Ground Spawn

[scottie]

Yes, I used the search and didn't find anything about it relative to recent patches...

Just and fyi that drops are not being removed from the map when picked up in the game. I don't know if this is a known problem or not but looks like one of the opcodes for this is not being (properly) processed.

Not complaining. Just letting you know in case nobody noticed.

[high_jeeves]

Nobody noticed.. except this guy 2 days ago...

http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2994

and nobody fixed it already.. like in this thread:

http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2995&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

--Jeeves

[scottie]

That first link you provide has NOTHING to do with my post. It's about drops not showing up on the map at all. My post is about drops not going away. Absolutely nothing to do with each other as far as I can tell.

The second link you provide has zero key words in it that I would use to search for information about ground spawn not being removed from the map and the subject of the thread gives no indicator of the actual point of the thread. In fact, the initial post simply says that some patch was applied but not what the patch was for. Additionally, I have the CVS from after that date as my GPS functionality is mostly working and mine still doesn't remove ground spawns.

If the ground spawns are being removed for others, perhaps I'll try deleting my source tree completely and grabbing a fresh copy from the cvs.

In any case, sorry for trying to be helpful and in the process apparently getting high-jeeves's panties in a bunch.

[high_jeeves]

You are kidding right? Did you even read the link?

Try reading the 4-7th posts on the second link.. if you still cant find the answer to your question.. i dont know how to help you.. all the keywords are there... its written in plain english.. dont fault me because you cant read..

--Jeeves

[S_B_R]

Man, Jeeves you just can't win. You try and be helpful and people still act like you Flamed them.... That's why I have cut back on my posts.... :rolleyes:

[SlowNLazy]

Originally posted by high_jeeves
You are kidding right? Did you even read the link?

Try reading the 4-7th posts on the second link.. if you still cant find the answer to your question.. i dont know how to help you.. all the keywords are there... its written in plain english.. dont fault me because you cant read..

--Jeeves

<snickers> DAMN IT JEEVES ... (using stupid Rock voice)Know your role!!!

You are to provide every answer to every question everytime it is ask regardless if it was asked 5 mintues prior.. You will do so with a sincere smile and a non-combative manner.. If you every get mad, you are to appoligize profusly for not having the skills required to appropriately handle the situation.

Actually I think the problem is... we ask too much for people to be able to draw conclusions from the facts at hand. No where in those post did it address "HIS" problem... Just references to what may be an issue with the OPT codes for drops... Which some of us may realize is a factor to "HIS" issue and POSSIBLY he needs to check his opt.h (correct name??) file to ensure he has the corrected values... Seems to me, more and more people are skipping the class in high school on higher thinking; ya know draw conclusions, deductive/associative reasoning, plot anticipation, saying thank you and excuse me(sorry .. ran out of big words), ect :P

[quackrabbit]

Well, Ratt edited my responses in the first post so that's why it's no longer valid.

Ground spawns are fixed in the current CVS. Re-download and compile and you'll be good to go.

[scottie]

Thanks quackrabbit. I actually got a CVS update last night that seems to have fixed it.

fyi for all you sarcastic ones: Please point out where I was asking for any help or requesting that high-and-mighty-jeeves do anything for me. I was reporting a potential bug that I found and was unable to find any other reference to. It's not like I even cared if the drops disappeared from the map... just something I noticed when I happened to drop something and pick it back up.

If he had any desire other than to flame as per his usual posts, he could simply have NOT posted anything and let it go or posted, "Bug has been noted and fixed."

"all the keywords are there... its written in plain english"

Oh, I see. I was supposed to search for RemDropCode. That's nice to know for the future, but not being one of the developers and not having that post in front of me at the time of searching, how would one know that exact phrase to search for? I searched for things like "ground spawn" "drops" "remove". Feel free to do a search on that page and show me where any of those obvious keywords appear in that thread in posts 4-7. It's a lot easier to find something when you know where it is.

Anyway, thanks to the developers for their continued work on seq.

[high_jeeves]

Again, i ask:



You are kidding right? Did you even read the link?


You bitch at me for not providing information.. i provided the link that had your answer in it.. dont complain if you failed to read it...

--Jeeves

[Surak]

jeeves is like some gaseous energy being from star trek ... he's there to feed of your negative emotions. be happy, laugh in his face, starve him of his fooood and watch him shrival up into a little ball!

[high_jeeves]

Oh no! The three post attacker has struck again.. thank you for your valuable addition to the community... lets see.. 3 posts... 3 flames... pretty good record, for somebody who complains about flaming... Keep going, and you might even get to hai_hai's level...

--Jeeves

[Hobo]

Actually Jeeves there are those of us with more than 3 posts that also feel you jump into flame a little too much. While it is always appreciated to see someone post a link with an answer to a question (if there is a question being asked) but is it really necessary to attach a flaming comment to nearly every one of them? I mean you take the time to find them help and then you rip them apart at the same time. I can understand flaming the guy who has asked a question that has been asked and answered a thousand times. But what good does it do for the community to constantly flame people, even if it's a subject that is in a recent thread? Why not just link to it and suggest they join that thread's discussion? Or better yet, ignore it all together. Sometimes I think you enjoy spending time searching out old threads to link to, just so you can flame a person, not so you can help them. It just gets old.

So please do as Ratt has asked and mentioned a few times lately and slow down on the flaming. It's really not necessary to flame all the time and our reputation is slowly turning into that of the old HQ board.

Thanks,

Hobo

[high_jeeves]

I guess the thing I dont understand about this whole thread is: I didnt even flame... Read what I wrote.. maybe you dont like my attitute, I dont really care.. considering that the solution was mentioned in the thread about the very patch he is complaining about, I think the original poster should have atleast read the thread about the fix before complaining that there was a bug with it...

As S_B_R and SlowNLazy said: I try to help.. I post the exact answer... the original poster doesnt even bother to read the whole thread (all 10 posts), and then flames ME about my answer...

How am I supposed to help this person more? Perhaps I should just fly over to his house, apply the appropriate patches (you know, the one in the link I sent him), and rebuild for him... Would that be appropriate? Or perhaps it is only appropriate if I am bowing, and kissing his feet the entire time?

The answer was in the post, he didnt bother to read it.. which one of us is at fault here?

--Jeeves

[Hobo]

Originally posted by high_jeeves
Nobody noticed.. except this guy 2 days ago...

http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2994

and nobody fixed it already.. like in this thread:

http://seq.sourceforge.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2995&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

--Jeeves



Frankly I see no one at fault. I guess to me it's just the sarcastic nature of your comment here and on other threads that starts to get old. Instead of tossing in comments like you did with the links above, why not just post the links and say "check these out for more info", or something like that? Why the need in all your replies to toss in sarcasm? Yes, sometimes it IS called for, but constantly and in nearly all your replies to people? To me, you've developed a reputation of being a flamer first and a helper second. I prefer the Jeeves of the past that always helped without judgement.

[scottie]

Jeeves:

1) I did NOT ask you for help. I simply posted a potential bug in case it wasn't known yet because I was unable to find mention of it when searching.

2) I DID thoroughly read the thread that you linked and since it indicated that the problem was fixed, I tried a new CVS which wouldn't let me connect. When I later was able to connect, I got a patch that fixed that problem.

3) I NEVER bitched at you about not giving me information because I never asked for information. Like I've said before. I wasn't even concerned about the "bug". I just wanted to report it to be helpful in case it wasn't yet discovered.

4) Yes, you provided links to the answers... in a very sarcastic and demeaning manner which is clearly flaming. I have no problem with the information you linked and appreciate the effort you went to finding it. But your delivery leaves MUCH to be desired when you talk down to people who clearly were only trying to be helpful.

I don't ask or expect anything from you other than the same basic common (not so common on message boards, it seems) courtesies I give to and would expect from any stranger.

[casey]

Originally posted by scottie
4) Yes, you provided links to the answers... in a very sarcastic and demeaning manner which is clearly flaming.

i find this amusing. most of the stuff you people complain about being flames dont even approach being a flame. Grow some thicker skin, and if truly feel someone is being a troll, or just dont like thier posts, dont reply to them.

i invite you to join some usenet discussions, or browse some older archives of fiesty groups, and you may learn what a flame really is.

in any case, there is an ignore feature on this board, and it works quite well if you no longer desire to read a certain users posts.

[Borscht]

I dunno what ya'll are talking about. I find Jeeves boring and repetitive, he always says the same damn thing over and over,
namely:

This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]