Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

133 Excellent

1 Follower

About AvadaKedavra

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

872 profile views
  1. Rule Clarification: Chat Rules Clarification

    not sure what much of this thread means because memes aren't really my thing but does this mean literally anything goes in clanchats as long as the owner is cool with it? rule clarification on that alone would be appreciated
  2. Revision 33 Poll & Feedback!

    Also, I forgot to mention my thoughts on 8: Can we somehow make it so mobs cannot be spawned in a region that isn't owned by the person who spawns them in? Oddly enough, the people who are spawning animals everywhere tend to do it in regions other than their own, and it's kind of annoying since the animals are impossible to remove if you aren't their owner and can sometimes become an impediment to build progress. Blocking mobs from being spawned in other people's regions would be great. I think spawners are also overkill for the server and are unnecessary.
  3. Revision 33 Poll & Feedback!

    4. Lets make more roads than cardinal roads... or lets expand individual contributor's ability to add more roads to the server by creating a unique road claiming policy. Either one works. 10. People who think C needs more events don't regularly play on C, and as someone who does regularly play on C, I absolutely think we don't need more events. Simple. 11. Absolutely not. I play on C currently because of the World Edit and the community. Without the World Edit, cities would stall like crappy prop planes and nothing would be accomplished during the first month of intense building. Without the World Edit, the server will fall into its player loss crisis far quicker and it will become necessary to reset the map more quickly -- possibly even before World Edit would be reinstated after a month. Don't kill off your main selling point when the traffic will be the greatest. Please don't do it and don't consider the idea farther than that. 12. Let's not, and here's why: these landmarks are just going to create trouble and it's not worth it. If this is implemented, let there be plenty of landmarks so people can share them, because otherwise, it's going to be a shit show. Also, not sure where this pieces in, but I think PvE test builds should be banned from the overworld and should be confined to the test build world. It's annoying that P players build their test builds in regions that end up disrupting our world, and I'd be really interested in them using space that isn't actively being built in by C players. Thoughts from the admins would be appreciated.
  4. 2017 Fundraiser - COMING SOON

    can the servers stay open so those of us who don't like fundraisers can play normally?
  5. I wanted to ask whether users on C could use //setbiome again. It's understandable that it was kicked from default permissions for whatever reason but I think time has proven that mods having to set biomes is kinda like asking mods to do tedious world edit for people and it's not really convenient for the mods or the users waiting on the mods. Could we either discuss a plan to get //setbiome re-added to our permissions or maybe some alternative solution (maybe a new plugin) that could help make this issue a bit more solved? I'm looking in your direction Challenger :P Thanks
  6. I'm Abitcat. AMA time.

    Why are you doing an AMA? Which pronoun will we use for our President after January 20th? He or She?
  7. I'm very glad we could work out a solution here. As per Holli's original post, I'm going to be allowed to reclaim the plots being disputed so I'll take time to look into this into further detail this weekend. As for the rest of the changes, when can we expect to see the other spawn city changes taken into effect? Thanks for keeping this final portion of the discussion focused on Holli's agreeable response -- I think it's an excellent olive branch to make sure everyone gets what they're looking for in this arrangement.
  8. Excellent! If we are all in agreement with all of what Holli said, then I think using her post as our guideline for success here would be highly viable.
  9. So the other cadmins in this thread were just talking about things you didn't talk about as a team?
  10. I was considering changing this a bit (eg. maybe clearing out some floors and just lighting them up so they still look nice from the outside), but a policy is a bit excessive to be honest since I can just do it on my own time as a courtesy because I know a ton of people have trouble traveling through downtown because of the lag from all the decorations. I'll spend some time looking into how to do that this weekend so it's hopefully a bit easier to fly though.
  11. Thank you for keeping on topic. I'd also like to thank Barlimore for adding these points because they are strong and reasonable. I'm going to ignore all the noise above because this post basically summarizes what actually needs to occur and it outlines it clearly in my mind. If we can progress through the rest of this discussion with the reasonable folks in this thread continuing the discussion forward then I can see an outcome that is amenable for both sides.Multiple people seem to agree that this is something we can address and I would be more than interested in having it addressed.
  12. Re-write yours first and I'll re-write mine. Yours is equally passive aggressive. I just followed suit. Nice
  13. I'll dive right into this one -- it seems like you took a while to write this one up since it reads like it was written last night and it reads like you copied random parts from my post and adding the same lines about how I broke the rules and how I need to stop building in spawn city because it's causing our hundreds of new players distress. I'll go in order respectively: Man, this is like fighting in Congress or something... That is some of the most legalized language I've ever read on these forums, and I'm not really surprised it came from this thread to be honest. I'll hand it to you, I'm impressed by the language here. Now let's dive into it. The notion that the plot be removed due to the owner not being active at the plot is absurd and is designed to make sure I'm not able to build at spawn city. Plain and simple. It's seems sneaky and passive but it's 100% aggressive on your part and completely contradicts everything else said by every other admin in this thread. This is completely against the notion that Nerd.nu, and specifically C, is trying to be a "community". Do people who live on a neighborhood come up with weirdly worded confusing policies to run people out of the neighborhood? Not if neighbors want people to live there... If you guys want people to play here, then the weirdly worded shadow rules and shadow games need to stop. This isn't an old issue and while it took a very long hiatus, your post just brought it back from the dead. Hopefully you'll continue reading from this point but I'd understand if you started writing your comment already... I admitted that I did this to a number of admins excluding you, so your logs are just going to attest to something I already said. If it makes you feel any better, I gave this lot to Vikhedgehog so this is irrelevant of course. I've asked multiple times. As DrTim58 said above, the users who gave my their plots, excluding the user who never played, are all active and all give me permission to use them. Your point about my point's irrelevancy is irrelevant in itself. You said this but Hollifer said this before: How come your point contradicts hers? How come you're just writing your own agenda here? The strictness of this two plots per person rule is EXACTLY the thing I'm trying to address. If you want more details on my thoughts here, I'd urge you to read my top posts. After checking here I was wrong in this regard because it looked like Bardidley had the plot adjacent to Vikhedgehog's new plot and two plots farther down from spawn but that changed suddenly... I'm not sure what happened there or if is just me going crazy but that was characterized and wrong on my part. You didn't read my top comment then. Let me reiterate again: Barely anyone builds in spawn city and barely anyone plays on C anymore. Unless there's a huge list of complaints from new users looking to build there that you're not sharing with me, this just looks like an attempt to make something come true that will not come true. People aren't using spawn city. Chasing me out isn't going to change this fact. If my plots were unbuilt, it would be Tim's build, Bard's builds, a few other towers and mostly unfinished plots. I really don't understand how you'd benefit by chasing me out or by making me carve out an entire city next to spawn city. It's not like you guys would even grant me a warp for anything I build... why should I leave when there's a warp to exactly where I want it right at spawn? And don't try to say "we're not chasing you out"... Passive aggressively removing me from plots that other users gave to me is the defacto of chasing me out. Then make more plots.... I also addressed this above if you had read but based on how many points I'm literally copying and pasting from my top post into this one, it's evident that you didn't... If you need more plots, make more plots. Use the HUGE CTA plot to make more plots... Accept my offer to move the CTC to the empty plot next to spawn and I'll give back all my plots... Ask me to develop the land that you gave to me into usable spawn city land and I'd happily let you give it out to people... Or recognize that this server isn't growing fast enough for more plots. I don't see how this even helps people stay... If people dislike your server then they're going to leave. A spawn plot isn't going to help with this one bit. And if those two players turn around and give me full permission to build there, then I'm breaking the rule again? Half the time I'm building FOR them, not for myself! DrTim58's building has a ton of awesome offices in it for his company -- not for me... While the two plots I'm referring to were going to be an extension for my hotel, I think if users want to give their only two plots to another user that it shouldn't be something held against me or them. You're kicking the wrong dog, and that only leads to regulars becoming dissatisfied and leaving. And I'm not upset, I'm working it out calmly and reasonably. Bardidley and Holli were calm and reasonable with me so that's why I'm awfully confused your post, but what the hey, I wanted a reply so I got one I guess.
  14. I'd be interested in having this kind of thing implemented for the future, but the major issue at hand right now is the fact the admins are removing plots that belonged to others in order to take them away from me. In addition to more flexible policy changes, can I be given these plots back?
  15. I appreciate your speedy reply. I understand that you guys are preparing for a mass of players to come and build in spawn, and if this was true I wouldn't have an issue with it, but given the current nature of our player base being really really really small, I think this absolutely needs to be reconsidered. Considering the fact I had permission to build on two plots owned by two different users and that those two plots were taken from me on the basis of me "building too much" is absurd in my eyes. I respectfully disagree with this point and I hope we can come to an agreement that better suites the needs that I'm expressing here. I believe that Spawn City is something that can be expanded and it's also something that is really conveniently set up for what I was intending to accomplish this revision -- building a large office complex in spawn city with a hotel located near by. I respect and appreciate the fact you granted me the land adjacent to spawn to use, and while I plan to use it conservatively once i get to the point of developing it, I would like much more certainty that my plots aren't going to get snatched up everything I make a modreq about them. When the two plots I was referring to above were removed, they were empty, but one had been empty for months and you had specifically given me indication that I would be allowed to keep this plot, and the other was Vikhedgehog's plot, and once I swapped plots with him I intended to build something there that would have benefitted the spawn city area. My overarching point here is not to be a bee in your bonnet to cause an issue. My overarching point here is that regardless of the size of spawn city, that there should be considerations made for players who are using the city more than others. Unless people are contacting you on a daily basis asking why I have so many plots, I don't really see an issue to fix here... I personally preferred the system where we modreq'd for a plot directly but that's another story... I felt it gave the mod teams better insight and also made it so policies could be better enforced. Now that NerdPlot is in place I think it's better to work with what we have, but for the record I personally thought the previous system was less messy than this automated system. Unfortunately that's just the consequence of automation though. I appreciate that you guys are willing to discuss this civilly rather than it remain an issue that is outstanding for the rest of the revision, and I hope you'll take into account the fact of what I said where activity should determine the number of plots a user has access to -- not just a unique IP/person behind the account. Many players claimed lots at the beginning of the revision and realized they weren't going to have time to develop them so they were 100% fine to let me use them, and I was 100% fine to develop them to make them nice. Again, I'm not looking to cause any issues here but I'd like to keep the plots I originally had given to me and I'd appreciate it if, as a result of this discussion, that those two plots are returned to me. I don't intend to expand outside my allotted area at this point but removing my plots for the sake of making room for other players (other players who aren't using Spawn City or who leave the second we say welcome to them) is kind of absurd to be honest.