-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] No Rick I wasn't, Bud used a nice tactic where you use intelligent sounding phrasing and what appears to be a well thought out post but in truth it is disguising sarcasm and negativity. I would much rather deal with the majority of the community, it is easier to see where you stand when someone says "Valv3 OMFG fix this you SUXXORZZ!!1!!" than "Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point." Now again, don't get me wrong, I get just as frustrated with the recent updates as the rest of this group. I was merely trying to point out to Bud that maybe he needs to think about using disguised negativity in his posts if he wants his LEGITIMATE concerns addressed (and they are legitimate). I am now, and true to this mailing list, having to defend something that was merely meant to be helpful and is now being taken too far and out of context. It seems we thrive on conflict here instead of just taking advice as it is given. Bud, I really didn't mean a whole lot by it, I was merely stating that I thought you were a bit harsh with what appeared to be misleading statements and that in the future maybe you should just be more direct. To those that are offended by MY post I will quote what I said the first time "Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue." Take it for what you will.
On 10/21/05, Rice, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brian, too late!! > > There is nothing wrong with Bud's post. He made no obviously harsh > statements that warranted your return post. I tend to think that the nicer > you are on these lists the more criticism you get. > > I think you were referring to Tyler's response, at least I am hoping you > were. If you weren't, then my previous statement really holds true!! Most > people on this list do not show half the respect to VALVe that Bud did. > > RR > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian M Frain > (eternal) > Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:41 PM > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Bud, > You would probably get a lot farther towards a response if you didn't post > with such cynicism and hidden jabs. We all get a little irked when updates > go bad but keeping in mind I have nothing to do with Valve and even I felt > a > little insulted at your post. You know what they say, you catch more flies > with honey. Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an > issue. > > > On 10/21/05, Tyler Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -- > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is > something > > else... > > > > On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Mr. Reynolds, > > > > > > It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in > > > February > > > of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running > > > successfully with bots for months; we receive an update at time of > > release > > > for DOD:S and now bots are crashing some Windows based systems. > > > > > > Could you tell us if Valve is more than peripherally aware of the > > > situation, > > > and if anything is being considered to rectify the situation? Perhaps > a > > > redefining the minimum machine requirements for a Windows 200x Server > if > > > that is the problem? > > > > > > I believe that there was another update sometime after the February > > fiasco > > > that also made adding bots without players difficult, someone came out > > > with > > > a workaround that was very successful -- that particular issue did not > > > present itself with the C++ errors seen at this time (and seen back in > > > February). Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a > > > server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, > > but > > > there is some suspicion at this point. > > > > > > Do you have any recommendations? Perhaps how to get data populated in > > the > > > MDMP files that are created at crash time to help diagnose? > > > > > > I appreciate your time, as always, and look forward to your reply. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Bud Ingram > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
