Jump to content
  • Advertisement


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1292 Excellent


About StarMire

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. StarMire


    It's definitely not automatic, I hadn't been able to find any information on how it worked, except that I learned you get it if you write an article (maybe?). I can't think of anything useful to write about at the moment, though. Orymus3 has a real skill for it; he's been pumping out some awesome articles. *envy*
  2. Good to know. Are these ad images always resized, to clean any malicious scripts? Or do you find that when you hand check them?
  3. StarMire

    Name for an MMO (Browser) Game

    RisenState is cool.  RisingState might be better (since it represents what's going on during the game?).   Is there anything wrong with just X State?  Or some letter?   How about a Greek letter?  Omega State.  Alpha State. Etc.   Any symbol will tend to avoid any explicit meaning you have to worry about, but also make your product distinctive and cool sounding.
  4.   There's no flash, it's just images.  They're all manually checked before being allowed.       If they weren't manually checked, since it's just an image, the server could tear them apart and make a fresh image file (there are a number of ways to resize, or change the file type, that would obliterate anything malicious in the original.  Unless you're talking about something that's part of the image itself.).  You potentially lose a little quality if it was lossy, but that's not a great sacrifice for the safety.   I assume this is already done by default, since there's a lot of user image content on this site (like screenshot showdown).  I may be wrong there, though.
  5. StarMire

    Maximum upvotes change

      Easy fix; have a certain amount of available rep per topic (which increases only slightly as the topic grows, as some kind of log of reply length, so there are diminishing returns).  This way, posting something useful in smaller less discussed topics is more useful to reputation than participating in some massively popular thread, where most of the available rep has already been gobbled up.       Rep calculated based on concordance of users wouldn't be done right away anyway, but would be weighted and calculated at the end of the day or week or something when enough votes are in, or enough opportunity to get those votes (at which point, the reputation could become visible and the voting period could be ended, thus preventing abuse from users trying to parrot others for rep without reading).     That's a good way to think about it.  I kind of do incremental revisions.  Come up with an idea, think about abuse, and revise the idea.  But starting with ways to prevent abuse and then molding that into a workable system could be useful.   - We don't want people upvoting themselves (this is tricky through alt accounts, and I think just requires some specific abuse controls to watch accounts and what they're upvoting.  We could also not allow new users, or users under a certain rep, to vote.) - We want to make people read the posts, and be sure a post is helpful before upvoting, and we need to be able to confirm it's helpful somehow (thus my concordance suggestion, but there may be other ways too) - We want unlimited voting, but smart voting so people don't just spam, so there needs to be both a cost and a benefit to voting which have to be balanced.
  6.   Gamedev discontinued those shady ads.  Now plus members can upload images, and those cycle in the banner instead (purely from gamedev, so no script that the trustworthy devs here didn't write).   I would have agreed before the change was made, but now the images here are the best kinds possible; from the community, for the community, and it's not possible to do anything shady with them anymore.
  7. StarMire

    Maximum upvotes change

    It may also be to prevent some people from having a larger effect than others by just voting a lot, and to prevent abuse from users using alternate accounts to upvote all of their own posts.   Having upvoting give reputation is a problem in itself, because it makes upvotes less meaningful, since a significant number of people just tend to go on daily upvote sprees without even paying attention to what posts they're upvoting.   I would suggest making upvotes give reputation to neither the giver NOR the receiver, UNTIL the post receives a certain number of upvotes (a concordance of opinion in the community), in which case it pays out reputation to all.   In order to allow people to give unlimited upvotes, you'd also have to weight the upvotes (and the payout in reputation) based on the number of upvotes that person gave that day (so, more upvotes means each one means less, and pays out less reputation back when they upvote something useful).   That would prevent the random upvoting, and reduce abuse potential substantially.  Of course, you'd also have to hide what posts were upvoted to keep users from just parroting other's responses.
  8. StarMire

    Free Unity3D Alternative (Godot Engine)

    Great find!  It looks like it's coming along with some promise.  I'll keep an eye on this, can't wait to see how it develops.   This gives a whole new meaning to "waiting for Godot".
  9. honestly, i could write up a long response to your response, but i think when you said this, I knew we would never see eye to eye on this subject.     That may be true.   I'm sure we both respect autonomy of personal property AND freedom of speech, but we just prioritize them differently.  It's a matter of difference of opinion, and maybe that's OK.   I just personally value freedom of speech much higher than autonomy of personal property, so in that context I see different things as more right or wrong in principle.  Maybe nobody's right or wrong here, just different ways of looking at it.   Best regards!
  10. StarMire

    Current Survey

      I would love to see a status bar somewhere, but maybe not quite as prominently, so the community would know where you guys are in terms of operating funds.   It might also be worth doing a kickstarter.   Since Wikipedia doesn't/can't sell anything, that's their only real option, but it looks kind of like begging to put it up there like that (which it is, of course).  Where a campaign might be able to provide something in return, and increase exposure.   Your goal would have to be something like "refactoring Gamedev's code so it can run at our current level of revenue sustainably" (Since a Kickstarter can't just be to pay bills, it has to be a project with a clear goal and point at which it can be finished).   You'd probably be able to sell a lot of advertising, surveys, etc. with a campaign like that, and get the funds to run the site (and support yourselves) while you fix what needs fixing.
  11.   Naturally, the language used to promote them might need to be changed in that case.  You don't really have to put commercial ads there.  It could also be another kind of message, a question, link to a forum thread, etc. to promote discussion on something, and as another mentioned, for contests.   But what do you mean by "should"? That you think it is unwinnable, or that you don't think it should be attempted for ideological reasons regardless of it being winnable?     I'm not sure what you're talking about... I'm not making an argument anything like that.  Every site has the right to do the same thing.  Most sites attempt it.  Some will fail, some will succeed.  It just depends on how much support they get, and whatever the powers that be for that adblocker decide.   Many adblockers even have ethical policies to deliberately allow non-intrusive ads.  IMHO the adblockers that block non-intrusive ads too are evil communist birthday party balloon poppers, but to each his or her own.      Which the ads in that banner space on Gamedev are not (at least, not anymore).   IMHO, nobody has the right to be protected from free dissemination of honest information/ideas.  We should just be protected from abusive methods thereof (intrusive ads, obscene ones, dangerous ones).     Well, for one thing it's not a choice.  The adblockers are blocking those images by default.  It's very difficult to use the internet due to other sites having abusive ads without an adblocker, so people are not deliberately trying to not support gamedev.  Most people who visit will not even know it's happening (which is why in the very least, I think we should ask them to disable it so they know what's going on).   Anyway, it's also their choice to visit the site or not.  If they want to drain Gamedev's bandwidth, and learn from the resources here for free which Gamedev has created a place for (with countless hours of work by the staff), they can support the site too by viewing these images.  Otherwise, these people are just leeching.   I think we see things differently on this matter.  I see those hypothetical users who actually want to block these images as doing something bad (although it's hard to imagine why they would want to).  This is Gamedev's site, and it should be displayed as Gamedev wants it to be.  I don't see this as a matter of personal property (the User's computer), because it's not something that doesn't affect gamedev; it's the User accessing Gamedev's servers.     I don't think I understand what you're talking about.  They do.  They do that all of the time.  Sometimes it's successful (particularly for non-intrusive ads), sometimes it isn't.  It depends on who reports them, who rallies in their favor, and what the powers that be decide.   I don't think you're suggesting that if we don't rename these images, then other sites on the internet will all follow Gamedev's example, and that by allowing these ads to be blocked, it will make adblockers function better elsewhere?   If I had to guess, I think you're probably implying that getting around adblockers is interfering with some right the consumer has to his or her own computer, I don't agree with that because they haven't lost that right, but along the same reasoning, look at it this way:  Adblockers are interfering with the right of free speech.  And freedom of speech doesn't mean the right to scream in somebody's face, the real life equivalent of intrusive ads, I'll cite constitutional law and court opinions to prove it if you want.
  12.   Have you considered a career in politics?    But really, this is part of the site's function, and it belongs to the users.  As I said above, it would be almost like blocking the classifieds. If we call it what it honestly is, a community image space, and our users take a stand and appeal to the adblock people (if some jerk reports it), are you sure this is an unwinnable battle?   How many people use adblocks?  It seems like almost a requirement to use the internet today because of malicious ads. Adding a request for people to unblock the site would be good at least, so we notice, but I'm not sure we can't reclaim that space as a default for the most popular blockers. I don't think those programs are out to be jerks, they're just trying to make the internet work.
  13.   Naturally, I whitelisted Gamedev as soon as I noticed; but how many people would notice?   Maybe a message can be added when the add is blocked to ask people to whitelist, since the ads are unintrusive. I'll take a guess that most people who use Gamedev are competent enough with computers to know how.     I'm not sure about that.   If we call the ads "community image space", which they really are, we may be able to completely avoid being blocked. Yes, some jerk might report it, but these programs must also have abuse systems in place so people don't report random images that are part of websites as ads to break them by making adblocks block them. There is probably human intervention at some point along the line.  Assuming those meatsuits have hearts pumping somewhere inside them, they might allow us out community image space.   I don't think it's necessarily an arms race, considering the usage of the space is from the community itself.  It's like an adblock blocking the classifieds section.
  14. Recently had to install an adblock due to another site, and the most popular one on Chrome (Adguard) is blocking gamedev ads. How could it know these are ads?  I wondered.   Oh:   http://uploads.gamedev.net/ads/adimage-_.jpg   That explains it.   These ads are coming from gamedev, going to gamedev.  They're also not intrusive or anything, and they support the site.  Is there any reason the file location, image name, and website code needs to express the fact that they are ads? It seems like this could be easily fixed in a way that made it impossible for any adblockers to block them by default.   Sadly adblockers are necessary for the terrible flash ads everywhere that lag my computer, and even worse ads that are dangerous, but these are neither.
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!