Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Curating a wiki is not as easy as you think. If anyone can edit the content, you have to be willing to open your site to all kinds of low-quality, off-topic, or counter factual edits. Reviewing the work of hundreds of users to maintain a consistent style and tone can absolutely be a full-time job.
I don’t know if it’s the case here, of course. But there’s a whole lot of “curating isn’t REAL work” shaming going on in this thread.
It’s not anything in the neighborhood of a full time job. He absolutely does not deserve to make a living on it.
And when those 100+ users contributed explicitly under a license dictating it not be for commercial use, he doesn’t deserve to earn a penny more than his expenses.
Maintaining high quality content is harder than it sounds, especially for a topic as expansive as BG3.
It’s a wiki. With literally over 100 people who have done a large number of edits. He’s not doing anywhere near all the work of documenting the game.
Curating a wiki is not as easy as you think. If anyone can edit the content, you have to be willing to open your site to all kinds of low-quality, off-topic, or counter factual edits. Reviewing the work of hundreds of users to maintain a consistent style and tone can absolutely be a full-time job.
I don’t know if it’s the case here, of course. But there’s a whole lot of “curating isn’t REAL work” shaming going on in this thread.
It’s not anything in the neighborhood of a full time job. He absolutely does not deserve to make a living on it.
And when those 100+ users contributed explicitly under a license dictating it not be for commercial use, he doesn’t deserve to earn a penny more than his expenses.
I strongly agree with the licensing issue. Noncommercial means noncommercial.