Cactus Game Design Message Boards

8. There is to be no formation of groups or other clubs that will in any way exclude other members on this board.

This sure sounds a lot like Open Discussion. Let's look at the facts:

1. There is a rule against exclusion of members.
2. There is an exclusive board based on an arbitrarily set number.
3. A board could be construed as a club.

If this rule is not being followed, can I break this rule?

2. Entire threads of spam will not exist in this forum.  Any excessive spam posts will be quarantined or deleted.

Personally, I think the rules should be re-written anyway. The SQF didn't get shut down, and that excluded any members who wouldn't say the oath.

This is another valid point. Especially since the following rules are consistantly broken:

2. Entire threads of spam will not exist in this forum.  Any excessive spam posts will be quarantined or deleted.

Every post by some members.

3. We want to encourage people to discuss and debate here within the guidelines of appropriate Christian behavior and good taste. Inserting totally irrelevant or downright frivolous posts into an otherwise worthwhile discussion will not be allowed. Any such posts will be quarantined or deleted.

Every non-Ruling Questions Board posts some members make.

4. Insults and derogatory remarks will not be tolerated here.  If we have any cause to think that you intend to ridicule, belittle or insult someone with your post, we will quarantine or delete it. If such behavior continues after enough warning, we will have you banned.

Most posts in Open Discussion.

8. There is to be no formation of groups or other clubs that will in any way exclude other members on this board.

SQF/Open Discussion

9. With the growing popularity of the Redemption® trading card game, some overzealous entrepreneurs (some joking, some serious) have been producing all sorts of graphics, shirts, etc. with copyrighted Cactus images and logos on them. This will not be tolerated without permission from Cactus Game Design.

What it is: Copyrights© and Registered Trademarks® are expensive. The person or company usually goes through an attorney who researches the copyright, applies for it, and upon receiving it, makes sure it is honored. Copyrights protect an individual's intellectual properties (properties that can cost significant money to bring to the market and to promote and sell.)

What Cactus has protected: Anything with a © or ® or ™ on it is off limits without permission from Cactus Game Design to use it. In fact, some of the images we have used in Redemption® come with their own © on them, closely regulating how Cactus may use them. For example, unless we get the property owner’s permission we cannot use any of Jeff Haynie’s works (Authority of Christ, etc.), any AOCOM, any Eternal Studios, any Jamison artwork, or any N’Lightning images on anything except Redemption® cards. Shirts, posters, etc. violate the © agreement.

Things off limits to use without our permission:
-        Redemption Logo
-        Flaming Sword image
-        Illustrations
-        Card Layout and Design
-        Redemption Game Mechanics

If any of these are used without our permission, we have the right, by law, to take legal action. This can range anywhere from having servers to taking down a website to legal action in a courtroom.

What Cactus expects from you:
1.) Do not assume anything. Ask permission. It is not that hard. Just send us an e-mail (cactusrob@frontier.com) and you will most likely be cleared to use it.
2.) List somewhere on the page/image that the images are for instance “©2011 Cactus Game Design. Used with Permission.”
3.) Do NOT sell the item. Making profit from our © names and games without permission will not be tolerated. All items you wish to produce using our logos and images must be first approved and will be subject to certain restrictions. (For example, all sales of Redemption® related items are subject to a 10% royalty to be sent to Cactus Game Design Inc.)

The New Card Ideas Board.


So what rules can I break without concern?

well there goes awesome looking playmats. guess i'll stick with my mtg and ygo mats.

There are always casulties in the fight for virtue.

The rules need a MAJOR rewrite IMO.

You're one of the more frequent posters in Open Discussion, and now you want it gone or something?

I don't think he wants Open Discussion gone. I think he wants the rule gone.

Dear admins,

I'm excluded from the Playtesters club. I'm denied access to their forums, which sounds like exclusion to me. Please fix this immediately.

Amor,
Salsa

Comprende! Thank you for your support Comrade Saucy Pants!

The rules need a MAJOR rewrite IMO.

The first thing I would suggest is that we legislate the requirement for proper grammar.

I must ask... what is your point in posting this?

You're one of the more frequent posters in Open Discussion, and now you want it gone or something?

what is this i dont even

I never said I wanted anything gone. I just want the elitism of the boards to go away if it is actually a rule. If it isn't a rule, I want to know why I have to listen to any other rule. Why can't I link to other boards for recruitment purposes, for example? I am in a group, so why can't I break that other rule?

Since the main culprit seems to be the Open Discussion board, I say we just delete that and be all good. I'm "old enough" but I don't go there any more for the aforementioned reasons. No one ever changes their mind anyway. I hear the same opinions over and over and over and.......

Good call, bro. Solve elitism with elitism. Brilliant!*

*Copywritten by Guiness Draft Beer. BRILLIANT!

either he wants the rules to be changed. or has given mods a reason to become stricter and start cracking down on everything he has detailed.

My bad, bro. Didn't know the internet was a country club.

my point is its probably best to not shed light on things that are happening that shouldnt be happening if you want it to continue happening...if open discussion is gone tomorrow, well, everyone now knows where to look.

thats the point. if you're one of those rich 'business magnates' that realizes helping that poor little kid on the streets will detract from your goal, why would you help him? pretty much proved my point. through sarcasm. wow, sarcasm. thats original!

But, seriously, you wouldn't help a kid if it would detract from your career?

I have no obligation to answer this because it is an impossible scenario for two reasons:
1.) When is the last time you saw a needy kid in the rich part of New York?
2.) Helping the kid would be good for my career. Just let me call up a couple news agencies, my PR guy said this stuff is gold.

everyone likes women these days.

I live in LA though

You're nearing a fine line. Don't forget you're just a short drive from San Francisco. You don't want to make them mad while they're still of use.

You two are extremely bored aren't you?

I have to disagree - If I said "You two are both lazy lay-abouts, good for nothing" (Clearly what you read in my innocent question) Then I would agree with you, however, you are choosing to interpret a question posed to you as an insult, which frankly, is insulting to me.

I have to disagree - If I said "You two are both lazy lay-abouts, good for nothing" (Clearly what you read in my innocent question) Then I would agree with you, however, you are choosing to interpret a question posed to you as an insult, which frankly, is insulting to me.

Based upon this suggestion that interpretation of the reading is paramount to the meaning of the post, I would have to suggest that virtually every post breaks rule number 4. That being said, I must therefore conclude that rule 4 is clearly allowed to be repeated broken without consequence.

Since rule 4 is no longer valid, RDT, you are the biggest noob I have ever met. Who plays a Disciples Type 2 deck without a Fishing Boat? Only you would.

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on July 31, 2011, 02:28:44 PM

Also known as likely to cause a flame war on CGD message boards.

I wouldn't worry about that. I have some really good topics in mind that can cause a bigger flame war, which will divert the attention of the first one. Similar to how the government kills celebrities when they want to commit war crimes, so the major news stations ignore the latter.

I heard that they also reprogram famous convicted felons (except Lindsay Lohan) so that the redemption stories can overcome the stories of the dead celebrities.