[Raritylicious]

as nosoop stated,
It is illegal to not include source file.
That's the issue here, Spirit_12.

It doesn't matter how anyone thinks about this kind of issue.

As long as there is a law that says you must provide source, you must do it.

Hey, if you don't like that rule, maybe you can try to change it by spending alot of money on lawyers and winning battles at the court.

Why not just litter your cigars in the middle of the forest?
I mean, the law says you must not do it but, your feelings and your opinions matters the most, right?
It's not like it's gonna start a forest fire XD

[asherkin]

Originally Posted by Spirit_12 What is the harm in releasing plugins without source?

We let people build plugins on top of the mountain of work that has gone into SourceMod, all done for free and fully open source - and the only requirement is that those plugins that are built also be open source. If you don't like that requirement, don't use our software.

MM:S is even licensed to not enforce the same restriction on MM:S plugin, so you get the benefit of our compatibility work without having to give back your source code.

[Spirit_12]

Originally Posted by Raritylicious as nosoop stated, Why not just litter your cigars in the middle of the forest? I mean, the law says you must not do it but, your feelings and your opinions matters the most, right? It's not like it's gonna start a forest fire XD

Because that can clearly run the risk of lighting a huge fire? Your example is a bad one, as Forest can’t make decisions for itself, server managers can. I never run plugins without a source as I’m not willing to take the risk.

You are just taking the risk away from end users, which means you have to put more effort and they can have it easy.

Originally Posted by asherkin We let people build plugins on top of the mountain of work that has gone into SourceMod, all done for free and fully open source - and the only requirement is that those plugins that are built also be open source. If you don't like that requirement, don't use our software. MM:S is even licensed to not enforce the same restriction on MM:S plugin, so you get the benefit of our compatibility work without having to give back your source code.

Not against the rules. I’ve been here long enough to know what is allowed and what’s not. Not the one to not provide the source but won’t go through the effort to regulate it.

[ghostofmybrain]

Originally Posted by Spirit_12 Not against the rules.

What are you saying isn't against the rules?

[Raritylicious]

Originally Posted by Spirit_12 Because that can clearly run the risk of lighting a huge fire? Your example is a bad one, as Forest can’t make decisions for itself, server managers can. I never run plugins without a source as I’m not willing to take the risk. You are just taking the risk away from end users, which means you have to put more effort and they can have it easy. Not against the rules. I’ve been here long enough to know what is allowed and what’s not. Not the one to not provide the source but won’t go through the effort to regulate it.

You are still wrong and you didn't get the point.
Your opinion here, does not matter.
If the rules were to allow people to distribute plugins without any source files, whatever.
But here's the thing.
The current rule says NO.
So fucking NO.

Are you gonna keep replying and waste people's time by bitching about "OH If i were in charge, I would not regulate it derp derp"

Like I said, If you want to change the rule, then go ahead and try.
No one's stopping you.
But until then, Authors Must Provide Source When Distributing.
Period.

[Raritylicious]

Jesus christ...
The Rule says NO.
Is it so hard to understand?

It's not about what I or anyone wants.
It's not about my or anyone's opinions.
GPL says NO

So
Fucking
NO!

Follow the rule.
If you don't like it, then change it (if you can LUL)

[Psyk0tik]

@Spirit_12, I believe that the main point here is that the author of the plugin is distributing binaries without their sources, and making money off of them on top of that. Not only does the license require the source to be included with any distributions related to SourceMod, but it also gives users the right to modify those sources to fit their wants/needs. Like many developers have stated in the past and continue to state every now and then, if an author doesn't want to give the source to users due to not wanting to provide their "private work," then they shouldn't be distributing the binaries in the first place (even if it's free).

This is why we make a big deal out of all these new members joining the forums on a daily basis. We always have some new guy/girl eager to share revisions that he/she made. While their binaries may not contain anything malicious, providing the source codes to them is still necessary. People are unpredictable, and it only takes one asshole to distribute malicious plugins to end-users.

[ddhoward]

You appear to have reneged on your promise.

Originally Posted by Spirit_12 I'll just grant you your wish. I'll refrain myself from posting anything anymore.

[Spirit_12]

Originally Posted by Raritylicious Jesus christ... The Rule says NO. Is it so hard to understand? It's not about what I or anyone wants. It's not about my or anyone's opinions. GPL says NO So Fucking NO! Follow the rule. If you don't like it, then change it (if you can LUL)

Using curse words to act virtues. The irony is strong in this one. I'll assume that the poster is either too young or its the language barrier.

Originally Posted by ddhoward You appear to have reneged on your promise.

No wonder this felt like de ja vu. We have been here right? Aight I'll stop.

[Raritylicious]

Originally Posted by Spirit_12 Using curse words to act virtues. The irony is strong in this one. I'll assume that the poster is either too young or its the language barrier. No wonder this felt like de ja vu. We have been here right? Aight I'll stop.

Are you not able to keep up with my logic so you just point out that I used swearings? lol
Like you said, what an irony.
The moment you stay out of the point and start pointing out your opponent's language and grammar, is the moment you admit that you lost and that you can't keep up with his intelligence.
If you want to win an argument, stay on the point.
Prove that I am wrong.
Prove that you are right.
With actual facts and datas to back you up.
Also, everyone on this post disagrees with you with this issue.

are you gonna keep going and let me keep destroy you to pieces or are you gonna stop?

english is my second language so yea. there is a barrier.
but like I said, pointing out people's grammar and language is the moment you admit you are not smart enough to defeat someone with an argument.
also, no matter how young you think I am or how big of a language barrier I have, as long as you are the stupid one, it doesn't matter one bit

Hmm let me guess.
Your next move will be either:

1. Keep saying how bad I am with english language despite it being my second language.

2. Keep saying how childish I am for using curses despite you are proven dead wrong in every single points.

3. Keep babble about how this issue is not a big deal despite GPL clearly says NO.

4. Keep babble about how you personnally would not regulate at all and continue to use your emotions instead of your brain.

5. Say anything you can to insult me and then say something like "I'm just gonna stop replying cuz u stupid" despite not proving anything with facts and logics.

6. Actually use your brain for the first time and prove everyone in this forum wrong with actual proofs and facts such as laws, loopholes in laws, laws that says you are allowed to not distribute source.

7. Admit that you were wrong and apologize for wasting people's time and be a better and smarter person.


Maybe your ego won't allow you to pick number 7
but dude, it's not that hard.