Add whether not not someone is a license holder to the Member In

#1 Sounds like an easy thing to do. but why?

#2 I like the idea.

I think the reason they didn't do that is because GG.com is supposed to be for all indie gamers. That would lend creedance to the idea that this community is only for Torque licensees.

#3 Sometimes I get that feeling anyway...(C:

#4 Rick had said he was going to back in June ( see: http://www.garagegames.com/index.php?sec=mg&mod=forums&page=result.thread&qt=5611 ) but apparently it was decided against or forgotten in the hustle and bustle of GG. Would love to see it put in.

#5 I think it is ok, but make it "hidden" sort of. Meaning, if they don't have a license, don't point that out with something like: "GG Licensee: No" Just put a note on their page only if they do have one or something, because I agree with Alex. And every day, this site turns more and more into a Torque site. Which is fine if that is what this site is meant for, but just make sure that whoever is changing stuff around realizes what the vision of the GG Team really is.

On that note, I'd like to see some other types of resources made available. C++ resources in either DirectX code, or OpenGL code would be a nice start. If this site is going to make a step into the "Indy Developer Site" direction, there needs to be more made available to us that isnt engine-specific. I think it will make us all better developers too. Because if we stick to learning Torque Script, we are only going to be marketable for Torque games in the future.

#6 I am fairly certain any applicable C++ code snippit or resource will be accepted. The predominance of Torque resources is due primarily to the fact that it is the engine that most of the people here decided upon.

But I like many would like some way to validate the license status of possible team members. Be it for the Torque Engine, a Content Pack, or any other material or resource that may be sold by Garage Games. Just as I would want to ensure that all members of my team were using legal copies of their development tools, be it Visual Studio, 3D Max, Maya or any other tool.

#7 what about in the memebers profile there is a little thing saying
" Has Torque engine: yes/No "

that way it just looks like a general thing and not a full memeber of GG.com etc...

#8 The reason is there is a fairly regular occurance of people asking REALLY BASIC questions about things like checking out HEAD that are explained in complete detail on the very first page of the private SDK pages. And they NEVER ask these questions in the PRIVATE SDK forums even when told to.

Now mean I would just ignore them if they could not follow instructions. But some people feel COMPELED to do work for others that refuse to put just a tiny bit of effort into RTFM. Even if they are legit license holders.

Asking over and over what the TAG for HEAD and 1.1.3 is, is suspiscious at best and annoying at its worst.

#9 It might be simplest to let SDK owners see other SDK owners, and leave it at that. For instance, if you're a licensee and someone else is, then you see "licensee" by their name in the forums.

That way people who don't care, won't see it. (eg... if you don't own Torque, and don't want to, then you won't be bothered with extra useless information).

That way people who it doesn't matter for, won't see it. (eg... if you don't have Torque yet, you won't feel alienated by all the people who have it... and you won't know who to pester for illegal information, though I doubt anyone does that.)

That way people who have access to licensed technology, will know who to trust and who they can freely give help to, regardless of where they post. (eg... if someone is asking basic CVS questions, and they're a licensee, then it's much easier to know to help them if they post in the wrong forum, or at least tell them to look in the private forums.)

Just my two bits.

#10 Did any of you think maybe it would be an invasion of privacy to do this?

#11 I think that it's a protection of licensee's rights (especially if there's a discreet policy like I describe). If a system like this is put in place, there will be a greatly reduced need to worry about accidentally supporting someone who has not purchased the SDK.

I guess if you don't want others to know, there are two options - either an opt-out option in user preferences so you can make it never display you as a licensee, even if you are (which is work for GG), or people who don't wish to divulge the information can register a secondary forum account (which is work for you).

I guess I really don't see how licensee-status can be viewed as private. By posting in the Private SDK forums you would give it away pretty directly, and if you never did, no one would care, since it would then be irrelevant if you were or not. It's like a name or e-mail address - it's "private", but having the information available is the price of doing business in a forum environment. At some point, anonymity just gets in the way of communication...

#12 "Invasion of privacy"? It's not like we are walking into your bedroom while you are masturbating to beastiality porn Rob...it's a Torque Liscense...(C:

#13 Rick is going to put TGE ownership status in the dev profile.

Jeff Tunnell GG

#14 truer words were never spoken Jeremy :)