Unvanquished Forum

For context, I invite you to read https://github.com/Unvanquished/Unvanquished/pull/3505 and https://github.com/Unvanquished/Unvanqu ... ssues/3503.

Please note that I'll be referring to points mentioned there.

With this message, I'm hoping to get some answers.

For those who don't want to go through the pull request and issue (which I can understand, they're not exactly pleasant reading), here's a quick summary: Sweet runs the best server of the game (https://acidtu.be/servers/connect.html? ... port=27960). It's the most popular, the most advanced, and has the largest number of maps. His server used to have the "featured" tag, which indicates that it's a recommended place to play.

However, following issue #3503, illwieckz (the project leader) decided on his own without consulting anyone to remove that tag from Sweet's server, likely due to conflicts between them.

I say "likely" because the decision was made with no community input whatsoever.

If you're on the Unvanquished Discord, IRC, or Matrix (the channels are bridged), you may have seen cu-kai's question:

@illwieckz where was the consultation before we un-featured sweet235's server?
I find it an odd decision that we have removed the [featured] tag from the most popular server on the game

illwieckz avoided answering and deflected.

Maybe we could assume he simply didn't see it? But between the Discord/Matrix/IRC messages, the GitHub issue, and the GitHub PR... That's a lot to miss!

Strangely enough, after these questions and comments, illwieckz disappeared. Well, "disappeared"... He actually went on to comment on other pull requests and issues, proving he wasn't absent at all.

And while I'm focusing on illwieckz here, the same could be said for Gireen, who vanished from the pull request after my comments.

All of this demonstrates one thing (actually several things, like how terribly this project is being managed, though that's not my focus here): the tagging system is just under the whims of upstream, and is just a tool tha tallow them to make power abuses.

"Recommended" should mean something like a server being recognized as outstanding by the community, not by the whims of a single person (or by upstream, which in practice amounts to the same thing).

illwieckz said this in the pull request:

We are free to recommend this or that server, to showcase this or this server, to flag servers as officials or development testbed if we want, etc.

But no. You should not have that power.

• "Recommended" servers should be chosen by the community, not unilaterally by upstream.
• "Development server" should be self-applied by server owners.
• The only legitimate use of this system should be to flag official servers.

Maintaining the list by removing servers because their owners disagree with you is simply an abuse of power.

illwieckz also stated:

The direction of the project wants the mechanism to be there to be able to recommend servers and other things in an editorial way.

But the community wants this mechanism to be led by the community, not controlled by upstream. If it isn't, then it shouldn't exist at all.

So again, I'm asking illwieckz to explain WHY the "featured" tag was removed from Sweet's server.

I'm also asking for the tagging system to be fixed, to let the community decide which servers are recommended, to let server hosts mark their own as development servers if they want, and to reserve the "official" label for upstream only.

Wouldn't it be more fun to write some code, instead of screeds on behalf of another person's grievances? We fondly remember https://github.com/Unvanquished/Unvanquished/pull/3383 and https://github.com/Unvanquished/Unvanquished/pull/3092.

As for the actual feature labels, the number of active servers at present is so small that I wouldn't spend two brain cells worrying about the burden of players figuring out which one to join.

As for the actual feature labels, the number of active servers at present is so small that I wouldn't spend two brain cells worrying about the burden of players figuring out which one to join.

You don’t play online, so of course you don't care about it. The same goes for Gireen and illwieckz (at least, the last time I saw illwieckz playing was less than a year ago).
So just remove this problematic system.
I forgot to mention:
Upstream does not play online. So how could they possibly recommend servers?

Wouldn't it be more fun to write some code, instead of screeds on behalf of another person's grievances?

Fun? It is not fun to write code for the upstream repo. I have no issue writing code for Sweet's server, cu-kai's server, freem's server, or any other servers, except those maintained by upstream or its members.
I’d like to quote this from Building a Community as a Service:

A very important thing is to lurk and live within communities, to listen to their needs, notice the growing aspirations, and accompany the births. It's a bit like probing a market but it's about being a friend.

I don’t think these words apply to Unvanquished.
Also, could you clarify what you mean by "instead of screeds on behalf of another person's grievances?"
The truth is, I no longer want to contribute to Unvanquished's code because of how things happened and how things continue to happen.
And I'm still waiting for an answer about why the "featured" tag was removed from Sweet’s server.

killing time wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 9:38 am UTC

As for the actual feature labels, the number of active servers at present is so small that I wouldn't spend two brain cells worrying about the burden of players figuring out which one to join.

It's important for new players, lest they join an unmaintained server and end up quitting the game entirely because of some hairy issue they encountered that does not happen on other servers.

killing time wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 9:38 am UTC

I wouldn't spend two brain cells worrying about the burden of players figuring out which one to join.

Well yes, but that's because you don't care about players in general. If you cared you'd at least consider that first impressions are important, especially if that might be the only impression you get in this attention economy.

I would ask, if it's so trivial and so unworthy of consideration why did someone take time from their presumably busy schedule to un-feature Map&Bot Testing? My hypothesis is it highlights how badly main branch of the game has been neglected and underdeveloped, which would lead any observer to asking a very uncomfortable "why?".
Pure politics

@Griese illwieckz did already address your incoherent rambling in the PR so there was nothing to add from me to that

also you are not entitled to get responses exclusive from me, especially when you act like a lunatic

beside that you contradict yourself anyway in your blind hatred.
first its useless, then you think its a bug, then a tool of oppression, then you suddenly want to wield that tool yourself

same goes for reaper btw

XReaperX wrote:

I don't know of anyone that looks at those labels for any reason, and new players won't even know what they mean anyway. LGTM.

https://github.com/Unvanquished/Unvanqu ... 4006723436

XReaperX wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 11:17 am UTC

It's important for new players, lest they join an unmaintained server and end up quitting the game entirely because of some hairy issue they encountered that does not happen on other servers.

at least get your stories strait when you guys try to instigate something just for the sake of it