User talk:Revenant

Please leave a message after the beep. (Newer messages at the bottom, please.)

	Things Best Forgotten
	This User talk page has an Archive

ugh

I thought you were using that code as your signature and was about to give you a lecture about breaking the signature policy. NVM. I guess it's turned into a friendly 'just make sure you don't use that code in future' note? :) -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 00:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Which code was that? Also
<SA> Hey rev, email DDR and tell him I demand a valid ban reason please. I don't feel like linking an email to the SA account ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 00:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh lol, is that against signature policy? Since when? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 00:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The 'malicious' special:logout link clause? Since ever, strangely enough. I really don't know, it was implemented before I arrived. As for SA, he was ban evading, if he wants to come back he can go through the correct channels to have his account unbanned (with any sysop, or even user I'm sure, not just me) -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 00:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ban avoidance--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 00:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

<SA> All it says when I edit is that my reason for banning is , definitely not avoidance

So, uh, enlighten me: What would be "proper channels"? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 00:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC) P.S. #udwiki is still about, though people seem to eb chatting in #redrum.

eb chatting? I don't usually bother with ban summaries. He can look at the vandal banning for an official reason (though I've already told him it via you so he probably shouldn't need to). Proper channels? Probably just like I said above, asking an op or just a member of the community, it wouldn't be difficult to be unbanned in his situation. All he's gotta do is ask -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 01:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

[06:11] <SA> REVENANT WAKE UP
[06:11] <SA> TELL THEMS THERE FAGGOTS TO UNBAN ME SO I CAN BITCH
How's that? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 19:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, "eb chatting" == "be chatting". Simple transposition typo, gleesh! Easy to recognise. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 19:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine. You can tell him I've unblocked him -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 21:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

<SA> SA is still banned what the fuck DDR
<SA> No, my IP is still banned. Fucks sake.
Maybe just one more thing? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 00:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Alright thanks. I actually thought I'd done that already but I was on a rush out to uni and must have missed it. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Cheers, man. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:48, 30 March 2011 (BST)

Snacks

Glad you enjoyed it. I marinate regularly but you guys rarely ever take a bite.--ZIPO/Talk/◆◆◆/CAPD 04:20, 29 March 2011 (BST)

User:Revenant/Archive/Gift of the Goddess

I should mention that the guy who deleted this has the exact same IP address as the page creator. Don't know if the guy just forgot his account or it's a little brother, but it's something ya should keep in mind. ~ Red Hawk One ^{Talk | space for lease} 05:16, 30 March 2011 (BST)

So I saw. Just saving a copy because I thought it was a neat page and deserved to be remembered. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:47, 30 March 2011 (BST)

UDWiki editing boilerplate:

Please note that all contributions to The Urban Dead Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here.

Orphanage

First. Second, check what is actually internally linked :P Not sure if I should rather hope that Cornlol's sock notices or doesn't notice... -- Spiderzed▋ 13:29, 30 March 2011 (BST)

dude, a little more hands off your bid

really. step back, act a bit more mature and the buttons will be yours if you really want em -- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

bitch 15:16 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I know. What can I say? I'm bored, it's entertainment. I am coming up with some great ideas, too. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:05, 31 March 2011 (BST)

well try not to give that impression UDwiki is serius biznanzz. -- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

bitch 02:06 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, indeed. It's a wiki for a game, after all. And if I write the ideas down, at least I'm not the only one who knows them and others can follow on if desired. TBH, that's part of what has prompted me to run again: stuff that could be done easily and isn't. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:25, 1 April 2011 (BST)

discussion on historical groups

Please see here my reasoning regarding why a vote which is not legitimate is not counted. It is an admin function and I do this with every vote that is done this way, which happens too fucking much for something so simple. Undo again, you can consider the action taken to vandal banning where it can be handled there. And again, the notion that I only do it for people that vote against me is a laugh. Grow up. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:20, 1 April 2011 (BST)

I considered it laughable when you levelled it against me, too, but you seemed to be taking it seriously, which is why I said it in jest today. Guess I touched a nerve? Ease up, man, taking things this seriously is not good for you. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:28, 1 April 2011 (BST)

It's my job and it's a very easy rule to follow, yet people can't and I become the bad guy for asking them to do it properly. Months of it just becomes annoying. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 03:32, 1 April 2011 (BST)

Dude. The reason literally every other wiki I've ever used accepts correctly marked-up {{unsigned}} votes is that to use them correctly you have to look up the edit in the page history: you know, the thing that is the actual record of their edit? The signature is just a formality.

Before blindly following "the rules", a good administrator should look at what rules actually exist as well as why they exist and whether they could be improved. If it's so annoying, do something about it! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:37, 1 April 2011 (BST)

But that's not completely accurate, people in different timezones may have different things in their preferences and that gives people different personal times that an edit time happened, dealing with it just becomes a nuisance. that's not even taking into account the potential for false timestamping (though there's no real reason it would happen bar trying to slip votes in early). Personally, I have nothing wrong with the rule. It's simple, it is a very easy rule to follow, and you don't blame the rule when there are people who can't do it and get aggressive over it; you blame the people I guess.

Either way, you were right about things getting personal, it was never my intention but sometimes things can get out of control, as they did, so I'm sorry about that. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 03:44, 1 April 2011 (BST)

There are tools to easily convert, and I just use UTC most places anyway because it's simpler. Timestamps are best checked on History in any case. Short of Oversight or deletion, history never lies. The reason I am opposed to this petty bureaucratic bullshit is it's completely unnecessary and works to make the wiki actively more hostile to new users. Small wonder the game is dying…
Apology accepted. Thank you. :) And please, believe me when I say that I am sincere in my good intentions. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:49, 1 April 2011 (BST)

Sorry I forgot to note, but the timezone changes appear in history too, I'm very sure. That's the problem, and already you're talking about getting converter tools for something that is much more reliably and easily executed by having one guy do (~~~~). And striking one single vote isn't something I'd bet would scare off a newbie, as much as the douchebags that used to roam this place and make it hard for them. I dunno. Might have to be one of the agree to disagree things but so far I'm fine with enforcing the rules to a point of uniformity among votes and signatures. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 03:54, 1 April 2011 (BST)