User talk:Mattrition

Hi, I've moved Classifying bugs out of my user space and fixed the links in the template and ther 12w19a known bugs page. Simons Mith 00:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thanks! I would suggest moving under the Known Bugs/Classifying Bugs instead, since it **only** applies to this area of the wiki. However, its your page so its entirely up to you :) --Mattrition 08:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I did consider that, but in the end I decided it was more appropriate to group it with the other guides. While the 'Guides' category does mostly consist of Tutorial/* files, there are a few other general guides, and all of those are in the main namespace. Conversely the Known_Bugs/* files only contain bugs or collections of bugs, so adding 'Classifying Bugs' there would have made it the odd one out. 82.69.54.207 02:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC) (Oops, not logged in. Sry. NVM.)

undefined ? Crafting a map results in a map_0 heldplayer 18:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

it does almost work as stated. but shift creating maps causes double number to added what next map number is going to be. also creating next map on same location shifts next map number and do NOT create same map (that was crafted there before).

if just created, normal means (no shift clicking), then created 3 maps by shift clicking, next map is going to be 12.

math: 5 + 3 * 2 + 1 = 12 = [maps created normally + 2*maps created by shift clicking - 1(to transform map numbers to id)] + [maps you are going to create by shift clicking] * 2 + 1(map going to create to find out id)

--93.106.62.36 15:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

On the Known bugs/Version 12w21a page, you merged my entry with another. While I see that this is indeed the same bug, the combined entry has my signature and states something (in first person) I haven't experience. You can gut, move or remove my entry but I don't want to be misattributed. --Thorny 15:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * sorry about that. I intended to completely replace the other report with yours because yours is much more clear and informative but I think I forgot what I was doing somewhere along the line. Misattribution is a slipperly slope so I'll be more careful about that in the future --Mattrition 16:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Ayup

I posted a follow-up query to Torchic Blaziken's moved 'Water Source' bug, stating that I can't see why it isn't a legit bug. I am aware of the 'infinite water' behaviour of the game's old water model, but does fixing TB's complaint inevitably reinstate that behaviour? If not, isn't what he complains about a legitimate bug, and isn't the proposed fix feasible? --Simons Mith 00:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC) http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Talk:Known_bugs/Version_12w19a#Moved:Water_source_does_not_generate_on_top_of_another_water_source

Changing Reports
I undid changes that you made to my entry on the bug report on snapshot 12w25a. Whereas I do not necessarily object to my entry being merged with the above entry (although I am not certain they actually are reporting the same thing), please do not edit my entry for concision. I realize that my entry is somewhat lengthy, but there was time and consideration put into what I wrote because I intend to convey a certain meaning to jeb and dinnerbone. If you feel that the entry requires editing for length, please consult with me first...do not merely edit my wording to something shorter that conveys a meaning different than what I intended. I mean no offense, I am simply asking for a basic editorial courtesy. I have been testing snapshots for a long time, but this is the first time that I have experienced a bug that was serious enough that I felt compelled to begin contributing to the wiki. Thank you. --71.61.206.196 11:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies for making changes. However, you should be aware of a couple of things. Firstly, the Known bugs lists meant for exactly that - a list of known bugs and issues compiled by players. It is not a place to communicate any other kind of feedback or, most importantly, your own opinions. The list is most helpful when bug descriptions are concise and without any "personal" comments. This is largely why I edited your report: comments about how you feel about the bug are nice and all but they don't belong there. If you want to communicate with the devs use twitter, email, or places like reddit. Do not use the wiki.


 * Secondly, this is a wiki. The pages are modified by collaboration with others. The reason we ask people to sign reports is so that we can easily contact them to get more information, not to stamp your mark on your own submission. Otherwise, these reports are submitted for anyone to change and edit. Conveying "feeling" is not needed in a list of known bugs and you don't "own" the report you submitted just like you don't "own" any other paragraph that you make on a wiki. Of course, if you think the edit made is somehow detrimental, you can undo it and contact the editor, which you did and that's perfectly fine. Just as long as you know that anyone is completely entitled to edit down reports as per the page's instructions.


 * I won't alter your report again, but I implore you to cut the description down to the bare minimum, or, even better, remove it and just add to the report that is already there. I will simply merge it again otherwise, because what we can't have is duplicate reports of the same thing. Thank you. --Mattrition 15:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)