esr is a community news and discussion site. the non-disclosure agreement is between the beta user and the contract drafter. esreality has no legal responsibility to enforce quake champions nda.

content providers are not liable for information shared by those who share information covered by an nda. when that information is shared, it becomes part of the public domain.

by attempting to enforce the nda, esreality administrators are placing themselves in the position of white-knight janitors fending off nda violators with their shining mop handles.

That sounds ridiculous if you say it outloud!


Why would you want ot make it harder on a company. There's a reason its closed beta. Sucks people want to think of a way out of everything.

Why would anyone care about legal responsibility if your trying to do whats right. Should Not be about trying to circumvent people's wishes that make the game for us. Simple as that!

that's a good point, if you assume altruistic motives of quake champions developers. i was speaking more from the perspective of what the admins should do, not whether it is right or wrong for a person to disregard some agreement they've made

if i were part of the beta, i wouldn't share my experience.

Don't think of it so much as a responsibility as the people in charge of ESR deciding to respect id's decision to not have things discussed. The ESR staff do have the right to make that decision. It isn't a question of if they have to, it's a question of them keeping in line with id's decisions, which is important if this place wants to stay a Quake hub in the future.

esr doesn't have a staff. esr has users who volunteer to perform some functions voluntarily, without being compelled or directed, when they show that they desire to and can be trusted to some degree to do those things.

how is it important for esreality to keep in line with id's decisions if it wants to stay a quake hub in the future? esreality users have been very critical of id software over > 15 years of site life, and there are many instances of id software's desires for the community being disregarded by esreality users. even syncerror was demoted as a user admin in the past for some problems with trying to cultivate esreality to be "in line" with id software desires.

Wow. That struck my perfectly. 100% agree.

Listen to me very carefully. There are three ways of doing things around here: the right way, the wrong way, and the way that *I* do it. You understand?

how big is your... collection of gifs? are girls impressed by it?

it's all about impressing the ladies with the size of my... gif collection

You impress me every time, bro. Unfortunately, I'm not a lady. :D

you're just a pronoun modification away from becoming one. don't be scared.

I think I'll go with xe, xer, xerself. :D

Technically - yes, the violations of NDA should not be allowed.
However, few of the posts as of lately do violate it. Saying out loud you don't trust id to resurrect Quake, or you think the next guy liking the game is a casual player doesn't obligatory mean you have actually played the game.

Discussing the FPS issues on one's PC, on the other hand, clearly does.

While censorship is a serious issue in general, I find it hard to see this NDA business as very serious.

The benefit to satisfying some people's curiosity about the progress of QC development is kinda small, and the harm due to leaking that information is kinda small too.

On the one hand, censoring NDA violations might put us in better favour with id, but do they take us seriously anyway?

On the other hand, putting info on the site might attract more users and benefit ESR that way, and if it doesn't, then it is only a very small pool of people actually seeing the leaked information so the harm to id would not be that great.

I would not censor anything except screenshots or vdeo/sound footage, and maybe detailed description of game mechanics (like new weapons). Not because of some let's-be-nice-to-id-software nonsense, but because of the spoiling. Some people want to discover this stuff themselves, plus there will be plenty of time to discuss it once the game's out. Performance reports, information about customizability (think console access and availability of certain cvars), or netcode reports are okay and should be encouraged imho.

yeah screenshots and video i'm good with.

That and shit talking about the netcode, cause its closed beta that's what they are Hoping to fix.

I think it's fair if admins delete NDA'ed parts by request from id software, but generally any post modification due to such reasons should not be silent and deleted parts should be marked to indicate why they have been removed.

exactly.

The actual problem is there's no forum to discuss QC beta stuff.

There is a closed beta forum but it's filled with noobs, so can't really have a conversation. Also the QC Community Discord is not too active anymore (or is there a newer channel?).

I downloaded already the 30 min video someone was linking on this site and I watched it carefully to understand more about game's details -you practically understand better when you see gameplay footage than by just reading champion statistics. I don't understand how this could hurt the game more as I am already having a critical view based on the gameplay disclosures coming from id Soft guys themselves.

On the other hand if id Soft is wanting to base the build of the game on ppl opinion (especially quake players) the fact that more ppl would have access to game mechanics once the development of the game would be in an advanced state of development would only make things worst.

I visit this site only to see ppl shitting on games that came after Q3A. And ensure myself, that everything was better in the past and that the youngsters from today are morally corrupted and weak, so no, nothing should be censored.

i posted that i agree with someone trashing qc and im not sure if im in violation of the NDA Xd oh well suppose the thread will be nuked before i am !!

I voted "no" but on the other hand I don't always agree with the democratic law of the many or of the stupid. This being said I am afraid that many bad decisions made by game companies like id would be aggravated or primary caused by public opinion -ie QL was better in the closed beta stage before the horde entered the QL forums with their invaluable advices.

The NDA agreement is between the player and the company.
If someone wishes to break it, he or she should be free to do so on a 3rd party site like ESR.
No admins morals or personal sense of right and wrong should ever stay in the way of free speech.

As for screenshots or videos, again, this is a 3rd party site for gaming-related news and discussion, therefore reveals are relevant.
There were a bunch of streams, screenshots and videos on other sites within hours after the first beta started, why should people be prohibited from sharing this kind of information here, on the go-to site when it comes to Quake?

Maybe a bit off but this site afford to play any role or policy that the admins want, ie they take the liberty to play the Nuremberg trial from time to time against political views they don't like -well for the last few 2-3 years it seems they were forced to tone down their progressive (anti-European) agenda, with every new Muslim atrocity in Europe.

Does anything think it would be a good idea to have a private forum just for beta testers?

What would be the purpose? They already have places where they can discuss QC without breaking the NDA. People who come here and talk about the game do so to share information with people who dont play the beta.

Avoiding noobs and mods, maybe.

good idea.

it would be a consens and solution for all here. it makes sense.

Seems a good idea to me!
But how would you be sure X or Y is really in the beta to allow the forum access?

A sincere promise will do.

Doesn't it break the NDA ? :D

lol

is this the end of qmau? response below:



crunkus elaborates on the penalties for violating an NDA:



qmau requests a response from his legal representative:

From a legal standpoint (assuming the jurisdiction that esreality falls into), can you go to court on behalf of a private contract being broken when you aren't one of the contract parties? Can random people (or the state) start enforcing id software's NDA? (probably a stupid question)

I'd tell you, but I might have to threaten you.

Filing out and online forum.

I got in contacted.



Yeah, sounds like he works for id.

Who the fuck is this crunkus faggot anyway ? Fuck this ass licking piece of shit

edit: go ahead, sue me for writing this, you can mouth-to-ass me after me eating a good spicy mexican chili for all the fucks I don't give about it

tell me how you really feel

have you won?