JeCel reports: Give the opportuniy to write a ... #1924
Labels
No Label
1. kind/balancing
1. kind/breaking
1. kind/bug
1. kind/construction
1. kind/documentation
1. kind/enhancement
1. kind/griefing
1. kind/invalid
1. kind/meme
1. kind/node limit
1. kind/other
1. kind/protocol
2. prio/controversial
2. prio/critical
2. prio/elevated
2. prio/good first issue
2. prio/interesting
2. prio/low
3. source/art
3. source/client
3. source/engine
3. source/ingame
3. source/integration
3. source/lag
3. source/license
3. source/mod upstream
3. source/unknown
3. source/website
4. step/approved
4. step/at work
4. step/blocked
4. step/discussion
4. step/help wanted
4. step/needs confirmation
4. step/partially fixed
4. step/question
4. step/ready to deploy
4. step/ready to QA test
4. step/want approval
5. result/cannot reproduce
5. result/duplicate
5. result/fixed
5. result/maybe
5. result/wontfix
ugh/petz
ugh/QA main
ugh/QA NOK
ugh/QA OK
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
5 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: your-land/bugtracker#1924
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
JeCel reports a bug:
Player position:
Player look:
Player information:
Player meta:
Log identifier
Profiler save:
Status:
Teleport command:
Compass command:
i dunno. that gives the opportunity to leave anonymous abuse :\
What's the use case?
there's several, e.g. creating lore that isn't visibly authored by a specific user. the potential abuse factor feels greater than any use case i can come up w/, though.
For staff, there's a
/change_author NAME
command.Having staff do it on players request for lore etc. would allow it while still beeing trackable and preventing 99.9% abuse cases.
I had the feedback option for harbours and stuff in mind. I figured some people might resist from giving critique for these things, because the books are not anonymous. But I see how it could be potentially abused^^
@JeCel would you be ok w/ us closing the issue then?
xy problem. We should not attempt a solution to y, while the root cause of the problem is x.
Let's close this, since we won't add anonymous books for obvious reasons. Lore can still be requested from staff.
With the quest API anonymous feedback will be possible, when the NPC takes the response rather than a book. Then we don't need to require people put up a mailbox, but can gather in a formspec.
Anonymous feedback. Good point, didn't think of that :)