SRL Archive - Discussions and Debates

I think it's been a long time coming that the community needs to rethink SRL member applications. What do we want the community to be? A group of mediocre programmers that never make scripts beyond their application? Or a thriving influx of new programmers that continue to improve the quality and quantity of scripts?

The problem with the applications now are that somebody can type up a complicated-looking script that won't compile and they will still be approved. We need to do several things here:

• Automatically or manually compile scripts
• At least one progress report
• A database of scripts to check for plagiarism

If these won't work perhaps we should scrap the scripts and set up a quiz-style application, like the exceptional ones over at the OSx86 community.
Is writing a complicated looking script that compiles and runs for over an hour the only thing we want in members? Some other things that should be considered in an application:

• Commits to SRL on github
• Willingness to help others, attitude, references
• Other programming projects
• Tutorials written
• Contributions to the community

A quick fix would be to restrict votes to SSRL+ until a better application is in place.

We also need to think about incentives. Why would someone want to become an SRL member? Is it simply to belong to an exclusive group? What else can we provide our members with? Ingame clanship? How can we better model the system so that the incentives are to continue programming?

Support for the first part! Don't see the point in having a quiz that someone could do for you. I agree with the things that should be considered(ish). I highly disagree with making votes SSRL+ (they vote yes just as much as members).
We've had an ingame clan before. No one really legits and quite a few got banned so it died. I can't really think of any more incentives other than more member only scripts and more information being given in the members section (since the forum is fairly inactive), examples of "more information" would be things like giving information on future updates to the forums, srl, simha, smart. And to discuss development there.

I agree on many points. I think it would be great if we had a thriving influx of new programmers and if we had a continuously improving scale of scripts. I would love to see applications that really make me say 'woah' or 'I didn't even know that was possible.'
But what can we do to bring this to fruition? Runescape isn't exactly as popular as it once was and we don't have a ton else to bring in the crowds. In order to find those good programmers, they need a reason to come. And many of them originally come as leechers that suddenly become quite interested in 'I bet I could do this.' That's why I started scripting here at least. I came for scripts. And THEN I noticed the open-source framework and how there were so many things I could do and so many things that people said were impossible.

So how would you (or anyone) like to bring more people here? I think a good way would be to dilute ourselves (so to say) and spread into more fields. Perhaps no longer being a site dedicated to Simba (because we're not Runescape, we're Simba), and become more of a coding/gaming/game dev site that features the exclusivity of Simba? Or perhaps there are far better ideas as that's just what comes to mind first for me.

As for the problems with applications currently. I think it should absolutely be a requirement that a script compile. There have been several scripts that haven't compiled that we ended up letting in and it really only would have taken the scripter a few more minutes to double-check the compilation and fix those silly last minute changes before submitting.
As for a progress report… Are you suggesting someone among us to that, or that they submit their own (possibly falsified) report alongside the app?
Absolutely like the idea of a database of scripts to check for plagiarism. There are free projects that currently exist that could do that for us, so long as someone would save the database and run themselves (or setup a more complicated automatic process through villavu server maybe).

Alternative application considerations and my related thoughts:
As for SRL commits, it seems to have been lately limited to people that are already members, or people that have done tremendous work on their own and submitted completed updates to get to commit to SRL, so I'm not sure how I feel on that one. Although a SRL commit would still be a plus, albeit not required in my head.
Willingness to help alongside a good attitude should be a must and I think we mostly keep up with the idea that we're a community and Members are here to help first and foremost (although a TON of members are great until they're accepted).
Other programming projects would be a great plus, but shouldn't be required as a number of people end up using as our their starting point into becoming programmers.
Tutorials are other contributions are always great as well.

As for the quick fix of voting becoming SSRL+ only - how many SSRL+ active people do we have now that vote? 3-5? maybe as high as 7?

I'm all for incentives, but I'm not sure what people may want from what we currently are besides the more elite scripts (for our current situation, typically meaning money makers).

I wouldn't mind a revamp of the application system, but I don't know what a good way to do it would be.

I think one factor is that many of the people voting don't test out the script to see how well it runs and are content to judge by reading the code.

As for restricting votes to SSRL: I don't think that will change the ratio of votes, only the volume.

First off, restricting votes to SSRL+ doesn't seem like a good idea due to activity. I think SRL Members spend a lot more time with the community than SSRL+. "We" are usually spending time on different things such as working on the include. Or just being inactive..

If you would put all things you mentioned in an application it would really become an elite rank. I think there is healthy ratio of SRL Members : normal members right now. I agree the SRL Members rank is hugely dependent on the community as well.

But yes, the application process could use some changes.

Here is why I suggested the SSRL change: as of right most if not all members glance over the script and press yes or no. In my opinion, this has not been working. The application needs to be changed so that this is not possible, or so that those who do so can no longer continue to do so.

@Kevin: I agree with your point about expanding SRL to topics outside runescape. It would keep the veteran programmers coming back and attract a greater variety of new ones. In my opinion this is the most desperately needed change. To keep from getting off topic, perhaps I should start a new thread.

Seems like you agree on most of my other thoughts, and the progress report idea needs to be fleshed out too.

Higher ratio of votes to get in, 50% is too low imo.

From: Olly
Higher ratio of votes to get in, 50% is too low imo.

> 67% was what I used to think it was anyway and I thought that was fine even before I was mem.

From: Kevin
> 67% was what I used to think it was anyway and I thought that was fine even before I was mem.

Maybe people can be able to rate the application 1-100 and make 70 passing?

Just throwing that idea out there :p because sometimes there is a grey area, yes and no is like black or white.

Current system seems fine…especially considering how many applications we have these days…

Here's my thoughts on the matter:

- ALL scripts should be ran/compiled before voted on, at least that's what I tried to do when I had the time. It seems people just go "It has this and this and this, that's good for me". I look at the structure of the code, the logic, and how the SRL library is utilized. I don't vote anymore, as I'm totally inactive due to work.

- Progress reports are nice, but can be faked.

- This really just comes down to memory of the scripts we have/had. I know the older members here are pretty good at spotting possible plagiarized scripts. This is a little harder to crack down on.

- I don't think SRL commits is a good idea, to be honest. Things could get out of hand with people requesting pull requests just to help with their application.

- A persons attitude is the BIGGEST factor really.

- I don't know if having other programming projects will work. I had very little programming experience when I joined and it wasn't until I started scripting did I venture out into other languages and projects.

- Tutorials should be written because the person wants to teach, not because it would help them get into Members.

- This is a HUGE part of the reason to vote.

If I were to submit my application today, that I did so long ago, I wouldn't get in with code alone. Being a Member is more than coding, it's the impact you make to the community. A combination of a script that works (utilizes the SRL library efficiently, follows standards, etc), and the impact the person has on the community play the factor on what to vote.

I do agree on the incentive part of it though, not trying to be rude, but Member scripts are not worth being a Member. If you can get into Members, you can create all the scripts we have. We need to have something else that would spark the interest in scripting.

From: Olly
Higher ratio of votes to get in, 50% is too low imo.

I agree. I vote for 70 or 75%.

From: cause
Current system seems fine…especially considering how many applications we have these days…

That's true, the applications are scarce now.

@OP:
I agree with a lot of your points but a couple I don't agree with is "Commits to SRL on github" (even of the Developers, only a handful do this) and "restrict votes to SSRL+". SSRL+ votes are generally more meaningful than a normal Member's vote, so perhaps should a rank above Member vote on an application it could count for more? Just a suggestion. But definitely all Members should be able to vote. I would much rather lower the bar and encourage effort than filtering very advanced applications but only accepting a few per year.

The thing I hate is when someone important like fakawi or wizzup votes and posts their opinion on the thread, and then you come back and look at the thread on the next day and like sheep everyone followed. I swear i've seen a poll go from 6-0 to 7-13 because of this.

but maybe thats offtopic. idc.
#yohojo4admin

From: Nebula
The thing I hate is when someone important like fakawi or wizzup votes and posts their opinion on the thread, and then you come back and look at the thread on the next day and like sheep everyone followed. I swear i've seen a poll go from 6-0 to 7-13 because of this.

but maybe thats offtopic. idc.
#yohojo4admin

That 'follow the admin' mentality has been especially annoying in a couple of apps where the person was only mediocrely active, few helpful posts on the forums, and had a script that almost completely ignored the SRL include in favor of overly long personally written methods and static coord clicking for almost every activity. And these get approved because an admin quick says 'yes' on it because the author showed up in IRC for a couple weeks (although sometimes us skype folk do that as well - we don't have an admin :p)

Well as one of those SRL members who applied with a few scripts then never scripted for SRL again, I apologize this isn't to say I stopped programming in fact its quite the opposite (Computer Science major, all I do is program now…) I just don't want my life to revolve around it at all times so I take my breaks with SRL. Now I should probably program here, but I prefer being a community advocate instead but if need be I can dust off my RS account.

Now back to the topic on hand, we get around 1 application a month now and I am not going to lie this is kind of saddening. When I joined we had about 3-4 a week sure some were BS but we received a lot of great members during that time (JJ, Ashman, Sin, etc etc..) so based on that I wouldn't change a thing just so we get more members trying at least but I do agree change is needed and somethings that would be awesome if implemented:

Mandatory amount of posts required (We don't tell them, but this way we know we will have active members)
Mandatory one tutorial written
Mandatory one script for OSR or RS that works well, and has all the guidelines you guys described above
Helpful and courteous
Active on at least one form of communication, even if it is just checking their PM box once a day (preferably skype, irc, etc.)

I apologize if this looks like scraps of incoherent phrases been up for the past 8 hours or so working on my MIPS code -.-… Youd think id be a master in assembly by now urgh.

Great discussion guys, keep it up! Everyone post your opinions!

From: lordsaturn
Great discussion guys, keep it up! Everyone post your opinions!

Did you not verify your e-mail? You seem to have gone from Retired Developer red to a Community Member light blue.

As for plagiarism detection, I think we can use Moss. The supported list doesn't include LAPE or PascalScript, but I think it's still similar enough to some of the languages to get the detection down. It could be setup to automatically send an application script alongside the list of scripts in our database (just every script people have ever published) for plagiarism detection.

From: Kevin
In order to find those good programmers, they need a reason to come. And many of them originally come as leechers that suddenly become quite interested in 'I bet I could do this.' That's why I started scripting here at least. I came for scripts.

This is the reality - people come here for the scripts, more specifically the public scripts that are freely accessible to them. It's pretty obvious why there have been no membership applications recently. I've been back 2 days and the one striking thing is there is no (bar two or three) working public scripts. New users come to these forums and see one or two half decent scripts. They are not going to stick around let alone submit a membership application! Even if they wanted to learn it would be pretty dam hard considering the lack of working scripts and updated tutorials. You need to see how it's done before you can do it yourself. We had a whole bunch of working scripts before RS3 and we were getting about 1 serious members app each week.



Obviously this due to the release of RS3 and the new SRL6 include. Great, we've got this awesome new include but nobody knows how to use it! In the first instance we need a bigger pool of working RS3/SRL6 code. Tutorials specific for SRL6 and RS3 would be nice (Only a handful of members here actually have the ability to write these tutorials. I know Coh3n + others have written some basic ones, but so much has changed.) Working scripts are a great resource to learn from as well. I know Asha is slowly updating his scripts, and I've learnt a lot from reading his new code.

Basically:

• More tutorials + working scripts = more people writing scripts
• More public scripts = more users coming to the forums (and hopefully sticking around)
• More users sticking around = more people learning
• More people learning = more apps
• More apps = more SRL members/contributors to the community
• etc.

I know this thread is about designing a new members application process, but the reality is the application process doesn't matter if you don't have any applicants!

From: Officer Barbrady
Maybe people can be able to rate the application 1-100 and make 70 passing?

Just throwing that idea out there :p because sometimes there is a grey area, yes and no is like black or white.

I like that idea. Either that or increasing the % of yeses (like Olly suggested) would be a good start.

From: The Mayor
This is the reality - people come here for the scripts, more specifically the public scripts that are freely accessible to them. It's pretty obvious why there have been no membership applications recently. I've been back 2 days and the one striking thing is there is no (bar two or three) working public scripts. New users come to these forums and see one or two half decent scripts. They are not going to stick around let alone submit a membership application! Even if they wanted to learn it would be pretty dam hard considering the lack of working scripts and updated tutorials. You need to see how it's done before you can do it yourself. We had a whole bunch of working scripts before RS3 and we were getting about 1 serious members app each week.



Obviously this due to the release of RS3 and the new SRL6 include. Great, we've got this awesome new include but nobody knows how to use it! In the first instance we need a bigger pool of working RS3/SRL6 code. Tutorials specific for SRL6 and RS3 would be nice (Only a handful of members here actually have the ability to write these tutorials. I know Coh3n + others have written some basic ones, but so much has changed.) Working scripts are a great resource to learn from as well. I know Asha is slowly updating his scripts, and I've learnt a lot from reading his new code.

Basically:

• More tutorials + working scripts = more people writing scripts
• More public scripts = more users coming to the forums (and hopefully sticking around)
• More users sticking around = more people learning
• More people learning = more apps
• More apps = more SRL members/contributors to the community
• etc.

I know this thread is about designing a new members application process, but the reality is the application process doesn't matter if you don't have any applicants!

You have some good points. :)

First, I'd like to comment on the number of RS3 scripts. The biggest reason is obviously RS3 and SRL-6 like you said. We took a huge risk creating a completely new include that wasn't at all compatible with previous versions. I still think it was the best thing to do given the circumstances, and since SRL-6 has been working well, the number have scripts has increased (I can only assume the ones still in the Public Scripts section aren't outdated). But another issue is RS3 itself - it's just not as popular as it used to be, which doesn't help activity here.

As for tutorials - there is still a huge number of outdated tutorials all over the place, which is a problem (and needs to be fixed). It just confuses users and could turn them away. I've written a basic SRL-6 tutorial, but it's not good for beginners. My AIO beginner's tutorial is good for Pascal Script, but doesn't apply to Lape (which is what SRL-6 uses). I plan on converting it, I just don't have the time right now. It also doesn't help that we have a million different includes and threads for each one all over the place. We are working on a better organization method, but there's a lot to consider and we haven't worked out all the kinks yet.

As for actual membership applications – I dislike the idea of requiring certain things like SRL commits and tutorials. Although it might help to get some more people involved, we don't want people doing it just to become a member, and we don't want a bunch of spam tutorials that lack helpful content (people writing them just for their membership app).

The SRL Member section needs something better than the standard scripts. Like, a really good money making script that isn't well known, something like that. I modified my superheater to use a keybind for the spell. With Rune bars I can make 1.2M/hour in F2P. I plan on releasing this to SRL Members. But that's nothing special at all, and you need high smithing.

The bottom line is we need to somehow bring in more users and supply them with what they need to learn, which with the release of RS3 and SRL-6, we don't have. I have a lot on my plate right now, but after Christmas I'll have more time. I think it would be a good idea to compile a list of what might confuse users. I mean everything – forum names, duplicate forums/threads, outdated tutorials or stickied threads, thread prefixes – everything. Or even better, just report the thread/tutorial, whatever. I think making things clearer and simpler would help to keep users here.

I realize that's a little off topic, but it's all relevant to the forums. :)

^ Brilliant post Coh3n.

I myself have been inactive for the past year and have come pack to these forums to find a lot has changed, not just with srl but with rs as well.

I felt like a new user coming back here and I'm not gonna lie it felt horrible. The RS3 scripts section had been forsaken after the release of srl 6 and there were hundereds, if not thousands outdated and broken scripts. Which was actually pretty scary to see.

On top that, a year away from scripting I had forgotten quite a lot and to come back, with a half - decent knowledge on pascal script, only to find everything was on lape and the include had changed, I nearly gave up. But I thought I'll stick with and looked a lot for tutorials and there honestly weren't any; just bare basic ones explaining types and overloaded functions, which didn't help much when it came to utilising srl 6.

Luckily, the only reason I am an Srl Member was because of my willingness to learn, which still holds true and I have spent hours attempting to try and get my scripts just to compile, let alone run. I've had to open the docs for srl 5 and srl 6 and find where certain procedures/functions are located in each one, see how the names and parameters have changed and whether they do the same thing and then convert; which is more time consuming than you think.

It honestly is a headache for me, and with all (99.9%) the tutorials here written for srl 5, a registered users who dedicates hours of his time to search the includes and try and apply srl 5 tutorials to srl 6 should be insta-promoted. It's hard work.

However, I'm slowly getting to grips with it and hopefully I'll have at least one script out by New Year and then I'm praying that will have a domino effect on me, making me release more scripts and tutorials to help revive this community.

From: abu_jwka
^ Brilliant post Coh3n.

I myself have been inactive for the past year and have come pack to these forums to find a lot has changed, not just with srl but with rs as well.

I felt like a new user coming back here and I'm not gonna lie it felt horrible. The RS3 scripts section had been forsaken after the release of srl 6 and there were hundereds, if not thousands outdated and broken scripts. Which was actually pretty scary to see.

On top that, a year away from scripting I had forgotten quite a lot and to come back, with a half - decent knowledge on pascal script, only to find everything was on lape and the include had changed, I nearly gave up. But I thought I'll stick with and looked a lot for tutorials and there honestly weren't any; just bare basic ones explaining types and overloaded functions, which didn't help much when it came to utilising srl 6.

Luckily, the only reason I am an Srl Member was because of my willingness to learn, which still holds true and I have spent hours attempting to try and get my scripts just to compile, let alone run. I've had to open the docs for srl 5 and srl 6 and find where certain procedures/functions are located in each one, see how the names and parameters have changed and whether they do the same thing and then convert; which is more time consuming than you think.

It honestly is a headache for me, and with all (99.9%) the tutorials here written for srl 5, a registered users who dedicates hours of his time to search the includes and try and apply srl 5 tutorials to srl 6 should be insta-promoted. It's hard work.

However, I'm slowly getting to grips with it and hopefully I'll have at least one script out by New Year and then I'm praying that will have a domino effect on me, making me release more scripts and tutorials to help revive this community.

I'm glad you stuck with it. :)

I think a lot of people are intimidated by switching to Lape, when switching to Lape isn't the hard part. Nearly all PS code is compatible with Lape (i.e. only a few small changes are required to make a PS script compile in Lape). It's the conversion from SRL-5 to SRL-6 that is more difficult, and is likely more difficult for someone who already knows how to script because you're switching from something you already know.

I would really like to know exactly what is so difficult about the change. I think it should be easy, but I know that's not the case for everyone, so I'd like to know what part of it was difficult for you. You also mentioned going through the documentation (which is great, I'm glad it's being used) to see what's changed, etc., and I'm sure you didn't realize there was this. Yes, it's long, but it may have been easier to Ctrl + F some SRL-5 functions you were looking for. Maybe that's something we need to make more obvious for scripters converting from SRL-5 to SRL-6.

I'd love others input as well on what was (or still is) difficult about the switch to SRL-6.

From: Coh3n
I'm glad you stuck with it. :)

I think a lot of people are intimidated by switching to Lape, when switching to Lape isn't the hard part. Nearly all PS code is compatible with Lape (i.e. only a few small changes are required to make a PS script compile in Lape). It's the conversion from SRL-5 to SRL-6 that is more difficult, and is likely more difficult for someone who already knows how to script because you're switching from something you already know.

I would really like to know exactly what is so difficult about the change. I think it should be easy, but I know that's not the case for everyone, so I'd like to know what part of it was difficult for you. You also mentioned going through the documentation (which is great, I'm glad it's being used) to see what's changed, etc., and I'm sure you didn't realize there was this. Yes, it's long, but it may have been easier to Ctrl + F some SRL-5 functions you were looking for. Maybe that's something we need to make more obvious for scripters converting from SRL-5 to SRL-6.

I'd love others input as well on what was (or still is) difficult about the switch to SRL-6.

Well, I'll be damned! I had no idea that link existed! Would've made life so much easier for me and saved me hours!

Tbh that was my main issue; the conversion. I searched the forum for hours but couldn't find anything like that link, which really should be easier to find.

Apart from that, the only issues I've really had is having to convert every type of function in my script. For example, I called functions such as ClickNorth(0); roughly twenty times in one of my scripts. I have to replace each one with the srl 6 equivalent, but I guess that's just standard updating…

Link = Bookmarked.

From: abu_jwka
Well, I'll be damned! I had no idea that link existed! Would've made life so much easier for me and saved me hours!

Tbh that was my main issue; the conversion. I searched the forum for hours but couldn't find anything like that link, which really should be easier to find.

Apart from that, the only issues I've really had is having to convert every type of function in my script. For example, I called functions such as ClickNorth(0); roughly twenty times in one of my scripts. I have to replace each one with the srl 6 equivalent, but I guess that's just standard updating…

Link = Bookmarked.

Okay, I'll make that link more obvious. :)

From: Coh3n
I'm glad you stuck with it. :)

I think a lot of people are intimidated by switching to Lape, when switching to Lape isn't the hard part. Nearly all PS code is compatible with Lape (i.e. only a few small changes are required to make a PS script compile in Lape). It's the conversion from SRL-5 to SRL-6 that is more difficult, and is likely more difficult for someone who already knows how to script because you're switching from something you already know.

I would really like to know exactly what is so difficult about the change. I think it should be easy, but I know that's not the case for everyone, so I'd like to know what part of it was difficult for you. You also mentioned going through the documentation (which is great, I'm glad it's being used) to see what's changed, etc., and I'm sure you didn't realize there was this. Yes, it's long, but it may have been easier to Ctrl + F some SRL-5 functions you were looking for. Maybe that's something we need to make more obvious for scripters converting from SRL-5 to SRL-6.

I'd love others input as well on what was (or still is) difficult about the switch to SRL-6.

People aren't used to using . this . that :)

From: Officer Barbrady
People aren't used to using . this . that :)

I know, but in my mind it's not THAT big of a change. I probably feel that way because I've been doing it that way for so long. :p

From: Coh3n
I know, but in my mind it's not THAT big of a change. I probably feel that way because I've been doing it that way for so long. :p

Lape was the first time I started doing things like that and it did take a bit of getting used to. That's all it is though, it's not harder and it's definitely more organized :)

From: Coh3n
Okay, I'll make that link more obvious. :)

:duh: Damn! That would have been helpful when I updated my script. That needs to be stickied in the tutorial section I think.

From: The Mayor
:duh: Damn! That would have been helpful when I updated my script. That needs to be stickied in the tutorial section I think.

It was in the SRL-6 release thread, which by the sounds of things was missed by most people. I've added it to my SRL-6 how-to guide. I'm going to change the title and sticky it so it's more obvious for people.

I haven't been active recently, so can't comment on recent trends in apps. However, I think perhaps having a minimum amount of scripts released to the public as a requirement for membership can only be a good thing.

1) If people want to become a Member, they'll need to release scripts. More scripts = good

2) Those who can't be bothered to release scripts won't get in. Less people = more exclusivity

3) More exclusivity -> more people wanting it -> again, more scripts

I prefer Quality over Quantity: Releasing one or more scripts isn't required in my eyes. A membership-worthy script in the application is enough to cover the scripting basics of the app for me, but the number one priority for me is how well they behave and how well they'd fit in with the rest of the SRL Members.