User talk:Mattrition

Hi, I've moved Classifying bugs out of my user space and fixed the links in the template and ther 12w19a known bugs page. Simons Mith 00:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

• Excellent, thanks! I would suggest moving under the [[Known Bugs/Classifying Bugs]] instead, since it **only** applies to this area of the wiki. However, its your page so its entirely up to you :) --Mattrition 08:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

• I did consider that, but in the end I decided it was more appropriate to group it with the other guides. While the 'Guides' category does mostly consist of Tutorial/* files, there are a few other general guides, and all of those are in the main namespace. Conversely the Known_Bugs/* files only contain bugs or collections of bugs, so adding 'Classifying Bugs' there would have made it the odd one out. 82.69.54.207 02:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC) (Oops, not logged in. Sry. NVM.)

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

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

if just created map_5, normal means (no shift clicking), then created 3 maps by shift clicking, next map is going to be 12.
math: 5 + 3 * 2 + 1 = 12 = [maps created normally + 2*maps created by shift clicking - 1(to transform map numbers to id)] + [maps you are going to create by shift clicking] * 2 + 1(map going to create to find out id)
--93.106.62.36 15:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

On the [[Known bugs/Version 12w21a]] page, you merged my entry with another. While I see that this is indeed the same bug, the combined entry has my signature and states something (in first person) I haven't experience. You can gut, move or remove my entry but I don't want to be misattributed. --Thorny 15:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

sorry about that. I intended to completely replace the other report with yours because yours is much more clear and informative but I think I forgot what I was doing somewhere along the line. Misattribution is a slipperly slope so I'll be more careful about that in the future --Mattrition 16:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Ayup

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

http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Talk:Known_bugs/Version_12w19a#Moved:Water_source_does_not_generate_on_top_of_another_water_source

I undid changes that you made to my entry on the bug report on snapshot 12w25a. Whereas I do not necessarily object to my entry being merged with the above entry (although I am not certain they actually are reporting the same thing), please do not edit my entry for concision. I realize that my entry is somewhat lengthy, but there was time and consideration put into what I wrote because I intend to convey a certain meaning to jeb and dinnerbone. If you feel that the entry requires editing for length, please consult with me first...do not merely edit my wording to something shorter that conveys a meaning different than what I intended. I mean no offense, I am simply asking for a basic editorial courtesy. I have been testing snapshots for a long time, but this is the first time that I have experienced a bug that was serious enough that I felt compelled to begin contributing to the wiki. Thank you. --71.61.206.196 11:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for making changes. However, you should be aware of a couple of things. Firstly, the Known bugs lists meant for exactly that - a list of known bugs and issues compiled by players. It is not a place to communicate any other kind of feedback or, most importantly, your own opinions. The list is most helpful when bug descriptions are concise and without any "personal" comments. This is largely why I edited your report: comments about how you feel about the bug are nice and all but they don't belong there. If you want to communicate with the devs use twitter, email, or places like reddit. Do not use the wiki.

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

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

I appreciate your feedback. I will simply delete the entry. While I do appreciate that this is a Wiki and that this is a bug report feed, I think it is also important that your understand that this is often the only line of communication users have to the devs. I am neither a Twitter nor Reddit user, nor do I intend to become one. Twitter has the disadvantage of limiting the length of messages that I can convey to Mr. Bergensten or Mr. Adams. Nowhere on Mojang's website does it provide email addresses for jeb or dinnerbone. I would be more than delighted to send an email directly, and would be appreciative if you can provide an email address for one or the other of them.

As far as expressing "personal" opinion, the only real message I am trying to get across to the devs (or others) is that this bug has been hanging around, and whereas it is fine that we keep reporting it, reporting it over and over again is of limited utility to devs. What I was trying to express is the desire the devs let us know specifically what crash report log, debug info, etc. they might need to help track down the source of the problem. It seems that it would be more helpful for us to give them that info rather than just saying, "entities are frozen again.". For example, it might be useful for them to know that in one of the freezes, the "squid mobs" floated up out of the water and continuously into the sky, while the "pig mobs" were entirely static. The entity freeze therefore doesn't affect all mobs equally. I can provide lists and lists of detailed information like that. I doubt that you would want such long details listed in the bug report feed, yet it would be of utility for the devs to know this information. The personal "feeling" I was trying to get across is this: let us know how to get that information to the devs so we they can kill this bug once and for all. After all, isn't that the purpose of releasing snapshots for beta testing?

Additionally, I am fully aware that signing entries does not stamp our ownership on them. I also appreciate that you are trying to maintain an orderly bug report feed. But just as you implore wiki users to keep entries to the minimum information necessary, I would also ask for mindfulness of whether extensive edits significantly alter the content of entries.

In the end, we are all trying to ensure that Minecraft continues to improve to be the best software it can be. As I mentioned, I have been a passive reader of the wiki bug report feed until just recently. Please understand that this particular bug utterly destroys the functionality of Minecraft for not only me, but many other users. As a customer who has paid in full for Minecraft, I have a genuine concern that if this bug is allowed to persist into the 1.3 release, that I will be losing value on my investment. This is a fair and justified concern.

Thank you for your time in responding to me and I hope that you have a good day! --71.61.206.196 16:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Much obliged to you for clearing up some of my bug reports. I've only just started playing with weekly snapshots and it's only when I saw the Wiki (which I use a lot) also had a bug reporting feature that I decided to chip in. I should probably be a bit more careful as I tend to come across something and Alt-Tab in the heat of the moment to sperg! --Bpdlr 15:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Heh, yeh I know its very tempting, but the bug list needs to be added to with a little restraint. Just make sure whatever you put down is without needless wording, to the point, and is not a specific scenario of an issue which has already been added. Those are the most common problems people have with filling the list. Also see Classifying bugs for other tips. --Mattrition 15:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

You announced to rewrite the instructions. OK - I'll keep my fingers off that now (I intended to do the same a few seconds ago...) --Kumasasa 17:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Woh...yeh I just changed them. Nice conflict dodging there ;) --Mattrition 17:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)