User talk:Rayvern/Archive

Pointless chatter

I love three of your templates. They are kinda neat.--Thari 09:09, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Glad to hear that I hit a couple of nuggets with my template shotgun *8-). There are no restrictions on them, so if you want to use them please feel free.

Out of personal curiosity, do you mind if I ask which three? (I currently favour 'Heart of a Child', 'Masks' and 'Snake Plisskin' - but thats just me) –Ray Vern phz ^•T 10:30, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Existing Threads

Advice

I responded to you on my talk page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:19, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Cheers for this. Took me a moment to respond as I'm just trying to figure out how to implement a user page layout similar to your own (and how to put in a sig). *8-). --Rayvern

If you want editing help, I'd be happy to help. As for the signature, the right way to sign is to type ~~~~ (which puts a link to your user page and a timestamp). –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:31, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Cool. Thanks. I hope you don't mind - I've been looking into how to do it by pinching/plagarising from your own page. I will be adapting it to my own uses, but your page seemed to provide an ideal leaping off point. (if you have a problem with it, let me know and I'll make as many changes as are required). Rayvern 21:37, 13 July 2006 (BST)

So long as you're talking about borrowing layout and not content, I don't mind. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:43, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Feel free to hit me round the head with a big wet fish if I get out of line.....just out of interest...what limitations are there on the funky template tags you have down the side of your page? Are some/all restricted to particular users? Can I make my own? –Ray Vern phz ^•T 21:51, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Well, nothing is restricted per-se, but using some of them when you really shouldn't would probably be a bad idea. For example, since you're not a moderator, I wouldn't use {{Moderator}}, {{Banhammer}}, or the like; if you're not actually a member of Project Welcome, I wouldn't use {{smallwelcome2}}; since your name isn't "Bob," I wouldn't use {{BobWorship}}; etc. Most of the others are open to anyone though. Anyone can make templates. Basically, once you're familiar with editing the wiki and using wikimarkup, I would read Help:Tables and Help:Templates, look at the code for some of the ones you like, and imitate what you see. Just make sure that whatever you make is in the Template namespace, and is categorized appropriately. If you need help, there are lots of people who can help: Xoid, Cyberbob240, myself, the authors of many of the templates, etc. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:56, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Many thanks. I'm going to keep checking out other examples and draft up a few to see what I end up with. Rayvern 14:55, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Vandalism

Uh... is this where new comments go? This is a lil' confusing. I just noticed that you created a particular user page. Evidence. It's a very good idea to place to ensure you are not on a user's user page when leaving a message. Many users tend to get stroppy when such happens, and if it's not obvious that you were leaving a message, and merely fucked up, odds are you'll get punished via M/VB. You may already know all of this, but just thought I'd clue you up in case you were not. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 15:35, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Sorry about the layout - still trying to get used to using the wiki. My apologies for the incorrect placing of my message. It was intended for the Talk page, not the user page, as you rightly point out. Thank you for shifting it across - I'll try to be more observant next time around. Should I delete the User entry, or should it be left as evidence in case of further action through M/VB? Rayvern 15:44, 14 July 2006 (BST)

I went ahead and deleted the page content. It wasn't listed on UDWiki:Moderation/Speedy Deletions for a moderator to remove, so I thought I'd save them the trouble. Again, my apologies for mis-posting the original message. Rayvern 18:14, 14 July 2006 (BST)

I don't think a M/VB case would be successful against you on for that, because it looked like an honest mistake. The problem is more when you are leaving a one to two line repsonse — that is not as obvious and will likely end up in you getting warned. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 16:27, 15 July 2006 (BST)

My thanks for the reassurance. I will be more careful in future.*8-) Rayvern 20:16, 15 July 2006 (BST)

A few tips

I noticed your custom signature, yet you are not using it. Is is that you don't want to, or don't know how to? Also; when I said "confusing" I meant as to where new messages go: do they go under "Comments Below", or "New Comment Threads"? Some users like to post messages at the top of a "parent" section, others prefer the bottom of a "parent" section, so that should also be noted, unless you like chaos. ( Hey, some users do. For example: Mpaturet's user page is almost unreadable. ;-) ) –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 16:31, 15 July 2006 (BST)

Also, instead of doing it the way you had it previously, which would force the first "heading" to appear on a table of contents once enough messages were left, why not simply remember that to edit anything from before the first heading to just use this link: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Rayvern&action=edit&section=0 –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 16:34, 15 July 2006 (BST)

I've been posting on and off for a little while now, but have only recently decided to make something of my user space. After looking around at various other peoples spaces (mainly of the moderators I have been in conversation with recently *8-) ), I'm gradually experimenting with things - like the title bar and user created templates (which I haven't completely got the hang of yet, got to play with the formatting).

I initially thought that using a custom signature would be very sweet, but I'm not sure if there is and equivalent to the '~~~~' shortcut to add username and timestamp (if there's not, I not sure I can be bothered adding the timestamp by hand every time).

The whole organisation of my Talk page is still up in the air (hence the chaos). I like the idea of having an "Add New Comments" link that automatically adds to the top of the page. Follow ons to existing conversations can then continue under the relevant section. I'll have a look at maybe adding your link to the navigation bar as a shortcut after I've finished playing with User Templates.

I appreciate your input on this (especially considering who you list as your arch-nemises (arch-nemisi?? - have to ask the Trio on that one). Rayvern 20:13, 15 July 2006 (BST)

If you have a custom signature and use ~~~~, the timestamp is still inserted for you. Also, it's "nemeses." –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:50, 15 July 2006 (BST)

AAaaaahhh....There's always someone (does it always seem to be Mr. Hammero on here? *8-) ). In terms of the signature then, I guess I must not be using it correctly. I put in the ~~~~ and I get 'Rayvern 21:09, 15 July 2006 (BST)' instead of my signature( –Ray Vern phz ^•T ). Is there something else I should be doing? Rayvern 21:09, 15 July 2006 (BST)

Hey, what can I say. I have a bloody huge number of pages on my watchlist. To answer your question, yes. Go to Special:Preferences, check the "Raw signatures (without automatic link)" checkbox, and type {{User:Rayvern/Sig}} in the "Nickname" box. One caveat: due to current software limitations, you can't use your normal signature inside of other templates. You will have to copy-and-paste it in manually, and insert ~~~~~ afterwards for the timestamp. You will notice that those of us with these fancier signatures never use them on, e.g., the suggestions page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:19, 15 July 2006 (BST)

Again you have my thanks. –Ray Vern phz ^•T 22:29, 15 July 2006 (BST)

Message from P-Knights

You stated...

"<message from P-Knights removed again, as per blatantly obvious statement of intent above. Can they read I wonder?> –Ray Vern phz ^•T"

That last statement was very hypocrytical. Why are you exempt from being blatant? All I asked was if I could retort to your statment. Disagreement is one thing, but censorsing your opponent is a new low. Instead of deleting your oposition's views, you should respond to them. If you are correct, then your oposition will see that. --Flogging Molly 04:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Exempt from blatancy??

I thought I was being completely blatant with the message "Based on your inability to keep to the truth, or to post a single message without insulting content, your credibility has now disappeared. Further communications from you or your group on this forum will be removed.".

Is that not brazenly clear, almost to the point of being offensively obvious, depending on your point of view of course.

Were you working on only the "offensively noisy or loud" meaning of the word?

Limiting your interpretations to suit yourself? (I'm assuming that you were aware of the other interpretations)

The talk page policy regarding your group is there because I got bored responding (for the reasons stated on that page and above), not because of any interest in censorship (even though that is a bonus side effect of the policy =).

Conditions for peace with The Brainiacs were stated reasonably and they are completely in line with our groups in-game stance.

Why the P-Knights still feel they have to get involved in a situation that was only made worse by their meddling is beyond me. As stated clearly on the talk page: "I think it's time you let your Brainiac allies deal with their own problems, I'm sure they are old enough to not need their hands held by you."

Many thanks, –Ray Vern phz ^•T

P.S. Yes, I have responded here. No, it is not against the stated policy - if you read it you'll note it specifically refers to this forum (meaning the talk page).

I don't have a removal policy for this page (...yet).

Borrowing format

Re: using the Buttonville barricade plan format....

Thanks, I worked hard on something more aesthetic than most of the plans which are often hard to read, slow to load, or just plain scary looking. I encourage it's use in other suburbs. Of course, it would be more usuable if I made a template.

Regarding the colours. Here are the reasons for what I chose: grey (obvious, don't you think?); green => safe place (EHB); yellow => caution (VSB); The red border is obviously for high risk. The Blue border for revive points was aribitrary just because it stood out among the others.

Let me know when your plan is up. --ZaqWer 22:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Dumping bodies from forts

I couldn't Re your vote due to rules, but there is something you should know:There is no "outside" on the forts anymore. Your either in, or on a block around it, with the exception of the armoury.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^P 18:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

aah...cheers...I'll have to have a better look at how the new forts work. I'll revise the vote once I've had a look. –Ray Vern phz ^•T 20:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not make bad faith edits on this wiki. Continuing this behaviour may lead to your editing privileges being revoked. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 15:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Remove the entire conversation, or not at all. Selectively removing edits is a abhorred because of how it was abused in the past. –Xoid ^M•T•FU! 21:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your time on this. A further question if I may. The conversation in question is now in the talk archive in it's vandalised state. This needs fixing. The question is if I can remove the entire conversation, or if I should attempt to restore the vandalised comments? –Ray Vern phz ^•T 22:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment on Zombiek's page

I happily take any constructive comment on board, but surely you should remain neutral in such matters? --Zombiek 17:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

While I have no real reason to remain neutral (I'm no mod and have no particular authority on the wiki), I do try to be (waits for the many claims to the contrary........), at least in cases that don't directly concern my own group.

I thought I had been reasonably neutral. I don't believe Homuncubishs post on your groups talk page is vandalism. I did, however, mention that you don't necessarily have to put up with it being there. As far as I am aware, you are allowed to remove entire conversations from your group or personal talk pages (just don't remove the odd post here and there from an ongoing conversation - thats vandalism...I learnt that one the hard way *8-) ). It would be worth checking with a mod first about doing this though - just to be safe.

Cheers, –Ray Vern phz ^•T 18:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Fuel

Fuel, any buildings in Miltown that need refueling, as you can see with the problems we having with the Zog Of Marrinium, our guys that are dedicated to stocking fuel and spray cans need to arm up with ammo instead. As such we have 30+ fuel cans that rather than being dumped be better given to a building in need.

The Coalition would prefer that non-NT buildings are kept fueled - primarily Hospitals and PDs. (powered NT buildings are against our policies *8-). ).

Also....please sign you posts...Cheers, –Ray Vern phz ^•T 12:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:Vandalsim Posting

Thankyou for posting before myself about the vandalism of our group page by Zog Of Marrinium to admin homuncubish

No worries. I've posted a note on your own talk pages.

(Can I ask that you sign using the "~~~~" in future, and use the "===" section heading for your comments.)

Cheers, –Ray Vern phz ^•T 12:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:Josephine General

Not sure, it was late last night and I didn't put too much care into reading. Nice page, sorry about the confusion.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^P|^'07 19:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd like your support Rayvern

I have a PK balancing suggestion up for voting in previous days: Lower The AP Cost To Use Syringes On Murder Victims. It lowers the cost to inject a syringe into a murder victim by 5AP. I think a fair way of dealing with the lower cost a PKer has to kill someone is to give a slightly lower cost to revive their victim. It doesn't impede PKers from killing at all, it just prevents them from draining as much scientist AP. If you like it I would very much appreciate your keep vote! Thanks! --Jon Pyre 06:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! --Jon Pyre 18:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Do Not Edit

Cool! Your using that graffiti thing I made! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I was just playing to see if I could figure out why your sig keeps indenting....*8-)

–Ray Vern phz ^•T 16:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Whatever...Have a cookie...

	A FREE COOKIE
	Axe Hack has given Rayvern a cookie for for telling me what the hell was wrong with my sig.

--•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Cookie! Glad I could help. (While I don't feel right pinching the Graffiti, I may steal your "Do Not Edit" idea for the non-main/ non-talk pages - hope you don't mind). –Ray Vern phz ^•T 17:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Nah. I don't mind. Use it however you want it. I really don't care. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Broadcast on 26.87MHz 30-08-07

Ray, there was a broadcast today on the shared LSFT for Fryerbank

1. 26.87 MHz: "Bigger Mortice..leave now while you can" (8 hours and 42 minutes ago)
2. 26.87 MHz: "You have been targeted for death by the Coalition." (8 hours and 41 minutes ago)
3. 26.87 MHz: "Leave the SE quadrant..or face our wrath!" (8 hours and 40 minutes ago)
4. A flare was fired 2 blocks to the west and 8 blocks to the south. (8 hours and 27 minutes ago)
5. 26.87 MHz: "DH: Canham Bank under attack. Building resecured" (8 hours and 24 minutes ago)
6. 26.87 MHz: "DH: 1 zed still inside..2 survivors..send guns and FAK." (8 hours and 24 minutes ago)
7. A flare was fired 14 blocks to the west and 12 blocks to the south. (5 hours and 30 minutes ago)
8. iamlamb said "went for fuel found 2 gennies going see if NT south need one" (4 hours and 29 minutes ago)
9. 26.87 MHz: "Armchair Philosophers - Phipps and Parr Towers under attack" (4 hours and 25 minutes ago)
10. 26.87 MHz: "May be zerging" (4 hours and 25 minutes ago)
11. 26.87 MHz: "Coalition will ..." *static* "... up bigger mortice, and we will all watch" (2 hours and 10 minutes ago

Just want to know if this is actually from The Coaltion, if so I suggest you look at Dragonhead wiki for list of all the BM characters UD ID's seeing they don't have their affiliations in their profiles.

The only sad thing is like the Zog of Marrinium, is that Amiasheep and Zombiek will just abandon those characters and create new ones instead, think idiots would learn. They are listed on Dragonhead DK13 Armchair Philosophers KOS list, now if true have pissed your group off as wellHomuncubish 21:04, 30 August 2007 (BST)

This doesn't sound like any of our guys. They tend to stick to the Radio Coalition, rather than borrowing other peoples frequencies.... To be honest, I'm not sure how bothered any of us are going to be - it all looks like a desperate attempt at Drama, so not worth wasting effort on. –Ray Vern phz ^•T 14:59, 2 September 2007 (BST)

The whole drama thing with Amiasheep, Homuncubish and Zombiek

I wish I hadn't gotten involved in this garbage.

The only reason I was aware that an issue existed was because I had just recently been involved in discussions with Homuncubish about members of my "pet" group being on the DragonHead PK list (something that was cleared up without incident or drama by the way) - so Homuncubish's page and the DragonHead pages were on my watch list.

I got to watch the drama unfold from it's very beginnings (worst luck)...so anyway, with the relevant pages on my watch list I noticed when the initial vandalisms took places and decided to report it (forever entangling myself in this mess).

I did make the fatal mistake of pointing out that one side of the drama had re-invented themselves as an anti-otherside group (which just made me giggle - I couldn't help myself, though I've been rueing that edit ever since). Beyond that I've only been watching and reporting vandalism when I saw it.

Personally, I think Zombiek took the right route. After a shakey start, they seem to be happy enacting their fury in-game and only reporting it on the wiki in an appropriate place. (edit - I take this back. Zombiek is still trolling as much as the other two - Rv).
Homuncubish and Amiasheep don't seem willing to take this lesson on board. (It's been mentioned any number of times throughout the drama that no one on the wiki is remotely interested in in-game actions, so long as no game rules are broken).

In terms of why Amiasheep was treated harshly where Homuncubish was given leeway, that's likely due to the fact that Amiasheep had already been banned once for vandalism, so had used up all his leeway.

I'm really not interested in their reasons for the drama, and I couldn't care less for the in-game antics they blame for the animosity. I just want to extricate myself from any association with their mess and get back to the nice quiet life I lead as a World Domination Hobbyist.

–Ray Vern phz ^•T 23:36, 27 April 2007 (BST)

Please note - This is a statement, not an opening for discussion. Any further posts on this page that bear any (even remote) resemblance to this issue will be arbitrarily removed - you have been warned

M.U.Z

Malton University Of Zombology

Your template is brilliant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DreadHeadDead (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Thanks. Always glad to hear from a fellow Zombologist. *8-).

–Ray Vern phz ^•T 12:15, 28 March 2007 (BST)

I just wanted to say thank you

You reverted the Lebende Tote page after it had been vandalized. You caught it before any of us Toties did, so good work! Thank you again. --Balistic 23:45, 19 May 2007 (BST)