viewer images in the table above, plus I'd really hate to find out about future items (through the RSMV) before the item is actually released with an update. It spoils the surprise. C.ChiamTalk 12:45, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Saying that is spoils the surprise for you is kind of biased. Some people like knowing all the inside info, and I understand that some don't, but this wiki is for information; if we can find out that something is going to be released, we should, no, will document it. And we have the spoiler policy, so you have to expect ruined surprises here. Anyway, no one will force you to view the images or articles. Chicken7 >talk 13:15, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Why does it spoil the surprise? Because the updates aren't out yet. And how are the images obtained then? Through the RSMV. It's not that I'm biased, but truly taking images from the RSMV is directly spoiling the surprise for many (I'm quite sure I'm not the only one) of the players here. Yes, no one forces me to look at the images or articles. But come on, I volunteer my time on the Wiki, because I find it to be a worthwhile activity to contribute in such a way, and I wish to improve the quality of the articles here. When I patrol the RecentChanges, and I happen to see a RSMV-item article being vandalised, then what? I want to be able to freely edit, and not have to restrict myself from editing certain articles. C.ChiamTalk 13:26, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Of all the opposes this is the only one I like. It isn't bowing down to Jagex. I still want the pics but I can respect not wanting the surprise spoiled.--Degenret01 06:39, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per all opposition. Lets not spoil it, it may not become part of the game, and lets not break Jagex's T&C even if that part (may) not be enforceable. This looks like this may become a no consensus or at most a rough consensus. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 13:09, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all support,This wiki IS not jagex, if it can improve the wiki then Ignore all rules. Maybe we could just show pictures of CONFIRMED updates. Also, this evens the votes out again.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.31.237.44 (talk).

Oppose - Per Oli FredeTalk 09:43, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Question for Supporters - I see that most supporters use the argument that we can have new information. That is a good argument, but it want to ask this question - where would we put this information? RS:NOT#FUTURE. How would we be able to say what these images could mean, without speculating? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:40, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

It isn't like we haven't written articles on future content before, and then updated those articles when the content was released. For example, this version the2009 Christmas event went into extensive detail about the then future Christmas event. I don't see how something like showing images of a dragon pickaxe or the music cape would be any different... particularly when there is additional commentary on the official forums or even on update articles or developer blogs about the topic. It is merely one more factual source for information... sort of akin to something seen on another fan site that appears to be authoritative and factual. Anybody trying to spoof one of these images would be quickly caught... like the folks who "faked" the Sailing skill on the hiscores page. --Robert Horning 17:53, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
But how would you know what the image shows? It could be a dragon pickaxe, but it could also be a new kind of weapon or something completely different. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:58, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
In the case of the Dragon pickaxe, rumors about its introduction had been made and discussed on fansites and on the official forums for years. Some j-mods had even said it would eventually be introduced, but that there wasn't a definite timeline for when that would happen. Again, using such kind of factual statements about future content, an article about the object certainly makes sense. In fact, a user tried to upload content from the model viewer for this exact article but had it subsequently deleted... using the "rule" against model viewer images as the basis to have it deleted. It is precisely in this context that I think such an image could be included. All the image from the model viewer would do is to help illustrate the article and provide an image when none is otherwise available. Even then, it could simply be "this is a speculated image of what may be the dragon pickaxe" or whatever item it might be. There are other items like the Dragon kiteshield that certainly could deserve an article... again based on factual details. Yes, it is a guess, but it is a strong guess and didn't resemble any other future content. --Robert Horning 18:53, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I do agree that they deserve articles - Jagex themselves have said that they will eventually complete the Dragon set, so it's a fact that the D Kite is coming. But I think that including the images is a bit too speculative. Even for Roddeck's Pipe I'd say that it would be too much speculation to include the image. I think that we should make articles about things that have been confirmed, but we shouldn't include RSMV images. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:17, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how an image can be "speculative". The images in the RSMV have been created by Jagex, so therefore, we know that Jagex is either going to add that item to the game, or is seriously considering it (if it is a spoof, we should still document it in an article, like Thingy) Chicken7 >talk 06:35, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
The image itself is not speculative, but trying to guess what the image represents is speculation.   az talk   07:20, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Exactly, so we won't do that. We'll simply say "An image was found on the RSMV, which may suggest that the [insert whstever here] is planned to be released" or something along those lines, as the last bit is a tiny bit speculative. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 07:52, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
I have never understood the war on speculation. If anything it leads to a more creative discussion of items and unreleased content. As long as we label speculation as speculation, whats the issue? Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 09:14, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with TEbuddy. I think speculation is good, as long as it isn't too far fetched. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  09:19, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Academic speculation is what drives our society of information. How would new theories of science, history, economy etc. ever be formulated without adacemic speculation? --Tortilliachp 11:53, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
I like speculation too. But the argument against it is this is an encyclopedia. Chicken7 >talk 14:40, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Do you need those images to speculate? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:21, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 20:45, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
Ever heard of rhetorical questions? >.<
What I meant was that, if you know something might happen, you can speculate about it. If you have an RSMV image, it will help the speculation. But do you really need the RSMV image to speculate? (this one's not rhetorical) Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:49, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 01:42, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
Although I previously disagreed with Tebuddy on one of the previous discussions (gee, that was a long time ago — has this been going on that long?) I'm going to agree with him on this point. Speculation, making guesses, and expanding our views is critical to many things in life. As long as it is clearly marked as speculation, and has cited sources that make this speculation reasonable and likely, then I think it should be allowed. The images are absolutely necessary — they are one of the sources of information that can support speculation. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 06:20, March 4, 2010 (UTC) 

Oppose - (back to the weighing in) per the images promoting rule-breaking, being speculative, unverifiable, an not from the in-game client. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 18:40, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - If this is passed, I will resign from RS wiki. Support, even by inaction would seem to me to be in violation of the Terms & Conditions which, given my active role in the game, would make my account, in my view, untenable. --King Runite1 20:59, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

That is directly incorrect. legal reverse-engineering is not against the jagex terms and conditions as per "You must not reverse-engineer, decompile or modify any Jagex Product client software in any way (except to the extent allowed by applicable law" quoted from http://www.runescape.com/terms/terms.ws --Tortilliachp 23:16, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
I can't possibly force you to participate on this wiki, but I presume that your "role in the game" is as a player moderator for you to make some statement of this nature. I appreciate your concern, and for me if this was a serious enough issue that Jagex was banning accounts and demodding player moderators strictly for their participation on this wiki and/or their external website usage of the model viewer images, I would change my "vote" to oppose. This is actual banning/demodding and not perceived threats that actually aren't happening. I would like to try and convince you that the use of these model images is ethical, legal, and that Jagex really won't take any extraordinary steps to do account blocking if we happen to have a couple images from the model viewer on this wiki, which is precisely what I've tried to accomplish on this thread. The issue you raise here, that some people consider this to be such a gross violation of the terms of service (regardless of the legality and any "official" statements to the contrary) that they can't possibly participate on this wiki and allow these images is indeed something to consider here. I have expressed dissatisfaction with what I perceive to be enforcement of official forum standards on this wiki when such standards don't apply, but I understand that this might be just a step too far as well. --Robert Horning 10:25, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Compromise time

People,let us TRY to come to a Compromise Look, we aren't going to get ANYWHERE if we don't compromise let me just= lay down the facts again first...

1.A Jagex Mod has said TALKING ABOUT THE MODEL VIEWER ON THE FORUMS is not allowed.

2.A Jagex Mod has said MESSING AROUND WITH THE GAMES CODE is not allowed.

3.The model viewer is perfectly legal, not messing around with the games code, and not against the terms and conditions.

4.Jagex cannot get us banned by using the model viewer as they could gain no proof we had used it unless they installed spyware.

5.The images COULD help the wiki.

6.Jagex cannot get us taken off the internet.

Now, heres a compromise.. what if,we use the model viewer images For articles on CONFIRMED future updates,and to get a better view of some things that may be hard to see. We would have a policy so that 3 people must confirm that the image ACTUALLY CAME FROM THE MODEL VIEWER, to make sure we don't get any fake images.Everyone,if my compromise displeases you then please do make your own, and that includes people on the anti model viewer side of the argument --82.31.17.13 14:32, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Pending - I want to hear other arguments for or against the compromise first. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  20:51, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - I still think that this would be far too speculative to include on the wiki. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 16:25, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Pending, leaning towards Support - I see that being too speculative bad, but we have had lots of speculations about things, if we get images from the RSMV just for CONFIRMED future content, it could be helpful for the wiki. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 20:57, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Making stuff up out of whole cloth is bad, but I don't see what is wrong with speculation. We already have articles about future content (I hope I've documented that abundantly on this thread) and the use of a model viewer to create an image when no other alternative exists seems like a logical and consistent policy that would be difficult to abuse. Making this the only exception for the use of the model viewer snapshots also seems like a very reasonable compromise, where in general we should encourage contributors to this wiki to use the standard user client (aka what you normally have for playing Runescape) for the generation of in-game content images. This can't be the only source of information about the item either, so it must have either a developer diary, j-mod post on the official forums, or something else that is clearly from an "official" source that announces this particular item as a confirmed future update for the image to be used... mainly as an illustrative image of what the item may be looking like. --Robert Horning 11:46, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per RS:IAR and Robert. Not putting those images when we have them is just nonsense to me, and if JAGeX doesn't want us to do it, I don't care, because if they don't want us to do this, then I don't want them to put them on my computer.Chessmaster (talkcontribs) forgot to sign this comment.

Support - per my and every other pro-RSMV-er's arguments in this discussion. Chicken7 >talk 02:20, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - If it can get a better product without breaking the law or ToS then why are we having this conversation. Everything I've read say keep opinion out of the articles or at the very least to a minimum. I've seen several edits to remove opinion so why are we letting and opinion(Jagex opinion) set policy? Don't limit your options when you don't have to. -- Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 03:49, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per my previous reasons. Even if the images were of a confirmed future update (although I don't know how you're going to verify that), they would still spoil the surprise, because you wouldn't really be expecting it. Quite like the Dragon pickaxe. Jagex confirmed that it would be released at some point, but we had no idea when, and it suddenly appeared when Forgiveness of a Chaos Dwarf. C.ChiamTalk 14:37, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - So it seems Jagex spoilt the surprise on that one by confirming it? Chicken7 >talk 16:54, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support for pics of confirmed to be released items. I can see a good discussion on each of these items and how do we know its the one they are talking about, but reason should (crosses fingers/knocks on wood) prevail on each of those.--Degenret01 14:45, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - per my previous reasons. Just because we've looked at the images in the cache doesn't mean they'll ever actually be in the game (beta content gets changed all the time). I also don't agree with the assertion that Jagex won't figure who's looking at the cache with RSMV. It seems like this would be possible from a programming standpoint. That doesn't mean that they will bother to do it however. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 08:13, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - That is one of the major reasons why we would have the images, because that beta content that was never released will never be available again, and it is something definitely worth documenting. And if Jagex does work out that someone looked at the cache and bans their account, it could turn into a legal scuffle where Jagex is on the defensive, which is definitely not what they're looking for. Chicken7 >talk 08:22, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that the issue isn't about creating an article exclusively about content from the model viewer. This is suggesting that the concept must have some official status as being a future update confirmed in some other manner. The Music Cape is an excellent example, as the cape is fairly obvious in the model viewer, and j-mods have confirmed that it is an item they may release in the future (they are "working on it"). The question that should be asked is if you think your status in the game is going to be impacted if you participate with this wiki and these images are also found in articles that you have contributed? I assert that nothing is going to happen to you, and that Jagex can't delete or force these images from this model viewer to be removed from the wiki, even if a formal court order was tried. As long as we stick with these very strict guidelines, we are staying within the terms of the law and technically even following the formal terms of service agreement that is being cited here. --Robert Horning 17:03, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
But can we be 100% sure that it's completely legal? Considering we're writing them a letter about putting their dialogue on our articles, we might as well put this in? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:05, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
It can be *magically* predicted what their answer will be: "No, it's illegal" OR "No, it's against the rules" OR "No, it's illegal and against the rules" OR just not answer it at all, avoiding the fact that it is perfectly legal and, by Jagex's very own rules, allowed. Hello71 02:51, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Epistemologically speaking you can never be sure of anything. Barring extreme existentialism, we are more than 95% sure it is legal. There is no reason, no argument can be provided to assert that it should not be legal. Unless someone can provide proof of illegality, it is crazy to assume something is illegal, or fear as much. --Tortilliachp 17:53, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't we at least consider their opinions about a fansite of their game using one of their 'products'? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:55, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Consider Jagex's opinion on this topic? Absolutely. That is the basis for this compromise, and for why it is heavily restricted and not allowed for any article we may find that has something related randomly extracted from the model viewer. This proposal isn't to pull out the images from the model viewer and use them in your sig, to give an example here of something that may, in fact, be illegal. If we didn't consider Jagex's legal rights nor their feelings on this matter, we would simply use these model images everywhere and not care about things like fair use or copyright at all. Do I think Jagex should control editorial policy in this wiki? I think not. That is the basis for my argument and why we really do need to achieve consensus here on this matter. This compromise proposal is to suggest that these images can be used, but in a very limited context, and one that is even more restricted than typical fair use legally permits. I don't see this being a feature creep to put these eventually everywhere either, and is a strong line to say to here and absolutely no more. --Robert Horning 18:04, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Why we should:
- It is not against the rules
- It isn't illegal
- The meaning of these images is often obvious, making pure speculation less 'likely' (can't think of a good word)
Why we shouldn't:
- Jagex don't want us to use these images, as the post at the top of the page says
- We cannot be 100% sure what an image is, and it will be very hard to make sure those speculations don't get through after all
Is that basically it? In that case, the pros don't seem to me to weigh up to the cons. I do hope a letter about this issue is sent to Jagex, since I think everyone here would agree that that would help this discussion. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:48, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
You didn't mention the pro of improving the quality of our wiki's information. About your second "why we shouldn't" pro, as said in the compromise, images will only be used on articles which are about things to be released in the future. With that said, it should be fairly easy to identify an image if you know what your looking for (ie, dragon crossbow) Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 23:05, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Two things in rebuttal to Oli, and a bit of a commentary on Chicken. Jagex did not say they don't want 3rd party fansites using the images. What they said was that discussion of the images from the model viewer in the forums for purposes of speculation is something they don't want to see happen. Since players can't post those images in the forums, all you can do is simply talk about them or mention that they may exist... which is a step further removed than this discussion. Jagex via the j-mods have also said that explicitly scanning the models and trying to figure out the internal files on the Runescape user client cache may be considered reverse engineering, and it certainly is proper for them to point out that they have a "no reverse engineering" clause with their terms of service agreement. Those are facts, but nowhere did Jagex ever say "The Runescape Wiki or any other fansites should not use images from the model viewer on their websites, or we will block your user accounts when we track you down". Even coming close to that was never done. All that happened here is that Jagex has discouraged the use of these images, and urged caution when it has already happened. As for identifying what the image might be, there will only be a small handful of images that won't be items that already exist in the game. At most a dozen or so and usually less. Since we have already put into this compromise that it must be for an item that is independently confirmed to be a future update, you would have your choice of one of those dozen possible images in the model viewer. I don't think that is necessarily all that hard to suggest that one of those images which is seemingly close in appearance to what players think such an item could look like that just happens to be in the model viewer that isn't already another items (so it is an unknown item) is in fact what Jagex is considering for the appearance of that item. --Robert Horning 16:06, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I must have misread that. I assumed that they meant that in their eyes using or even discussing these images was unacceptable. I do agree that these images can have a lot of information in them - the question is, how do we use that information? If something looks like a wooden bar with two red things on top, and a string between them, would we say that it 'looks like a Dragon Crossbow', would we say that it 'is probably a model of a Dragon Crossbow'? Do we go as far as to say that 'this is the Dragon Crossbow' or do we say that 'it has been suggested that this could be a model of a Dragon Crossbow, as Jagex has already confirmed that they will make it in the future'? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 22:22, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Did I spark that whole paragraph because I accidentally said "Oli's second pro" and not his "second con"? OMG! Chicken7 >talk 02:23, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Comment/Question - With three different sections already in this Yew Grove discussion, I'm kinda worried that whoever does the tallying in the end might neglect to read the entire discussion for each user's support/oppose vote and instead just count the votes in the most recent section. Since there's already a possibility of losing track of votes without the extra sections, can we please keep the adding of more sections to a minimum? Thanks! [2] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 06:28, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure there are plenty of admins keeping up with this discussion without actually posting on it, so should be neutral. Closure shouldn't be a problem. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 15:29, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
Here's the count right now: Support - 11.5, Oppose - 16 Hello71 23:45, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
We're not a democracy, so we don't count votes, really. But anyway, that result is fairly inaccurate because it includes double votes from all through the discussion. Just including the compromise, the supports are way outnumbering the opposes. Chicken7 >talk 03:11, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Chicken's right, we're not a democracy, but a majority need to lean towards a goal, and everyone needs to agree on a compromise (in theory), so tallying isn't going to fly, and it especially won't get a sysop/b'crat to close it. Just my twi cents. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 22:42, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Robert H. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  02:19, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - One further restriction that absolutely must be here with any RSMV images that are uploaded and kept on this wiki: They must be clearly labeled as to its source. For me, I would prefer a special template and category that is explicitly for images from the model viewer. This has two purposes: First, it identifies the source for attribution purposes (required for fair use/fair dealing). We can assume most images on this wiki come from the general user client, but this is an exception. Also, if for some reason Jagex does decide to be hard-nosed about this and make a formal request (DMCA to Wikia or even something directed explicitly to the RS Wiki community) to delete these images, it will be in one place which will make the job of removing these much easier. I would even go one step further: Any image not labeled in such a manner is a candidate for speedy deletion. --Robert Horning 21:31, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Zybez was blocked specifically in the in-game filter for being affiliated temporarily to gold-farming. My impression is that Rs Wikia would probably be blocked similarly if it were to become associated this this. --King Runite1 21:08, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

FYI, we already are blocked, and there is little hope that we will ever be unblocked. The issues with Zybez are something independent and even bringing this up has nothing to do with the compromise. What Mod Hohbein wants us to do in order to get unblocked, if that is his correct reason, is beyond our control and nothing we can do in terms of policy or administrative enforcement. Even bringing this up is a moot issue. --Robert Horning 00:51, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Wait - Some people don't want future updates results to be spoiled, including me. I want to see how this discussion goes so far, and I might just change my mind. Fishing.png NnK Oliver (600613) talk 01:26, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I support the OP's restrictions in using the viewer, but only insofar as it relates to not spoiling future updates, NOT because "we aren't sure if it is an update or not": the 3D models EXIST, but their existence is intertwined with various game features. To say that an image should not be posted simply because it is associated with future content (and we don't know WHICH content) and thus it would constitute rumor-mongering is absurd. However, on the basis of preventing spoilers-- this exception still merits some debate: what about those of us who WANT spoilers?--Agamemnus 01:41, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Except in extream situations - Despite the legality of the issue i view it as un-ethical END OF, you cannot make me think other wise. Also where ever possible I'll properbly relpace a RSMV image with one from ingame, even it it mean a slight drop in quality RS:IAR (I remain adimint that a ethicaly correct wiki is a good wiki hence I can support IRAing the rules on the images). However In extream cases where the item is released and it is impossible to obtain a slightly resonable image of it, IT could JUST be ethical allowable to use it, but such images should be tagged to incourage finding a better one--Orange boater.png Chao.Master Talk Quest.png 22:31, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

i support using these on the wiki. they do no harm, exept for the fact that they are against a jagex rule. the rule should not be there in the first place- viewing these gives the player no advantage at all, and it does absolutely no harm to other players.Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 03:17, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Hello,its the guy who came up with the compromise here(logged in now) and i have something to say to people who do not like my proposal and the people who are anti-model viewer. Come up with your own comprimise simple as that :P as we are not going to reach consensus if you don't try to come to a agreement.and if we don't come to a agreement this conversation is never going to end. Battleben 19:47, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

Okay with the the new wilderness castle out and the fact that a dragonkin statue does exist in the cache right next to the castles other models,i think this at least deserves a mention in the article,no pictures,just a MENTION,because if we dont,we are kinda denying people information.it isn't as if the statue isn't there,it probably is, we just cant see it.Battleben 11:21, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused. If you find that statue image in the cache, how do you know it must be in that castle? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:25, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well,i THINK its in the castle,it probobly is,But im not sure. tommorow we may mind out though,as im going to connect my comp to the tv to get a bigger viewing area.Battleben 10:21, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

And that's the problem with the RSMV. You cannot know for sure what a model is, until it is released. That's why this is pure speculation. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 12:25, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Right,so i dont know that a statue that is clearly of a dragonkin,located right next to the castles other models,and added the same day as the castle is related...Besides it probably IS added.Anyways,I think it atleast deserves a mention.Speaking of which,it seems someone has added a picture of it to the article.Battleben 14:25, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

No, you cannot know for sure until someone actually sees it in-game. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 14:36, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

You do know that basicly NO content in the model viewer is future content,only scrapped things and misidentified things already in the game.(okay,there are exceptions like the draynor graphics update..)For example the ghost cat was from a tail of two cats when your cat dies agaisnt the rat king.Battleben 15:27, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Not true. The ghost cat is an NPC that has been sighted in the wilderness a number of times. Many of these models are in fact future updates, it's just that you can't know in advance what they represent. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:30, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Riiiight,so if its future content,and it model just Happened to be with the models from a tail of two cats,its NOT related.besides the ghost cat in the wild is a rumor,like spike the red revenant and the mutant imp..Anyways, i think that the dragonkin model atleast deserves a mention in its article,anyway oli,come up with a comprimise please,another i have is no images,just mentions of what some models appear to be.Battleben 19:58, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

This is my compromise - don't allow RSMV images and don't mention them. Not much of a compromise, but that's my opinion. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:32, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
I personally like the sound of Oli's compromise at the moment... [3] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 22:42, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Changed my vote to Support AND here's my compromise:

  • Only images of items that can be easily be told to be themselves, and confirmed to be a future release by Jagex, like the dragon pickaxe one, should be included.
  • Images of those items must have a new template specifically for them, per Robert.
  • The articles for those images must have as reference the proof that Jagex has confirmed their release.
So... what do you guys think? Plus, for those who say they don't want the surprise spoiled or something, just don't check the items' articles, nobody is forcing them to go look. And some people like some surprises spoiled. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 00:05, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

what do we do for quests? nobody complains about spoilers on there- whatever we do there, we should do for these. i guess. O_o Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 00:08, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Good compromise brux,But i would like to mention one thing,Basicly nothing in the model viewer are future updates,Only beta content,the only thing that i can think of that would be future content would be the dragon pickaxes beta model,and the draynor graphics update.So,the fact that most things are beta content,means that there will not be any surprises.Battleben 08:43, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Kuradal was found in there too. Many of the models do represent future updates. The problem is that we cannot know for sure which update they represent. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 12:13, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
It truly can come down to common sense and/or personal opinion in the end. Chicken7 >talk 12:15, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
Which makes it speculation. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 12:18, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
Not exactly, but in a way, yes. Although we should be taking any opportunity to improve the wiki and this will greatly benefit. Chicken7 >talk 12:36, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment/Question - Where will these images go? Will they have their own articles, and if yes, how would these be named? Or would they all be on one list? What would the article say about what they show? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 15:54, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

It really depends,if there's a existing article about the subject,then there,if not,we will have a page of them.And your argument about Kuradal is false as Kuradal was already in the game(randomly teleporting to places with slayer monsters and using stat spy)Battleben 16:42, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

"the subject" - We don't know the subject. What I meant is, when one of these images is uploaded, will it be labeled (for example) "dragon kiteshield", or "model number xxxxxxxx" ? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:14, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Model XXXXXXXX speculated to be dragon kiteshield.(the old inv image of the dragon square halves doesn't count.)Battleben 08:31, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Brux, but I have to oppose your compromise on moral grounds (biting the hand that feeds us) and the fact that it is encouraging players to break RuneScape Rules to a level in which Jagex considers ban-able. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 10:10, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Biting the hand that feeds us? They refuse to allow us to name our site, they certainly do not "feed us", if anything we have to work around their not liking us.--Degenret01 14:29, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

theres no reason for this rule to exist, thus its perfectly fine to break it. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:25, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Plus,Its not against any rule in the first place,and if it is,then it shouldn't,And jagex will not ban us for it.

Read the post at the top. J4rfl3x themselves have said it's against the rules. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:27, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Read Robert's millions of posts. It isn't against the law, so therefore, that rule does not really apply here. (If I remember right) Chicken7 >talk 06:20, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
You don't think I've already read them? Look, Jagex doesn't want people to use this programme, that's all I'm saying. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 06:39, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
So its not against the rules, but against Jagex's plea to not look at images on our hard drive. Chicken7 >talk 06:59, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say it was against the law anywhere, I only mentioned RuneScape's rules. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 07:21, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
The images are theirs, so shouldn't they decide what may be done with it (except of course when what they want is really against the law)... Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 14:58, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Ever think jagex is wrong? its against no rule,against no law,and they cannot ban us for it,And I don't see what's wrong with looking at files on our hard drive,If its against the third party software rule,then so is internet explorer,and basiclly every other program in existence.Battleben 08:39, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

I don't like where this is going, I know little about legal stuff... Banning an account has nothing to do with British/international law, Jagex owns out accounts are are just lending them out to us, so that can basically do whatever they want to them without breaking the law. e.g. It is not illegal to say "arse", yet it is possible to have your account banned if you say it enough times in-game. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 08:59, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Continued

Support Brux's proposal - Per Chooky Pirate-Policeman. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  08:42, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose proposal - For the reasons why I said directly above. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 09:09, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support Brux's proposal - they cannot ban us for it, nor can they fine/send us to jail. as for it being against jagex rules, there is absolutly no reason for that rule to exist. it does no obvious, serious, or long lasting damage, nor does it give us an unfair or unearned advantage. what you guys seem to be saying is that we should blindly follow any rule jagex comes up with, no matter if the rule nessary or not. lastly, its like if i was to make a law saying you couldnt name anybody Ela, because i dont like the name Ela. it would be pointless, as well as impossible to inforce. just like this. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:46, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - What Jagex says is should be considered law, you break it and you may become banhammered (should they discover you doing as such). As for some people saying this "rule" should not be followed is like saying a Peeping Tom doesn't need to be jailed for invasion of privacy. It doesn't matter what you think is right/wrong/reasonable, your rights within this game are dictated by Jagex, it's their intellectual property and you are the new Tom violating thier rules. Ryan PM 17:37, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Except the RSMV against the rules or against Jagex's ToS, so your argument is moot--.Agamemnus 21:35, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
First off, I'm entiteled to my opinion. Secondly, it isn't "moot" as I have say it as it has been regarded by Jagex and Jagex Staff members if you had bothered to read the archive. Lastly, I can make any argument I feel needs to be said. Ryan PM 21:59, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Bluesonic, Oli, and everyone else who opposed the use of images from the Model Viewer. [4] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 17:45, March 1, 2010 (UTC)


I challange all of you opposers who give "per above" as your reason, to put into your own words why. there is no objective reason why not to use the images. Do you want to be controlled by fear? The irrationality shown in this thread suggests the average age of the contributers to this wiki is too low. Tortilliachp 18:02, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

The reason I put "per above" is because Bluesonic and Oli, not to mention Evil Yanks (who I forgot when I wrote my oppose statement Frown), summed it up very nicely why it shouldn't be done, and I felt no need to add repetitive statements to what has already been said. Therefore, I don't see why I should go along with your challenge, as my reasons, along with the other "opposers" reasons, has already been summed up nicely several times in this discussion. In all fairness, however, I believe us "opposers" should be the ones challenging you "supporters" to come up with your own reasons why it should be implemented, as there are plenty of supporters who have said "per above" in their arguments, yet you haven't called them out on it as of yet. [5] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 18:31, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

i believe we all agree that jagex cannot take action against the wiki for this. correct? Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 20:30, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

They may not be able to take legal actions against the Wiki or its users, but what's stopping Jagex from doing a mass ban of Wikians' RuneScape accounts out of spite for us thumbing our noses at them? As Evil Yanks stated above, our RuneScape accounts are the intellectual property of Jagex, and they're legally free to do what they please with our accounts. Personally, I don't want to risk having my account banned solely because everyone decided to pass this proposal and allow the use of images from the Model Viewer, which Jagex has forbidden us from doing. [6] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 20:36, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - Jagex only have to ask Wikia to do anything they want to the Wiki, it has been done before to other RS Wiki's for different reasons, but the point still remains. If Jagex wanted us to remove an image or article, they would request Wikia Staff to do it. Supposedly they can shut the Wiki down if they had enough reason to. Ryan PM

they cannot ban our rs accounts- they dont know our rs accounts. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 20:39, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Many users have usernames on their userpages. While these are not necessarily the right ones, I think Jagex wouldn't mind banning all of them, then checking whether they're the right names. We could even get other people banned for this - how much worse could it get? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:04, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

they cannot prove its us- if i put that i am zezima, gertjaars, or smokin mils, would they ban those accounts? i think not. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 21:08, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

We discussed this a while back. The fear that they could really pull off a mass banning like that is unsubstantiated. Sure they could nitpick through user-pages and maybe ban a couple of people, but they could also choose to ban the entire games population, just because they can doesn't mean they will. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 21:11, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
You do know who Andrew is and what his stance is on any rulebreakers in general?? We are (one of) the largest fansites in existence, I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to "make an example" of us if we did this. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 05:05, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
And what makes you think they would make an example of us aside from unfounded fear? There is too many technical and logistical difficulties in correctly banning the right people to do anything. Jagex is smart and efficient, they know how to run their game. Just read back in the archived section, this was all covered. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 13:04, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I have barely been following this conversation, there have been too many serious people arguing. I do worry about the entire reasoning being that Jagex are too nice to risk responding if we decide to blatently break the rules knowing the concequences, though I really don't want to argue any more since I always become as degen says "passionate" and end up making everyone hate me including me. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 06:41, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comment on whole topic - I don't like this. Aside from my busy schedule, this thread and the proposed by the community's view on such is a main factor why I hardly edit here anymore. I still promise this community my 100% devotion and commitment when I can, but this is a huge setback for our wiki and is a very large negative feature if any of this passes.

Bonziiznob Talk

05:07, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

I'm over this discussion too, and will no longer be participating in it. Although, I don't understand how if this thread passes you think it'll be a setback to our community. They won't be banning accounts if this happens, as it is not literally breaking their written rules, and it is not in any way or form breaking the law... Anyway, I'm done here. Chicken7 >talk 05:21, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
I doubt that this thread will ever come to a good end. It seems like a compromise is almost impossible. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 08:43, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

The only way this will end is if you anti model viewer people come to a comprimise! we have tried.One comprimise from me is no images,but maybe just mentions sometimes.If not,Then we always have the dark rs wiki...(keep in mind,It Is NOT a rule breaking wiki,Its policies are just a bit looser(allowing player articles for example)Battleben 09:17, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

"you anti model viewer people" - I don't like that. You're saying it like we "anti model viewer people" are a bunch of selfish idiots, and you are generalizing. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 15:14, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

you DO seem to be selfish idiots, no offense. you dont want these pics here? DONT UPLOAD THEM! just ignore them- u wont have committed any "wrong" or done anything against ur beliefs. but for those of us who dont respect jagex's rules outside the game, we can upload them all we want. and whatever happens, NONE of us will be banned. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:29, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

That's downright rediculous. First of all, how does this make us selfish? Then, how can we ignore these pictures when we can get in trouble for them (not necessarily a ban, but at least we'll never be as respected as we are now)? And, even though the chance isn't very big, you cannot know that no-one will be banned. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 15:42, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
If anyone was banned it would only be the uploaders, and Jagex does not respect us anyhow.--Degenret01 15:45, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't just talking about Jagex, I meant the whole RS community. Most people wouldn't dare go to a fansite about which Jagex have said that they're breaking a rule (even if we aren't). Also, Jagex could ban the whole lot - to set an example. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 16:10, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
Oli, sir, you are fear mongering. They most certainly will not ban everyone on this site and I am greatly disappointed you would try these fear tactics to win your point. Please lets stick to a bit of reality here. As far as the RS community, I think we have a fair representation here on this site and many people don't think Jagex should try imposing their rules off-site.--Degenret01 16:16, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

the rs community does not give. they want helpful quest hints, lists of drops from bandos, and tips on clues. they couldnt care less about what type of images we have. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:48, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Right,People,this is not going to get anywhere at all,so lets just end this discussion? if nobody will make a comprimise then we might as well request closure.

@ Degen - I am not trying to intimidate anyone by saying that they could ban everyone. That's just how I see Jagex - a bunch of people who are afraid of any slight breaking of rules (even if it's not really against the rules) and who will ban a whole load of people, then check whether they're really guilty.

Also, I am willing to make a compromise, I just don't agree with the current proposals, and sadly I have yet to come up with one that everyone can agree with. I'm thinking, really, my brains hurt, but I need to get it into a single piece (and wording isn't really my strongest side). Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:11, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Degen. Jagex is not about to ban a large number of their players just for having edited a site that they are afraid of. Honestly, I haven't seen any suggestion that I like, either. However, I don't think that we should avoid uploading pictures that could be helpful to the wiki because Jagex tells us that it is against the rules/ToS (which it isn't). I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 06:20, March 4, 2010 (UTC) 

theres no reason for that rule in the first place, therefore there is nothing wrong with breaking it. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 17:04, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

That's like saying "there's no reason for a law against murder, so let's kill someone". You can't say that breaking a rule is okay because there is no reason for the rule to be there. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:28, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

no, its not like that. not at all. does murder do serious, unnecessary, and long lasting harm to people, property, or animals or give an obvious and unfair advantage? YES. does this? NO. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 19:51, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

You can't say that breaking a rule is fine because there's no reason for the rule to be there. It's just not right. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:41, March 4, 2010 (UTC)
maby it isnt- but whats "right" is just someone's an opinion. anyways, this isnt getting anywhere. when i get my new keybord ill try to come up with a compromise. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:03, March 5, 2010 (UTC)


Closed - No consensus.--

Helm of neitiznot (charged).png Azaz129 Crystal shield.png Talk Edits Contribs

18:15, March 19, 2010 (UTC)