XenForo community

Some negative reviews as retaliation are lame, some positive review as sponsoring are lame as well. Now if the XenForo staff want to decide of what reviews good and which ones are bad, good luck for them. But any people who created some "polls" know people replies go to extreme (bad-great).

On XenForo, developers can reply to them whereas on the AppStore they can't. It should be enough, don't you think ? No need to create support profile posts like it has been done last days for a single bad review. This reaction is as much disproportionate as the review you are criticizing.

ccla I think the solution is that mod makers need to be willing to accept criticism

My comments here are not relating to the bad review, they are to do with the OP breaking licensing terms and his inability to comprehend that they are wrong. OverHere - 4 separate status updates in a period of minutes about the same thing rather than 1 update and the others as comments is spam.

I think the solution is add-on purchasers request permission from the developer before giving access to others of the add-on. Criticism isn't the issue. Failure to ask a simply question was.

Martok yes in that way I partly agree but there was a lack of space in replying to yesterday's talks. But yes several status updates are not the way, yes

I wish I could like Sheldon's comment. **LIKE**

Sheldon I think we past that! This is XF's job to ensure all authors have a baseline to follow, many mod makers have in fact asked me if they themselves or someone will add their mods!

It's not XF's job!!! Get that through your skull. That has been stated by XF Staff. You purchased the add-on. It is on you to request permission to give that add-on to your "well known developer". You didn't. You were wrong.

Just accept it. It doesn't matter what OTHER devs are doing, or asking. It is still on your shoulders to ensure you have the permissions for the things you are wanting to do. You did not. Simple. Anything else is irrelevant.

Moderation from both sides would have helped to avoid this discussion. I don't know if you realize but this bad review has turned into a discussion of intellectual property to know if a buyer has the right or not to ask a third party to install for him some software/script. Again, this is a total nonsense. Otherwise many of the posts of the "Custom service" forum should be closed.

Sheldon for the last time if a higher number of authors work with 3rd parties without hassle and 1 doesn't, this is something for XF to sort. Accept it or forget it boss!

How can you simply assume that? Holy smokes. I give up. I'm done with your nonsense. Keep searching for you validation. Someone might give it to you.

Every author is entitled to set their own terms of use. It isn't for XF to sort - Mike has clearly stated that. What Mike says is fact, whether you like it or not.

U should be done yes coz if there are no honest buyers like me then how can you be so sure buyers are not quietly stealing mods or their debs are? Just coz they asked they first inform the author about their 'intentions'? Wake up

I really don't think anything else needs to be said about this particular issue - both sides have made their points. Junk posts will lead to warnings. (If I could close this, I would.)

Mike as everyone has made their point and I have my position, so just delete this block in my view.

I would have allowed it if you had just asked or accepted that what you did was wrong, apologise and then ask. You never did. Instead you went on the attack, blamed me and refused to accept any responsibility, That is why your license was revoked. All you had to do was ask. Consider this a learning experience in how you deal with people in future,

Brogan, ok I'll lean back in regards to what you say but you gotta recognise that there is a legitimate desire to standardise and make clear first off whether mod makers across the board will accept 3rd party devs to set up their clients mods or not. I had no problem before you!

As I said, all you had to do was ask, rather than demand.