[Lance]

Originally Posted by protagonist

If I asked for help on how to use a command, I wouldn't want it nested in a load of "secure" coding. I would simply want an example and, if need be, apply my own security measures. There's no inherent reason in posting a command example with security included. It provides the answer plus a cumbersome read.

This isn't about what you would ask or what you would want. This is about what was asked, what was provided, and why it was the wrong answer.

Well, I noticed right away that there were no security features in the script. The first thing I thought was: "Wow, I wouldn't copy and paste that code. It doesn't even check to see who uses it.". I don't even write in GScript.

Now might be a good time to point out that you are not the author of this thread. The discussion point you are attempting to reply to deals not with you but with the author of this thread. You have not answered my question.

Also, if you say something is insecure, it wouldn't hurt to point out why it is insecure.

Actually, I did. In my first reply to her post. Please read it!

It's not copy&paste code. It's an example. If the author copy and pastes it, it's his or her fault for doing so.

Read the forum rules lately? Code that you can copy and paste and use it as-is (or with trivial modifications) on your server is just that.

People who ask for help are supposed to use the help in order to write their own scripts, not to copy and paste the suggestions.

Yeah, supposed to. In the real world it doesn't quite happen just like that. That's why the rule exists.

Also, to post what the script does is redundant. The author presumably knows his or her own desires.

Oh, please. His or her own desires are not necessarily equivalent to random code posted by random people in response.

1) That's where you're wrong. The NPC scripting forum frequently acts as a scripting guide. In fact, a guide is precisely what this forum appears to function as.

Looks like you need to re-read rule 1 of this forum.

2) So? It was an example, not a direct reference to the current discussion.

No relation -> false analogy.

Is it necessary to explain commands? If someone gave me something I didn't understand, I would go look up the command. It encourages the self-teaching method, rather than the "oh I got something wrong, can you tell me what to do to the letter?" method.

If you have sufficient belief that the person you are helping does not understand a command or concept, it behooves you to explain it. That certainly does not mean that you should do all of their work for them, but at least you can give them the information they would need to learn from it (while avoiding giving them the chance to simply copy&paste without learning).

You also can't script well if you don't grasp elements of the language. The nature of the question the author poses suggests that he or she does not yet have a grasp on some of the commands.

How does this respond to my point that scripting and security are not actually two different things? Your claim that they were separate was what I was responding to, after all.

P.S: Why don't you address the author with suggestions on security, rather than engaging in a confrontation with another forumer who was trying to be helpful?

I consider "Their question did not deal with security, but one of the responses was quite insecure" to be good enough reason for that.

P.P.S: And no, I'm not being hypocritical. I'm simply asking why a moderator who is so concerned with security would be so eager to attack someone's efforts without providing an example of an improved script.

An improved script of which, now? If you're referring to calani's, the approach is flawed. There is no 'improved script' for that approach for this problem.

Learning by example is probably the most effective way to learn anything. Including scripting.

Different people learn differently, man. The best thing any of us can do is provide people with enough information so they, with every learning style ("give me the the finished code and I will learn" naturally excepted), can learn.