What happened to my thread?

Discussion in 'Web Feedback' started by KHthe8th, Dec 2, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    It wasn't randomly selected (I know, I was there).
    1.6.4 came out on 1 July
    Mods were not updating in large amounts until August
    Grace period of one month added.
    Result: Posts after 1 September advertising 1.6.4 packs are likely to have never been hosted through FTB.
     
  2. McyD

    McyD New Member

    yet it was random, as for example my pack was hosted through FTB for quite some time, and had quite a few updates as 1.5.2 as well.

    and
    "1.6.4 came out on 1 July
    Mods were not updating in large amounts until August
    Grace period of one month added.
    Result: Posts after 1 September advertising 1.6.4 packs are likely to have never been hosted through FTB."

    is the defination of a randomly selected date. Otherwise the effort would have been made to remove packs that were never on FTB instead of picking a random cutoff date.
     
  3. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    Would you prefer they delete all promotion threads after 1 July?
     
  4. McyD

    McyD New Member

    So again the answer is a randomly selected date...just one that would effect more packs.
     
  5. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    How is it randomly selected?
    FTB does not currently host 1.6 packs. See everything Vauthil posted.
    1.6 came out on 1 July. Anything before that can't be a 1.6 mod pack, since it wasn't out yet.

    I'm getting the feeling you don't understand the meaning of the word random.
     
    Nerixel likes this.
  6. McyD

    McyD New Member

    but everything that came out afterward 1 July must be a 1.6 pack then, by that logic?

    And random in this case, means based on an arbitrarily selected date, having to do nothing with whether the pack was hosted through the FTB launcher as a 1.5.2 pack.

    I have read the whole thread, I was one of the first posters, guessing you have not read it all or you would have noticed that.
     
  7. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    No not at all, but if you're going to call the time frame that was chosen random, then why not remove any chance of any 1.6 pack being advertised?
     
  8. McyD

    McyD New Member

    why not just verify if the pack is on the FTB launcher as 1.5.2 as was the whole point of the cut off date...
     
  9. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    There are currently 3 Global Moderators. Vauthil, Lawbroken and Jadedcat.
    I believe they are the only 3 who presently are able to handle promotion moderation, unless the sectional moderators can. Even so, I believe there's only 2 or 3 of them and they can only handle one section of the forums each.
    Jadedcat heads the Mod Pack Team, who are presently working on 1.6 packs.
    Vauthil is maintaining and tracking current bug reports.
    Lawbroken is heading the Tech Support changes that are in the works.
    Watchful informed me that there are more than 230 private modpacks approved through the launcher.
    There are a total of 1,347 threads presently in the server promotion section. I don't know how many were there before they deleted threads.

    With what time do you think they can verify these threads?
     
  10. McyD

    McyD New Member

    So the community suffers because FTB can't staff its forums adequately? Sounds more like poor forum management more than anything else. There may be 230 private packs, but there is only 36 threads listed for them. As promotion threads for ultimate, unleashed, etc are outside of the whole private pack issue that we are discussing here as they are public packs.
     
  11. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    Edited a little, but I agree 100%.

    But do keep in mind that there were a LOT more before they deleted threads.

    Also remember, it's hard to keep people when there's zero incentive other than a name.
     
  12. Vauthil

    Vauthil New Member

    Yes, you also have to account for the increasing volume of server posts you never see as well, which is really what the policy is addressing. Anybody who posted those listings in the Whitelist/Greylist/Open sections goes through a moderation queue and gets deleted before you even see it.

    By all means, it's a valid enough criticism to levy that we're understaffed and in triage mode with this stuff. If you know anybody who can handle this kind of gig for no pay and possibly even less satisfaction, have them PM us. Required skills include restraint and attention to detail. Also preferably somebody with a lot of free time, as Server Promos has around-the-clock activity and submissions.

    Back to direct topic-relevant things: I don't know how the announcement of a couple hours ago (that, through voodoo magic, the amazing and wonderful LexManos managed a way to let the current launcher handle 1.6.4 packs) will impact this. It will depend on what the Mod Pack Team decides in re: third party packs, which is something I don't know. When I have an update to provide I (or somebody relevant) will drop in with it (may not be me as I'm coming down with something at the moment and will probably be going back to catching up on sleep now).
     
  13. Jadedcat

    Jadedcat New Member

    The main reason we removed servers where we could not verify that they started out using an FTB pack and updated to 1.6 on their own as opposed to just starting a 1.6 server with no connection to FTB is the following:

    We can't verify permissions. We have no idea if those server owners have permission to be distributing the mods through whatever means they are using.
    We have also been getting tech support requests for packs that aren't on our launcher but people think FTB has a responsibility because they are on our forums.

    Also no thread is ever permanently deleted, its just removed from public view. Which means if a server owner wanted to proove that they started by using a pack from the FTB launcher and that they got proper permission for the update but had to use a different means of distribution the thread can be undeleted.

    We don't take pleasure in deleting people's threads and undoing their work. However we have to draw the line somewhere. This is the FTB forums not the minecraft server network. Packs and Servers advertised on these forums need to be FTB related.
     
  14. McyD

    McyD New Member

    Can't verify? I do not see how that can be as each private pack has to be approved and its private pack code added to the launcher. This includes sending the permissions and the files, even more this has to be done before a pack can create a promotion thread. A simple check by Watchful would have seen if a pack had a submission or not.
     
  15. Jadedcat

    Jadedcat New Member

    The 1.6 packs can't be verified. Server admins using 1.6 packs didn't submit permissions lists for those so if they differ from the pack that was on the Launcher we can't verify it.
     
  16. Vauthil

    Vauthil New Member

    Going off of this tweet from 10 minutes ago, folks should have a way to update their existing private packs in the next few days. At that point, if you had one of the threads that was excised for being inside the three month cutoff, you can message us and it can be restored.
     
  17. McyD

    McyD New Member

    "we could not verify that they started out using an FTB pack and updated to 1.6 on their own as opposed to just starting a 1.6 server with no connection to FTB"

    You are saying to different things, first it was that you could not verify they started on FTB opposed to just starting separate and advertising here. Then jump to 1.6 permissions as the reason. Additionally, in most cases I would think that if a pack had all the permissions for 1.5.2 and when they updated to 1.6.4 most of the permissions are the same (out of my 200+ mods in my pack only 1 had different perms between 1.5.2 and 1.6.4), and they would have gathered any additional permissions they needed, such as I did. Even so if they had not, then as FTB is not distributing the pack, it does not matter as FTB is not liable.

    I do believe that only packs that were on FTB as 1.5.2 should be allowed to post in the threads if they updated to 1.6.4, but FTB has yet again used the excuse that they are stretched to thin just implement a blanket policy while hurting the community.

    But as the above post shows it will all be pointless in a few days. And FTB's trend of "We do it right after we mess it up" continues.
     
  18. Ashzification

    Ashzification New Member

    You should stop arguing with moderation staff.
    It makes perfect sense, it's just not the answer you wanted.
     
    Spidey and Nerixel like this.
  19. McyD

    McyD New Member

    Not arguing, just pointing out that the answer has been:

    We do not have time to verify packs were on the FTB launcher.
    We cannot verify 1.5.2 packs that were on the FTB Launcher.
    to now 1.6.4 Permissions

    The reasoning for closing the threads has bounced between multiple statements, but as I said it is a moot point now as:

    "Going off of this tweet from 10 minutes ago, folks should have a way to update their existing private packs in the next few days. At that point, if you had one of the threads that was excised for being inside the three month cutoff, you can message us and it can be restored."

    Since I already have all my permissions and the pack running, it is just a matter of putting it in whatever format FTB decides on.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page