/tg/Station 13

I got banned on github for making stungloves pull request. Fornoreasons.



I made a pull for adding rebalanced stun gloves back. Cheridan insta-closed (in ~30s) it without any discussion or testing.
https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/pull/8781

I made another one because even joke pulls and shit pulls are not closed that fast, without any discussion or such. Cheridan closed it too, not instant but still too fast.
https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/pull/8782

So i made issue about Cheridan closing pulls left and right for no reasons.
https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/issues/8783
And got a ban from Cheridan. On github. For no reasons. I didnt even know github bans exist!

Then i got a ban in #coderbus on my main IP.

--- Cheridan has banned *!*@3569C2FA.F8C6A749.A7E7A03C.IP
*** ACCount was kicked by Cheridan (Try the forums)

So i'm trying forums now. Unban me, deadmin Cheridan.

I'm not sure why Cheridan is such a dick. Maybe he hates stungloves, maybe he hates russians, maybe he hates critique, maybe it's because he is a head coder. Alltogether i think.

Hmm, maybe it has to do with your constant belligerence in IRC, bypassing an issue closure, and making a buttbaby joke 'issue' and going on calling me a shitty broken dickhead.

Maybe it has to do with that.

It's probably that.

Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

good ban

Jeb wrote:Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

lol salty

actually wait lol how come you care about this coder that does things for you but you bitch and whine about the other coders that do things for you

You got told several times by project authorities that the concept was flawed and could not be integrated as a crew it. Like, several times on several occasions, having given multiple reasons. You kept making new PRs and acting like a shit in IRC. I don't see how you're at all surprised by this outcome.

I'm just gonna point that, that when i did the exact same thing but with reverting one of paprika's removals, i got the exact same response.

I got banned from coderbus, i got banned from the github, and i had to beg for my access back.

I'm the fucking forums host, and even i got that treatment. You want to know why? because when you decide to bypass somebody closing your pr, no matter how stupid you think them doing it was, by opening another, you leave them no choice but to prevent you from bypassing their authority with a block.

I'll agree with you that instacloses are shit, but i'll also agree with coderbus that when people spam your github, you block them.

>MisterSpamOne against spamming

Jeb wrote:Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

Oh, fuck off with that bullshit.

If you closed a thread of mine I made, and I then immediately remade that thread with a snarky insult at you, wouldn't you ban me for bypassing your thread closure?

Was there an appropriate warning before doing this? I.e if you keep creating PR's you'll get github banned.

If not we need to formalise the process

iamgoofball wrote:

Jeb wrote:Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

Oh, fuck off with that bullshit.

If you closed a thread of mine I made, and I then immediately remade that thread with a snarky insult at you, wouldn't you ban me for bypassing your thread closure?

Nope. I'd rethink the decision of closing the initial thread in the first place. Besides, for the most part, not many threads here get closed aside from FNR forums.

In all seriousness, banning contributors from the github is detrimental to the project at large, when the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR" or by simply leaving the PR open for discussion rather than instaclosing it.

Jeb wrote:In all seriousness, banning contributors from the github is detrimental to the project at large, when the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR" or by simply leaving the PR open for discussion rather than instaclosing it.

Did you even read the rest of the thread?

Ricotez wrote:

Jeb wrote:In all seriousness, banning contributors from the github is detrimental to the project at large, when the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR" or by simply leaving the PR open for discussion rather than instaclosing it.

Did you even read the rest of the thread?

Sure did, thanks for your input.

Jeb wrote:...the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR"...

That was exactly what happened.

MisterPerson wrote:

Jeb wrote:...the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR"...

That was exactly what happened.

No, what happened from how I comprehend it was it was instantly closed with a vague reasoning basically saying "stungloves are shit, no".

There was a conversation in IRC where it was explaining very clearly that stungloves were not coming back.

Jeb wrote:

MisterPerson wrote:

Jeb wrote:...the entire situation could have been avoided by saying "Sorry, but we removed stungloves for a reason so we're going to deny this PR"...

That was exactly what happened.

No, what happened from how I comprehend it was it was instantly closed with a vague reasoning basically saying "stungloves are shit, no".

Cheridan in the first PR wrote:Not balanced for a crew item, can't be disarmed, examined, etc.

That's actually not all that vague. It could go into more detail, but I think those are probably some of the bigger issues.

oranges wrote:Was there an appropriate warning before doing this? I.e if you keep creating PR's you'll get github banned.

If not we need to formalise the process

There wasnt any warning about "stop spamming pulls or you'll get github banned" in both pulls. Or maybe i was distracted by the sounds of Saiga 12 firing and didn't hear anything.

MisterPerson wrote:There was a conversation in IRC where it was explaining very clearly that stungloves were not coming back.

I rewrited stungloves code from scratch using non-snowflakey Click() features (snowflakes everywhere in code was one of the reasons to remove stungloves), then asked in IRC why stungloves are bad. Most of responses were "THEY ARE JUST SHIT SHIT AND CANNOT BE FIXED EVER". I listened to other responses and rebalanced stungloves to make them less shit. I made a pull. But then some coder closed my pull without even looking at it, without any discussion or such. Why don't close it after discussion?

This is not even about stungloves, are they shit or not, this is about instaclosing pulls, banning fornoreasons and being dick. I got some unfinished PRs i can't finish because i'm banned, and this is really shitty.


And stop editing my Github posts, you dick. They are mine.

What did you think was going happen?

"Oh, he reopened the pull request! He means business, we'll have to listen to him now!"

I thought that gloves-hater would fuck off and leave my pull there for at least 24 hours, as it normally happens.

I'm pretty sure the biggest strike against stun gloves is that they're a weapon that goes in one of your equipment slots instead of in your hands. Which means that literally the only way you could add stun gloves in a balanced way would be to not make them gloves, which kind of negates the whole point.

Instant PR closes are shit but like, this is an obvious consequence of reposting the same PR multiple times and then making a "you suck" PR
literally the exact same thing would happen on the forum, that's not how you should conduct yourself on the internet

This is why all auhority is shit. You are all biased and incompetent. No man is fit to lead their fellow man. Had this issue been settled democratically, none of this drama would have occured.

deathhoof wrote:This is why all auhority is shit. You are all biased and incompetent. No man is fit to lead their fellow man. Had this issue been settled democratically, none of this drama would have occured.

2edge4me

MrStonedOne wrote: I'm the fucking forums host, and even i got that treatment.

well yeah why would anyone get special treatment

also what the fuck is an "instant PR close" in relation to a "delayed PR close"

danno wrote:also what the fuck is an "instant PR close" in relation to a "delayed PR close"

instant is instant
delayed is delayed

stun gloves (this is to my memory, at least) were initially removed because they were incredibly OP, and nobody could think of a way to make them not so at the time. headmins eventually decided to remove it and it was declared to be an all-around Bad Thing
mods please edit this if my memory fails me

I mean what is the functional difference. If it's going to be closed, why does it matter if it's closed right away or closed a bit later?

I think people like to have 24 hours of false hope

24h of disscussion, to spot weak points, fix someting, etc. That's why 24h pull rule is here i think.

The 24 hour pull rule is meant to allow people from all time zone's to be able to see and comment on a PR before it can be merged. This is so you should not have to worry about something big/bad/broken being merged just a hour after you logged off.

It should still be discussed though. Stungloves as perhaps a traitor item or some other workaround could be good.

ACCount wrote:24h of disscussion, to spot weak points, fix someting, etc. That's why 24h pull rule is here i think.

you can still comment on a closed PR. there is functionally no difference between closing it now or closing it later.

Jeb wrote:Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

For a forum mod you sure can be a shithead.

It's pretty obvious when someone just sidesteps being told no by opening an identical PR what needs to be done. You would encourage this? If someone created a thread that you had to lock or delete you would reconsider your position when they just opened another identical thread?

You must be terrible at this.

deathhoof wrote:This is why all auhority is shit. You are all biased and incompetent. No man is fit to lead their fellow man. Had this issue been settled democratically, none of this drama would have occured.

Please don't shitpost on a thread that is ostensibly about serious business. If you took this kind of crap in FNR your kebab would have already been removed, whether or not you're being serious.

An0n3 wrote:

Jeb wrote:Yes coderbus, let's ban all the fucking coders that do things for us.

For a forum mod you sure can be a shithead.

It's pretty obvious when someone just sidesteps being told no by opening an identical PR what needs to be done. You would encourage this? If someone created a thread that you had to lock or delete you would reconsider your position when they just opened another identical thread?

You must be terrible at this.

Thanks for your opinion.

danno wrote:you can still comment on a closed PR. there is functionally no difference between closing it now or closing it later.

You cannot comment on PR if you cannot see it. And nobody ever views closed PRs list.

You cannot comment on PR if you are banned too.

Phalanx300 wrote:It should still be discussed though. Stungloves as perhaps a traitor item or some other workaround could be good.

Like I tried to explain to him, I'm more than fine with stungloves as a traitor item (or just going wholehog and porting powergloves).

He stated the conversation wasen't about stun gloves, it was about the fact that you closed his post without anyone seeing it, which is pretty fucking shitty. I can suggest we give everyone pulse rifles on round start, a shitty idea, but a shitty idea doesn't need to be insta-locked-deleted-hated-on, debate it out people, this isent 4chan where people make a shitty post and get tons and tons of comments saying "ur mah gurd u post ish bad git gud fakkin scrooblord". The only reason he made the post to begin with is because you locked it without anyone seeing it, then he decided to make another one (bad idea) then you Github-IRC banned him.


Just be logical with it, un ban the lad, and let him make his post, if all the coders/community fucking hate his guts for it, so be it, let the community decide.

TG13 is a Democracy, Not a Admin/Coder-icatorship

EDIT: I quote someone on this

"TG isent a "Whoevers paying for it" leadership, its a "Whoever we like the most" leadership

Coderbus is a separate entity not associated with /tg/station13.

They are entirely a dictatorship.

le separation meme

/tg/station13 isn't and hasn't been a democracy, at any point. Headmins are elected democratically but ultimately after that they get final say on policies.

I and the other maintainers reserve the right to instaclose stupid PRs. Nobody should be forced to give lip service to crap that was removed for good reason, and repeatedly denied. Especially --and probably more importantly-- if the person doing it is going to be an asshole about it.

>tg station isent a democracy
>tg is a dictatorship
>i have been living a lie the past 2 years.

Why did you delete his post? That will not undo the bump.

Posting in a necromunger thread