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 phoned GW to get a comment on this, however all I got was Alessio's voicemail.....

"Alessio is unavailiable right now as he is currently trawling Dakka to discover the results of his project to improve Gwar!'s efame. Gwar! for president of Dakka!"

Green Blow Fly wrote:I respect Jon immensely for his tact and the contribution he has made towards interpreting the rules. Jon has excellent communication skills and comes across as a sincere person. I think GW having gave him credit is huge. The way he went about marketing (so to speak) his rules interpretations is why he was successful. He did a lot of research and for the most part went with what the majority thinks is right. I should add he had some help and those significant others also deserve their share of the credit. Jon always chooses his words wisely and I think that should serve as a lesson to us all. We can stand to learn at times, it's part of the human equation.

G

I appreciate the kind words G.

But GW didn't give me (and the rest of the Adepticon council) credit on their FAQs because they liked me (or us) and didn't give Gwar credit because they don't like him or they want to maliciously 'steal' his work.

The simple truth is that Games Workshop thanked us in their FAQs presumably because the INAT was a good source of questions for them at the time and they used a whole lot of our questions and some of our answers in as their FAQ.

While I appreciated the nice sentiment, they quickly realized that was a huge mistake, and I received a personal email from one of the design studio apologizing to me for the fact that they had thanked me and letting me know that they wouldn't be thanking me, or anyone else by name in the future on their FAQs.

Why, you might wonder?

Because to this very day, I still get emails and PMs from people who think either:

A) Because my name is on those FAQs I wrote them and they want to complain about how stupid XXX ruling is.
B) Because my name is on them I have some sort of official capacity to answer rules questions and they want to know the answer to question XXX.
C) Because my name is on them I clearly know someone in the design studio and they want me to pass XXX question onto the studio for inclusion in the FAQ.


Via their email I understand that when GW released those FAQs they got a wave of emails from people complaining and wondering why they let the 'Adepticon guys' make rulings on their FAQs and that they should clearly not let us do that because of how stupid they thought the rulings were.


In short, it was a mistake to thank us publicly on those FAQ documents by name and I agree that GW shouldn't do that anymore unless they're going to actually let someone outside of the studio actually write the FAQs.

And no, Gwar didn't write the SW FAQ anymore than I wrote all the FAQs in which I'm thanked...I mean, yeah, technically we did write many of the words and sentences, but the fact is, a FAQ is just a series of questions and answers about rules and whomever is 'really' writing these FAQs is the one who decides which ruling to make. Sure they take the wording from Gwar's FAQ or the INAT FAQ when it matches with their idea about what the ruling should be, but when it doesn't, they write another question or answer to fit.


And isn't that the whole point of a FAQ from a games company? When did everyone become so caught up in getting credit for their FAQ being ripped off? Isn't the whole point of writing FAQ questions for a game is that you hope the game designers find your questions and answer them in an official capacity?

I know that's the whole point for me writing the INAT FAQ! I'd love for GW to 'steal' each and every line of the INAT FAQ, change the rulings however they see fit and never give me a lick of credit.

The POINT is for them to answer the questions.

Or at least that's my take on it.

Do we really need a 4-page ego stroke thread for Gwar!....really?

Gwar really needs those strokes. He is the Billy Squire of 40k.

Jon your response was enlightening. Thanks for sharing.

G

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Do we really need a 4-page ego stroke thread for Gwar!....really?

Yes we do. Gwar for President!

Serioulsy again, why do people have to complain about a thread? If you don't like it, don't read it anymore, let other people enjoy it by having fun or what not.

I can only hope that a certain Italian is in Nottingham on a certain Weekend in August

yakface wrote:
The POINT is for them to answer the questions.

Or at least that's my take on it.

This. I don't care who gets credited as long as we get an official ruling to end the bitching and arguing about what the rule in question actually says.

I can understand Gwar!'s frustration at it, it does look like blatant copying which they still deny.
However I think Yakface (Jon?) hit the nail on the head, they were none-the-less providing an FAQ and an official one at that, Gwar!'s work or not, they were doing their job. It's just that, unlike Yakface, Gwar! wants the credit he deserves from it...

I think...

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 not makes him relevant to people who actually matter in the GW community.

Edited for truth

Gwar! wrote:I can only hope that a certain Italian is in Nottingham on a certain Weekend in August

This Italian?

Nurglitch wrote: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.

Hate the game, don't hate the Playa!

But don't suck yerself off either... It's stil gehy either way you slice it.

G

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. . .

Lets assume they did. We should care why?

Frazzled wrote:Lets assume they did. We should care why?

That's not really the point I was arguing with. . .I deliberately quoted the part of the argument I was crying shenanigans on.

apwill4765 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Lets assume they did. We should care why?

That's not really the point I was arguing with. . .I deliberately quoted the part of the argument I was crying shenanigans on.

Oh yea, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.

Frazzled wrote:

apwill4765 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Lets assume they did. We should care why?

That's not really the point I was arguing with. . .I deliberately quoted the part of the argument I was crying shenanigans on.

Oh yea, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.

Nor I, you =P

I don't personally care, but if I were Gwar! I would be bothered. It seems that cutting and pasting someone else's work into an official FAQ is not doing one's job as a lot of people suggest. I bet compiling questions, making rulings, and explaining many of those rulings is a difficult and time consuming process. If I took the time to do all that, I would want some recognition of my work as well.

I can see GW's POV as well, however. They are screwed either way. Credit Gwar! and then get slammed when Gwar!'s email inbox is full of whiners (OK Gwar! would probably love this, but he would be the exception). Don't credit Gwar! and get blasted for not writing their own FAQ. What it comes down to I think is they should have contacted Gwar! before using his work, and asked if he wanted a credit. I would never publish work that wasn't mine without the author's consent.

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

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

So you think that they wrote the exact same thing, word for word, punctuation for punctuation, multiple sentences carbon copied, all by coincidence.

1. Puncuation is a silly point to make if they wrote the same thing the puncuation is in the same places.
2. If Gwar copied the style of the previous FAQ's then one coming out is likely to be similar to Gwar's.
3. Not every word is copied straight from Gwar's faq there are only so many ways to say something with a simiar writing style and it was bound to look similar.

Joetaco wrote:1. Puncuation is a silly point to make if they wrote the same thing the puncuation is in the same places.
2. If Gwar copied the style of the previous FAQ's then one coming out is likely to be similar to Gwar's.
3. Not every word is copied straight from Gwar's faq there are only so many ways to say something with a simiar writing style and it was bound to look similar.

Many of the sentences are not similar, they are identical. Question, answer, explanation, all identical. I'll ask again since you didn't answer. Do you think that GW copied many of Gwar!'s rulings verbatim completely by coincidence and without knowledge of his work.

I'll refine with an example.

You believe that this:

"Troops selections in the Force Organisation chart instead of Elites when fielded in an army with Logan Grimnar? If so, is this optional?
A. Yes, they count as Troops and take up Troops Force Organisation Chart Selections. This is not an optional choice, so you can have at most six Wolf Guard Packs in an army with Logan Grimnar. "

is not directly copied from this:

"Troops selections in the Force Organisation chart instead of Elites in an army with Logan Grimnar? If so is this Optional?
A: Yes, they count as Troops and take up Troops Force Organisation Chart Selections. Furthermore, this is not an optional choice, so you can have at most six Wolf Guard Packs in an army with Logan Grimnar"

apwill4765 wrote:

Joetaco wrote:1. Puncuation is a silly point to make if they wrote the same thing the puncuation is in the same places.
2. If Gwar copied the style of the previous FAQ's then one coming out is likely to be similar to Gwar's.
3. Not every word is copied straight from Gwar's faq there are only so many ways to say something with a simiar writing style and it was bound to look similar.

Many of the sentences are not similar, they are identical. Question, answer, explanation, all identical. I'll ask again since you didn't answer. Do you think that GW copied many of Gwar!'s rulings verbatim completely by coincidence and without knowledge of his work.

I thought my responses made my opinion overtly clear but if you need me to spell it out, yes i do believe that the writers of the Space Wolf FAQ did not copy Gwar's work. Coincidence or not i can't say for sure, but i'll go on a limb and say yes that they didn't even know he had written one.
There are many coincidences in the world people and as much as it pains me to say this " great minds think alike "
I've written many papers throughout my school experince that have had many sentances that appear to be direct as you would say "carbon copies" of other peoples work and i am by no means a plageriser. When writing on the same topic in the same style there are bound to be the same sentances.

Joetaco wrote:

apwill4765 wrote:

Joetaco wrote:1. Puncuation is a silly point to make if they wrote the same thing the puncuation is in the same places.
2. If Gwar copied the style of the previous FAQ's then one coming out is likely to be similar to Gwar's.
3. Not every word is copied straight from Gwar's faq there are only so many ways to say something with a simiar writing style and it was bound to look similar.

Many of the sentences are not similar, they are identical. Question, answer, explanation, all identical. I'll ask again since you didn't answer. Do you think that GW copied many of Gwar!'s rulings verbatim completely by coincidence and without knowledge of his work.

I thought my responses made my opinion overtly clear but if you need me to spell it out, yes i do believe that the writers of the Space Wolf FAQ did not copy Gwar's work. Coincidence or not i can't say for sure, but i'll go on a limb and say yes that they didn't even know he had written one.
There are many coincidences in the world people and as much as it pains me to say this " great minds think alike "
I've written many papers throughout my school experince that have had many sentances that appear to be direct as you would say "carbon copies" of other peoples work and i am by no means a plageriser. When writing on the same topic in the same style there are bound to be the same sentances.

Okiedoke. . .

I could see your POV if it was just the same questions answered in the same manner, or if there were a clause or even a sentence or two that were exactly the same (as you say). But entire rulings? Entire PARAGRAPHS?

I don't buy it, and if I turned in a term paper with entire PARAGRAPHS that were almost exactly the same as another person, I would be failed for plagiarism, and I think you are grossly overestimating the odds of this happening.

This is ESPECIALLY unlikely, since GW has used people's work before and given them credit, and afterward said they would no longer give thanks for work done on their FAQ (see yakface's post)

I thought GW was famous for Copy and Paste. So all they did was Copy and Paste Gwar's FAQ, and add a bit more to look like they didn't take his entire FAQ.

Davor wrote:I thought GW was famous for Copy and Paste. So all they did was Copy and Paste Gwar's FAQ, and add a bit more to look like they didn't take his entire FAQ.

That's fairly obvious to most people, yep. And I agree with you.

I suggest that since you all seem to dislike GW so much you should stop playing. My advice.

Seriously... Does it matter? If they did in fact copypaste it (not saying whether they did or not, I'm staying out of it) and didn't give Gwar! credit, doesn't Yak's post prove why they didn't give him credit? I guess not. Someone at GW was like "HA! Now we got 'em!"

It is FREE! It HELPS us! Why are we going to complain that they didn't give someone credit when they've stopped giving Yak and the gang credit?

Honestly I say: Thanks GW for fixing your mistakes (with or without help) and I will continue to play your games and buy your products in the future!


Oh yeah,

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 not makes him relevant to people who actually matter in the GW community.

Edited for truth

So it turns out I mispoke myself.

CrazyThang wrote:I suggest that since you all seem to dislike GW so much you should stop playing. My advice.

Seriously... Does it matter? If they did in fact copypaste it (not saying whether they did or not, I'm staying out of it) and didn't give Gwar! credit, doesn't Yak's post prove why they didn't give him credit? I guess not. Someone at GW was like "HA! Now we got 'em!"

It is FREE! It HELPS us! Why are we going to complain that they didn't give someone credit when they've stopped giving Yak and the gang credit?

Honestly I say: Thanks GW for fixing your mistakes (with or without help) and I will continue to play your games and buy your products in the future!


Oh yeah,

Whoah whoah whoah. I'm not saying I dislike GW at all. I actually really like GW for the most part. I even said I understand their position, given what yak said earlier.

That being said, they should have asked before copying someone else's work, and there's simply no way around that.

They have no obligation too though. That's the point, they're not legally required to credit or acknowledge him. Gwar! made that faq for whatever reason, whether you think its cos he's a big bad egotisttical 40k warlord or just likes having clear well-defined playable rules, and it was purely voluntary. He wasn't requested to, and its their IP, so they can do with it as they will.

I don't agree with it personally, but they're not legally required to acknowledge jack.

apwill4765 wrote:

CrazyThang wrote:I suggest that since you all seem to dislike GW so much you should stop playing. My advice.

Seriously... Does it matter? If they did in fact copypaste it (not saying whether they did or not, I'm staying out of it) and didn't give Gwar! credit, doesn't Yak's post prove why they didn't give him credit? I guess not. Someone at GW was like "HA! Now we got 'em!"

It is FREE! It HELPS us! Why are we going to complain that they didn't give someone credit when they've stopped giving Yak and the gang credit?

Honestly I say: Thanks GW for fixing your mistakes (with or without help) and I will continue to play your games and buy your products in the future!


Oh yeah,

Whoah whoah whoah. I'm not saying I dislike GW at all. I actually really like GW for the most part. I even said I understand their position, given what yak said earlier.

That being said, they should have asked before copying someone else's work, and there's simply no way around that.

Didn't mean for it to be hostile, but I don't mean you in particular. This community in general seems to have a pretty gakky attitude towards the very company that makes the major games discussed here (not all). But agreed with the above poster, they have no obligation at all to credit him. Whether they should or shouldn't have not withstanding.