Compatibility with Enjin

Well, either way, rather than calling them lazy, you could have just provided the link and closed the topic.

Why do you feel you have to spend the additional time to point out to them that they are lazy? Did I miss a rule that says that you can’t be lazy on this forum? Are you a manager of people who work remotely so you have the ability to judge others amount of effort spent?

Plus, please address this:
Just because they chose what seems to be a wrong path of inquiry for their question doesn’t mean that it isn’t research. In this case, they could have very well gone to either forum (enjin/sponge) and asked the same question. Who knows, maybe they did! Maybe the Enjin folks referred them here.

Or are you too lazy to do so?

While we are quoting posts:
Here you call everyone who asks a question that is in the FAQ lazy:

Here you call everyone from a site lazy:

Another user determined to be lazy by the expert:

And here we go again:


People got around to it before I found those post’s most of the time, no point repeating what has already been said. I also use a different definition of research:
“The systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.”
So to directly answer you, we are not here to be used as a personal researchers. We expect people to have the initiative to go out and do things on their own.

  1. You’re right that is what I said but it doesn’t change the fact that people should be fully reading the FAQ before reading. Its purpose is to answer those questions, a little bit of effort now will save a lot time down the road.
  2. Lets provide a little more context here. ASO refers to the ‘Amateur Server Owners’ aka children, who are rather classically very lazy. They expect the world to be handed to them on a silver platter
    Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
    Chinese Proverb
  3. Redundant to explain the same thing’s again, read above. (this also applies to quote 4)

Our purpose here is not always to answer each and every question but to provide support. I am a strong proponent of teaching people to help themselves (that Chinese proverb has stuck with me). Especially when we have all of these wonderful tools and resources that people have spent a serious portion of time working on.

Then just lock the thread and say “Locked” or “Read the FAQ”

Okay, so you want everyone to read the FAQ before asking a question. Fine, make it a requirement of using the forum. Maybe make it so that they can’t get into the forum without scrolling through the whole thing. If they then ask a question that was listed in the FAQ you can ban them, call them lazy, whatever.

In this case, you are defining an entire class to be lazy. I really hope that a bunch of these “ASO”'s come into this thread and read that. I am sure they will appreciate it. I bet it will give a great impression of the project and people working on it to them. Although, it strikes me that if this is how the moderator staff thinks on this forum that they obviously don’t care and don’t want those people using the eventually launched platform.

1 Like

That was being seriously considered. The forum software isn’t quite as adept at putting useful stuff on the main page as everyone would like.

There is bound to be an increase in these kinds of daft questions as release draws nearer, and it may be that moderation needs to change their approach. Stamping out boilerplate is less personal, but less likely to give offence. IMHO.

1 Like

Thank you, @Inscrutable, for your response. This is exactly my point.

I understand your group probably gets a ton of people asking questions easily answered in the FAQ, but calling people names such as lazy just detracts from the community feeling that I am sure you would want to foster.

I agree to the general premise that we should do more to give information to users rather than the system we have now. That will be improved upon in the near future I guarantee.

On the other hand I do see where @disconsented is coming from. A small search on the forums for “enjin plugin” yields this post as a result. It clearly states that EnjinMinecraftPlugin will be ported over. Also, it is general common sense that one project is not responsible for other projects maintaining compatibility with it. This might have been better asked here. Again common sense that Enjin themselves would be responsible for their own plugin compatibility, he obviously understands the whole plugin to server relationship. Perhaps a better way to ask the questions would have been “Will the existing Enjin plugin be compatible with sponge?” In which we could have replied that “no, but it is planning to be ported”. That would have conveyed a more clear message in my opinion rather than it seeming like he is assuming that the Sponge team will take responsibility for the compatibility of another organization’s plugin.


@disconsented your right. I should have done my research xD. Though its rude to call people lazy if they just registered on sponge.



You should always read the FAQ and rules before signing up on anything.

1 Like

Giving a constructive response without a negative connotation achieves the same goal and is a win in almost all cases. It shows a level of respect for the Sponge team, the forums in general, and it’s users (new and old). Not to mention the positive impact on Sponge’s image.


You have to understood that it is anoying for us to say the same thing over and over again :smile:. I think lazy is still the right word here. But I have to tell, that I probaly am lazy on other forums (KSP forums) as well … . Meaby their is something wrong with the way we communicate. People don’t find things if they are right bellow their nose (even I don’t).

1 Like

@Staff Please move this discussion to another topic. I think it’s important, but it does not belong here.

Yes the EnjinMinecraftPlugin will be made for Sponge. As it is in the plugins to be ported from bukkit list.
Which can be found Here

As i said in your other post, someone else has already linked that already.

I ported Enjin forge plugin to 1.8 and 1.7.10, you can check it out here


Hello everyone, given that I am the official developer for the Enjin plugin at this time I figured I would weigh in on the conversation. We are currently working on a port for sponge as well as a major overhaul of our existing plugins/mods. I do not have any eta when we will release our first version for sponge but I have a feeling it will be within the next month or so. As part of my effort to port Enjin to sponge I have also taken the opportunity to port Votifier and may consider porting additional plugins that our team believes would be beneficial to users of the Enjin plugin.

Evan Lindsay
Enjin Minecraft Plugin Maintainer


Did your plans change? its been 6 months.

There is update from five days ago:


Yeah, I’m sorry. I was under a lot of stress with college and just getting 3.x mostly stable on bukkit has been our primary aim. I also wanted to give sponge some more time for the API to mature so I could ensure as many features could be finished on the initial release. I’m currently just working on porting our bukkit code base over to sponge. Shouldn’t be too much longer I think.

Thank you for the quick reply.

Would like to see a version compatible with sponge API 4.0

1 Like