TornadoHorse

Denevien, thrawn21, WickedCoolSteve, cyotie911, draykhar pls :)

I wouldn't want to see rankings in chat either, they might seem a bit irrelevant to a new player joining (unlike clan tags since that's a widely used feature). I like the idea of redesigning the leaderboard page, both in how the rankings are calculated and how the page looks. As suggested before, I think we should take note of how other servers record player rankings and statistics - looks appealing and is very informative.

I disagree, I think downvotes can be used well to even-out the karma in some situations and I don't think there's a problem with using them to show if you agree or disagree with a post, as long as it doesn't discourage you from commenting with your own opinion (and just using the votes instead). If you don't like the votes, ignore them. They really don't affect anything negatively, I don't understand the complaints.

I don't see a problem with similar groups of people sharing the same opinion. At the end of the day, voting doesn't really affect anything but shows who supports what ideas and opinions.

Like any of what you just said was positively contributing... I don't see a problem with upvotes or downvotes. Lots of people want them to stay because it's easier to give a vote rather than typing out an opinion/idea that's already been said. If you use them incorrectly then it'll give you a poor reputation. Generally, I think that's enough to put people off from misusing them but if they do get misused it's no big deal.

This. I'm not sure if there's something that we're all missing here, but so many of these long bans recently could've and should've been handled so much better. Why 'perm' bans have been replaced now with a year+ ban is beyond me, makes no sense and if those players are sane (and if nerd is still running by then) they wouldn't be coming back. We need a rethink on how we handle things, whether that's a change in staff or policy.

I don't understand the downside of temp bans. It reduces work load since there won't be nearly as many ban appeals to handle, the amount of bans that we have would be dramatically reduced and we might start to get rid of our image as the ban-happy server, more people would be able to play on the server because they aren't banned. Stop being so closed minded about this kind of thing, with there being so much evidence supporting temp bans and pretty much every other server out there using them, it's got to be pretty good, hasn't it? Let's try it out.

I totally disagree with what you've said. If you make it clear that there is open land as well as plots, there is no way that people will get confused, they'll only be leaving because they don't want to stay. Have big, bold, pink, flashing letters when you join screaming the commands at you to get to either plots or open land. Firstly, there's no way people would know about our server since we barely advertise apart from the occasional post on /r/mcservers, but if we did then don't advertise it as an open build server alone, say "open build and plot server". There is no way that players can get confused by this. The logical thing to do would be to have plots near spawn since people who just want to build something quickly won't hang around, but if that really is so confusing then don't have them at spawn, but have several warp signs and a command at spawn for instant travel.

Although I agree that I wouldn't like to see the PvE player base taking over the other 2 servers, it's not the fault of the PvE players if they use C more than the C players. We shouldn't restrict server access to only C players, we just need to get more C players to play on the servers more. C.nerd.nu is a server for building whatever you like; test builds, redstone creations, massive castles etc. I'd like to see some plot areas so that those that want to test build can do so quickly and conveniently instead of having to find good land/making a platform for the build, but apart from that I see no issue with any of the test builds that appear.

The way that we do it currently, any past or inactive mod can ask for their powers back, after a couple of weeks back in the community they'll get retrained and be modded again. Really, there's not too much difference between the 2 groups. I think past mods should be for just that, past mods. If they want to get their powers back then they have to go through the same process as anyone else. When inactive for 3-4 months, a mod should be moved to the inactive group without warning, but give them a message via the forums/in game letting them know they've been moved.

There was one done more recently than that, about 4-5 months ago if I recall, but it just wasn't spoken about as much. I don't think there's much of a need for discussion, just let the inactive moderators know that they're being demodded/moved to inactive, and if they increase their activity then they can ask for their powers back.

I don't think you can really abuse donations. Maybe a tier or something, people donating smaller amounts will have a less fancy looking thing on their name than someone who donates more if you wanted a solution for that. I'm not keen on this fix too much though since it's really people with essentially more money getting nicer looking things than those who can't donate as much - any size donation helps.

Minecraft server listing sites are a good place to do so, minecraftservers.org for example.

The only times I've really spoken to you have been to do with serious nerd topics which is a shame since I would have liked to get to know you better. You've had a great influence on nerd and creative especially and you'll be missed. Take care, Magknee00s, and if you ever get some free time we'd welcome you back with open arms! :)

We should be striving towards making the server better as a whole, whether or not it alienates the current player base. I think the feeling of the majority of the players is that we need to focus on having a PvP-focused server to differentiate ourselves from p.nerd.nu and to bring in a wider audience. If we only change things to what the current player base want, nothing will really change since those still playing are ones who enjoy the server how it is.

It sounds as if you haven't played on these kinds of servers very much. There are plenty of factions/PvP servers that have good communities, you just need to play them for a little while to get a feel for things. They do respect the rules too, otherwise they wouldn't be playing there. Any new players are good players. We should advertise and aim to draw in as big of an audience as possible, then from the players we bring in, the ones who enjoy our servers will hopefully stick around.

No need for debate here, Duff was asking for help with his idea to give him an idea about the values of certain items. This is far from a finished article, we don't need to debate at every stage. Duff needs to have a starting point for this idea which is why he is asking for help. If it gets to the point where we think we'd like to try an idea like this, definitely play testing would be needed, but not at the moment. I'm neither here not there with this idea, but I think it'd be better to group items together and then add values, rather than having to choose a specific value for each item. Building blocks together, food, tools with different tiers (diamond, iron) etc.

You can't. Regardless of where they speak, that won't change so it's not really an issue.

I've seen this too. I can't say I fully agree with it, but I understand why they do it and for good reason. If they want to speak to other people on the server then they'd know to use the same language as them. They're gonna be smart enough to figure out that no one understands their own language. I'd only see this being a problem if they're constantly being openly racist/sexist/homophobic, but I doubt that would occur. If they're being made to use private messages instead of open chat then they're further separating themselves from the community rather than being more involved.

When you're managing to reach 5 players at peak times and for the majority of the day there's no one online, I think it's safe to say the revision is pretty dead. Instead of turning to chaos as we always do, I'd much rather use this time to test out ideas for major changes that were discussed in the meeting. If we did this we wouldn't want it to be too tasking from a tech or sadmin standpoint since it'd be a bit silly to put a lot of time into organising something that wouldn't last for too long. Maybe implement some big plugins that we've never tried before like mcmmo, factions etc. without tons of polls first just to change it up a bit and get an experience of these types of gameplay.

#1 I came into the meeting a bit late and saw that discussion had moved on, so rather than disrupting the main meeting by talking about old topics, I stuck mainly to text chat and said my opinions there. As far as I can see, there is nothing wrong with this. Everyone is usually focused on what people are saying rather than typing during meetings, so this kind of thing should be fine. I'm not sure why you see issue with this. #2 This has been the first meeting where chat has been moderated so harshly, where you aren't even allowed to say hello to someone entering the channel. I think you take yourselves a bit too seriously. Why can't we make a funny comment now and again in chat and why is that being ever so disruptive? The answer is, it's not. It doesn't disrupt anything if you just read it and move on. The problem is when players bring up that it isn't on task, which sparks off more of an argument than there was. Yes, not everything I said was to do with discussion. Whilst the meeting was ongoing, how did any of those things (that you've listed in #2) *actually* disrupt the meeting? They didn't. Calm down. #3 Me and tobylane were having a discussion about things brought up in the meeting. Apart from a couple of insults here and there, we didn't do anything hostile. It didn't disrupt the chat, and instead of thinking that you have to govern it, it would be better if you didn't pay attention to it and started talking about other things. #4 There was a discussion in chat where someone brought up the sadmins and I voiced my opinions. I didn't do so by shouting about how bad you all are or calling you unintelligent twerps, I politely and calmly voiced my thoughts on our current sadmins and what should happen with them. If you're unable to take criticism then that is your problem, don't get angry with me for it. #5 A kick was not the right way to deal with the situation which is why I was so suprised by it, I did not expect that from you Mumber. It made it worse. People were kicking up a fuss in chat about it and it totally derailed the meeting, especially after I was banned. I hope you can see this now. I did nothing to deserve a ban, but I have already admitted that I was a bit disruptive after I'd been kicked. I want the server to improve as much as you may think I don't. I think these meetings were a great idea and hopefully something big can come from them.

I was wrongfully banned from Mumble. It was a meeting where there are discussions. I was being a little disruptive but those were my opinions, shared by many others. I'm not sure why you thought it would be a good idea to ban me for that as I'm sure with hindsight you'll see it was rather foolish. I wish to be unbanned.

These changes aren't only to make the experience more enjoyable for only the current players, it's to bring in more players so that, in turn, the current players have more fun and the whole server is improved. If we're purely focusing on what the current players want, we have pretty much nothing to go on and nothing will improve. We shouldn't rule out anything at this stage and we need to be as open-minded as possible about Survival's future.

That's impossible. If you strip mine, you've got as much of a chance to find diamonds as anyone else. I don't know how plumping ores would affect anything more than the XP plump and enchantism have already. Ores are easy to get at the moment, and we've already tried to make the grind to get armour easier. It's not positively impacted PvP levels at this point, so I think we might be barking up the wrong tree there.

Don't think of it as "Don't know" vote, because that would be a vote for an undecided person leaving you not really knowing what their stance is. Having the 3rd voting option as neutral would leave it as a throwaway option, if you will. If you don't have an opinion on the player you can choose to just stay neutral on them, and that vote will count neither for or against them.