Diznatch52

Definitely, but if the locations are preselected, it might end up being the case that a city built on top of one. Suddenly, that city has a portal. I kinda like the idea of giving portals to the towns that had been consistently active over the course of the rev, though that could also be complicated.

Honestly, that could still be an issue with favoritism. "why are none of the new portals near my city?" "why is one of the new portals right near city x?" Even if the admins pre-decided where the portals should go, that might still be an issue.

Would it be possible to allow /list-all from lobby? On a secondary note, would it be possible to include the event server in the listing of /list-all?

I believe I asked something similar in the past. Lemme see if I can find it. here we go https://nerd.nu/forum/index.php?/topic/659-theres-a-maximum-number-of-upvotes-you-can-give-per-day/#entry4363

I'm pretty sure that means he intended/intends to have them on a weekly basis, and since he's 4 weeks behind (the rev started almost exactly a month ago), he "owes" us 4 arenas. After making them up, it's probably a safe assumption that they'll be on approximately a weekly basis.

While I don't agree with the idea of a "flame war" on this topic, throughout the bitter back and forth going on in in-game-chat there were some good points brought. I am interested in finding out whether people believe that running from fights is detrimental to the server overall (in that it disincentivizes random PvP encounters), or if it is a necessary part of PvP (in that a person might never get into a fight unless the are assured of a win). Personally, I dislike the concept of running from a PvP encounter, regardless of the reason (I lose many fights, and I'd rather not run in the hopes that when I am winning a fight, my opponent will do the same), and believe that either running should be disincentivized or that not-running should be incentivized. I'm not sure what should or could be done about this, if anything, and I open the floor to those who are more imaginative with these types of things than myself. Please try to keep this discussion civil and refrain from any personal attacks. This is not about any specific person, nor should it be.

Sir, plz 2 b mine.

related question: Could we get our build from a personal server WEed in?

Perhaps something should be done now by the admins while waiting for the community to design something else? Is that a possibility? Same thing with the lobby. Just throw something in there, like roastnewt's suggestion, while the community works on a more agreed upon final product.

Sorry about the post unrelated to the question just posed. Was this ever fixed? I still get spambotted randomly. It's possible it's less often, but it's definitely still an issue.

Right, but that sentence follows into the next one. My point was not that those who play primarily on P are not allowed opinions. It was that in this case, where TheRandomnatrix is in fact talking about S, the statement that was made was an incorrect one likely based off of his experiences on P.

I disagree. Firstly, I would like to call attention to the fact that you are a player primarily on P and this is a discussion about S. While it may be true that there is not usually such a long wait for modreqs on P (and as someone who played on P for a decently long time I don't believe that this actually is the case. I've had to wait hours for assorted simple reqs on P.), the same cannot be said honestly about S. I've been on vacation for the past few weeks and have been playing on S during all sorts of hours. There have been long stretches of time at any given point in the day or night that no moderator has been on. S players have been saying for a long time that S needs more moderators. "the idea of waiting hours for a flow request" is most certainly not an exaggeration. Does one always have to wait an extended period of time before a modreq is filled? No. Does it happen often enough to be considered significant? Probably. Also, there's the issue of having to make multiple modreqs for one build due to water not working quite the way one expected, or if one is making a build that requires one source be flowing before another, or honestly any instance where not having flowing water is a clear inconvenience. Furtheremore, It's absurd to assume that players making large structures should idle around online waiting for the req to be done. When I am making a build that requires a req to continue, I don't just stand there waiting. I go do something else, generally something not on minecraft. Very much this. EDIT: Wow such grammar

You're absolutely right. Perhaps this would be the best way to go about it: Have a "weeklong" trial period. If there is an immediate and obvious griefing problem, kill it after a day. If there is no problem, let it run the week and have further discussion. Worst case scenario, the mods trade the possibility of many fewer reqs for them and a better experience for the users for a (few) day(s) of possibly more griefing reqs. Is it not worth the trade?

This is unnecessary and unhelpful. Please refrain from this type of bickering as it can very easily cause a topic such as this to be derailed. For those who have issues with barneygale: it's fine for you to dislike someone. As it is, The Headadmins saw it fit to unban him from the subreddit and forums in a trial period. He, as much as anyone else, has the right to give his opinion without having personal attacks thrown at him. This is true of anyone on these forums. Regarding the actual topic at hand, I'd love to see a week or so trial period run without safebuckets. Worst comes to worst, it fails miserably and it is re-enabled. I've also been a proponent of a Glacier-like plugin for months and would love to see this enabled if the complete disabling of a safebuckets-like plugin is deemed unfeasible.

As a member of that town and person who took part in the spleefing I don't know what you're talking about. We all expected to be attacked, and the only reason the first time didn't go well was because like 20 PvE players joined at once. You would have to be an idiot to not notice that. In the end, some good PvP was caused by it. After that, when we had the postponed Spleef event at a later time, people joined slowly, we had a bunch of great spleef matches, and we were not seriously attacked a single time.

Do you like having beds?Do you like this solution to stop bed camping? Anything we should change? 1.) Yeah, I've certainly been enjoying them. 2.) From what I've experienced it's been mostly good. The only bad thing is when your bed is more than ten meters from your chest room(for example) and someone hangs around in there so whenever you go back in there, they just kill you. In conclusion, better than not beds, but not necessarily fixed the problem completely. 3.) Yes, as pointed out in number 2, although unfortunately I do not have any ideas at present. Sorry!

The only feedback I have about general survival (other than to say that I think the negative in-chat trolling has gone down in a very pleasing way) is that I believe that the spambot is overzealous. I'm constantly receiving warnings about chat spam, and I would attest that I am indeed not spamming chat with normal conversation. Is there anything that can be done about that?

So yeah, it seems like this was handled like any of the returning inactive staff members, which makes sense given past vs inactive can be a function merely of whether or not they tell anyone they're leaving.

Just to clarify something, as perhaps I'm misinformed, was or was LRO not forcefully demodded at the time of her leaving? If she simply decided to remove herself, I don't see much of a problem with the situation. It's the same as with other mods who have returned. If it was the case that she was forcefully demodded, it seems trivial and unfair that she return and simply be reinstated, regardless of the few hoops she was forced to jump through.

There are such things as in-game polls, you know. They did one in rev 9. Also, using MOTD one could easily set up a link to a decent poll and get some actual information rather than dismissing concerns based on a minority opinion.

I no longer have much stake in the matter, but it seemed pertinent to note that you apparently tallied things up based solely on comments people made and not at all based on the upvotes/downvotes (which clearly applies to agree/disagree) on those comments. If those had been taken into account, I'm sure those numbers would be significantly different, although I cannot say whether or no the overall consensus would change. Furthermore, when 12 people out of a server that gets over a thousand (I believe in the thousands, no, totemo?) uniques have an opinion, that's not exactly anything close to majority. It's not even close to a consensus. I don't really see how you can base anything at all off that.

Just a heads up, the maximum level for thorns in 1.5 was Thorsn3, not Thorns2.

I know one is not allowed to build portals, but are you really not allowed to build on portals? Assuming obvious things like "don't restrict access etc etc.

AFAIK you are allowed to build on portals on S. It's just that no one does because it would make you incredibly easily raid-able.