le message de news: 47d66069@news.povray.org...

> It would be neat if in the image submission process, the entrant could 
> (via
> some click-through legalese) agree that the competition admins may, at
> their discretion, choose to grant third-party requests for non-commercial
> use of their entry if reasonable attempts to contact them fail*. Or have 
> it
> the other way around; make this a default condition of registration/entry
> and require them to opt out of it if they do not wish to do so.

IANAL, but this seems much too vague from a legal point of view. It would be 
preferable to let users choose between existing, well-established licenses 
that already have formal definitions, terms and conditions. That would also 
simplify image use for third parties. See for instance how Wikimedia Commons 
handles this: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing

G.

-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer art
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

"Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.47d6897a5c79dc2573e406e60@news.povray.org...
> Given the caliber of the people involved in this project, this comment is
> probably unnecessary, but I feel so strongly about it that I'm going to 
> take
> the time to make it anyway.  Some of the private information that I 
> provided to
> the old IRTC and TC-RTC in the understanding that it would be used 
> privately by
> the Admins now turns up on a Google search for anyone to read. If my 
> address
> and phone number were to similarly be put out in the open for public 
> viewing, I
> would be quite displeased.  Explicit assurances in this regard would be
> appreciated. Also, I'd be willing to give out this information for private
> Admin use only because experience with the people involved has given me 
> reason
> to trust them.  If I had just stumbled upon the IRTC anew and was told 
> that
> giving out my address and phone number were conditions for participating, 
> I
> would very likely suspect the worst and decline to enter.  Please consider
> requiring just a valid email address with a stipulation that if one wins
> anything, a physical address to which the prize is to be sent must be 
> provided
> to the Admins within X number of days or the prize is forfeit.
>

I very strongly agree with this!!!!
Thanks Mike for putting also my own concerns so clearly.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

I've read through all of the proposals here David, and first let me say that I
like the system as it is coming.

I agree with the choice of making an address optional, but IMO, you should put
some sort of disclaimer underneath it.

If I were to write said disclaimer, it would be "A home address is optional, but
if provided, will only be used to mail you a prize in the case of winning a
round.  This information may be provided later, if you wish"

In this manner, people know why they are being asked, and what happens if they
don't give it right away.  I just thought I'd make a point of this.

My second point, I think that the voting system in post one works the best.  I
always liked the system of voting in three categories, partly because I once
received an 8 in one category, while recieving 6's in the others.  Granted
that's not a big difference, but I think it allows for some flexibility.  Also,
I know I'm probably all not right in my train of thought, but, just my line of
the code.

As for the comments, I think they should be on the basis of optional, but highly
recommended.  I remember in one voting round with 25 images, It took at least an
hour and a half to write out all 24 comments (myself excluded), and I had
nothing else to do.  Comments do take a while, and I'll proabably still be
happy to sit out and write them for a couple hours, but there are those out
there who may not have time, and therefore be dissapointed that their votes
won't count because they didn't have time to spare to write out comments.
Again, it's just my line of code.

Any thoughts, David, or anyone else?

Post a reply to this message

David Buck wrote:

>    - Voters don't see who submitted the image until voting is finished

There are some artists whose views in p.o-t are enormously unpopular, 
and the low esteem the consequently enjoy may spill over into the voting.

On the other hand, some artists don't need their names on their work in 
order to be identifiable.

>    - Every voter must provide a comment on each image they vote on
>       - Voting is a privilege and a responsibility
>       - Providing constructive comments helps everyone
>       - The submitters put a lot of effort into their work, the
>          voters should respect that with appropriate comments

Granted, although comments will often be rote entries unless a human 
being reviews the comments.

> Does this sound reasonable?

It all looks fine to me, not much different from the old rules.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

"Chris Cason" <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> 
wrote in message news:47d6615d@news.povray.org...
> Chris Cason wrote:
>> permission to use an IRTC image for a good cause, and to have to 
>> refuse
>
> [following up to self to clarify]
>
> not technically 'refuse', since I don't have the right to give 
> permission
> in any event (except in certain very specific circumstances). so 
> while I
> can't actually 'refuse', it still feels like it when I say I 
> can't help;[

I think it would be trivial to include some option fields in the
registration/entry form that presents options such as:

do you reply to all permission to use requests with NO
contact info: xxx xxx

etc. - simple response engine incorporating above parameters

lots of permutations there - as long as a db is being used
it might be wise to use it

Post a reply to this message

Given Gilles' graph, I suggest:

1) A simple scale of 1 to 10.
2) Everyone gets to nominate one image for an honorable mention of Artistic,
Technical, Theme, etc.  Entrants can win more than one, but voters must choose
a separate entry for each mention.
3) Forcing comments will elicit poorly-thought-out comments.  So don't.


As far as addresses and phone numbers, IANAL, but I wonder if there were some
countries where this could be a problem for you to obtain the address and phone
number of minors, even if you do so by an online form where they say they are of
age. And I trust Chris and David "today", but with mission drift over a decade
I'm sure that data is going to get spilled somehow somewhere along the way.

I would encourage the kind of folks that Paul Bourke was getting as judges to
register as voters.  I think it would be cool to have some people with taste
who don't necessarily know that much about ray tracing.

Post a reply to this message

Nimish Ajmani wrote:
> If I were to write said disclaimer, it would be "A home address is optional, but
> if provided, will only be used to mail you a prize in the case of winning a
> round.  This information may be provided later, if you wish"

Why is everyone focusing on the "prize" aspect, when we don't even know 
that there will *be* prizes, and it has been repeatedly stated that the 
*contact* information is for *contacting* people?

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

"gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.47d71dff5c79dc258ff951eb0@news.povray.org...
>
>
> As far as addresses and phone numbers, IANAL, but I wonder if there were 
> some
> countries where this could be a problem for you to obtain the address and 
> phone
> number of minors, even if you do so by an online form where they say they 
> are of
> age. And I trust Chris and David "today", but with mission drift over a 
> decade
> I'm sure that data is going to get spilled somehow somewhere along the 
> way.
>
IMO, it is not only a question concerning minors, it is just a question of 
privacy. My phone number, for instance is not available publicly here by 
deliberate choice.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
> news:web.47d71dff5c79dc258ff951eb0@news.povray.org...
>>
>> As far as addresses and phone numbers, IANAL, but I wonder if there were 
>> some
>> countries where this could be a problem for you to obtain the address and 
>> phone
>> number of minors, even if you do so by an online form where they say they 
>> are of
>> age. And I trust Chris and David "today", but with mission drift over a 
>> decade
>> I'm sure that data is going to get spilled somehow somewhere along the 
>> way.
>>
> IMO, it is not only a question concerning minors, it is just a question of 
> privacy. My phone number, for instance is not available publicly here by 
> deliberate choice.
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 

I've come to agree with the privacy concerns.  Even though the intent 
was always to keep that information private and visible only to IRTC 
admins, it does cause too many privacy concerns.

I will make the section optional and add a note explaining that it is 
optional and how it would be used if provided.

E-mail confirmation will be required.

David

Post a reply to this message

Mike the Elder wrote:
> Given the caliber of the people involved in this project, this comment is

> the time to make it anyway.  Some of the private information that I provided to
> the old IRTC and TC-RTC in the understanding that it would be used privately by
> the Admins now turns up on a Google search for anyone to read. If my address

Can you give me an example of this with respect to the IRTC?

To my recollection the IRTC had no 'private' information in the submission
process. I'm curious to know what it is that you say has turned up that
should not have.

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message