Minecraft Name: Jdawger Suggestion: In short: Having items that were previously located in a trade sign moved to an unlocked chest nearby during a Trade Sign Removal. Reason: A little while ago, there was a problem with trade signs as the names “bluwool,” “bluclay,” etc were discontinued. A staff member (think it was Nicit) destroyed the now faux trade signs and put the items in a nearby chest. This got me thinking: Why can’t this be the case for trade sign removals? I’m sure there’s a reason why this is not the case, but I haven’t seen anything regarding this (I’m sure there’s a similar suggestion or a staff posting/exploit that I’m missing) Other Information: Just to clarify a few things: -By having it in an unlocked chest gives similar access as an LWC chest removal and gives everyone access -This could clear some storing assets (forgot actual term) or reduce lag as more people would apply for trade sign removals. -I don’t know 100% what happened regarding that staff member giving my stuff back (if he duped it and voided the items inside or what), but I’m not seeing any issue as no additional items are technically created in the process -Obviously money and exp would become void, but I’m sure many members of ECC care more about the items rather than that stuff. Edit: https://ecocitycraft.com/forum/threads/lwc-trade-sign-property.163399/ I found a similar post posted by stigarose. However, what makes mine different is with the chest, it gives a chance for all members to reap the benefits. Also, I know SA’s have a lot to do and are almost short staffed, but I know I’m fine waiting extra time for a trade sign removal knowing the items would be reintroduced to the world
I'm glad you linked the previous suggestion because I'm going to use my previous answer again. The reason why it's not currently being done: Items are destroyed by the server when breaking a trade sign, so there is no other way except for spawning in new items. The reason why I really hate the idea of profiting from trade sign removals (and, for the record, also LWC removals):
I hear and understand what you said in stigarose’s suggestion, but one can argue the same for LWC removals On locked chests. Plus, what about someone who claimed a town and the original owner decided to store all their items in trade signs (I know town claims are supposed to be “non-selfish,” but I’m sure anyone would still want the items inside even if they didn’t know it existed in the first place)
Funny you should mention that, I was just in the process of editing what I said as that was not the intended message
I do. The difference is that trade signs automatically destroy items; LWC removals don't. GameAdmins break a sign and that's it. Compare that to LWC removals - we'd need to keep track of "SuperMod X unlocked the chest, then removed item Y and item Z and then destroyed both"; that last part simply cannot be verified unless the item is a tool with an item ID. I don't like the fact that LWC removals don't destroy their items, but it's simply not viable to do it.
I apologize in advance, but I just watched “The Big Lebowski” last night and had to put this here as it’s relevent. I respect your opinion (and quite frankly, I respect you @314 <3) but I’m Honestly curious what other staff thinks
Rip @y0landi 's stuff in his trade signs Like the others have said, Trade signs destroy the contents. The bluwool thing had to be done by SA's who could spawn stuff in. Destroy itmes to spawn them back in kinda seems like a long winded process into something which isnt really needed, and as horrible as it sounds. Remove stuff from the economy is a good thing xD
I hear you, but my suggestion was altered slightly to be SA handles trade signs, but whatever. Mods pls lock
