Mals

I no longer moderate reviews. You would need to chat with Death.

Hi Dustyhansen. NoEscape on Codefling does not claim to work with Raidable Bases. I suspect (but have not confirmed, the owner ID is 0 for Raidable bases). So is not covered as the description says. Perhaps see if the Raidable base plugin can set an id other than 0? -Mal

This appears to be user error as the source of issues. Please note, refunds are optional at the creator's discretion. I would suggest a bit more checking of the correct setting for running a custom map, it is more complex than a generated map. https://codefling.com/refunds

Some cool stuff there. What is the plan for 2025?

Changed Status from Pending to Fixed Changed Fixed In to 2.1.7

Hi Dusty. Sorry for the slow reply. The current version is: 2.1.06, I update it to: 2.1.7 -Mal

MyLocation - Failed to compile: 'PhoneController' does not contain a definition for 'PositionToGridCoord' | Line: 185, Pos: 76

Any ETA on fix, this is from 2 months ago?

Any ETA on this, as it has been broken since October?

It can't see the database rustbp. Either the configuration in the plugin is not correct, or the database is not running.

@Billy Joe I can see you have been on the site, can you please respond to this support request, it is almost 2 weeks old.

I do try to resolve customer issues as it is better outcome to solve the problem than have a bad review, and a flawed product. My goal is customer service in getting things fixed, and being fair to creators that they get a chance to fix an issue before getting slammed for it. A lot of creators are not server owners, so they have no clue about how things are going with their creations after initial release until a customer lets them know. Also, as someone who runs over 100 plugins, there are a lot of edge case you only see in running servers. That said, if it is a critically flawed product and not getting addressed, hello 1-star review. In some cases, if the review has an issue that another person has a support request for that is a few weeks old and not even responded to, straight to approve. I'm trying to be fair, but firm. Trust is hard. A lot of place don't care if they are selling garbage, so will pump out sunshine and happiness for all products to drive sales. Death cares about the quality of the products and the reviews. I take my role as moderator seriously, I just wish I had more time to spend on it during the week. I don't cherry-pick the good ones, just statistically they are the highest volume of what is submitted. I approved a slew of negative reviews last month, just search for products with 4 or fewer stars and you will find the negative reviews.

Hi Dusty. My apologies, I thought I had dmed about that review. I am planning to spend a few hours on reviews tomorrow and catch up.

If you find a product you bought is not being reasonably supported, report it. I am all over that! I check the discussion, support pages, and reviews. Regardless, I contact the creator and raise the concern. I also follow up with the reporter. I (currently) have the right to block sale on unsupported content, and will do so if it is not reasonably supported. But please be reasonable. For example, on wipe day, a ton of plugins break. Some people fix them before or the day of wipe (Gold Star). Some might not be able to on wipe day (deployed, travelling, sick, live in the wrong time zone, etc.). But if it is still broken a week later, it is worth following up. I prefer a quick fix for critical plugins, but know not all of them will be fixed within hours of wipe. So reporting a plugin an hour after wipe is going to result in contacting the creator, and allowing them time to action it, which might take more than 24 hours. Many creators do this as a hobby, so can't action it until they are home from work, or might work 12-hour shifts so take a day or two to get a decent rest day to action bugs. Very few creators have this as their full-time gig, and even fewer have support staff on at all hours.

My template reply I selected a real review that will not apply to 99% of the plugins on purpose, to avoid tipping review. If I see a review is heading in a direction, I do prompt (my players love this... I ask what do they love about it?) Honestly, I personally don't care if you love or hate a plugin (unless it is one of mine ;-)), I just need it to have some context, otherwise it really just sounds like fanboy cheerleader squad and I wonder if you are BFF IRL with the creator.

TL;DR I moderate most things, I am human, if you don't like how things go with a review, please report the review. Most reviews have been moderated by me, but not all. If you think my moderation is wrong (I know I am not perfect at it), report me, I will hand it off to senior Codefling staff to review. I am not above review of my reviews and behaviour, and definitely reflect on reports. Death wants useful reviews to aid in informed decisions, thus the review of reviews. I know it is uncommon, and a new experience to many customers. Codefling's goals are factual reviews with some details, that talk about the product (good or bad), do not have expletives, or personal attacks. If a review meets those criteria, I approve. I am fine with you saying something suck if it meets that criteria! I have some guidelines and rules from Death to follow. I do my best to follow that direction and be fair. My goal is a positive outcome for the customer, and reasonable treatment of creators. If I can, I mediate issues with a creation. I will also follow up with creators who are not providing reasonable support of their products. But in some cases there is no resolution other than a negative review. In some cases, I ask the customer to address the concerns raised with their review, so their review can be approved (see below for examples). I do my best to be fair to all involved. I am an unpaid volunteer, reducing a potential for conflict of interest. Death is not my employer, he is my respected friend. I do this to help the site, as I believe it transformed the space for modded servers. My review process: I review a bunch of factors about a review. Is the review factual. Is it about the creation and reasonable support. If it about interaction off the site, we can't police that and can't prove it is factual. Support requests make my life a lot easier, I can see the interaction, if the creator is sitting on their hands, etc. I understand one person's "factual" is not another's. That often where there are disagreements that can't be resolved, and I make a decision (right or wrong) where to stand on a review. Thus, the report function if you feel I have been unfair or unjust. Other factors that might lead to a discussion: Is this an enhancement request (aka asking for new functionality not listed in the description [Please put a support request in for that {and it is always at creator discretion}]). Not getting a requested enhancement is not a basis for a review. Talk about what the plugin does do good/bad, but talking about what it does not do, which is not in the description, seems unfair. For example: Reasonable: "Lights-On works but does not support turrets". Less reasonable: "Lights-On does not support permissions" (when the description explicitly says why). Unreasonable: "Lights-On does not make the Bradley's headlights flash in the time to the music I am playing". I'd approve the first, try to discuss the second (as the creator), and ask the reviewer to revise in the third one, as this is a massive enhancement request out of scope for the plugin. Again, this is at moderator discretion, so I can get it wrong (chat with me or report me). Does it say something specific ("this sucks" or "nice!" not good, "this sucks because it all barrels explode in zombie scientists and the plugin said it modifies water catchers" or "the plugin wipes the config on server restart" specific). If it includes personal attacks rather than addressing the plugin or quality of support, it is not going to get approved. Mals is evil and should die in fire, not good, Lights On turn all my lights off and Mals ignored my support requests for two months, okay. (I'd check that is true and if so, approved). BTW we do get AstroTurfing all with the same content for different creations, but you don't see those as the posters and I discuss making distinct reviews per product (sample: "The UI is exception and my players love this!1!" for all the plugins for a specific creator, all within 10 minutes... suss). Review bombing is treated similarly. I also see customer upset with one of a creator's items, dumping non-specific negative reviews on each one of their other items after asking for a refund on a specific plugin, also suss. Things are not reviewed in a vacuum. Just so you know, I really want good product too, I have six pages of purchases on the site, I don't want to waste my money on crappy products. I'm not just a moderator and hobbyist developer, I am a customer and server owner too. So I try to see if from all side.

I don't think you can review a paid file without having a license/purchasing it. @Death that is true isn't it?

If there is an issue with a plugin not being maintained in a reasonable timeframe, report it, and it will be followed up. Note, Timeframe is subjective as we try to be reasonable to both the customer and the creator. Dump and run is not okay as a creator.

I will be honest here, we do moderate reviews. If the review is vapid, we ask the customer to add at least one element about the item. Here is the template I use to reply to those: Hi . Your review: Thank you for taking the time to leave your review! Unfortunately, we cannot approve reviews with no substance. If you'd like to edit your review and resubmit, consider listing at least one detail/fact on why you like/dislike it and the purpose of your review. We appreciate your understanding! Bad Example: This plugin is great, and the author is awesome. Good Example: Easy to use, very configurable and updating when needed, perfect plugin for economy sustain! (actual review for Rust Rewards) Thanks! -Mal If the review states something is broken, I check if they put in a support ticket. If there is no support ticket, I contact the reviewer and creator to get the ball rolling on resolving the issue. In all cases where a review is not approved, the reviewer is contacted. So if your review is more than a day old (I work a 50+ hour week and this is my hobby) then there should have been correspondence on it if not approved. There are 25 reviews that are either lacking detail and not redone, are WIP trying to resolve issues. I usually follow up on those on the weekend to try to nudge progress, or approve the review if the creator is not taking action or responding. This is different from some site that just let the review happen. The goal is to ensure reviews have value, and that in the case of issues we try to have resolution for the customer and give the creator a chance to have a positive outcome with their customer. There are some negative reviews out there, some creators get right cranky with me for approving them. But if they have basis and are unresolved, or there are support tickets showing it is not being addressed, it will be approved. I'm here to ensure quality reviews, and when there are issues, hopefully a positive outcome for the customer and creator. If you disagree with my moderation, you are welcome to chat with me on site, or Discord. If you strongly disagree, put in a report and I will escalate that to Codefling senior management for review. I am human and sometime make mistakes. If you have suggestions to improve this moderation process, I am happy to chat with Death about suggestions to change the process. I follow Death's direction in how he would like me to moderate. I do agree on the push notification, its nagging is horrid. -Mal

So this was fixed in the current release?

So this was fixed in the current release?