Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About DoctaSax

  • Rank
    big blowhard

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    in my own head
  • Bio
    the usual

Contact Methods

  • Skype

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. DoctaSax

    Site questions, comments, and suggestions

    IIRC the ratings system isn't enabled site-wide, but clubs can have it, so that's probably where the ones with ratings come from in the filter. 'Commented' and 'reviewed' are possibly also club-only.
  2. Hi there, I hope not to seem too invasive, but we're having a little bit of a problem over in the NV Sexout Spunk topic. Could you please take a look at that?

    If this shoutout wasn't appreciated feel free to curse me.

  3. @legacyslayer : accusations of asset theft & copyright infringement are serious, and so shouldn't be made in public but rather through a report. Both times you publically accused RussianPrince of it this year, the actual licenses granted RussianPrince the right to do exactly what he did. You don't get to call people thieves when the evidence doesn't back that up. If the original creator of the assets allows, even wants, them to be used, you don't get to say RP can't use them. If the original creator doesn't require to be credited, you don't get say RP's doing anything illegal if he doesn't. You don't make the rules concerning those assets, the original creator did. @RussianPrince: "legacycunt"? Really? End of thread derailment. Can it, both of you.
  4. DoctaSax

    Rape sims

    Same thread as always. Don't tell modders what to do, or not do. Do it yourself, or not. End of story.
  5. DoctaSax

    M.C.G. for Skyrim LE

    Please respect Angelos92's wishes. Nothing is set in stone when it comes to mod development, but if you just release something after spending a lot of time and effort, the last thing you need the feedback to be about is that you should change the entire structure. Please focus on what it is instead of what it's not.
  6. DoctaSax

    Sexout Spunk

    So far I have no reason to think they don't. Depends a little on what's in NC of course, and I don't know anything about that.
  7. DoctaSax

    MXR covering LL mods

    It is. Ur not my dad.
  8. DoctaSax

    MXR covering LL mods

    Back on topic. Pretty please.
  9. DoctaSax

    MXR covering LL mods

    "OMG, LL exists!" -> used to be clickbait a few years ago "there's weird, pervy content here - don't watch!" -> only showing it for... science? "Let me make fun of how things aren't working because I don't read descriptions." -> exactly what we need more of "never really been to LL before" -> uh-huh It's like 2012 all over. Dem were the days.
  10. Probably never. And that's alright. Vin's working on LifePlay, which is a sweet concept, and there's only so much even he can do at the same time. People are allowed to move on. For the past x pages, instead of someone else volunteering for the project, all I see is people complaining or expecting this mod to be on the rails. So the thread's probably long overdue for closing.
  11. DoctaSax

    Looking for female modders to interview

    I think @A.J. would make an interesting choice.
  12. Know full well why a post was removed. Whine about staff not taking the time to explain what you already know.
  13. DoctaSax

    Mod Assets- What Can I Use and Where/When?

    This can only work if the mods that the assets are from are also permissive, otherwise not. I'd imagine an OS-only modding environment would be a lot more strict when it comes to infringements than regular sites, even, because the aim is for others to be able to freely - and legitimately - use what you upload. Everything would always be with permission, because it's explicitly granted, not because the need for it somehow went away. This is really not necessary and counter-productive even. A lot of people who're into the FOSS ideal are so because it encourages creation. Monetary incentives can encourage creation so it's not much of a taboo for many of them, and several would even insist on being able to share as freely (ie: unrestricted) as possible, including with people who'd monetize. Anybody who's against sharing their stuff with other creators who'd make money off it would only have to add a non-commercial clause to their license, as long as it's otherwise permissive.
  14. DoctaSax

    Mod Assets- What Can I Use and Where/When?

    Nah. He left modding altogether over the paid mods drama. Pride was all about freely sharing, ie without restrictions. To date, SexoutNG is the only truly OS framework hosted on LL, under a BSD or MIT or something like that. I'll probably do the same for my next mod - the previous ones were all GPLs, which is still quite strict, in reverse. I still like the idea of a dedicated OS modding environment but christ, where to start, eh. It wasn't quite the same. I'm not talking about a creative project but hosting a site. Which ofc does require all those things you list too
  15. DoctaSax

    Mod Assets- What Can I Use and Where/When?

    Eh, let's not turn this into a philosophical debate over the pros and cons of copyright. What we have to work with is both the law stating that everything you create is automatically yours to decide what to do with, and a modding culture that's copied that as its philosophy too (with some exceptions where some expect more leniency, I suppose, although they really shouldn't). Screens of unauthorized modifications to mods... we don't have rules against it, we also don't have rules allowing it, it's really not our job to do any of the allowing or disallowing when it comes to things we didn't make. That's the rights holder's job. Complaints about screens or videos of mods may seem silly to you, and they are to many people, but again, in the end, if a complaint is made, it'd be rare for a hosting site to go against the wishes of a rights holder in favor of somebody claiming 'fair use' or 'it's the internet, after all'. It may be grey area stuff, but nobody's interested in putting it all to the test via courts and such. Even if not retroactively, this is simply going a bridge too far for established sites like LL or Nexus. How long would the wait have to be before a mod's assumed to be community-owned? Can you ever assume it to be community-owned without an explicit statement or license that says that it is? And if it has such an open statement or license, there's no need for a waiting period to determine if the original modder is inactive: it's up for grabs from the start. So it all comes down to us saying: going forward, you can only publish under an open-source type of license (ie permissive or copyleft), which would drive away quite a few modders. The only way something like that can work is in the form of a new site that only accepts uploads under open-source terms, from the moment they're published. Prideslayer & I once talked about his wish to create a site that'd only allow host such mods and tools, as well as the possibility of using open-source bounties and other such incentives for highly skilled people to create tools and frameworks that'd be 'community-owned' and so would never be blocked from further development. I still think there's something to it, but again, it'd have to be a separate, specialist site where only people who share that philosophy would publish. Applying it to a site where a wider selection of modders are already active is really out of the question.