FANDOM


  •   Loading editor
    • Thank you for informing me. I took care of it.

        Loading editor
    • So... I'm confused. On the deletion log you claimed "Copyright violation: Hacking instructions," then on the user's message wall you claimed it "...isn't considered hacking..."

      Anyways, nowhere in said blog was it needed to somehow thwart any protection system - so our access is never even implied to be unauthorized, nor illegal. Furthermore, in what rules is it stated that him sharing this information is not allowed?

        Loading editor
    • We have been saying for really long time that we don't discuss methods of cheating, unfair advantages or hacking on the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • So how does viewing open access files fall under any of those categories?

        Loading editor
    • Even if someone doesn't consider viewing the game files as hacking or cheating it is still supplying external links on the wiki which is not approved of. We have issues in the past with game files being viewed and information being pre-released information being leaked before, and we aren't even sure that is legal to even do.

        Loading editor
    • i would like to point out that this information is already available from the debug screen in the game itself.  and the gamerules url i found by looking in on of the games crash logs on my laptop.

        Loading editor
    • I also wonder about this-if all that is shown is what is on the debug screen, including the gamerules url that BFS publishes, what is the specific issue? If someone looks at files and publishes information not yet released by BFS, that is covered in our pre-release policy. (I can confirm that BFS appreciates this policy, based on an email I received from them).

      We have external links all over the wiki-what is meant by "supply external links on the wiki which is not approved of..."?

        Loading editor
    • ... We do have instructions how to view the debug screen on the Glitches page (and this information has been there pretty much since that page's creation), so if the information that was posted in said blog was easily available through the debug screenwhich WE even provide instructions for accessingthen I don't see where the issue is here nor why the blog had to be removed.

      That may be something that bears consideration in the future. The debug screen may be a glitch but if information from that isn't allowed to be posted, then the information explaining how to access it also needs to be removed, else we are simply contradicting ourselves.

        Loading editor
    • Another user mentioned that he thought the blog contained a link that MAY not have been appropriate. If that is the case, I would propose the blog be restored and the user asked to remove that link if it is really an issue.

        Loading editor
    • We don't tell people to go and view the links on the debug screen. We just say how to see it since it easy to just happen across by accident anyway.

      Many people also strongly feel the blog is not appropriate.

        Loading editor
    • It may not be my place, but I am going to say something anyways...

      I'd have to agree with the deletion. We don't openly tell people how to view the game files or whatever other links are on the debug screen. Yes, we tell them how to access it (the debug screen) but not how to use it.

      Having the link to the game files openly on the wiki is only asking for trouble... we've had problems with pre-release content in the past, why take the chance for it in the future?

        Loading editor
    • Bane, you have three admins in this chain who have indicated that we have concerns about its deletion. There appears to be no issue with this other than Wolfie and Wiz questioning it. That is not a valid reason for deleting a blog. As I said, I believe it should be restored and if, as one of your arguments stated, there is an inappropriate link, that could be removed. Describing the debug screen and how to read it is not, in any way, a violation of wiki policies.

        Loading editor
    • The blog was a lot more than that. It gave the external links and instructions on how to alter them to see content.

        Loading editor
    • Also if there is such a problem with my decision then just open up a demotion forum over my opinion or interpretation of how we handle game file links or leaked information on how to access them here on the wiki. I really don't think I misused my tools, but if think so then just get this over with and we will if the community wants me gone. I'm sure certain people who for whatever reason want to not see me around and it would be a great chance for them to do it.

        Loading editor
    • While people may not want to see you around, this is about a user, not you. Most of us have some flexibility when another admin asks us why we did something, so I was hoping you might also be willing to do some discussion with others. I know I, for one, am just concerned that perhaps this blog was deleted when it could merely have been adapted by removing the details on how to access/alter game files. I did not see that offer made to the user; his blog was deleted and he was blocked until another admin challenged that decision.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote:
      Also if there is such a problem with my decision then just open up a demotion forum over my opinion 

      Uhm. How about we not because that has absolutely nothing to do with this and this issue can resolved without resorting to such things. I would rather issues of demotion come up over actual serious things and not something as petty as disagreements that can easily be talked out, yeah? I mean, we're trying to talk it out, aren't we?

        Loading editor
    • Tatzelwyrm wrote:

      Bane Cane wrote:
      Also if there is such a problem with my decision then just open up a demotion forum over my opinion 

      Uhm. How about we not because that has absolutely nothing to do with this and this issue can resolved without resorting to such things. I would rather issues of demotion come up over actual serious things and not something as petty as disagreements that can easily be talked out, yeah? I mean, we're trying to talk it out, aren't we?

      I'd actually prefer that to since I only try to use the tools to help the community which I feel like is what I do with them.

      Maybe how we handle the game file links is something which should be discussed. If Backflip really wanted people to look into them with instructions on how to view the content in it wouldn't they just have a press release on how to do so? They clearly don't want that information public or it wouldn't require some sketchy steps of going to unknown and unapproved web sites.

      The external links we do have are to the breeding sandbox, Wikipedia page, Backflip Studios company page, and other places we know and can confirm are safe.

      We can't confirm it is even legal to view those links.

        Loading editor
    • Well, this thread certainly expanded. I agree with DT's sentiment that while internal links are favored to external links, external links are welcome where appropriate.

      The only issue in the past I know of where viewing these files has caused a problem was with the LYD. As DT stated, our pre-release policy now covers issues such as that.

      I personally have about seven months of successful experience with using the game rules to quickly and efficiently bring accurate information to this wiki. I recall times near the release of the Race Track and Kairos where we witnessed code which we did not see the use of, and were left to assume it was for future use. Neither of these times caused any problem.

      This content is openly hosted with no attempt to prevent our access, implying we are allowed to view it - where as there is nothing implying we are not allowed to view it. The server hosting these files is owned by Google, and I am currently reading their Terms of Service for a definitive answer to the legality.

      Tatz mentioned this might be a topic of discussion for the future; I agree this issue warrants its own specific discussion considering how many debates it has caused over time. I'm in the middle of class right now so I can't start a thread this instant, but I think this is something which should be done sooner rather than later.

      I also agree with Tatz on the demotion issue which... really came out of nowhere?

        Loading editor
    • The demotion topic came from the implication that I misused my tools as an admin in deleting the page.

        Loading editor
    • Oh, my, I certainly hope that users don't think we should be demoted any time we make a decision others don't agree with! I'd be back to "anonymous user" if that were the case!

        Loading editor
    • Debug screens/consoles are viewable by users in several games. While this may not be common (I don't play enough games to know) it is certainly not "sketchy". The URL for hosting the game files is Google Developer's App Hosting, so again nothing "sketchy" there.

      BFS encouraging users to view game rules (such as in a press release) is notably different from users being allowed to access such. Our devices "view" this page every time we load the game, and from the server's side there is little to no difference for loading the page to a browser instead.

        Loading editor
    • Oh god yeah, we wouldn't have any admins left haha. 

      But yeah, hm. In light of this thread I think this is definitely something that warrants further discussion (on more appropriate terms). I mean, the debug screen has been available since Dragonvale's beginning, Backflip has to have been aware of it, but yet it still remains. So perhaps we should dicuss on what grounds certain things are or aren't allowed based on that. Of course, pre-release content still isn't allowed, no one is saying otherwise to that, I think.

        Loading editor
    • I think we need to revisit how we handle this kind of thing since there seems to be a lot of different opinions in the community on how to do so.

        Loading editor
    • Popping in again...

      Bane, if you ever do that again, I'm going to smack you :P (teasing)

      As for futher discussion about this issue and how we might deal with it better... I think that's a great idea.

        Loading editor
    • So, in the end-what part of the policy was violated by this blog? That's really the only reason we would delete it.

      It doesn't give any pre-release content, it doesn't tell people how to cheat, and it contains external links but if we allow none, we may as well start cleaning up the "Real Life" page now.

      I think that's the issue-we can't explain to a user what part of our policy he violated.

        Loading editor
    • That is ridiculous actually, the "Real Life" page links are to Wikipedia which are linked all over the wiki in the notes of the individual pages.

        Loading editor
    • Also, the violation was in this part:

      "Not to upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party; "

      The blog had links off wiki to a site with instructions on how to view copyrighted material from Backflip which they did not release themselves to the public. If it is in the game we can take screenshots of it and crop them so they aren't considered copyrighted material, but the codes themselves are copyrighted material.

        Loading editor
    • I will note that viewing copyrighted material does not infringe upon the copyright. It is once the material is taken and claimed as ones own work that the copyright is infringed.

      We have a general disclaimer saying everything here related to DragonVale is owned by BFS and our uses of the content here falls under Fair Use. So not only can we view the content, we can use it here freely.

        Loading editor
    • Dragon trip wrote: It doesn't give any pre-release content, it doesn't tell people how to cheat, and it contains external links but if we allow none, we may as well start cleaning up the "Real Life" page now.

      People could use it to leak content onto the wiki, using the file i remember that the giant habitats were in the files a month or 2 before it was implemented, and we were not to discuss it in any way... So i cant see how this is much different, its pretty much saying use this and a few downloads and see pre release stuff! Thats just how i view the sititueation, And people would probably discuss it weather it be in pm main chat or comments granted admins can delete comments, but it still does give access to pre release content! So it would be better to play it safe then be sorry imo.

        Loading editor
    • Wolfie, if a user leaks content, THAT is a policy violation. Many, many users have access to the files but know not to violate the policy. 

      The information in the blog, by the way, is current detail, not anything future.

        Loading editor
    • People have used many times to leak information about pre-released content on the wiki prior to the actual release. This actually ruins the fun of the game for many people who do not want to accidentally read about it, and might also be illegal since it is not actually released to the public in the game yet.

        Loading editor
    • Agree; I am comfortable with our policy not to publish pre-release content. When users ask me in chat if I am interested in learning what they learned from game files, I always say "no thank you".

        Loading editor
    • Giving instructions on how to view that information, which might be against the law, gives people the resources to spread that information though. It is giving them the tools to do the activity against the policies.

        Loading editor
    • OK, then, I think I'm hearing that there is no policy violation here. We also give people resources on how to breed dragons, well before BFS decided to give "hints". So, unless there is a policy violation that can be clearly shown, we need to restore the blog.

        Loading editor
    • I honestly can't see why we are arguing this... Our policy is no discussion of content that has not been released. The blog in question did not violate anything as the things that you can find after following the steps detailed in the blog are stats for buildings, dragons, and decorations that have already been released, you cannot use this method described in the blog to find material to be released in the future.

        Loading editor
    • It is released in the game. As I mentioned that page is what your device loads when the game loads. While there may be unused content (which would imply future use) all of the content is in your game.

        Loading editor
    • We tell people to register on the wiki to contribute since we no longer allow anonymous edits; by your logic Bane we are giving people the tools to break the law since even the underage users must create accounts to participate, but we have already established that that is in fact what we're not doing, because whether an underage user creates an account or not is not our responsibility, and we are simply to take action against it when we are aware of it and be done with it.


      Edit; Yes this was a relevant point because it's kind of in the same vein. My point is that we are not telling users to break any laws, but in the case they do and we are aware of it, then we take action against it and move on.

        Loading editor
    • Psycho Wendigo wrote: I honestly can't see why we are arguing this... Our policy is no discussion of content that has not been released. The blog in question did not violate anything as the things that you can find after following the steps detailed in the blog are stats for buildings, dragons, and decorations that have already been released, you cannot use this method described in the blog to find material to be released in the future.

      Actley u can there were a few things that u could have found out before release, i think the most recent was the giant habtaits, using that (before its release) game files one could have seen that When its,updated if they put in content that is not avalible in the game its giving info!

        Loading editor
    • Again, Wolfie, "if they put in content not available in the game" THAT will be deleted in light of our "no pre-release content".

        Loading editor
    • Wolfie, what you're talking about is something different that requires a jail broken device to view a games files. This blog only showed content already released from the debug, which is possible to do without a jailbroken device

        Loading editor
    • There is a disclaimer with those buttons though about Wikia's Terms of Use and if they break the law we have control on them being blocked from Wikia by informing Wikia. This is different because if people are given the these links they can ruin the game for many people who might see the information before we get to delete it.

        Loading editor
    • But sometimes this is very rare we miss commonts that say things, like a few weeks ago i found a gamcenter friand regeast on the emerald page from like a month or 2 before we found it. So it would be better to be safe then sorry thats my view on it

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote: There is a disclaimer with those buttons though about Wikia's Terms of Use and if they break the law we have control on them being blocked from Wikia by informing Wikia. This is different because if people are given the these links they can ruin the game for many people who might see the information before we get to delete it.

      Let me very clear about this, because nobody is getting what I'm trying to say, the information gained by following the steps in this blog we have already because it has been offically released

        Loading editor
    • Sorry, Wolfie, but we don't delete content because some user might someday decide to post something they shouldn't. Yes, we do miss things, but we manage them when they occur.

      There is nothing in this blog that discusses unauthorized content; this is all information BFS makes available to people. Just because someone may figure out how to use it in a way they should not, does not mean the user who created the blog should be penalized. If that were the case, half our staff would have to be blocked for having access to game files.

        Loading editor
    • Psycho Wendigo wrote:

      Bane Cane wrote: There is a disclaimer with those buttons though about Wikia's Terms of Use and if they break the law we have control on them being blocked from Wikia by informing Wikia. This is different because if people are given the these links they can ruin the game for many people who might see the information before we get to delete it.

      Let me very clear about this, because nobody is getting what I'm trying to say, the information gained by following the steps in this blog we have already because it has been offically released

      This is false, there were a few dragns we found out about with out jail brakeing.... The link is for ALL game files! Not just the on currently in the game as far as i know

        Loading editor
    • The link is for all game files - however game files are not uploaded until they are released, as the game uses the most recently uploaded version. There is occasionally content the game does not show (sometimes requires an actual app update as in the case with Kairos) but it has been released and your game is using it.

        Loading editor
    • If we do allow these links on wiki though and someone finds links that let them see pre-release content and puts it on the wiki since they thought they could because of other links already there then that ruins the fun for many people. Also, I know of some gamefile links that are supposed to only have released information in them but at times I have been given through PM by people descriptions and costs and other information prior to its release. Example being the Giant Habitats, and some other things as well.

        Loading editor
    • Wolfiethezwolf wrote:

      Psycho Wendigo wrote:

      Bane Cane wrote: There is a disclaimer with those buttons though about Wikia's Terms of Use and if they break the law we have control on them being blocked from Wikia by informing Wikia. This is different because if people are given the these links they can ruin the game for many people who might see the information before we get to delete it.

      Let me very clear about this, because nobody is getting what I'm trying to say, the information gained by following the steps in this blog we have already because it has been offically released

      This is false, there were a few dragns we found out about with out jail brakeing.... The link is for ALL game files! Not just the on currently in the game as far as i know

      I read the blog, and what I understand is it just shows information about the things currently in the market only

        Loading editor
    • The issue, then, would be to deal with pre-release content. I also know that users have ways of getting to pre-release information. We take down that information if it is posted. This blog is not doing any of that. 

      The "ifs" that might occur should be dealt with if and when they occur. 

        Loading editor
    • Dragon trip wrote: The issue, then, would be to deal with pre-release content. I also know that users have ways of getting to pre-release information. We take down that information if it is posted. This blog is not doing any of that. 

      The "ifs" that might occur should be dealt with if and when they occur. 

      If we allow some links and not other links then where is the line? What are keeping some links from ever adding pre-released information for people to spread like wildfire on the wiki again and ruin the new content for people who don't want to see it. All the links which have had pre-released information in them at some point didn't at all.

      We shouldn't be giving propane and matches out to people when we don't want the forest to burn down.

      I am also not sure it is even legal for those some of those links to be around.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote: ... and someone finds links that let them see pre-release content and puts it on the wiki since they thought they could...

      The pages the urls link to don't have links to find on them, and if someone violates our policy because they feel they can we correct that (it's part of our volunteer role on this wiki).

      Bane Cane wrote: ...I have been given through PM descriptions and costs and other information prior to its release.

      The thing is, whether you could view it in game or not, that information was already released. If we don't want things not readily viewable in the game being discussed, then that should be discussed in a more formal pre-release policy (I can't find much of one currently).

      The main complaint I see against allowing users to view these files is that "they might break our policy"... which is already a given possibility since we have policy which can be broken.

      Where to draw the line? It's simple, linking content which is explicitly pre-release should not be allowed. There is a risk to finding out something you don't want to if you poke around the internet. A risk everyone accepts when they open a browser.

        Loading editor
    • As to the legality *sigh - I'm addressing this again*... These files are openly available and accessible with NO protection measures. Even if the content is copyrighted, it is not illegal to view copyrighted material unless it is protected, which it is NOT.

      There are encrypted files in the .ipa - so decrypting those would be an example of illegally viewing copyrighted material.

        Loading editor
    • I get what everyone is saying... however, I still feel that links to the game files should not exist, under any circumstances, on the wiki. We all know (the we hope it's not the case) that so many users do not read the policies... and it having a link to the game files, in my opinion, will only cause problems... it's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of "when" it happens. The mentality of "well, I got the link off the wiki, so it's okay to share what I find on the wiki" regardless of whether it's in the game already or not. I knew about the Storage Tower weeks before it was officially released because someone looked at the game files. I, personally, choose not to access them. Yes, it may be on the debug screen, but that does not mean it should be on the wiki with flashing lights saying "Look at me"... in my opinion, it is not something we should encourage.

        Loading editor
    • I feel as if the "when" rather than "if" basically applies to every policy we have here. Yet we are all still here because we accept those risks.

      All of our examples of content appearing in those files before they were readily viewable from the game interface totals to five instances over the course of the year and a half I know those files have been used by us for information purposes. With such a low opportunity, that would probably put our no pre-released content at being the least broken policy on the wiki.

      Also, I'm having trouble finding anything about pre-relased content in policies besides the File Policy. Does anyone know where I can find more complete information so I can view it in it's entirety?

        Loading editor
    • Jumping in here.

      There is also the Chat Policies on pre-released content. 

      The game rules normally don't show pre-released content, but there have been several instances in the past where Backflip has put that pre-release material on there (without pushing the game rules) with a user exploiting them and then passing info to other members about the pre-released info.

      It may not be illegal to view them, and certainly it is easy if you just look in the debug screen. If a user chooses to view them through the debug screen that is up to them. But if there are copyrights to them and such, why would we want to promote users to visit there and potentially even view pre-release info if it is existing there?

        Loading editor
    • Frost786™ wrote: Jumping in here.

      There is also the Chat Policies on pre-released content. 

      The game rules normally don't show pre-released content, but there have been several instances in the past where Backflip has put that pre-release material on there (without pushing the game rules) with a user exploiting them and then passing info to other members about the pre-released info.

      It may not be illegal to view them, and certainly it is easy if you just look in the debug screen. If a user chooses to view them through the debug screen that is up to them. But if there are copyrights to them and such, why would we want to promote users to visit there and potentially even view pre-release info if it is existing there?

      I agree, I know of game files where the Metal Dragons were in it for weeks before release, same with the Storage Tower, and with the Giant Habitats. We shouldn't be supplying tools to people to ruin the experience for others on the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • CelticStar87 wrote: I get what everyone is saying... however, I still feel that links to the game files should not exist, under any circumstances, on the wiki. We all know (the we hope it's not the case) that so many users do not read the policies... and it having a link to the game files, in my opinion, will only cause problems... it's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of "when" it happens. The mentality of "well, I got the link off the wiki, so it's okay to share what I find on the wiki" regardless of whether it's in the game already or not. I knew about the Storage Tower weeks before it was officially released because someone looked at the game files. I, personally, choose not to access them. Yes, it may be on the debug screen, but that does not mean it should be on the wiki with flashing lights saying "Look at me"... in my opinion, it is not something we should encourage.

      I agree with everything Celtic has said here.

        Loading editor
    • hm..i agree with moon - there is aboslutly no written rule that states you cannot have ownership of the game files. I also agree that owning the game files is no unfair advantage - knowing about an item before it's release won't help you get it any faster!

      However, from the moment i learned about the files, and a user gave them to me, they said it very clearly - "don't discuss them, as far as you are concerned they don't exist". I feel that giving users acsess to THREE different files is something that would be looked upon as rule breaking.

      From my personal experiences, users talk! The files have come up often in discussions - according to those who feel the blog should be restored, i am assuming you would have no problem with a user linking to them in pm, or copying a piece of coding and positing it in main if it is along the lines of a conversation? I highly doubt that!

      While i do agree that having the files, and having the links to the files, does not MAKE users talk about pre-released content or any of that. However, there is also a general rule about rules - common sense! 

      If we avoid the files whenever they come up, and i have seen several mods say "take it to pm" when the questions about them arise, then having the links on the wiki can't be right!

        Loading editor
    • Wiz, you are correct-I am completely aware that users link to these and discuss them all the time in PM's, so I guess as one who is struggling with why we would delete this blog, I would agree with your statement that I have no issue with that. Yes, I would have an issue if a user linked pre-release content in main chat.

      Interestingly, no one seems to want to propose a policy that says we cannot use game file information to get leveling information for new content, or that we should block users who ever discuss things in PM.

      I am torn on how I feel about this overall, and if someone actually drafted a policy, I would certainly participate in a discussion. My comments here are not about whether or not I think we should have a policy, but cover the concern that we do NOT currently have a policy that disallows this blog.

        Loading editor
    • We can definitely make a policy, or hold a forum for one at least. There are clearly people on this wiki that don't want those links or the code on the other end of those links anywhere on this wiki.

        Loading editor
    • And the thing with the files is that those links could very well contain pre-released content!

      While it is nearly impossible to read the whole damn thing (lol), bfs adds things to the files, and assuming that one knows how to tell where they are, we are now giving out the link to the unreleased content! As stated before, the giant habitats, metal dragons, storage tower and several other things were in the files for weeks at a time before they were ofically in the game.

      If we get to file number, let's say 800, and the game itself goes up to 799, and we have the updated link on the wiki, a user could easily see that the "rock element" was added to the game! that's pre-release content, and that is where i have the issue! 


      I always wondered why we had no policy about the files..when i came to the wiki it seemed that everyone at large just kept it hushed about them, and i grew to accept that.

        Loading editor
    • It always seemed like an unwritten rule that many people agree with that that stuff is not on the wiki, and oddly it isn't even written and I think it should be.

        Loading editor
    • Yep, I agree Bane. We have it clear in Chat and Images policies, but no where else. That's the modification someone needs to draft for discussion. I think Gizmo has some really good language we might want to consider.

        Loading editor
    • maybe we could add an * after "pre-release content" and have it say something like: This includes the public discussion and linking of the DragonVale Game files.

      of course it would be a little longer, but along those basic lines, maybe?  

        Loading editor
    • Something like that may work, but a draft would definitely be a good thing to build off of.

        Loading editor
    • Wiz, nothing in current wiki policy disallows pre-release content except for images. So, we would need to evaluate a completely new policy or draft an update to the current one. 

        Loading editor
    • Well, I guess technically one isn't to discuss pre-release info in chat anyway because Chat Policies apply to PM.

        Loading editor
    • As i am still uncertain of how we classify these files, and moon made it clear this isn't © infringment, but would you say that these files are proprietary rights of bfs?

        Loading editor
    • No, because they make them available. I think if we draft a policy, it needs to just be a wiki policy that says we don't discuss content before it's available in the game, and we don't provide information on how users can access that information. Not sure how that would be worded in such a way that doesn't also require us to remove "level" information from all our pages, but I don't think we should try to be lawyers.

        Loading editor
    • Dragon trip wrote:
      No, because they make them available. I think if we draft a policy, it needs to just be a wiki policy that says we don't discuss content before it's available in the game, and we don't provide information on how users can access that information. Not sure how that would be worded in such a way that doesn't also require us to remove "level" information from all our pages, but I don't think we should try to be lawyers.

      Can we not just state that we don't provide access to these files, and that pre-release information should not be spoken of anywhere on the wiki? This wouldn't restrict us from the "level" information.

        Loading editor
    • Frost786™ wrote:

      Dragon trip wrote:
      No, because they make them available. I think if we draft a policy, it needs to just be a wiki policy that says we don't discuss content before it's available in the game, and we don't provide information on how users can access that information. Not sure how that would be worded in such a way that doesn't also require us to remove "level" information from all our pages, but I don't think we should try to be lawyers.

      Can we not just state that we don't provide access to these files, and that pre-release information should not be spoken of anywhere on the wiki? This wouldn't restrict us from the "level" information.

      This works for me, I don't think the links or the information/codes should be discussed anywhere public on the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • We can't just modify it; someone should draft a policy proposal for discussion. I think that language makes sense to me, as well, but I'm just one user of many.

      I'm also not sure which section this would best fit in, but I look forward to seeing someone's draft! It probably could fit into what we already have rather than being a new policy altogether.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.