Quote from: allo_moon3d on April 20, 2019, 04:33:06 AM

Your description does not begin to give us credit where due! It does not mention the redesign effort and upgrading of outdated code we performed. Additionally it does not factor in our realtime ETH exchange backend or any of the visually obvious design changes that weve made.

I don't mean to in any shape-or-form minimize the amount of work you've done. And I can see there's several improvements. You (and your team?) seem like competent developers, and I have no doubt you'll keep improving it.

However, it's also kind of beside the point. All your work is built upon code in which you're not following the licensing requirements.

Quote

  Fair to who? Us getting the license certainly does not benefit crash players. At best, it would give Daniel some pocket change. It does not seem fair to a startup to be forced to either pay for a license or Open Source their competitive edge (in a sea of commoditized v1 clones). Hence we are sticking to our guns.

As you know, the code was made available on the condition that you contribute back either monetarily (via paying a 1 time fee) or via making your changes also open-source, to potentially benefit everyone else who is interested.

Quote

Frankly its a shame that the only people who think it is unfair to use the open-source code are other game operators that have cloned v1 BaB (or in your case made BaB v1). Much like George RR Martin wouldnt be ecstatic at you downloading GOT, Im sure you and the other license holders arent ecstatic about us not buying it.

It really makes absolutely zero difference to me what you do. I'm just posting my opinion here as someone linked me to this thread and asked me what I thought, and I figured it'd make the most sense to me just being public with my thoughts.

Quote

Still to come out here and publicly claim we are untrustworthy (even tho we never did any wrong to our players), seems more unfair to me.

I wouldn't say that you are untrustworthy as much as I'd that I'd never trust your operation. (Or maybe that's the what untrustworthy means? But still, it feels like too strong a word).

Of course everyone needs to make up their own mind.

To be perfectly honest, the reason that I wouldn't trust you isn't so much about the piracy/copyright infringement, it's more just how you're handling it. I just don't for the life of me understand why you'd let this whole thing tarnish your brand. And a brand that doesn't mind being tarnished, is one I'm scared of. Actually not very long ago (a couple months, at most?) there was a much bigger site (betking) that also violated the license and then pulled the "we modified it, so we shouldn't have to pay or open-source it". I too left them negative trust over it, as I reasoned that it's kind of ridiculous to trust a site that is happy marring it's reputation so easily (also their lying about it wasn't really inspiring).

Then a week or so later, they decided to scam all their investors.

Now I'm not trying to imply you'll do the same, but I just don't trust brands that don't fight hard to have a squeaky clean image.

Quote

Saying things like this does not give me much optimism for your future and we are tarnishing our brand just seems like blatant attacks on our character, rather than our actions as game operators. Still youre entitled to your opinion. We will continue to build trust in our community one feature/one day at a time. Im sure consistency over time will benefit us!

I think you misunderstand what a character attack is. I believe I've only criticized your actions on account that's all I know of you. Violating the license is an action as a game operator! (Unless you've internalized this so much, it's now part of your character?! :S)

Despite this, I harbor you no will-ill and hope you go on to surprise me and build a successful business.

P.S. you build trust via how you act in situations like this, not in how much development or features you make.

P.P.S. why do you think it'll lower your competitive advantage in releasing your changes? bustabit built a multi-million dollar business on totally open-source code. A site is made up of a lot more than its source code. Actually the only reason I stopped publishing the source as open-source was for anti-DOS reasons. I was getting attacked by a bunch of people I pissed off on bitcointalk (lol...) and they kept reading my changes and the source code to better learn how to DoS the site. From a competitive point of view, I'm really not sure it matters.