My Reply to Essentials+

This is my reply to Essentials+

This document is solely to explain my side and reasoning for everything; this is not meant to attack Stan, Essentials+, or anyone else.

Let's start… Shall we?

stanlxie, the owner of Essentials+, used to be at Verveo. Verveo is a group that is in the ro-tech space.

stanlxie was removed from the team, then shortly after, created his own group (that's fine, there's no problem with that). A month or so later, I found that stanlxie was releasing a competitor product to Basic Admin Remade, Essentials+ Admin, which is good — competitors bring good results to everyone. If it wasn't copied at all from my own product, it's fine. I wouldn't mind it.

Uh-oh!

When the admin from Essentials+ was released, I found that…

• The license was copied with no credit (stanlxie mentioned it was copied after I asked, but still, no credit was given)

• The layout of the settings was oddly similar.

• The "ExtraSettings" Basic Admin Remade had was in the same location, but renamed, on the admin.

• The clone script was copied with the comment in it being changed. (According to stanlxie, there's "no other way to clone a script", there is, in the main script.) Fun fact: it's easier to add it into the main script instead of creating another module script for it.

Below, you'll find screenshots of everything.

Maybe I'm in the wrong, maybe I am, but it sure at least looks like it's the same.

But… I didn't know..?

safety concerns via failure to take action on dangerous activity outside of essentials+ (including people being sexual to minors and impersonation, and yet you still ignore this) with claims that it will ‘satisfy me’ if anything happens when I was merely asked to provide evidence.

In their document, they mention safety concerns related to a perceived failure to act on dangerous behavior outside of Essentials+, including issues like inappropriate behavior toward minors and impersonation, and suggest that action would only be taken to “satisfy me” if something happened, when I was simply asked to provide evidence.

This information came from a former staff member, and it was never brought to my attention at the time. These types of comments and behaviors are not acceptable, and had they been reported to me, I would have taken immediate action. The assumption that I knowingly ignored these issues is unfair, especially since this was the first time I had heard about them.

I also reached out to someone to inform Stanlxie about this. That person was already aware of the situation but never told me, and Stanlxie knew that I wasn’t aware either when I contacted him, yet it still wasn’t mentioned in the document. No one ever communicated this to me directly.

Ok.. I was in the wrong (for some things)

The

B00PUP had constantly made comments like ‘check my bio’, ‘link in my status’, ‘google basic admin remade’ and even at one point tried posting a link to his product in a support thread. We have also found that he has acted similarly in servers such as easyPOS.

I admit was definitely in the wrong and shouldn't have done that. I know stanlxie is reading this, I do apologize for that. Shouldn't have done that. Additionally, the stalking (don't know a better word) of his GitHub, I admit to that too. Shouldn't have done that.

Soooo… Do you think I was in the wrong?

I don't know if I went overboard (I think I did for the "I was in the wrong" section). But, I'm not sure if I did for…

• Contacting Parcel regarding the admin

• Being upset the admin was copied (if you think it was copied)

I honestly don't know. I might have, I might have not. It's up to you to decide what you think.

That's it.

This is my reply to the "true colors" of me. I'm not going to make any more comments on this topic unless I need to.

Sidenotes…

stanlxie mentioned this in the Discord server:

especially when he only took action when his 'special' partnership with <group> was on he line

There were other reasons this person was removed from the team; I do think it's ridiculous to assume and make such accusations. Other factors were involved, and Verveo takes our partnerships seriously. If a user is blacklisted by a group, I’ll respect that decision regardless of who it involves. I genuinely value all of Verveo’s partnerships.

To be honest (I'm not accusing, I'm simply saying "I think"), I think that the shutdown was blamed on me, despite other factors being involved. I'm not sure if I'm wrong or right on that. I'm sure I'll be attacked for saying that (It's just what I think. Take it with a grain of salt.

I might update this later if I seriously feel the need to.