User talk:DanceDanceRevolution

edit User talk:DanceDanceRevolution Start a topic. Press: + Is it an emergency?  Email  Archives 2007 2008 2009 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2010 H1 H2 2011 Q1 Q2 H2 MORE 2012 2013 2014-2017

So yeah...

You've got the basics, thinks there's a VB case as well. What else you want to know? --Rosslessness 18:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

holy shit

you're still around? Linkthewindow  Talk  13:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

The same goes for Ross, Boxy and to a lesser extent Aichon as well. Linkthewindow  Talk  13:19, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Funny thing, when you look purely at the number of years we've each been around, we've all been here for the majority of the game's life:

• August 2009 for me
• October 2007 for Ross
• August 2007 for DDR
• May 2006 for Boxy

And yet, despite that we've all been around for the majority of the game's life, I think we'd all agree (myself included), that there's a big difference in terms of how long it feels like people have been around between the people who were there before the game peaked (e.g. you, box, Ross, DDR, etc.) and the people who came by sometime after that (e.g. me). —Aichon— 15:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I miss the elders of the wiki. The Grims and the Vantars of my youth... --Rosslessness 19:09, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's weird isn't it? I joined not long before the game started to enter into decline (mid-2008, decline mid-2009 roughly,) and it always seemed that I'd missed out on the best years of the game.

What's stranger is that we're coming up to the one decade anniversary of UD next year, and my character's been in the game for seven of those ten years (so what you said, basically.) Linkthewindow  Talk  08:52, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Yep! Only occasionally since not much happens on the wiki. Nice to see you still around too. A ZOMBIE ANT 07:30, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's pretty quiet these days. Less then 50 changes a day, and virtually all of them are people updating suburbs and danger reports. Still, it's nice to see that this place is still serving it's purpose. Linkthewindow  Talk  08:52, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Pretty much. The game is dying so quickly, quite sad really. I'm thinking maybe a change in the suburb danger report descriptions might be warranted. A ZOMBIE ANT 09:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. I've swung past a couple of the forums of the groups I used to be a part of - virtually all of them are dead (although the MCM is still going in game, which is very nice to see.) It's sad to see, despite the (many) problems with the game and the wiki (okay, mostly the wiki,) I generally enjoyed my time here. Linkthewindow  Talk  09:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

You're all fucking old and I'm putting you in a home. 03:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Double holy fucks!--User:Sexualharrison14:23, 25 May 2014

It's funny how all the old guys come out of the woodwork suddenly. Linkthewindow  Talk  09:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Truly inactive psysop changes

In a nutshell, activity levels would be based on timestamps instead of edit count. We could have a few different levels of activity based on the timestamp. Let's say Active, Less Active, Inactive and Hiatus. Sysops notified on talk page if activity level is changed. To address the issue of crat inactivity, mandate that all crats maintain Active status. If a Less Active sysop is promoted to crat, they have one week to update timestamp, or vote is restarted without them as candidate. ~ _{06:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)}

Could it be automated? A ZOMBIE ANT 06:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps. I had the same thought and tried to think of ways. Templates would be involved, so possibly. Edit: Yes it is possible, I've thought of a way. Or at least semi-automated. I think it might be better if it wasn't fully automated, since sysops would be notified of status changes. This could be a crat duty. ~ _{06:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)}

Sure, I meant the status but not the notification thing obviously. I think they key to its appeal would be the ability for it to be automated and not need maintenance. Upkeep isn't exactly one of the things this wiki prides itself on ;) A ZOMBIE ANT 07:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Let's keep it simple. If a 'crat fails to make an edit for a month, anyone can ask them on their talk page if they're still around. Failure to reply in a week is grounds for putting their seat up for grabs. It preserves the community's authority in removing inactive 'crats, while giving us more flexibility in dealing with them by not forcing us to immediately put their seat up. A change like this is also more in line with the inactive sysops policy. It also means that if the community doesn't care that a 'crat is inactive, they can stay inactive. If the community does care, then the 'crat will need to be active or else they'll get demoted. Either way, the policy would react to the community. —Aichon— 07:01, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

That would work as well, but without the added benefit of a page which shows at a galnce which sysops are active, less active, elegible for crat, etc. Even having such a page on the wiki gives sysops some administrative purpose for editing, which is benefit for anyone that believes that an occasional edit is an indication of activity. ~ _{07:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)}

I do like simplicity so I like Aichon's suggestion (der) but I don't mind the idea of a status of activity for each op. What numbers are you thinking for each status 'bracket'? A ZOMBIE ANT 07:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrarily, I'd say within 2 months for the first bracket, within 4 months for the second, after that, sysop is considered inactive and has a week before demotion. Hiatus could extend the second bracket to up to 6 months. ~ _{07:36, 15 June 2014 (UTC)}

I'm gonna be totally honest, it's a shame we just didn't have more sysops. For me, that's always going to be the solution, get more sysops, reduce the activity quota so it literally only serves to stop totally inactive ops from being crat (I'm going to start calling it a "bob case" from now on) and I'm sure we'd be fine. There's gotta be a way to 'simulate' having more sysops through policy. There has to be a way. A ZOMBIE ANT 07:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

If only there was a page that had some at-a-glance info about sysop activity... :P —Aichon— 07:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, I still think the whole system, and I basically mean EVERYTHING, needs a rewrite at some point in simpler terms. —Aichon— 07:41, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

^ This is something I'd really like to see. If not already obvious from my stupidity about most wiki policies that aren't common-sensical, I sometimes feel like the current policies could use simplification (but it might be because I'm an EFL speaker.) There are barriers to entry I see when it comes to sysops -- some people are active enough on the wiki, but don't really bother with the sysop nominations due to: 1) lack of interest in performing the duties of a sysop, 2) lack of knowledge on how to handle the MediaWiki platform, and 3) potential ambiguities with WIKI LAW.

I'd also like to see Administration/Sysop Check as an automated, or at least, semi-automated process -- unless it'd put too much strain on the servers. Could be handy for those of us who are too scared to prod a psysop to check if they're still alive and kicking. -- ^{(stalk · KT · FoD · UT)} 11:21, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

/late

Even though I wasn’t around for this, I just wanna thank you for including me anyway. ♥ ЯЭV⁠€⁠NΛИ† ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 11:45, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

My pleasure, A ZOMBIE ANT 08:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

As a well connected player, do you have any idea who meatpuppeted me in? A ZOMBIE ANT 08:07, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

That's a tricky one!
Mis obviously had people from his various groups voting for him – whether or not that counts as "meatpuppeting" or simply "gathering support" seems to vary depending on who you ask, who's doing it, and who's opposing it – but the people voting for you are from all over the spectrum. Closest thing to a bloc voting for you is a few CAPD, and they were all pretty active on the wiki anyway (and having played with those players in a few games, mostly in opposition, I can't see them stooping to puppetry). A few DEM (but DEM was huge), a few Bashers (ditto)… and then we've got the last couple of one-shot voting accounts that squeaked in the win. Of those, two were from (different) French IPs, and one was from an obvious proxy that got caught. Could easily be someone who wanted you to win (or Mis to lose) doing something as relatively low-tech as visiting a couple of libraries or internet cafes and making sure to never edit the wiki from them again.
Sorry! No conspiracy I knew of, though bear in mind I've never really been as well-connected on the pro-survivor side, which is where I'd hazard it would have come from, and it only takes one person with half a clue and fewer scruples to tilt things juuust enough. ЯЭV⁠€⁠NΛИ† ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 04:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Good snooping and thanks! I've always been curious, you know how it is, when you receive political donations, you want to know who's pocket you're in ;) A ZOMBIE ANT 09:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

RE: "lol- the best"

Can I at least know what that message meant? --- Alex Yamata 21:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

DDR is referring to the fact that Umbrella has been one of the most contested names, with plenty of drama surrounding it. See the Umbrella page for some of them. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:03, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I was a part of the original Umbrella Corp, and have read up on a lot of that drama. I joined I think early 2012 and then went inactive for about two years, so I wasn't a part of it. But because of that drama, that group has diminished and so had its likeness from the community. My group will have some roleplay, but I'm going to avoid drama at all costs. To be technical, I have no real relation to Umbrella Corp or its activities. I tried making suggestions to get them active but I kept getting rejected. So there you go... --- Alex Yamata 22:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Alex. I didn't mean to be rude or offensive in the slightest, I think the idea of Hyper Umbrella to be interesting and should make a good group to witness in Malton. However, simply by virtue of it being called "Hyper X" where X is a group that has, as Spiderzed said, a very aggressively contested names in the past (and the funny battles that ensued) I just thought it was quite funny to see a group called Hyper Umbrella come to fruition. A ZOMBIE ANT 02:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Ooooh! I get it! I'm slow but it can't be helped. Hehe! That's silly DDR! --- Alex Yamata 04:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

So... This is heading in a somewhat predicted direction. No call for contest though.--President Jackson 05:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I think he may have left since this conversation took place. A ZOMBIE ANT 05:52, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The judgements laid on me are many. I left long after this, but I shadow because Miyajima wants me active, and I'll shadow until I'm done. I'm posting because Aspir is for some reason re-visiting old crap that should be at rest. --- _{Alex Yamata} ^Pres/CEO _{HYPER-UMBRELLA} ^P! 06:14, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't say revisiting, more so initially discovering. Like many of these people have said, there's been a lot of drama surrounding Umbrella over the years (Since becoming CEO, I've tried to distance us from it as much as possible). He just saw this and potentially believed that it was rather similar to events of the past. Nonetheless, it's not an issue; Jack no longer seems to be in the dark, and is satisfied. My apologies for the extra post(s) on your page DDR. --Chairman Fanglord, 11:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Please don't apologise, no issue for me, I actually enjoy conversations. A ZOMBIE ANT 11:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Requeeeest?

Hi DDR! I've noticed a little of your work, do you think you could help me make a neat little name sig? Not very good at anything other than BBCode. (I'm good at stealing and altering code though, as yooou have seen!) --- Alex Yamata 04:18, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I can't speak to DDR's willingness, but if you just need some base code. You can view DDR's sig here just click edit or view source to see the code. Everyone's sig either links to a page with the code or shows their actual code, both good for stealing. This would probably also be helpful. --_K 14:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Alex. I'm happy to see you have an interest in nice signatures and I like that you seem to like stuff I've done. Sadly, the year I spent away from UDWiki (the only wiki I use) has left me pretty illiterate with coding and design, so I fear I wouldn't be able to help you all that much. I also don't have much time as the little moments I spend on UDWiki I prefer to spend working on an important dangermap update for the community. I do recommend you have a look at any of my older signatures (the ones linked from my main page and here: Signature ^{2 3 L 4 A}) or look at my very old sandbox that I used to conceive some nice signatures and play around (and also steal designs, as you mentioned). Sorry I couldn't help any more, but please let me know if you have any questions or would like any advice. A ZOMBIE ANT 14:00, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

RE: Houghton Towers

It isn't as an insult, if anything, it's a compliment. Even if they are goons, even if they may be childish, they are smart. They are causing an imbalance to the game but that very imbalance is their advantage. They are creating a dominance, the strongest control. This isn't a bunch of ragtag players banding together as zombies and killing people. They are strategic and know exactly what to hit and when to hit. "even as zombies" the only insult is they are metagamers, not roleplaying. Taking outside information for their own gain and abusing it. Do I really want to compliment them? No, I hate players who see no enjoyment without killing another player, but it isn't my place to judge them. Facts are facts, whether or not the truth hurts. I never expected them to leave me alone in the first place. But if you force me out of Houghton Towers, you rip from me the only reason I found to keep playing. Me getting killed and my building ruined is different, it's just a fight. But if you permanently take me out of the whole equation, there's nothing left for me. At least no one can say I didn't try. --- Alex Yamata 22:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Terms of endearment from someone you don't respect and likely despise (ie. anyone who plays UD) is not a compliment, it's an insult, even condescending. For example, the first serious post made on their talk page. You can do what you want, my recommendation is The Dead aren't a group to beg to. A ZOMBIE ANT 04:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Some friendly advice: don't swim with bleeding wounds in shark-infested waters. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 08:40, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

So I gave a passive compliment and that means I have some sort of liking towards them? Not only did I not beg, but I didn't plead, either. I asked one, simple, question. And I didn't even break any rules or act negative towards an individual or anything similar, and I have sysops putting me down? What, is being nice a crime in the world now? Oh and, Revenant, I never just look out for myself, so if I go down because I was being nice, well, meh. Doesn't exactly matter anymore, does it? What, are human beings supposed to be dicks with each other? It's not a valid motive nor is it going to make anything better. --- Alex Yamata 13:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Who’s a… wait, DDR, are you still a psyops? Shit, man, I thought you’d’ve broken free of this place before now. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been a sysop for, what I assume, is around 2 years. Alex may be referring to Spiderzed, who kindly offered similar feedback to what you and I have said. A ZOMBIE ANT 10:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Please don't take what we say as hostile Alex, we are just giving you some friendly advice based on how we know The Dead (Revenant himself being a key member in the past I believe?) I must say though, if you react to what we have said by crying foul and calling us dicks, I really would hate to think how you'd handle the Dead at their worst.

I assure you that my only intention is to give you a knee-up in wiki-related stuff, so I must insist on letting you know that there is no policy on civility on the wiki. Administrators, just like normal users, are allowed (though obviously not encouraged) to be as rude to one another without repercussion (unless it breaches extreme levels of harassment or any laws within the UK). In fact, this lesson is a very important one considering we are talking about The Dead, whose users often laugh in the face of civility. We aren't trying to upset you Alex, just give you some advice (that's well-warranted, I believe) to not provoke the userbase of the Dead. A ZOMBIE ANT 10:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Meh, if they are as cruel and tough as you say they are, I don't see why they'd feel it worth it to assault me. If they ravage my wiki edits, they'll get stomped due to rules. If they kill me or destroy my headquarters (Like they've been doing since the first time I rebuilt it?), well, I guess I have to use my two legs and get up, then rebuild the building after my allies, members, or friends revive me. Also, you know it would make me feel better if you used words I didn't have to google, and not say I cry. I know full well what the phrase means, but everyone suspects my responses to be filled with tears (Or, as "those" tend to call it; pubie tears). (However if you feel inclined to be cruel and rude, it's your choice, I have no place judging you). Really, that whole thing was passive. I don't expect any higher official to be civil, I just expect them to know the difference from right and wrong. Whether or not they act out right versus wrong personally is up to them, but when a rule they stand for is broken, they take action. With me, you see, you have no need to warn me of what the Dead may do. The entire point of that post to The Dead was to explain to them that if they eventually disrupt the balance enough, they may just kill the game for good. (if, eventually, enough; they may). I really don't care what they do. If they don't always ruin my building? Awesome! If they do keep destroying it? Well, I guess ya gotta make me work for it. They can kill me and destroy my toys all they want, but I have no reason to leave, not even if the whole horde came at me. Why should I sit at the other table when the only thing wrong at this table is the bully steals my milk. It's an online game, people shouldn't take it so seriously; as I don't. The only time I get serious, is when I'm roleplaying, playing in a group.

	It's a Joke, OK?
	This user supports the use of humor, even when other people don't get it.

	... Wha?
	This user just doesn't care.

I'm not afraid like the others. I don't run in fear when everything goes to crumble. Because I can rebuild it. I can make it better. No, I can make it funner! Now, this is the real insult to the dead; anything they do is just a poke to my ribs, and it tickles! Seriously, what can they do to me as an individual? I don't have pride, I don't have respect by the community, I'm not even known by the community. And they can't hurt me in any other serious way. So why should I care? Have more fun, and stop worrying about so much <3 --- Alex Yamata 13:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I get what you are saying. But if your reason for playing relates to a single building; yes the dead can take that. I don't think anyone would say you shouldn't engage your enemy, but there are plenty of groups who would enjoy fighting you over a building that you could talk to, who would be semi-civil, who would enjoy having a new enemy. The dead are not those people. So, do as you want, but if you want the most fun (and to help someone else have fun too) I'd pick a new enemy and a new area. Why don't you come to the Block Party in Roftwood, it's a bit of a journey but I think it'd be worth it and you'll get to meet/interact with some new people (both DHPD and SoC will be there and would be the groups you'd probably be working with most in Dunell Hills, anyways). --_K 16:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

--Edited-- I've went and posted on my brothers account, he has it to automatically sign in. We can chat somewhere else if you think I'm zerging (Which I'm not, you can check on the locations of our characters, though, I'd have to ask him where his characters are) (Speaking of which, I forgot this whole time... I need to make sure the next Suburb we go to isn't one my brother settles in) Jerrack 16:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Sounds cool, but nah, gotta get up and running with my new members. Also, I'm staking on a few buildings. My reason to play is to roleplay as if I am the president of Hyper-Umbrella corporation, and right now, our first Headquarters is the Houghton Towers. I'm sure we'll move at some point, just not right now. But if it really makes you all happy, I'll start preparations to look for a new H.Q., any suggestions of suburbs? The building isn't of any concern to me what they do to it, and I'm (so far) not having any serious fuss with The Dead. Hell, The Dead could see this conversation and possibly think "The hell are they talking about?" Now look, I've went and made a mess of DDR's talk, haven't I? --- Alex Yamata 16:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear, I fear everything that we've said to you may have completely flown over your head. Since nothing we say seems to have any value to you, good luck with your building, hopefully all goes well eventually. A ZOMBIE ANT 06:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Flown over? How? I think I know that poking the Dead could have a long lasting affect on me, but other than that... I don't think I see what I could've possibly missed... --- Alex Yamata 14:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Forget it Alex, you'll be fine. The Dead obviously aren't concerned. A ZOMBIE ANT 01:14, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I hope I didn't upset any of you :< You can delete this, it's fine. I'd rather not damage your reputation in the future. --- Alex Yamata 07:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Lol. You haven't damaged my reputation, I do more than enough to damage my rep to worry about anybody else doing it. Besides, I don't believe in deleting discussions. No point hiding what actually happens between users, eh? A ZOMBIE ANT 08:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

RE: Zombra

I guess in a way that could be violating something or other, but it's not like I did anything he'd object to. I'll ask him ingame if he's okay with me linking his character to his own group. It isn't like I did anything bad, and if he declines it's an easy erase, but I doubt he'd care. I thought that it would be better to link the two, or at least one links to the other. It seemed reasonable, sorry if I'm stepping over boundaries. --- Alex Yamata 15:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Don't make user pages for users that a) aren't you or b) you haven't obtained prior permission to make. A ZOMBIE ANT 10:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't ever do it willy nilly and I will never especially not do it to anyone I've not communicated with. It's not something you have to watch me for, that I can promise. Also, He's fine with it --- Alex Yamata 12:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Then it's no drama. User pages are typically governed by the user whose name they fall under so usually doing stuff like that isn't considered appropriate. Not punishable (unless done maliciously or maybe if Zombra were to have complained about it), but do make sure to ask before you make one in future, just to be sure :) A ZOMBIE ANT 12:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm Sorry

I can't believe it took so long for me to realize it, but you and the others just wanted to make sure nothing would happen to me and that I wouldn't start a bunch of drama, god I'm stupid! Thought processing is diminished for me due to some medical problems, but I get over them and tend not to care about... almost anything nowadays. I'm sorry I disregarded you guys. Now a question I hope you're willing to answer... How would you feel or... do you think it'd be a good idea for me to join Project Wiki Patrol. I'd really like to, if that's okay. I'm not looking into any kind of future with this. I just feel it'd be a good place for me, so I can actually have other things to do other than my group, and I hope not to be seen as a bad user of this wiki yet... --- Alex Yamata 12:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

No need to be sorry Alex. We were only giving you advice, not forcing it down your throat and you were, and still are, welcome to do as you please regardless of what we say. As for Wiki Patrol, you certainly may join it, though you'll notice it's not a very popular page, and usually patrolling the wiki doesn't need to be made so official, you can just do it and people will notice your good work regardless. A ZOMBIE ANT 12:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Some of you (You as in the group that all know each other, sysop or not, the famous people more or less), can be a butt at times, but you guys do have heart and I can see it. Even I'm a butthead at times, and I still care about people. Well, still, thank you. I immediately left Peddlesden Village because so many people were pressuring me I felt like that was a really bad place to go, like the baddest of the bad. Well, you'll be happy to know I have a new phone mast building :D --- Alex Yamata 12:39, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Good. I must urge you never to feel pressured to move to one place or another based on what's said on the wiki (unless people put it into effect by killing you in-game etc). Words are just words, you should enjoy the game as you wish. A ZOMBIE ANT 13:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Much stuff on Project Wiki Patrol is outdated today. The recruitment page check is probably the only thing that still matters. Deletions still come up and are needed, but much less so with the reduced speed at which new pages come up. Bug reports and suggestions are extremely low traffic pages today. And nobody, absolutely nobody has ever manually patrolled recent changes, or bothered to care about their patrolled status. Never.
If you are looking for projects to get your hands dirty, you better look here or here. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

There are quite a few people who stalk those recent changes, mostly to note PKers and Zombies. Not saying they do anything wiki-wise, though. But the point isn't to be a part of Wiki Patrol, it's supposed to mean something that I want to help out. I'm not going to do enough work that constitutes a Sysop, and neither will I be a glorious editor like some of you (Maybe 5,000 edits in 2 years +, maybe, though). This isn't saying I'll be lazy, it's that I want more time to play around on here and do stuff, but I just can't get it. So if I do something that doesn't relate to something I made, It'll be done right. --- _{Alex Yamata} ^Pres/CEO _{HYPER-UMBRELLA} ^{P! 18:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)}

Case closed.--President Jackson 06:08, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

In response to your original comment, I believe he's upset with me because of this edit I made. I can understand why he might be (he's by no means the first to be upset with me for something I've said while in-character), but I very intentionally use my other wiki signatures when speaking in-character so that it's clear I'm neither speaking for nor as myself. I've had no interactions with him in-game, and all of my other interactions with him on the wiki and on IRC have been pleasant ones. —Aichon— 18:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Can

We

Drop

It

I'm not mad, but bringing all this back up from a peaceful rest does piss me off. Being mad doesn't matter, and there isn't any case. You can't have a discussion with monsters. So I politely.... demand this gets dropped. There's no reason to bring it up, there's no case to be solved, there's no laws being broken, but I am being provoked and if another thing is brought up I will do everything I can to make it stop, this I swear. Watch and see that I don't. --- _{Alex Yamata} ^Pres/CEO _{HYPER-UMBRELLA} ^P! 06:22, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay...I'm not sure what exactly it is that you want dropped since I'm not sure what I said that offended you, but regardless, I had nothing more to add here, so as far as I was concerned the discussion was already done. And, to be clear, it was not my intent to provoke you in the first place by responding here. Calling me a monster and issuing threats was rude and wholly unnecessary. —Aichon— 07:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I haven't stated any names, but for the record; don't act all high and mighty on your Psysop horse. You know everything you've done and don't act all scared because I made a threat. Obviously I'm not going to tamper with anything, so don't pretend like you're concerned. What I want dropped is everything that is in the past. My only hope left is that DDR is a kind person and I don't want to litter his Talk page with useless unnecessary crap. We all keep having these conversations with each other where DDR is not apart of it and it's ridiculous. If we need to talk to each other, it should be on our Talk pages or we request another form of communication because these talks have nothing to do with DDR. --- _{Alex Yamata} ^Pres/CEO _{HYPER-UMBRELLA} ^P! 14:48, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

People don't need to worry about whether it's my talk page or not. If you all would like some sort of neutral ground to discuss things I'm happy for it to be here. I'd only read it through recent changes if it weren't anyway. A ZOMBIE ANT 00:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I owe you an apology

It is not our policy to educate those who are in centers of learning, since they are already seeking to educate themselves. Unfortunately, I lost track of my location and failed to notice I had stumbled into a center of learning...where you also happened to be. Again, I apologize for failing to adhere to our standards and hope that I have not hindered you too much. IV ^PK 03:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

As a long-term wiki drone I knew I couldn't hide from PK forever... A ZOMBIE ANT 06:52, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Jerden ruling crowbank...

I tried JRC like you said,it's been three days and no reply on his forum....I think hes relinquished his place in Crowbank and just up and left.Thanks for the suggestion anyway,appreciate it! Just let me know if any other PK groups come to mind :)--PayneTrain^(FU) 09:44, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries. I notice Jerden is still active on the wiki, listing his kills, so I assumed the group would still be going. A ZOMBIE ANT 03:17, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Did you know

That here, where I live, they make a cheese that contains live maggots and it's considered a real delicacy? --Janus ^talk 22:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I tried to post on your page the other week but it was lost.

Also, that actually sounds better then haggis. Linkthewindow  Talk  02:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

That sounds like the sort of things that would happen on my page.

And how dare you challenge my isle's pride and joy. Haggis is nothing compared to maggots jumping out of your plate. Ever so inconsiderate. --Janus ^talk 10:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

...I truly hope the maggots are at least warm at the time of consumption. A ZOMBIE ANT 03:10, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Ohgods, you live in Sardinia? No wonder you were so good at surviving in a zombie apocalypse! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 23:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

We have also mastered the skill of disguising ourselves as sheep. Just imagine how useful that will be in case of an actual zombie outbreak.

Also, you reminded me of glorious historical facts. --Janus ^talk 15:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Ha! Me too. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 23:38, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Naw, dude

When I say “Grim never came back”, I mean I can tell you for a fact that he never came back and posted on the wiki since he b& himself at the end of teh coup. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh! Damn, I really wish it had have been him. A ZOMBIE ANT 23:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I can't believe

How long some people here are sticking out. Also it's kinda hilarious when I look back on what I've done here all these years before. What have you been up to? Are you still living in Australia? Cheers! --Thadeous Oakley Talk 22:12, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Yep, still. It's funny, this place is like a second life you so easily forget about. I've already forgotten about 90% of what has passed on this wiki. I wish I didn't. A ZOMBIE ANT 23:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion help

Hey can I get an opinion on my suggestion? Its currently in the developing suggestions.JoshCz (talk) 00:10, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Ghost Nappa!

There's no one to haunt, so I'm haunting you. Fear the horrible ghost! --Axe Hack's Ghost (talk) 03:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Eeek! A ZOMBIE ANT 11:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

That's better. --DDR's posesssed answering machine (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Not unwillingness

In reference to your comment, it wasn't unwillingness, so much as it was a combination of lack of time and laziness. I saw him doing it on his talk page one day, but didn't have time to investigate to see if he had done it in his templated sig so that it was screwing up the whole wiki. And I was too lazy to check in later to see. By the next day, it was apparent from other comments that that was exactly what he had done, so I set aside some time and undid the stuff.

As for punishment, we act on A/VB cases. Always have. Maybe I've gotten a bit softer with time, but I prefer to solve things outside of A/VB if we're able to do so, so I only initiate A/VB cases in situations where I don't have a reasonable expectation that we can solve it otherwise. Once an A/VB case arrives, however, I'll call things what they are. It seemed to me that we could deal with the current situation with a little edit reverting and a page protection, but that if things kept escalating, A/VB would still on the table as a remedy. Plus, A/VB is something that anyone can initiate, so if someone else had truly been bothered by what he was doing, I figured that they'd have put him up (in fact, I actually thought that you or Yonn would have put up the A/VB case based on the comments I was seeing).

Anyway, your comment is (mostly) fair, though I obviously think there were other factors at play in this case. The one thing I strongly disagree with is the sentiment that we're unwilling to punish established members of the community. We may be less inclined to initiate action, just because we know from experience that they're not throwaway accounts created to rabble rouse, but it's not our job to create A/VB cases. That's left up to everyone. It is our job to handle A/VB cases, however, and at least in that regard, I think we've been doing okay. If we're not, however, let me know where you think I could be improving. :) —Aichon— 14:48, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

That's all fair I guess, I do however feel that this has been a predictable event from the getgo, especially with Revenant, who likes to push things as hard as possible. The fact it was him made it especially easy to predict which is why im surprised the veteran ops didn't see it themselves. Another thing is giving away a soft warning to Mis after a classic case of shitty garbage vandalism. Especially when it's a common issue with him, sitting back and not being firm, instead asking him nicely not to do it (bob?) just, for some reason, invites troublemakers to blow things out of proportion. Lo and behold his way of reacting to the communities outcry is to 'vandalise' AH's vandalism signature, not warn him or revert it. It's not something you'll always control totally but Ive never understood, for example, the logic behind 'well he knew the consequences and did it anyway so why bother punishing him accordingly', that's how it felt to me.

I keep finding myself coming back to the Team America thing where, frankly, if the op team had been dicks more than pussies in some very specific situations, I feel others could have been avoided. Cause some people are always gonna behave like assholes.

As for regular users not reporting it, well, you're definitely right, I guess that's a lesson in there for myself as well. I wrote one up and was going to post it actually, but knowing how soft the ops had been (responding with making a policy about it bob?) made me think it wasn't really worth it, I guess I have learned the lesson that I just should have. A ZOMBIE ANT 15:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

As for improving, I've always thought very highly of your work as an op, always. I appreciate your asking but I don't think you need any improvement at all. I just feel like someone in the op team needs to be the bastard more often. The op team needs the unpopular guy every now and then. It doesn't have to be- nor should it be- you. A ZOMBIE ANT 15:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, having said all this out loud I now realise that everyone's idea of 'too far' is different, so i understand if some of this sounds over the top. A ZOMBIE ANT 15:43, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, and having seen some of the cases you just brought up and my own responses to them, I can honestly see why people might think we're being soft. I'm actually glad you brought up those cases, even if I've (so far) said Not Vandalism on them, since there were things with them that needed to be said. And your comment on Axe's case makes me want to scrap the entire sig policy and replace it with something like what Yonn suggested. —Aichon— 16:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. And lol. Just keep in mind that Yon's suggestion is how we've always worked as sysops if the situation is extreme enough. Hopefully that doesn't change with the lack of users. A ZOMBIE ANT 06:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Since I've been mentioned, thought I'd chime in. Regarding Mis, you're totally correct, I should have reported it as vandalism right away — (unfortunately?) my focus as 'sop tends to be on fixing up the error rather than punishing the offender.

With regards to the "responding with making a policy about it", I don't really see it that way. My response isn't to the individual actions, it's to the existence of dispute. In fact, I don't see myself as making a policy in my capacity as sysop, but as a regular user — a user who is not, in that capacity, empowered to "punish" others.

If you'll allow an analogy, I suggest policies where I feel clarification of the rules is needed, while recognizing that the new policy will have no effect on whatever situation is ongoing. A crime (or non-crime) occurs and is brought through the court system; as a result, the legislature takes action to clarify the rules for future cases. I've slowly realized that this wiki (unlike others I've been on previously) doesn't see it that way (blatant example and current example). So instead things are built upon a (arguably shaky) system of precedent, with continuous and ongoing opposition to actual (even non-substantive) changes in the rules.

This went off in a side direction it probably shouldn't have; hope that's ok. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 19:54, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

You're certainly right, making a policy to fix the issue is a great thing to do, and obviously it's done as a user like you said. I guess we differ on effective methods of stopping this, in my eyes, this kind of stuff is already covered in vandal precedents and sysops have the power to stop this stuff without resorting to policy voting. The latter is good for the long term, but often doesn't solve the immediate issue, which is not only an individual issue like you've said, but is probably the one-off issue that won't happen again if it gets stomped out. A ZOMBIE ANT 06:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm generally and have always been a more libertarian-minded, laissez faire op who prefers to keep authoritarian measures to the necessary minimum. That's what I've offered for years, that's what got me into op position without ever actively shooting for it, and I'd be the first to withdraw from my position if what I offer is deemed the wrong stance for an op during A/RE.

At the time the policy was drafted it already looked like the issue was well on its way to being resolved, and with the problematic sig being locked into a non-problematic state there was no immediate danger that needed to be contained. Rev actively mucking up an admin page was a different beast that disrupted a current admin page, and it has been one that has been dealt with swiftly and decisively.

As Aichon said, if something on the wiki annoys you, just bring it up on A/VB for review. - If you think that the pendulum has swung too far to the libertarian end and that we need more voices for a stricter op culture, feel free to run for promotion again, or to propose users who could provide that. -- Spiderzed▋ 10:50, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with being a relaxed op if you're happy to deal with stuff like this. If you're not, I think the results speak for themselves. 3 (?) days of drama and all it took was Revenant raising the stakes to tragic proportions by involving Boxy, and after throwing in Mis and AH we haven't had any more pesky edits 24 hours on.

I'd probably complain a lot less if I was an op but I don't think I'm needed- these things are super rare and everyone does a pretty good job anyways. A ZOMBIE ANT 12:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Drama? What happened the last 4 days was mild irritation at best. Nothing compared to the actual drama of yesteryear like the goonsig drama, or Cornlolio, or NWO, or Umbrella, or the time the entire op team was held hostage at Misconduct over the Izumi unbanning... - I think we have hit the right break-off point between being lenient and erecting the official "No Fun Allowed" sign using authoritah. -- Spiderzed▋ 12:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Drama is relative, and at it's core it's always been the same. Someone tries to game rules, people don't like it, they keep pushing it until the fun stops. Usually "fun stops" is when the ops come in and stamp it out because it serves no purpose and is just shitstirring. This week was no different and IMO shouldn't have been treated any different. A ZOMBIE ANT 12:28, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you, but this is still fun. ЯЭV⁠€⁠NΛИ† ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 22:05, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Noooo! A ZOMBIE ANT 00:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Bye --Janus ^talk 09:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Howdy bud, long time no see, thanks for dropping by. A ZOMBIE ANT 09:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Moo. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 04:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Howdy. Our similar sigs confused me. A ZOMBIE ANT 04:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Me too! I think that was why I commented here. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Inactive group

Literally the only reason I added the tag. Now to wait the four months required. --Rosslessness ^{; the shambling custodian of UD's past...} 08:15, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry 😇😂 A ZOMBIE ANT 08:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

You'd better vote at least 15 times on it as well! --Rosslessness ^{; the shambling custodian of UD's past...} 08:29, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll assemble the BBK doofus brigade. A ZOMBIE ANT 13:46, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Good times

Cyberbob240 said:

youre such a bastion of INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY ddr (see how mature i am) would it be acceptable to you if i was to allow you to use my arse as a receptacle for your penis and in return you support my side of the argument

I feel like I've truly seen some profound statements here -- Adward  03:30, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

When Cyberbob and Iscariot left, this world was thrust into darkness. A ZOMBIE ANT 03:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

the wiki became far less quotable, that is for sure -- Adward  03:57, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I feel like I should chime in, since it was apparently my research that led to Izzy's departure, but I've got nothing to add. It was a sad day when he left. —Aichon— 17:57, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I’m pleased he’s gone because he was a dickhead. But it was fun having someone care too much about the wiki enough to make constant drama. A ZOMBIE ANT 18:20, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Iscariot said:

I invite you to explain why you are obeying these rules constitutes a difference with Cheese's rules explains the difference between what you're saying and precedence's example.

He was definitely a funky boy -- Adward  18:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Found the context of that quote. All this time I read it and figured he had said it about me, but it was about Thad. Figures! A ZOMBIE ANT 01:26, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Cracking times! One of my favourite quotes from round here. What were the finis logs? -- Adward  01:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea... I remember dying of laughter. All I remember specifically was a screenshot in a template showing his introduction. Along the lines of "hello is anyone here? this is the God of Santlerville speaking to u" And then it went... A ZOMBIE ANT 01:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)