Assembly 03 - Crippled Releasefiles
category: general [glöplog]
I think it's a real shame that the submitted files to Assembly 03 are not in it's actual state. Our music entry for example (I do not mention any names now, otherwise it might be seen as hidden advertisment or stuff). It was submitted in a ZIP fitting the rules at the Assembly Partypage (16 chars max). The ZIP contained the entry (as MP3 and an additional NFO file for further information). At every page hosting/mirroring the files I can only see "Songname by Artist.xxx". That's it... the .NFO has gone... and the orginal file names as well. This happens to _nearly_ every submitted production at Assembly. If anyone has such a system... he should use it his own, but _NOT_ modify the stuff and make it public so that everyone get's the modified version. - Kojote
who cares man. if you don't like it, don't submit. infofiles with music are silly anyway. put info into some ID3/OGG tags instead and you're done.
who cares man. if you don't like it, don't submit. infofiles with music are silly anyway. put info into some ID3/OGG tags instead and you're done.
the fact is they setup rulez for how a filename has to be, and then modify it. that only suckz! not sure if yuo guys would see it the same way if one of your productions would be in the same situation. of course there was a ID tag anyway... still i hate it that my submitted stuff get's modified. asm was the first party to do this shit...
by submitting your song/demo/whatever you accepted their rules, you are free to read the rules before you enter the compo, you are free to not accept them and not to take place in the compo... where is the problem?
just gone through the "contract rules" again. i found a nice point telling: "- The Author gives ASSEMBLY Organizing the right to use the Work or parts thereof, free of charge, in their original or modified form in the marketing, broadcasting, publishing or distribution of material related to the current and future ASSEMBLY events." - Anyway... Leaving out parts of a production or modifiying something else than the name of a ZIP file is 100% BULLSHIT
smoke a blunt and enjoy life :)
there are more serious problems in the world, like mr. g.uu.bush for example...
there are more serious problems in the world, like mr. g.uu.bush for example...
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: democracy just doesn't work!
sprang ein Hirschlein über den Waldeshain und schnupperte am Ärschelein von einem Kojötchen, und am Morgen danach feierten sie Tiefzeit, dem blauen Wal zum trotz kauften sie sich eine Eigentumswohnung im Keller vom Weißen Haus in Waschschinken D.C. gleich neben dem Hundstrümmerl mit dem Namen Tschortsch Dabbeljuh Busch. Die grünen Zweige der halbnackten Dominas regneten herab auf die nackte Haut des Weihnachtsmannes und Elvis Pressplay Junior schwängerte seine Siamkatze, von oben, von unten und natürlich von hinten. Gezeichnet, euer: Izmir Übel
lame, lamer, TMB
I've said if before, and I'll say it again: dominas just work great!
write your bullshit at least in english that the others have a good laugh too. using two different nicks is lame as well... I'd really like to have serious opinions of others here...
3y3 533 y4! \/\/4nn4 b3 1337? y4 w4n|<3r5 57i11 533/\/\ n07 70 |<n0\/\/ 7h47 TMB != ReeBoK, 50 p13453 f3c|< 0ff... 7h4n|< y4...
btw. kojote, i just hate you for adding some nonsense release news. ever heard from such things as latest added/released prods menus.
probably recognized that i do not post such news anymore since 2 weeks? i had some talk with a few sceners and changed my opinion slightly. anyway... if you go to the add-news page at pouet.net it redirects you to ojuice. and that's where i entered the news which were thought for pouet. I can't be held responsible if the moderators put stuff in a wrong category. and if you have a problem, please let me know. we are all adult people and can discuss stuff in a "normal" way. just from beeing shut up i do not know what you think, now i know. and just btw... you could say it in a more friendlier way...
i agree with kojote on the primary topic.
I agree... My 4k intro had 13 words long name, so I had named it shortly "u-after.zip". Now it has a pretty horrible filename in scene.org :P
i would be mad as hell when some party orgas would cripple up my releasenames. i always package my releases in bbs-conform way, 8+3, and that's the way i want them to get spread. so i totally feel with you, dairos.
Oehm..well, guys...I surely also liked the good old bbs-style 8+3 in the days where it was very useful for sure...
But I also would say that this 'system' is pretty way outdated meanwhile and so I don't really understand that people still _insist_ on 8+3 these days...
Most of the time this way the release-name is even more 'cryptic' and not really useful when you're able to use more characters finally to write a 'normal' release name and additional a group name as well!!
So _where_ do you _really_ still need 8+3 only these days? (BBSs' ?? Oehm..where?? more than 2 still online and heavily supported?? In opposite to all the internet sites and ftps ??)
Just take any ftp-site on the net and it won't have a problem with a normal lenght of e.g. 32+3...
This would also make searching much easier or 'recognizing' files itself and everything...
So I don't mind the naming of the assembly releases at the moment...(of course I agree if the asm-orga set up serious and strict rules for naming (8+3??) and finally broke 'em themselves....that's surely not logical then...but well..I wouldn't understand why asm insited on 8+3 then as well... ;-))
Well, that's my opinion at least... ;-)
But I also would say that this 'system' is pretty way outdated meanwhile and so I don't really understand that people still _insist_ on 8+3 these days...
Most of the time this way the release-name is even more 'cryptic' and not really useful when you're able to use more characters finally to write a 'normal' release name and additional a group name as well!!
So _where_ do you _really_ still need 8+3 only these days? (BBSs' ?? Oehm..where?? more than 2 still online and heavily supported?? In opposite to all the internet sites and ftps ??)
Just take any ftp-site on the net and it won't have a problem with a normal lenght of e.g. 32+3...
This would also make searching much easier or 'recognizing' files itself and everything...
So I don't mind the naming of the assembly releases at the moment...(of course I agree if the asm-orga set up serious and strict rules for naming (8+3??) and finally broke 'em themselves....that's surely not logical then...but well..I wouldn't understand why asm insited on 8+3 then as well... ;-))
Well, that's my opinion at least... ;-)
well weasel, call me an outdated weirdo, but i prefer 8+3 files because i DO support bbs's. and no, there are not 2, but about 20 still around, getting heavy support. mail me if this phrase caught your interest.
but anyway, it's not even about 8+3, but it's about the integrity of a release package. i think it's a "holy rule" that the creator decides about everything how his release is packaged, and that includes the filename. every group/individual has its own way of packaging, so it's part of his/its concept. and party orgas don't mess up with the infofile - so why they mess around with the fileformat? an inacceptpable thing, i'd say. you can be sure at evoke we won't fool with your release package, unless it got some weird chars in the filename.
the package, including the filename, is intellectual property of the autor and/or group. basta.
but anyway, it's not even about 8+3, but it's about the integrity of a release package. i think it's a "holy rule" that the creator decides about everything how his release is packaged, and that includes the filename. every group/individual has its own way of packaging, so it's part of his/its concept. and party orgas don't mess up with the infofile - so why they mess around with the fileformat? an inacceptpable thing, i'd say. you can be sure at evoke we won't fool with your release package, unless it got some weird chars in the filename.
the package, including the filename, is intellectual property of the autor and/or group. basta.
8.3 is fine by me if the product is easily recognisable in that space. Having 100's of demo.zip really isn't useful when you're trying to find a particular prod! BBS operators should surely be capable of renaming a file intelligently anyway.
Same goes for asm orgas renaming the archives, i think it's fine if it helps clarify the group, the name of the prod, and maybe the OS. I think any further messing with the contents, removing nfo files etc is going way to far though. OK if there is some copyright issue or pron or whatever, but if a simple nfo with requirements or some ascii art is removed, I can't see any good excuse for that.
Same goes for asm orgas renaming the archives, i think it's fine if it helps clarify the group, the name of the prod, and maybe the OS. I think any further messing with the contents, removing nfo files etc is going way to far though. OK if there is some copyright issue or pron or whatever, but if a simple nfo with requirements or some ascii art is removed, I can't see any good excuse for that.
cut the crap.
go do something useful instead.
go do something useful instead.
It's really annoying that some prods got to keep their infofiles but some were stripped. There's absolutely no reason to leave out infofiles.
dipswitch:
Well, I _definitely_ agree with you if you are talking about _inside_ a zip-file and its contents of course!
As that is 100% part of the group/the release/the style of the prod-release itself.
So leaving out, changing or deleting anything from inside the archive of a release is surely a _lame_ and of course an inacceptable thing then!
BUT: I was just talking about the zip-file name itself. That one - in my opinion - is not that 'critical' if it gets changed by an ftp-site, a bbs-system or a party-orga cause they want to keep it on 'one and the same style for their party-ftp' for people having it easier to find and recognize anything they are looking for then...
If a group insists of any special filename of their prod...they can still do that with the .exe file _inside_ the whole archive then...which of course then shouldn't be changed by anyone else not having any group-rights to do so then...
Further I also second psonice's view as well...
Well, I _definitely_ agree with you if you are talking about _inside_ a zip-file and its contents of course!
As that is 100% part of the group/the release/the style of the prod-release itself.
So leaving out, changing or deleting anything from inside the archive of a release is surely a _lame_ and of course an inacceptable thing then!
BUT: I was just talking about the zip-file name itself. That one - in my opinion - is not that 'critical' if it gets changed by an ftp-site, a bbs-system or a party-orga cause they want to keep it on 'one and the same style for their party-ftp' for people having it easier to find and recognize anything they are looking for then...
If a group insists of any special filename of their prod...they can still do that with the .exe file _inside_ the whole archive then...which of course then shouldn't be changed by anyone else not having any group-rights to do so then...
Further I also second psonice's view as well...
weasel, the original discussion was about that the file names _inside_ the archive were changed, and files _inside_ the archive were left out. and that really sucks in my opinion :)
and if organizers plan to do something like this, they should announce it _before_ the party and not just do it (even if their rules theoretically allows them to do that).
about changing the archive name: ever tried putting the url to an assembly release into the topic of an ircnet channel? won't work, because the url's are too long. sucks ;-)
and if organizers plan to do something like this, they should announce it _before_ the party and not just do it (even if their rules theoretically allows them to do that).
about changing the archive name: ever tried putting the url to an assembly release into the topic of an ircnet channel? won't work, because the url's are too long. sucks ;-)
