I mean, each and every single one of these suggestions has been suggested by a member of the community and then, through community feedback, been seen as something people want.
I wouldn't want to start shitcanning things people actually want just because they're small features or whatever. Low priority or remain on the backlog? Sure, but not deleting them entirely.
For the most expensive item in the shop, the login message (which is currently uncustomisable), it takes 250 reactions, or 21 hours straight of winning every single reaction.
This suggestion would see it require 500 reactions - or almost 2 entire straight days winning every single reaction. In practice, this would be longer, since there's a lot of people capable of competing for reactions and obviously you're not gonna sit on the server for 2 days straight just for a login message.
You can also double that, give or take for every other shop item. It already takes long enough to get the stuff imo - the issue lies in that there's nothing to do with coins once the shop is bought out.
Tbh vouch for something like this, provided it's limited.
The current system comes with long wait times as someone could in theory clog the whole epsilon queue and as it places blocks by hand you'd be waiting for hours to get a chance.
I've concerns about how this could potentially be abused though but I wouldn't mind something like this in theory.
what exact purpose would this serve?
Filling up disc space speedrun by the sounds of it.
To be honest the ability to only appeal if the ban is incorrect still doesn't sit right for me. I understand "don't break the rules if you don't wanna get banned", I do, but everyone fucks up and makes mistakes and would like us to err on the side of caution in cases.
Like, if someone signs up to the forum, appeals sincerely and apologises 2 months into their 4 month ban for crashing the server, why should we deny them immediately without such a second chance? The very worst case scenario is that they crash the server again, but we've got active enough staff members to sort out the issue and the server can restart in less than a minute. And that's the very worst - when we've got serial griefers or serial trolls coming back whose have less negative impact, there'll be even less of a nuisance caused if they return to their old ways.
The best case scenario is that for those 4 months we have someone actually coming and playing on the server. Even if they're not insanely active, it's still another player. Someone to build with, someone to talk to.
These appeals aren't gonna be coming in by the masses, I'm only referring to when someone's able to put up an appeal that would convince the community to let them back.
If it worked in the past why not try again
In my time here there have been a handful of SMPs and save for a honeymoon period, none have lasted longer than days. They were all close to survival, as per the suggestion.
ryan why is it so bad that the server world size grows?
There's only a limited amount of space the server can hold, and storage can be expensive.
Honestly object since I believe our playerbase is too small to split across yet another server.
The leak contained the IP addresses of one banned player as the main piece of sensitive information. The rest were just a few conversations here and there, an announcement from myself asking admins not to crash clients anymore after the raids, and it rather notably included a public announcement about development.
May I propose an alternative suggestion where the senior voting round will be publicized only AFTER the voting has concluded, elimating the "pressure politics" problem?
People learn from other people, and the ability to see the thought processes behind each vote will aid in that. It allows the people to know what seniors find in people therefore enhancing the learning from other people.
To be honest, any publication of the senior vote makes the senior vote pointless. I see some of the points you've made, but the trouble is that I just can't get away from the fact that it defeats the entire purpose of the senior votes if they're made public in any way.
The idea behind them, from what I know, is that they allow for seniors to potentially express concerns that they might not want publicised. If they're going to be public one way or another, nothings gonna be said in there that isn't gonna be said during the public voting period. So there's no need to have a second voting.
As I said in my last answer, the debate as to whether or not the senior vote is still necessary is for another thread, so I still object.
Edit: also I just wanna say I appreciate your efforts to take on the feedback and compromise.
Tbh I vouch.
If someone actually wants to impose as a staff member, they usually bypass one of these measures with a subtle typo like "Admln" or incorporate the tag into their nickname to get around it. Like all filters, it's not that effective, and I've seen it all.
They're also usually pretty quickly shut down since if there's more than one player on the server, there's also either a staff member around, or someone who knows the server enough to see through the impersonation.
Especially I vouch further because most of the blocked phrases are for redundant staff roles we don't have anymore. There's no point preventing people from having the acronym for "telnet clan admin" when that has not been a thing for at least two years.
Unfortunately, due to you not having had a forum account for a calendar month, this application is denied.
You're free to reapply on the 17th November.
Please be sure to double check the pre-application checklist before you post another application.
I'd be lying if I said we got on well (not that we've got on badly) but as you've pointed out yourself, you say what you mean and you mean what you say, and I've a ton of respect for that. It's a vouch from me.
Changes 14th October 2022
So seeing as the way we operate now has far outgrown the need to force admins to have profile pictures, I see no reason to do anything but amend the requirement thread, merging the recommendation into the forum account requirement.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
Applicant deleted the thread.
The entire purpose of the senior voting round is to allow seniors to privately discuss the applicant amongst themselves. If they want to vote publicly they can.
This just defeats the entire purpose of it existing which is another debate.
Object.
if you wanna see server chat appeal and get unbanned
They shouldn't have to appeal because of Change all indefinite bans to long-term bans
That suggestion was for the bans manager on the freedom gamemode and may not apply to the network.
Nuclear war is extremely unlikely because it is mutually assured destruction. Everyone knows that if they send a nuke, it won't be long before there's one headed the other way.
The threats of nuclear war have been thrown around quite a lot since WW2 ended - look at the 40+ year cold war, where, especially at the start of which, both the US and USSR were flooding tons of money into developing nuclear warheads they never actually fired at anyone in a war that never technically had any fatalities.
I may be wrong, I may be misjudging the threat. But all I can see it as is a threat. I wouldn't go building bunkers and stocking up on soup just yet.
