The Shadow Tribe currently has no levels built, so it will easily be over a month until you see its release.

9 months is still technically more than a month.

The Shadow Tribe is now done, which means all levels are now complete for this pack. The Shadow Tribe has a primary focus on the remaining tools, Bombs, Umbrellas, Swimmers and Hadokens. There are no grenades anywhere in this pack.

Under my current expectations I will give this pack the full release at the beginning of 2019. That is because I don't expect anybody to play Lemmings 3, and therefore imagine there will be no more updates.

The new version is in the opening post, along with an updated full save file that includes the Shadow levels.

v04 changelog:

• Shadow Tribe!

If you were to silently autoremove by/By it would probably be wise to create some test levels with some strings such as "Byron" or "Kirby Is Amazing" for author, as improper implementation would result in letters being stripped and could potentially go undetected until someone with the string "by" or "By" in their author name tries to put their name in the author field and finds part of it mysteriously missing.

It is, of course, a trivial problem to solve, but I've seen a lot of crappy filters out there. It is, of course, a cl***ic mistake.

A debug build is often used for debugging purposes but these can be impeded by the default software fullscreen, e.g. since you can't access crash messages or don't get out of the program window easily.
So at least the debug build should default to windowed mode. 

One more thing I want to add, in the same vain as my earlier point how all this probably benefits the store more than the customers:

Yes, those things you mentioned waste everyone's time, but I think the store has much more capacity to absorb the extra times spent compared to individual customers, even when it comes to major issues like the example you cited.  Because the store is pretty much never equally busy at all hours of day, extra time spent here and there will usually be balanced out by lulls elsewhere during the day.  Also, it's probably comparatively rare that a customer who's already in line ready to pay will decide to give up the purchases altogether due to issues with someone in front of the line; in almost all cases they'll simply wait the extra time, very annoyed for sure, but ultimately the store does not lose the transaction from the customer.

Now yes, on a longer term basis, if a store consistently and frequently runs into these kinds of issues, some customers will definitely stop going to the store in preference for another place without such frequent issues, so it is still in the store's interest to minimize these kinds of issues.  But beyond a certain threshold of "it doesn't happen often enough, or take up too much time or otherwise impact customers negatively", the store basically can absorb the occasional extra major time spent (and the more frequent little extra seconds here and there) with minimal risk of loss purchases or loss customer retention.  And so there's no incentive from the store's perspective to get rid of the coupons or loyal programs or whatever, despite the inefficiencies they can introduce to the checkout process.

To put it differently:  yes, what happened sucked for Simon.  But will that rather unfortunate incident be enough to get even Simon to permanently boycott the store and shop elsewhere?  I'm guessing no?

firstly, whether the sale will really be private in this day and age

Mostly yes, I pay cash for 90 % of my purchases.

Sweden: Customary to take bank cards for any bill, and people happily pay everything with that. Germany: Most places don't accept it unless the bill is 5 Euros. Thus cash is still popular.

Online purchases are a pain. The super-high-secure checkout sends unencrypted email afterwards.

whether it's really that big a deal that some giant marketing firm who's never heard of you beyond as "customer #410757864530" knows which brand of toothpaste you buy.

I thought cashback programs had you register with name? At least banks do. They'll keep this data in their super-high-secure datacenter, which falls prey to social engineering 3 years down the road. Or to an overworked maintenance programmer.

The main problem is that other people use cashback. That is the real time drain.

At my store, the cashback ad says:
Exchange your cashback points for vouchers!
200 points = voucher worth 2 Euros
500 points = voucher worth 5 Euros
1000 points = voucher worth 10 Euros
2000 points = voucher worth 20 Euros

Makes one wonder at how low a social level this list is aimed.

Also, calling the cashback point a "point" instead of 0.01 Euros. Who would swipe their card for 3 cents? Being unbothered must be worth more to even those people. But 3 points, sure, that's worth it! Numbers go up! Fun!

items will always be marked as 'on sale' even when the price is high

Hah, such simple technique, and I'm sure it works more often than it should. I haven't seen it conciously, but still sound advice.

(most customers are likely more interested in the additional, on-the-spot discounts - which can actually be quite significant, sometimes as much as $15 - $20 off a $100 order).

Yes, I agree that this is a lot, and I would even let myself be bothered to get an extra 10 to 20 Euros. Saving 10 % is nice.

on something you were planning on buying anyway; it does save money, though a small amount. Over time it adds up if you're diligent with this method.

I accept this. I'd say it costs too much time for the effort, and you risk end costing other people's time. If your experience is less annoying than mine, that's fine.

it's a little disingenuous to pick the worst case example where the coupon isn't working;

It may be slightly over-the-top, but it's still representative, sadly. There are many other ways that produce excessive waits:

• Old lady must be told several times that now is voucher/cashback time, then she digs in wallet for cashback card.
  
• Person (even smart ones) forget to put vouchers on the counter until after the system seemingly-randomly expects vouchers to be entered. Transaction rollback is problematic, sometimes needing special keys or privileged members. (Also see Minim's post.)
  
• Person wants to mix two types of voucher/cashback. How does it go? Ask the cashier risk other people's time? Memories of clashing features in computer programs come up. Even more memories of house rules in games come up that hook into the same event of the basic game and their interaction/timing is ill-defined.
  
• The cashpack program has an annoying mascot that looks like on drugs, and it stares into your eye everywhere in the supermarket. By checkout time, I want to bite somebody's head off. I accept that this maybe doesn't apply to everybody. >_>;;
  

Every voucher/cashback program is one extra way how designers, over the years, manage to screw up every simple idea (buying at a physical store). The nastiness of these programs grows at O(n^2).

You can't exactly use that example to say the barcode scanning system is bad, unless it happens frequently.

Barcode scanning is one alternative out of many mutually exclusive ways to register prices. It is far less error-prone. It's also ubiquitous and has grown bug-free. It doesn't collide with other cash-out-time stuff.

Coupons fail far more often. Certainly I accept that my specific failure is rare, but they can fail in many more ways, even if less time-consuming.

Some of our customers do, but some of them present me coupons before they show their loyalty card. If I try put coupons through the system before the loyalty card I get in trouble and need to ask a manager.

This is beautiful.

I feel like all clerks should fail this step on purpose, every single time this ordering matters. The manager should be called every time. That is how nasty it is.

This really should have come up in user testing: Supermarket-manufacturing firms probably test their checkout processes on real clerks, providing fake customers with random such problematic cases.

The many kinds of different vouchers/cashback can't possibly be known at design time (when the supermarket-cashier-lane-manufacturer designs his cashier user interface), and no single voucher/cashback firm should be responsible to define all interactions with all other voucher/cashback firms. This is the main reason why vouchers/cashback are fundamentally flawed from a systems design point-of-view. Nobody can be made responsible for the mess. My hunch is then to cut such mess immediately from the design. (Of course my hunch won't make the marketers any money.)

Why does Red Bull require IDs in the UK?

At least in Germany, there is only one age check for alcohol and tobacco at age 16. Hard liquor is locked behind glass doors and customers must ask a clerk to unlock.

Interesting that the UK introduces so many more more special rules.

-- Simon