User talk:Jedaz/Archive2
Wiki disscussion forum
I have just created a wiki discussion forum to discuss the wiki in standarded message board format. All current wiki moderators will be made moderators on the forum.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 21:03, 9 June 2006 (BST)
- Thanks for dropping in and letting me know, but I don't quite see the point for it. Hmm... once theres more activity I'll probably join but for now I feal that the current way that we go about communication is fairly effective. - Jedaz 04:43, 10 June 2006 (BST)
Your attention is needed
You voted kill becasue of the math. Aparently in trying to calculate the math you reached the conclusion that "4 * 0.35 = 2.1" becasue you used 6 insted of 4. I thought I should ask you to double check your math and reconsider your vote if you voted kill becasue of that mistake. --TeksuraTalk 00:00, 12 June 2006 (BST)
- Hunh? I'm sorry but I can't see where you got 4 from. Unless you are saying that for the first Target they take 2 damage and the other two take 1 each. But that doesn't make sense from a roleplaying perspective (or at least to me). I used 6 because I'm presuming that the damage would be the same on all targets. If it's the case that the first person takes 2 damage and the other two take 1 damage I'm still voting kill because I think damage should be consistent. - Jedaz 02:20, 12 June 2006 (BST)
Another Skill under Vomit called Putrid Bile would cause the damage done to the selected target
to become 2. Those hit by the splatter are not affected. This translates into .8 Damage per AP
Why delete?
Why delete the UD avatar and UD Profile links on the main page.They weren't voted for deletion. Please revert. --Zod Rhombus 06:39, 18 June 2006 (BST)
- The reason that they were removed is that we decided that they wern't going to be a helpful resource for most people as it is unlikely that Amazing would be willing to help this community after his year long ban. Also there was a notice on the talk page saying that they would be removed if no one objected. If the community wished to have them up then someone would have spoken up and then it could have been discussed before their removal. If you want it back then I'm sure you can state your case for why you think they should be place back there, however I don't see any reason for them being up and thus I'm not going to revert it. Anyway you don't have to have something voted upon to be changed, if we did then nothing would ever get done. If you don't like my response you may go to another moderator and ask for a revert and I will respect their decision regardless, however I feel they will have the same sentiment as me about it. - Jedaz 07:06, 18 June 2006 (BST)
- Who are 'we' that decided? If I remember correctly (and I do) these pages were voted on and were voted for 'keep'. Now if you adhere by your own guidelines for deletion, these links would not be removed. I don't want to 'shop' for a mod, that's the problem with the current moderator situation now - too many 'factions' and I believe that is counter-productive to the guidelines of how the wiki should work. I believe this should go to misconduct. Mods should not be allowed to delete pages without due process, that's how it is simply spelled out in the rules. In fact, the fact that it went through the voting process and passed, it should not have to be voted on again. These are useful pages that have no connotation to Amazing, other than he made them in good faith for all to use. --Zod Rhombus 22:17, 18 June 2006 (BST)
- Just look at the discussion on the main page to see who decided. Also if I read it correctly in both instances there were more removes then keeps which reflects the communities attitude. The issue with the voting was that they didn't have any guidelines set out as to how many votes are needed and how long it takes and hence it was considered "invalid". Also if you decide to take this to misconduct you may want to change what you are reporting me for, I didn't delete pages, I modified a protected page. Just setting your facts strait. Anyway I have no doubt that at the time of creation that they were made in good faith, however we as a group we decided that it would be best to be removed and we acted upon what appeared to be what the community wanted as a whole. - Jedaz 00:01, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- The 'vote' on the discussion page is invalid, it did not adhere to established wiki guidelines. The fact that it is Amazing's creation is immaterial, what pages/links will be next? If the mods can't follow the rules they set, why have them? Misconduct it is. --Zod Rhombus 04:54, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- If I may, Jedaz? (Note: This is aimed at Zod)
- The 'vote' on the discussion page is invalid, it did not adhere to established wiki guidelines. The fact that it is Amazing's creation is immaterial, what pages/links will be next? If the mods can't follow the rules they set, why have them? Misconduct it is. --Zod Rhombus 04:54, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Just look at the discussion on the main page to see who decided. Also if I read it correctly in both instances there were more removes then keeps which reflects the communities attitude. The issue with the voting was that they didn't have any guidelines set out as to how many votes are needed and how long it takes and hence it was considered "invalid". Also if you decide to take this to misconduct you may want to change what you are reporting me for, I didn't delete pages, I modified a protected page. Just setting your facts strait. Anyway I have no doubt that at the time of creation that they were made in good faith, however we as a group we decided that it would be best to be removed and we acted upon what appeared to be what the community wanted as a whole. - Jedaz 00:01, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Who are 'we' that decided? If I remember correctly (and I do) these pages were voted on and were voted for 'keep'. Now if you adhere by your own guidelines for deletion, these links would not be removed. I don't want to 'shop' for a mod, that's the problem with the current moderator situation now - too many 'factions' and I believe that is counter-productive to the guidelines of how the wiki should work. I believe this should go to misconduct. Mods should not be allowed to delete pages without due process, that's how it is simply spelled out in the rules. In fact, the fact that it went through the voting process and passed, it should not have to be voted on again. These are useful pages that have no connotation to Amazing, other than he made them in good faith for all to use. --Zod Rhombus 22:17, 18 June 2006 (BST)
|
STRAWS LOL |
| Anybody see somebody reachin' for straws say "Yeah!" |
Cyberbob Talk 05:29, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Probably not the most constructive thing you could have done Cyberbob but oh well. Anyway the 'vote' is still valid in the aspect that it gauged peoples opinions on what they wanted to happen with it all. And how do you reckon that the creation of the pages by Amazing is not important? I'm very curious as to why you think this because wouldn't he also be the one maintaing them? I would also like to point out as far as I know there were no rules set in relation to edits of the kind I made. However I've been known to be wrong and if you can point me to somewhere that proves that I am then I'll be happy enough to admit I'm wrong. But if you feel that this has to go to misconduct then so be it. Obviously you have strong convictions about this and nothing I will be able to say will make you think otherwise. Well it's your choice, but I don't feel convinced enough to change it back, especialy seeing that after 5 days you are the only person as far as I know who has objected to the change. - Jedaz 05:55, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Zod… there was another discussion afterward. After Amazing got banned. There was no vote, only a talk about it. The discussion was there for almost a week and no one paid any attention, so Jedaz figured no one cared.
- Yesterday, the one and only Amazing, spewed inane babble out for several minutes, whilst I asked him to try and make some sense, Amazing seemed to calm down. I then told him of their [the link's] removal as a courtesy. Amazing then proceeds to bitch and moan, hurling abuse my way. Not exactly conducive to improving my impression of him, or getting me to reverse Jedaz's alteration. I even gave him a golden opportunity to nail his enemies to wall, and instead of taking it, I got more abuse hurled my way. Frankly, if I hadn't of told that ass that his links were removed, neither he nor you would ever have noticed. Seriously, why do you even bother supporting him Zod? –Xoid S•T•FU! 06:32, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- I am not doing it in support of Amazing, pages/links should not be deleted on a whim, against the rules set forth on the wiki. I would support this no matter who the author/creator is. These pages pose no threat to the UD community and should not be removed for 'potential' negative content and or bad faith edits - only if negative/ bad faith content is presented and then they should be removed in accordance to the wiki guidelines. These links have the possibility to be useful and, as per previous vote, should be included on the page. Part of my concern is - since Amazing was/is a big part of my group's presence on the wiki and in-game, what stops mods from removing more relevant content from said group, mainly Crossman Defense Force pages. No, I still believe we must follow the rules, even the mods. --Zod Rhombus 22:38, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- The wiki guidelines prevent the mods -- and anyone else -- from randomly removing things from user or group pages. As for the main page, that's a different story. By your logic, we should include lots of other links on the main page: Google, the Library of Congress, an article about the World Cup, BBC News, the Wikipedia, Coca Cola, NASA, currency exchange rates, and any other links that have the possibility to be useful. Just because someone finds it useful doesn't mean it has to be advertised on the main page of the wiki. If you want to see those links, just put them on the CDF page. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 23:14, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Quit obfuscating the facts. Fact: the links were voted on for 'keep'. Fact: despite the vote, they were removed. The guidelines were broken. --Zod Rhombus 03:05, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Please provide links to the wiki guidelines that you claim were broken and quote the necessary parts. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 03:14, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Anyway Zod, didn't you said that the 'vote' was invalid? So how could they be voted for 'keep' if there wasn't a valid vote, especialy when removed out numbered keeps? If you don't have any other points that you want to try and argue then leave it at this. If you don't like it take it to misconduct as you were saying before because I haven't seen any one convincing point for why they should be restored. - Jedaz 05:06, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Please provide links to the wiki guidelines that you claim were broken and quote the necessary parts. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 03:14, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Quit obfuscating the facts. Fact: the links were voted on for 'keep'. Fact: despite the vote, they were removed. The guidelines were broken. --Zod Rhombus 03:05, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- The wiki guidelines prevent the mods -- and anyone else -- from randomly removing things from user or group pages. As for the main page, that's a different story. By your logic, we should include lots of other links on the main page: Google, the Library of Congress, an article about the World Cup, BBC News, the Wikipedia, Coca Cola, NASA, currency exchange rates, and any other links that have the possibility to be useful. Just because someone finds it useful doesn't mean it has to be advertised on the main page of the wiki. If you want to see those links, just put them on the CDF page. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 23:14, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- I am not doing it in support of Amazing, pages/links should not be deleted on a whim, against the rules set forth on the wiki. I would support this no matter who the author/creator is. These pages pose no threat to the UD community and should not be removed for 'potential' negative content and or bad faith edits - only if negative/ bad faith content is presented and then they should be removed in accordance to the wiki guidelines. These links have the possibility to be useful and, as per previous vote, should be included on the page. Part of my concern is - since Amazing was/is a big part of my group's presence on the wiki and in-game, what stops mods from removing more relevant content from said group, mainly Crossman Defense Force pages. No, I still believe we must follow the rules, even the mods. --Zod Rhombus 22:38, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Yesterday, the one and only Amazing, spewed inane babble out for several minutes, whilst I asked him to try and make some sense, Amazing seemed to calm down. I then told him of their [the link's] removal as a courtesy. Amazing then proceeds to bitch and moan, hurling abuse my way. Not exactly conducive to improving my impression of him, or getting me to reverse Jedaz's alteration. I even gave him a golden opportunity to nail his enemies to wall, and instead of taking it, I got more abuse hurled my way. Frankly, if I hadn't of told that ass that his links were removed, neither he nor you would ever have noticed. Seriously, why do you even bother supporting him Zod? –Xoid S•T•FU! 06:32, 19 June 2006 (BST)
Tallying
If I can help out on tallying up the votes for suggestions on which voting has closed, I'd be glad to. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 18:46, 19 June 2006 (BST)
- Actually currently I've got a program that tallys up the votes and changes the template of the suggestion. However for the votes to count they have to start like #'''Keep''' or #'''Kill''' ect. So it would help if you can check if the votes are within the voting timeline and to have them start as needed. But usually when the numbers are close I go and check to see if they are tallied correctly. So yeah I've got it fairly under control but if you want to help out then just making sure that they start that way would be helpful thanks. So yeah, just for your information start from April if you want to help out because the previous 5 months have been processed. Well let me know what you reckon. Once we catch up it'll be easier to keep this system running smoothly I reckon. - Jedaz 04:50, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- No problem. I'll browse through and fix any suggestions I see that aren't in the
- Keep
- Re
- Kill
- Keep
- etc format. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 18:07, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Yep, that'll be good thanks. - Jedaz 03:04, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- No problem. One thing, though: I've noticed that some of the pages are protected, but some aren't. I obviously can't edit the protected pages, but is there any reason that only some of them are that way? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 04:28, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- Oh, well just edit the un-protected pages and I'll go over the protected ones myself if you spot any errors on them. I got a bit proactive and processed some of the suggestions and so I protected them once I was done. If there are any votes ect that were in the incorrect format and would change the final outcome (ie going to Peer Reviewed, Peer Rejected or Undecided) then let me know and I will fix it up. But I can't really imagine that it would really change the outcome much in most cases. Of course it is a bit irresponsible of me but with the back log and so forth I don't think that making a small mistake here and there is going to hurt anyone. Well just to let you know where I'm up to in processing suggestions the Last Day Added on the peer reviewed page is a fairly good indicator of where I'm up to. So if you aim to be at least 10 days ahead of it then I think this should run smoothly. Of course it is a big ask so I won't blame you if you want to drop out at any point along the way. - Jedaz 06:09, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- It doesn't seem like too bad of a job, actually, and I'm glad to help out. Can you point me to an example of what a bad format looks like? I haven't seen anything yet, except for maybe this. What do I do about the Abstain vote? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:37, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- Those votes are fine. A bad format would be like
- It doesn't seem like too bad of a job, actually, and I'm glad to help out. Can you point me to an example of what a bad format looks like? I haven't seen anything yet, except for maybe this. What do I do about the Abstain vote? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:37, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- Oh, well just edit the un-protected pages and I'll go over the protected ones myself if you spot any errors on them. I got a bit proactive and processed some of the suggestions and so I protected them once I was done. If there are any votes ect that were in the incorrect format and would change the final outcome (ie going to Peer Reviewed, Peer Rejected or Undecided) then let me know and I will fix it up. But I can't really imagine that it would really change the outcome much in most cases. Of course it is a bit irresponsible of me but with the back log and so forth I don't think that making a small mistake here and there is going to hurt anyone. Well just to let you know where I'm up to in processing suggestions the Last Day Added on the peer reviewed page is a fairly good indicator of where I'm up to. So if you aim to be at least 10 days ahead of it then I think this should run smoothly. Of course it is a big ask so I won't blame you if you want to drop out at any point along the way. - Jedaz 06:09, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- No problem. One thing, though: I've noticed that some of the pages are protected, but some aren't. I obviously can't edit the protected pages, but is there any reason that only some of them are that way? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 04:28, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- Yep, that'll be good thanks. - Jedaz 03:04, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- No problem. I'll browse through and fix any suggestions I see that aren't in the
where I would prefer it to be like.
What happens with the program is that it looks at the first 11 letters and what not and then determines what the vote type is (ie a Keep, Kill ect). If it doesn't see what it wants then it just discards it as either an invalid vote or a comment. So basiclay what I'm really looking for is that each vote starts with a #''' then the vote type being either Spam, Keep, Kill, Dupe ect and then another ''' just after it. Does that make sense? - Jedaz 06:45, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- I think so, yep. I'll keep looking for invalid votes. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:55, 21 June 2006 (BST)
- Ok thats good then. Thanks for the help in keeping everything accurate. - Jedaz 06:57, 21 June 2006 (BST)
Misconbitration
You may want to check this out. Cyberbob Talk 05:29, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Thanks, I left my reply there. I'm not very supprised that this has occured, but I'm not worried about it either. Well we'll see what happens. - Jedaz 05:50, 20 June 2006 (BST)
Suggestion Category
I entered a suggestion on the 26th of April that does not seem to have been moved to Peer Reviewed. Could you help me determine what category is appropriate for filing it? I'm leaning toward Game Mechanics. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer. --Spraycan Willy MalTel 08:53, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- I would actually put it in User Interface. The reason it hasn't been moved yet is that there is a massive back log which is being tackled and we are just about done all the way to the end of March, infact March should be completly done within the day. But if you wish to move it add the suggestion to User Interface, add it's name to the end of its respective list and also add a link to it at Most recently added suggestions. That should be about it really. - Jedaz 09:02, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Thanks so much! I think I accomplished what you recommened (along with your help there). I feel your pain on the back log. That was a hassle even with the great directions in the page. Thanks again! --Spraycan Willy MalTel 09:36, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Yep, it looks good and no worries. - Jedaz 09:38, 20 June 2006 (BST)
- Thanks so much! I think I accomplished what you recommened (along with your help there). I feel your pain on the back log. That was a hassle even with the great directions in the page. Thanks again! --Spraycan Willy MalTel 09:36, 20 June 2006 (BST)
Yer back?
So did I do a half decent job of holding the fort while you were away? –Xoid S•T•FU! 09:12, 28 June 2006 (BST)
- Yep, you did a great job with the suggestions. Thanks alot for covering it for me. I'm not 100% better yet but I'm definitely much better then I was before and I should be fine to handle the suggestions system now. So thanks again for taking care of it while I was gone. - Jedaz 09:29, 28 June 2006 (BST)
- Since this is on pretty much the same topic, I'll use the same heading. Is there a proper way to format tallies? I know there is a style you are supposed to follow int he Suggestion instructions, but no one seems to follow it 100%… –Xoid S•T•FU! 07:58, 30 June 2006 (BST)
- Well I didn't think there is any proper way. But probably the best way is to have it like this
- Of course you don't list the ones that there isn't any votes for. Does that answer your question? The reason that they style hasn't been applied constantly I reckon is probably because people did so little work with the system and didn't pay that much attention to it, also Tally hasn't really been used much anyway so theres not much to go on how to use it. But it should be easier to look after the system now because I went and finished the backlog just today belive it or not so I'm quite happy with that. (I just had to say that) - Jedaz 08:12, 30 June 2006 (BST)
Moderation
You may or may not know, but I've currently got a bid for moderator going. If you want to, I'd like to hear what your thoughts are there. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 09:17, 28 June 2006 (BST)
- Ah, yep. I'll go and check it out. Thanks for pointing it out to me. - Jedaz 09:30, 28 June 2006 (BST)
You missed one
Yeah, I've been watching out for my suggestion. :) "Axe Sharpening," on Suggestions/25th-May-2006, actually passed (barely, but it did), but it looks like you accidentally skipped it. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 10:23, 29 June 2006 (BST)
- Oh, thanks for pointing that out to me. I didn't notice it actually because I'm using a program and what not so that one keep vote that wasn't set out properly didn't register correctly. But I'll go and change it right now. Thanks for pointing it out, and it looks like that the back log should be done in just a few days at tops which is good for me. - Jedaz 10:30, 29 June 2006 (BST)
- My pleasure. Nice work on the suggestions! I bet you'll be glad to have the backlog gone. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 10:33, 29 June 2006 (BST)
- Ok there you go, it's fixed up now. Thanks for noticing my work, and yeah I'll be very glad when it's all done. The only reason that the backlog is even there is because people were slack, but hopefuly it won't happen again, and if it does it's someone elses job next time, lol. - Jedaz 10:47, 29 June 2006 (BST)
- My pleasure. Nice work on the suggestions! I bet you'll be glad to have the backlog gone. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 10:33, 29 June 2006 (BST)
Let it be said
That I agree with your not warning Gage. Though I do believe he was the culprit, I admit there was insufficient evidence. Hopefully, now that it's on record, he'll think twice before doing something that stupid again. –Xoid S•T•FU! 13:40, 4 July 2006 (BST)
- I'm glad to hear. Well lets hope it stops him from vandalising in the future, if it doesn't then I'm sure whoever rules on the case next time would be more inclined to warn him. - Jedaz 13:48, 4 July 2006 (BST)
Thanks, but...
I don't think that it will ever get 100% would be keeps. Gage seems determined to make me drop it. I don't even think he reads the re-visions. Btw, I put it in devolping suggestions.--Labine50 MHG|MalTel 23:24, 6 July 2006 (BST)
- Ah, oh well, you don't have to have 100% keeps for it to pass. Anyway if your idea doesn't get a few kills/spams then it's obviously not that big of a change. Belive it or not I got some spams/kills for a suggestion that makes DNA extractors more useful while still preserving not knowing the Zombie stack order. - Jedaz 05:35, 7 July 2006 (BST)
Vandal bans
Looks like our favorite idiot is finally done with his vandalism spree. Might want to take the names from Special:Ipblocklist that you blocked and enter them into M/VD. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:59, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- Yeah, will do while it's quite again. - Jedaz 07:01, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- I have a feeling our "friend" is creating more accounts. Just a hunch, I wonder if theres any way to see newly created accounts... - Jedaz 07:16, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- The wikipedia shows it. Of course, they're actually up to date. And I figure he's probably creating more accounts. Fucking idiot. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 07:18, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- Yep, well hopefuly Kevan will get motivated and actually update the software. But we all know how that goes. Anyway there isn't much we can do about it at the moment so we'll just have to ride it out. - Jedaz 07:19, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- The wikipedia shows it. Of course, they're actually up to date. And I figure he's probably creating more accounts. Fucking idiot. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 07:18, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- I have a feeling our "friend" is creating more accounts. Just a hunch, I wonder if theres any way to see newly created accounts... - Jedaz 07:16, 16 July 2006 (BST)
Another thanks, but...
Hey Jedaz, thanks for unstriking my vote and all, but there's already an Arbitration case about that and I didn't want to touch that until the final ruling. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 07:46, 16 July 2006 (BST)
- Oh, I didn't know. I don't visit arbitration often, but if I knew about it then I would have left it. Oh well too late for that now. - Jedaz 07:57, 16 July 2006 (BST)
Body Moving
Any reason you just deleted it from the talk page? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:46, 21 July 2006 (BST)
- How to Cycle Today's Suggestions, check items 12 and 13, I've just finaly started to get motivated to start following what it says closer. It's per the rules, but previously I've just been lazy on doing it. Oh, I did make a mistake with it though, but that can be fixed quite easily... but yeah I moved it as per how it should be done. - Jedaz 06:50, 21 July 2006 (BST)
Finishing the Lexicon?
We've had about a month of inactivity with the lexicon, and we're only missing 7 articles. You think you can handle writing one or two more then help with final cleanup? We really can do it! (Please RE on my talk page. --Darth Sensitive 
W! 00:40, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- I'm just letting you know that you make PacMan cry. He will no longer be able to save you or the wiki from Blinky, Pinky, Inky, and Clyde. But as a token of good will, he'll live on on your talk page. http://wiki.urbandead.com/images/6/6b/Pacman.PNG --Darth Sensitive
W! 12:48, 27 July 2006 (BST)
Illegal Re's
You'd better put those on the talk page. Cyberbob Talk 03:37, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Honestly the rules don't state how they should be dealt with. If you want to bring me up for vandalism then you can also bring up anyone whos struck them out for vandalism. If you can point me to the part where it says "Illegal RE's must be struck out" or something along those lines then please do so and I will apologise. However I'm using my "moderator privilege" to deal with how I think they should be dealt with. - Jedaz 03:42, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Jedaz, they'd better go on the talk page or back on the main page, because otherwise you just vandalized. Come on man, don't make me report you.... –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 03:42, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Usual precident is that re's removed are to be placed on the talk page of said suggestion. You could argue it, but its better to just do it. --Karlsbad 03:44, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Fine, I'll move them to the talk page. - Jedaz 03:46, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Um... not quite
Boy, this is the day of technical corrections, isn't it? There would almost certainly not be 100MB more data transmitted. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 05:32, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Fine, 85.83MB when using the corrent amount of bytes for the URL string, but close enough. I just used 50 bytes instead of 45 like it actualy is. And I did use the total of active characters insead of active characters in a day so it would be a bit more like 51MB. It's just more out of laziness then any other reason why I said it was 100MB and did the calculations as I did. Anyway I guess you could just say that it's close to 100MB in a worst case scenario. - Jedaz 06:19, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- No, it's nowhere near. Ever hear of mod_gzip? mod_deflate? Squid? Etc.? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:26, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Well then how much do you reckon it would be? I mean, you seem to be an expert on this so you should be able to give me a reasonable estimate. - Jedaz 06:35, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Fine. The string in question is 45 characters. Let's assume we're using 8-bit ASCII, so that's 45 bytes. Let's say there are 40,000 active characters (based on the stats page), at 50 views a piece. That's 2,000,000 page views. If the data were retransmitted in the raw every time, that would be 90,000,000 bytes, which is about 85.83 megabytes. Let us now assume, however, that we achieve the same compression on that string, relative to the whole page, as we do to the main Urban Dead page. The current main page is 3420 bytes, which is about 3.3 kilobytes. Using bzip2/DEFLATE, that turns into 1831 bytes, which is about 1.8 kilobytes. Using gzip, I get it down to 1729 bytes, or about 1.7 kilobytes. Let's go with the latter, since I suspect mod_gzip is used more than mod_deflate, due to DEFLATE's slower speed over gzip. The ratio of compressed/uncompressed is 1.7/3.3, or about 52% the original size. So that brings the string down to around 23 bytes, which over 90,000,000 page views is around 43.87 megabytes. That doesn't take into effect caching or anything else, mind you. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:51, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Ok, fair enough. So thats about 43MB more instead of 100MB, I never said that I took all factors into consideration. I guess 0.5KBs wouldn't really make much of a difference... oh well, it doesn't matter really, Kevan will decided if it's worthwhile changing it or not. - Jedaz 07:09, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Fine. The string in question is 45 characters. Let's assume we're using 8-bit ASCII, so that's 45 bytes. Let's say there are 40,000 active characters (based on the stats page), at 50 views a piece. That's 2,000,000 page views. If the data were retransmitted in the raw every time, that would be 90,000,000 bytes, which is about 85.83 megabytes. Let us now assume, however, that we achieve the same compression on that string, relative to the whole page, as we do to the main Urban Dead page. The current main page is 3420 bytes, which is about 3.3 kilobytes. Using bzip2/DEFLATE, that turns into 1831 bytes, which is about 1.8 kilobytes. Using gzip, I get it down to 1729 bytes, or about 1.7 kilobytes. Let's go with the latter, since I suspect mod_gzip is used more than mod_deflate, due to DEFLATE's slower speed over gzip. The ratio of compressed/uncompressed is 1.7/3.3, or about 52% the original size. So that brings the string down to around 23 bytes, which over 90,000,000 page views is around 43.87 megabytes. That doesn't take into effect caching or anything else, mind you. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:51, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Well then how much do you reckon it would be? I mean, you seem to be an expert on this so you should be able to give me a reasonable estimate. - Jedaz 06:35, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- No, it's nowhere near. Ever hear of mod_gzip? mod_deflate? Squid? Etc.? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 06:26, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Revive point
I thought the warriors were suppose to run revive points? I've been standing on Horler square for like 3 days already, and nobody has revived me yet. Please revive me thanks.
My character name is Wang 2 Big, and this is my profile link: http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=587741
My suggestion
Hey there, you killed my suggestion, and I've re'd and hope you will change. Basically, it's up to Kevan in the implementation for that, as it's a mostly technical issue. Whatever works for him. --Burgan 15:05, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- There you go, I've changed my vote. - Jedaz 02:20, 30 July 2006 (BST)
A better way to strike
Just letting you know that I've created a new template, {{Strike}}, that should allow us to strike comments and other things in a superior way to how we normally strike things. Once the wiki is updated and we can use templates inside of other templates, this will be even handier (e.g., we can use it on the suggestions page). Here's an example of it in action: while right now we strike things, it's even better to strike them in style. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 21:02, 29 July 2006 (BST)
- Thats a good idea. Well hopefuly Kevan will update the software soon. - Jedaz 02:24, 30 July 2006 (BST)
M/VB - Saromu
If we are allowed to remove complete utter bullshit from a page, does that mean I can remove stuff about ASS being in Grigg Heights from the Grigg Heights page? No proof, I deny it. Fuck, I could tell you where we are and allow you to verify it, we are not in Griggs. Jackson5's lies are pissing me off. –Xoid S•T•FU! 14:01, 19 August 2006 (BST)
- Unh, yeah. Thats what a wiki is. If you don't like someones edit you change it back or bring it to arbitration. Don't like my ruling? Fine, I personaly don't mind if you want to over turn it, go right ahead. But I'm saying that it's not vandalism as I don't feel that the original edit was a factual edit and it was only speculation at the time of the edit, thus it served no real purpose so it should have been removed. - Jedaz 14:10, 19 August 2006 (BST)
- I was actually wondering if your logic was solid enough that I should bother trying to fight Jackson5's stupidity by removing his inanity. Now that I see A) that it is solid enough and B) that you'd likely back me up if this ends up at M/VB, I feel, what? Justified somehow? Meh. I'm not sure of the right wording at the moment. Head hurts too much to think straight. –Xoid S•T•FU! 14:30, 19 August 2006 (BST)
- Go right ahead, I'll support you. It's a public page and so it's open to anyone and everyone to edit no matter who they are. It's all ok as long as the edits are in good faith. - Jedaz 14:35, 19 August 2006 (BST)
- I was actually wondering if your logic was solid enough that I should bother trying to fight Jackson5's stupidity by removing his inanity. Now that I see A) that it is solid enough and B) that you'd likely back me up if this ends up at M/VB, I feel, what? Justified somehow? Meh. I'm not sure of the right wording at the moment. Head hurts too much to think straight. –Xoid S•T•FU! 14:30, 19 August 2006 (BST)
Chainsaw suggestion
Are you pulling the Lord's leg? The suggestion was totally different and God thought voting on something other than the suggestion at hand was against the rules... That would've been overwhelmingly approved if given a moment. Oh well, goodbye suggestion. The Lord will not fight it. -- (The Lord God) † Pray 04:02, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- He, nope. They had the same kind of idea, anyway 4 people didn't like your suggestion, and most likely there would have been more that wouldn't like it. Anyway people don't vote fair, you should know that. - Jedaz 04:06, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- The Lord is fast learning this in many ways. The problem was that the suggestion was not a Dupe or Spam, and the Spam votes were actually citing Duplication, but were labelled "Spam" to promote immediate removal and... Pardon the Lord while he pours holy water on his boggling, steaming brain... -- (The Lord God) † Pray 04:12, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Well even so Spam is still legitimate because people can simply say that it's a ridiculous idea because theres already one in peer reviewed. - Jedaz 04:16, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- The Lord points out that you're incorrect. That's when a Dupe vote applies. -- (The Lord God) † Pray 07:34, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Well even so Spam is still legitimate because people can simply say that it's a ridiculous idea because theres already one in peer reviewed. - Jedaz 04:16, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- The Lord is fast learning this in many ways. The problem was that the suggestion was not a Dupe or Spam, and the Spam votes were actually citing Duplication, but were labelled "Spam" to promote immediate removal and... Pardon the Lord while he pours holy water on his boggling, steaming brain... -- (The Lord God) † Pray 04:12, 20 August 2006 (BST)
Theology
If you want to discuss theology and such with the Lord, take it to God's talk page and please give the other wiki users a rest. -- (The Lord God) † Pray 07:34, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Talk pages are used for just that, talk. If people don't want to see anything then they can just ignore it. I'm not going to force people to read our babble. - Jedaz 07:49, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Are you in some sort of drug-induced state at this point? The Lord would like to know, honestly. -- (The Lord God) † Pray 07:51, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Ha, don't make me laugh. I could ask you the exact same thing. - Jedaz 07:55, 20 August 2006 (BST)
- Are you in some sort of drug-induced state at this point? The Lord would like to know, honestly. -- (The Lord God) † Pray 07:51, 20 August 2006 (BST)
Mother of fuck...
...you need a hobby man. Or to get bummed out on how no one else does your job for you, or if they try they screw up. Well, here's a reward. Not much of one, but just something from me to say: "Yes, I recognise you're a hard worker, and deserve more than this, but I can't bribe people over the internet, so hopefully this lackluster substitute will suffice."
|
A FREE COOKIE |
| Xoid has given Jedaz a cookie for his tireless efforts on suggestions system. |
–Xoid S•T•FU! 13:29, 22 August 2006 (BST)
- Ha, yeah I know. Thanks alot, I really appreciate it. It's kinda scary looking back at the old peer rejected and so on just to see how broken down they were. - Jedaz 13:35, 22 August 2006 (BST)
- It's true that the internet makes you stupid. I used to never get your and you're mixed up. </off topic> I came here just before you started cleaning up that mess, I've watched you through pretty much every stage of sorting them out. It's easily as much work as the location pages were, and just as tedious. Copy + paste, double check, copy + paste, double check, ad infinitum. –Xoid S•T•FU! 13:49, 22 August 2006 (BST)
- Yeah, I know. The only reason that I got through all of that backlog was because I knew a bit about programing and was able to make my job about 100 times easier. At least with the location pages once you are done you are done. But still I can imagine that the location pages would be just as annoying. - Jedaz 13:59, 22 August 2006 (BST)
- It's true that the internet makes you stupid. I used to never get your and you're mixed up. </off topic> I came here just before you started cleaning up that mess, I've watched you through pretty much every stage of sorting them out. It's easily as much work as the location pages were, and just as tedious. Copy + paste, double check, copy + paste, double check, ad infinitum. –Xoid S•T•FU! 13:49, 22 August 2006 (BST)
My Awesome Idea
Hi, can you please check out my idea.[1] It would be quite cool and nice if this was made.--Canuhearmenow 20:50, 22 August 2006 (BST)
- Ok, I've left my comment, it looks like a good idea. - Jedaz 06:17, 23 August 2006 (BST)
