GrafX Censorship
in [Visual Objects]
|
Prev: List of VO Developers
Next: Designer Gucci Boston - Monogram Black 114914Mblack Handbags, Replica, Fake
From: Geoff Schaller on 22 Apr 2008 18:40 Hi Folks, Brian is up to his old tricks again and has removed the messages of at least 3 people and possibly others from several of his Vulcan threads. There were a couple of important threads discussing what the VO to Vulcan code converter would or should do and what Robert might do with further versions of VO. There were also a number of messages pleading for information about coming SP releases and one thread requesting details of VS version comparisons. All of these threads were quite interesting and quite important but our young friend Mr Feldman sees fit to obliterate any such discussions and refuses to allow any debate at any level on feature sets and directions. I might say that this completely misrepresents the Charter given him by CA when it handed over the rights to VO. Knowing the nature of VO users, CA made it plain that the VO community was to be consulted and included in the development of the product and GrafX was only given VO on terms that stated the VO must be continued to be developed. It is not enough to say that because Brian has VO, he has the sole right to decide its future. He does not and CA can take back the product if it so chooses or it thinks Brian is not fulfilling his obligations. Other user group presidents at the time saw the charter and know this to be true. At this point, I am coming around to the opinion that GrafX is failing in its duty toward us as VO denizens. I put this up for comment. Geoff
From: Stephen Quinn on 22 Apr 2008 21:26 Geoff AFAIK CA has never owned/developed Vulcan so there's nothing they can do about it.. AFAIK Grafxsoft owns the newsgroups your referring to (or at least they're PRIVATE newsgroups not PUBLIC) and the admin/moderator of those groups can do whatever they want regarding moderating those newsgroups. Why post it here anyway - no-one here can influence what gets added/removed from a private ng. If our unhappy about it complain to the people who own the newsgroups. CYA Steve
From: Geoff Schaller on 23 Apr 2008 02:35
Steve, > AFAIK CA has never owned/developed Vulcan so there's nothing they can do > about it.. The issue is 'VO' and what constitutes development. Brian's public stance is that the evolution of VO is Vulcan therefor Vulcan by definition is VO. It depends on how he wants to define this. The reason for 'Vulcan' was so that he could avoid paying royalties to CA out of new versions but then what does that mean for VO? If it stops evolving then he breaks his contract with CA so he has to keep VO moving at some speed forward. That speed has been pitifully slow. And it is also why he cannot say officially that he will never improve VO. CA would come down on him. But what about us? If Vulcan is where all effort is to go then we have the same right to comment and criticise as we always did. But none of this justifies censorship. > AFAIK Grafxsoft owns the newsgroups your referring to (or at least they're > PRIVATE newsgroups not PUBLIC) and the admin/moderator of those groups can Yes. So we can voice our concerns in a genuinely public forum and let others take up the discussion or ignore it as they see fit. > Why post it here anyway - no-one here can influence what gets added/removed > from a private ng. Because I can reach the others on those forums. They all read both. > If our unhappy about it complain to the people who own the newsgroups. I did and the complaints were removed <g>. Hence my continuation here. Cheers. Geoff |