Diznatch52

To be fair, Loud recently told me that updating that list has been on his list of things to do for a while. The Sadmins do know that it needs updating, but perhaps it needs to be a higher priority.

Still makes one wonder why he would be brought back in the first place. It's not like S has any need for mods at the moment.

Any news? Any news on this either?

I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with this, but it is still in opposition to the publicly stated policy as posted by four. It may be best to either stick by the old word of the Heads or formally change that to reflect the change in policy.

This is directly in opposition to what Four linked to.

Just to confirm, however, that if a player feels there will be bias in the appeal, he will not be rejected because the adminstaff don't necessarily feel that? What a player perceives and what the staff perceives can be very different.

Roast: you make a good point. Malvagio: I'm not sure I love the idea. What if the chest was broken before the bounty was cached in? Would that disable the bounty? This seems like it's getting a bit too messy from a technical perspective.

On P as well. The concept behind Den's idea is to deal with cases of people missing the /me is AFK or logging in after it.

I like the concept behind the prison pearl system, as that would also force a likely loss of at least one diamond to the one who makes the bounty, and I believe the current system allows bounties that are too cheap. I think that's kind of the whole point of this new system. If the one who made the bounty is online, he or she would have the choice whether or not to release the person they put a bounty on. Otherwise, that person would stay pearled until the diamondss are gone. I believe malvagio is saying that if you actually want to put a bounty on a person, don't do it frivolously; do it because you want to trap them for at least a little while. If that's not the concept behind the bounty system, then maybe this is the wrong way of going about it. Without the ability to sort by things other than most recent, this is pretty much useless at the moment, as there are just way too many bounties.

A few thoughts. The first, purely because I think it sounds better: /afk Playername should do "Player is not currently listed as AFK" rather than "Player is currently listed as AFK." But Maybe I'm over thinking that. The other part is more of an agreement with Wayne's inital idea. I think that having a message sent to those people who mention name or msgs saying something along the line of "Playername is AFK" would be a helpful addition.

A poll appears to have been set up! Vote all ye who care.

I couldn't agree more. Can someone please set up a poll for this?

Did you get a chance to discuss the block totemo suggested?

the TL/DR was allow TNT.

Right, but I think the point that he's making is that I could very easily just lead creepers to AFK people. This is a case of possibly allowing a block that could be used improperly (and the player banned for it), but also has many proper uses. I'd advocate for trusting your users. If someone uses this improperly, then that person would probably get banned for doing something else anyway.

Out of curiosity, did you check last time in-game for those who were not greater than a month? I would contend that as a primarily minecraft-server based service, those who are not active in-game and do not know the current user-base should not have the right nor the power to take part in decisions made about said user-base.

Yup, that appears to have been the problem, thanks.

haha, right, I had forgotten that used to happen.

I'm using the correct URL

So Here's the problem in picture form: As you can see, when scrolling over a user, this happens. What normally happens, for those of you who don't know or have never tried, is that it is supposed to display a small amount of information about the user. Don't know if this is just for me, for everyone, etc. For info, I'm using firefox. Thanks!

But what were vanished players doing on a Spleef court during playing? I doubt setting up perms.

What was the context of this warning? I was here 18+ months ago, and I don't recall what you're talking about.

I feel like this conversation is going nowhere. Some people want them to stay, some people want them to leave. No one is changing heir mind if they haven't already. Can we please have a poll to see where everyone stands without further needless argument?

I am interested in what criteria staff uses for determining inactivity. Is it solely based on how long since last absolute login? Activity in Modchat-private? Time since last modreq done? Time since last actively played?