Well shazam! How am I going to demonstrate my awsome gramer and maturity if you don't hurry up and get me approved? I think that people with my increadable level of maturity shouldn't have to wait that long. (i.e. I is getting old an' jest might kick the bucket 'nyday now.)

My missions aren't appearing on the test server. Is there something I have to do or say to get them on the server.

Don't put <>s around descriptions.

Maybe time for some new blood in the PCC :)

Or just for the devs to approve some of the whole boatload of missions in the submissions area...

/me leans rogue's way...

well i'm in if my "essay" was acceptable
/me crosses his fingers

Actually, there are eight missions in the submission cue, and I've been testing them lately. The few I've tested recently have some corner cases that make them problematic for production use. But, I haven't tested enough to comment/reject yet.

I think if you're testy about the pace of testing and approving missions, you may be indicating that you aren't PCC material.

Use this time to test and problem solve your missions.

Looking at the assignment of intellectual property, it seems to be very broad and far reaching. It seems to imply (or could be read to imply) that ideas that I use within VO are entirely the property of Guild Software, and that this would affect how I could use those ideas outside of VO.

Writing software is both by job and hobby, and I'm always working on various game ideas of my own. If I took one of those ideas and used it in VO, does this give Guild Software the right to restrict how I use that idea elsewhere?

I have absolutely no problem with GS using whatever I would do as part of PCC however they want (I'm a fan of BSD style licenses after all), however being a non-lawyer I'm nervous about agreeing to anything which may allow GS to limit what I might do with those same ideas in my own projects.

Would anyone from Guild Software like to comment on this?

The assignment is a defensive measure, against outside suits that could claim the IP belongs to the creator rather than the company, and sue for compensation long after the fact (usually down the road, when there's money involved). Making sure the intellectual property is clearly (or, as clearly as possible) owned by the corporation is also a requirement of getting.. say.. outside investment (venture capital, angel investment, etc). No VC will touch a company with a ten-foot pole unless the intellectual property is established as owned by the corporation in question. Otherwise, they're looking at putting money into something that, once it becomes successful, becomes a target for litigious individuals who may have contributed at some point. Companies have been utterly destroyed by lawsuits of this kind.

How broadly or narrowly it could be interpreted would be up to a judge. I'm not an attorney either, so I can't comment much beyond what I've already stated. I can say that our intent is simply to protect the company from outside litigation, make sure the company assets are all clearly owned *by* the company, and keep our options as open as possible with respect to future outside investment. Would that we lived in a less litigious society, I'd be happy to do away with all of this stuff (I'm more of a BSD-license type, myself). But, given the current realities, we've been advised to hedge our bets in some respects.

If people think it's too worrisome and don't want to contribute because of it, I totally understand. That's why it's part of the application process. It is what it is, weighing the pros and cons is really an individual choice. At the end of the day, the scope of legal ramifications is really based on what one can justify, and what evidence one can bring to bear that supports that justification.. which makes operating in this world kind of a vague and scary process for everyone.

Okay, thanks Incarnate for the long response. I've written the essay, but I'm going to think a bit about the agreement before deciding. I understand your reasons for having the agreement however, and your reply makes me feel a somewhat better since I don't have a problem with defensive agreements of this nature.

Good post Incarnate, I'll add something here ;

If you plan on trying to sue Guild for intellectual property later on, don't sign up.

(heck, if you don't have anything to add, don't sign up. Since I couldn't figure out the mission editor, I felt I couldn't contribute to PCC. So I didn't even try to join)

I've sent an email with my idea for a mission tree again. I hope this time it doesn't get eaten by the spam filter...

No response. Either it was lost again, or my ideas don't even rate a reply...

I heard Incarnate was really busy.

I put in an application, glee.

Edit: I hope the mission editor is improved since the last time I used it~

Jex, I have your email flagged as "important", I've just been a little bogged down lately. Sorry for any other applications / etc that I haven't responded to recently.

Haha, that was funny. I went to the PCC messageboard via the VO wiki link and thought it was bugged before I realized Incarnate accepted me. Time to makes some missions then~

application sent.
i might have botched the essay send.
let me know if you need the essay resent.

been checking, i can see pcc content now.
thank you; i'm jumping right in.