Albert

That's what happens when you remove so many games from the store at once... I'm just glad people had an opportunity to buy them, but, damn, the number of games sold was just nuts, far exceeding what I was expecting! I'll go into some details soon about the various things I'm actively working on to greatly reduce the amount of time it takes me to get orders out. That's not really going to help with the Last Chance orderes, but as I mentioned above, the goal by this time next year (or earlier, really) is to ship 95% of orders within a week's time. ..Al

I haven't sent out a new update yet, as others have surmised, I have my head down and furiously building games. Built another 250 Last Chance games over the weekend, and will get several hundred more done over the next few days. This work will result in shipping another large batch of orders next week, then it's time to rinse and repeat, and I can start on the next big batch of games. I'm shipping 100-200 orders in each batch. The orders vary quite a bit in size, some have just one game, and other orders can have 30 or more games. ..Al

I saw this posted on reddit, pretty amusing, since this was quite the leak as it hasn't even been announced yet. Weird that it showed up at an airport like that!! Also, who the heck buys these giant LEGO sets (like the Titanic set, which is enormous!) at an AIRPORT?!?! ..Al

I'm glad I switched away from Chrome to Firefox a while ago! ..Al

Good idea! ..Al

I suggest not using a Code block for the instructions, as the text in those blocks doesn't wrap, making it difficult to read beyond the width of the browser window. ..Al

Wow, that is really damn cool!!! Although you'll really need to focus on keeping track of your own row if you had eight people playing! If there was something to visually discern them from one another, such as different background colors (but still dark), or maybe different color lines between each row, or something else, that would help a bit. ..Al

I know you feel you're being wronged here, but please do not post someone's personal email address or physical address. I have removed that information from your above post. Thank you, ..Al

I'm not surprised at all, and good luck trying to get Google to change anything they do. Might have better luck with Firefox. ..Al

Yeah, Chrome blocked it for me, but Firefox allowed it. This makes it even more stupid. I wonder if they have a whitelist of file extensions they allow without these frightening warnings. ..Al

I think .a26 is fine, although I would need to verify that again to be sure. ..Al

Yes, attachments are stored in a CDN (Content Delivery Network), so this is pretty common and not something they really should be flagging. That doesn't mean they aren't using it as a factor, though, nor does it make it any less ridiculous. ..Al

I'm only going to leave that up there for a few days so most people who visit regularly will see it. I'll also pin this post in the "Announcements" forum. Unfortunately, there's no easy way for me to have it appear just on the front page of the forum. ..Al

Yeah, I think it's absolutely ridiculous that they are doing this, and like you said, it's an extremely lazy solution to the problem. ..Al

Yeah, it seems to vary a fair bit depending on browser and what version of a browser you're running. I'm extremely unhappy that browsers have decided to flag all such files as "dangerous", even though it's patently false. I might consider mass changing attachments that have this issue to something else. For instance, using ".a26" for Atari 2600 binaries (although ".a78" does have a significant meaning, so I could not rename Atari 7800 ".bin" files to ".a78", so I'd want to come up with a consistent naming scheme. I also need to identify which file attachments besides ".bin" are being flagged in this manner. ..Al