Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't have a problem with GW taking Gwars work and not crediting him for it (and seriously guys, when you have sections that identical, its clearly plagiarism). As John said, they have their reasons for not crediting. Not only that, its their IP, they don't have to ask him for it either.

What irritates me is that they didn't do the courtesy of dropping a email saying, 'Yes, we're taking your FAQ, cheers mate for the effort, we appreciate it, but we won't be crediting you for reasons XYZ'. It wouldn't take them more than 5 minutes, would stroke Gwar's ego as appropriate, and wouldn't leave everyone thinking (as usual), that they're a bunch of inhuman jackasses.

I swear, do they even have a public relations department? 'cause they really need to get one.

Ketara wrote:I don't have a problem with GW taking Gwars work and not crediting him for it (and seriously guys, when you have sections that identical, its clearly plagiarism). As John said, they have their reasons for not crediting. Not only that, its their IP, they don't have to ask him for it either.

What irritates me is that they didn't do the courtesy of dropping a email saying, 'Yes, we're taking your FAQ, cheers mate for the effort, we appreciate it, but we won't be crediting you for reasons XYZ'. It wouldn't take them more than 5 minutes, would stroke Gwar's ego as appropriate, and wouldn't leave everyone thinking (as usual), that they're a bunch of inhuman jackasses.

I swear, do they even have a public relations department? 'cause they really need to get one.

What planet do you live on?

Nurglitch wrote:

Ketara wrote:I don't have a problem with GW taking Gwars work and not crediting him for it (and seriously guys, when you have sections that identical, its clearly plagiarism). As John said, they have their reasons for not crediting. Not only that, its their IP, they don't have to ask him for it either.

What irritates me is that they didn't do the courtesy of dropping a email saying, 'Yes, we're taking your FAQ, cheers mate for the effort, we appreciate it, but we won't be crediting you for reasons XYZ'. It wouldn't take them more than 5 minutes, would stroke Gwar's ego as appropriate, and wouldn't leave everyone thinking (as usual), that they're a bunch of inhuman jackasses.

I swear, do they even have a public relations department? 'cause they really need to get one.

What planet do you live on?

Planets? What are these sci-fi concepts? Everyone knows the world is flat!

I actually heard someone recently say "Earth rotates the sun" ha!

Ketara wrote:I swear, do they even have a public relations department? 'cause they really need to get one.

No. Apparently they don't have play testers or proper writers either.

GW's PR and playtesting dept:

I don't think Gwar has done anything to endear himself with GW. Gwar simply has quite a big ego and likes to stroke it. Now if this wasn't the case I might feel differently. People copy other people's all the time and don't give them credit. In this case no one as yet can prove without a doubt that GW copied Gwar's FAQ. I think it's important to remember that Gwar released his FAQ prior to the release of the actual SW codex. We have no idea who Gwar really is; for all we know he could be an employee of GW having a bit of fun with us. At the end of the day I don't really care but that is just me for what that is worth. In a few days or couple of weeks it will be forgotten by most.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote: We have no idea who Gwar really is; for all we know he could be an employee of GW having a bit of fun with us

GWar!=A Certain Italian?

Think about it....

All this whining about GWs copying GWAR!s FAQ might have a very simple consequence:

GW wont do it again. They will not look online for inspiration for questions and answers to include in their FAQ. They will not look at home-made FAQs for input.
They might not even take a peek at them in fear of getting influenced when it comes to the wording they eventually choose.

IS THIS A GOOD THING?!?

Of course it isn't! Due to GWAR!s immense ego and his desire for recognition (in the world of doll-pushers, no less) he might have closed off a way of influencing the games designers.

"Ha! That'll teach em to ignore my awesome powers!" might make one warm and fuzzy now.
But wouldn't it have been more intelligent (and heaps more productive in the long run) to think; "This is great!. I have an opportunity to influence the games designers. I will have a better game to play with rules I agree with....and in the process I might even get to swing the designers into my way of thinking. This is a golden opportunity"?

Guess not. *shakes head at the futility of mankind in general and all-capital-profile-name-individuals in particular*

Am I being overly harsh? Am I flamebaiting?
Or do I just lament a wasted opportinuty?

Steelmage99 wrote:All this whining about GWs copying GWAR!s FAQ might have a very simple consequence:

GW wont do it again. They will not look online for inspiration for questions and answers to include in their FAQ. They will not look at home-made FAQs for input.
They might not even take a peek at them in fear of getting influenced when it comes to the wording they eventually choose.

IS THIS A GOOD THING?!?

Of course it isn't! Due to GWAR!s immense ego and his desire for recognition (in the world of doll-pushers, no less) he might have closed off a way of influencing the games designers.

"Ha! That'll teach em to ignore my awesome powers!" might make one warm and fuzzy now.
But wouldn't it have been more intelligent (and heaps more productive in the long run) to think; "This is great!. I have an opportunity to influence the games designers. I will have a better game to play with rules I agree with....and in the process I might even get to swing the designers into my way of thinking. This is a golden opportunity"?

Guess not. *shakes head at the futility of mankind in general and all-capital-profile-name-individuals in particular*

Am I being overly harsh? Am I flamebaiting?
Or do I just lament a wasted opportinuty?

1) . . .What?
2) Yea you are being overly dramatic.
3) I don't care how big Gwar!'s ego is. I also roll my eyes at all of you members who say he shouldn't care about people copying his work without consent or credit, or that it happens all the time. When it does happen it is called plagiarism.
4) Gwar! doesn't even recognize GW FAQ's as official for his rules arguments, which is what he cares about, so why would he care if GW continued making the crappiest FAQ's on the block? I doubt he is "lamenting a wasted opportunity".
5) And seriously, the "futility of all mankind"? You kidding me? This is a forum about toy-soldiers, not a UN committee meeting.


I understand why GW did not give him credit; in fact, it makes a lot of sense. However, I used to field calls for my old place of business on a fairly frequent basis. These calls had to do with asking permission to republish pieces of studies my company published on composites properties. So while I understand why GW didn't publicly credit him, can you honestly tell me they shouldn't have at least e-mailed and/or PM'ed him beforehand?

You completely and utterly missed the point.

Of course GW should have contacted GWAR!.
Of course GW blatantly copy-pasted GWAR!s FAQ.
Of course it is a dill weed-move.

But I am not talking about GWs behaviour here.
I am talking about the response of GWAR! and a number of members of this forum.

I am presenting the scenario that reacting in a different way could have lead to a more productive future of FAQs.

You don't agree? Fine. Hell, my doomsday-scenario might not even come to pass.
Perhaps GWs designers will simply say; "Who is this GWAR! they all talk about?".

Steelmage99 wrote:You completely and utterly missed the point.

Of course GW should have contacted GWAR!.
Of course GW blatantly copy-pasted GWAR!s FAQ.
Of course it is a dill weed-move.

But I am not talking about GWs behaviour here.
I am talking about the response of GWAR! and a number of members of this forum.

I am presenting the scenario that reacting in a different way could have lead to a more productive future of FAQs.

You don't agree? Fine. Hell, my doomsday-scenario might not even come to pass.
Perhaps GWs designers will simply say; "Who is this GWAR! they all talk about?".

GW has a long standing history of doing what they want, customers be damned

Seriously though, I don't think it will stop GW using outside material for their FAQ, and I think Gwar! is entitled to a little indignancy over this thing, and if he wants to post a thread about it, that's not the end of the world.

To all of you saying "this is just an ego boost" I would say that he succeeded, 5 pages of people arguing whether or not GW is wrong and how bad they feel for Gwar! would seem to be a success as far as ego goes. This is assuming he did it all for ego of course (whether or not this is true can not be known by one such as myself).

Of course they will do it again!

1) It saves them time
2) It results in a better FAQ
3) There is absolutely no legal reason why they should not do it
4) 99.9% of their customers will never even know they did it..
5) 0.05% of their customers agree that what they did is okay
6) 0.03% don't care eitehr way
7) 0.019% care, but won't alter their buying habits
8) 0.001% might buy a few less models
9) Even Gwar! doesn't seem to mind all that much.

This thread is a good read though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joetaco wrote:

apwill4765 wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Something that people might want to take into consideration is that there's only so many ways of saying the same thing.

Its why plagarism is such a problem in academic circles, not because any large proportion of students are evil idiots furiously copying other people's stuff, but because they're all essentially writing the same thing.

I have no doubt that were Gwar to introduce himself as "Gwar" to Alessio Cavatore (sp?) at Nottingham, Mr Cavatore's face would go blank with confusion about whether he's supposed to know who Gwar is. Gwar's relentless self-aggrandizing does makes him relevant to people who actually matter in the GW community.

Do you really think that this:

Gwar! wrote:

Q. Can a Wolf Guard Pack that has nine Wolf Guard and Arjac Rockfist take a second heavy weapon?
A. Yes, as it is for ‘every five models’, not ‘every five Wolf Guard’.

My FAQ:
SW.86.04 – Q: Can a Wolf Guard Pack that has nine Wolf Guard and Arjac Rockfist take a second Heavy Weapon?
A: Yes, as it is for “every five models”, not “every five Wolf Guard”. [R.a.W]

Is an example of two people accidentally writing the same thing?

That they :

a) Came to the same R.A.W. conclusion
b) Worded the question in the same fashion VERBATIM.
c) Worded the answer in the same fashin VERBATIM.


The fact that this happened several times makes it seem to me that coincidentally including the same content is a far cry from what was going on here. . .

Frankly i doubt that GW even saw Gwar's faq. Gwar wrote his faq in the style of the official GW faqs with the akward back and forths and overly formal answers. Things that Gwar (someone who cares about the rules to the extent that no other person who plays this game would care) and they (the inventors of the game) saw wrong with the codex are likely to be the same thing. In conclusion it only shows that Gwar knows what he's talking about albiet i'm sure everyone has already accepted that

Believe me, I've seen exam boards exclude pupils from entire subjects because of far less, and as a teacher, I've agreed with them about it.

If you think that can be coincidence, you must have a very shaky grasp of several things, including statistics, writing styles and the way the human brain works in a logical sense.

Fifty wrote:Of course they will do it again!

1) It saves them time
2) It results in a better FAQ
3) There is absolutely no legal reason why they should not do it
4) 99.9% of their customers will never even know they did it..
5) 0.05% of their customers agree that what they did is okay
6) 0.03% don't care eitehr way
7) 0.019% care, but won't alter their buying habits
8) 0.001% might buy a few less models
9) Even Gwar! doesn't seem to mind all that much.

This thread is a good read though.

I have issue with your statistics.

0.018% care, but won't alter their buying habits while 0.002% might buy a few less models. Wikipedia told me so!
And No, I don't mind too much, but I am a little annoyed. I also found it ironic because, at the time I posted the thread, I was getting a lot of "You don't write the GW FAQs so your opinion doesn't matter" comments

I notice they have stopped now

Playing it cool now huh? What a hypocrite.

G

Fifty wrote:

Believe me, I've seen exam boards exclude pupils from entire subjects because of far less, and as a teacher, I've agreed with them about it.

If you think that can be coincidence, you must have a very shaky grasp of several things, including statistics, writing styles and the way the human brain works in a logical sense.

Well then Believe me, Mr. "i'm a teacher and because i point it out i'm clearly right", As green blow fly so eloquently pointed out there is as of yet no proof that GW has taken/ seen/ heard of Gwar's space wolf faq. If you think that this is some huge statistical impossibility thats fine, but as of this moment it would appear that it is some coincidence not some evil conspiracy where the english want to get some hits off of Gwar's work.
If you think that it can't be coincidence, you must have a very shaky grasp of the several things, including business, social skills and overall trust in people.


now that, that's been said i'm sticking to my guns, but not arguing this anymore. Theres no sense in continuing this because i'm not going to change your opinion and your not going to change mine. I hope that when the truth comes out we will be able to admit we were wrong to the correct party.
-Joetaco

This is getting flamy and my funmeter is low. Closing now.

I think we've all learned a valuable lesson here: