Our records show that you have outstanding author rewards points. Please confirm your latest payment information and redeem your points balance via the Author Reward Store.
From the FAQ all the examples of rewards seems like stuff like gift cards, etc. Is it possible to opt out of any junk (gift cards etc.) that would cost wowace / curse money and still be able to get the possibility of stuff like beta access for testing etc?
Also you might want to check your point system so it doesn't end up counting stuff like mine twice. In my case I combined a bunch of my older plugins into a single library, and then to ease upgrades (though now wondering if I just created confusion) made the old projects become subsets of the library via embedding. So even though they are technically an addon using a library, it should probably only count once.
I bet you'll find creative authors that break up their addon into 2 or more independent parts for download.
For example, Titan Panel comes with about 10 plugins by default. If the author decided that he would remove those 10 plugins, and distribute them as 10 separate standalone plugins, that would skew download counts as well.
Note: I merely used Titan Panel as an example, no harm intended. Cartographer is another such example, where it contains submodules, Bigwigs is another one, etc.
To respond to your Titan Panel Idea, Fubar dosn't come with any default modules. So i think it's fair game that if the "Parent" addon and modules are infact fully stable with out each other then they are valid as a seperate addons.
The thing is that you don't want to have the rewards program make things very obfuscated for the end users.
I.e. if it is something related to count, then you might see authors breaking up their addons needlessly into subparts. Just for the "total number of addons" count benefit.
Maybe points should be allocated using statistics from the CurseClient since it can easily test which add-ons are actually installed and enabled.
This data should be seen as a 'sample' (I'm not good with statistics terminology) and used to extrapolate an approximation of the total number of the people actually using a particular add-on versus people just downloading it...
I don't know if it's really clear but I think you get the idea :)
To differentiate an add-on from its modules by the same author, a test on the 'required dependencies' and author names could be used...
I'm not sure that hiding the way points are allocated is a good idea (security through obscurity always fails eventually)
Maybe points should be allocated using statistics from the CurseClient since it can easily test which add-ons are actually installed and enabled.
How can it test which addon's are enabled? If you are referring to the curse profiler I have that uninstalled and disabled from ever being installed and I know I am not the only one so that method wouldn't work either.
Also you might want to check your point system so it doesn't end up counting stuff like mine twice. In my case I combined a bunch of my older plugins into a single library, and then to ease upgrades (though now wondering if I just created confusion) made the old projects become subsets of the library via embedding. So even though they are technically an addon using a library, it should probably only count once.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumFor example, Titan Panel comes with about 10 plugins by default. If the author decided that he would remove those 10 plugins, and distribute them as 10 separate standalone plugins, that would skew download counts as well.
Note: I merely used Titan Panel as an example, no harm intended. Cartographer is another such example, where it contains submodules, Bigwigs is another one, etc.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI.e. if it is something related to count, then you might see authors breaking up their addons needlessly into subparts. Just for the "total number of addons" count benefit.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThis data should be seen as a 'sample' (I'm not good with statistics terminology) and used to extrapolate an approximation of the total number of the people actually using a particular add-on versus people just downloading it...
I don't know if it's really clear but I think you get the idea :)
To differentiate an add-on from its modules by the same author, a test on the 'required dependencies' and author names could be used...
I'm not sure that hiding the way points are allocated is a good idea (security through obscurity always fails eventually)
How can it test which addon's are enabled? If you are referring to the curse profiler I have that uninstalled and disabled from ever being installed and I know I am not the only one so that method wouldn't work either.
Spyware much (if the curse client was to upload this)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumWhen is OneBank3 going to be released?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThanks for translating my post. ;)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumSimply put it is based off of popularity, (not download counts).
We've put in safe guards into the way it's generated to minimize the ability to game the system.
There is also a threshold, although pretty low, that one must pass before receiving points.
Any news on when premium will be launching? First of the year maybe...?