The issue is, the guidelines were made without SVS zones in mind. I don't think any of us even considered anyone would want to try and start anymore SVS zones as they have all been dying, and merging into Chaos. The creator(s) of SVS zones no longer exist. So we end up going with the SSC versions most recent head sysops as the people in this seat. The zone names themselves are property that are outside of VIE's SubSpace CD release of the maps and setings. And Bargeld said the map and settings didn't bother him, but he didn't want him to use the name. That is a request I can respect, and honestly, the zone isn't out West anymore, so Alpha West really doesn't make any sense. As for the maps, as I told TGS, it is just out of respect of other SSC zones. I'd have had to see a really good reason for it to be denied, but it just gives them a heads up when all the players come to that zones sysop whining about it. Players are what are zones are about, and they're the best at harassing people. Like Hyperspace was given permission to use Premiere League's map (I asked Ghost Ship for them, and permission was given) but due to constant harassment from Premiere League players, I think they finally took it down. Or I had heard they did, but never checked tbh. Respecting each other is what SSC is all about, and it is all that keeps us alive. Once we start pissing each other off, and disconnecting ourselves from each other again, we'll begin the huge fall again. We've finally leveled off, and the network sysops are getting along decently again. We can't do this alone, and need to work together if we plan to have a future. Sorry, bot a bit off subject, but yeah. That is my whole feeling behind all of this. I have pretty much been left in charge of inspecting new zones that want to join the SSC Network, and I am very lenient on it. But when it comes to SVS, it is honestly very messy, and very hard to lay down ANY sort of rules without just getting the entire game to say "VIE no longer owns SVS, and the current svs head sysops now own the rights to the content". Which of course could never happen, and legally is wrong, so we're stuck here.