You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'd like to know what is this repo's stance on officially endorsed but unofficial servers: Discord API and Discord Linux. And how do you want to show them here.
Unofficial officially endorsed server 101 just in case: The server is not run by Discord but it's acknowledged as an useful resource and often referred also by Discord staff. For example, DFeedback has "useful resource" links to, and only to, DAPI and DLinux.
Currently, DAPI is listed in official servers but DLinux is not listed at all. Should these both be listed as an own category below official server, titled as endorsed servers? Or right after official servers with an "unofficial" note? It'd feels too harsh to drop them under Community Resources.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think we should open up servers from Servers under the official tab to a new tab called Popular Servers, as there are many servers that aren't officially endorsed but has a large community base.
jacc
changed the title
Stance on officially endorsed unofficial servers
Adjust README to support servers that are popular but not endorsed by Discord
Nov 1, 2019
Hello,
I'd like to know what is this repo's stance on officially endorsed but unofficial servers: Discord API and Discord Linux. And how do you want to show them here.
Unofficial officially endorsed server 101 just in case: The server is not run by Discord but it's acknowledged as an useful resource and often referred also by Discord staff. For example, DFeedback has "useful resource" links to, and only to, DAPI and DLinux.
Currently, DAPI is listed in official servers but DLinux is not listed at all. Should these both be listed as an own category below official server, titled as endorsed servers? Or right after official servers with an "unofficial" note? It'd feels too harsh to drop them under Community Resources.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: