License Display and Association

[Sheldon]

You are wrong. Period.

If I want to add one of my Admins, Mods or Devs here on XenForo to do various tasks, its nobodies business except mine to show if they are linked to my account or not. Period.

That is fine and dandy as well. Actually, better. Yeah, let's do it that way.

Like the double "period" though. Although, that is your opinion, so your opinion doesn't make me "wrong. Period.". But thanks.

 

[Sheldon]

A simple way to show that a customer is licensed is being used over at XenForo's direct competitor, Invision Power Services.
View attachment 43193

I have yet to see one complaint about it. At here, it seems like a big fuss about such a simple feature.

At the end, it is not up for us but the developers on if they want to implement this.

My first post had the same type of thing, I just simply put it as "Associate". But I get your concept as well. Not sure why the backlash.

 

[Slavik]

1. Bob needs to find better admins. Even if I have the most extreme blowup with those that I work with, I would not throw them under the bus like that.
2. Post under regular name, change your ways. Your actions under your current name would mean much more than creating an "alt".
3. Share same login.

1) Just because you wouldn't, doesn't mean others wouldnt. Telling someone to find a better admin isn't a good reason because people can seem like great individuals until something goes wrong.

2) Some people wish to have a fresh start free of old tags. Just because You would carry on posting doesn't mean someone else doesn't want to do it a different way.

3) What if they wan't to post their seperate, differentating opinions?

 

[Sheldon]

Snip....

No, your last post comparing this to something akin to the Rosa Parks situation is what closed the other one.

 

[Sheldon]

1) Just because you wouldn't, doesn't mean others wouldnt. Telling someone to find a better admin isn't a good reason because people can seem like great individuals until something goes wrong.

2) Some people wish to have a fresh start free of old tags. Just because You would carry on posting doesn't mean someone else doesn't want to do it a different way.

3) What if they wan't to post their seperate, differentating opinions?

Ummmm, did you not ask how "I" would handle those situations? I replied how "I" would. You don't need the bold, you asked me a direct question.

Ok tell me how you would handle these 3 situations.

Right?

 

[EQnoble]

No, your last post comparing this to something akin to the Rosa Parks situation is what closed the other one.

How ...how are they akin, in what way?

and it got closed because you asked for it to be closed....because you got mad that you are not controlling things.

My remark about Rosa Parks was for comparison value....

Rosa Parks, wants to sit where she paid to sit....and a group of people putting her under duress of that group try to force her to the back of the bus....I was merely telling you that I sit where I paid to sit...and that you don't drive the bus.

 

[Slavik]

Exactly.

Your opinion.

Not everyones.

 

[Mike Edge]

Slav, can you at least merge the several threads on this all created by Op into one thread. No reason for multi threads on this all leading to the same conclusion

 

[Sheldon]

....

No, your comparison was utterly ridiculous. I'm not driving the bus, nor do I want to. That is why there is this discussion. Apparently it is an issue.

Exactly.

Your opinion.

Not everyones.

Who said it wasn't mine? You asked me a direct question. Do you not recall that? Don't ask my opinion if you do not want it. You asked, I gave.

 

[EQnoble]

No, your comparison was utterly ridiculous. I'm not driving the bus, nor do I want to. That is why there is this discussion. Apparently it is an issue.



Who said it wasn't mine? You asked me a direct question. Do you not recall that? Don't ask my opinion if you do not want it. You asked, I gave.

If it is an issue and you want to act as the mitigatory factor (which is obvious that is what you are doing)..

why snip my quote from this thread and respond to a different thread that you had closed ....instead of responding to any of this....

Again....we come to the same thing in this duplicate thread basically...and again no compromise.

I already said I have no problem with an api returning you a 0 or a 1 saying I am licensed or not...I also have no problem with you getting a 0 or a 1 saying a member is associated with someone in general...but who they are associated with is their business.

I already said it is fine to differentiate between a license holder and an associated member...however that is as far as it is acceptable. Listing who is associated with my account is way beyond the scope of what I think you should know about me. I trust xf with my info...not you and certainly not every random person who wants to snoop around.

If you want to turn people down for not sharing their info that is your damn business...and most definitely not my problem. In my country the needs of your business seriously hold no weight compared to my privacy and seeing that I have not engaged in business with you, you have no rights to my information, I simply don't trust you...if I want you to know who is associated with me...it is up to me to tell you.

You can always just deny me the sale of your products if that suits you, but you are asking xf to join your crusade and take your side against my rights to privacy.




That is a circular argument, with no real validity. I can see you are a well known member simply by your stats...since that IS how you became a well known member, even without the super imposed title your stats reflect the same info.

You are asking to display NEW information that I did not agree to, if you are asking to see my associated list.

There is a huge difference there.

ohh yeah because the only valid opinions in this thread in your mind that warrant any REAL response to are ones that coincide with yours...

 

[cclaerhout]

This debate has always been done in another thread, so no need to kill each others one more time.

I've read the Slavik hypotheses, I understand them, and honestly I don't care who are the associated users. Correct me if I'm wrong but if a associated user illegally shares XenForo who would be hold as responsible (in theory and without any talks)? The owner of the major account isn't it, the one who bought the software. So when a independent developer sold an addon to a customer, the idea is to be bought by the owner of the XenForo license, not by his associated account. Which means an associated account shouldn't not even be mentioned in that debate: independent developers should only care to sell to the owner of the account. That's all.

And before to continue to debate, just a question, a real one and without any ideas behind it, but Slavik are you talking on your own name or as a XenForo moderator? What I want to mean, if XenForo doesn't want to display an information which can already be checked but with a very boring way, it just need to be said and this topic just need to be closed. No need to waste each other our time debating and creating a bad atmosphere.

 

[Sheldon]

If it is an issue and you want to act as the mitigator..

why snip my quote from this thread and respond to a different thread that you had closed ....instead of responding to any of this....

ohh yeah because the only valid opinions in this thread in your mind that warrant any REAL response to are ones that coincide with yours...

Likely because I don't agree with the idea that showing licensed and associated is this HUGE GIGANTIC privacy issue.

It is an issue, and I want it brought out in the open. If you don't want to be involved with it, great. Don't be. It is still an issue the devs face each day. Myself, I am on their side attempting to combat this. I don't care who wants to help, who doesn't. Either way, it is an issue that needs to be addressed, one way or another.

 

[Sheldon]

but Slavik are you talking on your own name or as a XenForo moderator?

Yes, that would be great to know as well.

 

[Slavik]

Who said it wasn't mine? You asked me a direct question. Do you not recall that? Don't ask my opinion if you do not want it. You asked, I gave.

I did want it, and I asked my questions in a specific way, to get a specific responce to prove my point.

Oh and, just for clarity.

And the whole "opt-in" option is a joke. There should be no opt-in. It should be shown, period.

This is an assertion you made stating that everyone should be subject to your opinion.

I'm telling you, that I disagree with this, as my opinion differs.

But if you want to carry on playing pedantics Stewart, please go ahead, it will just end up undermining the thread like the others.

 

[Sheldon]

I did want it, and I asked my questions in a specific way, to get a specific responce to prove my point.

I'm not following. Of course you did, you asked my opinion, but yet, you had to continually bold the fact it was my opinion. You've lost me.

 

[Slavik]

And before to continue to debate, just a question, a real one and without any ideas behind it, but Slavik are you talking on your own name or as a XenForo moderator?

In my own name of course. The ultimate decision will always lie with KAM.

 

[EQnoble]

Likely because I don't agree with the idea that showing licensed and associated is this HUGE GIGANTIC privacy issue.

It is an issue, and I want it brought out in the open. If you don't want to be involved with it, great. Don't be. It is still an issue the devs face each day. Myself, I am on their side attempting to combat this. I don't care who wants to help, who doesn't. Either way, it is an issue that needs to be addressed, one way or another.

I will say this straight up then...you are the wrong person to be doing this...and I do not want to be associated with the way you are going about this.

You obviously don't care about anyone who doesn't agree with your idea and you are too narrow minded to understand that what you think is not what everyone thinks and you enforce that by trying to invalidate every single person who disagrees with you either directly , with sarcasm , or unrelated arguments.

You don't care about the general population...your side is ONLY for 3rd party devs and people that support your crusade... and your words and actions show it.

 

[Sheldon]

You don't care about the general population...your side is ONLY for 3rd party devs and people that support your crusade... and your words and actions show it.

Obviously. the developers of add-ons here need the help and some type of protection that they are NOT getting now. Its not for people who support my "crusade". This is done for the developers benefits.

I will say this straight up then...you are the wrong person to be doing this....

For what reason? And who should be doing it then?

 

[EQnoble]

Obviously. the developers of add-ons here need the help and some type of protection that they are NOT getting now. Its not for people who support my "crusade". This is done for the developers benefits.



For what reason? And who should be doing it then?

Give me an honest reply to my concerns a couple posts back and then I will respond to you.

 

[Sheldon]

Give me an honest reply to my concerns a couple posts back and then I will respond to you.

What post? I told you, I don't agree with your ideas. What else do you want?