|
|
 |
« Reply #5325 on: December 01, 2012, 01:37:08 PM » |
|
"Last edited" would be easy to abuse, i would just have to add a space to my description and it would be on top of that page. Everyone could do this, resulting in it being useless and abused.
Change log: Why? You know your old hack, keep a notepad file next to as you edit.. Then paste that into the description.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5326 on: December 01, 2012, 01:55:04 PM » |
|
"Last edited" would be easy to abuse, i would just have to add a space to my description and it would be on top of that page. Everyone could do this, resulting in it being useless and abused.
Change log: Why? You know your old hack, keep a notepad file next to as you edit.. Then paste that into the description.
Changelog for people who are downloading, not for the person who is uploading, so the people downloading know what they're getting. If a change log is implemented with the last edited feature, then abusers would be caught. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5327 on: December 01, 2012, 02:35:19 PM » |
|
Changelog for people who are downloading, not for the person who is uploading, so the people downloading know what they're getting.
If a change log is implemented with the last edited feature, then abusers would be caught.
I still don't see why we need it.. You can easily just make a notepad file and put your edits there, then copy it to the desc box..... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5328 on: December 01, 2012, 04:57:41 PM » |
|
I still don't see why we need it.. You can easily just make a notepad file and put your edits there, then copy it to the desc box.....
Not everyone does that though. This would be a requirement to submit, and would help the "Last Edited" sort. Also with "Last Edited", they could make a wake where only edits other than the description count. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5329 on: December 01, 2012, 05:07:57 PM » |
|
Not everyone does that though. This would be a requirement to submit, and would help the "Last Edited" sort.
Also with "Last Edited", they could make a wake where only edits other than the description count.
So they would have to code a ton of stuff into the BV, when it only just displays a new tab..? I could easily just edit the download url, save, then re-edit and put back in the original link and it would be on the top again. Abusing such a page is way too easy, plus it gives no big extra either. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2012, 05:08:50 PM by パンドラのハート »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5330 on: December 01, 2012, 05:09:13 PM » |
|
Should "recently edited/updated" we added to the things that we SHOULDN'T have?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5331 on: December 01, 2012, 05:14:42 PM » |
|
Should "recently edited/updated" we added to the things that we SHOULDN'T have?
Should we add "recently edited/updated" to the things that we SHOULDN'T have? ^That's what you meant right? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5332 on: December 01, 2012, 05:19:40 PM » |
|
So they would have to code a ton of stuff into the BV, when it only just displays a new tab..?
I could easily just edit the download url, save, then re-edit and put back in the original link and it would be on the top again.
Abusing such a page is way too easy, plus it gives no big extra either.
It's plenty of a big extra. There are tons of hacks on the vault that aren't newly added or top downloaded but have been edited within a certain amount of time recently, I know there are Clouds and Shadows that have less downloads than older versions. The vault is hardly perfect when it comes to the advanced search, so it makes finding the best versions of certain hacks difficult to find. Abusing the page could come with reprimands. If having a changelog is too much, have a small counter on each hack that shows how many times it's been edited. These abusers can be reprimanded just like any other abuser of the system. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5333 on: December 01, 2012, 05:23:33 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SSJ - The guy that can, but won't. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5334 on: December 01, 2012, 05:29:58 PM » |
|
Yep, it's big.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5335 on: December 01, 2012, 05:38:15 PM » |
|
Should we add "recently edited/updated" to the things that we SHOULDN'T have?
^That's what you meant right?
Yea. Didn't re-read it. Yea. I think it should be added to the first post. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5336 on: December 01, 2012, 05:39:31 PM » |
|
It's plenty of a big extra. There are tons of hacks on the vault that aren't newly added or top downloaded but have been edited within a certain amount of time recently, I know there are Clouds and Shadows that have less downloads than older versions. The vault is hardly perfect when it comes to the advanced search, so it makes finding the best versions of certain hacks difficult to find.
Abusing the page could come with reprimands. If having a changelog is too much, have a small counter on each hack that shows how many times it's been edited. These abusers can be reprimanded just like any other abuser of the system.
Again: Why should they go through tons of work for one single simple page that's easily abused? Just forget it, i highly doubt it'll happen since it's been said it won't a few times before already. By several people. Yea. Didn't re-read it.
Yea. I think it should be added to the first post.
Sillytendo  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5337 on: December 01, 2012, 05:45:24 PM » |
|
Again: Why should they go through tons of work for one single simple page that's easily abused?
Why are you assuming it'd be tons of work? It's just a sort system, and there are counters aren't difficult. And for the last time, I'm aware it's abusable and have suggested a number of ways around that now. No one is going to abuse it if it means their hacks are going to be taken down or they're banned from the vault. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5338 on: December 01, 2012, 06:10:00 PM » |
|
Yep. That's pretty big. Fixed it. Thanks for pointing that out. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #5339 on: December 01, 2012, 06:23:37 PM » |
|
Forgot to add in my last post, I'm positive ds22 didn't submit that before me; I checked the sfx hack list for any JP Ike sawnds / brsars, and there were none. Apparently he either didn't bother to check, or he noticed mine and submitted it anyway. For all I know, he could have just downloaded my hack and renamed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
