[Rydolph]

I was scrolling through suggestions when this caught my eye.

https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-23592.html

It was a good suggestion which would've helped in-game with roleplay, had support from 100% of its voters, wouldn't have affected performance , and it seemed easy enough to make the changes.

But it got denied simply because someone in the staff team didn't think it was "required;" Just because something isn't required, doesn't mean it shouldn't be added - especially if it's helpful.

Before you relate this to politics, where people "elect" (although they don't in this community) people to have a voice for them - sure, they know what's best for certain situations so they don't go through with some things, but the example in the thread linked above isn't very fair in my opinion.

What do you guys think?

[Soviethooves]

It’s a very specific situation involving a suggestion that doesn’t really do much other than change some text color. If they think it isn’t required I guess it isn’t required.

If you wanna make a fuss of a suggestion go see the FA:S Medkit suggestion.

[Kvatch]

It’s a very specific situation involving a suggestion that doesn’t really do much other than change some text color. If they think it isn’t required I guess it isn’t required.

If you wanna make a fuss of a suggestion go see the FA:S Medkit suggestion.

It changes the text colour of /me's which makes them more noticeable in chat. Without players, staff have no purpose here so I think they should stop being so dictatorial and give the actual meat and potatoes of the server, the players, the satisfaction of following through on some suggestions, especially something so small yet effective.

[Soviethooves]

It’s a very specific situation involving a suggestion that doesn’t really do much other than change some text color. If they think it isn’t required I guess it isn’t required.

If you wanna make a fuss of a suggestion go see the FA:S Medkit suggestion.

It changes the text colour of /me's which makes them more noticeable in chat. Without players, staff have no purpose here so I think they should stop being so dictatorial and give the actual meat and potatoes of the server, the players, the satisfaction of following through on some suggestions, especially something so small yet effective.

Is changing a text color really so effective that it requires uproar? You’re blowing this out of proportion seeing as it isn’t negativily impacting anyone

If you can give me more evidence to why the staff team is acting in a dictatorial fashion with suggestions that effects the players negatively than I may rethink my stance on the matter. They’re disorganized, but they’re certainly not ignoring the players

I’m fine with the suggestion, but this discussion is kind of ridiculous considering this is a rare occurrence. Just suggest it again.

[Hungames]

lol its a fucking color. it seems easy to implement so why the fuck not. 100% player vote. people want it just do it.

[Night]

You also need to take into consideration what time DEV have to spare, and if it's worth adding to their workload. It's a nice addition, but DEV time can be better directed elsewhere for now, especially since projects on the roadmap are taking up a lot of developer attention, limiting what time they're able to give.

[Toxic]

Blanket statement to make a judgment based off of particular circumstances and a minimal perspective.

[Kvatch]

You also need to take into consideration what time DEV have to spare, and if it's worth adding to their workload. It's a nice addition, but DEV time can be better directed elsewhere for now, especially since projects on the roadmap are taking up a lot of developer attention, limiting what time they're able to give.

Don't you think if it was a viable suggestion at all it would be approved? We still have approved suggestions from 2016 that are good ideas but the devs either don't think they're right for this time, or haven't got around to them like you say. So why has this suggestion failed to pass the staff vote with this in mind?

[Nebula]

Modeling new models that no one asked for even though there were enough other models suggested takes less time than changing abit of code for color?

[Doctor Internet]

Modeling new models that no one asked for even though there were enough other models suggested takes less time than changing abit of code for color?

itt, people fail to understand the concept of specialisms.

---

Since Bambo made such an eloquent response, I might as well do one too. brb

[Bambo]

Sure it is an easy enough implementation when looked at from the outside, however as some stated in this thread, there are suggestions piled up and on top of that, many more projects that get priority with the development time being short when combined with real life responsibilities.

Does the denial mean it'll never get done? No.

You can suggest it in the future, and it can get implemented when/if the load of the devs decrease.

Some updates are too individual and small to be considered when development are already short on time.

Updates that can combine to a bigger plan down the line, that also have an important impact on the gamemode are more important I believe.

Sure, /me's would be easier to see but right now, it'd be easier for the development time to focus on the load they have currently and then take a look back at it or when it's suggested again, reconsider it.

The retry suggestion can be in an appropriate time by asking someone in the team if now is the time, or if there is time to look into it.

Tl;dr 

Lua Dev time is short as is, the implementation can look as an easy thing to do, but consider that, our developers don't develop 24/7 and that this implementation will take away from the projects that are in works.

[Kvatch]

Sure it is an easy enough implementation when looked at from the outside, however as some stated in this thread, there are suggestions piled up and on top of that, many more projects that get priority with the development time being short when combined with real life responsibilities.

Does the denial mean it'll never get done? No.

You can suggest it in the future, and it can get implemented when/if the load of the devs decrease.

Some updates are too individual and small to be considered when development are already short on time.

Updates that can combine to a bigger plan down the line, that also have an important impact on the gamemode are more important I believe.

Sure, /me's would be easier to see but right now, it'd be easier for the development time to focus on the load they have currently and then take a look back at it or when it's suggested again, reconsider it.

The retry suggestion can be in an appropriate time by asking someone in the team if now is the time, or if there is time to look into it.

Tl;dr 

Lua Dev time is short as is, the implementation can look as an easy thing to do, but consider that, our developers don't develop 24/7 and that this implementation will take away from the projects that are in works.

So if this is the case, how come it wasn't approved for coming back to at a later date? 80% of the suggestions in the approved forum are at least a few months old. How come that suggestion couldn't pass the staff vote if the devs are too busy right now, when you say we can make the vote again at a later date and it have a higher chance of being approved. The suggestion should just be approved and sit in the approved forum like the rest until the devs are ready to come back to it. A few recent changelogs were based off of suggestions that were made a long while ago. Can't this apply to this suggestion too?

Ideally staff shouldn't rely on suggestions being remembered and reposted when the community "guess" when the devs are less busy. Due to the lack of changelogs recently, I would say the devs aren't busy enough compared to how productive the development used to be. That's not me cracking the whip but I'm just saying that if you want players to repost when the devs are less busy, perhaps we should be involved more in knowing what they're actually doing instead of updating the roadmap once in a blue moon.

 A suggestion should be accepted if it's a good suggestion. Development time should be considered after it's been accepted, because you can always keep a suggestion thread in the approved forum for 2+ years like some suggestions have been.

That's just my opinion anyway.

[Doctor Internet]

For development changes (not policy or rules changes), generally, suggestions are denied by staff vote for a few reasons. Being outright retarded, having a better solution (even though they tend to be moved to approved in that case), because development believe it to be a unproductive use of their time. There's a couple of others, but they tend to not come up. For the specific example, it would have had zero positive gameplay impact. There's not been a spate of people missing /me's. It's better looking is completley subjective, and (just personally) I don't believe it to look better. However, there are downsides. Currently, chat, whisper, yell, gagged chat, /me, /it and /announce are all the same colour. Changing one would either requiring changing them all, partially changing them, or changing none of them and leaving one as a changed colour for... Reasons, I guess?

A lack of advantages, combined with some disadvantages, combined with the time it would take to do this is why it was said that it wasn't really required (at least, from what I can gather from voting staff members).

Otherwise, the alternatives are either that everything gets approved, and it doesn't get done for above reasons. Or, we go back to how it used to be. Everything sat in suggestions until a dev approved it. No transparency, no voting, and you didn't know what's happening at all until it got finished.

---

Sure it is an easy enough implementation when looked at from the outside, however as some stated in this thread, there are suggestions piled up and on top of that, many more projects that get priority with the development time being short when combined with real life responsibilities.

Does the denial mean it'll never get done? No.

You can suggest it in the future, and it can get implemented when/if the load of the devs decrease.

Some updates are too individual and small to be considered when development are already short on time.

Updates that can combine to a bigger plan down the line, that also have an important impact on the gamemode are more important I believe.

Sure, /me's would be easier to see but right now, it'd be easier for the development time to focus on the load they have currently and then take a look back at it or when it's suggested again, reconsider it.

The retry suggestion can be in an appropriate time by asking someone in the team if now is the time, or if there is time to look into it.

Tl;dr 

Lua Dev time is short as is, the implementation can look as an easy thing to do, but consider that, our developers don't develop 24/7 and that this implementation will take away from the projects that are in works.

So if this is the case, how come it wasn't approved for coming back to at a later date?

See my post on this. It wasn't denied for a lack of time. It was denied for other reasons.

80% of the suggestions in the approved forum are at least a few months old. How come that suggestion couldn't pass the staff vote if the devs are too busy right now, when you say we can make the vote again at a later date and it have a higher chance of being approved. The suggestion should just be approved and sit in the approved forum like the rest until the devs are ready to come back to it. A few recent changelogs were based off of suggestions that were made a long while ago. Can't this apply to this suggestion too?

See above.

Ideally staff shouldn't rely on suggestions being remembered and reposted when the community "guess" when the devs are less busy.

See above.

Due to the lack of changelogs recently, I would say the devs aren't busy enough compared to how productive the development used to be.

Have you considered the possibility that LL is not a primary job for any of our development staff, and that other jobs, education and most importantly health come before coding for LL. Not only that, not all our developers code Lua. PaulB used to only do Web. Bambo only does web. CMR and Rock only do modelling. Faustie, Temar and Burnett tend to focus on backend services.

That's not me cracking the whip but I'm just saying that if you want players to repost when the devs are less busy, perhaps we should be involved more in knowing what they're actually doing instead of updating the roadmap once in a blue moon.

1. See above.
2. There's a lot more than just the roadmap for what we're doing. Dev blogs, update pages, the changelogs show various stages of our progress.

 A suggestion should be accepted if it's a good suggestion. Development time should be considered after it's been accepted, because you can always keep a suggestion thread in the approved forum for 2+ years like some suggestions have been.

It really depends. If a suggestion adds zero utility, it doesn't really matter if it takes 10 seconds or 10 years, it's not being approved. If it's a project that takes 10 years, it doesn't really matter if it adds zero utility or huge amounts of it, it's most likely not getting in. It's a balancing act between what's viable and what we can actually do with a realistic estimate of our time management and skills.

[Vimpto]

You also need to take into consideration what time DEV have to spare, and if it's worth adding to their workload. It's a nice addition, but DEV time can be better directed elsewhere for now, especially since projects on the roadmap are taking up a lot of developer attention, limiting what time they're able to give.

But going off Applejack which is what the game mode is based off, it would take 10seconds if that to change the color.

Code:

cider.chatBox.messageAdd(nil, nil, { name..": "..text, Color(255, 255, 150, 255) }, filtered);
        elseif (class == "me") then

Surely it isn't wasting very much development time to change 4 numbers

However, there are downsides. Currently, chat, whisper, yell, gagged chat, /me, /it and /announce are all the same colour. Changing one would either requiring changing them all, partially changing them, or changing none of them and leaving one as a changed colour for... Reasons, I guess?

Yell and Whisper have (yell) and (whisper) as a prefix in white so they are more easily distinguishable

[Taylor]

You also need to take into consideration what time DEV have to spare, and if it's worth adding to their workload. It's a nice addition, but DEV time can be better directed elsewhere for now, especially since projects on the roadmap are taking up a lot of developer attention, limiting what time they're able to give.

But likewise devs can choose when they do what, so why should it matter?