Talk:Home of the Underdogs/Archive 2

message: I'm removing the following sentence:
This is nevertheless controversial, as some parties allege that all manner of abandonware is illegal.
First, this is incorrect. It is a well-established fact that abandonware is illegal. It was always part of the code of honor of abandonware webmasters not to pretend otherwise. Second, any discussion about the legality of abandonware should be in the abandonware article, not here. — Graf Bobby 09:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality of abandonware 

message: Perhaps it is a problem on my end, but all attempts to access anything other than the main page result in a blank web page. Anyone else seen this?
24.58.114.90 02:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: activity of the site

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — GarrettTalk 09:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of [[:Template:{{ucfirst:hotu}}]]

message: Can you ban all the IPs belonging to ESA/IDSA from editing ANY pages? What they do is nothing short of vandalism. Next time you'll see them chewing up whole entries, replacing them with "PUBLICATION FORBIDDEN UNDER YET ANOTHER NAZI DIGITAL COPYRIGHT ACT, SEE YOU IN COURT". Same goes for RIAA and MPAA.
Thank you.
--A Concerned User 195.164.48.92 08:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't it be easier to simply assign the article semi-protected status? Or are you volunteering to do all the work? Bwanderson 03:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Inevitably, Wikipedia will be edited by people and organizations with an agenda. It is in their interest for information that affects their business negatively to disappear rapidly, regardless if it is true (or more importantly for the Wikipedia mission, notable). If you are concerned, add this page to a watch list and revert / keep the article NPOV as much as possible. JubalHarshaw 03:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A minor suggestion... 

message: A request for an article at HotU returns a redirect to this page. This is not a huge problem by itself, since the NwN expansion is documented as being a possibility. However, the page Hotu serves as a disambiguation page for the acrynom, including nothing further then Home of the Underdogs and Hordes of the Underdark. The problem that I see is this: either the term HotU is used for Home of the Underdogs more often (enough to merit both HotU and Hotu redirecting here with the NwN expansion listed as it is now), or the term HotU is used for both equally and should link to disambiguation.
The Bioware site itself uses HotU as an acronym in the forums for game owners (to be completely accurate, it uses NwN:HotU), so I believe both terms are used equally. Admissibly, a "google test" shows Home of the Underdogs first, but NwN is a close second. (Not counting the FS2 entry at Home of the Underdogs which for some reason is listed as a separate site). It is very clear to me that neither Home of the Underdogs nor Hordes of the Underdark use the term Hotu as often as the term HotU. Therefore, I do not think it is fair to say that one should direct one place (one of the articles or a disambig) while the other should go elsewhere. Dylan 21:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you need to even ask on the talk page, to change one of the acronym redirects if its something you've obviously put that much logical thought into, but my feeling is that if you give it a few years, very few people will be searching for 'hordes of the underdark' (especially in acronym form), while people will still be using (or at least talking about) home of the underdogs. Miscreant 00:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HotU Redirect? 

message: Home of the Underdogs seems to be inaccessible at the moment.  Anyone else experiencing this? 69.11.4.75 (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Same here, even after three days. I still hope that the site is going to be back, it is a great source of reference. 84.227.154.77 (talk) 04:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Has the owner stated a reason for being a prick about this? I mean, if there is a large and important community it seems retarded to just abandon it and let it rot away as soon as you get bored with it. --Threedots dead (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The owner has been paying very high bandwidth hosting bills out of her own pocket for a long time, despite moving onto different projects years ago. I would say that this is more dedication than most of us would be willing to give, no? Miscreant (talk) 02:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Absolutely. By the way, the owner is a "she" :) For years and years she worked hard on the content, paid big bucks for hosting, offered everything for free, and even risked legal prosecution. And if after years of goodwill she pulls the plug, it's "being a prick about it" - I think it's that lack of thankfulness that is so frustrating to a lot of site operators, leading them to giving up their projects after a while. HOTU has already done more than most other sites for the underground/vintage gaming community. Of course it would be sad if the site was down for good, but nobody could say that there ever was a lack of dedication to the project and its fans. 84.227.10.43 (talk) 05:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  People like myself are put out, though, by the lack of an announcement of the site going down. I'd just downloaded Discworld off there, and now I don't have access to any of the technical documentation that they hosted on site - unless I know the right search terms to find it on Google cache. I think if proper notice had been given people could have made mirrors, got what resources they thought would have been valuable to keep, etcetera. I think whoever this enigmatic she is has done a brilliant job, but it doesn't change the fact that the biggest abandonware resource centre has been destroyed by some rather thoughtless action. (Or lack thereof) I wouldn't say I'm angry, just that this is unfortunate. 210.1.205.27 (talk) 07:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Google cache?  May I suggest the Wayback machine instead?  There were also at least one user who occasionally posted on the forums pondering whether he should put up a mirror.  As for Discworld specifically, it may be supported by ScummVM in the near future; there have even been suggestions that it will be legally released as freeware. 69.11.4.75 (talk) 04:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Site down again? 

message: This article needs to be updated with relevant information, but there are several holdouts that insist on believing HOTU can never die, so my edits get reversed.  This is contrary to reality as the site is no longer online. 
Particularly:
The site, however, continues to stay online (despite large web-hosting bills), and its community still actively post in the forums.
Fact #1: the site is not online.  Fact #2: Besides the community being in significant decline for quite some time since 2006, you can't post in a forum if it's no longer up.
Also, the statement "despite large web-hosting bills" is completely arbitrary and unverified.
Oddlesofnoodles (talk) 03:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * Yeah, but with minimal functionality - none of the files/screenshots/boxshots are working. So whether it'll be back for real or stays in the current lobotomized version is still very much uncertain. --The Fifth Horseman (talk) 16:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevant Status