forfeit

My concern is that multiple clients, each with a copy of the vessel debris to be destroyed, process the destruction and refund the credits. I'm not familiar with when/how the client decides to despawn or if this is even an issue.

Thanks for the update to make the version check opt-in, this mod is really useful with 0.24. Do you know if this works correctly with DarkMultiPlayer, or if random clients will get someone else's refunds?

This is a horrible bug report, since I haven't narrowed down a cause yet, but maybe someone has seen the issue before. We had a half dozen playing on the server last night, with a couple of client crashes here and there. At some point a vessel must've been corrupted, because at the end of the evening nobody could recover, revert or return to the space center. My client told me there was a kerbal on a ladder, which wasn't the case. I saved the Universe\ directory to look at later when I have more time, I'll let you know if I find anything obvious there. Once Universe\Vessels was cleaned out everyone had to delete their persistent.sfs file but things are back to normal now.

As I mentioned in my response to his same request, I can't see contributing to a third-party data collection mod that does not anonymize data, even to change its function to opt-in. There are a slew of data protection and privacy laws that I wouldn't want to attempt to navigate in order to store data about users of a software product I did not publish, even if informed consent to statistics collection was granted by users. Competition requires a shared goal. My goal is to allow users to easily disable the functionality of this mod, not to provide an alternative. Hopefully I can address disabling auto-updating mods before too long, let's hope it doesn't stir up this much drama again.

Because there are no "legal problems" with what I've done. That's my point.

Not to be rude here, but I'm looking for an official response.

I've been silent for a while now, but now it's starting to sound like Majiir's contributions and desire to protect his burgeoning data collection empire are receiving preferential treatment because he's a big-name modder or some such nonsense. I still have not received a reasonable explanation as to why my code infringes upon his "intellectual property" or even if that's really what I'm allegedly infringing upon. Sure, it's been said that clicking the "fork" button somehow poisons the codebase, but I've also been told that I cannot post a new version that isn't forked but has the same functionality. Honestly I no longer expect an answer at this point, but I've never had such an attachment to a single line of code before.

I would agree that there's a problem if I had, say, taken his code and changed the URL it reports to. In fact the code disables the mod in question, it in no way duplicates his work. Is the takeaway from this that mod authors are not allowed to reuse assembly names, namespaces, class or variable names from other code? It may have started as a fork, which is entirely fine under the Github ToS, but it is no longer using anything that could be construed as original or novel code covered by the license.

"Harmful" "infringing" and "wage a modding war" are some strong statements if you want to have a civil discussion. Some have argued that your mod is harmful, as it damages the modder/player relationship. I've seen many requests to get away from the, what some consider to be suboptimal, opt-out system currently in use. Due to those responses, I felt that the disabler mod was the only way to resolve the issue without relying on the mod itself to respect a config file option. I have no desire to "improve" third-party opt-out data collection, as I don't believe that any data should be collected from uninformed users, without their explicit consent, nor should any such data be retained without robust data protection and detailed privacy and retention plans. Commercial organizations and even large governments have trouble with data which is naively "anonymized" or appears to be "innocuous," it's something that should never be taken lightly.

https://help.github.com/articles/github-terms-of-service section F.1.

Either way a file has to be distributed and this was honestly easier than figuring out what string I would need to put in a file and where that file goes.

BetterThanSpyware 1.0.4 for KSP 0.24 Tired of looking through every updated mod for self replicating libraries that send your "anonymized" data to a random web site? Fret no more. This mod aims to disable the ModStatistics data collection without the need to jump through any hoops. Simply extract the contents of the archive to your GameData\ folder. The current release is 1.0.4. It has been tested against ModStatistics 1.0.3 on Windows systems. Download | Source | License | Author

A couple of us kicked the tires on 37f3698 for an hour or so and nothing broke. We're playing career mode with mods, modcontrol is off, settings are otherwise default. The server and clients are on windows, using 64-bit KSP.