You can't steal from open source plugins, and I never said I couldn't tell you what language it's in, because I know what language it is in.


Wow, you're a d#$%@$(s.

 

-----signature-----

As far as I can tell, Warbot doesn't have a EULA, so you can't claim it's open source. There IS no way to conceal the code of a script, so you can't claim that because the code is clearly visible, the author doesn't mind anyone copying it. Any book you can get off any library in the world obviously has the entire text on display for anyone to see, but it's still illegal to copy it. Simply put, you passed someone else's code off as your own, whether intentionally or not doesn't matter. Personally, I'd call that stealing, but I'll accept that definition's open for debate. Regardless of what you call it however, it's still contemptible.


Bottom line is, you took someone else's code, and without asking permission you released a modified version that's sole purpose is to UCM, and led people to believe it was your own work. Don't insult anyone's intelligence by trying to deny it.


Anyway, back on topic- given that you claim to have simply removed a whole chunk of code from Warbot, leaving only the functions visible in that screenshot, I suspect this is probably a long way from being reliable, for the simple reason that Warbot uses a finite state machine. When you rip out parts of an FSM without an understanding of it's design, you more than likely break part of it, and unless you understand the code well enough to re-engineer the transitions between states to fix any deadlock/livelocks that you've inadvertently created, there's a good chance that it'll stop working whenever it was expecting something that you've removed. Of course you might get lucky, it might work without any problems, but the odds of that aren't great. Putting technical issues to one side though, even if I was inclined to UCM, I'd be more than a little reluctant to trust a plugin when the 'author' didn't even know what language he was working with.

All questions of UCM aside, given the OPs antagonistic response toward the programmers who provide the framework for the plugin in the first place, as well as his initial presentation of the plugin as his own work, it will go on the "Not Recommended" list. Antagonism doesn't make for good future support if something DOES go wrong, and I generally find it poor form to **** where one eats, so to speak.

 

-----signature-----

Warbot's admin detection does not work and hasn't worked for along time. All it did was look for the + sign in front of a name, but decal removes that. I took out all the admin detection code in the latest version. I could have looked at the raw messages but decided to leave it out. So Eps, I would take that out unless you want people to get banned.


As for log on death, yes, it could be used by an UCMer, but it also could be used by someone with a CoC legal bot (portal/buff/trade etc).


As for copying the code, I've stated on the warbot support thread on Cam's site that I don't care if the code is reused, as long as credit is given.


Maud-Dib (author of WarBot)

I was tested the other week and the admin alert and all worked for me


well, the fellowship report thingy didnt work, but alarm went off and autoresponded

 

-----signature-----

My warbot is customized here and there and all the features that I use work, even the fellowing after relog.


Cam's site is exactly where I read it, somebody asked about releasing their own version of edited warbot, and it was said that it is allowed as long as the editor takes responsibillity for user support and doesn't throw it on the original writer, and gives the original credit for what was copied.


I like how Thorfinn_Sigurdssen assumed that that I never checked before I edited, and they wrote big long responses without knowing the facts about if it was open or not. You also must have never seen warbot's files, it is VERY easy to follow and very easy to understand. If you make a mistake in the coding, it points out exactly where the problem is and it is very easy to go back and fix. It splits everything into different files and most of everything has comments. As for me not knowing the language, I exagerated on that, I wasn't sure what the name was called, Jscript, Javascript, java, w/e. The name of the code doesn't change my understanding of how what is infront of me is doing what it does.

 

-----signature-----

So, are you going to release this plugin?

 

-----signature-----

Not to you.

 

-----signature-----

I'm not interested in using it. We are considering updating LT's license agreement, though. We do not agree with the use of this plugin in conjunction with LT.

 

-----signature-----

-Eps, Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the first time in the whole thread where you have actually ADMITTED to using the WarBot code, and this is the first time you've credited WarBot as the source. (Perhaps that one post could be considered credit... MAYBE)


But it seems that your admission to using WarBot as a base has only been when coerced. Therefore, you did not initially properly credit the source. What you SHOULD have done was told us in the VERY FIRST post that you have a plugin based on the initial WarBot source that does X, Y, and Z... etc. We shouldn't be finding out 50 posts into the thread that your code is completely taken from WarBot. That is NOT properly crediting the source. Did you leave the WarBot credits in the code? Does your code have comments in it saying that it was based on WarBot, and including the original Author?