User talk:Toejam

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search


I see you have an interest in the decay levels and repair cost. Maybe we can exchange information. In Eastonwood we have ruined buildings in all decay stages. Visit the Eastonwood Ferals Almanac for some screenshots and informations. --CannibalX 17:26, 14 June 2008 (BST)

Thank you for your answer. I think you are right when you say there is a tactical application; high repair cost makes it easier for zombies to hold a suburb and keep it ruined. It’s a psychological thing like breaking free running lanes it keeps single survivors or smaller groups from barricade strafing your place. And it gives your suburb a cool look if every single building is somewhat decayed. I also noticed ruined buildings that didn't have the repair cost written on the 'repair' button. First I thought only dark buildings are that kind of buildings but your iwrecords screener destroyed this theory. I try to keep the Almanac up to date; if you want to add something you are welcome to do so. --CannibalX 00:46, 15 June 2008 (BST)
Of course you can link the almanac. --CannibalX 18:18, 16 June 2008 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions

thanx for correcting the location of that link that i messed up on --Scotw 15:31, 17 May 2008 (BST)


Haha thanks alot dude! I'm gonna look for a cool one for you, i'll let you know i i find one. See ya! LemonHead7t7 *̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡|͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|]]| ̡̡̡ ̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡*̡͌l̡* Talk/PDA/Red Rum/MOB 22:15, 5 May 2008 (BST)

Pker History

But but...everything is a survivor conspiracy. Cheers for telling me!--Thekooks 17:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


I don't like. Zombies don't risk anything other than a headshot... it's a totally different level of risk to meatshield as a survivor, and to camp in a ruined building as a zombie -- boxytalk • 13:17 13 November 2007 (BST)

Well that and zombies don't view it as meatshielding, it's kinda completely different in purpose and implementation when zombies do it.--Karekmaps?! 22:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Not really. Both sides dogpile into a building to stop their enemy from taking it over. --Toejam 22:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually most of the time it's used with ?rise or for the same purpose. The other thing is far rarer and many groups actually discourage doing it.--Karekmaps?! 22:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Because it can be a bit boring? --Toejam 22:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that and it's pretty ineffective unless you absolutely positively need to hold a building.--Karekmaps?! 22:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Guide

Good Idea actualy. What else needs to be added?--Seventythree 00:58, 22 September 2007 (BST) Cool. I'll add stuff, as and when I think of it. Feel free to dlete/amend anything on there.--Seventythree 01:36, 22 September 2007 (BST)

Stockpile suggestion.

I think the one stockpile per person rule is to also prevent abuse like people hording 20 generators per person around buildings in a NT to prepare for seiges and such. (just an example). It's not entirely realistic ofcourse, but so is the fact that you can't trade in-game, etc. It's always easy to relax the restrictions once the thing is in place. It's a rather new mechanic so it doesn't hurt to be prudent.--Vista 17:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

RE Your msg on my talk page: You listed some 0 AP "actions", but the only one that really counts as an "action" is dropping an item (really, logging in is an action?). Dropping an item is only 0 AP because you are also losing any further use of that item for the benefit of freeing up inventory space. It's a trade-off. Whereas, the Drop Gun/Retain Ammo suggestion eliminates the trade-off. Loading a weapon is usually 1 AP, but this bypasses the AP AND frees up inventory space. If dropping the gun left behind a partial clip, which must then be loaded I would vote keep, otherwise it's a free action. Think about it, what if I suggested that dropping a clip automatically loaded the bullets into another weapon instead? It's the same thing. --Matt Scott 9 23:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Suggestions Archive

Toejam. I have been handling the cycling of Talk:Suggestions, but except for the odd case, I did not preserve whether they were Active or Developing suggestions, because I thought it did not matter. Recently, I noticed that you make this distinction in your nice archive pages, but my lack of doing so has led to all being listed as Developing. Would you like me to start cycling this info as well? I am not sure it is all that useful, and truth be told, it is a bit of a pain. --SporeSore 14:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Historical Groups

If you want to make a change to thhe way the page works, set up a discussion at the bottom of the talk page where we can hash it all out. Thanks! --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 02:19, 1 May 2007 (BST)

Re: Waughn

FYI: I worked that out little issue out with him. When he realised what he'd done, he apologised and I assisted him with his editing problems. --Cyberbob Sys U! 04:24, 12 May 2007 (BST) Also - don't you think six months is a little over-the-top? That's not to say that I wouldn't be able to achieve it, but it's a very long time to hold someone in suspicion... --Cyberbob Sys U! 04:31, 12 May 2007 (BST)


Now the categories are united (I put everything in the bigger category (56 articles in one, 7 in the other)) but if you don't like the way your page is now, feel free to put it back to the way it was. This isn't something I feel strongly about. --Toejam 17:06, 19 May 2007 (BST)

Frequently Asked Questions

The inappropriate (and ugly) picture is taken out of the article, as are the comments that don't make any sense without it. It's an improvement, and the question is still answered. --Toejam 21:28, 20 June 2007 (BST)

Malton Medical Staff

Hey Toejam: Thanks for the comments! Unfortunately, with the MMS being in the heart of the red zone in central Malton, the state of the group is a lot worse than the state of the wiki graphics.

A Question

Why, when replying to Wan Yao here, did you delete my comment? -- Pavluk 18:44, 20 August 2007 (BST)

No problem. I hate those Edit Conflict things as well :-) -- Pavluk 19:19, 20 August 2007 (BST)


Wow, this looks cool! thanks --~~~~T''' 10:55, 21 August 2007 (BST)

Policy Discussion, Performance Review

Toejam said:
This policy wouldn't set extra rules over a sysop's behaviour. But it would allow the non-sysop community to have more power in how it's run. It helps solidify the notion that sysops are just regular users, and not some eternal aristocracy.

I brought this here because I don't like adding more than 1 RE to any voters comments, especially if they get long.

The issue is that good sysops who do their job will be removed because they aren't liked. There are a few like that, Grim would probably end up being reviewed weekly even though he follows the rules very well and doesn't even inform other users of his sysop status unless he is doing sysop duties. Mathew Fahrenheit probably wouldn't have had a single day without a review considering how much history he has of provoking people, it was a surprise he made a sysop on the third try. The real issue is that this will be used for petty agendas but done in the name of making sysops perform better, there is absolutely nothing in the policy that makes this make sysops do, or try to do, their duties any better. The policy actually makes it harder for them in many ways because if someone doesn't like a sysops warning of another user or a page voted on for deletion or protection they can, and probably will, bring the acting sysop up for a performance review. Misconduct punishes a bad sysops, this punishes an unpopular sysop who hasn't done anything worth warranting the removal of their powers or any sort of punishment, it makes their words matter and not their actions.--Karekmaps?! 13:37, 3 September 2007 (BST)


Close, but not quite. What I intend to create is a system where users can enter the data from using NecroNet Access at a specific NT, that will then update to a compiled map, and will allow individual pages to create a custom map with their desired range (such as a suburb, custom region or territory, or any individual location). This will achieved by creating a sub-page for each cell, from which the table will make a template call (this will allow NT building-specific data-sets to share the same information, when their range's overlap). The purpose of this page will be to allow a Malton-wide survey of scanned zombie's numbers, allowing a higher rate of participation in the collaborative effort by facilitating location/page-specific data-sets for which information may be updated. --Morgan Blair 22:29, 12 September 2007 (BST)

Oh, did I leave that on your User page? I'm so sorry; I must have been really distracted, or something... --Morgan Blair 23:33, 16 September 2007 (BST)

We Demand a giant E!

Project Evil requires a giant E! for a logo before we can start making templates to further our evil plans. Since you were responsible for the recent uploading of the giant A!, we were hoping that we could persuade you to grant us a giant E!

Failure to comply will result in us graffiti'ing a rude message on Mount Rushmore with a giant laser cannon in space. --The Grimch U! E! 05:32, 17 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks. --The Grimch U! E! 05:34, 23 September 2007 (BST)

Oh Noes!

Thar be no discussions!--Karekmaps?! 17:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Class Breakdown on Stats

For a moment there I was like "What what what??" that I would miss the very data I was looking for, but I realized that it was a breakdown of people's classes. In that a military person is a military person, even when a zombie. Though I find it odd that on today's stats page the number of zombies matches the number of standing zombies. Then when you add together the number of standing survivors, revivifying bodies, and dead bodies you get a number close to the total number of survivor classes, though the number is off by 2. Coincidence, a misperception on my part by the misleading title of the chart, or a bug in the Stats page. Very odd... Wenin 17:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That's the thing, there must be something wrong with the way the stats are being put together. I know that there are survivors standing around as zombies. They should be counted as Standing Zombies. Think of this, there are long played zombies who started as survivors in order to get XP faster. If when they are a zombie, they aren't being counted as a Standing Zombie, then the numbers are totally off. So either the class break down is not accurate at all, or the the Standing Totals are not accurate at all. I'm sure the creator of the game isn't interested in its accuracy, since it just feeds the beast of complaints between the two groups. Wenin 23:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)


Hi, your profile has THEM as your group name.. but you're not officially a member of our group, and I don't think I've ever seen you before. Someone *did* report that in the past you've been sighted at our little stronghold, the Haslock Building, but I didn't personally see that. I'm not sure I'd want our group to be held accountable for your actions, since I don't know if you play as a survivor, PKer or zombie.

It doesn't feel like my place to ask this, but would you kindly remove THEM from your profile? If you're really interested in joining us, stop by Haslock and hang around for a bit.. and maybe you can officially link up with us! We've got a good sense of humor (and an IRC channel), so you might enjoy hanging around. :D Thanks, in advance!--Commie Woman 02:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you! :) --Commie Woman 04:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

mall status map

Thanks very much. I made the map page, but I was manually updating it. User:Karek provided the code to make it update automatically from the separate mall status pages. Hope you find it useful. Garum 14:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


Well...My siggy says it...Guess I'll uphold my end of the deal...

Cookie.jpg A FREE COOKIE
Axe Hack has given Toejam a cookie for stuff.

--•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 02:31, 11 April 2008 (BST)


You edit conflicted me adding News updates. Punk. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾ 17:05, 14 October 2008 (BST)


Regarding your vote on several user redirect pages i have separated the case into individual cases, if you feel so inclined please recast your vote on each page relevant to how you feel about that particular redirect being kept on the wiki. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.--xoxo 07:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


While grateful for your support in the promotion bid I feel I really should point out that I simply do not have the skills or patience to do many of the technical functions that a sysop normally does. This is not to say that I cannot and will not learn enough to help out, rather to point out that I currently have no clue as to how they work. If you were voting for me because you trust my judgement on issues like A/VB and Misconduct then thank you… if you think I can be trusted to maintain the wiki infrastructure then please change your vote to abstain because I am crap at editing stuff let alone fixing other folks mistakes.--Honestmistake 14:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It's qualities like not being nasty and not warning or banning people too easily or unfairly that matter to me in a sysop. Knowing how to protect a page (say)? To me, that's not important - that sort of knowledge is easy to pick up. --Toejam 11:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)