Open Designs Forum » Site Specific
[sticky]
Site Rules & Design Submission Guidelines (Last Updated: 30 January 2012)
(392 posts)-
We should build a new database table for this, instead of having the system fire off emails...Posted 3 years ago #
-
So we need to add a new guideline, stating that
designers may not use the Creative Commons Attribution License to force users of their template to keep sponsored links. Template attribution is hereby limited to at most require an indexed (cannot have rel="nofollow" applied to it) link to the designer's own site. If a template does not clearly state the terms for attribution, all CC and GPL licensed templates default to this.
Feel free to post revisions of that statement, or whatever you think the rule should be.Posted 3 years ago # -
seeing as how that's all still up for discussion, I don't think we need to do it until the discussion is finished.Posted 3 years ago #
-
seeing how no one has disagreed with Jason (and all other supporters of this), seeing how the only active admin in the discussion (Sean) appears to support this, seeing how Jason is a moderator, seeing how something needs to be done and discussing gets nothing done... I think it's a good thing to keep this rule up until a better rule comes along.Posted 3 years ago #
-
How about this...
Designers may not use the Creative Commons Attribution License to force users of their template to keep sponsored links. If a template does not clearly state the terms for attribution, all Creative Commons licensed templates default to this.
I thought the second sentence was a bit redundant, but correct me if I'm wrong. And it's really not an issue with GNU GPL, since that license doesn't allow for sponsor attribution anyway. Just makes it a little easier to understand, imo.Posted 3 years ago # -
I agree, there's no need for all that preamble if we only allow GNU GPL and PD, and it does all the things as we need. Again i ask, can someone justify leaving CC as an option? This is not a rhetorical question - i would like to know in case it's worth keeping, but at this stage I can't see any.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Sam: sounds good to me. Pete: The Creative-Commons licenses are very author-friendly.Posted 3 years ago #
-
@Gnome: it doesn't answer my question - what does it have that others don't have that make it essential to stay here? I'm sure it is very author-friendly, but that doesn't mean it fits into this website.Posted 3 years ago #
-
I can't justify it staying here as an option.Posted 3 years ago #
-
@Pete: Of it's own merits, I don't see a reason to keep it. The only reason I see is all the existing templates that are licensed that way. The author may not have wanted it GPL or PD, so you can't just change them. You'd have to get permission first. Since it's the most common license on here, and since there will probably be a few NOs and a lot of no-answers, the site might lose a decent number of templates. The way around that would be to remove it as an option, but keep old templates licensed just the way they are. Grandfather them in so to speak.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Posted By: aaroncampbellThe way around that would be to remove it as an option, but keep old templates licensed just the way they are. Grandfather them in so to speak.
exactlyPosted 3 years ago # -
The reason why designers use CC is because it's available to use... i'm sure many would choose the highest licence available here if it was available. It's no secret that many designers have a problem with not being acknowledged for their work/losing 'control' over their designs. I personally think all templates should be only PD here, but I also acknowledge that for all sorts of reasons many designers are a funny bunch and don't like giving away something for nothing. So GPL is a fair compromise - it protects the designers interests and protects this site's interests. It's a two way street, not just the designers street.Posted 3 years ago #
-
I have no doubt we may lose some designers if we dump CC. But if that's the price to pay for no sponsored links then "ya godda do what ya godda do". But i reckon for every designer that leaves because CC is no longer an option, there will be 10 more who will stay or join because they like the fact that this site won't be come a pool of sponsored templates.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Ainslie: I have requested access to that document. I want to flesh out the license descriptions from an old project I did a few years back. SO, no one can come up with a good legal reason CC Attrib should be left as a license option?Posted 3 years ago #
-
I will grant access and for any other mods/admins that want it. Not sure I want to stick my neck out too far already being lynched :-) but the part about sponsored links will need to be decided on. I suggest that a poll or vote may be the best way to go as it potentially can create a lot of heated debate.Posted 3 years ago #
-
I still agree with Gnome that if sponsored links are going to be allowed that we should add in a rel no follow on sponsored links but only on the demo version on OD, not the actual download distribution. Having paid links not only hurts the site/design template it's on or the person who uses it, it's also going to hurt OD in the search engines because paid links are a huge no-no, simple as that.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Sean: nobody seems to take offense to that (from what I distilled from that other conversation), since each designer has one well-indexed link on their user page. On the other hand, This should probably be a question asked in a brand new thread.Posted 3 years ago #
-
How do we decide if we are to allow sponsored links or not?Posted 3 years ago #
-
I also don't think we should have sponsored links. Bad for the sites the links are on. Only thing they're good for is raising money for someone else but every day, more and more search engines are punishing sites for sponsored/paid links. My only thought is if it is decided we allow sponsored links that on the demo version of the template on OD would have the rel no follow added to the link but only on the demo, not the download. I think it's a bad idea to make it mandatory that a sponsored link stay on a design template as part of the license. As for how we decide if it happens or not, I'm thinking it would be a good idea if Joe and Christopher spoke up about it too. We have 3 admins and I'm the only one chiming in. It sucks. I am sick and tired of being the only admin speaking up on these things. Part of why I left OSWD, then OWD as an admin. I was tired of pulling almost all the weight... and it's why I've considered stepping down as an admin here on OD. So many people ranting and raving and a few of the core people who can help make changes are not chiming in... Granted, moderators are speaking up, not all of them, but a few... so... yeah... more frustration. I'm just working on the things on my plate for OD, then it will be time for me to move on... and just be a user/member/contributor and not someone with the label 'admin' to my name.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Posted By: SeanI am sick and tired of being the only admin speaking up on these things. Part of why I left OSWD, then OWD as an admin. I was tired of pulling almost all the weight... and it's why I've considered stepping down as an admin here on OD. So many people ranting and raving and a few of the core people who can help make changes are not chiming in...
I don't blame you one little bit. I have seen Christopher in the forums but LobsterMan hasn't been in for ages. I guess I'm doing quite a bit of ranting as you will have noticed. Sorry! Personally, I don't think we should have sponsored links in any form but if the community agrees to accept them I will shut up and put up with it. I think we should have a vote between the admins and mods. That is why a poll systems would be good. We could even open the voting up to the whole community with a decent poll system. Option 1: we accept sponsored links but they can not be made mandatory ect.. Option 2: we do not. Then give 72 hours for everyone to vote. After that time it's final even if only a few voted. I don't know what do you think?Posted 3 years ago # -
Whatever we are doing, we need to make a decision on the issue of sponsored links in templates quickly. We have castigated ramblingsoul for sponsored links but are still approving designs with questionable links in them: Make Money Online on top menu. Netmeter at bottom of template. Fotoaparáty a fotogalerie at bottom of template. ...and heavens know more templates in all probability. Just checked some more. Yes there are loads...Posted 3 years ago #
-
@ainslie Dinitely agree. A link to a designer's own site is fine, but a lot of extra links that start to look like a linkfarm in the template? Not so cool.
Has anyone else noticed that the "Templates Maker" (from the Make Money Online link above) is just "Free Css Templates" under a new user ID? There are several others that also appear to be the FreeCssTemplates gang under a light disguise or maybe someone is just re-submitting their templates under different "user names" .. am I losing my mind or did these guys just get new IDs and keep on posting their linkware templates just as they had been before??At the rate these guys post templates - you almost have to wonder when they have time to eat, sleep, and step away from their keyboards! Sorry - I was gone for 2 weeks and when I looked at the designs posted over the last month, its VERY heavy on the FCT templates and light on quality originality :(
Just my 2 cents worth ...Posted 3 years ago # -
They certainly seem to be submitting too many templates for just one person. Although looking at a couple of "freecsstemplates" templates I don't see any sponsored links.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Christopher is the person doing all the design approvals. I am waiting for a email reply from him. Chris, if you read this, check your email and email me back... get on Skype... something... this is ridiculous that my emails are going unanswered...Posted 3 years ago #
-
@ainslie - the very first link you posted (right above my response post) if you follow the link, the name of the USER is different but it has text directing others to the freecsstemplates website and is almost word for word the text of other freecsstemplates templates "copy" - and that one (by "Templates maker") links to "Make Money Online" as you pointed out ..
I know we don't want to limit how many good templates someone can submit, but is there a limit or rule to how many people can use one single ID to submit designs??:confused:Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks for that. No there are no rules on how many templates can be submitted by a person or single ID for that matter. I'm not sure that anybody has even considered it. I don't think it is a problem as long as the templates are within the rules and not abusing Open Designs. It does seem like there might be more than one person submitting under the one ID. Although it probably is possible do a template a day I've never met anybody that dedicated yet! I can see the "Free CSS Templates" text but there is no actual link. Is this really the same person or just circumstance? There are similarities, yes, but nothing definite from what I can see! No hard evidence.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Once we get a polling plugin, we'll vote on the addition of rel="nofollow" to DESIGN PREVIEWS ONLY, to protect the ranking of OD.Posted 3 years ago #
-
Just a question: In the template i submitted, i included the following 4 real links: Open Designs, learn HTML, learn CSS and get Firefox. Does that harm OD in any way?Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.