good idea... yes

What if hacker b writes a better version?

We accept it.

Ok I voted option 2 and again think it should be judged by days registered rather than posts. I don't post that heavily mainly because[list=1][*]I search for the answer before I post an error which 98% of the time means I don't have to post a question since it's been answered already.[*]I don't spend alot of time just hanging out due to work :( (wish I could I like this place and the people)[*]I tend to only post if I have something useful to add.[/list=1]

So that's what I'm saying. You're going to be judging the quality of the code, I hope you have the manpower.

No, where have you read that? You must be reading my posts and backwards. If hacker B releases a different version of an existing hack there is no reason not to accept it. Whether it's better or worse, that's up to you to decide.

>edit<

oha - now I understand you.

PS: suggestion for a new hack: user may edit his voting ;) :D

Yes. It would cut down on the clutter that resides in most of the replies. The "yea this is cool", "check my site I installed" and other nonsense that currenty populates most of the threads.
Each thread for a hack should serve as support for the hack and anything else should be moderated out. I read the forum everyday, even though I don't have any hacks installed, and for every useful post there are 3 others that do nothing but take up space.

IS this currenlty even a problem?