Brand Nubian performing live in 2008. Background information Origin, Genres Years active 1989–present Labels / Associated acts Members (1989–91, 1997–00, 2003–Present) (1989–95, 1997–00, 2003–Present) (1989–95, 1997–00, 2003–Present) DJ Alamo (1989–91, 1997–2000) DJ Sincere (1992–1995) Brand Nubian is an group from, composed of three emcees:, and, and formerly two DJs: DJ Alamo and DJ Sincere. Its debut album, is one of the most popular and acclaimed albums of the 1990s, known for socially conscious and political lyrics inspired by the teachings of. Placed the group on its list of the 25 Greatest Rap Groups of All Time. Contents • • • • • • • • • • • • History [ ] 1989–1992 [ ] Brand Nubian formed in 1989 and their first single, 'Brand Nubian,' was released in 1989. Signed to by A&R man, their debut album,, was released in 1990. Generally acclaimed, the album drew fire for militant rhetoric on tracks such as 'Drop the Bomb' and 'Wake Up.' The controversy helped selling in excess of 400,000 copies. A version of the -directed video of the single 'Wake Up,' featuring a black man in white-face makeup, was banned from MTV. On that channel and from official sources, this image was replaced by a. The singles ',' 'All for One,' and 'Wake Up' all became hits on Billboard’s chart in 1991. Shortly after the group's debut release, Sadat X and Lord Jamar quarreled with Grand Puba, and he left the group, along with DJ Alamo, to pursue a solo career. Following this, Lord Jamar and Sadat X asked DJ Sincere to join the group in 1992. The same year, Puba released his solo debut,. At the end of 1992, Brand Nubian released the single 'Punks Jump up to Get Beat Down'. The track created controversy because of its content such as Sadat X's line 'I can freak, fly, flow, fuck up a faggot/I don't understand their ways; I ain't down with gays.' Despite this, the single charted on the at number 77. Later versions omitted the line and replaced it with different lyrics, including the version on the greatest hits compilation The Very Best of Brand Nubian. 1992–1996 [ ] In early 1993, Brand Nubian released their second album,, which included the song 'Punks Jump Up to Get Beat Down' and the number 92 Hot-100 single 'Love Me or Leave Me Alone.' That same year, the group's song 'Lick Dem Muthaphuckas' was released as part of the soundtrack. Brand Nubian’s next release,, came out in November 1994. Blog Angelology. Download One For All Brand Nubian Rar free. One For All Brand Nubian Rarity. Brand Nubian - The Now Rule Files EP (Vinyl) at Discogs. Reviews were mixed and sales mediocre, despite the top-40 Hot Rap Tracks singles 'Word is Bond' and 'Hold On.' In 1995, Brand Nubian broke up and its members started solo careers in music and television. That same year, Grand Puba released his second solo effort, 2000, featuring another Billboard Hot 100 single, 'I Like It (I Wanna Be Where You Are),' and Sadat X released his first solo effort, Wild Cowboys (Loud/RCA/BMG Records), in 1996. 1997–2000 [ ] Brand Nubian's original members reunited in 1997 and contributed 'A Child is Born' to the soundtrack. In 1997, 'Keep It Bubblin' appeared on the soundtrack. In 1998, Brand Nubian released the album on /. It featured contributions from producers such as,,, and. The lead single ' became, at number 54, the group's highest-charting single on the. In 2000, Brand Nubian once again teamed up with Buckwild of, releasing the single 'Rockin' It,' after which the members, once again, pursued their solo projects. Sadat X released a solo EP in 2000, The State of New York vs. Derek Murphy. 2001–present [ ] Grand Puba released his third solo effort, Understand This, in 2001, which received little attention. Brand Nubian reunited once again in 2004 for their fifth album,, released. Sadat X released another solo effort in 2005, titled Experience & Education, to mostly positive reviews. Jamar pursued his acting career, appearing on an episode of, as well as episodes of,, and. Lord Jamar released his first solo album,, in June 2006, on. Sadat X's third full-length album came out in October 2006. In 2007 the group released an album titled, containing material recorded ten years earlier during the sessions for the 1998 Foundation album.
0 Comments
One of the best gadgets to enjoy mobile games is iPhone. Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D is one of the top games for iOS and we can help you to play it without any payments! To download Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D for iPhone, we recommend you to select the model of your device, and then our system will choose the most suitable game apps. Downloading is very simple: select the desired ipa file and click 'download free Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D', then select one of the ways you want to get the game. No information is available for this page.Learn why. Tower bloxx deluxe 3d free download - Kid Pix Deluxe 3D, 3D Ultra Mini Golf Deluxe, Addictive Tower Blocks - Construction in City with Bloxx, and many more programs. Just a few easy steps and you are enjoying Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D for iPad or iPod. And remember! We update our collection of free ipa games daily, so stay tuned! IOS Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D - free download for iPhone, iPad and iPod. Play Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D app! Download it right now! You will surely enjoy its exciting gameplay because this is one of the best games. One of the best ways of is a creating a cool game video review. You can download Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D to iPad or iPhone absolutely free of charge directly at our site. Thanks to this game you will not get bored at school or at work. Beautiful graphics and addictive gameplay will keep you captivated for hours. And if you're not sure if you should play Tower bloxx: Deluxe 3D our video reviews will help you to make a right decision. You'll find out pros and cons of the app, watch the most interesting moments of the gameplay. Get any ipa game for your mobile device just in a few seconds! Download all content free via PC, WAP or QR code. And if you want to play best games for iOS just sort the list by Popularity. And to stay tuned all the time you can follow our group - and in Russian. Tower Bloxx 3D: Deluxe is based on reliable playing principles of a perfect preceding game. It offers you an immersing three-dimensional experience with fascinating story and incredible gameplay depth. Build gigantic skyscrapers, create brand-new premises for the residents. Tower Bloxx Deluxe game features: • Stunning three-dimensional graphics, which makes the city more real than ever before; • Simple one-button puzzle game; • Unique combination of test of reactions and the ability of solving puzzles; • Put the city inhabitants and the record of the fast game to on-line League of Achievements. Play Tower Bloxx Deluxe game! Download it for Java phones right now! Tower Bloxx Deluxe is one of the best games. You will certainly enjoy its fascinating gameplay. You can get any mobile game for your cell phone absolutely free of charge directly on this site. If you want any other java game - select it from the upper block. Block forms randomly so you always can play in something new. Also you can use Games Xpress for even more quick game selection! Just with one click you can see screenshots of all our games and download those which you like. And don't forget! You can download Tower Bloxx Deluxe for mobile phone on our site totally free and get it via PC, by WAP or QR code. Follow us on Facebook to be the first to get! You can find best it in message, or posting in your blog. Attention, Internet Explorer User Announcement: Jive has discontinued support for Internet Explorer 7 and below. In order to provide the best platform for continued innovation, Jive no longer supports Internet Explorer 7. Jive will not function with this version of Internet Explorer. Please consider upgrading to a more recent version of Internet Explorer, or trying another browser such as Firefox, Safari, or Google Chrome. (Please remember to honor your company's IT policies before installing new software!) • • • •. Ohayou minna~nah post kali ini saya akan membahas cara mengatasi 'Licensing for this product has expired' pada Adobe Photoshop CS6. Download MIDISOFT Studio 4.0 4.0 by Midisoft Corporation. The biggest free abandonware downloads collection in. Midisoft Studio 4.0 is a MIDI sequencer in a. Please do not post links to files you do not have the legal right to redistribute. If the vendor has a free download, you can post a link to that. You didn't mention what Wine version you're using. If it's not 1.6, upgrade. You can also try winetricks allfonts. Is no more!:-(. This is/was a very good, simplistic and easy to use program that is easy to learn. It offers multiple tracks controllable with a mixer and also has the music notation. The problem is that it is an old program that only works correctly on a computer using Windows 95 & NT 4.0. The newer operating systems will not permit the tracks to play correctly. I use it on an old laptop I had not used in some time with Windows 95 for practice proposes only (guitar and bass) by muting the track I want to play. If you do not have access to an old operating system – don’t buy this. I am still using it on my Windows XP PRO, I originally bought it for window 95/98 then latter got an XP computer, went to Midisoft's web page and they had a patch or a update that was free and I still use it. Only problem is that when I bought a new Yamaha keyboard YPG 325 I have not figured out how to play my music into the software and record it as with my old keyboard. With the old keyboard If I wanted to write something, and don't know notation, I just played the music, while it was in the record mode, and my music appeared on the screen with the correct notation, and I could print it out and had a friend that played very good would play it and correct what the computer got wrong, like the difference in a eighth note and a doted eighth. But today I was looking to get the worship studio, I can't find any real midisoft pages I guess they have gone out of business, Does anybody know. Plenty of companies that are using the name but no download link,, their just using midisoft name to promote, other software once you get there. One of the absolute shames of contemporary MIDI software vendors is that no one picked this up from the original (and now-defunct, I believe) Midisoft, and did the simple tweaks to allow it to function with present-day operating systems. Upon first examination, I thought that all it needed was a port update to work with USB (and maybe that's all it does need). However, I'm seeing that it apparently has issues working with newer operating systems, and that track mapping isn't right. I haven't attempted to port it myself, so I can't say. BUT.this was one of the best little pieces of MIDI software I've ever come across, for the novice (and not-so-novice). In a single easy-to-use package, it combines sequencing, editing, mixing, and notation. No, there are no plug-ins or complex FX chains (it pre-dates them), but it provides all GM instruments and several Roland conventions, and let my ancient Casio WK-1200 turn out (and score) finished pieces that completely embarrassed hardware workstations and DAWs costing thousands. Drivers may also be available for free directly from Manufacturers’ websites. DriverUpdate, SlimCleaner Plus, Slimware Cleaner, Slimware Antivirus and Slimware Premium Support are trademarks of Slimware Utilities Holdings, Inc. Microsoft and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. PC Mag.com is a trademark of Ziff Davis, Inc. Used under license. Reprinted with permission © 2017 Ziff Davis, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Other third-party marks listed above are the sole property of their respective owner. No affiliation or endorsement is intended or implied. This whodunit series based on Agatha Christie’s crime novels and short stories, is named after its star sleuth, Hercule Poirot, a famous former Belgian policeman, who settled for good in London after the war, soon so famous as an infallible private detective that he becomes a society figure in his own right. In each episode Poirot gets to solve a crime mystery -mostly murder(s)- for a paying client or otherwise catching his attention, generally along with his faithful English sidekick Captain Hastings and/or his Scotland yard ‘friendly rival’ Detective Chief Inspector Japp. Agatha Christie’s brilliant Belgian detective is on the case in the series of the hit PBS mystery. Fan favorite David Suchet stars as the dapper sleuth who solves the thorniest of cases with his formidable intellect. Agatha Christie Poirot S12 Special Murder On The download from DownloadFreeSharedFiles.com, Megaupload Hotfile and Rapidshare files. Agatha Christie Poirot S12E02. Set in glittering 1930s Europe, these remastered adaptations capture every splendid detail of the Art Deco era. Any POIROT set is just plain GOOD murder mystery. Agatha Christie suspense perfect. David Suchet acting excellence. Combined they make any British Mystery viewer salivate. Add top guest stars in each, and kick in some of the best filmed period mystery ever produced. It’s what fans have come to expect with Poirot, Agatha Christie, Masterpiece Mystery, and the untouchable as Hercule Poirot.. How To Live 365 Days A Year [John A. Schindler] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. One of the great self-help books of all time, How to Live 365. One of the great self-help books of all time, How to Live 365 Days a Year has sold more than 1 million copies and has been translated into 13 languages. Author John A. Schindler, M.D. Introduced the powerful concept of EII, or 'emotionally induced illness,' long before most physicians were aware of the connection between emotions and physical health. Our new edition of this 1956 New York Times bestseller, a classic of the genre, has updated health and nutrition information by a leading health and fitness expert. Schindler's original research explains how prolonged unhappiness sets off negative responses in the nervous and endocrine systems, producing symptoms of disease, and offers techniques for coping with EII. His landmark advice on positive lifestyle, exercise, and nutrition speaks volumes to today's self-aware readers. Topics include achieving emotional satisfaction, attaining sexual maturity, dealing with stress in the workplace, and meeting the challenge of the aging years. Author: John A. Schindler Pages: 213 pages Format: PDF Size: 39.03 Mb. Views: 13921 Recommended Author: Since it was first published in 1997, THE OPTIMUM NUTRITION BIBLE has revolutionized health by showing more than half a million readers how to achieve a profound sense of well-being by devising the best possible intake of nutrients for their unique biochemical makeup. THE NEW OPTIMUM NUTRITION BIBLE presents the latest research from Britain'¬?s top nutrition expert Patrick Holford, with new chapters on stimulants, water, eating right for your blood type, detox, homocysteine, and toxic minerals. You'¬?ll learn to analyze your symptoms, Good health and a fit body are inextricably entwined with great sex. On a physical level, fitness makes one a more attractive and skilled lover. On an emotional level, studies show that body image plays a key role in sexual desire and satisfaction. Research has linked a healthy sex life to lower risks of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, depression, and obesity. Nature'¬?s cycles affect not only the external climate, but also our internal health and mental well-being. With this as its primary tenet, STAYING HEALTHY WITH THE SEASONS revolutionized the fields of preventive and integrated medicine when it was first published in 1981, and introduced a seasonal approach to nutrition, disease prevention, and mind-and-body fitness. A leading practitioner of the season-based lifestyle theory, Dr. Elson Haas provides simple, logical advice for achieving glowing good health: Bring the mind and body into balance What’s the average human life span.72 years.78 years? Actually, science has determined that humans were designed to live 120 years, and that, until now, most people died too soon. It’s also now clear that most of the maladies we commonly associate with aging, such as frailty, senility, and arthritis aren’t part of nature’s plan, but the result of other factors such as bad nutrition, disease,and disuse. Best of all is the news that, no matter how old you are or what shape you’re in, you can take steps to reverse the aging process that has Taking control of your health and well-being is a necessary and personal journey. From teens and parents fighting obesity in America, to aging baby boomers refusing to go quietly into the dark night—everyone can stay fit, healthy, and active for many years to come! This book lays out a sensible and holistic road map that makes health and fitness an ingrained part of your lifestyle, and an easy-to-achieve goal for both men and women at any age. For more than three decades, Dr. Maffetone has been treating and advising patients, coaching. CycloDS Evolution vs Supercard DS ONE - A complete comparison and guide **Navigate quickly through the comparison by clicking the links below** - - Cheats - - - - - 2. Cheats You are probably thinking why cheats? Well, ever since flash carts were released, cheats have been increasingly popular because of the ease of use. I could link to thousands of sites dedicated to cheaters and their codes. And with availability comes mass usage. Both the CycloDS Evolution and the Supercard DS ONE offers pretty good cheat systems. CycloDS Evolution: The CycloDS Evolution uses a software to compile Action Replay codes into a format they can use. For a corresponding game, make sure that the Action Replay Cheat is place under the official database (cheat.dat files under the _system_ folder on your micro SD) or the user database (usrcheat.dat files under the _system_ folder on your micro SD) The lower screen of the DS will show the “Action Replay Cheat (Y)” button. The software is a brilliant piece of work, after installing it onto your computer, you will notice that all the.nds files on your computer will no longer be a generic blank icon, but instead will show the icons of the game. Unfortunately, with the popularity of codes, no one uses the software any more. Why use it when you can download pre-compiled codes that are no bigger than 1 or 2 megabytes? They take no space at all, and pretty much contain every code released on the internet. You simply download the user.evoCheats file and place it CycloDS folder you have on your MicroSD card. Then you are done. You go to the settings on your CycloDS Evolution, enable cheats, go run a game, and it will prompt you “Do you want to enable cheat codes for this game?” You click yes, and it will bring you to a list of cheats and you can enable or disable them, then your game boots. In game, holding L+R+A+B+X+Y will bring you to the CycloDS Evolution’s extend mode, one option inside, labelled cheat codes, allows you to turn off all the codes at once, or turn the codes you have selected back on. I would also like to take this chance to talk about the CycloDS Evolution’s slow-motion feature. By lagging up the game with a lot of random useless codes, it can slow games to a certain level, which could be useful for quick mini games. It is done extremely well and can be toggled with the extend mode to slow the game down to 50%, 33% or 25% of its original speed. As well, it is useful to mention that the extend mode also allows you to adjust brightness settings in game for a DS Lite console. Pretty self-explanatory in my opinion. What is wrong with the system? Well nothing really. The first complaint is the fact that it asks you whether you want to cheat every time you boot a game once you have cheats enabled. So if you wanted to cheat for one occasion, it gets really annoying. The other complaint comes from the fact that the Supercard has a more advanced cheating system. In game, Supercard DS ONE users can turn on and off individual codes, so they are no limited to global shut off or start up to codes. Team Cyclops’ reply to this is that it is highly unstable to turn on and off a code at a time, and could cause glitching and freezing inside the game. They decided not to add the feature in because of this. Apparently text is also cut off for the CycloDS Evolution, long descriptions might be cut off, but seeing as it must be really long before it is a problem, you will rarely see this. As well the extend mode might be slower as you have all the features clogged into one menu, but it beats memorizing dozens of key combinations that Supercard DS ONE users have to face. Supercard DS ONE: The Supercard DS ONE’s cheat engine is far more advanced, but seems to fail once again in terms of ease of use. The cheats are not using the database files that most carts are using, instead, individual games get their individual cheat files. As a result, major compilations choose to leave out Supercard DS ONE from their databases. Thankfully the people at are up to the task of keeping up with the latest codes. Again, the Supercard DS ONE has software to create your own cheat files, it isn’t exactly hard, but it is just annoying. You have to copy and paste AR cheat codes in a certain format (@ sign in front of the titles) into a text file, then use their ar2cht.exe file to change it to a cht file. Then you use cht2supercardcheat.exe to convert that file into the usable.scc file that Supercard uses. Again, most users won’t need to go through that process with pre-compiled databases being extremely popular. Keep in mind you can always use the cheat databases created for the DSTT or YSMenu./ With the.scc file, you put it into the cheat folder of scshell, named as the release number of the rom you are using. Or if you don’t have a release number, you can name it the same as your.nds file and place both files in the same folder. Now when you boot up the Supercard DS ONE, move to your game and look at the File Information popup, go to set patch, and you will be able to enable your cheats there. With that enabled, you will be given a list of codes every time you boot the game. In game you can use various key combinations to pull up the list or simply turn on and off the cheats. By holding L+R+Start+Up, you will be able to access the list and turn them on and off individually. By holding L+R+Start+Left, you turn all codes on, L+R+Start+Right to turn all codes off. So this menu can be accessed before you enter a game and during any part of a game. I don’t have any major complaints with the Supercard DS ONE’s cheats and the system. The few minor annoyances include their odd format that no one supports and the fact that turning individual cheats can be glitchy (not really in my experience). And of course, the ugly green text on a black screen. That is the single ugliest design I have ever seen. It cuts all the descriptions of cheats short, and it is just big and unnecessary. As well, the features mentioned for the CycloDS Evolution, the slow motion can be achieved on the Supercard DS ONE by manually putting a bunch of gibberish codes, the ingame brightness controls can also be done using Action Replay codes which can be found here:. In this video you will see how the cheats work. You don't see any longer cheats that get cut off, but rest assured, there are many. Supercard DS ONE versus CycloDS Evolution, once again, it is inconclusive. The CycloDS Evolution is able to bring ease of use to the table, offering cheats in a certain style, whereas Supercard DS ONE offers more options, but in a sort of brutish way, possible glitches along the way, its own format, and of course the horribly disgusting bright green text. As well, the extra features offered on the CycloDS Evolution is presented in a much nicer way, although present on the Supercard DS ONE, it is much harder to use, and much more of a chore to implement. If you want to cheat, but also want pre-made databases, you can always use YSMenu or DSTT’s menu, as their cheat files are easily converted to. **Navigate quickly through the comparison by clicking the links below** - - Cheats - - -. How to update R4? After downloading and decompressing the new updated files, there will be one shell folder and two files _DS_MENU.DAT、 _DS_MSHL.NDS.Copy these files to the root directory of TF card to replace the former files > >R4DS V1.02 Cheat code Database R4DS V1.02 Cheat Code Database Size:706kb Language: Updated Date:2007-5-21 15:00:01 Version: 1.02 Instructions:R4DS V1.02 Cheat code Database Put the cheat.dat to _system_ directory, overwrite the old database. Interface overview: Download address: R4DS V1.02 Cheat Code Database:|||||| Copyright©2006. Studiourile Walt Disney Animation, realizatorii 'O poveste incalcita' si 'Ralph strica tot,' prezinta 'Regatul de gheata', o aventura amuzanta si uimitoare pe marele ecran. Optimista neinfricata Anna porneste intr-o calatorie epica — impreuna cu asprul om al muntilor Kristoff si renul sau loial Sven — pentru a-si gasi sora Elsa, ale carei puteri inghetate acopera regatul Arendelle in iarna vesnica. In conditii care mai pot fi intalnite doar pe varful Everest, troli mistici si un om de zapada amuzant numit Olaf, Anna si Kristoff se lupta cu intemperiile intr-o cursa pentru a salva regatul. Download Desene Cartea Junglei In Romana >>. The lack of a corpus regarding ethical issues in institutions of memory is triggering some concerns about. Participation of citizens as active content creators for the Web raised new issues for the governance of the institutions. (Building trust in digital interactions: citizens, institutional and corporate ethics). • • 847 Downloads Abstract The modern availability of powerful video game development frameworks has resulted in something of an indie renaissance. Within this blossoming of small scale development are numerous hobbyist developers who build games for their own inherent satisfaction rather than with the expectation of any financial remuneration. While many of these individuals labour in isolation, some have undertaken projects of sufficient scale and complexity to require the recruitment of multiple developers over long periods of time. The lack of direct payment for volunteered efforts in such environments creates numerous interpersonal issues that must be considered—these relate to aspects of intellectual property ownership and the treatment of developers, as well as to the expectations of those players who may invest their time in a hobbyist title. The nature of recruitment for such projects is such that formal experience in software development or games design cannot be assumed, and the management complexities this paradigm introduces are of sufficient complexity that few tools are available to ensure the coherent development of a game. This paper is a reflective analysis of the issues that emerged through the development of one such game. The observations contained within however are applicable to all multi-developer projects where financial compensation for contributions are likely to be non-existent. The easy availability of popular game development frameworks along with the rise of digital distribution platforms such as Steam, Xbox Live, the App Store and the Google Play store has resulted in a large expansion in the opportunities for indie and hobbyist game developers (Swain; Martin and Deuze; Guevara-Villalobos; Lipkin ). Game development is now a hobby that is within the reach of individuals who may have previously been excluded as a consequence of the scale of the task and the difficulty of securing distribution opportunities. Not since perhaps the era of the bedroom programmer has the production and development of games been quite so accessible to those who have no vocational role in the game industry. Although many games developed by hobbyists are of a necessity restricted in terms of scope and complexity there are still titles that involve many people collaborating on code and content over long periods of time. It is within this context that this paper is situated. Within this paper too will define hobbyist development as primarily differentiated from indie development by the trait that no member of the team has a full or even part-time vocational role in development—all members of a hobbyist development team are volunteers, and it is this aspect that makes the movement significant. Within this definition, all hobbyists games are indie games, but not all indie games are hobbyist games. Despite this new renaissance of unremunerated game development, there has not been a corresponding increase in the awareness developers have with regards to the professional and ethical issues that may be associated with their work. The tools have gotten better, but they still work in the same human context. Within the realm of purely hobbyist development, where significant remuneration may not ever materialise, the task of building a volunteer team to collaboratively develop a substantial project introduces considerable interpersonal complexity. While this complexity is true of any team, within a hobbyist project the usual financial levers and incentives are not available to managers. This social complexity in turn creates a potentially fraught situation—lacking financial remuneration for the effort others might invest in the project, issues of intellectual property and the future prospects of monetization can result in an ethical and legal tangle which few are equipped to unpick. Formal licences for developer contribution can help resolve these issues, but when individuals initially accrete organically and informally around a shared set of goals, such licences may be adopted too late, if ever. The nature of building a development team in hobbyist communities has its own complexities, and there may never be a ‘right’ time to insist on a firm legal and ethical foundation for contribution. We discuss these issues in relation primarily to the development of the collaborative hobbyist game Epitaph Online (Heron ), a text-based MMO developed primarily, but not exclusively, by the author of this paper. We discuss the collaboration regime of the game; the decisions that set its technical framework in place; and the emergent issues of legality and ethics that evolved over its 4 years of closed development. We also discuss the ethical and professional issues that emerge from ‘releasing’ the game in its various open phases. The nature of hobbyist development largely precludes formalised closed testing and this has a corresponding impact on those who invest their recreational time in the game—bugs are inevitable, and the lack of a dedicated customer support team means that recompense, if available, may not be possible to apply consistently. Software development skills cannot be assumed of those who volunteer (Townsend and Heron ) and this in turn exacerbates issues of quality control. While the issues discussed in this paper cannot ever be fully resolved within the limitations implied by hobbyist development, it is possible that awareness can reduce the likelihood that they will unexpectedly derail a promising project. 2 The Context of Contribution. The nature of hobbyist game development tends to better support solitary, rather than collaborative, development effort. Work must be accomplished during developer free time, which as a currency is often difficult to accumulate and to spend reliably. The highly asynchronous and seasonal nature of development does not permit for organisational traction to be easily generated, and the fitful nature of progress can have a significant dampening effect on momentum. Pragmatics too dictate that a hobbyist game should be, as far as is possible, something that can genuinely be completed and released—this tends to bias hobbyist development away from large, complex games that require multiple developers and towards smaller, more abstract games that focus on mechanics, or procedural generation rather than large amounts of specifically tailored content. However, neither of these are iron-clad observations without exception. Substantial numbers of hobbyist games do end up being developed either in partnership with another interested individuals or as the result of a consortium of developers who are inspired enough to volunteer their effort without any likely financial reward. The Multiuser Dungeon (MUD) scene which was most vibrant in the early nineties (c.f. Young; Dourish; Heron ) is an area where the popularity of the games led to a constant stream of new developers—largely recruited from interested players—joining the creator staff and developing new, on-going content. However, again the nature of voluntary collaboration complicates this—turnover is rapid, and even when an individual volunteers they may end up costing more time in training than they save in development. In 1998, the first author of this paper started playing one such game—Discworld MUD (Karlsen ). After a year of dedicated participation in the player community, which included membership of emergent social structures and de-facto player government structures, he volunteered his services as a developer—or in the parlance of the game, a creator. No financial reward was associated with the position of being a creator, and it conferred no in-game advantages upon player characters. Attempting to influence the game was in fact an offence for which a creator could be dismissed and all impacted players deleted. Such dismissals occurred with some regularity, and the owners of the game put many systems in place to identify creator misconduct and allow for it to be effectively dealt with. After a lengthy tenure as a developer on Discworld MUD, which eventually led to his being promoted to the highest creator rank of Admin, this author resigned his position to begin development of his own game—Epitaph Online. Contribution as a creator in hobbyist environments is driven primarily by a sense of intrinsic motivation—the desire to contribute to a game and have those contributions experienced and appreciated by other people. In many respects, the motivations for developers in these environments can be understood in the same terms as those contributing to open source projects. Contribution offers opportunities for the perfecting of expertise (Moody; Raymond; Lakhani and Wolf; Von Krogh ); the enhancing of personal reputation (Bezroukov; Lakhani and Wolf; Raymond; Von Krogh ); and for the inherent fun of building game content (Von Krogh; Lakhani and Wolf; Moglen ). Others are motivated by a belief in the game and its community (Hertel et al.; Raymond ). Participation in the game development also has the potential to yield real world benefits, with several creators having explicitly acknowledged the role that their contribution had in securing real world employment. Many too become creators to address what they perceive as fundamental problems with the game they have played such as balance issues or missing functionality. However, the freedom that is required to make sweeping changes to game content is not usually given to new creators. The expectation is that contributors will ‘make their bones’ by proving themselves trustworthy through sustained, high-quality contribution. Once a track record of authorial leadership (Reagle ) has been established, they are usually permitted to agitate for their own personal pet projects and given the freedom to develop them, within constraints. The key element of this is that individuals contribute for their own personal reasons—they are not, in the main, selling their skills. As such, the relationship they form with the code or content that they produce is not simply that of a disinterested producer creating ‘work for hire’—it is an on-going and personal connection. It is also, unless formal contribution criteria are put in place, code that belongs legally and ethically to the person that produced it and not the game for which it was developed. However, even making that assumption about the ownership rights that the game may possess over contributions is additionally frustrated by the widely divergent geographical and legal jurisdiction within which contributors are located. 3 Project Management in Hobbyist Environments. Within environments such as these it is not strictly speaking possible to employ any standard project management techniques. The various tools and levers available to a manager are largely absent. The only real punishment with any force available beyond social approbation is the ultimate sanction of removing a developer from the team. Such an action generates drama, creates resentment, and is ultimately self-defeating—it deprives the project of someone who was, at least at one point, an advocate for its success. There are few sticks available within a totally volunteer environment. Carrots, where they are available, tend to focus on intrinsic reward—recognising accomplishment with ever-grander developer titles (such as senior creator) and through permitting more freedom to self-direct developments. Developers may also be encouraged to take on more visible leadership roles, allowing for a higher degree of recognition and a greater ability to shape the development of the game over the long term (Reagle ). In a large sense, the reward for significant contribution to the game is the ability to make further significant contributions. The overall impact of this is that those who are responsible for managing a project’s success over the long term must place an unusually large amount of trust in those who have volunteered their time—this is true whether that is a natural inclination on the part of the manager or otherwise. Intrinsic motivation can be fragile (Frey and Jegan ) and easily compromised (Schulze and Frank; Bolle and Otto ). The role of management then becomes identifying those areas in which someone is most interested in working and creating opportunities there. A competent manager then must work with the developer to collaboratively identify a project that is both attractive to them and valuable for the game. Finally, the manager must make available the resources and remove the obstacles that would stand in the way of its successful completion. Beyond that, a manager’s ability to influence the project or the developers that work on it is limited. Real life obligations frustrate any attempt at coherent scheduling. The inherent ebb and flow of personal motivation along with what may be a complicated geographical dispersal mean that face-time cannot be guaranteed. The presence of both parties in a manager-managed dyad may be erratic on a day by day or week by week basis. It is perfectly possible that the time frames and availability of both may never sync up. Planning and organisation too are made difficult by the fact that much of the decision making must be devolved to those undertaking the work requiring a certain amount of management by motivation (Frey; Roberts et al. Intrinsic motivation in these environments is bound up in large part with autonomy to shape how a project develops, and this rarely survives being given a fixed specification and being told ‘implement that’. A sense of ownership over a project’s evolution is required to ensure that the work remains sufficiently interesting to warrant a developer’s on-going commitment, however this can fracture a game’s thematic consistency and create difficulties in ensuring game balance. This in turn leads to complications working across a large project—the more autonomy is given, the more inconsistent and incompatible projects will be unless collaboration to a common end is somehow enforced or encouraged. Within Discworld MUD for example there are several implementations of a basic ‘faction’ system including the crime and legal systems in the city of Genua, the family system within the Counterweight Continent and the City Watch system within Ankh-Morpork. Lacking a common architecture upon which these systems could be built, they all have their own infrastructure and do not integrate with each other. Similarly, the various crafting systems that have been implemented do not represent any coherent or cohesive workflow—the outputs of one part rarely feed as inputs into another no matter how logical that feed-through might be. The systems simply are not designed to work together. They behave differently in equivalent circumstances. Since they share no code, when a new piece of functionality is added to one system it does not rattle through to the others. Each generates its own bugs, and each bug must be dealt with in that specific system—fixes in one are not reflected as fixes in the others. This is all as a result of too much developer autonomy being ceded in an environment where formal expertise in software development is rare. This is to the cost of the development of the game itself. Management then becomes a balancing act between ensuring intrinsic motivation can be harnessed whilst also being respectful of the context and pragmatics of software development (Townsend and Heron ). For the most part, simply providing the right tools in the game engine is enough to resolve these issues, and this is the path that was taken for Epitaph. Epitaph has more factional representation than Discworld, but all factions operate from a common core which ensures that when new functionality is added, or bugs are fixed, it is an improvement for all represented factions. Similarly, all the various flavours of crafting within Epitaph are handled by a common core of code. However, these specific examples are obvious only with the benefit of hindsight—the future problems of code divergence on Epitaph were dealt with early because of experience gained within Discworld MUD. They are also, importantly, things that were put in place before other developers were brought on board so served to anchor expectations as to how game systems were developed. Resolving these problems in the early stages of a project requires considerable foresight or a large body of generalizable experience. It also requires a developer that can invest the time into building an architecture that will work in a multi-developer environment, and doing so at a time when multiple developers may be a distant, even unlikely, dream. Part of the role of management in environments like this too must then be as an educator—helping those new to the game architecture to learn how things are done, either through the provision of formal training material (c.f. Heron ) or through helping locate relevant exemplar assets within the game itself. The nature of the environment requires a peculiar blend of skills that other, more traditional, projects do not necessarily need to emphasise. Discipline is vital in ensuring the effective development of any significant piece of software, but it is precisely this aspect that hobbyist development is least able to leverage. The nature of collaboration in environments like Epitaph tends, much like the hobbyist development process itself, to progress organically and in fits and starts. Generally speaking, projects are an emergent property of largely unstructured social interactions. Developers discuss game-related topics through whatever social tools are provided. These discussions will lead to further discussions about what can be done to improve the game relative to the topic that has emerged. These discussions will then either be forgotten about when the next topic arises, or enthuse participants sufficiently that they look to collaborate to bring it to fruition. Townsend and Heron ( ) discuss this issues with regards to identifying anything as solid as ‘authorship’ with regards to these nebulous and organic relationships—essentially, the tightly interrelated nature of software development makes such terms unhelpful for understanding what any individual may contribute to the overall project. This in turns adds complexity to identifying legal authorship or ownership of contributions. Collaboration then is a product of the social environment, and similarly difficult to direct from the top-down. A will to collaborate must exist or any participation in such activity will be half-hearted at best (Zeiller and Schauer ). Given the difficulties though of directing development, collaboration adds a new and challenging dimension to the task of shepherding a hobbyist game to completion. Collaboration may enthuse development in a direction that, while exciting, only exacerbates issues of feature creep (Levesque; Senyard and Michlmayr ) while directing effort away from core deliverables. Such ad hoc projects are usually ancillary as far as the game goes—they might eventually end up being core features, but they are rarely in their initial conception so important to the game that their development must be instantly begun—if they were, they’d already be part of the emerging infrastructure of the game itself. 4 Project Scoping and Feature Creep. Runaway Projects (Keil et al. ) are often the result of short-lived enthusiasms for a particular development—when the originators are no longer available, or are distracted with other tasks, new developers may be assigned to the project in what becomes an effective and on-going demonstration of the destructive power of the sunk cost effect (Keil et al. The projects are, in and of themselves, sufficiently interesting to get new developers excited about taking them on—that is part of the problem. If fully developed, the projects may well be as impressive and satisfying as everyone has planned—but these projects will never be completed in their existing form. These new developers, when assigned to the project, spark off their own enthusiastic extensions because few in these environments want to simply implement someone else’s creative idea. The project then becomes ever more epic in scope and potential. However, faced with the difficulty of then bringing the original plans plus the new extensions to life, the developer sooner or later loses motivation in the face of the immensity of the task and drifts away. All that is left behind are the plans that they made, and the code representing what relatively meagre amount of progress they were able to achieve. The cycle then repeats, until a project becomes so mammoth and impossible that all it serves to do is sap away new talent that might have been able to thrive and build confidence with a more manageable project brief. Few new developers have the self-confidence to say ‘This project is way too big, let’s do a smaller version of it’ because that is simultaneously a critique of what may have been years of developer effort, and also an acknowledgement that they are not up to the task as it is presented. That the task presented may be a poisoned chalice is immaterial in this respect. That the project exists and has been started creates a kind of psychological requirement for it to be completed a la the Zeigarnrik Effect (Zeigarnrik; Norton et al. They are rarely abandoned except grudgingly and when the attrition cost associated with losing promising new developers becomes too high to justify. These issues emerge when the management of a game cannot simply set the parameters of contribution. In an environment where people are paid for what they do, the act of assigning projects and ensuring their timely completion can be viewed as a managerial transaction. In multi-developer, hobbyist environments it’s more about curating an on-going relationship in which those that are being managed perversely have all the genuine power. Given the social context of this collaboration, a second important issue is raised—that which has been termed ‘design by committee’ (Henning ) as a consequence of a kind of ‘concurrent engineering’ (Maier, p 3). Much of the social interaction in the development of a game is about the game itself—what would be fun, what is not fun, and what balance issues need to be addressed. The low cost nature of suggestion means that there are lots of ideas and many of these will be high quality and highly relevant. The more people involved in the conversation though, the more likely that discussions will tend incorporate issues of the ‘long tail’. Ideas will grow arms and legs, possible abuses will be highlighted and countermeasures designed in. A brainstorming session about a reasonably well constrained scenario will become increasingly blue-sky the longer the discussion persists. An exchange about a relatively obscure scenario in which a particular system has an unusual quirk will eventually, as time goes by, result in someone saying ‘Basically we need to rewrite this system from the ground up and add in all these new capabilities’. From a purely theoretical perspective, it’s probably even true—working within the context of a budget and deadline, such discussions can be more effectively re-contextualised and limited to what is manageable. Hobbyist developments rarely have the same pressures. However, when it comes time to implement any of these ideas actual contribution beyond the conceptual is far more difficult to generate. Developer time and enthusiasm are scare resources and must be spent wisely. When the committee design stage has fizzled out, the person that has been tasked with implementing the project finds they are now faced with a largely impossible task because of the well-meaning additions that were suggested during an enthusiastic discussion. What may have been a simple change with a well-defined scope becomes a massive project that will yield, in the end, only incremental benefits over what is already in place. We have a natural tendency as human beings to spend other people’s time more freely than we spend our own—when those making suggestions have no ‘skin in the game’ when it comes to implementation, it is only natural that their reach will exceed the actual developer’s grasp. It is clear then that there are multiple layers of what might define contribution in multi-developer environments, and that the ability of individuals to at least partially self-select their own contribution is mandated by the voluntary nature of the system. At one level is the provision of general ideas and suggestions that others will then take on to develop. At the other is the development of fully featured systems and frameworks that will make their way into the game proper. Given the environment, it can be hard to separate out the contributions that an individual has made in terms of their relative value or importance. A good idea presented in the right way may be much more important to a project’s eventual success or popularity than weeks of coded effort that duplicates existing but non-generic functionality. While generally speaking it is usually argued that ideas are ten-a-penny (Elaine ) and all that matters is the execution (West ), the situation is somewhat more nuanced within game development—the right change to the right game system may yield great player satisfaction even if it only ends up being a few lines of code. Ten diligent hours of play testing might result in a value in one system changing from a ten to a nine, with tremendous impact on playability. We cannot exclude the evaluative element of player appreciation from our definitions of contribution, and this in turn creates some of the ethical and legal complexity which we will address. 5 Dealing with Intellectual Property. What we are describing is a complex and socially fragile environment in which to develop software, and everyone involved is generally doing so out of a sense of attachment to the game itself, or the creative outlet it provides (Postigo ). However, the loose nature of collaboration and contribution creates a very real difficulty when it comes time to assess rights over intellectual property, and a game is little more than an encapsulation of intellectual property within an externally compelling package. As a matter of de-facto policy, those charged with the day to day operating and administration of the game require the ability to authorise access to code or to the executed representation that the code presents to players. However, the authority for this is largely simply assumed. The expectation is that the very low stakes involved would disincentive legal challenges in the case that it was seriously contested by another party. Given how these games are operated, usually, for no profit and with no formally valued assets, there is little hope for someone seeking financial compensation for the unlicensed use of their work—enforcing intellectual property rights, after all, is largely the province of the wealthy. Lacking the credible risk of costly legal action, administrators are largely guided instead by their own sense of ethical responsibility to those who have contributed. This in turn is inverted in their dealings with other individuals—in the event that the game’s intellectual property is violated, there are few credible opportunities for seeking recompense or restriction. Several times during the life of Discworld MUD, the entirety of the game’s gigabytes of code were downloaded by dissatisfied creators and used to start unauthorized ‘forks’ of the game. Contribution to hobbyist environments requires at least some degree of access to either the underlying code or closed tools that generate content—within Discworld and Epitaph, coders gain increasing access to the code as they prove their ability to contribute. Hobbyist environments are, in large part, trust economies—access to game systems is something that is earned via showing that a developer can be trusted with that access. When that trust is violated the consequences for the integrity and originality of a game system can be significant. Many environments lack a formal policy on the ownership of contribution. At best there is an informal policy which states generally ‘The code that you write here belongs to you, but you grant us the right to use it as we wish’. This informal policy serves reasonably well for most environments, and acts as the foundation tenet of a kind of ‘ethical ownership’ of the game code. However, it is not a legal ownership in any real sense and its lack of formality means that the arrangement can be revoked at any time by the person who contributed code. Given the tangled nature of what contribution means in these environments, this can be a difficult demand to meet unless the code is easily identified as belonging to a single person, and not too tightly integrated into other game systems. As part of the normal course of developing a complex game engine, administration teams often make available subsets of the engine for others who want to build their own similar games. These offerings usually contain only structural elements, and rarely if ever include game content beyond that required to demonstrate how the various systems can be used. These are sometimes known as mudlibs or codebases. Discworld MUD has released a number of these over the years, and a variant form of the Discworld mudlib was used to build Epitaph. Epitaph in turn formally forked from the Discworld mudlib in 2012, naming its derivative branch the Epiphany lib. Each version serves to create a basis upon which others can create their own games by using the various building blocks of the engine. They also permit for expanding and changing the game systems to meet a new developer’s particular preferences. Other mudlibs and codebases exist, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. The Discworld mudlib is released with the following licence attached (spelling errors preserved as they are in the README file): Discworld mudlib distribution - version 20.0 This is the Discworld mudlib distribution, it is distributed as a publically usable mudlib based off the code running at Discworld mud. There is no warenty for it’s use and we cannot be held responsible for anything you do with the code. This code is required to be used in a free way, no commercial use may be made of any of the code contained in this distribution. The Discworld administration team ([email protected]): Pinkfish, Turrican, Ceres, Sojan and Hobbes Two features are especially notable about this licence. The first is that it is not a legal licence, and isn’t a variation of any of the commonly used open source licences that serve as a baseline for distribution of modern software. This is, in part, a legacy from the original release of the Discworld mudlib which came at a time which issues of intellectual property ownership in software development were not so high profile or so high impact. The second thing is that none of the administration team have a firmly established legal right to issue any licence at all. There is no formal transfer of authority from the developer to the administration team, and even if there were that team has undergone many changes from the first years of the game—of the administration team named above, currently at the time of writing only one remains in an active administration role within the game. As such, while there may be an ethical or moral case of ownership that can be exerted by the administration team, it has little or no legal weight behind it. The nature of hobbyist development is such that opportunities for commercialising such a game are limited to non-existent, and so there are few opportunities to violate the licence in any case. However, in the event such a breach occurred there is no mandate for the administration team to negotiate on behalf of all the coders who have contributed to the mudlib over the game’s 20+ years of operation—for Discworld that number is a surprisingly large 1000+ developers. The effort they may have invested into the game is also not possible to assess in the aggregate—as in most such projects, there is a very long tail of contribution (Heron et al. Strikingly, in this scenario it is those who develop the code, rather than those that exert moral authority, that have all the power. There is an asymmetrical relationship where the administration team can be legally denied (in theory, if not in credible practise) the right to use any code that has been submitted to the game. They in turn cannot deny permission of anyone else unless individual coders permit them a suitable licence. They have only the legal rights that their individual contributions grant them. Strictly speaking, it is likely not legally possible for the administration team of Discworld to release a mudlib at all, largely because there is no formal policy of ownership. It may be a largely academic issue, given how challenges to the admin’s team authority to distribute the code of their developers are rare, but in higher-stake environments where real money might be involved it would be an important and problematic situation. This has relevance to Epitaph and all games built using a Discworld mudlib, they are built from a mudlib that the Discworld MUD administration team likely had no legal authority to release. Given the small stakes, everyone involved simply pretends the issues do not exist. This is a luxury that not all hobbyist games would be able to enjoy. To avoid these problems for Epitaph’s future, early on in its development a code ownership policy was put in place to define on what basis contribution was made to the game. It enshrined the right of creators to their own intellectual property and to use it in whatever context they wished outside Epitaph, but it also stressed that code submitted was irrevocably donated as a ‘fork’ to the game. The full policy can be seen at —it is not a binding document, written as it was without the assistance of any legal representation, but it serves as the basis for formalising the agreement that all creators make upon being employed. Formal legal representation, given the lack of a budget to support hobbyist development, is not lightly retained. To avoid the issue of impermanence of the administration staff roster, a company was set up to act as an overarching owner for Epitaph—this in turn ensures that there is a continuation of ownership should anything happen to the original owner of the game. This company, Imaginary Realities, is not intended to generate a profit—merely ro act as a resolution for issues of ownership. Developers then agree to provide Imaginary Realities with an irrevocable right to use, modify and distribute the code they submit under any licence that the administration team consider appropriate. A restriction is placed in the policy though that this will never be for commercial purposes—while the legal validity of the Discworld licence may be questionable, the Epitaph licence still honours its ethical validity. In the situation for Epitaph Online, it is further complicated by the fact that the mudlib runs on a second application—a driver called FluffOS. This in turn comes with its own bespoke licence. This in itself is a fork of an earlier application called MudOS, which was dervived from LPMud: This game, LPmud, is copyright by Lars Pensj|, 1990, 1991. Source code herein refers to the source code, and any executables created from the same source code. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to extend and modify the source code provided subject to the restriction that the source code may not be used in any way whatsoever for monetary gain. ****** The name MudOS is copyright 1991–1992 by Erik Kay, Adam Beeman, Stephan Iannce and John Garnett. LPmud copyright restrictions still apply. In addition, the entire package is copyright 1995 by Tim Hollebeek. ****** FluffOS is a range of patches to MudOS distributed as the patched source tree for convenience. LPmud and MudOS copyright restrictions still apply. Both FluffOS and its earlier ancestor MudOS come with a similar issue to the Discworld lib itself, although one that is perhaps more tractable given how the number of contributors over the years is considerably smaller. However, both licences prohibit the use of the code for commercial purposes, and this is not an unusual restriction amongst such games. The popular DIKU codebase for example has been the subject of considerable controversy over the years regarding whether or not derivatives have been changed ‘sufficiently’ to free developers of its licence, which states, among other things: You may under no circumstances make profit on *ANY* part of DikuMud in any possible way. You may under no circumstances charge money for distributing any part of dikumud—this includes the usual $5 charge for “sending the disk” or “just for the disk” etc. By breaking these rules you violate the agreement between us and the University, and hence will be sued. Leaving aside the unlikely outcome that anyone will attempt to sue over a breach of the DIKU licence, it itself exhibits a confused grasp of who is responsible for violating an agreement—the agreement between the creators and the University is not legally binding in itself on those who use the software. Such legally incoherent licences are a feature of the time period in which the code was developed—standard templates such as the GPL or the various Creative Commons licences were either not available, or sufficiently obscure that knowledge of their existence cannot have been assumed. The licence here then represents an agreement unlikely to stand up to much dedicated scrutiny in court, but again exerts an ethical prohibition against profiteering from the work of others. There is little then to credibly stop someone who wishes to make a profit from their game from doing so even when the mudlib or the codebase they use insists on non-commercialisation. Lacking much in the way of legal architecture or precedent, the community has instead solidified around a culture of vocal condemnation for those that violate licences. Zen ( ) discusses one particular case—that of the mud called Medievia: It is important to understand from the license that it was never meant to be a legal barrier for developers. The lack of legal counsel in writing the licensing agreement is clear when examining the misspellings, non-legal terminology, and loopholes in the agreement. Thus, the licensing agreement was really a request from the DIKU authors to acknowledge their efforts if other developers used the DIKU code. The reaction of the community is similarly discussed: Consequently, despite the large amount of support shown for Medievia, backlash from the developers within the MUD community was harsh. Many crusaded against Medievia by trying to inform gamers about the illegality of the Medievia or, in the case of the cracker who stole Medievia code, directly attack Medievia. Even some Medievia players decided to stop playing because of the ethics involved while others felt that because of the DIKU license issue, the game had stopped focusing on its players and had declined in recent years. Two of Medievia’s coders, Cestus (Kurt Schwind) and Thranz (Keith Hudson) resigned from Medievia in 2000 due to ethical objections to the game code. Additionally, the same year, two of the community’s major resources on the Web, Top Mud Sites and the MudCenter, removed Medievia from their MUD listings. Clearly, many in the development community and those in charge of resource centers believed that Medievia benefited greatly from the DIKU code, and they felt that Medievia was illegally generating revenues. By omitting Medievia from their databases, Top Mud Sites and MudCenter greatly altered the geography of the MUD community. As major resources within the community, this omission is a signal to others that to the people in the MUD community, Medievia should not exist. The effectiveness of such reactions are questionable, given how Medievia survives to this day while other less morally dubious games have withered away. However, what is shown in this short discussion is the extent to which the community itself will act to police what it sees as licence violations. Such controversies rarely make themselves known to players however, as developers tend to congregate on sites where those individuals are correspondingly rare. 6 Conclusion. In this paper we have addressed some of the legal and ethical issues that developers of hobbyist games will face, especially in multi-developer environments. We’ve done this primarily with reference to the text game Epitaph Online and its ancestor Discworld MUD, as this is where the largest bulk of these issues have been encountered. While Epitaph Online is a game that has a very specific style and niche, the lessons are relevant to all titles and genres. It’s incumbent on those responsible for administering the evolution of a game that they understand the implications of intellectual property obligations. When working just within a small group of friends, concepts like code ownership policies may seem abstract and potentially divisive. However, the long term implications of not agreeing upon these issues early are considerable—it’s entirely possible that someone can lose all legal right to do anything at all with their game by not being mindful of the consequences. Similarly, outside of the legal context of licensing there is an ethical and professional context that revolves around being a productive member of a larger community. Even in cases where the legal sanctions that might be applied are unlikely to have much weight, community responses can be striking in their righteous indignation. There are already many more games in the world than any one person can possibly play, and the last thing a developer needs is a whole community of otherwise like-minded souls actively briefing against their offering. It is incumbent then on those responsible for the management of mulit-developer, hobbyist environments to proactively consider the implications of intellectual property before they become an issue. This may often seem like putting the cart before the horse, worrying about the legal ownership of a product that does not exist in any meaningful form. As we have seen in this paper though, leaving these considerations aside until there is a concrete need has the inevitable consequence of rendering future negotiations all but impossible to fairly conclude. This article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Please help with a. (November 2011) () Design-build construction methods, where the designer and constructor are the same entity or are on the same team rather than being hired separately by the owner, began to make a resurgence in America at the end of the twentieth century. Most of these design-build projects were and are led by the contractor, who hires an architect to design its building, which the contractor then builds for its client, the owner. More recently, some architects have begun to embrace a lead role in the design-build approach. They contract with the owner both to design and to construct a building, and they procure the construction services either by subcontracting to a general contractor or by contracting directly with the various construction trades. Ironically, although the notion of an architect leading a design-build team is considered new and innovative, it is really a return to the construction approach employed for the millennia prior to the twentieth century, in which the architect was the Masterbuilder, rather than merely the designer. The following definition describes, assesses and compares the architect-led design–build ( ALDB, sometimes known as designer-led design–build) process to other, related architectural project delivery methods. It focuses on the architect's role in each method, and characterizes that role in terms of responsibility. Responsibility is interpreted in terms of how much direct contact with the client (building owner) and how much control over the project the architect has, and how much risk the architect bears. The architect's role and responsibilities may change in function of the geopolitical location of the development and other criteria. This definition of ALDB outlines the broader context of, presenting that as an alternative to the traditional process for making buildings. First, this traditional process is introduced, then the distinct forms of design–build are explained, and from there, the focus narrows to examine specific forms of the architect-led design build method, what distinguishes it, the benefits and limitations, the results that it can achieve. Design-Bid-Build project timeline The architect's role in traditional design–bid–build [ ] This sequential process separates design and construction into independent tasks. Furthermore, the owner's two contracts – the first with the architect and the second with the general contractor – sets up discrete teams of specialists. Each may take too narrow a view of the whole, and if, with respective responsibilities unclear, tasks overlap or are overlooked, the parties' relationship can become more adversarial than collaborative. Fear of the resulting litigation that often targets the architect can drive architects to absent themselves from the hurly-burly of the construction process. If less involved on site, the architect may lose opportunities to inform construction, as an advocate for the client's vision and as a steward of the original design intent. Not only does this handover of responsibility diminish the architect's standing, the lack of continuity may also compromise the quality of the project outcomes. Design–build as an alternative to design–bid–build [ ] • Dynamic: (or Design/Build, D-B or D/B, or 'DB') is a construction project delivery system in which the designer and constructor are teamed together (or are a single entity) rather than each being hired separately by the owner or developer. If teamed together, the designer and constructor may be in a joint business venture, or one may be the subcontractor of the other. • Efficient: Typically led by contractors, 'design–build' has evolved as an efficient way to deliver projects primarily where the building project goals are straightforward, either constrained by budget, or the outcome is prescribed by functional requirements (for example, a highway, sports facility, or brewery). Construction industry commentators have described design–build as a high performance 'construction project delivery system', a dynamic approach to making buildings that presents an alternative to the traditional design-bid-build approach. • Single-source: Design–build is growing because of the advantages of single-source management: Unlike traditional design-bid-build, it allows for the owner to contract with just one party who acts as a single point of contact, is responsible for delivering the project and coordinates the rest of the team. Depending on the phasing of the project, there may be multiple sequential contracts between the owner and the design–builder. The owner benefits because if something turns out to be wrong with the project, there is a single entity that is responsible for fixing the problem, rather than a separate designer and constructor each blaming the other. Not all design–build projects are alike. Here, there is a distinction between design–build projects led by contractors and those led by architects. Architect-led Design Build is a form of 'design–build' that, according to the DBIA, has been rapidly gaining market share in the United States over the past 15 years. The Design Build Institute of America describes the design–build process as follows: Taking singular responsibility, the design–build team is accountable for cost, schedule and performance, under a single contract and with reduced administrative paperwork, clients can focus on the project rather than managing disparate contracts. And, by closing warranty gaps, building owners also virtually eliminate litigation claims. The DBIA's 2005 chart shows the uptake of design–build methods in non-residential design and construction in the United States. Architect-led design–build is sometimes known by the more generic name 'designer-led design–build'. Although employed primarily by architects, and other architectural professions, the design–build structure works similarly for interior design projects led by an who is not an architect, and also for engineering projects where the design–build team is led by a professional structural, civil, mechanical or other. In addition, it is common for the design professional who leads the design–build team to create a separate corporation or similar business entity through which the professional performs the construction and other related non-professional services. Design–build continues to gain ground as a significant trend in design and construction today. In March 2011, industry consultants ZweigWhite published 'Design-Bid-Build meets the opposition'. In it, they suggest that while Design-Bid-Build 'still rules', the traditional approach is losing favor as 'alternative project delivery methods threaten [the] design-bid-build model.' While not referencing the architect-led design–build approach specifically, the article states that D/B already accounts for 27% of projects, according to their 2010 Project Management Survey and goes on to argue that, The emerging trends in delivery seem to point to a return to the primordial concept of the masterbuilder, as exemplified by D/B and IPD [Integrated Project Delivery]. Design–build workflow [ ] The dynamic architect-led design–build workflow reintroduces discursive coordination, collaboration and consistent, reflexive managerial oversight over the arc of a project schedule, maximizing project efficiency (time, cost, functionality) without compromising design performance or the quality of project outcomes. Design–build can be an iterative and dynamic method, reflecting an emergent design process in which decisions are made holistically and progressively refined as interdependencies are prioritized, identified and coordinated. Contractor-led design–build projects: the architect's role [ ] On contractor-led design–build projects, management is structured so that the owner works directly with a contractor who, in turn, coordinates subcontractors. Architects contribute to contractor-led design–build projects in one of several ways, with varying degrees of responsibility (where 'A/E' in each diagram represents the architect/engineer). Three models of contractor-led design–build (1) Architect as employee of contractor [ ] The architect works for the contractor as an in-house employee. The architect still bears professional risk and is likely to have less control than in other contractor-led design–build approaches. (2) Architect as a subcontractor [ ] Here, the architect is one of the many subcontractors on the team led by the contractor. The architect bears similar professional risk but still with little control. (3) Architect as second party in contractor-led integrated project delivery (IPD) [ ] The architect and contractor work together in a joint venture, both coordinating the subcontractors to get the project built. The building owner has a single contract with this joint venture. The contractor leads the joint venture so in supervising the subs, the architect might defer to the contractor. The architect bears the same risk as they do in the traditional approach but has more control in IPD, even if they were to defer to the contractor. Examples of contractor-led design–build projects [ ], Anchorage, AK, Neeser Construction, Inc. In 2010, it won the 2010 DBIA Design Build Merit Award for a public sector project over $50 million., Phoenix, AZ, Ehrlich Architects In 2009, it won the 2009 DBIA National Design Build Award for a public sector project over $25 million. Architect-led design–build projects [ ] Architect-led design–build projects are those in which interdisciplinary teams of architects and building trades professionals collaborate in an agile management process, where design strategy and construction expertise are seamlessly integrated, and the architect, as owner-advocate, project-steward and team-leader, ensures high fidelity between project aims and outcomes. In architect-led design–build projects, the architect works directly with the owner (the client), acts as the designer and builder, coordinating a team of consultants, subcontractors and materials suppliers throughout the project lifecycle. Architects lead design–build projects in several ways, with varying degrees of responsibility (where 'A/E' in each diagram represents the architect/engineer). Three models of architect-led design–build (4) Architect as provider of extended services [ ] Contracted to the owner, the architect extends his or her services beyond the design phase, taking responsibility for managing the subcontractors on behalf of the owner. The architect bears similar risk but has more control over the project than in the traditional approach or on contractor-led design–build projects. (5) Architect as primary party in architect-led integrated project delivery (IPD) [ ] Again, as in (ork together in a joint venture, both coordinating the subcontractors to get the project built. Again, the building owner has a single contract with this joint venture. This time, the architect leads the joint venture so in supervising the subs, the contractor might defer to the architect. The architect might bear more risk than they do in the traditional approach but risk is shared with the owner and the contractor, as outlined in their agreement. An alternative approach to effectuating this delivery structure is for the architect to contract directly with the owner to design and build the project, and then to subcontract the procurement and construction responsibilities to its allied general contractor, who enters into further subcontracts with the trades. This is a difference in form, rather than in substance, because the business and legal terms of the agreement between the architect and the general contractor may be the same regardless of whether they are characterized as a joint venture or as a subcontract. It is the 'flip side of the coin' of the contractor-led approach described above in which the general contractor subcontracts the design to the architect. (6) Architect as full service leader of design build process [ ] Contracted to the owner, the architect offers full service to the owner, taking responsibility for managing the subcontractors, consultants and vendors, and involving them throughout the project, start to finish, from design through construction. The architect's role shifts during the project, from designer to site supervisor (effectively taking the role of a general contractor), but monitors the project vision, and is able to call upon subcontractors' construction expertise throughout. The architect bears the greatest risk but also has more control over the project than in either the traditional approach, or in the contractor-led and other architect-led design–build projects. Workflow [ ] In design–build projects led by architects, the architect has the opportunity to lead the team through progressive iterations during the design–build process instead of producing sequential, schematic, design, construction drawings and construction administration documents. These continuous feedback loops extend the phase in which the team is dedicated to producing the most informed design. Each iteration is progressively informed by budgets, continuously improving information and the best efficient construction techniques. The architect≠client relationship renegotiated [ ] Together, client and architect can prioritize their decisions so choices can be made when the relevant information for making decisions is actually available. This is in contrast to the typical process in which architects are constrained to make speculative choices without accurate cost or technical information, and clients are invited to make decisions only at review milestones. Here, the architect is able to co-design with the client in an ongoing exchange throughout a project, so the client retains more influence over the design, and once on site, is a more informed stakeholder during construction. This way, architect-led design–build can be co-creative, and the most appropriate project outcomes can emerge from this active dialogue between clients, designers and fabricators. The process allows clients the opportunity to participate with full transparency in the financials of the project throughout its time-line. ALDB project timeline Key features [ ] Challenging the split between design and construction [ ] • In the master–builder relationship, design and construction tasks were considered inextricable from one another. From the mid-twentieth century on, design and construction contracts, activities and roles were separated from one another as projects became more complex. In response to this complexity, increasingly specialized roles, silo'd by skill, and project management shaped by litigation and risk management, deepened this split. • The architect-led approach challenges this 'Balkanization' of the building profession, successfully, respectfully, comprehensively reintegrating design and construction tasks and reuniting architecture and construction professionals. • The architect leading these complex design–build projects acknowledges that the client requires interdisciplinary – not just multi-disciplinary – teams of properly coordinated, varied specialists to deliver, and these cross-functional teams require active management to collaborate effectively. Better business [ ] In architect-led design–build projects, the leading architect: • Serves the owner directly, rather than through the contractor • Respects the contractors' craft expertise and time • Facilitates a profitable project for all • Reclaims his or her own value, and draws on knowledge from a project to feed it back to the profession • Facilitates as the 'conductor of a work or symphony with only a single performance', advocating the owner's vision, maximizing the subcontractors' construction expertise and brokering the two. Above all, the architect leading the design–build project empowers the architects and contractors to produce better, cost effective, higher quality, context-sensitive, high performance buildings. By comprehending, prioritizing, and designing according to specific relationships between scope, quality and time, and by optimizing cost to program. So by inviting architects to lead, design–build methods give architects a platform for advocating clients, respecting craftsmanship and reasserting the value of architects' expertise, improving the built environment, and for doing better business. The more functional and less fearful the architect's business, the more attention they can pay to producing high quality design outcomes. Generating unique outcomes by replicable methods [ ] Consistent and recursive, the design–build process can generate unique, high quality buildings that improve and optimize the broader built environment and work for and are tailored to clients beyond the construction schedule, within specific budgetary, scheduling and site constraints. By removing impediments mostly ascribed to aggressive risk management, the approach broadens the scope for greater architectural creativity. This way, outcomes are more likely to respond to functionality, synthesize context, social intent and artistic sensibility. • • • May 11, 2011, at the. • February 8, 2011, at the. • The Zweig Letter, ISSN 1068-1310, issue 902 •. Archived from on 2011-05-11. Retrieved 2011-03-23. • • • April 8, 2011, at the. Archived from on 2011-07-20. Retrieved 2011-03-29. • LePatner, Barry. 'Broken Buildings, Busted Budgets: How to Fix America's Trillion-Dollar Construction Industry'. The University of Chicago Press, 2007. • An Enthusiastic Sceptic by Nat Oppenheimer, Architectural Design (2009) Volume: 79, Issue: 2, Pages: 100–105, an assessment of Building Information Management (BIM) software • ^ March 21, 2012, at the. Archived from on 2011-05-11. Retrieved 2011-03-23.. Archived from on 2012-08-22. Retrieved 2012-08-22. • • October 28, 2010, at the. Further reading [ ] •, by Mark Friedlander • American Institute of Architects (AIA), issue 21, August 21, 2009 • When Is Hiring Professionals Worth It? The Bottom Line: It Depends.; Architects vs. Contractors vs. Design-Build Firms... There Are Several Options and No Easy Answers, by Denise DiFulco, The Washington Post, July 17, 2008 • ' Design-Build' Trend Sweeps Redo Market; 2-Step Approach Unites Architects, Contractors by Ann Marie Moriarty, The Washington Post, March 27, 2002 External links [ ] Examples of projects [ ] • The East Harlem School, New York,, Architects • • • • • • The Vienna Way House,, Architects • Examples of design–build school programs [ ] • • • • •. I can't find any sites that have the manual for the tuner FM-9435. PacParts does list some parts for the unit:. Description of HITACHI HTA-3000 Service Manual Complete service manual in digital format (PDF File). Service manuals usually contains circuit diagrams, printed circuit boards, repair tips, wiring diagrams, block diagrams and parts list. Service Manual ( sometimes called Repair Manual ) is used mainly by technicians. If You just want to know how to use Your tv, video, mp3 player etc. You should look for Owner's Manual. After placing order we'll send You download instructions on Your email address. The manual is available in languages: English, German, French. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |