User talk:Zombie Lord

This page has RULES and if you don't follow my RULES I will get all CRAZY on you and drag you through 17 different kinds of VB/A HELL! This is SEEREUS BIZNIZZ!! Just kidding, I don't really give a shit. I would prefer new shit went on the bottom but, you know, whatever. :) However, my friend Upson over there WILL spray your cockroach ass if you get out of line. Upson's Latest Kill: Paddy Dignam →
Just look at that poor Bastard. Don't end up like Paddy. :'(	"Bugs, although they're essentially brainless, you gotta watch out for em...cause...they creep up on you."

[edit] Mall alt

Your images are great and the mall art overlord wishes you to know more are needed to fulfill the hordes ever growing needs. You may now continue one with regularly scheduled programing.--Karek^maps?! 00:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hay

On DS, there has to be five days before the last comment, okay? It's not that big of a deal, but that is how things go. :) --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 19:09, 5 June 2009 (BST)

I was going by what is says on the DS page: "Developing suggestions that appear to have been abandoned (i.e. two days or longer without any new edits) will be given a warning for deletion. If there are no new edits it will be deleted seven days following the last edit." Should that be changed?--Zombie Lord 19:13, 5 June 2009 (BST)

Probably not. Because due to my faulty memory, I remember incorrectly someone saying it has to have 5 days with no discussion. Never mind. >< --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 19:17, 5 June 2009 (BST)

I'm pretty sure it used to be five days. --Midianian^{¦T¦DS¦SP¦} 20:11, 5 June 2009 (BST)

It's been like that since DS was set up, maybe the old talk was different? --  RoosterDragon  20:19, 8 June 2009 (BST)

It's two days with no discussion before {{SDW}} is posted, and then after five days, it's deleted, if that's what you mean? Linkthewindow  Talk  14:03, 14 June 2009 (BST)

[edit] DS Page

Hey, I'm thinking about tidying up the intro to DS a bit, and wanted an opinion of a regular maintainer of the page just to check it over. An example is at SuggestionsTemplate, with discussions on that talk page.

Also, I was wondering if changing the SNRV or SDW (nice stealth switching to that btw, tis much better than the old one) templates to take a date as the variable would be better than the number of days.

EG: So the text would read "blah no active discussion blah... This suggestion will be removed on the 12 June 2009." That way you only need edit to place/remove it and cycle stuff, as opposed to editing it every day to keep it in check. --  RoosterDragon  20:19, 8 June 2009 (BST)

Commented on your DS intro template on its discussion page. You read my mind on the SDW template change. I had been looking for a countdown timer to add to it, but found out that this wiki does not support javascript. :) Even if it did it might be too cumbersome. Your dating idea sounds like just what that template needs. I'll work on it ASAP if you don't get to it first.--Zombie Lord 20:48, 8 June 2009 (BST)

I got to it first, the template and the few uses on DS are fixed. --  RoosterDragon  22:13, 8 June 2009 (BST)

[edit] Thank you...

...for adding the discussion from the Developing Suggestions pages to the suggestion page, and removing the suggestion from the developing suggestion. :D Thanks! --Rolfero 18:22, 9 June 2009 (BST)

	Rolfero-Wiki-Cookies!
	Rolfero baked you some wiki-cookies!

[edit] Signature

Your sig is set up wrong, it shouldn't need to take any variables or anything. It should only be the handle portion of your name. You need to go to Special:Preferences and change the nickname box to {{Nosubst|User:Zombie Lord/sig}} if you want a templated sig. If you don't want it templated, just put {{User:Zombie Lord/sig}}. This will churn out the code on the page each time you sign, and automatically add a timestamp for you. --  RoosterDragon  19:34, 18 June 2009 (BST)

I need the variable to mess with my timestamp. I may shrink it later or otherwise alter its appearance. I couldn't figure out any other way to do that that without a variable.-- | T | BALLS! | 20:26, 18 June 2009 (BST)

Btw, I sign my sig like so {{User:Zombie_Lord/sig|~~~~~}}, so it's really not a lot of extra work, it just generates my timestamp automatically.-- | T | BALLS! | 20:29, 18 June 2009 (BST)

That's the thing, you shouldn't be messing with the timestamp, just let the wiki paste them as is. They're for reference only. --  RoosterDragon  20:32, 18 June 2009 (BST)

Hmm, I thought it would be ok, I see timestamps that are altered here and there. Boxy's for example.-- | T | BALLS! | 20:40, 18 June 2009 (BST)

His isn't in massively annoying bold type. Looking at his code it also appears to work by signing four tildes like a normal sig, as opposed to having to type out a template call. --  RoosterDragon  20:43, 18 June 2009 (BST)

So its actually the boldness you object to. Well, maybe I'll shrink it down a bit.-- | T | BALLS! | 20:49, 18 June 2009 (BST)

Additional: I sorta get annoyed with those sigs that generate code on the page. You go in to edit and these guys have sigs 10 freakin lines long, EVERY time they sign the page. Kinda clutters up the place.-- | T | BALLS! | 20:35, 18 June 2009 (BST)

It's more to do with reducing server load. Templated sigs produce more strain on the server. I would make mine non-templated, but it's got a ton of code. See? Linkthewindow  Talk  21:26, 18 June 2009 (BST)

You can put a redirect on your image sig, so people can click the image to reach your userpage. --  AHLGTH 00:36, 19 June 2009 (BST)

Done. Thanks! Very groovy. :)-- | T | BALLS! | 00:55, 19 June 2009 (BST)

[edit] EVIL

	EVIL IS GOOD
	This user or group believes that the bad guys can sometimes be the good guys.

[edit] Sig

So now the timestamp looks reasonably normal, one wonders why you bother embedding it into your signature code in the first place? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 01:50, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Obviously because I didn't know how to alter the timestamp with the Nickname section before. Of course I had to stumble upon it by accident while trying to backward engineer Boxy's sig, rather than anyone pointing it out.-- | T | BALLS! | 01:56 23 June 2009

Well, a) you should come and ask. b) You've already made a totally new signature code to use, wouldn't this be the optimum time to change it to a regular ~~~~ signature, rather than change all your current signatures from Zombielord/sig to Zombielord/sig2? Why didn't you just change the original sig 9 accommodate for your already-posted signatures, and then make Zombielord/sig2 a normal sig, and start using it normally? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:01, 23 June 2009 (BST)

a)I'd rather work it out myself than ask. If someone wanted to volunteer info, I wouldn't ignore it though. But since your original question was not sincere, I assumed you didn't really give two shits whether I had asked or not. b)Since the original sig had the timestamp as part of the template, I assumed it would remove them if I changed the sig template and I would have had to go and change all my timestamps anyway. I didn't change them all to sig2, just the ones on permanent pages. Once the rest of the original sig instances are cycled out, I'll just delete it and use sig2.-- | T | BALLS! | 02:31 23 June 2009

a)If you'd rather not ask, then don't complain to us when no one comes to help. 99.9% of the wiki's users wouldn't have known you even had a problem, even I didnt. b) You've still done this the hard way regardless of whether you've chosen to leave out 3 pages in your massive signature-editing spree. And no, you still haven't answered my question as to why you don't just change it to a regular signature with a regular timestamp. You just complained about not knowing how to alter the timestamp. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:41, 23 June 2009 (BST)

a)I wasn't complaining at all. You are the one who waded in with your mock question and began this "complaint". I'm sure Rooster and I could have had a quite pleasant conversation over my original post on his Talk Page, where I was merely asking his opinion. As I have already stated, your question was insincere, and so I simply gave you the answer you already knew, and then mocked your "helpfulness". Perhaps heretofore I have credited you with too much intelligence. I'll try not to make the same mistake in the future. b) How many pages did I edit? 4? 5? Massive, let me tell you. heh. Or maybe, just maybe, you're being a petty schmuck. As usual.-- | T | BALLS! | 03:10 23 June 2009

Don't you fucking tell me what my question was. It was a serious question and your inability to answer it just proves you are just another stubborn prick. I was asking you that question because if you admitted that using ~~~~ for a proper timestamp was common sense (which it is, hence my attitude which you took for "insincere"), I was going to help you achieve that. Instead you resist and carry on like a headless tool. Good for you, insisting on Rooster's opinion and no one else's, but Rooster is a man that, by his own admission, "Demands standard formatting across the board", which begs the question, would he have suggested this common sense idea anyway?

I'll just rehash some points to you. 1. I am not a petty schmuck and don't behave as such 99% of the time, unless dealing with the most petty of users such as yourself. 2. My intelligence is so irrelevant to any of this because the fact is that I have at leased some sort of knowledge and experience on wikis that you obviously don't. And 3. The fact you edited 5 pages to change your signature is not only irrelevant, but also proves that you'll always just be another sheep that herds the suggestions section. With your attitude and perceptiveness, I suggest you stay there. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:37, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Just because I don't want your opinion, that automatically excludes all others except Rooster? Nope, sorry. You're question was insincere and you know it. If you had truly wanted to be helpful, you would have just stated your advice right away, rather than begging me to jerk you off by "asking" for your "help". No thanks. Here's a hint: If I want your opinion, I'll ask you on your page. Don't hold your breath. You've proven to me over and over that you are overly emotional, and yes, petty. I'm sure I can expect even more nonsense from you here and there around the Wiki after this little bit of foolishness is finally concluded, as "revenge". Heh. Please prove me wrong. Or not, I really don't care.-- | T | BALLS! | 04:01 23 June 2009

I would beg you to ask any other user on this wiki about how I operate, but I wouldn't hold my breath because you would once again point the entire subject onto your egotistical self. Aggression shouldn't be wrongly perceived to be emotion, simply because I repeatedly demonstrated time and time again how your suggestions were fucking idiotic and ignorant (which they were), and you have obviously not recovered since. Naturally, I could assume that having that in mind it isn't, and will not be, me out for the "revenge". Have a good time on this wiki. The suggestions system awaits more of your ignorance. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 05:14, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Lets follow the track of your "input" thus far..."Zombie Lord, please ask ME about what I feel is best for your signature." (I refuse this and the process is repeated twice.) "Zombie Lord, please go ask others on the Wiki what they think about ME."

Who is egotistical again? Not to mention excessively needy.

There have been other users much more harsh than you regarding my suggestions, and I seem to be getting on fine with them. Your insistence on turning the subject there and the status of "my recovery" would suggest that you are actually projecting your own egotism on me. (There's that word again...hmmm)

Oh and thank you for wishing that I have a good time on the Wiki. Another shining example of your sincerity, I can only assume. Heh.-- | T | BALLS! | 12:13 23 June 2009

This entire argument has happened simply because of your idiot defensiveness to what is right and logical because you are too fucking idiotic and stubborn to admit that you have the simplest solution to your signature woes but because you deemed my comment on your wiki inexperience as 'hostile', you dismiss it. I am asking if you would like help now or anything else on the wiki, ever, I would always love to help because I work for this wiki, which is why I involved myself into this issue. I can only conclude you will say no in advance, whatever. I'm not continuing this crap because my only interest is helping users on the wiki, and you don't want it, you'd rather project yourself in your own head and diminish myself as such, and so be it. I guess I won't further my opinion on you as a user, so I'll close this and see you on DS. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:57, 23 June 2009 (BST)

this is lol. zombie lord dont ever change --Cyberbob 14:00, 23 June 2009 (BST)

No worries.-- | T | BALLS! | 19:09 23 June 2009

Thank you, Boxy. (Note to DDR: See, this is how it's done. You would do well to emulate Boxy. Did he come in here and say: "Hey, I have some advice for you, but first you have to jerk me off before I'll tell you."? Nope, he just came right out and stated it. Because he's, you know, actually helpful.)-- | T | BALLS! | 19:09 23 June 2009

[edit] Your balls

are funny--Bonghit420 14:43, 23 June 2009 (BST)

Thank you.-- | T | BALLS! | 19:10 23 June 2009

Epic balls are epic. --Haliman - UBCS ^{UBCS Forum} 07:45, 2 July 2009 (BST)

X Y IS X EPIC WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Cyberbob 07:47, 2 July 2009 (BST)

[edit] Lawls, manythings

Firstly, that Vader template is hilarious. What's the code for using it? Furthermore, I'd like to point out to you (though I assume you know) that you fit most of the criteria for promotions. Although I wouldn't personally vouch for you, considering our past conflicts, you have been performing many editting tasks and shown a leadership role by signing up for things such as arbitration and other such things. You have in excess of 500 edits in the past month. If you want to become a sysop (which i assume you do, from the fact that you've been systematically fulfilling these criteria), then you'd be able to apply now. However, I feel you'd run in to difficulties with many people on the wiki, though I'd guess that you should easily get three vouches. Whether or not the sysops vote to give you the position or not, however, would be another matter completely. --Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 12:58, 3 July 2009 (BST)

The code for the template is {{Balls3}}. I wasn't aware that I quailify for SysOpship. However, I have no desire for such a promotion. I keep the Suggestion pages tidy for my own pleasure, and because it's the place I usually hang around the most.-- | T | BALLS! | 13:37 3 July 2009

Being around for 2 months, having 500 edits and cycling/adding suggestions, and fancying oneself as a potent arguer does not make someone sysop material. Yonnua, you are way off the mark. Not that I think ZL couldn't be a sysop in the future, but first, he needs to want it, and second, he needs to spend time in the administration sections. Of course, I'm trying to imply that what he is doing isn't bad and I wouldn't expect him to change it just because he technically qualifies to be a sysop, but there are just standards to meet which I imagine ZL wouldn't want to bother himself with, at this time. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:48, 3 July 2009 (BST)

Why were you just so impolite? I merely told ZL that he fitted the description currently on that page. If he doesn't want it, he doesn't have to do it. I just told him that, according to what the page said at that time, he could if he wanted to.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 19:25, 3 July 2009 (BST)

Jesus Christ, DDR, what is with you? Do you feel that the Wiki is not complete until every last corner of it has been plastered with one of your blowhard comments?-- | T | BALLS! | 01:19 4 July 2009

It's my job to keep tabs on everything going on. You're free to take Yonnua's advice over mine, I was just making sure you didn't listen to it and make a dick of yourself. I never intended to create offence, but if I did, you aren't the user I thought you were. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:21, 4 July 2009 (BST)

No, not at all offensive. You're just baffling in your insistence on over-blowing your own importance and your apparent notion that everything can be made better if you slur/drool some comments all over it, regardless of how immaterial those comments are.-- | T | BALLS! | 03:21 4 July 2009

ddr shits on many things but in this case his shit is made of precious gemstones (ie it is correct) --Cyberbob 03:22, 4 July 2009 (BST)

But, of course, that's not the point, CyberClown. Not that you care, heh.-- | T | BALLS! | 03:24 4 July 2009

CyberClown oh ho ho ho ho that was a good one (it wasn't) --Cyberbob 03:25, 4 July 2009 (BST)

Humor was not the point. You seem to have problems in that area, don't you? :)-- | T | BALLS! | 03:26 4 July 2009

"wat u said was not the point" *dodges every comeback smugly* --Cyberbob 03:33, 4 July 2009 (BST)

Case in point.-- | T | BALLS! | 03:44 4 July 2009

hehehehehe --Cyberbob 03:52, 4 July 2009 (BST)

Look, I was just trying to be helpful to another user. There's no point starting a huge dramatic fight because of it. DDR responded (albeit it slightly offensively), with no trully harsh intentions. From there, it spiralled out of control for no real reason. Since we've now established that ZL won't be able to apply for now, let's not spend hours insulting each other.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 10:49, 4 July 2009 (BST)

The sysop guidelines are ancient and are quite pointless - most (serious) candidates have edits in the thousands (or even tens of thousands.) Those guidelines are in need of an update.... Linkthewindow  Talk  14:48, 3 July 2009 (BST)

ZL is doing the stuff that a lot of us did before being sops. Cycling suggestions and giving feedback is the simplest way to get yourself noticed in an admin way. I salute our future overlord. --Mr. Borehamwood -Rosslessness ^{-Wants a new city} 19:52, 3 July 2009 (BST)

no don't because he'd be a shit sysop BALLS --Cyberbob 03:21, 4 July 2009 (BST)

	Anti-Bureaucracy
	This User hates bureaucracy and encourages wiki-revolution

DOWN WITH THE CRATS!!!!!!!!!!!! --Imthatguy 04:39, 4 July 2009 (BST)

Hmm, oh idk, we need some kind of bureaucracy. Overthrow the crats and destroy all bureaucracy and you're just gonna end up like Robespierre. :P-- | T | BALLS! | 02:50 6 July 2009

[edit] DDR's Folly

still qqing after your only altercation with him, cute. --ϑϑℜ 01:28, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Has nothing to do with any 'altercation" with me, heh, but his obvious failings as a SysOp. I'm actually responding to his actions against other users. But that doesn't fit into your fantasy world, does it? I like how you ignore your own habit of making snarky comments in response to pretty much everything I say since your own "altercations" with me, though. One rule for you and another for everyone else I guess. Wonderful SysOp material there, let me tell you. :) -- | T | BALLS! | 01:36 18 July 2009(BST)

Didn't know snideness was a rule now? My pardons. Don't deny it though, don't you also find the amazing timing between when he snapped at you, and when you found him "not fit for the humour" suspiciously neat? ;) --ϑϑℜ 02:12, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Nice dodge. On your second point, I thought his rushing to the defense of his girlfriend rather sweet, and it had little at all to do with my decision to stand up and speak the truth regarding his actions on other areas of the Wiki. (Regardless of my assumption that the SysOp team would cover his ass for him yet again) He did fail to deny his obvious and purposeful trolling of Wiki Users in general in that exchange though, despite whatever dissembling he may be employing now to "play the innocent" whose motive were "genuine" on the VB Misconduct Pages. Personally, he can troll me all he likes, but it's his habit of doing it to newbies and other weak targets that concerns me. It's just bad for the Wiki, and can't help in keeping new users around. Regardless of whatever skills he possesses, he's a cancer on Public Relations and should have no business in a SysOp position. -- | T | BALLS! | 02:36 18 July 2009(BST)

Moving it to your own talk page, how noble. I didn't bother reading your text wall, the fact that you've unilaterally moved it over to a place where you can edit the contexts of the discussion at your whim has decimated all confidence in your arguing strength. --ϑϑℜ 03:14, 18 July 2009 (BST)

If I alter anything, you could easily tell. Of course, that's not what you're really afraid of though, is it? -- | T | BALLS! | 03:17 18 July 2009(BST)

Afraid of nothing. Tired of everything. Our arguments go nowhere. You're not worth the time. --ϑϑℜ 03:24, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Interesting. Then I wonder why you constantly seek me out, while I largely ignore you until you toss off one of your ineffectual little barbs. :) -- | T | BALLS! | 03:30 18 July 2009(BST)

lmao zombie lord show me one instance of me having trolled a newbie oh wait you can't because you just made it up :| --Cyberbob 04:05, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Yeah. I hand DDR the ammunition he needs to actually stand a chance of winning an argument, and he doesn't even pick it up. A WHIPPED DOG. -- | T | BALLS! | 06:05 18 July 2009(BST)

oh my god... I was just kidding before when I called you the puppetmaster... but you are --Cyberbob 06:06, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Ha. Looking for a fight then? Go somewhere else, you parasite. You realise I don't give a shit and then you froth over it. --ϑϑℜ 09:41, 18 July 2009 (BST)

HA HA HA, Whatever let's you sleep at night. (presumably in Cyberbob's arms)

DDR:"Oh, Cybercakes, thanks for coming to rescue me again from that big bad Zombie Lord!"

CyberClown:"It's ok, DDR, you're safe in my arms now, baby."

DDR:"Teehee."

CyberClown:"Don't forget to vote in my favor on everything over on VB/Misconduct."

DDR:"No worries, my love!"

CyberClown:"Good. Now, roll over."

-- | T | BALLS! | 10:03 18 July 2009(BST)

yes you are correct ddr certainly did vote everything in my favour on a/vb - OH WAIT HE DIDN'T. welp, you sure do like your imaginary scenarios --Cyberbob 10:14, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Yeah, only on everything that mattered :) I mean he has to keep up at least the appearance of impartiality, right? -- | T | BALLS! | 10:20 18 July 2009(BST)

oh fuck YOU GOT US HOW DID YOU KNOW --Cyberbob 10:22, 18 July 2009 (BST)

I'm observant like that. -- | T | BALLS! | 10:25 18 July 2009(BST)

there you go again with the faggot/homo/effeminate insults again. any self-image issues you'd like to share? --Cyberbob 10:15, 18 July 2009 (BST)

I don't consider Faggot/homo/effeminate intimations to be insults. Just reporting what I see, man. What are you, a homophobe? Sad. :( -- | T | BALLS! | 10:20 18 July 2009(BST)

a true paragon of objective reporting... --Cyberbob 10:22, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Thanks! :) -- | T | BALLS! | 10:24 18 July 2009(BST)

You really are trying every trick in the book to bring me back into more of a fight? You surprise me, I didn't think you were this pathetic :/ but w/e. --ϑϑℜ 10:51, 18 July 2009 (BST)

Can't get one over on you, eh Sherlock? Heh. Then again, you do keep coming back to me with one more desperate comment though, don't you. When you could be off somewhere "not fighting". Are you trying to convince me or yourself? -- | T | BALLS! | 11:09 18 July 2009(BST)

Except he's not really fighting or being antagonistic, while you still are. Also, this petty shit you've been pulling lately has made me realize that the growth in maturity that you seemed to have was a lie. That really sucks you know? You were a pretty decent editor after you stopped with all the screamng about balls and shit on Suggestions, but now you're being petty and dickish again. :/ --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 17:08, 18 July 2009 (BST)

I liked the "Balls" version of him better. Now he just thinks he's a fine and witty arguer but he's just made of solid failuminum. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 17:10, 18 July 2009 (BST)

That would make sense, except that I do not seek this Clown out. Check the record. He comes to me. I'm simply not going to roll over for it. I know DDR is one of your boys and all, but come on, look at it honestly. I was decent enough to drag this crap into my own Talk Page, rather than shit up the discussion area it started in. Trust me, if DDR could manage to keep his own dickish comments off pretty much every area I comment on, you'd never see any of this happening. -- | T | BALLS! | 00:42 19 July 2009(BST)

Or if you (or even both of you combined) could manage to keep your own dickish comments off pretty much every area you visit, you'd (almost) never see any of this happening. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 02:08, 19 July 2009 (BST)

DDR's record of instigation speaks for itself. I give what I get. If any of this actually concerned you, you'd start with your buddy over there. -- | T | BALLS! | 03:32 19 July 2009(BST)

kittens? you sure liked to give a lot of Balls for good input in the past. Who's my buddy again? I forgreted. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 03:34, 19 July 2009 (BST)

[edit] Hai!!1

o HAI!!! i sdecided to come say hai coz um nice and shit. So hai!! =D 00 Cheese 03:24, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Hello, there. :) -- | T | BALLS! | 03:32 19 July 2009(BST)

[edit] N00dles

Although I have no knowledge of Mistakes are made, I happen to have a greater insight in to the situation with "N00dles". It's run by two members of FOXHOUND, who I'm in the Dulston alliance with, so I know the story. You should talk to Met Fan about it, because he's more active, though I don't know how active on the wiki. The long and the short of it, however, is that N00dles will not have any more issues, as it's out of production. That's the basic scoop.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 21:28, 19 July 2009 (BST)

It would appear you have already attempted to talk to Met Fan, with no response. I'll look in to this for you.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 21:30, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Ah, thank you. -- | T | BALLS! | 22:08 19 July 2009(BST)

Alright, I contacted Met Fan on the forums. However, I think he's inactive atm, so it may be a while before he responds.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} 10:57, 20 July 2009 (BST)

[edit] Quick question

is there a template that says I support ZL in his/her attempt to make UD FAIR to the zombies? --Crazy Hobo Man 08:10, 16 August 2009 (BST)

	I Solve Problems
	Get it straight, Buster. I'm here to help turn UD into an actual game and give Survivors their balls back. If my help's not appreciated, lots of luck, gentlemen.

As close as I've come, so far.-- | T | BALLS! | 19:53 24 August 2009(BST)

Yeah that was the closest I could find. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 22:49, 24 August 2009 (BST)

Damn ZL, that has to sting. Cyberbob  Talk  13:35, 16 August 2009 (BST)

Not really.-- | T | BALLS! | 19:53 24 August 2009(BST)

[edit] Ball-less Trenchies and Zombies

The problem with this game isn't just the humans. It's the trenchies on both sides.

There are human trenchies. We all know and hate them. But there's also the zombie trenchies. They whine about combat revives, punch their reviver, Gk, and jump out the window. I would be dual-natured, but the zombie trenchies make it impossible to be Combat Revived. COME ON! The only reason people Mrh Cow is because it's impossible to get Combat Revived.

[edit] The Solution

[edit] For humans

To deal with zombie trenchies:

• We should take a big C.R.A.P. on Malton. Then convince all of the newly revived zombies to ambush the trenchcoat armies that march in and claim victory.
• Hunt down zombie spies, kill them, and put them on the Do Not Revive Lists.

[edit] For zombies

To deal with the human trenchies:

• If you get Combat-Revived, don't whine about it. Just go and bounty hunt for trenchies.
• Go to a trenchie list, add them to your contacts, and HUNT THEM DOWN!!!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brainguard (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Perhaps the problems are the inherent issues with the games design, rather than the people playing it? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 03:09, 27 August 2009 (BST)

I think the game isn't flawed. It could use a little more realism, but the main problem is the players. I'm a Mrh Cow, but I wouldn't be if someone got the balls to start combat-reviving. Unfortunately, most survivors do not appreciate Dual Nature players. And how realistic are Zombie Spies? Sure, there'll be insane Death Cults in any apocolypse (example Greenies and Fundies in World War Z by Max Brooks), but most people would be GRATEFUL to be cured. Zombies aren't intelligent enough to ask for revives and then go on a killing spree.

And human trenchies are just losers in real life. --Brainguard 18:09, 30 August 2009 (BST)

[edit] Hardcore City

Please see my suggestions on the Hardcore City discussion page. --Brainguard 00:40, 30 August 2009 (BST)

[edit] DS

"Calling you a cunt is most definitely constructive, because every new player needs to know that you are a raging fuckwit whose example they most definitely should not follow."

That definitely made me laugh. You should get in fights more often. ;) -- SA 15:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with being constructive towards the suggestion at hand. These bullshit attacks on newbies are the reason we have less than 1% of the UD game community that bother to come around the Wiki. Supposed to be a place for the UD community, not a place for insecure assholes to bully soft targets in order to make their tiny little peter feel bigger.-- | T | BALLS! | 16:26 14 November 2009(BST)

If more than 1% of the UD community came to the wiki I assure you they wouldn't bother with DS and the suggestions system. There are plenty more interesting things to work on here :/ --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 05:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Nothing that actually has a chance to effect the actual game. The rest is just Chinatown, Jake.-- | T | BALLS! | 11:09 15 November 2009(BST)

Though deep down we all know Kevan doesn't read the shit we throw to him anymore anyway :*( --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 11:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)