Thread:TheGoldenPatrik1/@comment-71.114.50.112-20171125032602/@comment-71.114.48.167-20171129220622

''[Look all I am going to say about this whole shibozzle is that Pi, you clearly need to either scrap your ideas or change your names. I mean seriously? Tale of Diepteer? That's so similiar to the original Tale of Diep brand. Same with using the Archancellor. Like c'mon, you seriously expect us to believe that you aren't ripping off those ideas? All I am saying is that you need to come up with a new name for your story, as I see it being a complete outsider to both as a name resembling too much of that of the original. So please, do a name change sir before I confuse the two.]  ''

I can't change page names. I want it to be Saga of Diepteer now(which goes better with Epic) but I can't change it. I asked for it to be changed.

I already explained why it was named that way orignally. Pi wrote: TheGoldenPatrik1 wrote: Did you even look at the image I made? There has been a link since the page was created.
 * "The Archchancellor is a black circle ringed with fire with smoky black forming a clock and hands with glowing red eyes. He holds a black staff in each hand one each with a glowing red orb."

-Pi I couldn't see the pic, had too many Wix ads. ? not sure even with Adlock off it is easy to see... been that way with wix site for a while... notsure anyway i changed that.

''[Banarama still believes you've done exceptionally little in regards to changes, making small edits that matter very little without any change to the problem at hand. Because the details aren't what matter. It's the current skeleton as an entire whole you're using that needs changing. It doesn't matter where you got the idea from, it's just that people are viewing it as very similar to what we have now in the form of the Tale of Diep. Because just because we're the only ones saying stuff doesn't mean our idea is alone. I can name at least seven people who believe the Tale of Diepteer or Epic of Diepteer or whatever has its basis in a model already used to even an extent. Because even if it ISN'T based off Tale of Diep, in that case its based off of OTHER MORE OFFICIAL MATERIAL, and is STILL plagiarism (albeit possibly out of our jurisdiction). All in all, I have people telling me this needs to be taken to Ursuul. ]''

Tell me what to change. I have not seen any actuall plagirism yet just similar ideas which is not plagarism otherwise there would be no books. SImilar base plot is not plagarism in the real world.

What really matters here is viewer acceptance; If everyone thinks its a load of low-quality copying and don't read or care about it then why does it matter?

''[Now that that silly thought's out of my head, I have to agree, this situation has gone much too far, with the content of Diepteer much too similar to that of the ToD and the supposed inspirations being out of place. Name changes, reworking the whole Diepteer-Tale whatever, and many other things must be done if you want your conceptions to be accepted here as conceptions and not thinly veiled plagiarism, whether that was your intent to copy or not, Pi. ]''

It has place holder names and a few semifinished parts. Thats the whole plagarising Epic of Diepteer in all its glory. A boss page with a few attacks and an infobox, A page on SoDt (ToDt) with unique factions, a cult page with unique organisation and one unique enemy and only on page, an EoDt page for organisation. Thats it not much there is there?...

"Thinly veiled plagarism" I think if I really wanted to plagarise I could a better job.... a much better job than what I have...and more activity not being taken up on this thread....

You don't have to accept it or like it or even think its orignal!

Give me the plagarism straight from the page show me what is similar.

I'm tired of accustations after I tried to avoid conflict and said I'd change it!

Yours truly,

Annoyed and Vexed

Pi