|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
quick add a scenario section and put sirivann realm or i downvote!
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
So you're telling me that: Mods: *update the original thread, out of respect to its creator. Supporters: *update the data then ask mods to update the original thread, out of respect to its creator. Community: *post records and send updates to Chess and the supporters. Do not remake the thread, out of respect to its creator. But: Wolf: nEw tHrEAD cUZ iT dOEsNT hAve mY nAMe ? ? ? ? ? You're literally pissing over the legacy of all the players that spend an enormous amount of time updating the earlier thread. As a supporter who kept the thread updated for a year+ despite not having "powers" to do the updates myself: I consider this new thread highly disrespectful. You're not even acknowledging our work. And no, linking to the original thread is not enough. --- That being said... I lean toward pragmatism. Having the thread updated is what gives it value. If you will update the thread now because it has your name, then that's fine. I may be offended, but thank you for your work. Because the thread was made in 2013 and it was very popular, this update does break a lot of links in a lot of places, like http://atwardatabase.weebly.com/links.html. And the link of people who bookmarked this thread (like me). The old thread was also well indexed in google so searching "atwar recordbook" will still link to it. If we want to keep all of these links working we may need to swap the topic_id of the old and the new thread.
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
hmm idk, let me ask t3mpest. Left some suggestions in the thread, btw 
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Not needed, it's fine. You should just know it wasn't because of 'my' name in it. I really had good intention. But anyways, I respect your words. Also say hello to Tempest from balkan dog
----   
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Very surprised that you would lash out at Croat for updating the record book. He made a new post for the update. The "record book" is not an original idea, so since Croat had to relocate data for every category, it does not make sense to update an older thread whose content neither you or Chess contributed to whatsoever. Croat deserves full credit for what he did. And you deserve full credit for what you did. We should have multiple posts for the record book as time goes on unless it is updated by the same person. When atWar needs you most, you are not active, Clovis, but Croat is.
I would feel the same way if Clovis told me what he told you, but from an outsider's perspective, you should ignore unhelpful criticism and re-post the thread that you made. Thank you for both your works. Also, you should both delete your comments on this news thread so that new players don't have to see this nonsensical forum feud. If either of you cared enough about atwar to make a record book for it, it's strange that you would then argue with each other like this on a news thread that has the effect of turning off new players. You accomplish things through private chats, not public stunts.
---- Happiness = reality - expectations
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
I hopw no one questions clovis's contribution to the game, it's ok to be busy you know. Also, Croat, buddy, you beed to spend more time with Steve.
----  
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Actually, it does. I explained why in my helpful, constructive post:
You've already seen this pattern with the atWar rules. It's the same, original thread from long ago. I've only ever seen the OT change owner (Guest14502, Meester, and now atWar_Official) when the person who posted it is demoted. This is because it gives a wrong impression if the post is coming from a non-staff. But the thread was never remade and the same link from 2011 works in 2022.
I was told that you wrote a lengthy post bashing me and questioning my contributions. Seems like it was deleted. I didn't see it so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. If you truly have good intentions, just update the original post. A lot of people, myself included, would be very thankful for that! Also, do not add no-skill categories (a lot of people complained about that in the new thread). Good luck (If you don't update the old thread, then we will all know what you were going after...)
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Just so I dont make longer posts again: Im not losing a single more second touching "your" shit anymore, update it yourself and suck my dick. The fact it made you log into atwar after several months and place it this way talks enough itself.
----
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Problems with bookmarks or with one link on a weebly website is literally the most negligible, least consequential thing I've ever heard. It's not even worth addressing, which is why I didn't. There is no practical reason to take all of Croat's work and put it in your or Chess's post. In fact, there is plenty of reason to not do that, which I laid out in my first post on this thread. I'm only taking Croat's side because it's very clear that you instigated an argument with him for no reason at all
---- Happiness = reality - expectations
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Weird that you've never heard about the importance of proper, working, links. We, the web devs spend extra time making sure that the old link always work. I'm curious, how do you navigate atWar's forums to go to one specific forum post? * Do you use the "Watch Topic" functionality? * Do you use your browser's bookmark feature? * Do you go into every section (like "Tournaments") and click on the pinned thread? * Do you tab your browser's search bar and search "atwar recordbook" on Google? * Do you use atWar's forum search? * Do you get there through an external site with links, like the atWar's Database? I use most of these approaches. My watched topic list looks like this:  I respect your opinion, but I'm going to disagree with you. You're breaking people's functionality (a very practical, consequential thing to do) and none of your reasons are good enough to me. I already put atWar's rules as an example of a thread that has been maintained and even changed OT's owner while still keeping all the functionalities working.
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Ok, I spoke with some players regarding this. The very first thing I want to say is that I'm sorry if I was too harsh on you. We may just have got each others wrong. I want to re-start this conversation with the understanding that we both want what is best for the community. Here're some general conclusions that I reached with some players, and I hope you agree with them as well: 1. We believe that what is best for the community, what will please the most players, is just to update the old thread. This will keep all the links working. 2. If you don't want to update the old thread, for whatever reason. Please bring your thread back. It is not an ideal solution, but it is better than an outdated, old thread. 3. We don't think you deleting your thread was in the best interest of the community. So please bring it back or update the old thread. I truly hope we can reach a solution that benefit the community the most. Clovis has sent you a Peace request. Do you accept? ❤️
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
That way we can talk whenever about whatever. I'll re-do it as update in Chess' thread without stuff like number of games, posts or reputations. With that, I just wanted to put some more fun stuff into the thread. But, as you liked (and as it's logical), there will be only skill records for individuals and clans. I'll also keep out most SP per turn/game, I found out that majority of most SP records are actually illegally reached and it's impossible now to define which is less illegal to be put on the leaderboard. Confirm if it's fine or say if you have some other idea to be put in
----
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Keep most games/cws
---- 
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
This is good for me
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
Clovis insisted on updating it in old Chess's thread instead of making new thread with someone else's name in front of it, in this case mine
----
载入中...
载入中...
|
|
|
载入中...
载入中...
|
