Hey Friends!

I think we designers need a "god" account.  If you are working on a board that you want help with, or if you want to collaborate on a board...  You can log into the "hive mind" account, edit the board, save, log out, and let somebody else in.  It's essentially GitHub (collaborative project management) for WarGear.

Thoughts?

I wonder if Tom could simply revive the Cartographer account --  http://www.wargear.net/players/info/Cartographer -- to serve this purpose.

There have been other requests for collaborative editing. Sounds reasonable as long as it isn't to difficult to implement.

In the meantime, there is always xml and email.

I don't think it would take any implementation.  We just make an account and grant public access to it.  Or access upon request?  Then you just log in, Create new Board, Upload XML and images... or Export XML and edit it and resubmit.  We can keep a change log in the description, so you know what's been edited.  Create new versions if you want to test something without losing old versions...  It's all build in already.

+1 to the idea EN.

Edward Nygma wrote:

I don't think it would take any implementation.  We just make an account and grant public access to it.  Or access upon request?  Then you just log in, Create new Board, Upload XML and images... or Export XML and edit it and resubmit.  We can keep a change log in the description, so you know what's been edited.  Create new versions if you want to test something without losing old versions...  It's all build in already.

This, or something similar has been suggested before.  There are just a few 'extra' things that have to be considered.  Does it have a separate log-in? If the password is publicly known, there has to be some code to prevent people from actually playing games on the account.  - PMing, etc..   I'm a fan of the idea, the infrastructure is there, but implementation is not as simple as setting up an account I don't think.

I think one log-in is fine.  The password shouldn't be public, but it should be available upon request.  That was it's public, but we know who has access to it.  If I ever log into the account and it's in a game, I'll just surrender immediately.  I don't see an issue with just not cheating with the account.  

I'm going to go ahead and make one.  If anybody is in, send me a PM and I'll send you the account info.  If it's been suggested in the past and still doesn't exist, I think diving in is probably the only way to get it done.

If you are just going to use it for testing & designing boards (i.e. no public games), is there any harm in just creating a shared account?   Just pick a name, create the account & share the password with whoever is collaborating.

Here's a list of suggestions for account names:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cartographers

EDIT: Hadn't refreshed the thread when I posted this, so it might sound a bit redundant.

Edward Nygma wrote:

I think one log-in is fine.  The password shouldn't be public, but it should be available upon request.  That was it's public, but we know who has access to it.  If I ever log into the account and it's in a game, I'll just surrender immediately.  I don't see an issue with just not cheating with the account.  

I'm going to go ahead and make one.  If anybody is in, send me a PM and I'll send you the account info.  If it's been suggested in the past and still doesn't exist, I think diving in is probably the only way to get it done.

Ed - what's the name of the account. I think if nothing else, the name of shared account should be known & publicized.  That's at least one way to keep tabs on them & make sure they are not being abused.

I haven't done it yet, in case there was a serious issue brought up.  I plan on checking it regularly and I won't let it join any games.  If it joins them, it's immediately forfeiting, so I don't know why you would try to use this account to cheat.  You won't get far in ranking with my actively surrendering.  Anybody have any insight on names?

The Cartographer's Club?

Doesn't the account also have to be premium, though? That would be an issue.

All interested parties could pitch in for a 5-yr membership for it or we could rotate investment into the premium on a quarterly basis.  The former, we'd have to work out with Tom, I'm sure.

I'm happy to pay for the first year.

I think Tom un-locked map making so it does not require premium?  So, a basic account should work just fine... Unless there is some other reason requiring premium?

berickf wrote:

I think Tom un-locked map making so it does not require premium?  So, a basic account should work just fine... Unless there is some other reason requiring premium?

i think it was just for one board release. 

personally i'd like to use tom's Cartographer account for this. it serves multiple purposes: 
a) proves to us Tom is on board with the idea
b) uses a name already established as a solely map maker account
c) it's generic enough but pretty specific in name to identify as map makers (kinda like 'legion')! 

I'm waiting to make the account until we're all on the same page.  I'm happy using cartographer.  I'm also happy to pay for at least 1 year membership.  Let me know.

I guess just to weigh in:  

I'm on board with this idea. I like the idea of collaborating, and it seems like a very simple way to do it. 

It would be good to have some kind of etiquette structure (like when would it be appropriate to go making changes, or what if you don't like the changes a person makes?).

And we should at least think through the 'some men just like to watch the world burn' scenario - where someone wants to go in and destroy all the good work that could happen there.

ratsy wrote:

I guess just to weigh in:  

I'm on board with this idea. I like the idea of collaborating, and it seems like a very simple way to do it. 

It would be good to have some kind of etiquette structure (like when would it be appropriate to go making changes, or what if you don't like the changes a person makes?).

And we should at least think through the 'some men just like to watch the world burn' scenario - where someone wants to go in and destroy all the good work that could happen there.

As the 'primary' contributor (original person to put the board there for public edits) one could keep the board in their own board making pages and then export the xml's back to their page once it has gotten to where they expect it to go.  So, redundancy can protect from any 'burn' mentalities.

The primary depositor of the board could also post what they are hoping to achieve by opening the board up for public editing...