Forum guidelines

[Miloch]

Any particular reason the Boots of Speed topic was locked? You might as well delete it if you really want to quash all dissention whatsoever (or in this case, reasonable discussion as it really hadn't progressed much further than that). This will make for a most user-unfriendly fixpack, but your call.

 

If I'd brought up another topic where it's been discussed already then by all means link back to that. But I grepped the forum for 'unique items' and other related terms before posting and didn't see a topic devoted to it (though it'd been discussed in other unrelated threads).

 

If you consider this a Tweak instead, then fine, move it to the Tweaks forum.

 

If you just don't want the discussion on your forum (i.e. want to quash dissent) then yes, that is your prerogative to lock it, or even ban my account I guess if you're fed up with my blather. But as the discussion was already cluttering up an 'exploit' thread it had nothing to do with, I saw nothing unreasonable about starting a new topic for the subject. Though I even said in my original post I didn't want the discussion to devolve into arguments over what constitutes a fix vs. a tweak - locking without reason seems a bit severe.

 

On a similar note - I've noticed several of the Fixpackers saying they don't support the current BG2/Baldurdash Game Text Update (though I've also seen them say they don't read or even care about game descriptions - I guess not enough code in them? ). So I also don't think it'd be unreasonable to discuss, in theory at least, a game text update more in line with the game's design. Not that I'm voluteering for such a project, at least not now, as we have more than enough work on our hands with the BG1 Game Text Update (unless someone quashes that too, but I'd rather host it here than on my own server).

[pro5]

It doesn't seem locked to me, at least I can use "Add Reply" button and get the normal reply box window.

[devSin]

Miloch, chill. Nobody is outraged by your opinions. We don't have pitchforks, and we're not coming to get you.

 

Open discussion is encouraged. If the topic was locked, it was most likely a mistake (or pesky forum gremlins having a bit fun). You're not going to get banned.

 

As for the GTU, it's just not feasible. Trust me. There's nobody remotely interested in attempting to correct 80,000 strings, and it's an overwhelming task.

[Miloch]

We don't have pitchforks, and we're not coming to get you.

Oh, what a giveaway. Did you hear that, did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about - did you see him repressing me? You saw it didn't you?

 

Yes, it was locked briefly; yes, it is unlocked now; yes, it was probably a mistake, or an itchy trigger finger or whatever. Feel free to delete this topic, or lock it, or deep fry it with a side of liver or whatever.

As for the GTU, it's just not feasible. Trust me. There's nobody remotely interested in attempting to correct 80,000 strings, and it's an overwhelming task.

Well, yes, I figured that. Though that doesn't mean we can't talk about it theoretically (though I doubt anyone, including myself, is even interested in talking about it much ).

 

It could be done though. Slowly but surely, and using tools to filter out strings you don't need to look at, the same way we're doing with the BG1 GTU.

[CamDawg]

Two topics were closed some time overnight or early morning; I'm not entirely sure why. I opened them as soon as I made my morning visit.