Community Project

CJMaeder · 2017-07-31 21:54:09

XxAtillaxX wrote:

To be clear, you aren't apart of the community, either - you've even deleted the community Discord server.
You've been an over-privileged scum **** who thinks they can do anything without being held responsible.

That was my personal discord server.
I deleted it because it had become more vulgar than anything else.

As far as work went on the unity project
I started the project
Thanel and I were the primary workers on it.

PS: I was not aware you thought so highly of me.

mrjawapa, NegaStrife

LukeM · 2017-07-31 22:54:50

Ernesdo wrote:

XxAtillaxX wrote:
If it was published, not only would he be committing a crime but any derivative of the work would be taken down as theft and copyright infringement.
You know, maybe instead of being pathetic and retarded, take the legitimate route of creating an original work, like the person who is making HaxEE is doing.
how is haxee original

As in original code (not copied), rather than original ideas

John · 2017-07-31 23:01:55

destroyer123 wrote:

As in original code (not copied), rather than original ideas

The physics were copied, which makes sense for an EE client.

Zoey2070 · 2017-07-31 23:10:44

[5:56 PM] atillabyte: @Zoey2070
Warning: Flaming (Minor) (3 points)
Date issued: Today 18:05:56
Expires: 2018-01-27 18:05:56
Issued by: Different55
"I mean you're right and I agree with you 100% but...
can't go around calling people overprivileged scum ** even if that's exactly what they are.
also sorry hit the wrong button.
idk is flaming (minor) too lenient? it might be too lenient."
[5:56 PM] Zoey2070: rip
[5:56 PM] Zoey2070: that was savage af tho
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: going to have someone post on my behalf anyway, replying to these retards
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: "cjmader is trying to help the game"
yeah, no he isn't. the same guy that was going to delete a bunch of **** from bigdb and releasing the shared secret and blame it on me, which is the reason why Nou fired him after I went and contacted him
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: and deleted the community discord, yeah he sure loves the game
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: no it's more like
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: he's butthurt that he got caught
[5:57 PM] Zoey2070: wtf is the shared secret tho
[5:57 PM] Zoey2070: just that unity isn't really a thing?
[5:58 PM] Zoey2070: it's a SHARED secret
[5:58 PM] Zoey2070: anyways if u format the post and **** i'll post it
[6:01 PM] bulldozer: well it must be a thing if Lame wanted to publish it
[6:03 PM] atillabyte: it essentially allows anyone to do anything, there was a connection type called "merge"
[6:03 PM] atillabyte: had permissions to delete/create **** in bigdb, payvault etc
[6:04 PM] Zoey2070: so is cj just saltly and threatening to **** ppl over then?
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: essentially yes
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: you can post discord log ad-verbatim
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: can't be bothered to write a nicely formatted post
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: also this is evidence gathered of cj trying to **** over ee
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: full chat logs, screenies, etc
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: https://atil.la/x/img/AV5UQydqMp.7z

some woman, mutantdevle, Swarth100

Lictor666 · 2017-08-01 00:23:34

Zoey2070 wrote:

[5:56 PM] atillabyte: @Zoey2070
Warning: Flaming (Minor) (3 points)
Date issued: Today 18:05:56
Expires: 2018-01-27 18:05:56
Issued by: Different55
"I mean you're right and I agree with you 100% but...
can't go around calling people overprivileged scum ** even if that's exactly what they are.
also sorry hit the wrong button.
idk is flaming (minor) too lenient? it might be too lenient."
[5:56 PM] Zoey2070: rip
[5:56 PM] Zoey2070: that was savage af tho
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: going to have someone post on my behalf anyway, replying to these retards
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: "cjmader is trying to help the game"
yeah, no he isn't. the same guy that was going to delete a bunch of **** from bigdb and releasing the shared secret and blame it on me, which is the reason why Nou fired him after I went and contacted him
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: and deleted the community discord, yeah he sure loves the game
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: no it's more like
[5:57 PM] atillabyte: he's butthurt that he got caught
[5:57 PM] Zoey2070: wtf is the shared secret tho
[5:57 PM] Zoey2070: just that unity isn't really a thing?
[5:58 PM] Zoey2070: it's a SHARED secret
[5:58 PM] Zoey2070: anyways if u format the post and **** i'll post it
[6:01 PM] bulldozer: well it must be a thing if Lame wanted to publish it
[6:03 PM] atillabyte: it essentially allows anyone to do anything, there was a connection type called "merge"
[6:03 PM] atillabyte: had permissions to delete/create **** in bigdb, payvault etc
[6:04 PM] Zoey2070: so is cj just saltly and threatening to **** ppl over then?
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: essentially yes
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: you can post discord log ad-verbatim
[6:04 PM] atillabyte: can't be bothered to write a nicely formatted post
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: also this is evidence gathered of cj trying to **** over ee
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: full chat logs, screenies, etc
[6:05 PM] atillabyte: https://atil.la/x/img/AV5UQydqMp.7z

I like how the "staff" play together to give special aura and unique smiley and don't care about the game... They don't care so much they are ready to give the source code away...

Vinyl Melody

Gosha · 2017-08-01 04:31:11

Emalton wrote:

How would it not speed up progress?

We staff already has this code so helping Ee staff with this is useless

If he release the code everyone will go creating their own clients. It won't be open Sourse project, it will be a mess

LukeM, mutantdevle

Zumza · 2017-08-01 10:15:46

Gosha wrote:

Emalton wrote:
How would it not speed up progress?
We staff already has this code so helping Ee staff with this is useless
If he release the code everyone will go creating their own clients. It won't be open Sourse project, it will be a mess

I said it numerous times before and I already get tired of it.
If EE will be made open source there aren't going to be more remakes than there are now. And a remake will never have the number of players than the original game has.
The only thing that an open source EE can do is to allow anybody to contribute, to fix bugs and speed up the process until EE still has a chance.

mutantdevle · 2017-08-01 11:01:17

Zumza wrote:

The only thing that an open source EE can do is to allow anybody to contribute, to fix bugs and speed up the process until EE still has a chance.

You forget the part where we all have to agree if the code someone has made should be added to the game. We also have to agree on how it gets coded. Everyone will have their own coding styles which will be messy and hard to understand to other users.

Think of it this way:

Code X is the current version. 2 people work on the code making 2 versions of the game XY and XZ. We now have to decide whether we use X, XY or XZ. But say we want XYZ, now the 2 pieces of code have to be brought together without making any extra bugs. Unstructured open source does not work. There will be so many versions of the game created that are all intended to become part of the full game, all with their own separate variable names and then the community must decide what gets added and what doesn't. Then there's making everyone's code compatible with each others. If you really think that the EE community will be able to agree on all of this then you think too highly of this community. Open source will be a mess.

LukeM

Kolios 14 · 2017-08-01 11:14:32

Devlin wrote:

You forget the part where we all have to agree if the code someone has made should be added to the game. We also have to agree on how it gets coded. Everyone will have their own coding styles which will be messy and hard to understand to other users.
Think of it this way:
Code X is the current version. 2 people work on the code making 2 versions of the game XY and XZ. We now have to decide whether we use X, XY or XZ. But say we want XYZ, now the 2 pieces of code have to be brought together without making any extra bugs. Unstructured open source does not work. There will be so many versions of the game created that are all intended to become part of the full game, all with their own separate variable names and then the community must decide what gets added and what doesn't. Then there's making everyone's code compatible with each others. If you really think that the EE community will be able to agree on all of this then you think too highly of this community. Open source will be a mess.

Why would that be a problem? Isn't that how git already works like?

mutantdevle · 2017-08-01 11:24:11

Kolios 14 wrote:

Why would that be a problem? Isn't that how git already works like?

When there is organisation to the code, like there used to be, everything should work fine.

But when you have lots of people working on their own versions of the code things will become messy. It will be hard to read what others have done and variables will be inconsistent. For example someone might add a new block to the game which has a new id. Someone else may also add a different block with the same id. This creates a problem and when there are lots of problems it becomes a huge pain to go through the entire code to fix other people's messy coding. There may also be arguments involved. For example if someone adds a new type of coin to the game and then other people just remove it again. Also who will decide whose code gets added to the game? If anyone can add anything to the game easily then people would purposely sabotage the game or people will start adding ideas that aren't good and no one likes. People would be free to just remove and add anything unless all code had to go through some kind of process. But whose in charge of that? What makes you think people will listen to them in the first place?

Kolios 14

peace · 2017-08-01 12:00:40

Devlin wrote:

Kolios 14 wrote:
Why would that be a problem? Isn't that how git already works like?
When there is organisation to the code, like there used to be, everything should work fine.
But when you have lots of people working on their own versions of the code things will become messy. It will be hard to read what others have done and variables will be inconsistent. For example someone might add a new block to the game which has a new id. Someone else may also add a different block with the same id. This creates a problem and when there are lots of problems it becomes a huge pain to go through the entire code to fix other people's messy coding. There may also be arguments involved. For example if someone adds a new type of coin to the game and then other people just remove it again. Also who will decide whose code gets added to the game? If anyone can add anything to the game easily then people would purposely sabotage the game or people will start adding ideas that aren't good and no one likes. People would be free to just remove and add anything unless all code had to go through some kind of process. But whose in charge of that? What makes you think people will listen to them in the first place?

wrong you cant just add a new block it needs tto be coded in the sever too if u add a new block new action blocks will need to send apackets to the server likeeffects does but people could just rextexture blcoks/smileys

Tomahawk · 2017-08-01 12:25:34

I doubt those of you wanting the source code to be released can name three members of the community both willing to and capable of coding decent updates in Unity.

It would be a complete mess, and anyone that tried to work on it would quickly understand why an unpaid dev team isn't making amazing progress.

mutantdevle

Zumza · 2017-08-01 13:05:49

Devlin wrote:

Zumza wrote:
The only thing that an open source EE can do is to allow anybody to contribute, to fix bugs and speed up the process until EE still has a chance.
You forget the part where we all have to agree if the code someone has made should be added to the game. We also have to agree on how it gets coded. Everyone will have their own coding styles which will be messy and hard to understand to other users.
Think of it this way:
Code X is the current version. 2 people work on the code making 2 versions of the game XY and XZ. We now have to decide whether we use X, XY or XZ. But say we want XYZ, now the 2 pieces of code have to be brought together without making any extra bugs. Unstructured open source does not work. There will be so many versions of the game created that are all intended to become part of the full game, all with their own separate variable names and then the community must decide what gets added and what doesn't. Then there's making everyone's code compatible with each others. If you really think that the EE community will be able to agree on all of this then you think too highly of this community. Open source will be a mess.

Have you ever worked or at least check how people work on open-source project? Likely not by what you're saying. There are general rules of code-styling, also there are git-hooks that can run scripts to automatically format code to the rules of that specific code-styling. On open source project people do small fixes within each commit. Commits are then accepted or rejected by the main dev group. There are also unittests that will be run for each commit automatically to check if its ok. If 2 people work on the same file, which usually doesn't happen because you often specify what you're working on, both versions can still be merged. Git is extremely smart. Git is not only used for open-source projects, VCSs are used by any software company.

Devlin wrote:

Kolios 14 wrote:
Why would that be a problem? Isn't that how git already works like?
When there is organisation to the code, like there used to be, everything should work fine.
But when you have lots of people working on their own versions of the code things will become messy. It will be hard to read what others have done and variables will be inconsistent. For example someone might add a new block to the game which has a new id. Someone else may also add a different block with the same id. This creates a problem and when there are lots of problems it becomes a huge pain to go through the entire code to fix other people's messy coding. There may also be arguments involved. For example if someone adds a new type of coin to the game and then other people just remove it again. Also who will decide whose code gets added to the game? If anyone can add anything to the game easily then people would purposely sabotage the game or people will start adding ideas that aren't good and no one likes. People would be free to just remove and add anything unless all code had to go through some kind of process. But whose in charge of that? What makes you think people will listen to them in the first place?

No. Open-source projects aren't an anarchy. The main dev-team specifies clearly what features are requested to be made, what bugs have to be fixed... Not all pull-request have to be accepted.

Tomahawk wrote:

I doubt those of you wanting the source code to be released can name three members of the community both willing to and capable of coding decent updates in Unity.
It would be a complete mess, and anyone that tried to work on it would quickly understand why an unpaid dev team isn't making amazing progress.

I can name more than 3. And from my point of view not amazing progress is still better than no progress.

Kolios 14, Vinyl Melody, mrjawapa

LukeM · 2017-08-01 14:00:44

Zumza wrote:

Devlin wrote:
Zumza wrote:
The only thing that an open source EE can do is to allow anybody to contribute, to fix bugs and speed up the process until EE still has a chance.
You forget the part where we all have to agree if the code someone has made should be added to the game. We also have to agree on how it gets coded. Everyone will have their own coding styles which will be messy and hard to understand to other users.
Think of it this way:
Code X is the current version. 2 people work on the code making 2 versions of the game XY and XZ. We now have to decide whether we use X, XY or XZ. But say we want XYZ, now the 2 pieces of code have to be brought together without making any extra bugs. Unstructured open source does not work. There will be so many versions of the game created that are all intended to become part of the full game, all with their own separate variable names and then the community must decide what gets added and what doesn't. Then there's making everyone's code compatible with each others. If you really think that the EE community will be able to agree on all of this then you think too highly of this community. Open source will be a mess.
Have you ever worked or at least check how people work on open-source project? Likely not by what you're saying. There are general rules of code-styling, also there are git-hooks that can run scripts to automatically format code to the rules of that specific code-styling. On open source project people do small fixes within each commit. Commits are then accepted or rejected by the main dev group. There are also unittests that will be run for each commit automatically to check if its ok. If 2 people work on the same file, which usually doesn't happen because you often specify what you're working on, both versions can still be merged. Git is extremely smart. Git is not only used for open-source projects, VCSs are used by any software company.

Devlin wrote:
Kolios 14 wrote:
Why would that be a problem? Isn't that how git already works like?
When there is organisation to the code, like there used to be, everything should work fine.
But when you have lots of people working on their own versions of the code things will become messy. It will be hard to read what others have done and variables will be inconsistent. For example someone might add a new block to the game which has a new id. Someone else may also add a different block with the same id. This creates a problem and when there are lots of problems it becomes a huge pain to go through the entire code to fix other people's messy coding. There may also be arguments involved. For example if someone adds a new type of coin to the game and then other people just remove it again. Also who will decide whose code gets added to the game? If anyone can add anything to the game easily then people would purposely sabotage the game or people will start adding ideas that aren't good and no one likes. People would be free to just remove and add anything unless all code had to go through some kind of process. But whose in charge of that? What makes you think people will listen to them in the first place?
No. Open-source projects aren't an anarchy. The main dev-team specifies clearly what features are requested to be made, what bugs have to be fixed... Not all pull-request have to be accepted.
Tomahawk wrote:
I doubt those of you wanting the source code to be released can name three members of the community both willing to and capable of coding decent updates in Unity.
It would be a complete mess, and anyone that tried to work on it would quickly understand why an unpaid dev team isn't making amazing progress.
I can name more than 3. And from my point of view not amazing progress is still better than no progress.

The problem is that managing all this be harder than making the changes themselves, as 90% would be terribly made, buggy and impossible to build future updates upon. The best thing to do would be to only allow certain people with good enough records to make changes, then it would be easier to manage. Wait... That's basically what's happening already...

mutantdevle · 2017-08-01 14:13:00

Zumza wrote:

Have you ever worked or at least check how people work on open-source project? Likely not by what you're saying. There are general rules of code-styling,

I'm fully aware of this and I have mentioned this several times. My point is that I doubt the EE community would be able to adequately abide by this since it is in such a poor state. If you haven't noticed most people don't exactly agree with each other. I guarantee there would be arguments over what rules there should be and even when that's settled there will still be people who would not listen to them and new players who want to help code may not be aware of them.

Zumza wrote:

also there are git-hooks that can run scripts to automatically format code to the rules of that specific code-styling. On open source project people do small fixes within each commit. Commits are then accepted or rejected by the main dev group.

Who will be the main dev group? Who gets to decide this? Again this is a point that the EE community will not agree on.

Zumza wrote:

There are also unittests that will be run for each commit automatically to check if its ok. If 2 people work on the same file, which usually doesn't happen because you often specify what you're working on, both versions can still be merged.

There is no promises that the merges will be successful and I guarantee there will be pointless bugs that will become hard to fix since the mixed code would be hard to read in order to find the cause.

Zumza wrote:

No. Open-source projects aren't an anarchy. The main dev-team specifies clearly what features are requested to be made, what bugs have to be fixed... Not all pull-request have to be accepted.

Again who gets to be on the main dev-team? Who decides if a pull request is accepted?

Zumza · 2017-08-01 14:41:51

Devlin wrote:

Zumza wrote:
Have you ever worked or at least check how people work on open-source project? Likely not by what you're saying. There are general rules of code-styling
Zumza wrote:
also there are git-hooks that can run scripts to automatically format code to the rules of that specific code-styling. On open source project people do small fixes within each commit. Commits are then accepted or rejected by the main dev group.
I'm fully aware of this and I have mentioned this several times. My point is that I doubt the EE community would be able to adequately abide by this since it is in such a poor state. If you haven't noticed most people don't exactly agree with each other. I guarantee there would be arguments over what rules there should be and even when that's settled there will still be people who would not listen to them and new players who want to help code may not be aware of them.

If new programers who don't know the rules happen to do a push request which doesn't follow the rules, they'll be notified by a person or by the automatic git-hook script that does this verification as I said.
This is how it happens in any open-source project...

Devlin wrote:

Who will be the main dev group? Who gets to decide this?

The same main dev group that its now.

Devlin wrote:

Zumza wrote:
There are also unittests that will be run for each commit automatically to check if its ok. If 2 people work on the same file, which usually doesn't happen because you often specify what you're working on, both versions can still be merged.
I guarantee there will be pointless bugs that will become hard to fix since the mixed code would be hard to read in order to find the cause.

There is mixed awful code already, admins already publicly said that. Open-sourcing the EE will just add extra hands to find those bugs.

There is no reason for EE not to gain the advantages of making it open-source. If EE will be made open-source it will have the same benefits as any other open-source project. EE programming community is not special than other programming communities.

mrjawapa, Kolios 14

mutantdevle · 2017-08-01 15:35:26

I'm sure you are aware of the many negatives of open sourcing the code has as well as knowing the positives. But the thing that makes me so against this idea is the OP of the thread, you can't exactly trust their intentions. I don't exactly trust the whole of the rest of the community either. Also you'd want the current main dev group to be in charge of the community dev group? hahahahah no. I thought you wanted to open source EE because you wanted progress to be made?

There was a time when I liked the idea of open sourcing EE but things have changed and so has that possibility. This community is far too divided and the code it would produce would be equally so.

BEE · 2017-08-01 15:57:51

How about instead of releasing the source code we just make a thread asking for anyone that is willing and able to code in unity, have them give an example or two, then get them on board as a volunteer?

If the thread is left open to the public, it's essentially the same thing but safer as you have a list of who can access it.

mutantdevle

Gosha · 2017-08-01 16:23:06

BEE wrote:

How about instead of releasing the source code we just make a thread asking for anyone that is willing and able to code in unity, have them give an example or two, then get them on board as a volunteer?

That wouldn't work if a volunteer is not the owner.
If you want a legit optimizated ee - you need to edit server-side code aswell

XxAtillaxX · 2017-08-01 16:24:03

Think about what's being discussed here, the nefarious and completely illegal releasing of confidential information.

It's incredibly simple-minded to assume that any deed that may remotely benefit you is an altruistic one.
Why doesn't he go ahead and release the emails of registered users as well in order to get some boosts in numbers?

It's damaging one entity as a benefit for another - this isn't as much of a community project as it is a revenge tactic.

mutantdevle, LukeM

BEE · 2017-08-01 16:26:35

Gosha wrote:

BEE wrote:
How about instead of releasing the source code we just make a thread asking for anyone that is willing and able to code in unity, have them give an example or two, then get them on board as a volunteer?
That wouldn't work if a volunteer is not the owner.
If you want a legit optimizated ee - you need to edit server-side code aswell

I am confused. Are you saying that all of the programmers working on EE currently are also owners? O_o

Zumza · 2017-08-01 16:37:23

Devlin wrote:

I'm sure you are aware of the many negatives of open sourcing the code has as well as knowing the positives. But the thing that makes me so against this idea is the OP of the thread, you can't exactly trust their intentions. I don't exactly trust the whole of the rest of the community either. Also you'd want the current main dev group to be in charge of the community dev group? hahahahah no. I thought you wanted to open source EE because you wanted progress to be made?
There was a time when I liked the idea of open sourcing EE but things have changed and so has that possibility. This community is far too divided and the code it would produce would be equally so.

The negatives of not open sourcing EE might be greater at the moment. Who the OP of this thread is irrelevant as long as he can legally make this decision.
The main dev group can start with the current main dev group until we'll sort things out.
If we don't trust each other and if we're divided then we can't call ourselves a community. The roots of that division is mostly made because we see no progress. This might still be the solution.

BEE wrote:

How about instead of releasing the source code we just make a thread asking for anyone that is willing and able to code in unity, have them give an example or two, then get them on board as a volunteer?
If the thread is left open to the public, it's essentially the same thing but safer as you have a list of who can access it.

I think I did propose this in a PM to Thanel a very long time ago(3 years maybe? somewhere close after EE2 update, might be wrong). They were unwilling to work with anyone who they didn't know, and had no interest into taking the time into knowing persons.

XxAtillaxX · 2017-08-01 16:37:50

BEE wrote:

I am confused. Are you saying that all of the programmers working on EE currently are also owners? O_o

I've inferred that from his statement as well, and it isn't fair to imply the role of development is synonymous with administration, given the two aren't mutually exclusive to begin with, nor necessarily need to be.
It's definitely a benefit for them to be separate from one another, however given the current administration, there's much more of a line between administration and moderation than there is development and administration.

Zumza · 2017-08-01 16:40:05

XxAtillaxX wrote:

Think about what's being discussed here, the nefarious and completely illegal releasing of confidential information.
It's incredibly simple-minded to assume that any deed that may remotely benefit you is an altruistic one.
Why doesn't he go ahead and release the emails of registered users as well in order to get some boosts in numbers?
It's damaging one entity as a benefit for another - this isn't as much of a community project as it is a revenge tactic.

Well, then I guess we should deal with it like any other user that threats to release that kind of information. Flag him and forum moderators will decide if he has to be censored or not.

XxAtillaxX · 2017-08-01 16:58:14

Zumza wrote:

Well, then I guess we should deal with it like any other user that threats to release that kind of information. Flag him and forum moderators will decide if he has to be censored or not.

I don't think he should be banned from the forums for merely insinuating that he'll be committing a crime, or being complacent in doing so, nor do I believe it's against the terms.

If you had an example of someone being warned for similar, you could then make a case for it.

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#26 2017-07-31 21:54:09

Re: Community Project

#27 2017-07-31 22:54:50

Re: Community Project

#28 2017-07-31 23:01:55

Re: Community Project

#29 2017-07-31 23:10:44

Re: Community Project

#30 2017-08-01 00:23:34

Re: Community Project

#31 2017-08-01 04:31:11

Re: Community Project

#32 2017-08-01 10:15:46

Re: Community Project

#33 2017-08-01 11:01:17

Re: Community Project

#34 2017-08-01 11:14:32

Re: Community Project

#35 2017-08-01 11:24:11

Re: Community Project

#36 2017-08-01 12:00:40

Re: Community Project

#37 2017-08-01 12:25:34

Re: Community Project

#38 2017-08-01 13:05:49, last edited by Zumza (2017-08-01 13:12:23)

Re: Community Project

#39 2017-08-01 14:00:44

Re: Community Project

#40 2017-08-01 14:13:00

Re: Community Project

#41 2017-08-01 14:41:51, last edited by Zumza (2017-08-01 14:44:45)

Re: Community Project

#42 2017-08-01 15:35:26

Re: Community Project

#43 2017-08-01 15:57:51

Re: Community Project

#44 2017-08-01 16:23:06

Re: Community Project

#45 2017-08-01 16:24:03

Re: Community Project

#46 2017-08-01 16:26:35

Re: Community Project

#47 2017-08-01 16:37:23

Re: Community Project

#48 2017-08-01 16:37:50

Re: Community Project

#49 2017-08-01 16:40:05

Re: Community Project

#50 2017-08-01 16:58:14

Re: Community Project

Board footer