Ask a moderator about the forum and the rules

[Placebo 28]

.Jonny quotes from banned forum members in your signature contravene forum rules so I've removed them.

[Tulip 0]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask it, so I'm sorry if this is in the wrong place...

I haven't been at the boards in a long time because I've been busy with things. So I was a little surprised to find an email from support@bistudio.com in my inbox. The email has a subject of "Re: Password request", and it says that "the validation process was successful", and then gives me a new password to the forums. And that password works, by the way.

Does anyone know what that is about? I had not lost my password, I haven't been at the forums in months, and I certainly haven't requested a new password. :O And besides, even if I had requested a new password, wouldn't I have had to validate the request first?

I'm just a little confused, because I really haven't been in the forum for a while, and then I suddenly get a new password in the email.

Thanks for your help.

[Placebo 28]

Someone probably thought their username is Tulip on here so requested the password. I use about 20 forums around the web for everything from football matches to boxing to gaming to Flashpoint stuff, on most I'm Placebo but on some Placebo had already gone so if I hadn't logged in for a while I tend to forget I'm not Placebo on them

[Tulip 0]

I guess that might be it. It's odd, though. I was a bit curious, so I tried what would happen if I requested a new password. It does send an email first with an "unlock code" that you can use to validate the password request, and only after that it sends the new password in a different email. So, that's two emails in total, first the validation and then the new password. So, if someone thought their username was the same as mine and requested a password, why didn't I get that validation email then? I only got a new password straight away... what could that be about? :S

Edited: And now it happened again! I got another new unsolicited password email, and my password changed. The password in the latest email works, my old passwords do not. I didn't request this change, and I did not get a validation email for it. I'm a little worried here. If someone has just mistaken their log-in name for mine and requesting a new password, why aren't I getting the validation emails for the password requests, why does the password change without validation? Is there any way to know who is doing it?

[shadow 6]

If you do not click on the confirmation link in the email then your password will not be changed.

Atleast its supposed to work like that.

[Tulip 0]

If you do not click on the confirmation link in the email then your password will not be changed.

Atleast its supposed to work like that.

Yes, that is the way I understood it, too. And that's why I'm confused. Because: 1) someone other than me keeps requesting a new password for my user name, and 2) I'm not getting any comfirmation email at all, but 3) just an email that says "The validation process was successful. This email contains your new password." and has a new password for me. So in effect I'm getting my password changed without my confirmation.

[shadow 6]

So in effect I'm getting my password changed without my confirmation.

In that case you should check what email adress is registered in your account. Perhaps change it and the password.

[Maddmatt 1]

So in effect I'm getting my password changed without my confirmation.

In that case you should check what email adress is registered in your account. Perhaps change it and the password.

The email address seems to be my original, normal email address. I can change it, along with the password, but I'm not sure why it would help. And it doesn't explain, I think, why I'm not getting the validation emails for the password requests - or who's making them and why.

Maybe a weird forum bug? The software for this forum is pretty old, from 2001!

Could be someone else requesting a new password, and it's changing the password of the wrong account

[Tulip 0]

Maybe a weird forum bug? The software for this forum is pretty old, from 2001!

Could be someone else requesting a new password, and it's changing the password of the wrong account

How could that be the case? And if it is, isn't that pretty bad? It would mean there's someone out there that can't access their account, and then they end up changing my password while they're trying to change their own. Isn't there any way to find out what's happening? This gives me the creeps.

[Placebo 28]

It's really not that big of a deal, if I see any future password change requests I'll delete them, now go back to worrying about what threads to post your words of wisdom in

[Tulip 0]

It's really not that big of a deal, if I see any future password change requests I'll delete them, now go back to worrying about what threads to post your words of wisdom in

Thanks! I guess I'll just try not to worry about it. I just got a little scared by those emails coming in all of a sudden. I thought someone might be in my email. Back to playing ArmA, I suppose. Wish I wasn't so busy though.

[abs 2]

I am sorry that Stavanger's Militaria // ArmA Addonlist is not coming back.

PS: @Mod Please close the thread, thanks to all!

Maybe it's time to remove this as a sticky to allow for more real estate space on the ArmA: Addons and Mods Discussion sub-forum?

Abs

[Heatseeker 0]

How about giving the comunity a small, nice xmas present guys?

Lock this thread already... its 98% bashing, flamebaiting, trolling, etc.

There arent many serious contributions, discussion is far from reasonable, its a good idea gone bad really.

Armed Assault is now more than a year old, its time to drop the hate.. this is not how things used to be around here .

[Placebo 28]

Trojan paranoia removed, we have enough 12 year old AOL subscribers on here without giving them more reasons to panic

How about giving the comunity a small, nice xmas present guys?

Lock this thread already... its 98% bashing, flamebaiting, trolling, etc.

There arent many serious contributions, discussion is far from reasonable, its a good idea gone bad really.

Armed Assault is now more than a year old, its time to drop the hate.. this is not how things used to be around here .

I'm leaving them alive until 1.09 is released, then they will both be closed and any future feedback must be about 1.09, there'll be one thread for good and bad feedback

[JBâ„¢ 1]

Does any mod know who added the text "I joined in July 2005" to my profile (in the member level slot). I cant change the text myself so someone with the correct permissions/access must have done it. Its not that I particularly mind. Its just I joined in Oct 2002 as 23_Pilgrim but my account got screwed up and kept spazzing out on me. It still reads as Awaiting Authorization.

Thanks

[klamacz 447]

OK, I have a question about signatures. It looks like in the last month or something, something changed in forum software and I cant use php generated images. Giving them tags "img" in brackets dont work as it says:

Quote[/b] ]You are not allowed to use that image extension on this board. A valid format is: http://www.domain.com/picture.gif, an invalid format is: http://www.domain.com/picture.one.gif

I can understand that its rule about unspecified size of the image generated in real time by php. Is there anything else i can do to use my image like this:

http://www.klamacz.czadowe.info/arma_us....8&p=212

[raedor 8]

Does any mod know who added the text "I joined in July 2005" to my profile (in the member level slot). I cant change the text myself so someone with the correct permissions/access must have done it. Its not that I particularly mind. Its just I joined in Oct 2002 as 23_Pilgrim but my account got screwed up and kept spazzing out on me. It still reads as Awaiting Authorization.

Thanks

It probably was W0lle who changed your name from JB [sASMOD] to your current one... I guess JB [sASMOD] joined in July 2005.

@klamacz: No idea. :O

[mr burns 131]

Subject: Let's talk about VOIP ...

I posted to talk primarily about VOIP, which, yes, offers a significant gameplay improvement along with features that cannot be matched by Teamspeak.

Problem with that is that theres simply nothing more to say about VoN than that it is indeed nice - fullstop

Cannot understand moderators enforcing us to fill a thread with stuff like this:

I for one welcome our VOIP overlords.

Awesome! 1.09 looks awesome. Those non-serious videos are hilarious.

Thanks for the update, Dslyecxi!

But that VOIP features blows anything away... even bugs.

.. instead of getting serious info.

You could aswell lock the thread after the first post

[baddo 0]

People who don't want to discuss the subjects Dslyecxi is offering for discussion could just leave that thread alone instead of spamming.

I welcomed the information he gave and I have a hard time understanding why people started to spam the thread.

The problem is definitely not Dslyecxi but the other people in that thread who are doing their best to make that thread become something it isn't meant to become.

I think there is still the one big complaint thread and people are meant to use that one for their pointless and ignorant complaints, instead of ruining a thread started for constructive discussion.

[Placebo 28]

I'm sure the motives were pure but I personally think it was a horrible decision and a cruel one to the community to create a thread to force discussion about one small aspect of 1.09.

Contrary to what some people may think Voip is not a large part of 1.09 in terms of what people are hoping for from it, most people would simply like some bugs to be fixed, some performance to be improved, some multiplayer matches to take place without some "female genitalia" coming in and destroying the session via cheating. That's what people are desperately waiting for and it's no surprise that the thread, along with the brittle posting manner of certain posters in it led to a lot of problems. When 1.09 has been released would (IMO) have been an appropriate time to laud the new and improved VON.

Also until I hear otherwise it's still an extreme no no to 1. make it known you're in the beta test and 2. revealing information learned as part of beta testing.

[Balschoiw 0]

..and 3, to change the thread title from "Let´s talk about 1.09, improvements and VOIP" when it doesn´t go into the planned direction...

I have to say that I didn´t understand how Mods couldn´t see the flaw in this thread and the ironhand they applied to users who are obviously more interested in other improvements than the MP VOIP part was rather a unfortunate decision.

1.09 will be a crucial patch, for BIS , for Arma and the community, that´s why I think that only posts from officials covering the range of changes will be informative and satisfying.

If it´s released, the features can be debated to death, but picking one of them and keep it hanging in front of the users noses doesn´t do any good.

As much as I appreciated the look on VOIP in 1.09 I guess it´s by the nature of the issue itself, the 1.09 patch, that people will not stop asking for more if they are given the chance to.

Quite natural.

About the non-disclosure agreement: I definately wondered about that myself as it would be totally opposing former BIS info policies and it´s obvious that only a BIS changelog or announcement can be the source of information we are all waiting for so much.

As much as I appreciate the effort the outcome was very predictable.

[W0lle 1048]

Re. the "iron hand" I just say this:

If we ask three (3) times to stay on topic and people still keep going off-topic or flaming/spamming the thread then what you expect us to do? Twirling thumbs and having a laugh?

I honestly can say that I was extremely patient, but if clowns like MisterXY coming up and admit that they give a sh*t about our directions and even have the guts to ask for more - then there's a line crossed I refuse to tolerate - as much as I understand the people asking for more then just the VOIP feature.

[Placebo 28]

Also until I hear otherwise it's still an extreme no no to 1. make it known you're in the beta test and 2. revealing information learned as part of beta testing.

Just to clear this up, he did have permission from Marek to make this thread so in terms of that he didn't do anything wrong. However the thread will remain closed for the same reasons as I closed it. I'm sure everyone is looking forward to knowing the specifics of what 1.09 will include but I think the fairest way for the interests of everyone is to learn all about it at the same time and to be able to discuss all aspects of it at the same time, without being told by a peer that "this is what you can talk about only".

[dslyecxi 23]

Just to clear this up, he did have permission from Marek to make this thread so in terms of that he didn't do anything wrong. However the thread will remain closed for the same reasons as I closed it. I'm sure everyone is looking forward to knowing the specifics of what 1.09 will include but I think the fairest way for the interests of everyone is to learn all about it at the same time and to be able to discuss all aspects of it at the same time, without being told by a peer that "this is what you can talk about only".

The number of topics that were open to discussion were pretty significant. You seem to have turned it into a VOIP-specific issue, but whatever. You get to run this community. Thank god we have alternative places to discuss ArmA.

[Tankbuster 1737]

Also until I hear otherwise it's still an extreme no no to 1. make it known you're in the beta test and 2. revealing information learned as part of beta testing.

Just to clear this up, he did have permission from Marek to make this thread so in terms of that he didn't do anything wrong. However the thread will remain closed for the same reasons as I closed it. I'm sure everyone is looking forward to knowing the specifics of what 1.09 will include but I think the fairest way for the interests of everyone is to learn all about it at the same time and to be able to discuss all aspects of it at the same time, without being told by a peer that "this is what you can talk about only".

I've read this over and over, and the thread it concerns too and I'm still not getting it. The thread was closed because it was too narrow or because it was potentially too popular? Either way, I think you got it wrong.