Are you sure you want to go to an external site to donate a monetary value?
WARNING: Some countries laws may supersede the payment processors policy such as the GDPR and PayPal. While it is highly appreciated to donate, please check with your countries privacy and identity laws regarding privacy of information first. Use at your utmost discretion.
I had three scripts on this site, and now have two. I'm reasonably certain I didn't accidentally hit the gigantic orange DELETE SCRIPT button while editing in the new version. The URL (https://openuserjs.org/scripts/Ezalias/Ezas_Image_Glutton) 404s. If there's any kind of un-delete function or user history, I can't find it, since clicking my own name just leads to my blank Profile, and there's only one setting on the Preferences page. Obviously there's no Issues page to check.
Even if it's gone forever - a mild annoyance, but unsurprising given how prominent the apparently unsecured DELETE SCRIPT button is - I can't re-upload the same script. Selecting a file to upload has never worked. Copy-pasting into the online editor worked for the three scripts I had, and was the only way I could update these scripts, but now that doesn't work either.
Re: @Ezalias:
A few things:
If anyone fails to follow the TOS any account and scripts are eligible for removal... I kept your account on because maybe you didn't know (even though you should have known before you signed up... after all I do think you know how to read ;)... but that is still optional.
If you wish I can help you troubleshoot your issue. The three methods available are GitHub import, uploading a file and pasting into the editor... all three are tested constantly and do work... so something on your end may be foo barred. I'll need your user agent first (just the agent and not the IP or anything else that site offers) and we can go from there.
Re: @Ezalias:
Just a reminder your other two scripts are scheduled for removal as well if you don't fix them. I'll give you about 24 hours to fix the licensing.
... what?
What hyperactive timeframe did you expect me to respond within? I updated those scripts last-thing yesterday and one was completely gone when I woke up! I don't even check this site every single day. There's no global indicator for comments, either, so I'd have to individually check each of my script's pages just to see that an issue exists. If I hadn't made this thread, I would never have known you'd left a comment, since I can't get to the Issues page of the script, because the script's page has been deleted. Meanwhile the other two scripts' Issues pages have no indication of what's wrong. Your "reminder" is the first and only notice I've seen that they're not kosher.
I'm glad you're feeling helpful about testing my upload issues, but that's small comfort compared to the fact you were ready to delete my entire account without visible warning or recourse. Pardon me for skimming the TOS and assuming that no rights reserved counted as open-source - but your standard operating procedure for handling that sounds hostile and self-defeating. Why comment ever if you're immediately going to delete the only place I'd see that comment?
All it would've taken was "Hey, 'public domain' doesn't count, please re-read the TOS," and I'd have changed it to MIT as soon as possible. The approach you've chosen is wasting time and patience for both of us while also damaging your site's utility as a source of content.
Very simple... you've had almost a year to read it and abide by it. This isn't up for debate.
If you continue to violate the TOS your account will be removed as well. The OUJS community doesn't need this sort of poor etiquette from a Script Author and I have no qualms about removing your account for clearly violating it. You apparently don't know how to use the site for messages... this is your last warning... any further behavior of this sort from you and your account will be terminated... that is final.
Have a nice day. :)
I thought I had read and abided by it. I say this not to excuse the oversight, but to explain that the length of time spent in violation isn't relevant, because I was not cognizant that there was an oversight to correct. Such a mistake, once made, could not have been corrected before someone pointed it out to me. The first indication of error from my perspective was three hours ago - after you escalated from an indication to deletion. (Does this "permanent removal" intentionally prevent me from uploading a corrected version, or is that an upload issue worth discussing?) From a user perspective, one of my scripts simply disappeared without explanation or any indication of wrongdoing.
You are correct that I don't know how to use the message system. There does not appear to be any global message indicator in the header, the footer, or my user page. If there's an FAQ page, I can't find that, either. There's a Comments tab in my user page - but it shows messages I wrote instead of messages written to me. I have literally no idea how I was supposed to see your message about the now-deleted script unless I happened to click on your user page.
(An aside regarding the word "unsecured" - I meant in the sense of a high cliff without a guard rail, not in any network-security sense. I almost clicked that big bright Delete Script button on multiple occasions, which is why I considered accidental self-deletion as a plausible scenario in the first place.)
I cannot begin to guess what your definition of professional etiquette excludes, when you yourself include smiley-faces with your threats of summary account deletion. I've done my best to explain my problems in a civil manner conducive to mutual improvement. If that's not polite enough then so be it.
What is the purpose of permanently barring a script name instead of a script's contents? You don't sound shy about removing entire accounts, so it can't have much use for spam prevention. I can still re-upload the corrected script, now that I've been informed what was wrong with it. (Uploading from a file still does not work, by the way. Firefox Developer Edition 38.0a2 (2015-03-10), useragent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0. Didn't work in normal FF 32.x either. Or Chrome v.whatever-Chrome-silently-updated-to-in-March.) It's both draconian and ineffective, unless the goal was to mildly annoy authors.