BAM Development (see page 25)

[Hawt]

Private should be private. Not "the download is private but that's it"

[Ad Bot]

[IdeTheBird]

why quote someone and give no input? it's handicapped and you aren't changing anything besides upping your post count.

[Ipquarx]

why quote someone and give no input? it's handicapped and you aren't changing anything besides upping your post count.

They're giving input: their opinion. It just happens to be the same as someone elses opinion. That's not a bad thing. And guess what? My opinion's the same too, so here we go:

Private should be private. Not "the download is private but that's it"

[IdeTheBird]

They're giving input: their opinion. It just happens to be the same as someone elses opinion. That's not a bad thing. And guess what? My opinion's the same too, so here we go:

Pretty handicapped to just quote someone when it's already been said, I'm pretty sure whoever is reading gets the point.

[Port]

Will you put an id lookup thing

The BAM website will include tons of searchable statistics, including BLIDs.

[Fluff-is-back]

The BAM website will include tons of searchable statistics, including BLIDs.

Yey! And a nice friendly api?

[Port]

Yey! And a nice friendly api?

REST-friendly endpoints with JSON responses (and maybe XML, depends).

[Fluff-is-back]

REST-friendly endpoints with JSON responses (and maybe XML, depends).

I am now a true bam-liever!

[Port]

I am now a true bam-liever!

That was terrible.

[Crispy_]

Private should be private. Not "the download is private but that's it"

That doesn't really work when everyone already knows about those crappy private add-ons that only their selective group can have. Allowing people to see the page would do nothing more than hosting a server with that add-on activated.

[$trinick]

That's why most people host passworded servers when they are beta testing their (private for the time being) add-ons. So handicaps don't come in and forget everything up. Allowing people to see the page would probably be bad for everyone-- developers wouldn't fill out information about the Add-On and people would be angry that they can access an add-on's page but not download it.

[Crispy_]

That's why most people host passworded servers when they are beta testing their (private for the time being) add-ons. So handicaps don't come in and forget everything up. Allowing people to see the page would probably be bad for everyone-- developers wouldn't fill out information about the Add-On and people would be angry that they can access an add-on's page but not download it.

I'm referring to private add-ons that are private so your ego would be boosted. Not beta add-ons.

[Port]

I'm referring to private add-ons that are private so your ego would be boosted. Not beta add-ons.

The point of an add-on being private is not boosting your ego. If the only reason you want support for private add-ons is boosting your ego then you can go look for another service (oh wait).

[Chrono]

I'm referring to private add-ons that are private so your ego would be boosted. Not beta add-ons.

There's only few kinds of add-ons I've ever seen kept private.
1. Because Badspot failbins it.
2. Because the gamemode requires a single higher populated server to be of any entertainment.
3. They aren't done yet.
4. It's not user friendly. It requires extensive effort to become functional in a server beyond installation.
5. It's abusable in common server conditions.
6. It stopped working and due to an update, is irreparable.

[$trinick]

I'm referring to private add-ons that are private so your ego would be boosted. Not beta add-ons.

So you suggest that BAM implements two private add-on systems that work exactly the same way except that one showcases your add-on to the public and the other one doesn't? Even in a perfect world that would be absurd, and this world isn't perfect so nobody would use the private add-on system and everyone would use the beta add-on system.