It's not wrong to place non-intrusive DRM in mods. If you mean my old anti-Technic code, I'm at least not hiding that, but taking the consequences.>Puts DRM in Minecraft mods
>Complains about other people being wrong
That irony.
Gotta love how they say @Watchful11 doesn't work there. Just because he denies packs because we have mods without permission doesn't mean that its all his fault. Personally I think its great that we follow the rules... (Even if I got "told" I can't have optifine in my pack, which for the record was left in from testing and wasn't intentional)On topic:
View attachment 14571
This comes from one of the moderators on the Technic forum. Now I get the gist. They really don't care.
There's no fault he can have.Just because he denies packs because we have mods without permission doesn't mean that its all his fault.
Well he is the one that denies them, or tfox or the new teamThere's no fault he can have.
Yes, but there is nothing wrong with denying them.Well he is the one that denies them, or tfox or the new team
Flamebait maybe, but I am of the opinion that truth takes precedence to everything else, and sometimes the truth is unpleasant and drama-provoking. That does not make it a good idea to gloss over.A partially incorrect, unbiased statement is infinitely better than a highly biased, flamebait statement.
It wasn't actually ment as a flamebait, but I do see why you are interpreting it as one.Flamebait maybe, but I am of the opinion that truth takes precedence to everything else, and sometimes the truth is unpleasant and drama-provoking. That does not make it a good idea to gloss over.
Flamebait maybe, but I am of the opinion that truth takes precedence to everything else, and sometimes the truth is unpleasant and drama-provoking. That does not make it a good idea to gloss over.
Funny how a bunch of fans are more objective that the very people we trust to bring us the truth...I do agree with you, but the specific statement my comments were made about was highly biased to the point where I would expect it to come from a "news" channel somewhere. That kind of bias doesn't need to be put on any sort of reliable wiki. Conveying the same message while taking an unbiased stance will always be accepted on a wiki that is properly run.
Funny how a bunch of fans are more objective that the very people we trust to bring us the truth...
A "news" channel somewhere.I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to.
Surely we are permitted to refer to it by name; I mean, it is already infamous outside the US for basically consisting of pitting an ignorant moron against someone at least halfway intelligent and then declaring the moron "won" the debate because he shouted louder and you heard nothing from the intelligent person.A "news" channel somewhere.
It was a quote from Padfootes post.Surely we are permitted to refer to it by name; I mean, it is already infamous outside the US for basically consisting of pitting an ignorant moron against someone at least halfway intelligent and then declaring the moron "won" the debate because he shouted louder and you heard nothing from the intelligent person.
..And for hosts shrieking like animals.
"GET OFF MY PHONE!"
Well name changes literally just came outI'm surprised that didn't happen sooner.