Reconsider inclusion policy 2.3 "Language": accept also non-English content #622
Description
Context: a content of mine has recently been refused on CDB due to the fact it's in Italian. It's an educational game that's being played in schools as I write.
I think not accepting non-English content is the contrary of inclusion, since we can't expect the whole world to speak/understand English with a high level of proficiency. This also ignores local projects for local realities, like in my case. I'll copy-paste the answer I posted under the CDB refusal:
So, for starters, there isn't any string in the custom modules written for the game. Italian words are only present in the title, the subtitle (or description) and the CDB description (README).
About the title, there's plenty of videogames out there made by non-English companies that title their games in English (marketing, because it "sounds cool", it's not important). An example is the recent HORSES, made by an Italian team. For once that a game is titled in a language different than English, I frankly don't see any problem.
About the rest, we're talking about a project that is about a local reality (the ruins of a castle in Marche, Italy) for a local (Italian) community. If I want other Italian schools to download and try it, I cannot provide an English CDB description, because the public is not English. Expecting a game for a local reality whose language isn't English to provide an English description when they go see what the game is about is the opposite of inclusion. It excludes whomever doesn't understand the language (whether it's in full or at all).
Speaking of inclusion, I suggested the client to upload the game on CDB so as to have a handy way to download what he needs from school to school - as different schools might have different OSs. If rule 2.3 forces people to provide content in English, it means that in order to gain visibility, people has to create English content - even when it doesn't make sense. If you don't create English content, you don't exist.
Maintaining a custom client is not something I want to do nor it's bearable (imagine having to recompile on Android Studio every time you change a line of code). The same applies for self-hosting a custom CDB for this work: time aside, in the workshop the client had a few days ago, kids wanted to continue to play the game. They can do it at home if they can download the game from the official client with no tweaks of sort, which is why is important for us to have the title in here. It's a smooth experience and it can act as a bridge to the whole Luanti ecosystem - instead of having them opting for other way less ethical solutions.