|
Mason,
instead of posing problems, could you try building solutions from the intent? This is something that is meant help both builders and administrators, so input that helps would be appreciated. I knew the wording was not right, that is why I asked for help.
The core intent:
1.) To prevent mud owners from using builders' areas on multiple muds without the builders' permission.
2.) To state that builders cannot request the removal of areas just because they are out of sorts with the mud administration. Owner's need to have some assurance that as long as they don't violate the stated rights, the area cannot be removed.
3.) To state that builders can request the removal of areas if the mud owners do something like distribute the area without the builders permission.
4.) To state that mud owners have the right to modify the area. No area is perfect or completely balanced upon submission, changes must be made.
5.) To provide a builder with a copy of the area.
[start edit]
6.) To state that credit to the original author may only be removed at said author's request. There is no reason that a mud owner should remove area credit.
[end edit]
The icing:
To ensure that people who make serious modifications get credit too, just like the authors of Diku derivitive codebases receive credit with the Diku team.
The sprinkles on the icing:
To have a second similar agreement but with the difference that builders are refrained from submitting areas to multiple muds.
Please help me build something that the community can use.
Thank you,
Neranz Laverani, Seeker of Knowledge
P.s.
On a side note, after talking to a notary, I do know that in the U.S. you can have age verification be part of the notary signature block. At least for U.S. citizens, age can be confirmed.
|