Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Report'.
Found 3 results
SS Bug I believe I have found a bug in the soul stone system. It looks like the pillar in Johannesburg works for most people, but not for me. Ever since they have moved the pillar, it hasn't been working for me whatsoever. And, yes, I did bind my soul stone to the pillar once they moved it. I even did it today (December 4) again, and it doesn't work. Please help me fix this for myself and anyone else that is having this problem because I keep on having to ask GMs to teleport me to Johannesburg. And also, the soul stone keeps on sending me to my racial pillar, just thought that would help. Again, please help me or fix this bug so I am able to use my soul stone correctly again. And by the way, I wasn't able to post this is the Bug Report section because it didn't let me. Thanks in advance!
[b]Nature of the bug:[/b]Anytime you destroy a block with an item that isn't the most efficient it re-spawns itself 2 or 3 times before finally disappearing. [b]First occurrence:[/b] (Providing an exact time helps us locate the error messages, which can help in fixing the bug) A long time ago, didn't think to report it but I am pretty sure it is a bug. [b] Describe exactly all the actions you took leading up to the bug: [/b] Dig at wool with ax instead of sheers, dig at cobble with ax instead of pickax, etc. [b] What messages are/aren't you getting that you would/wouldn't get normally :[/b] (in the event of a crash, please also provide the error log) No messages, the block just reappears multiple times. [b] Frequency of occurrence:[/b] Every single time. [b] Are you able to reproduce the bug: [/b] Yes. :)
While not exactly a pressing issue, I feel that the overall report feature on lotc could be more efficient than it is right now. I believe that this can be done in several ways. The first way that efficiency could be increased is by a merger of ban reports and strike reports into a joint system, perhaps only called reports. The reason I believe that this should be done is that currently there doesn't seem to be an antiquate difference between what constitutes a strike and what constitutes a ban. Now supposedly this is all decided by the player but in reality the moderator decides what the punishment shall be. I've seen times where someone given only a strike report has been banned and where someone who has had a ban report filed against them only given a strike. Additionally, there isn't really a clear marking anywhere on the forums about what the difference is between the two. Thus, the line between the two is blurred and serves no real purpose. If the current system is going to be kept than I believe this change would definitely increase efficiency. Building off of my previous point, I believe that strikes should be more visibly enforced. As it stands I don't believe many people feel there is any real consequence of being given a strike. While supposedly there are building punishments related to strikes but I have not really seen that being enforced. This problem could be easily solved with a plugin. One plugin that I found that can be of use in this matter is the simple warnings plugin, found is the simple warning's plugin, which I found at http://dev.bukkit.org/server-mods/simplewarnings/. Thus upon logging a strike, either by using a forum like current ban reports are done on or using a google form a moderator would add a strike to that player's account. As a result of this, a player is easily able to see what their strikes are and how many they have. This has the benefit mostly allowing players to see that there are measurable consequences for receiving strikes instead of merely shrugging them off as many do currently. A third main point that I believe could be improved is ban report time. I feel that most ban reports in which both parties are active are handled quickly and responsibly. Kudos to the GM team for that. However, the reports that do not attract much attention are those in which the defendant is either inactive or non-existant on the forums. To remedy this, I have thought of several solutions. The first is that a reporter must first contant the person who is having a report filed upon them that they need to post to defend their actions. Alternatively, a GM or other staff member could contant the defendant personally. More urgently, I feel that a maximum time must be given to all reports to ensure that they are done in a speedy and timely matter. If more than two weeks have passed without any posting from the person being reported, the GM should automatically be forced to make a decision. This would of course factor into any eventual appeals as well. These currently are the three largest ideas that I possess for trying to make an already good system even more efficient. If you have some feedback on these ideas or have your own, feel free to post below.