Uber_Corq said: ↑ If un-following a player made their follower count go down by 2, that would be pretty bad. MCTrump says: In order to follow someone new, you must unfollow two other people.
I see what you did there. And as for beta testers. This is not something we are ever going to do, because we already have 30+ of them. For someone to be selected to be trusted with early information, would require a vetting process. We have that in place already, it's called becoming staff Every major update we have the staff team run through to find bugs. If you want to help with that, apply for mod
I 100% agree with what you said. I don't think my point was clear though. My point was that a grammar example is not a good one in this situation because development knowledge is no where near as prevalent as basic grammatical knowledge. It is also on a different level as one who proofreads a paper has direct access to the source, and that doesn't happen here unless you are already staff. That is why I think the example provided was not applicable. But this is all moot at this point, since Aikar already addressed the topic.
I think you are over-thinking the response. The whole idea I got from the original response/analogy was that someone with a new perspective could find flaws that the original seeker could not. That is completely applicable to testing. What I don't think you get is that it's preferable to have someone involved who is NOT directly involved in the original development, or as you put it "has direct access to the source." A proofreader rarely has access to "the source" either, in that they do not necessarily know the methods or plan of the author. All that they are concerned with is the methods and application applied by the final user. You could equate an Editor with an Internal Tester. The Editor has a much more intimate knowledge of the genre and effective writing style. The Proofreader, on the other hand, tends to key in on minutiae of grammar and spelling that could have a more subtle effect on the Reader. In a similar way, an internal tester may have key knowledge regarding code that enables them to hone in on issues that noone else can feasibly be expected to find in a reasonable amount of time. They are in a unique position to evaluate certain discrepancies. However, it may take a broader testing base to evaluate other potential "bugs" that might otherwise go unnoticed by persons with such an intimate knowledge and focused attention to the issues they are familiar with.
I don't know why, but the word choice confused me a little. Does Aikar mean list things that could potentially break, or only things that would have noticeable effects if broken? Or am I totally misinterpreting?
Both, I guess. You could look at some posts by other people to get an idea. I'm not sure if we, as non-developers (at least non-Minecraft developers, for most of us), will be able to think of good things to check for, though.
My 2 cents... It would not be fun to play EMC if XP Grinder mechanics were affected. In the past there were some changes to mob movement that affected standard XP Grinder models. These were fixed...and bliss once again.
