No, you didn't elaborate on people asking you in the thread, so I'm going to keep my research to myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
That, and a lot more.
I have a lot of concerns in regards to your recent actions, but I don't want to give you ideas what to do next, as your community already gets a fallout from that. I won't argue about that in my own thread, since it's not its purpose.
Comment has been collapsed.
What? I answered multiple questions about it, in the reply to that comment itself. And it was obvious the reason why I changed it: to enforce that giveaway descriptions are shown.
You're slandering my character by saying that I engage in suspicious behavior with my extension. And I assume you're doing that in bad faith, to get people to use your script instead of mine. If there's one thing that I've always been is transparent with my users, which is why even the source codes for my server and my Google Web App are available on GitHub. If you're going to accuse me of suspicious behavior, when I've never intentionally added any malicious code to the extension, then please elaborate on it, because if there's currently any malicious code in the extension, then I want to remove it.
Comment has been collapsed.
yay drama :popcorn:
btw i would really like to see you two as professionals..
so please dont use expressions like "highly suspicious behaviour" if there isnt any proof of like.. security or privacy issues..
elseway someone may get that impression :) ty
Comment has been collapsed.
Removing features, purging GitHub history in order to deter any eventual reverts, going close-source, putting more features under mandatory server tracking, including those that worked perfectly fine before, pushing extensions as opposed to userscript and making it impossible to downgrade them are just a few of those. Those are facts, not impressions.
I know what will happen next, but I won't give ideas. I'm just going to repeat what I said in the OP and recommend userscript version. I prefer people to assume that it's all made-up bluff rather than causing a fallout and then saying "I told you", life taught me that once.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get what you want to point out and understand it.. and even tough i wont approve any of those changes, they have basically nothing to do with the source code. So its the >developers behavior< that is suspicious, not the code itself (afaik - never inspected it as i dont use it)
no offense to either of you :)
/e:
btw thank you for doing the work of forking it for everyone. its not like you had to do it for more ppl than just yourself...
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, it literally says so in the original post :)
as opposed to being on gsrafael01's mercy and highly suspicious behaviour
Comment has been collapsed.
I did not mean the source code of the project itself, but the project lead behind that project, you're right. I'll ensure to correct that so nobody gets the wrong idea (although I can no longer state anything about the current code since it's closed-source starting from v8.3.11 onwards).
Comment has been collapsed.
gsrafael did that for a while, eventually decided to go back open-source (after having 2 releases closed-source). The alone fact that he decided for this just because I decided to fork the project, also speaks for itself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Those have nothing to do with suspicious activity in the extension code. The GitHub history is back, so that point isn't valid. I'm going closed-source because of you, so that point isn't valid. What does "mandatory server tracking" even means? There are no features that require my server. If you use Game Categories, you can deny permission to my server and the feature will still work fine. I was very clear when I made the decision to stop working on the userscript on why I did it, some of the reasons being better performance and more freedom to implement some options suggested by some users (like the option to make a SteamGifts tab active when opening the browser). It's not impossible to downgrade, you just have to build the old versions yourself. And Chrome already does not offer old versions, so that point isn't valid.
You know nothing, Jon Snow Archi.
Comment has been collapsed.
Initially I thought I'd be fine just creating an ad-block filter for those popups, but after seeing this thread I really don't want to use original extension. What gsrafael01 said there goes against my beliefs as a software engineer and against open source spirit in general, as JustArchi already mentioned earlier in his post.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is the exact reason for me forking the project. It's not just about some feature that I could hack myself if I wanted, it goes against the OSS project spirit with a lot of concerns that I can no longer ignore, even if I'm going to be the only one raising them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can't find the discord link. Have you posted it somewhere?
Comment has been collapsed.
Since gsrafael01 reconsidered his decision, I can set up automation that will merge and release my own fork versions on each ESGST update so nobody from the extension team will be hurt and receive all updates and bugfixes.
Let me know if there is any interest in this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Time to try new things and find out where Archi’s 🍿 is :bite:
Comment has been collapsed.
I dunno what all the drama is about. And I don't have energy to care 😎I just understand you restored something that should never have been messed with. Thanks Archi 👍
Mandatory pop-ups is always a bad thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
So, since the GitHub history is back, the extension will remain open-source, and the old releases are being restored, you have no reason to keep "highly suspicious activity" in the post.
Comment has been collapsed.
You didn't resolve all of my concerns from above, I stick with what I said, regardless whether you agree with me or not. Let users decide who is right.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's hard to resolve a concern I don't know because you refused to elaborate. I asked what "mandatory server tracking" is, you didn't answer. How is moving from the userscript to the extension a suspicious activity? Those are the only 2 concerns you bring up that I haven't resolved. If there are more, please enlighten me.
And yes, let users decide what they want to do, but accusing me of suspicious activity is just low, and you don't need to do that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not going to elaborate on loss of trust due to your actions done recently. You can't magically undo last week and act like nothing happened. Even if you resolved all of my problems then I'm still not going to magically close the fork and call it a day, you acted entirely irrational and your actions still go against my belief, as precisely stated here. Your recent actions are the result of highly suspicious activity, and they are entirely independent of what you decided to do now. I have valid concerns in regards to what you're going to do with the extension next, which is why I forked the project, kept using old userscript version and I don't need to worry about decisions you make tomorrow, while evaluating to what degree I'll support the fork myself. I have a peace of mind now, which is a very important matter to me, as I do not use software made by people I do not trust.
I asked you kindly, you refused, do not be shocked I refuse to cooperate with you now. If you believe I'm shaming you for no reason, create a ticket and report the thread to SG staff and let them decide. I don't need to explain my reasoning to you.
Comment has been collapsed.
Your recent actions are the result of highly suspicious activity
No, they aren't. They're the result of me lashing out at the over-the-top complaints I was getting, to which I've already apologized for.
I have valid concerns in regards to what you're going to do with the extension next
I'm not even sure what this means. The code for the extension is open, you can see exactly what I'm doing with the extension. If you're referring to my comment about using my server to refuse connection to older versions, I'm not going to implement that. And I don't even know how that would be possible. It's just something I said in the heat of the moment because I was angry.
The decisions I make in the extension are always with the website's interest at heart. Which is why I made the decision to limit requests to SteamGifts to 2 per second for some features, because not having that limit would lead to a negative impact on the website. And it's the same with the descriptions, I believe not having them being mandatory leads to a negative impact on the website. And this is a position that I've always held. It was initially mandatory, then optional due to pressure, then mandatory again, then optional again due to pressure, then mandatory again, then optional once more due to pressure, and now mandatory again. It's not like it was always optional and I just flip-flopped on it overnight.
I didn't refuse. I told you I would be glad to bring the custom filters back if I could block generic filters like .* and .+, which is what I did. That wouldn't even impact you, since I'm pretty sure you don't even use those filters, yet you decided to stay salty about it.
I tried to make amends, again and again, just like I'm doing now. If you won't accept them, then there's nothing I can do, but again, I ask that you do not accuse me of "highly suspicious activity", because it's not what I do, and the 2+ years I've been maintaining this extension should weigh more than the stupid things I did this week. I don't understand why you keep making things so difficult.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't refuse. I told you I would be glad to bring the custom filters back if I could block generic filters like .* and .+, which is what I did. That wouldn't even impact you, since I'm pretty sure you don't even use those filters, yet you decided to stay salty about it.
You took the freedom of users for your own personal agenda and point of view, which is completely against the OSS spirit regardless how many times you gonna say that it's fine.
I tried to make amends, again and again, just like I'm doing now. If you won't accept them, then there's nothing I can do, but again, I ask that you do not accuse me of "highly suspicious activity", because it's not what I do, and the 2+ years I've been maintaining this extension should weigh more than the stupid things I did this week. I don't understand why you keep making things so difficult.
I do not make it difficult, I asked you to think it through, and you openly stated your stance which is complete opposite of mine. I no longer trust you as a developer, and you should know better that trust is built within years and can be lost in a single week. I do not mind what other people think, whether they agree with me or you, and whether they have reasoning or not. I'm not going into argument here, it's clear as day that you do not listen to your users, pushing irrational features that do not contribute anything good to the project or SG for this matter, and you can't see a problem to the point I had to make a fork and people had to start using it so you do.
Nothing you say is going to change the above, no action you do now will change the course of actions you took, you're free to minimize the damage and ensure your community that you're trustworthy person, but that still has nothing to do with my opinion posted in this thread that is based on valid decisions you took in the past, which resulted in me forking the project for my own usage, and evaluating which way it's going to take. You're not going to change my opinion now, deal with it.
You definitely considered forking as something entirely irrelevant to you, as you posted previously to another user, and you didn't listen to any arguments posted by anybody. The flip-flopping you refer to only shows how insecure it is to trust you on making the right call, since you can't even evaluate over several months the result of the feature being available or not. I made my decision and as opposed to you, I'm not going to go ahead and change my mind the next minute, regardless how many amends you're going to do. I don't have a single reason to use official version anymore, and I won't, because it doesn't just no longer satisfy my usage, but I don't trust you as a project lead anymore. Even if you reverted the first, you're not going to revert the second. This is on top of the other changes I plan to implement in the future after careful code review, including rate limits and other artificial blockers you put, if the users come up with valid reasoning for them. But that is thankfully my call at this point.
Comment has been collapsed.
Again, that has nothing to do with OSS spirit. A software being OSS doesn't mean it can't have restrictions.
I no longer trust you as a developer
Fine, but don't imply to other people that I'm untrustworthy just because you no longer trust me.
it's clear as day that you do not listen to your users,
Except 95% of the extension was made by me listening to my users and implementing their suggestions. I listened to you, didn't I? When you suggested all of those enhancements to Game Categories? And we don't have the numbers on who disagrees with this change, less than 20 people have uninstalled the extension according to my stats, so I'm going to assume the majority doesn't care about mandatory descriptions, but that the minority is loud.
It's not an irrational feature. If you don't like it, say so, but do not claim it is irrational when there have been many arguments raised in favor of it, which you just seem to ignore.
you didn't listen to any arguments posted by anybody
Why do only arguments on your side count? This is a 2-side issue.
The flip-flopping you refer to only shows how insecure it is to trust you on making the right call
Yeah, on something as small as a giveaway description that has nothing to do with security. On every other issue that was actually important I've been firm.
since you can't even evaluate over several months the result of the feature being available or not
It never made it to months, because I always caved to the pressure and reversed it in a couple days.
I'm not going to go ahead and change my mind the next minute
I'm not asking you to change your mind on anything, but simply to remove your accusation that I engage in "highly suspicious activity" from the post. That's all. Once you do that, I'll move on.
And just so you know, the rate limits were requested by cg, because users were stressing the server too much with the extension. They're not artificial blockers, but serious blockers that prevent serious negative impact on the website. If you don't care about that, then it shows that you clearly don't care about SteamGifts, which makes you not a trustworthy person as project lead.
I ask you once again, to remove "highly suspicious activity" from your post. You have nothing to gain from it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I ask you once again, to remove "highly suspicious activity" from your post. You have nothing to gain from it.
I'm not gaining anything from it, I'm stating my opinion on your person based on your actions, and I already told you that you're not going to police that out. The thread directly states "due to MY concerns", and I never said those have to be concerns of the majority. In fact, I can openly state that those are concerns of minority, because majority doesn't care. Still, if you have a problem with that, contact with SG support, but we both know that you're on the losing side here.
less than 20 people have uninstalled the extension according to my stats, so I'm going to assume the majority doesn't care about mandatory descriptions
Then why are you here, why are you arguing and trying to act like nothing happened, and the best part, why did you add filtering back if those people are so irrelevant? Look, if people will want to use your version and ignore my concerns then they're more than welcome to do so, I'm not forcing anybody to my opinion, I'm not fighting for it, and I couldn't care less whether other people will have the same view or whether I'm going to be alone with those concerns. I repeat, if the issue doesn't exist in your opinion, then ignore it and move on, and if you acknowledge the issue, then don't act like I'm shaming you for no reason, because I elaborated on why I do, and just because you don't agree with my reasoning doesn't make it invalid, regardless how many times you gonna repeat yourself.
As opposed to you, I don't tell anybody what they should think, what features they're allowed to use and what version they should have installed, I let people choose, and if they choose that my point of view is irrational and entirely made-up, then I don't know why you're wasting your time on me. You don't have any influence over my opinion, my statements or my ESGST fork, while I have enough reasoning to claim what I think of your recent actions and let people make conclusions. You can call it accusation without basis as much as you like and you're still not going to achieve anything with that.
I'm ending it here because this discussion is going to nowhere. You're more than welcome to reply to everybody about everything you wish, I'm going to focus on the project I forked and the "20 people" that will be using it.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you have never told people that they should use the latest version of ASF instead of some antique one? :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you see me removing ASF versions and making it extraordinary difficult to use any of the past ones?
You can use ASF v0.1 if you want to and nobody is going to stop you. I have all the rights in the world to claim what I support and what are mine recommendations, but I'm never going to actively shutdown older versions just because I don't agree with people using them. ASF never forced anybody to anything, and it's my primary example of how OSS project should be run. I tell you what you should run if you want support offered by me and the community, but I never force you to anything and as long as you do not bother anybody with your problems, you can use v0.1 for what I care. In fact, if it makes you happier then I'd even recommend you to do so.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never claimed anything of the sort. Should implies it's not mandatory in any way, just recommended, so the opposite is also true, a recommendation tells people what they should use. It has nothing to do with what they could or must use or not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, keep using that argument when I've already restored the versions.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm stating my opinion
It's not an opinion, it's an accusation. You could've just said that you made your own forked because you disagreed with my decisions, without claiming that I engage in "highly suspicious activity". You turned it into personal attack with that. And no, we both don't know what.
why did you add filtering back if those people are so irrelevant
Because I listen to my users. ;)
As opposed to you, I don't tell anybody what they should think, what features they're allowed to use and what version they should have installed
And yet again you attack my character without any basis. I've never told anybody what they should think. I made it clear that this was my decision and that the people who were annoyed by it could find other ways to achieve what they wanted. I also never told anybody what features they're allowed to use, ESGST has hundreds of features and options, all because of user feedback. And neither did I ever tell anybody what version they should have installed. By design, Google Chrome users can only have the latest version installed, because Chrome does not offer old versions. When I deleted the old releases from GitHub, again, I was lashing out, and my head was not in the right place, which I've already apologized for and restored the releases. It's unfair for you to define me by those things, when I've already took responsibility for it and apologized, and worked to ensure that I could undo the damage.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a made up problem. I simply removed the option to show giveaway descriptions when using Enter / Leave Giveaway Button, making it mandatory, and people started acting like the sky was falling down.
Comment has been collapsed.
If it's a made-up problem then I can't understand why you're wasting time here replying to it if you have at least a few dozen of real problems to resolve. Let us handle our made-up problems ourselves, thanks.
Comment has been collapsed.
I reply to whatever I want to reply, stop trying to police what can be talked about in this thread. Feels a bit ironic.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not policing anything, you're more than welcome to post here as much as you like, and the irony is the strongest with the person trying to police other one to remove information he's not comfortable with, I wonder who that could be.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let us handle our made-up problems ourselves, thanks.
Begs to differ.
It's not information, it's accusation, without basis.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like claiming someone is knowingly making false claims just because you disagree with them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I just pointed out you were making a false equivalency. Whether you were knowingly doing so is not my problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, you falsely claimed that a similarity is an equivalency which I pointed out to you several times. Whether you don't understand the difference between those 2 or not is your problem. If I never claimed any equivalency, how can it be false?
Comment has been collapsed.
Whether you were knowingly doing so is not my problem.
Are we seriously still arguing over this? Seriously?
Comment has been collapsed.
As long as you still make false claims about me we are, it's simple as that. I said there is a similarity, then you wasted several messages telling me that I said there is an equivalency which I disproved time and time again. If we can agree that I never said anything about things being equal we can finally stop this, all up to you as it always was.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't make any claims about you, I just said that you made a false equivalency. Whether you intended to make it or not, is, like I said, not my problem. The way you worded it in your post is the definition of equivalency.
Comment has been collapsed.
So we are still arguing about this, great. You claimed that I made a false equivalency knowingly. "I never made any claims about you, I just said things about you", do you even get how silly that argument sounds? You still don't understand how equivalency and similarity are different do you?
Equivalence implies being equal.
Similarity implies being partially equal.
So where in my post did I say things are exactly the same and what are those things? You should start with explaining this instead of only repeating "False equivalency" like a broken parrot with no logic.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you're arguing with your own definitions of words instead of the ones that literally are in a dictionary?
Comment has been collapsed.
No, the ones that are generally used by people. Have you never heard the term "false equivalency" being said when someone compares two things that are unfairly compared? Try watching a politics debate between liberals and conservatives and you'll most likely hear that term.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope, I don't follow politics, especially US which has nothing to do with me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
You're the one who's literally doing that, using a logical fallacy trying to prove me wrong when I'm not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks Archi, not all heroes wear capes. (At least I think you don't wear one, do you?)
Comment has been collapsed.
This is weird.
I have no problem with giveaway descriptions popping up for giveaways I enter.
It's cool that ESGST is open source, allowing you to fork it. It's weird to imply that gsrafael is being untrustworthy now over the change, especially when it's still open source.
The extension version performs much better than the script version on my very old computer, so I prefer that one.
Good luck with the fork, though I have no reason to apply it myself. I'm sure many other users feel differently about the change, and it's cool of you to host the fork that reverts it.
[edit] Okay, I have read up a bit more and yeah, there were some poor reactionary choices made. I get it now, your reasoning. Hopefully things cool down, and it seems like they have, but I understand your weirdness now. [/edit]
Comment has been collapsed.
I never claimed that rafael is being not trustworthy over the change, the lack of trust came out of at least 7 different concerns I stated above, and you listed just one of them.
But as opposed to one person who tells you what you should think, I acknowledge that my concerns are minority and that majority doesn't care about threats of shutting down server for old versions, making it impossible to downgrade, pushing extension over the userscript, purging GitHub history and all old releases, and finally making a change that doesn't bring anything positive to the community. I also have concerns over potential security escalation in regards to extension that has access to whole process (as opposed to userscript which has website scope), but I'm not throwing accusations of what can happen, only stating what has already happened.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, missed a bunch of that when I was on the ESGST thread yesterday. Have read up, and precautionary forking was a good choice. Hopefully the future bears it out as unnecessary, but in the heat of the moment, I don't blame you.
Comment has been collapsed.
Seems that my action pushed rafael on the right track to make up for the damage he caused, which is very good for the endusers, but still I have my doubts over the whole situation. Still, users are gaining from this, and that was my main objective of the whole fiasco, so I've succeeded in that.
Comment has been collapsed.
And I thank you for that, but when you push someone on the right track you don't continue to slander them over stupid things they did in the heat of the moment.
Comment has been collapsed.
Again, those were stupid reactionary choices, as put by godprobe, that I would not have done if I could go back. And choices that I've already apologized for and reverted the damage.
And again, I didn't tell anyone what they should think. And again, the "threat" of shutting down the server was an empty threat that I made in a moment of anger. A threat that I don't even know how to make happen and have no intention of pursuing. And again, I already took steps to allow users to downgrade again. And again, pushing the extension over the userscript is not a suspicious activity, but an improvement because of the better performance. And again, "purging" the GitHub history is a reversible action, which I reversed. And again, the change does bring something positive to the community, no matter how many times you continue to ignore that. And I went ouf of my way to implement a way to let users control the permissions that the extension has to give them more control over it. And not once in the whole lifetime of the extension did I ever give users any reason to believe that I would ever do something malicious with the privileges of the extension. Whenever someone asked me what a permission was for, I explained it for them. And obviously, the source code has always been available for people to see that there's nothing malicious in it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, I'm still waiting on your answer on what "mandatory server tracking" is. As well as what you have to say about rate limits considering that they were requested by cg. You just dodged those points, I wonder why.
Comment has been collapsed.
Couldn't we all agree at this point that nothing serious happened and drop the drama? There is no way such argues would ever benefit the community.
Comment has been collapsed.
For me personally i see only 2 problems:
-
Categories/Tags no longer work
Would it be possible to integrate SG Game Tags into this version instead?
Ruphine stated the script is open to use and modify for anyone at this point. -
Loading buttons integrated by ESGST is much slower on this version
Is this even fixable?
Comment has been collapsed.
I expect those two to become community projects where I'm still going to accept and review pull requests, but without any work of my own, except compatibility-related, unless another maintainer shows up that will like to continue where I left.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks to gsrafael and his stance on userscript, open-source and partially reverting the initial filters change, I'm happy to announce that userscript version of v8.3.12 is now available, with appropriate change in regards to custom filters. I've reviewed the code in the meantime and while I have a few other places I'd like to improve upon (in regards to artificial limits), I believe that latest version of the source code is free of malicious intent. This is why I'm no longer recommending to stick to the old version, and instead happily use the latest one with the appropriate changes applied.
I've also rewrote the OP to further clarify the goal of the project, as well as its current state.
Have fun.
Comment has been collapsed.
Did you manage to get new blacklists from this, if there has been huge outcry against hiding descriptions before? Or can we assume it's the same limited group of people who already blacklisted you for ASF so the effect would be minimal?
Comment has been collapsed.
Check for yourself, if you ask me I even gained a few new whitelists, even though I couldn't care less about them and I'd still do what I'm doing even if the proportions would be reversed. No amount of BLs will stop me from having my own opinion and helping others.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know you don't care about them, I was purely curious since I don't seem to be able to gain more at any kind of fast rate any more so my theory is that it's always the same people triggering about everything. 160+ seems to match that theory.
Comment has been collapsed.
Where do I turn off popup comments when I enter giveaways?
Comment has been collapsed.
The giveaway description filters are less restrictive. This means that you can use a filter such as .* in order to restore old no-popup giveaway enter button. In original ESGST, this filter is made illegal (not effective).
Comment has been collapsed.
Changing settings is not working for me atm.it doesnt accept my settings. still same as default.Thats new. there was not problem like this before.i deleted all data.Now giveaway button gone too.Any suggestion?
Comment has been collapsed.
If you configure tampermonkey to do it automatically for you, no.
Comment has been collapsed.
For all ESGST matters, you should reach gsrafel in his original thread once you confirm that your matter is relevant to the equivalent version of ESGST.
Comment has been collapsed.
hi, just tried the userscript - works nicely for what i'd use it, also appreciate it being a script instead of an add on 👍
would you perhaps know why the "Have/Wan't Checker" * feature in ST is being held since the steam wish-list change or api update (i'd presume) - this change occurred i think around the time the wish-list format changed dec 2018? or even before that ... not sure anymore
how it used to work: compared the games in the want section of the trade thread + games on the users wish-list in steam
(listing the game names and matching it up with your have list)
how it works now: compares the games in the want section of the trade thread + games on the users wish-list in steam
(only listing them as game ID's therefore incapable of matching them to your have list) ²
² the latter of which would cause you to have 0 matchups unless you had exported/copy-pasted
and listed all of your "have games" as ID's (like "638970" instead of yakuza 0)
edit: before even posting this just noticed the feature isn't listed anymore in ESGST, so "did it dieded?"
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, no clue, as stated in the OP, you should ask gsrafael about that. This is ESGST matter, not A-ESGST. I appreciate the kind words in the first sentence though.
Comment has been collapsed.
appreciate the reply - will inquire about it there
Comment has been collapsed.
I did something dumb and had to remove add-ons. Can someone tell me where are the settings I can enter/leave giveaways on the home page?
Comment has been collapsed.
For all ESGST matters, you should reach gsrafel in his original thread once you confirm that your matter is relevant to the equivalent version of ESGST.
Comment has been collapsed.
.* for filtering all descriptions works as described. No more pop-ups. Thank you!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you JustArchi, you saved me many useless clicks per day.
Comment has been collapsed.
Due to how I was treated by SG staff and suspended afterwards, without any relevant answer to my open ticket, I've decided that I'm cutting my entire SG discussions activity and closing all the threads that I maintain, as I refuse to add any community value to the shithole that this place has become.
In regards to this thread, I intend to keep suppporting A-ESGST as stated in the OP, and I've opened GitHub issues for any questions, issues and discussion that would otherwise take place here, the project development will also continue as before. If there is a person that would like to resurrect the thread and maintain it himself, I don't have anything against and you're more than welcome to do so.
Thanks for your support and I'm sad that I was treated like a dog shit by moderators of this place. Since I'm unable to change anything on my own, I'm switching the focus to places where I can, in particular my projects and other communities that care about their members. SG is the last place that does.
Comment has been collapsed.
A-ESGST
Due to my open concerns in regards to ESGST project started by gsrafael01 and his recent actions, mainly openly going against the community spirit, I've decided to fork the project in order to apply modifications for my usage (reverting changes I do not agree with), while at the same time ensuring the code review of future changes applied to the project. Since I'm already making use of this fork myself, I also made it available for the rest of the community, in particular people that also do not agree with the recent course of action.
What are the differences?
For people that would like full list of changes that I applied on top of ESGST, please check my GitHub.
Core differences:
.*in order to restore old no-popup giveaway enter button. In original ESGST, this filter is made illegal (not effective). This approach has better maintenance and compatibility with ESGST compared to boolean button, and since there is no difference for the end-user, I decided to go this way about restoring it.For all important matters that are not explicitly listed above, A-ESGST's behaviour is equal to ESGST's one across the same version.
Download
Once you have tampermonkey (or equivalent) installed, you can install the userscript by navigating to this page.
Reasoning
My objective of this fork is to benefit from all the SG enhancements done by gsrafael01, while cutting on all artificial limits and other intentional blockades that take away freedom of choice that is given to every SG user. I believe that every user should make the choice himself to what degree he wants to make use of features available to him, therefore I'll actively work on keeping the fork up-to-date with official ESGST while at the same time ensuring that the newly introduced features are not going against user's privacy, do not have malicious intent, do not take freedom of choice from the user and otherwise are not in conflict with the spirit stated above. In a single sentence, this is ESGST without limits, maintained by me.
Support
For all ESGST matters, you should reach gsrafel in his original thread once you confirm that your matter is relevant to the equivalent version of ESGST. A-ESGST focuses on remaining compatible with all features that are supported by ESGST, and compatibility-wise there should be no differences. Only in very limited number of cases, where you found a bug and you couldn't reproduce it in original ESGST of the equivalent version, you should report the issue in this thread and I'll be happy to look into it, if indeed one of my fork-related changes are the cause of that.
All questions/cases that are specific to A-ESGST (but not ESGST) are of course more than welcome, this is what the thread is for to begin with. I just don't want common ESGST matters discussed here, as it can be done much better in the original thread, while benefiting the ESGST community at the same time. Keep A-ESGST thread for A-ESGST matters, we have another one for ESGST already.
Development
I will try my best to correct any concerning behaviour raised by the users, whether it's artificial limits, intentional anti-consumer behaviour or likewise. Let me know about any issues you have and I'll happily evaluate. All usual feature requests and bugs correction should be reported to official ESGST. Of course, I'll also happily accept any pull requests sent to the fork, as long as A-ESGST is the right place for it (and gsrafel openly refused to implement it).
Is the project still supported?
As stated in my thread closing statement, despite of SG thread being closed, I intend to keep the project up-to-date and supported through non-SG channels. You can check the current version of ESGST that A-ESGST is based on.
Despite completely opposite stance on very important matters to me, I feel obliged to thank gsrafel for his work and making this fork possible.
Have fun.
Comment has been collapsed.