Difference between revisions of "User:Aichon/Archive 2013"

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Line 268: Line 268:
 
== (: ==
 
== (: ==
 
No problems at all. I thought about joining Philosophe Knights at one point. Too much thinking for me to RP such a title, as I tend to over think things anyway and getting into philosophy constantly would give me a headache. Anyways, no hard feelings. I'm always open to ideas from your group if you wanted to collaborate something. [[User:CyberOpposition|CyberOpposition]] 04:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 
No problems at all. I thought about joining Philosophe Knights at one point. Too much thinking for me to RP such a title, as I tend to over think things anyway and getting into philosophy constantly would give me a headache. Anyways, no hard feelings. I'm always open to ideas from your group if you wanted to collaborate something. [[User:CyberOpposition|CyberOpposition]] 04:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
 +
== Anticlimax ==
 +
Watching [[Special:Statistics]] after a sig change isn't as exciting as you made it seem. I want my $7 back. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>01:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
:Wait wait are the sig image size rules gone? {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 04:06, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Not last I checked. I reverted his change, since I can only assume it was an accident. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:17, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Damn. Was gonna go buck daft there. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 04:29, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Hmm. That's weird. Looks fine on my end. Let me try again. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>04:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
::::The issue is that the new image was huge, so it made your sig take up something like 400px. Fix that and it'll be fine, but I don't need to be seeing gigantic images for sigs all over pages. :P {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:32, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::Annnnd, still doing it. Change your sig if you want to use that image, maybe? Enforce a size limit on it. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:33, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::Try clearing your cache, maybe? ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>04:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
::::::Huge rabbit is huge still. It's not a cache issue, since it ''should'' be showing up that large, given that the image itself is that large and you aren't setting it to show up smaller anywhere. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:36, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::No I'm pretty sure its a chaching issue. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor|15px]] <sub>04:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
::::::::You're right. When I closed out my browser completely, I'm unable to see the images at all (I just see my desktop image on my computer!). Must be a caching issue. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:42, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::It looks like a tiny bunny to me, well within sig limits. Are you sure it is not on your end? -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 04:49, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::I think you broke it Aichon. Now it is like a million pixels large or something. -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 04:55, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::I'm sure it's me. After all, I reverted everything to how it was a few hours ago, and it's been broken for years... ¬_¬ {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:59, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::::I think I finally fixed it. How's this? [[File:Vsig2.png|link=User:Vapor]] 05:00, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::::<nowiki>*</nowiki>sigh* {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:02, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::::Looks fine on my end. The large images were messing everything up. Thanks for fixing it. -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 05:04, 1 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== I'd like your opinion... ==
 +
I'm putting this on your page because I'd love your opinion.  I'm daring to do this publicly because I'd like to see what other folks think too - but I'm hoping for thoughtful, non-dismissive answers.  I tend to see the official channels as rife with that brand of contribution.
 +
 +
So, something Kirsty said on her SysOp 'application' made me think about how well the wiki is tied to the game, and it made me remember that for a decent period of time way back when I first started that I didn't get it at all, what was here, how the meta game worked, and even that there was more than "What the percentage likelihood to find a genny in a mall hardware store is..."
 +
 +
That, and as I came back last fall, I was amazed at how balkanized everything had become.  How in order to figure out what's going on at the moment, I visit 10 or so group forums every day, FAR AWAY from what is really supposed to be the centralized resource for information about the game.
 +
 +
It occurs to me that maybe the front page is due for a revision?  Something that has a slightly more sexy and comprehensible GUI?  go HERE for group information, go HERE for guides of all kinds, go HERE for gameplay information, a what's happening that actually corresponds to shit happening in the game?  "The MOB's eating West Grayside.  The Philosophe Knights continue to hunt Team Zombie Hardcore.  The Late Night TV Crue are killing all the SysOps they can find... Axe Hack is making another obvious alt and trying to get into groups undetected... etc.?
 +
 +
That - and I'm not sure this is even possible now that Kevan's ditched - but maybe the log-in screen of the game itself needs a box touting the wiki a bit more, rather than just a button saying 'wiki'?  "HEY YOU!  There's another whole component of this game that goes way beyond what you see when you log your guy in!  Go to the wiki to find a group, to read about coordinated stuff people are doing, yadda yadda?"  Something that drives traffic here, where they'll find something simple and comprehensible, and then get sucked in the way I was to the human side of this and at just how amazingly clever people can be in this game?"
 +
 +
Further, then maybe there needs to be a campaign that asks active groups to at least update their pages with some kind of 'recent activity' once a month?  So it's not necessary to go to all those forums?
 +
 +
I'm probably dreaming, and my specific ideas might suck for a host of great reasons - but overall, aren't there things we might try to reverse the slow decline here?
 +
 +
Thanks for listening.--[[Image:SarahSig.png|90px|link=User:Sarah Silverman]] 15:54, 5 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:I definitely agree that the main page needs a redesign, and focusing around the sort of stuff that you're talking about would be a great idea. It's actually a topic that we've talked about quite a bit and that pretty much everyone agrees is necessary. Unfortunately, no one has put together a mockup for a new design that A) we can all agree on, and B) that will actually function correctly. I put together [[User:Aichon/Sandbox/Demo13|something]] a few months back that we all pretty much agreed would be a step up from what we have now, but we discovered at the last minute that the menu bar across the top is broken for everyone using the default theme, ever since the last wiki software somehow broke the way that the CSS is included in themes.
 +
 +
:As for the login screen, that's out of our control entirely, I'm afraid. And regarding having more in-game updates on the main page, I'm actually in agreement that stuff like that would be useful, but the problem is that it (as you might imagine) gets extremely sticky when you start to give preferential treatment to groups just because they're more well-known or whatever than other groups. With various groups being inactive and active, oftentimes from one week to the next, it's almost impossible to keep updated, and that's assuming that the groups even want their whereabouts on the front page at all. That said, I think that I'd actually be in favor of having a box with extremely short (<10 words, say) status updates from any groups that show up on [http://www.urbandead.com/stats.html the stats page] and that get deleted automatically after a month or something. We need to get over ourselves and start doing what's best for the community-at-large that isn't a part of the wiki community, which is something we've had problems doing. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:36, 5 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::A snapshot of stats to put on the main page would be pretty sweet. It could be bot updated or, lacking that  gnome'd weekly or so. I'll make myself available for main page reboot discussion if it resurfaces. Not sure if we'll get the css/theme problems fixed. Has anyone ping'd Kevan about that? Maybe there's a testbed wiki somewhere that stuff can be worked out and give a step-by-step method of fixing those issues. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>18:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
:::Afraid not on that last point. Something outright broke, so without having a copy of this wiki that we could attempt to fix, I'm not sure how we'd be able to use a second wiki to help us here. And I'm not sure that anyone has pinged him, though I kinda doubt he'd respond even if we did on a topic like this. Anyway, I'm game for reopening these discussions as well with some ideas that are a bigger departure from what we currently have. One of the complaints with my design was that it didn't have something on the left side to visually balance out the right, but status updates from groups in a box down the left side could do just that for it. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:09, 5 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:The discussions Aichon mentions are [[Talk:Main Page#Main Page Organization Discussion|here]] and [[UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Archive/2012 Q4#Main Page|here]], and the technical issues with Aichon's proposal are discussed [[User:Aichon/Archive to do|here]]. They're an interesting read and give a good idea of why nothing happened last time this topic came up despite largely having consensus. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:09, 5 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Perhaps a help group for new groups could be formed, similar to Project Welcome. Something to help the numerous Crit 2 group pages blossom into nice group pages and maybe an introduction to metagaming. Or just a collection of resources for new folks trying to form groups. I know there are some guides out there but it could be that they're being passed over/not seen. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>19:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
:::Wow!  Of course you guys have worked on this.  I want to read up on everything Bob posted, then I'll come back.  Thanks!--[[Image:SarahSig.png|90px|link=User:Sarah Silverman]] 21:59, 5 April 2013 (BST)
 +
If you guys are worried about preferential group treatment for in-game updates on the wiki, you can always word it to be anonymous. "A mob of zombies ransacked Caiger Mall last night", or something like that. Little, quick, sentence-long news blurbs on the main page, so to speak. (People who really know what's going would probably still know what and who the updates pertain to, though.) It might also be worthwhile to have some sort of centralized active group page, if you wanting to quickly know what groups are up to. I don't know. Also, we could give the [[CP]] something to do. But I'm not sure that we'd ever use it much, without really needing to. And one more also... I do have ideas for another main page, although I don't have the time to create anything right now. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:25, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::This is mostly what makes people not want to update or read these things. It's better to have flavor, just no recruiting or falsification. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 06:30, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::Is there any chance we could have a "first day on the wiki" guide like the one for the game on the main page?  Maybe divided into a sections for game information and wiki information, just make it links to useful information and brief descriptions of what you'll find.  I don't know if that would help the main page, but it would help me. --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 22:36, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::Hmmmm... I'll see if I can mock something up. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 23:21, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::If you do, I got some thoughts on content, just not sure how to go about making a public discussion type page or if it even should be on the front end... --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 02:23, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::Whip together some text. Even if you don't pretty it up, if you put down some ideas for the text that are useful, we can run with those. Coming up with useful stuff to put on the front page was a major problem before. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:46, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:There was a time not long ago where we tried to redesign the main page. All that happened was nothing got changed, except the community sections you seem to value (and I worked prettye hard to put on the main page) being pushed further down the screen where no one would read them. Merry Christmas {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 14:01, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
==A Question==
 +
Is Sexualharrison allowed to vote kill on my suggestion because "fuck you"? [[User:Lpha|Lpha]] 15:25, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:Suggestion votes need only justification, and even that is often waived as justification is easy to produce. There is effectively no check for the validity of the justification, as a.) sys-ops are not moderators and b.) civility is no requirement on UDWiki (such a policy has been shot down). tl;dr: Yes, Harrison is allowed to. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 16:17, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::There's actually the inane/invalid vote clause, if you look under voting rules. {{tongue}} --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 17:10, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Yes, and it states: ''Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.'' "Because fuck you" may be poor form, but is some sort of reasoning/justification and thus formally sufficient. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 17:19, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::You have to look down a little further. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 17:35, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::Is this regarding the "inane vote removed" example? Because, while possibly rude, Harrison's vote isn't "inane" - it was caused by a [[User_talk:Sexualharrison#Please add Keep in Front of Vote|conversation on his talk page]]. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 20:17, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::Am I mistaken or are suggestions at this point exercises in futility because Kevan's not updating the game?--[[Image:SarahSig.png|90px|link=User:Sarah Silverman]] 21:25, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::You're not mistaken. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:22, 6 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::I kind of view the suggestions system as a mini-game or side quest or something. Its fun for some. Some take it way more seriously than they should and others (like me) completely just completely ignore it. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>23:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
:::::::::finally some drama. and where is SA when I need him? i think  i stole that one from him. --{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>00:56, 7 April 2013 </small>
 +
:Allowed to? Sure. Is it valid? Honestly, I don't know, and I wasn't planning to try and sort it out unless it would actually make a difference in the outcome of the vote. Also, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the troll vote clause in the Suggestions' rules, since that's a sysop power that applies in this case, and it allows sysops to act as moderators in situations such as these, which is extremely odd. Of course, that rule hasn't been used in years, and with good reason. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:45, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:Answer: No, he can't. But nothing will happen unless a sysop strikes it, which they most likely won't. (also: the rules say sysops can strike ''troll'' votes, the word inane isn't codified in the rules anywhere, only the suggestion). {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 14:05, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::You'd be suprised how [[Suggestion:20080925 Barricade Instability|unproblematic]] this was [[Suggestion:20080423 Let zombies use the letter “D”|when]] I [[Suggestion:20080414 Speargun|used]] it, or [[Suggestion:20080409 Blinding Attacks|other]] sysops, even a [[Suggestion:20070730 Zombie Vision|Vista]], even a [[Suggestion:20080425 Penalize URL Actions|direct precedent]] (if one cares about precedents here). I even got away with it on [[Suggestion:20081027 Hello! Can you hear me?|Iscariot]] (although I think there was an associated vandal case). You have people who don't care about their vote, who get their vote struck; thus they don't care and there wasn't any problem. (Exception, Iscariot. But Iscariot is Iscariot.) Any molehills here aren't mountains. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 14:32, 7 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Yep, pretty much. Get some teeth, ops! {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 08:28, 8 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::ah more arm chair syoping. too bad you have no say whatsoever anymore. aww.--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>08:31, 8 April 2013 </small>
 +
:::::Just looking to watch more drama bud, as you wanted yourself. don't get all shitty with me busta {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/a}} 15:11, 8 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::but I love pooping all over your years of hard work here on UDWIKI fucknuts.--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>12:51, 9 April 2013 </small>
 +
:If you'll notice, he did give a justification in his original vote, to wit: "'''Meh'''", which translates to "this is a bland and uninspiring suggestion, and I could either vote keep or kill, so don't give me any shit about my vote, or it may change".<br />Or were those just the voices in my head? {{wh}} <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 10:32, 8 April 2013 (BST)</small>
 +
::which was my point exactly.--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>15:01, 8 April 2013 </small>
 +
::[[File:563097_10151538790558399_1122107544_n.jpg‎]]--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>16:24, 8 April 2013 </small>
 +
:::In the end though, isn't the definition of "Troll" a society generated norm?  A benchmark reliant on a moving target of zeitgeist?  If I say that I find Sexualharrison's vote within bounds, appropriate and entertaining, am I not pulling the pole in the opposite direction of it being justifiably called a troll vote in our community?  Assuming so, I found it within bounds, appropriate and entertaining.--[[Image:SarahSig.png|90px|link=User:Sarah Silverman]] 20:18, 9 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== Wasn't talking to you ==
 +
Was talking to the sysop team as an entity and anybody who backed both decisions i.e. Karek, Boxy, Rev, Spiderzed, Rosslessness, etc.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 03:27, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:By the way, having looked at the list of current sysops, you are literally the only one who I actually trust to be reasonable. <3 --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 03:31, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::...
 +
::I hope you can understand why I thought you were talking to me, since I was the one that voiced the "sysops are not moderators" reasoning which you seemed to be responding to. Even with having thought that, however, you're still cool in my book. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:39, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Yeah, sorry, those were separate statements, apologies for the confusion. What I was getting at is that sysops aren't obliged to never moderate or be political, they should do whatever helps the wiki run most efficiently. In some cases, that requires moderating content. (I.e. to be an effective administrator it is also sometimes necessary to be a moderator.)--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 04:15, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::No problem, and I can agree with that. If the need arises, sysops have a higher responsibility to do what's best for the wiki, even if it means overstepping their bounds and being taken to A/M. But moderating other users should be reserved for extraordinary circumstances that warrant such an activity, and should instead be left to the users themselves on a regular basis, particularly in the case of personal disputes, which are best resolved through dialog between the involved parties. When Lpha placed "Keep" before our votes without our permission, that was rightly excused as the newbie mistake it was. But his deciding to press the issue with Harrison and disregard what we told him about it being unnecessary, just so that he could see the Keep votes neatly lined up, created a problem entirely of his own making. Of course, a normal person, newbie or not, would either shrug it off or seek to address it with the other party, either of which would be acceptable outcomes.
 +
::::Instead, rather than shrugging it off or talking with Harrison to resolve the issue he had created, his first resort was to ask me whether or not Harrison was breaking any rules. Who does that? And when he found out that there was a rule Harrison might be breaking, he went to another sysop and asked him to deal with Harrison. Newbie or not, it's poor form to drag others into a personal disagreement so that they can beat up your opponent, rather than dealing with it yourself, and even more so if you later try to pit those people against each other by bringing in another when the first one doesn't go along with your plan.
 +
::::So, not only is he trying to use a rule that I believe should be erased (I'm not assigning him any fault for that since he couldn't have known; I'm simply explaining my reluctance to use it), he's also made himself extremely unsympathetic by demonstrating poor form and doing anything ''but'' being willing to handle the problem himself. Thus, even if I did support the use of the rule, I'd be unlikely to exercise my discretion in using it here, since I believe that he created the justification that Harrison is using and now has a responsibility to handle it himself. That has nothing to do with him being a newbie or folks looking out for a clique of long-timers. It's because he didn't act like a decent person should have acted (neither did SH, for that matter, but I'm not making any moves to support SH either, instead just choosing to let them sort it out among themselves).  {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 06:44, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::Fair enough, sounds reasonable.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 11:34, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
I still can't believe all this crap over a meaningless suggestions vote. --{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>06:57, 10 April 2013 </small>
 +
:Would it be the wiki if it wasn't? Part of the charm of this place is its ability to crush souls under meaningless issues. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 07:18, 10 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::really looking forward to what boxy has to say. think he will keep going down the line syops or get the hint?--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>23:53, 10 April 2013 </small>
 +
:::No clue at this point. He has quite awhile before the suggestion closes, so he could still go pretty far. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:35, 11 April 2013 (BST)

Revision as of 18:48, 18 April 2013

Aichon:Talk Archive 2013
Aichon
ˈīˌkän :Talk Archive 2013
Personal tools
project wonderful
column-okay