Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
What of it? On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 2:37 AM, Fernando Casas wrote: > http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=no+u > > Ugh... No, you! > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:23 PM, matan nov wrote: > > > > > >> no u > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper > wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant > >>> bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting > >>> irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: > >>> > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > where you are coming from. > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > waste of bandwidth. > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > best! > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > we have come to hate. > > f0rkz > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > each day. > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > like: > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > email would > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > nothing > > to do with MyIS. > > ___ > > 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 > > > > > ___ > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=no+u > Ugh... No, you! > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:23 PM, matan nov wrote: > > >> no u >> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper wrote: >> >> >>> Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant >>> bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting >>> irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: >>> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know where you are coming from. My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a waste of bandwidth. Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the best! A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists we have come to hate. f0rkz On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Umm, ok, umm > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > each day. > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > like: > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > email would > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > nothing > to do with MyIS. > ___ > 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 > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
And there was me thinking that this topic was going to come to a friendly end. Good Job... you ruined it. 2009/4/14 1nsane <1nsane...@gmail.com> > Ugh... No, you! > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:23 PM, matan nov wrote: > > > no u > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper > wrote: > > > > > Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant > > > bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting > > > irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: > > > > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > > > > where you are coming from. > > > > > > > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > > > > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > > > > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > > > > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > > > > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > > > > waste of bandwidth. > > > > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > > > > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > > > > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't > write > > > > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, > we > > > > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is > the > > > > best! > > > > > > > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > > > > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > > > > we have come to hate. > > > > > > > > f0rkz > > > > > > > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > > > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > > > > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > > > > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > > > > each day. > > > > > > > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > > > > like: > > > > > > > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > > > > email would > > > > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > > > > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > > > > nothing > > > > > to do with MyIS. > > > > > ___ > > > > > 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 > -- Sent from Olly's SEGA Game Gear ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Ugh... No, you! On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:23 PM, matan nov wrote: > no u > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper wrote: > > > Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant > > bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting > > irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. > > > > > > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: > > > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > > > where you are coming from. > > > > > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > > > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > > > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > > > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > > > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > > > waste of bandwidth. > > > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > > > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > > > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > > > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > > > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > > > best! > > > > > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > > > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > > > we have come to hate. > > > > > > f0rkz > > > > > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > > > each day. > > > > > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > > > like: > > > > > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > > > email would > > > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > > > nothing > > > > to do with MyIS. > > > > ___ > > > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
:facepalm: f0rkz On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:23 PM, matan nov wrote: > no u > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper > wrote: > >> Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant >> bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for >> posting >> irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. >> >> >> On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: >>> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know >>> where you are coming from. >>> >>> My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into >>> corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way >>> into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. >>> No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure >>> the >>> day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a >>> waste of bandwidth. >>> Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If >>> linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be >>> stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't >>> write >>> the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. >>> Instead, we >>> would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is >>> the >>> best! >>> >>> A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in >>> these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists >>> we have come to hate. >>> >>> f0rkz >>> >>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: >>> Umm, ok, umm Apologies for my emails on this. It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on each day. A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something like: "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers email would be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm nothing to do with MyIS. ___ 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
no u On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:13 PM, msleeper wrote: > Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant > bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting > irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. > > > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: > > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > > where you are coming from. > > > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > > waste of bandwidth. > > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > > best! > > > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > > we have come to hate. > > > > f0rkz > > > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > > each day. > > > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > > like: > > > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > > email would > > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > > nothing > > > to do with MyIS. > > > ___ > > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Yeah I agree. But also, how about, everyone stop posting irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list, and I will stop badgering you for posting irrelevant bullshit on the mailing list. On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:08 -0400, f0rkz wrote: > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > where you are coming from. > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > waste of bandwidth. > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > best! > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > we have come to hate. > > f0rkz > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > each day. > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > like: > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > email would > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > nothing > > to do with MyIS. > > ___ > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
@ Olly - googles is installed now @ Forkz - thanks for understanding @ Matan - you need the HLDSWhiteSupremicists list i think ;) @ Robert - Im 38 with 3 kids, i should know better @ Everyone else, sorry for wasting your bandwidth On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Robert Whelan wrote: > Parents should learn to password their computers while unsupervised kids > are present > > > > > > From: Jeff Wozniak > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list < > hlds@list.valvesoftware.com> > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:36:28 AM > Subject: Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the > problem." > > *DOH!* > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:55 AM, matan nov wrote: > > > Oh shit, I sent that to the wrong mailing list.Ignore please. > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:55 PM, matan nov wrote: > > > > > All niggers must hang. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > >> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > > >> where you are coming from. > > >> > > >> My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > > >> corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > > >> into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > > >> No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > > >> day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > > >> waste of bandwidth. > > >> Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > > >> linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > > >> stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > > >> the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > > >> would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > > >> best! > > >> > > >> A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > > >> these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > > >> we have come to hate. > > >> > > >> f0rkz > > >> > > >> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > >> > > >> > Umm, ok, umm > > >> > > > >> > Apologies for my emails on this. > > >> > > > >> > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > >> > each day. > > >> > > > >> > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > >> > like: > > >> > > > >> > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > >> > email would > > >> > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > >> > > > >> > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > >> > nothing > > >> > to do with MyIS. > > >> > ___ > > >> > 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 > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Parents should learn to password their computers while unsupervised kids are present From: Jeff Wozniak To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:36:28 AM Subject: Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem." *DOH!* On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:55 AM, matan nov wrote: > Oh shit, I sent that to the wrong mailing list.Ignore please. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:55 PM, matan nov wrote: > > > All niggers must hang. > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > >> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > >> where you are coming from. > >> > >> My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > >> corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > >> into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > >> No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > >> day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > >> waste of bandwidth. > >> Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > >> linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > >> stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > >> the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > >> would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > >> best! > >> > >> A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > >> these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > >> we have come to hate. > >> > >> f0rkz > >> > >> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > >> > >> > Umm, ok, umm > >> > > >> > Apologies for my emails on this. > >> > > >> > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > >> > each day. > >> > > >> > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > >> > like: > >> > > >> > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > >> > email would > >> > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > >> > > >> > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > >> > nothing > >> > to do with MyIS. > >> > ___ > >> > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
*DOH!* On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:55 AM, matan nov wrote: > Oh shit, I sent that to the wrong mailing list.Ignore please. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:55 PM, matan nov wrote: > > > All niggers must hang. > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > >> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > >> where you are coming from. > >> > >> My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > >> corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > >> into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > >> No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > >> day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > >> waste of bandwidth. > >> Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > >> linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > >> stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > >> the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > >> would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > >> best! > >> > >> A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > >> these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > >> we have come to hate. > >> > >> f0rkz > >> > >> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > >> > >> > Umm, ok, umm > >> > > >> > Apologies for my emails on this. > >> > > >> > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > >> > each day. > >> > > >> > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > >> > like: > >> > > >> > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > >> > email would > >> > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > >> > > >> > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > >> > nothing > >> > to do with MyIS. > >> > ___ > >> > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
All niggers must hang. On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, f0rkz wrote: > No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know > where you are coming from. > > My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into > corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way > into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. > No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the > day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a > waste of bandwidth. > Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If > linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be > stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write > the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we > would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the > best! > > A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in > these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists > we have come to hate. > > f0rkz > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Umm, ok, umm > > > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > > each day. > > > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > > like: > > > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > > email would > > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > > nothing > > to do with MyIS. > > ___ > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Oh shit, I sent that to the wrong mailing list.Ignore please. On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:55 PM, matan nov wrote: > All niggers must hang. > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, f0rkz wrote: > >> No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know >> where you are coming from. >> >> My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into >> corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way >> into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. >> No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the >> day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a >> waste of bandwidth. >> Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If >> linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be >> stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write >> the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we >> would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the >> best! >> >> A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in >> these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists >> we have come to hate. >> >> f0rkz >> >> On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: >> >> > Umm, ok, umm >> > >> > Apologies for my emails on this. >> > >> > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on >> > each day. >> > >> > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something >> > like: >> > >> > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers >> > email would >> > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" >> > >> > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm >> > nothing >> > to do with MyIS. >> > ___ >> > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
No worries mate. I know I am guilty of drunk calls/posts so I know where you are coming from. My beef is that I just feel like people try to back others into corners and beat them up like bullies. This way they buy their way into the srcds mailing list cool club and aren't flamed themselves. No wonder valve wants to shut the lists down. Honestly, I figure the day would have come already. Half the flames/posts on here are a waste of bandwidth. Honestly this is a very hostile environment and it shouldn't be. If linux discussion groups were structured like this, we would still be stuck in the days of Redhat 5. I am just glad we actually don't write the code for the server platform, nothing would get done. Instead, we would argue and make fun of each other over what version of gcc is the best! A more civil approach to things will really help get things done in these crap times. Then again, it wouldn't be the same mailing lists we have come to hate. f0rkz On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Umm, ok, umm > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on > each day. > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something > like: > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers > email would > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm > nothing > to do with MyIS. > ___ > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
I see you are using GMail. Kindly install the Mail Goggles labs app. 2009/4/14 Patrick Shelley > Umm, ok, umm > > Apologies for my emails on this. > > It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on each day. > > A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something like: > > "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers email would > be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" > > i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm nothing > to do with MyIS. > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- Sent from Olly's SEGA Game Gear ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Umm, ok, umm Apologies for my emails on this. It was a 4 day holiday over here in UK and i got badly wrecked on each day. A proper, sober reply to msleepers email would have been something like: "you'll have to ask Philip Bembridge why he thought a hlmappers email would be relevant to hlds as he forwarded it to hlds" i've got a really bad hangover if its any consolation, and btw i'm nothing to do with MyIS. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
eeek run away... they dont offer remote desktop on their dedicated servers. Not to mention vent, team speak or a website. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:01 PM, f0rkz wrote: > The face of myinternetservices.com! > > f0rkz > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 9:03 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > I reserve the right to say wtf i like to msleeper - and FYI Mr > > Freud, he is > > dumb, very dumb. > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Saul Rennison > >wrote: > > > >> msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that > >> you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy > >> devices used in his email. > >> > >> On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Im blaming Philip Bembridge! > >>> ___ > >>> 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
The face of myinternetservices.com! f0rkz On Apr 13, 2009, at 9:03 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > I reserve the right to say wtf i like to msleeper - and FYI Mr > Freud, he is > dumb, very dumb. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Saul Rennison >wrote: > >> msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that >> you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy >> devices used in his email. >> >> On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley >> wrote: >> >>> Im blaming Philip Bembridge! >>> ___ >>> 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Not really, at least a 'cat fight' would be worth following :p this is nonsense... Cat fight On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > I reserve the right to say wtf i like to msleeper - and FYI Mr Freud, he is > dumb, very dumb. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Saul Rennison >wrote: > > > msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that > > you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy > > devices used in his email. > > > > On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > Im blaming Philip Bembridge! > > > ___ > > > 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 ____________ From: Jake Skenna To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:12:19 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem." ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Cat fight On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > I reserve the right to say wtf i like to msleeper - and FYI Mr Freud, he is > dumb, very dumb. > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Saul Rennison >wrote: > > > msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that > > you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy > > devices used in his email. > > > > On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > Im blaming Philip Bembridge! > > > ___ > > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
I reserve the right to say wtf i like to msleeper - and FYI Mr Freud, he is dumb, very dumb. On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Saul Rennison wrote: > msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that > you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy > devices used in his email. > > On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Im blaming Philip Bembridge! > > ___ > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
msleeper's "relevence" question was rhetorical-- the irony is that you're calling him dumb when you didn't see the 5th grade literacy devices used in his email. On 13 Apr 2009, at 23:11, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Im blaming Philip Bembridge! > ___ > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Im blaming Philip Bembridge! ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
The Cabal process is certainly not a living thing here, or maybe it is. [FLASH] MjrNuT Arise from Flames and Ash, Behold Immortality www.flamesandash.com On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:38 PM, wrote: > Send hlds mailing list submissions to >hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >hlds-requ...@list.valvesoftware.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at >hlds-ow...@list.valvesoftware.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of hlds digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: "Writing the code was typically less than halfthe > problem." (msleeper) > 2. Re: "Writing the code was typically less than half the > problem." (Brent Veal) > 3. Re: "Writing the code was typically less than halfthe > problem." (Alec Sanger) > > > ---------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:32:58 -0400 > From: msleeper > Subject: Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the >problem." > To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list > > Message-ID: <1239658378.16373.9.ca...@svm.conepuppy.com.conepuppy.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Normally you'd be right but in this case, no. The article has nothing at > all to do with server administration. > > * The first paragraph is describing how before HL2, Valve's design > process was not close-knit like they are now. > * The second paragraph is describing how they fixed it when the > developers started working closely together. > * The third paragraph is the author whining that the SDK is too hard to > learn. > > I see nothing that has to do with server administration. At all. It was > posted here because whoever posted it thought it was "interesting". > Which it is. But what it's not is -relevent to the administration of > game servers-. > > > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
nothing against you, Pat, but I kind of agree with sleeper on this one. I personally don't like the guy much, but he does make a valid point. Thank you, Alec Sanger P: 248.941.3813 F: 313.286.8945 > From: mslee...@cyberwurx.com > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:32:58 -0400 > Subject: Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than halfthe > problem." > > Normally you'd be right but in this case, no. The article has nothing at > all to do with server administration. > > * The first paragraph is describing how before HL2, Valve's design > process was not close-knit like they are now. > * The second paragraph is describing how they fixed it when the > developers started working closely together. > * The third paragraph is the author whining that the SDK is too hard to > learn. > > I see nothing that has to do with server administration. At all. It was > posted here because whoever posted it thought it was "interesting". > Which it is. But what it's not is -relevent to the administration of > game servers-. > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 22:22 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > I dont reward msleeper in any way. > > > > Like i said, if he had read the entire email, he would have answered his own > > question. > > > > My money is on that he *did* read the entire email, and knows full well why > > it ended up on hlds, and that his "relevant to server administration" > > comment was just to wind others up. > > > > But to quote one of his catchphrases ... "i dont reward stupidity" > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:16 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > CLEVER > > > > > > f0rkz > > > > > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > > > Fork off > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > > > >> Inb4internet bully. > > > >> > > > >> Grow up. > > > >> > > > >> f0rkz > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > > > >>> > > > >>> Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > > > >>> answered > > > >>> your own fucking question. > > > >>> > > > >>> Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > > > >>> Looks like > > > >>> your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > > > >>> you are. > > > >>> > > > >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > >>>>> Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > > > >>>>> have > > > >>>> found > > > >>>>> out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > > > >>>>> but if > > > >>>>> you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > > > >>>>> happened. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > > >>>>>>> Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Phil > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra > >
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
And if you hadn't made a reply, it wouldnt currently be cluttering our mailboxes On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:32 PM, msleeper wrote: > Normally you'd be right but in this case, no. The article has nothing at > all to do with server administration. > > * The first paragraph is describing how before HL2, Valve's design > process was not close-knit like they are now. > * The second paragraph is describing how they fixed it when the > developers started working closely together. > * The third paragraph is the author whining that the SDK is too hard to > learn. > > I see nothing that has to do with server administration. At all. It was > posted here because whoever posted it thought it was "interesting". > Which it is. But what it's not is -relevent to the administration of > game servers-. > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 22:22 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > I dont reward msleeper in any way. > > > > Like i said, if he had read the entire email, he would have answered his > own > > question. > > > > My money is on that he *did* read the entire email, and knows full well > why > > it ended up on hlds, and that his "relevant to server administration" > > comment was just to wind others up. > > > > But to quote one of his catchphrases ... "i dont reward stupidity" > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:16 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > CLEVER > > > > > > f0rkz > > > > > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > > > Fork off > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > > > >> Inb4internet bully. > > > >> > > > >> Grow up. > > > >> > > > >> f0rkz > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > > > >>> > > > >>> Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > > > >>> answered > > > >>> your own fucking question. > > > >>> > > > >>> Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > > > >>> Looks like > > > >>> your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > > > >>> you are. > > > >>> > > > >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > > > > have > > > found > > > > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > > > > > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > > > > but if > > > > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > > > > happened. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper < > mslee...@cyberwurx.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > > >>> Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > >>> > > > >>> Phil > > > >>> > > > >>> 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > >>> > > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra > > > article > > > on > > > >> The > > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > > > [ > > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > > > Half-Life > > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > > > meaning > > > >> that > > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by > > > the > > > >> content > > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > > > effect, > > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly > glowing > > > lines > > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and > > > mysterious > > > >> glowing > > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters > > > were > > > >> exposed, > > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … > > > nothing. > > > >> After > > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. > > > Engineering > > > was > > > baffled. > > > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > > > designers > > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it > > > was > > > for. > > > >> The > > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations > > > would > > > >> cause the > > > beams to have very ugly-looking effec
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Normally you'd be right but in this case, no. The article has nothing at all to do with server administration. * The first paragraph is describing how before HL2, Valve's design process was not close-knit like they are now. * The second paragraph is describing how they fixed it when the developers started working closely together. * The third paragraph is the author whining that the SDK is too hard to learn. I see nothing that has to do with server administration. At all. It was posted here because whoever posted it thought it was "interesting". Which it is. But what it's not is -relevent to the administration of game servers-. On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 22:22 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > I dont reward msleeper in any way. > > Like i said, if he had read the entire email, he would have answered his own > question. > > My money is on that he *did* read the entire email, and knows full well why > it ended up on hlds, and that his "relevant to server administration" > comment was just to wind others up. > > But to quote one of his catchphrases ... "i dont reward stupidity" > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:16 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > CLEVER > > > > f0rkz > > > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > > > Fork off > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > > > >> Inb4internet bully. > > >> > > >> Grow up. > > >> > > >> f0rkz > > >> > > >> > > >> On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > >> > > >>> Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > > >>> > > >>> Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > > >>> answered > > >>> your own fucking question. > > >>> > > >>> Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > > >>> Looks like > > >>> your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > > >>> you are. > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > > > have > > found > > > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > > > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > > > but if > > > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > > > happened. > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > > wrote: > > > > > >> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > >>> Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > >>> > > >>> Phil > > >>> > > >>> 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > >>> > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra > > article > > on > > >> The > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > [ > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > > Half-Life > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > > meaning > > >> that > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by > > the > > >> content > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > > effect, > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing > > lines > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and > > mysterious > > >> glowing > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters > > were > > >> exposed, > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … > > nothing. > > >> After > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. > > Engineering > > was > > baffled. > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > > designers > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it > > was > > for. > > >> The > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations > > would > > >> cause the > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent > > textures > > >> to > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It > > became > > >> very > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work > > and > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely > > necessary > > to > > >> make > > the technology useful to the game. Writin
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
I dont reward msleeper in any way. Like i said, if he had read the entire email, he would have answered his own question. My money is on that he *did* read the entire email, and knows full well why it ended up on hlds, and that his "relevant to server administration" comment was just to wind others up. But to quote one of his catchphrases ... "i dont reward stupidity" On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:16 PM, f0rkz wrote: > CLEVER > > f0rkz > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Fork off > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > > > >> Inb4internet bully. > >> > >> Grow up. > >> > >> f0rkz > >> > >> > >> On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > >> > >>> Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > >>> > >>> Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > >>> answered > >>> your own fucking question. > >>> > >>> Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > >>> Looks like > >>> your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > >>> you are. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > >>> wrote: > >>> > If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > > have > found > > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > > but if > > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > > happened. > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > wrote: > > > >> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > >> > >> > >> On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > >>> Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > >>> > >>> Phil > >>> > >>> 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > >>> > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra > article > on > >> The > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > [ > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > Half-Life > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > meaning > >> that > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by > the > >> content > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > effect, > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing > lines > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and > mysterious > >> glowing > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters > were > >> exposed, > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … > nothing. > >> After > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. > Engineering > was > baffled. > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > designers > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it > was > for. > >> The > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations > would > >> cause the > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent > textures > >> to > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It > became > >> very > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work > and > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely > necessary > to > >> make > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was > typically > less > >> than > half the problem. > ] > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source > modding, > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we > want, > but > >> we > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve > it. > I'm > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my > maps > over > >> and > over again because I don't have the time for another full time > job > - > >> and > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm > only > >> posting > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to > get my > ideas > >> into > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about > the > >> complex >
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
CLEVER f0rkz On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Fork off > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > >> Inb4internet bully. >> >> Grow up. >> >> f0rkz >> >> >> On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: >> >>> Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. >>> >>> Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have >>> answered >>> your own fucking question. >>> >>> Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. >>> Looks like >>> your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick >>> you are. >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper >>> wrote: >>> If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > have found > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > but if > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > happened. > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper wrote: > >> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? >> >> >> On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: >>> Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge >>> I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article on >> The Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm [ No Good Deed Goes Unpunished Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to Half-Life freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," meaning >> that any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the >> content creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" effect, basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing lines between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious >> glowing beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were >> exposed, and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. >> After two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering was baffled. During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level designers knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was for. >> The parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would >> cause the beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent textures >> to apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It became >> very clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary to >> make the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically less >> than half the problem. ] It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, but >> we still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. I'm speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps over >> and over again because I don't have the time for another full time job - >> and that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only >> posting this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my ideas >> into maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the >> complex example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not decompiled maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or have >> to wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this drastically >> with the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would >> thank you Valve. ~Nate >>> ___ >>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >> please visit: >>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds >> >> >> _
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Fork off On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM, f0rkz wrote: > Inb4internet bully. > > Grow up. > > f0rkz > > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > > Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > > > > Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > > answered > > your own fucking question. > > > > Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > > Looks like > > your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > > you are. > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > > wrote: > > > >> If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > >> > >> > >> On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > >>> Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would > >>> have > >> found > >>> out why it ended up on the hlds. > >>> > >>> This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - > >>> but if > >>> you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what > >>> happened. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > >> wrote: > >>> > Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > > Phil > > > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > >> > >> I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra > >> article > >> on > The > >> Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > >> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > >> > >> [ > >> No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > >> > >> Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > >> Half-Life > >> freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > >> meaning > that > >> any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by > >> the > content > >> creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > >> effect, > >> basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing > >> lines > >> between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious > glowing > >> beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were > exposed, > >> and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … > >> nothing. > After > >> two months only one level designer had put it in a map. > >> Engineering > >> was > >> baffled. > >> > >> During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > >> designers > >> knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was > >> for. > The > >> parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations > >> would > cause the > >> beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent > >> textures > to > >> apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It > >> became > very > >> clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > >> integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely > >> necessary > >> to > make > >> the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically > >> less > than > >> half the problem. > >> ] > >> > >> It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > >> mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we > >> want, > >> but > we > >> still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. > >> I'm > >> speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps > >> over > and > >> over again because I don't have the time for another full time > >> job > >> - > and > >> that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only > posting > >> this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my > >> ideas > into > >> maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about > >> the > complex > >> example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not > >> decompiled > >> maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or > >> have > to > >> wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this > >> drastically > with > >> the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community > >> would > thank you > >> Valve. > >> > >> ~Nate > >> > >> > >> > > ___ > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
And this is why we can't have nice things. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 3:59 PM, msleeper wrote: > If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would have > found > > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - but if > > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what happened. > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > wrote: > > > > > Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > > > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article > on > > > The > > > > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > > > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > > > > > > > [ > > > > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > > > > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > Half-Life > > > > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > meaning > > > that > > > > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the > > > content > > > > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > effect, > > > > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing > lines > > > > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious > > > glowing > > > > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were > > > exposed, > > > > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. > > > After > > > > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering > was > > > > > baffled. > > > > > > > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > designers > > > > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was > for. > > > The > > > > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would > > > cause the > > > > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent > textures > > > to > > > > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It > became > > > very > > > > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > > > > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary > to > > > make > > > > > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically > less > > > than > > > > > half the problem. > > > > > ] > > > > > > > > > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > > > > > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, > but > > > we > > > > > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. > I'm > > > > > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps > over > > > and > > > > > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job > - > > > and > > > > > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only > > > posting > > > > > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my > ideas > > > into > > > > > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the > > > complex > > > > > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not > decompiled > > > > > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or > have > > > to > > > > > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this > drastically > > > with > > > > > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would > > > thank you > > > > > Valve. > > > > > > > > > > ~Nate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Inb4internet bully. Grow up. f0rkz On Apr 13, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. > > Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have > answered > your own fucking question. > > Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. > Looks like > your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick > you are. > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper > wrote: > >> If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. >> >> >> On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: >>> Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would >>> have >> found >>> out why it ended up on the hlds. >>> >>> This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - >>> but if >>> you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what >>> happened. >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper >> wrote: >>> Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > Phil > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > >> >> I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra >> article >> on The >> Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at >> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm >> >> [ >> No Good Deed Goes Unpunished >> >> Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to >> Half-Life >> freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," >> meaning that >> any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by >> the content >> creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" >> effect, >> basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing >> lines >> between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious glowing >> beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were exposed, >> and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … >> nothing. After >> two months only one level designer had put it in a map. >> Engineering >> was >> baffled. >> >> During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level >> designers >> knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was >> for. The >> parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations >> would cause the >> beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent >> textures to >> apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It >> became very >> clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and >> integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely >> necessary >> to make >> the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically >> less than >> half the problem. >> ] >> >> It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, >> mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we >> want, >> but we >> still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. >> I'm >> speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps >> over and >> over again because I don't have the time for another full time >> job >> - and >> that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only posting >> this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my >> ideas into >> maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about >> the complex >> example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not >> decompiled >> maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or >> have to >> wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this >> drastically with >> the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community >> would thank you >> Valve. >> >> ~Nate >> >> >> > ___ > 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 >> arc
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Its a pity you dont care enough about being a complete tosser. Like i said, twat, if you'd have read the whole email you'd have answered your own fucking question. Nice to see your still plumbing the depths of your own stupidity. Looks like your still coming up with fresh ways to show everyone what a prick you are. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, msleeper wrote: > If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would have > found > > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - but if > > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what happened. > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper > wrote: > > > > > Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > > > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article > on > > > The > > > > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > > > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > > > > > > > [ > > > > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > > > > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to > Half-Life > > > > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," > meaning > > > that > > > > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the > > > content > > > > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" > effect, > > > > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing > lines > > > > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious > > > glowing > > > > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were > > > exposed, > > > > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. > > > After > > > > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering > was > > > > > baffled. > > > > > > > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level > designers > > > > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was > for. > > > The > > > > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would > > > cause the > > > > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent > textures > > > to > > > > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It > became > > > very > > > > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > > > > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary > to > > > make > > > > > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically > less > > > than > > > > > half the problem. > > > > > ] > > > > > > > > > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > > > > > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, > but > > > we > > > > > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. > I'm > > > > > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps > over > > > and > > > > > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job > - > > > and > > > > > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only > > > posting > > > > > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my > ideas > > > into > > > > > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the > > > complex > > > > > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not > decompiled > > > > > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or > have > > > to > > > > > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this > drastically > > > with > > > > > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would > > > thank you > > > > > Valve. > > > > > > > > > > ~Nate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > 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 >
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
If I cared about the hlmappers list I'd subscribe there. On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 21:47 +0100, Patrick Shelley wrote: > Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would have found > out why it ended up on the hlds. > > This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - but if > you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what happened. > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper wrote: > > > Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > > > > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > > > > > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article on > > The > > > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > > > > > [ > > > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to Half-Life > > > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," meaning > > that > > > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the > > content > > > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" effect, > > > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing lines > > > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious > > glowing > > > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were > > exposed, > > > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. > > After > > > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering was > > > > baffled. > > > > > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level designers > > > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was for. > > The > > > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would > > cause the > > > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent textures > > to > > > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It became > > very > > > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > > > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary to > > make > > > > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically less > > than > > > > half the problem. > > > > ] > > > > > > > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > > > > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, but > > we > > > > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. I'm > > > > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps over > > and > > > > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job - > > and > > > > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only > > posting > > > > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my ideas > > into > > > > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the > > complex > > > > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not decompiled > > > > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or have > > to > > > > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this drastically > > with > > > > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would > > thank you > > > > Valve. > > > > > > > > ~Nate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Get a grip you twat - read the whole fucking email and you would have found out why it ended up on the hlds. This is hlmappers email and someone decided to post it on hlds - but if you'd have spared 1 ounze of common sense you'd have read what happened. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 PM, msleeper wrote: > Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? > > > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > > > Phil > > > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article on > The > > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > > > [ > > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to Half-Life > > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," meaning > that > > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the > content > > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" effect, > > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing lines > > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious > glowing > > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were > exposed, > > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. > After > > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering was > > > baffled. > > > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level designers > > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was for. > The > > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would > cause the > > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent textures > to > > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It became > very > > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary to > make > > > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically less > than > > > half the problem. > > > ] > > > > > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > > > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, but > we > > > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. I'm > > > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps over > and > > > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job - > and > > > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only > posting > > > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my ideas > into > > > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the > complex > > > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not decompiled > > > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or have > to > > > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this drastically > with > > > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would > thank you > > > Valve. > > > > > > ~Nate > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > 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
Re: [hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Cool article but this has what to do with server administration? On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 09:47 +0100, Philip Bembridge wrote: > Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) > > Phil > > 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > > > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article on The > > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > > > [ > > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to Half-Life > > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," meaning that > > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the content > > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" effect, > > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing lines > > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious glowing > > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were exposed, > > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. After > > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering was > > baffled. > > > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level designers > > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was for. The > > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would cause the > > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent textures to > > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It became very > > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary to make > > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically less than > > half the problem. > > ] > > > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, but we > > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. I'm > > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps over and > > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job - and > > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only posting > > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my ideas into > > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the complex > > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not decompiled > > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or have to > > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this drastically with > > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would thank you > > Valve. > > > > ~Nate > > > > > > > ___ > 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
[hlds] "Writing the code was typically less than half the problem."
Interesting post on the HLmappers mailing list :-) Phil 2009/4/5 Nathan Voge > > I just thought I would throw up this quote from a Gamasutra article on The > Cabal: Valve’s Design Process For Creating Half-Life found at > http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991210/birdwell_01.htm > > [ > No Good Deed Goes Unpunished > > Until the Cabal process got underway, technology was added to Half-Life > freely. It was assumed that "if we build it, they will come," meaning that > any new technology would just naturally find a creative use by the content > creation folks. A prime example of this fallacy was our "beam" effect, > basically a technique for doing highly tunable squiggly glowing lines > between two points; stuff like lightning, lasers, and mysterious glowing > beams of energy. It was added to the engine, the parameters were exposed, > and an e-mail was sent out explaining it. The result was … nothing. After > two months only one level designer had put it in a map. Engineering was > baffled. > > During the Cabal process, we realized that although the level designers > knew of the feature, they really had no clear idea of what it was for. The > parameters were all very cryptic, and the wrong combinations would cause the > beams to have very ugly-looking effects. There were no decent textures to > apply to them, and setting them up was a bit of a mystery. It became very > clear the technology itself was only a small part of the work and > integration, training, and follow-through were absolutely necessary to make > the technology useful to the game. Writing the code was typically less than > half the problem. > ] > > It still seems that this problem is still around Source modding, > mapping,... The technology is there to do almost anything we want, but we > still have to search and trial and error for hours to achieve it. I'm > speaking as someone who has left and returned to many of my maps over and > over again because I don't have the time for another full time job - and > that is what it currently takes to make sense of it all. I'm only posting > this because the L4D SDK is on the horizon and I'd love to get my ideas into > maps without having to reverse engineer maps (I talk here about the complex > example maps that are sometimes included in the SDKs and not decompiled > maps), or trial and error (guess) what entities work together, or have to > wait/search for community tutorials. Please improve this drastically with > the next SDK release. I know I and the rest of the community would thank you > Valve. > > ~Nate > > > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
