Rule Ratification: Reader Agreement (Wiki) Version 1.0

[cloudii]

• As of April 2nd, 11:51 GMT, 2014, Supervisor Simon has approved the ratification of the Reader Agreement Rules with 11 in favor, 2 waiting, and 0 objections.
  
  These rules are now officially passed. The wiki page is protected from all changes.

-------------------

At the 1st P.N.B-T.E.O.C.C.C.P (General Meeting), you may have noticed that I have been driving an initiative to change, re-draft, and migrate rules to the Wiki.

As such, I have decided that once I finish drafting the rules based on the materials discussed in the meetings, I will post the final draft for everyone to see and vote on. If these rules are accepted as official by consensus, it would be great if a Wiki Supervisor could remove the {{Draft}} tag from the rules and supervisor-protect the page.

--------------------

For this poll, vote ONLY on the:

• Baka-Tsuki Reader Agreement
  
  Please consider these rules independently of the other rules that are still in draft stage.

This page contain rules relevant to reader behavior. Contributor Rules will be covered in another page (not being voted on now), but the Reader Rules also apply to Contributors because contributors are readers .

The separate pages for reader and contributor rules is mostly to recognize that 90% of Baka-Tsuki's browsers are indeed readers, and they probably don't care where translators register, etc.

If you vote, please leave a comment saying what you voted for. This is not a secret ballot.

This is simply so we don't get stumped if 5 trolling readers people vote "no" or something. FYI, the votes are changeable.

[Mystes]

Maybe we should specify which measures will be taken? It'd be more fair, I guess.

[denormative]

Considering BT currently violates the "Regarding Licensed & Banned Material" section (SAO & AW), it may be problematic to require readers adhere to it.

Unless someone wishes to detail 'licensed' with more specificity, it would probably be easier to change it to 'planned to be published' or 'published' or something similar, since that's effectively how the status of SAO/AW is at the moment.

[Mystes]

Considering BT currently violates the "Regarding Licensed & Banned Material" section (SAO & AW), it may be problematic to require readers adhere to it.

Unless someone wishes to detail 'licensed' with more specificity, it would probably be easier to change it to 'planned to be published' or 'published' or something similar, since that's effectively how the status of SAO/AW is at the moment.

It's getting deleted lol

[cloudii]

Maybe we should specify which measures will be taken? It'd be more fair, I guess.

Sure. I didn't specify anything because Oni's original forum rules didn't state any specific warning protocol or anything (a lot of this is copy-pasted and just language-edited from Oni's rules @___@;; For some rules, Oni did specify an immediate ban, but I didn't carry that over).

Considering these are rules regarding readers (which generally means they don't have wiki accounts, which potentially means we really can't give them a warning). But I suppose we can assume we have a reader (or a spammer) that does have an account...

• Comments, posts, and questions deemed to be in violation of the rules will be deleted on the spot and a warning will be issued. Repeated or serious offenses may be accompanied with a suspension or ban.

It's added now, Kira. Reconsider vote? (FYI, if you have a better wording, feel free to edit directly onto the page). We'll just shift votes around until we're satisfied.

Considering BT currently violates the "Regarding Licensed & Banned Material" section (SAO & AW), it may be problematic to require readers adhere to it.

Unless someone wishes to detail 'licensed' with more specificity, it would probably be easier to change it to 'planned to be published' or 'published' or something similar, since that's effectively how the status of SAO/AW is at the moment.

Q__Q;; Theoretically, we actually don't violate our own rule.

That's because Yen Press only has 1-4(?) licensed. We have 1-6 removed.

But... If you have a better way to word it to avoid the confusion, feel free to edit directly onto the page. Just let us know if you change anything so we can look into it again. You're an editor aren't you? xD

Anyway, I suppose this line was kind of vague (it used to say all "projects will be deleted upon release..."), since it implies the whole project will be deleted. Since that isn't always the case, I've changed it to read the following. We can consider it a minimum standard. At the very latest, this is when a project will be deleted.

• All corresponding Baka-Tsuki translations will be deleted upon the official release of a corresponding licensed or published light novel of the same language.

EDIT: I was also thinking about what we're practically trying to achieve. If we limit our rules to "planned to be published" or "published", theoretically a reader could go and share links to SAO 10 (after all of SAO gets deleted ASAP on BT) because there are not concrete plans to publish it yet. However, we have considered in abandoned nonetheless, and I don't think we'd want readers to post links to translations to any project that we've considered abandoned.

I think we're trying to achieve this:

• That readers do not share links of fan translations that Baka-Tsuki has considered abandoned.
• That, in the case Baka-Tsuki that has never hosted the project, readers do not share links of fan translations of material that is licensed.

Alternatively, we could also take the historical philosophical stance that the sovereign is above or outside of the law. XD It was a popular notion in the days past. Social Contract is for citizens, but the sovereign is outside that contract. Hobbes for you.

Note: I've voted yes for myself. xD

[denormative]

Considering BT currently violates the "Regarding Licensed & Banned Material" section (SAO & AW), it may be problematic to require readers adhere to it.

Unless someone wishes to detail 'licensed' with more specificity, it would probably be easier to change it to 'planned to be published' or 'published' or something similar, since that's effectively how the status of SAO/AW is at the moment.

It's getting deleted lol

Sure. The problem is it was 'licensed' ages ago, and hasn't yet been removed; which is why I'm pointing out the conflict. We're asking our readers to do what we aren't.

Q__Q;; Theoretically, we actually don't violate our own rule.

That's because Yen Press only has 1-4(?) licensed. We have 1-6 removed.

But... If you have a better way to word it to avoid the confusion, feel free to edit directly onto the page. Just let us know if you change anything so we can look into it again. You're an editor aren't you? xD

Anyway, I suppose this line was kind of vague (it used to say all "projects will be deleted upon release..."), since it implies the whole project will be deleted. Since that isn't always the case, I've changed it to read the following. We can consider it a minimum standard. At the very latest, this is when a project will be deleted.

The problem is this new interpretation hasn't been reflected in the "TLG Translation Common Agreement" on the wiki; nor do I recall an official announcement of how the new rules work other then the discussion on the private Admin forum here: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=6068&start=45

I mean, if the new rules *are* in effect, then then volumes 6+ of Hidan no Aria would be restored, since only volumes 1-3 have been licensed, right?

My problem, as noted in the other thread, is that we've not codified the new rules anywhere, nor seemingly announced them; I'm a forum mod so I'm supposed to police this Reader Agreement, yet I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to be policing. Which covers what you've mentioned below:

• All corresponding Baka-Tsuki translations will be deleted upon the official release of a corresponding licensed or published light novel of the same language.

EDIT: I was also thinking about what we're practically trying to achieve. If we limit our rules to "planned to be published" or "published", theoretically a reader could go and share links to SAO 10 (after all of SAO gets deleted ASAP on BT) because there are not concrete plans to publish it yet. However, we have considered in abandoned nonetheless, and I don't think we'd want readers to post links to translations to any project that we've considered abandoned.

I think we're trying to achieve this:

• That readers do not share links of fan translations that Baka-Tsuki has considered abandoned.
• That, in the case Baka-Tsuki that has never hosted the project, readers do not share links of fan translations of material that is licensed.

This is why licence agreements are hundreds of pages long in 6-point font; it's difficult to codify, "don't be a twit" into a common consensus, clearly understood English.

Anyway, the above is correct assuming: "Upon confirmed notification of licence of volumes of a series on BT, an administrator will backup the relevant pages associated with the volumes (plus the next two); remove them from the wiki; and place mention on the wiki page as to why they've been removed (assuming with a link to an appropriate forum post/news article/something with the information so no-one can come along and argue about it)." the above "All corresponding Baka-Tsuki..." text is correct as to how we're currently working.

Also given our... flexibility with posting links to raws (aka, don't do it on the forum, if you must that's what PMs are for), your 'achievements' would probably be better written:

• DO NOT publicly share links of fan translations that Baka-Tsuki has considered abandoned on the forum or wiki.
• In the case Baka-Tsuki has never hosted the project, DO NOT share links on the forum or wiki of fan translations of material that is licensed in those languages (when in doubt: ask). That is: if the material would be 'abandoned' if Baka-Tsuki hosted it, DO NOT post links to it as per the previous rule.

Writing annoying, fiddly, legalistic writing is annoying.

[cloudii]

The problem is this new interpretation hasn't been reflected in the "TLG Translation Common Agreement" on the wiki; nor do I recall an official announcement of how the new rules work other then the discussion on the private Admin forum here: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=6068&start=45

I mean, if the new rules *are* in effect, then then volumes 6+ of Hidan no Aria would be restored, since only volumes 1-3 have been licensed, right?

My problem, as noted in the other thread, is that we've not codified the new rules anywhere, nor seemingly announced them; I'm a forum mod so I'm supposed to police this Reader Agreement, yet I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to be policing. Which covers what you've mentioned below:

[...]

Anyway, the above is correct assuming: "Upon confirmed notification of licence of volumes of a series on BT, an administrator will backup the relevant pages associated with the volumes (plus the next two); remove them from the wiki; and place mention on the wiki page as to why they've been removed (assuming with a link to an appropriate forum post/news article/something with the information so no-one can come along and argue about it)." the above "All corresponding Baka-Tsuki..." text is correct as to how we're currently working.

• All corresponding Baka-Tsuki translations will be deleted upon the official release of a corresponding licensed or published light novel of the same language.

Actually, at this point you've convinced me to remove that yellow box with this above message. ---- UPDATE: As of now, I have removed that entire line.

Since this is a page for rules for readers, there is no reason why there should be a statement about how we handle our translation projects (from an Administrative side) on this particular page.

TBH, rules exist to guide readers and members. There isn't any particularly demanding reason why we should place down rules delineating our own administrative practices unless we intend to establish transparency with the public. We're not a formal state or organization with a constitution, and imo, there's no reason to restrict ourselves in that way.

In TLG's Common Agreement, all that's stated is that translations will be deleted "upon request". Nowhere do we state we will actually remove licensed material from our own volition, even though we tend to do so anyways. Every licensed project, as far as I know of, has been treated on a case-by-case basis. Unless there is an overwhelming motion to codify our protocol dealing with licensed projects, I see no imperative to create any official protocol that's recorded on any rule page.

Thus, a line like the above quoted should not belong anywhere in the rules. It's acceptable line to place in the help/about pages, because it exists for informational purposes and describes what we actually do, but it doesn't promise anything... For example, this is what is currently written on the "About Baka-Tsuki Help Page" (which is not a rule page).

Fan translations hosted by Baka-Tsuki may be removed and projects may be declared formally abandoned without warning.

The most common reason a translation may be removed from the Wiki is that a light novel series has been licensed by an English (or Alternative Language) Publisher. Baka-Tsuki Administration considers how quickly and much material will be removed on a case-by-case basis.

All decisions are final, so please do not complain. We are most interested in preserving the integrity of Baka-Tsuki as a site, and we're sure you wouldn't like to see us shut down from a DCMA Takedown Notice.

--------

This is why licence agreements are hundreds of pages long in 6-point font; it's difficult to codify, "don't be a twit" into a common consensus, clearly understood English.

[...]

Also given our... flexibility with posting links to raws (aka, don't do it on the forum, if you must that's what PMs are for), your 'achievements' would probably be better written:

• DO NOT publicly share links of fan translations that Baka-Tsuki has considered abandoned on the forum or wiki.
• In the case Baka-Tsuki has never hosted the project, DO NOT share links on the forum or wiki of fan translations of material that is licensed in those languages (when in doubt: ask). That is: if the material would be 'abandoned' if Baka-Tsuki hosted it, DO NOT post links to it as per the previous rule.

Writing annoying, fiddly, legalistic writing is annoying.

Lol. That's legal issues is actually one of my big concerns. For example, if (god forbid) Baka-Tsuki ever got involved in a lawsuit, these publicly available pages will be up there for scrutiny. We could argue that TLG's Common Agreement should be the only document that should be taken legally, but that doesn't stop a prosecutor from using text that we have previously endorsed as an organization.

That's exactly why these rule pages should reflect the public face of Baka-Tsuki more than anything else.

As such, that's also why I don't agree with your suggestion to publicly state our flexibility with sharing links of fan translations.

• As an organization we officially should not endorse the sharing of links of "licensed" materials. (End of story).

That should be our stance as an organization. What we don't see however, we can't enforce. Like that, everyone's happy.

TBH, I still prefer not to define "licensed". I would intentionally keep it as a vague point in the rules, and you guys (the supervisors) would have the freedom to judge what the definition of "licensed" is, and apply it however the situation calls for. In either case, these rules really only affect the distribution of "licensed" material (not how we decide to abandon projects).

• Interpretation: Literal License --- As in, Yen Press only owns the SAO license for volumes 1-3
• Interpretation: Entire Series License --- As in, SAO (the series) has been "licensed" even though Yen Press only has the license for a portion of the novels
• Interpretation: Licensed meaning "Published" --- For some reason, people tend to assume this too

Either way, the vagueness is enough to defend ourselves should anyone ever call us "hypocritical" for demanding that readers do not share fan translations of "licensed" series. (Though personally, I see nothing wrong with us being hypocritical xD)

[larethian]

Can someone help create an updated general guideline for editing?

I want to propose the following guidelines to be included with respect to editing a Project Homepage:
1. One should not modify synopsis except fixing grammar errors or typos. Synopsis updates should be submitted to supervisor or original synopsis submitter for approval.
2. Project general info should only contain relevant factual information, and can only be edited to correct wrong or outdated information, additional relevant facts or fixing of grammar errors or typos. It should not contain irrelevant factual information (based on staff discretion), or personal opinions.
3. Staff section should only be modified by approved staff and supervisor of project.
4. Chapter names can be submitted by anyone, but may be changed by translators. Modification is not allowed after a translator finalized a chapter name unless it's with approval.
5. New sections should not be created without supervisor approval. This include terminology sections and other customized needs for a project.

Did I miss out anything? Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm in a hurry. Create a new thread for this if needed. Thanks.

[cloudii]

Can someone help create an updated general guideline for editing?

I want to propose the following guidelines to be included with respect to editing a Project Homepage:
1. One should not modify synopsis except fixing grammar errors or typos. Synopsis updates should be submitted to supervisor or original synopsis submitter for approval.
2. Project general info should only contain relevant factual information, and can only be edited to correct wrong or outdated information, additional relevant facts or fixing of grammar errors or typos. It should not contain irrelevant factual information (based on staff discretion), or personal opinions.
3. Staff section should only be modified by approved staff and supervisor of project.
4. Chapter names can be submitted by anyone, but may be changed by translators. Modification is not allowed after a translator finalized a chapter name unless it's with approval.
5. New sections should not be created without supervisor approval. This include terminology sections and other customized needs for a project.

Did I miss out anything? Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm in a hurry. Create a new thread for this if needed. Thanks.

Sure. Irrelevant to this particular thread, but if no one else makes a guideline for this, I'll get to writing it myself, eventually. xD I've bookmarked your proposals.

[zzhk]

On that note about editing guidelines,

3. Honorifics are to be kept with a -, like -san (Translators may or may not include them, so it's the editor's duty to correct them)

This rule seems slightly ambiguous. Does it mean that whenever honorifics are retained, the hyphen must be used (in other words, a punctuation rule), or honorifics must always be kept across the board (a stylistic rule), and in each case, accompanied by a hyphen?

Essentially, what are "them" referring to in "may or may not include them"? The honorific or simply the hyphen?

For example, I can easily see supervisors (or project managers as they're now renamed) deciding to eschew honorifics for western fantasy settings as a stylistic choice, which would mean it is not an error to be corrected (as this rule seems to imply).

[larethian]

This should just be guideline and depends on project team.

[cloudii]

Just a reminder to everyone that if you vote "wait" or "no", please state why.... otherwise we'll never be able to address whatever your concern is. xD

Zzhk and Larethian, I perfectly understand your concerns about the current format guideline. xD However, in this thread, we're only voting for the ratification of the above linked rule (the Reader Agreement). Each separate page will be ratified separately since I imagine there may potentially be many things we don't agree on if we tried to ratify everything at once.

But yes, I otherwise I agree with you that those current rules in the Format Guideline could easily be replaced with a statement that it could be decided by the project team.

[Cindynka]

Can someone help create an updated general guideline for editing?

I want to propose the following guidelines to be included with respect to editing a Project Homepage:
1. One should not modify synopsis except fixing grammar errors or typos. Synopsis updates should be submitted to supervisor or original synopsis submitter for approval.
2. Project general info should only contain relevant factual information, and can only be edited to correct wrong or outdated information, additional relevant facts or fixing of grammar errors or typos. It should not contain irrelevant factual information (based on staff discretion), or personal opinions.
3. Staff section should only be modified by approved staff and supervisor of project.
4. Chapter names can be submitted by anyone, but may be changed by translators. Modification is not allowed after a translator finalized a chapter name unless it's with approval.
5. New sections should not be created without supervisor approval. This include terminology sections and other customized needs for a project.

Did I miss out anything? Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm in a hurry. Create a new thread for this if needed. Thanks.

A quick question... Regarding projects with no supervisor (usually ALTs) how will it be in the fifth point?

[cloudii]

http://www.baka-tsuki.org/project/index ... suki:Rules

To help address everyone's concerns, I've laid out the organization of the rules index page. There will be 3 sections to the rules:

• Section 1: MASTER RULES - These rules are law and apply globally. No Project Manager has authority to modify these rules.
• Section 2: PROJECT CONVENTIONS - These rules describe translation-project-specific related rules (ie: honorifics, max number translators per volume, etc). The Project Manager has all the authority to customize these rules however they see fit. However, they're being listed here to represent a default situation when a Project Manager has not specified any rules at all.
• Section 3: SPECIAL PROTOCOLS - This section describes protocols and guidelines for more specific situations. Of course, Project Managers do not have power over this either.

They haven't been composed yet, but I promise that they'll be debated here once they're drafted... The current draft translator agreement that's currently posted also has to be completely re-written.

Currently, I'd also like to scrap the "Format Guidelines" page on the Wiki and replace it with the "Project Conventions" page, because I feel like the current Format Guidelines page has many ambiguities (as Zzhk pointed out) and has portions that act more as tutorials than guidelines.

Can someone help create an updated general guideline for editing?

I want to propose the following guidelines to be included with respect to editing a Project Homepage:
1. One should not modify synopsis except fixing grammar errors or typos. Synopsis updates should be submitted to supervisor or original synopsis submitter for approval.
2. Project general info should only contain relevant factual information, and can only be edited to correct wrong or outdated information, additional relevant facts or fixing of grammar errors or typos. It should not contain irrelevant factual information (based on staff discretion), or personal opinions.
3. Staff section should only be modified by approved staff and supervisor of project.
4. Chapter names can be submitted by anyone, but may be changed by translators. Modification is not allowed after a translator finalized a chapter name unless it's with approval.
5. New sections should not be created without supervisor approval. This include terminology sections and other customized needs for a project.

Did I miss out anything? Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm in a hurry. Create a new thread for this if needed. Thanks.

A quick question... Regarding projects with no supervisor (usually ALTs) how will it be in the fifth point?

There was a terminology change that the meeting decided on:

From now on, Project Supervisors will be referred to as Project Managers. Project Managers can be anyone (doesn't have to be a Wiki Supervisor), and there'll be a section in the rules describing how an individual can apply to become a Project Manager.

--------------------

Also a reminder. For this poll, vote ONLY on the:

• Baka-Tsuki Reader Agreement
  
  Please consider these rules independently of the other rules that are still in draft stage.

[Nurin]

I voted on yes, I don't I need to explain my reasons as Rikka, Cloud(A.K. no sun) should already know that, etc etc...