This isn't a plugin we support or even customise for TF specifically.
I've raised a Github issue though with the author (Who happens to be @"Fleek"#188 ) to ask it be added.
Given the nature of this request, it's not substantial enough to justify us forking the plugin.
Github issue here - https://github.com/Focusvity/ItemizerX/issues/6
I think I'd prefer to see it in chat so people know it's happening and that their stuff hasn't randomly been de-spawned.
Declined.
Approved with @"StevenNL2000"#2 's suggestion. FS-384 raised to implement.
I have no strong views either way, but would very much appreciate folks thoughts on the matter generally given it's had very little in the way of comments to date.
So I'm not going to block or otherwise change this, I appreciate it can sort of be used to bypass vanish, but all it does is tell you if they're somewhere on the network, which isn't a huge secret anyway.
For example:
I was in Hub-02, the user I ran /seen on was on Freedom-01, I have no way to know for sure if they are on my server or another server, just that they are somewhere on the network as a whole.
I've split the thread that I caused de-railing things out, apologies for the confusion. That's my bad.
Quote
(Since this is where I fucked up originally) - As I understand it's per policy. I am however saying here that Ashaz removal was instigated as a result of the evidence being used in this thread of him leaving the discord, you can't sanction someone multiple times for the same thing imho.
Quote↩ @'Panther' but rather to punish the people who acted immaturely and caused you to leave the discord.
As I said before I split the thread out, this was also handled as part of this, and will continue to be managed as appropriate.
↩ @'Panther' Then I'll withdraw my statement, that's absolutely fine.
My comment stands though, anyone who is objecting on the grounds that "He left the discord" will not have their vote considered at all. Provide a better reason why an existing admin cannot reinstate, or leave it be.
↩ simplynick Then by all means vote. As I've said I will disregard votes that have been driven from the user leaving the discord / other platforms, because as far as I'm concerned time is already served.
And this is "Different" because it's somewhere between "Self leaving" and "Removal" and if that doesn't work for you, then it's because I said so...
Quote↩ RedEastWood So there isn’t any point in these votes? Should have made that clear before we all wasted our time…
↩ simplynick So basically we wasted our time just because you wanted to see people's comments? That's actually stupid, next time, would be nice if you made it clear.
You were the ones that started voting before I made any comment...
Quote↩ @'Panther' The reason you were removed, in my opinion, was due to an oversight of what was actually going on. The goal here shouldn't have been to punish you for leaving the discord, but rather to punish the people who acted immaturely and caused you to leave the discord. However, I still don't think you're fit to be an administrator, and I don't want to base my vote on anything but that. Sorry, but I object.
For what it's worth - That has also happened as part of what happened here.
↩ Shdwo No idea, I'm personally interested to see peoples comments, and I made clear I'd like Ashaz to formally re-instate through this process, but unless someone can provide significant evidence to suggest I shouldn't allow the re-instatement, this will be treated as any other automatic re-instatement.
I've raised FS-383 to investigate the CoreProtect logging state of Bonemeal to ensure it is properly logged in a way admins can work with, and if it is to then raise the ticket to re-enable it. If it can't be done currently we will have to understand if we want to do the dev work to make it supported or not.
↩ simplynick And as I've said, it's been dealt with. It's why we're all here.
I also absolutely disagree with your comment, and I'd rather people remove themselves from situations before they end up escalating it...
I see no real objections on here.
I've raised FS-381 to ensure lava damage is enabled by default.
I've raised FS-382 to do an investigation into if TNT explosions without block damage is going to cause significant lag to server and clients.
Fireworks I think will probably for now need to stay disabled by default until we can think of a better way to allow them.
Quote↩ simplynick He rage quitted but he didn't rage quit, seems legit.
The dude "Left"... I don't recall him making a scene, calling people out, doing anything to "Warm up to" him leaving.
As I've said, the punishment on this matter has been served.
I must say I am quite tempted, though personally I've no idea if / when I'd actually even use it. Especially given I lug a laptop around with me when I'm out of the house anyway.
For clarity, I instigated the removal of Ashaz in response to him leaving the discord server, ultimately as punishment for the number of times it had happened previously, and while being in the discord is not strictly a mandatory requirement to hold active administrator status on the server, it's something I feel very important (And likely will make a mandatory requirement in the future anyway, but that's nothing to do with this). So for those who are using those historic leaving as a example of "Rage Quiting" (When as Video says, there was no rage, it was a silent leave...), as far as I and the EAO team are concerned that "Sanction" has already been issued in his removal from admin status and requirement to re-instate.
I would encourage people to use common sense here, and remember that leaving the discord is not grounds for removal normally, and I will put my hands up and say there's a good chance he wouldn't have been removed if I wasn't made aware of it by other individuals on the server at the time.
↩ Tizz So this is part of the reason for trying to move towards something that is driven by averages / the plan data (Though I agree the plan data isn't exactly ideal, but I'm encouraging people to use it now as an early indication as to how close / far off they would be from meeting this).
At the end of the day we need admins who can regularly interact with the wider community, I do fully understand that for some folks live gets in the way / working scheduled and such will get in the way, and within reason I fully plan for the EAO Team to be able to accommodate that, however I'm really sick of those handful of folks that come on to do the bare minimum because that's not fair on the community as a whole, or the other members of the admin team who then need to go even further above and beyond to pick up the slack.
I'm not saying this will be perfect, and it may yet get thrown out the window and replaced with something else if it doesn't look like it'll work as well as I think it should be, but the ultimate aim is that the entire staff team can average somewhere around 3 hours per week on the server, which doesn't feel like it should be too huge of an ask as a rule of thumb.
Quote↩ volleo6144 also uh activity checks are changing to 12 hours starting next month just making sure you knew
No they're not... Would suggest re reading that thread...
We are going to be changing the minimum monthly activity requirements later this year to require admins to hold a minimum of 12 hours a month of activity. This is to try to help encourage admins to be on more regularly throughout the month and to engage better with the community on the server.
We will with immediate effect be updating the ratio in the plan activity index, this will mean you will need to average 3 hour per week, every week over 3 weeks to show as "Active" on the server.
I would strongly encourage admins (and anyone in the community for that matter) to check on their profile on plan ( https://play.totalfreedom.me:8080 ) and ensure you are showing up as "Active" in the activity index.
Going forward we will look to move away from planned and scheduled activity checks, and they will become random with the EAO Team checking all admins rating in the activity index, and having conversations with those admins that are failing to meet the minimum activity requirements. We've noticed in previous activity checks that some individuals would come on towards the end of the month just to hit the quota, and by basing it off of a rolling average that will be substantially harder to do.
I'm hoping that this change will be welcomed and will ultimately continue to enhance the quality of our administration team in their commitment to our player-base.
Happy to answer any questions folks might have, and just to reiterate, this is not going in to force with immediate effect, the current activity removal policy will be enforced for at least this current month.
Quote↩ Beta_Alpha mainly because apple still is a lot behind in terms of battery capacity, RAM and storage, key factors that determine the long-term usability of a phone.
So this is a very common point, but generally a very poor comparison...
IOS and the software you can download to IOS is generally far far better optimised to run on the ecosystem, so you can get a much "Spec" but get the same if not better actual real world performance.
I've just been issued an iPhone 7 as my work phone, and it runs just as fast, and feels just as slick as my OnePlus 7T Pro which is significantly newer, despite the fact the OnePlus 7T Pro has a SUBSTANTIALLY higher hardware spec.
My only issue with cost to date has been the fact they charge the same for their phone as they do a laptop, which just never sat right with me, but I absolutely intend to buy the Pro / ProMax version of this years iPhone to replace my OnePlus 7T Pro, which will have done ~2 Years compared to my last iPhones 5-6 years...
And as you say later in your post, the ecosystem generally apple has really is something quite excellent...
