WayneByNumbers

Hadn't thought of that, good to know.

Someday, we're going to have to go for the whole maximum 512 diameter, you know that, right?

As I recall, the /trace command used to have the full 28d time period as its parameter, it was dropped to 21 some months ago. I vaguely recall talking to totemo, and he explaining that he was overhauling the LB code, trying to use a more unified system between the three different servers. Not sure exactly what's going on with that, but I've been wondering if it would be possible, at least for C, to have /trace (and it's related commands) extended back to the full LB record. Ok, so maybe I'm just being lazy, since we're just talking about alias commands and the full commands aren't that hard to type out, but it seems odd to have the shortcuts at all then if they use nerfed parameters.

For any mods who have encountered that annoying repetitive "NCP: Playername failed Passable: moved into a block ([Floor material]). VL [some number that keeps going up]." when someone joins with certain phone chat apps, I have discovered a workaround for at least some of them on Creative. For some reason, the player model keeps trying to sink into the ground, I don't know why. I have found that in at least one instance, though, that can be mitigated by teleporting said player high into the sky. They will keep sinking slowly, but after falling a little distance, will rubberband repeatedly back up to where they were; if they're high enough above the ground, they never reach it. They may or may not have to be in survival mode for the rubberbanding to work, I admit I did not fully test this, my bad. I also do not know which apps have this problem or which ones work with this method. For players who use phone apps to log in to Creative, you may want to fly into the stratosphere and set a home there, so you can later warp there from the chat line when you use the phone app.

Not to get off topic, but since each of the new Heads came from a different server, just wanted to clarify, are S and P also looking to replenish their ranks?

It's like having a giant, cuboid wooden sword!

This has been quietly nagging at me for months now. Our official explanation for our zero-tolerance policy on slurs has, since before the move to the new forums, been pocked with typographical errors. It currently reads: "The reason that these remarks are offensive is: Let's say someone were to say "That's gay, why does the park close that early"... This is a banable offense. The word "gay", when used in this way it is used in a negative fashion. It implies, in this situation, that you are unhappy that the park closes. You would also be impling that gay is a synonym for a negative word, and therefore, when used in this way it carries negative overtones. It is these overtones that can be offensive to other people because any race or way of life should never have any negativity associated. The same thing can be applied to any racial slur also. There are also racial and homophobic that hold negative connotations in and of themselves. Even though you might not find them offensive, the fact that they are considered slurs, can mean that others will." Polished up a bit, it might read: "The reason that these remarks are offensive: Let's say someone were to say "That's gay, why does the park close that early..." This is a bannable offense. The word "gay", when used in this way, is used in a negative fashion. It implies, in this situation, that they are unhappy that the park closes. They would also be implying that "gay" is a synonym for a negative word, and therefore, when used in this way, it carries negative overtones. It is these overtones that can be offensive to other people because any inherent trait should never have any negativity associated. The same thing can be applied to any racial or ethnic slur also. There are also racial and homophobic slurs that hold negative connotations in and of themselves. Even though you might not find them offensive, the fact that they are considered slurs can mean that others will." Ok, so I committed the minor sin of using "they" as a singular neutral pronoun, but "he/she" is usually too clunky anyway. Since this is an official policy link, used fairly often in the appeals, I always felt it should have a more professional tone. Anyone think it's worth changing?

Ceviche (at least the kind I've had, Peru variety I think) consists of slightly undercooked fish chunks mixed with shredded lettuce, cooked corn, and lemon juice. So, now would you try it in your taco?

Let's organize dis. Subreddit post, server messages, forum post, a submission system, submission start/end dates, voting start/end dates, the works. Personally, I also like the idea of seperate logos for the different servers, it would be kinda boring to have all 3 on your list and they all have the same icon. Don't forget event and chaos, we could have logos ready for those too!

Planning on being there.

I'll probably show up for the Thursday one. I remember we discussed building some kind of meetinghouse, if that happens will the location be posted here? (or here?)

Noted. Can't say I'm surprised, just thought I'd ask. One reason I'm in support of letting players ask for a block count on their stuff is because I did the same, so I not only understand the interest but also don't think I should have access to that request if others don't (speaking of cases when LB logs have gone stale). I suppose, as [ADMIN] reqs go, a simple run of //count would probably be a welcome break, so in the (unlikely) event that I run across such a request, nobody would mind my elevating it? I agree with everything tristan said. No need to advertise, people can only ask about their own stuff, but if they're curious, sure.

Holy crap. I wonder whether this thread has any effect on this discussion, since it concerns player access to LB? I'm also curious as to what kind of requests we're talking about; players wanting to know about their overall activity and wanting block totals, or players wanting to know about specific builds and how much work went into them? Req #1283 looks more to me like the latter. I don't see any problem with asking for a count on the number of blocks in a build; I had the same curiosity when I built an Orthanc out of pure obsidian in Rev 9. That was accomplished with //count rather than LogBlock, though; the build had taken over a month, and many of the edits would have expired. I wonder whether, in those cases of players wanting to know how impressively huge their stuff is, this would be more a discussion about permission for and use of //count rather than LogBlock policy. As I understand, //count was made admin-only after a nasty incident where a mod accidently made too large a selection (the whole map) and ran //count, resulting in a server crash. While I can see the danger, I'm inclined to think that this was a rather unlikely incident in the first place, and that the WorldEdit CUI has reduced the chances even more. Perhaps //count could be made staffwide again for such build-quantifying requests. But I digress. In the case of requests for global LB data, I feel just a little more cautious. While I don't really believe that LB should be absolutely for grief tracking/repair only, I do note the possibility of griefers or x-rayers using /lb me or such info cleverly. In the most extreme griefer case, a griefer would probably destroy something completely, run /lb me and take note of what types of blocks he destroyed, and spam those elsewhere on the map so his creations still outnumber his destructions. This strikes me as both very unlikely (seriously, who would do that?) and not particularly effective; whatever has been destroyed can still be noticed by the builder, and now there's this suspicious blob of blockspam somewhere else. /trace-r commands would easily reveal the truth. As for x-rayers, I've less experience. Does detection rely on ratios that much, or are they more of another nail in the coffin for suspicious tunnels? So basically, I agree with totemo. I don't see any ironclad reason to disallow /lb me (and I like his idea of a throttleable command if server load is an issue). For things like req #1283, I think that's a legitimate interest, but //count would perhaps be more useful, and that doesn't seem like a dire enough request to have to get automatically bumped up to admin level.

Unfortunately, we no longer have it, but my family used to have an Atari 2600 with like 50 games. Super Breakout, Pac-Man, Space Invaders, Centipede, Donkey Kong, Maze Craze, Air-Sea Battle, Berserk, Warlords, Missile Command, Defender, and more. I sometimes miss those old tinny sounds. One thing we do still have is an old Macintosh Performa 6320CD with some great old games still on it. Civilization 2, Star Fighter (3DO version), Math Blasters, Descent (for some reason, when this one was ported to Mac, someone decided to record studio versions of the previously MIDI music; some of the best gaming music I've ever heard), Logical Journey of the Zoombinis, Buried in Time. I still dig some of these out now and again.

Finishing admanta's pyramid, Diamond_Lover123's Princess Celestia, and Twitchy1138's Boeing Dreamliner. Hate seeing stuff left abandoned. Edit: spelling

Hello Najonano20, You were banned not only for griefing, but for having a client with some kind of destructive hacks installed. Keep in mind that you should uninstall those to play here, they're not allowed. You are considered responsible for your account, so don't let anyone use it who might grief again. Considering you have gone ahead and read the rules and you were banned over 2 months ago, I'm willing to lift this ban. Go build stuff!

As I recall, users on C did have access to the coal ore block up until sometime in rev 20. When it was disabled, I remember asking about it (though I don't remember who), and hearing something about modreqs from players overdoing "detective work" becoming cumbersome. Not sure if that was the only reason, it didn't seem great to me at the time. The only issue I can think of with giving players back the LogBlock tool is that then nobody could place coal ore. Oh, the horror.

Nope, I've checked. Coal-blocking the obsidian logs the lava placement, but not the obsidian creation. I did a trace on LavaFlow, to make sure, and a couple edits showed up, so I know that feature is running. Why do I always* seem to run across these LB vulnerabilities? *Ok, twice.

Boy, is this refreshing to hear. And I definitely share your hope that the MCPublic community can get back to focusing on the game. Which you all just lost, by the way. :3 Have to admit that, during forum testing, I was seriously hoping the Fiery Cesspit was a joke. Was glad to see it gone.

The relays seem not to have updated for a while, and I haven't seen IAmARelayBotAMA around, someone ban it or something?

Ran across this troublesome spammer today, who seems to have heard of a clever little way to circumvent some block trackers: Lava in the water turns into obsidian. While SafeBuckets prevents the rest of the lava from spreading, the trouble is that LogBlock doesn't track lava blocks hardening; the rollback only got the lava blocks, while for the obsidian I had to use /removenear, and then a little /fixwater to clean up. Can LB be configured to track fluid-to-solid events?

Ok, specifics: Perhaps you're thinking I was speaking categorically; sorry for not being clearer. I was limiting my responses to only the logs Tharine posted, and I certainly agree it wouldn't make sense for her to ragequit over just the conversation she used as an example. There was more to it, and she said so. And Synergetrick, perhaps you misunderstood my intentions in my original essa... post. I never used the word obsession, I said care and dedication. On re-reading her post, I do see that yes, she did in fact often tell people to leave her alone on inappropriate channels, but she also said that that didn't help much. I do believe Tharine, and you, when you say that she really did want to benefit the servers through her actions as SAdmin; I never believed otherwise. What I really wanted to get across is that too much of this whole hoopla seems to be based on the assumption of malicious intent where there was none. I don't think any players (or the rest of the all-too-few SAdmins) intended to be a part of overworking Tharine and ruining the game for her, I don't think the other admins were actually trying to drive her away in chat, and I don't think anyone in this discussion is either trying to uphold some kind of tyrannical regime or to incite mass revolt. If anyone has any more questions for me personally, please do ask. As you've probably figured out, I don't really mind explaining myself. Now more general: In the interest of moving the conversation out of neutral, I'd like to try something; everyone who wants to, include in your next post what you would like to see happen, and, optionally, why, so at least we all know where each other are coming from. I realize this carries a risk of descending to people responding with what a terrible idea something is and that someone is a terrible person for having it. I hope one thing everyone can agree on is that no one wants that. What I would like to see happen is maybe an official statement from the Head Admin team, or Admin team in general, with whatever they deem appropriate a message for the community as a whole so that everyone (players and staff) knows where the leadership of the server stands. I would also like to see a little more formalization of staff-level decision-making, I do feel it's gotten a little "comfortable" as the server has aged. I also think it would be a good idea to expand the Admin team a bit (somehow), to both spread the collective workload and encourage communication. Above all, I'd like to see the community get back to discussing Minecraft. Reemphasizing that these are just ideas, not promises or "causes."

Since you asked, I will elaborate. The trust I was referring to was that of the other administrators, as applying to the commonly understood practice of keeping staff discussions private. Her views that were implemented were, first, the addition of more forum permissions to moderators, and, second, the deletion of JohnAdams1735's subreddit post which she felt reflected poorly on staff. Both courses of action, the posted logs reveal, were taken. I can't speak for the other several times you reference, but I have to admit I recall seeing this comment and reading into it differently than you seem to have done. Specifically, I think the meaning of the word "expect" could be interpreted a couple ways. My impression of this comment was that it was saying, yes, participation and feedback are welcome, but no single player ever has the right to a guarantee that their ideas will be used, and those who can't accept that are free to leave if they wish. I agree the wording could be taken other ways, and it would be up to the poster of this comment to clarify the intentions (I refer you back to my previous monstrosity of a sentence, ¶ 2, bemoaning the limitations of text-only interactions). Well, if you want to hear what I think of all this, I could tell you, but I can't speak for all of Staff, and I'm glad that you've noted that staff members' individual responses have been just that; individual. Announcement of an official statement, collaborated upon by the admins, is probably what you're looking for. I have to admit, I would like to see one as well, if only to put the whole matter to fitful rest. All this discussion about transparency, civility, and the role of staff members vs. players is not an issue that started with Tharine. Maybe we need a constitution or something.

When I read her post, I got the impression that that was much of her problem; she cared too much. She cared about being an effective admin so much, she allowed her workload to get out of hand, such as people contacting her on non-nerd.nu channels (like Facebook and Steam) with nerd.nu issues; the best thing to do would probably have been to simply ignore those or give them some stock reply like, "If you have an MCPublic issue, please bring it up with me through server channels." Apparently, she allowed her dedication to motivate her to indulge these intrusions instead, and I tend to think that had she not been rubbed so raw by all this, the posted conversation might not have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Also, concerning those logs themselves, I didn't really enjoy them, certainly, but I really didn't find any of it shocking either. How did people think disagreements at the admin level were usually handled? Around a hardwood conference table in a high-rise building overlooking some slick, modern skyline, all dressed in suits and ties and someone standing at the front with a whiteboard and pointer? I've seen much worse, and don't think it's quite fair for people to hold the admin team to such an ivory standard as to be unable to believe that seeing them at their worst, in private, is not the best indicator of who they are, or how they administrate. Perhaps being a moderator myself has given me a somewhat closer perspective on the fact that staff members are people, and not just people, but Internet People, like all of us here, subject to moods, imperfections, and emotions, and usually confined to seeing others as a simple line of text, devoid of things like tone of voice, body language, facial expressions, etc., that can significantly change any phrase's meaning. Excuse me I need to go get more commas. A lot of people seem to have ignored the fact that those logs reveal that the specific issues raised (that is, moderation permissions on the forums) were addressed almost immediately (if peevishly), and the resolution was mostly in favor of Tharine's expressed views. In fact, I think she herself made one mistake (which I have observed to be a common one); she attempted to force her opponents to admit to being wrong immediately after the fact. Does that ever end well? Overall, her tone seemed very professional and stand-offish, and while you could arguably call that passive-aggressive, I do think that's a better way to channel one's anger than name-calling. I will say that I didn't find her to be the most antagonistic participant in those logs, and I've already expressed on the subreddit my relief that at least a few people involved were there trying to bring things back on track and the temperature down (and Tharine agreed with me on that). Dangit, out of parentheses. Technically speaking, I think it is possible to say that Tharine broke a commonly understood trust (though I admit I have never seen the policy in writing myself) that staff-only conversations/deliberations should not be made available to non-staff without some kind of admin approval, and I kind of wish she hadn't made that post for the sake of the heated arguments it seems to have engendered. I do note that she was willing to at least make overtures of neutrality (in a world of text, that goes a long way), and has expressed dismay that the resulting turbulence has reached the degree it has. Even so, I believe she could have handled her issues in a gentler way, and I still think that, had she not let her job as admin ruin the game and the community so much for her, she probably would have. There's a bug on my screen (really). Shoo! In conclusion, I think the whole argument has become too polarized (anyone surprised?). I find it uncharitable to refer to Tharine as a "runt," and unreasonable to think that occasional friction between staff members "shouldn't exist in the first place." Either way, though, this discussion does exist, and I'm getting sick of the past, and would like to see more talk of what the future will hold, what will happen/be done, and to heck with whatever "prompted" it.

To perhaps clarify what I meant in my post, I wasn't calling for a third "No Opinion" option to be added to the poll itself (though that might be nice), I was talking about actually abstaining. Not to make a disturbing example of myself, but I haven't actually, in my time here, ever cast a vote on the nominees. Being, at best, a rather distant member of the community, I didn't feel I was familiar enough with any of them to be able to offer any kind of informed opinion, and I didn't want to just put up a post (as the votes went in the old forums) or put my name in the polls voting "No" to everybody. Also of concern (to echo MasterCommaThe) is that it may not be properly understood by everybody that "No" votes may be out of simple unfamiliarity. That could potentially be addressed by stating that policy in the beginning of voting threads in no uncertain terms. Much has been said, though, about the potential for injured pride or misinterpretation, and I wonder whether that could be sufficiently solved even by such an explanation. Another potential issue comes to mind; if we add a neutral option, or publicly make it policy to withhold votes on simply "I don't know them well enough," that will make it all too clear the opinions of anybody who then does vote in the negative. But I suppose that's the idea of transparency. It's just that right now, we seem to have the worst of both worlds.