Talk:Suggestions/archive27
 |
Archive Page |
| This page is an archive page of Talk:Suggestions. Please do not add comments to it. If you wish to discuss the Suggestions page do so at Talk:Suggestions. |
Further Discussion
This is for any further discussion concerning the suggestions page that doesn't fall into the previous categories.
New system
What is that!?! I hate it!!! Urgh! -Certified=Insane☭
03:09, 9 May 2007 (BST)
- I agree, WTF? That's just a mess. Oh, and I moved this to a more appropriate section.--Pesatyel 04:34, 9 May 2007 (BST)
- I disagree. It is nice and clean. Give it a chance instead of flaming it.--SporeSore 13:45, 9 May 2007 (BST)
- Clean!?! How!?! I like using the TOC to find suggestions, but with this, it's just so cluttered! No to mention it's overkill for the headers... -Certified=Insane☭
21:03, 9 May 2007 (BST)
- Yes, it's because individual pages have been included into the suggestions page. I've been meaning to cut down on the headers (and have already cut them a bit). Is that your only problem with the system? I do want to know what is annoying about it so it can be improved, if possible -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 12:51, 10 May 2007 (BST)
- Clean!?! How!?! I like using the TOC to find suggestions, but with this, it's just so cluttered! No to mention it's overkill for the headers... -Certified=Insane☭
- I disagree. It is nice and clean. Give it a chance instead of flaming it.--SporeSore 13:45, 9 May 2007 (BST)
Gotta say i don't like it so much... but then I don't have to keep track of it! --Honestmistake 12:41, 10 May 2007 (BST)
It does seem to make voting a tiny bit more work (my own experience) but it makes authoring suggestions and processing the votes HUGELY easier (again, in my experience). More than a fair trade-off, IMO. --Seb_Wiers VeM 15:29, 12 May 2007 (BST)
- Being an experienced member of the mindless Suggestions horde, I have to say it does make suggestions easier to vote on and such. However, it's very cluttered. But, at least's it's organzied. --User:Axe27/Sig 15:31, 12 May 2007 (BST)
Overhaul this Page?
Now that suggestions get their own pages, how about overhauling this page to be in-line with that concept. My thinking is that "developing suggestions" could be placed on their own page, one created in a fashion similar to how suggestions are now created. These would go in the category of "developing suggestions", a new category page used specially for that purpose. When it came time to vote on the suggestion, the suggestion'a author would just create a new suggestion page (as is normal for the current process), and put a re-direct to the original developing suggestion page on the talk page of the new suggestion. That would also free up this page for actual talk about the suggestion process and category, not the suggestions themselves. --Seb_Wiers VeM 15:24, 12 May 2007 (BST)
- They could even put in a move request request, and the development page could be moved to the new suggestion's talk page (assuming you can move main pages to talk pages, I guess, never tried it :)) -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 13:09, 14 May 2007 (BST)
Would anyone mind if I move the large block of text at the top of the main Suggestions page onto a new page and link to it instead? It's just that it's a lot of scrolling to get past it and there's no need to see the rules every day. --Toejam 13:21, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- I think that Vista may have been thinking of doing something similar. What were you thinking of moving? -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 13:26, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- Yeah, I remember there being a discussion a while back about this. I'd move {{Suggestion_Navigation}} and {{Suggestion_Intro}} away to streamline the page. --Toejam 13:37, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- I don't think that the Navigation template needs to go anywhere (it should be on all Suggestion pages, it's small), and I'd prefer an overhaul of the Intro template, so that it was mainly links to the rules (and the like) pages. But I'd discuss it with Vista if I was you. I don't want to get heavily involved, ATM -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 13:57, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- Yeah, I remember there being a discussion a while back about this. I'd move {{Suggestion_Navigation}} and {{Suggestion_Intro}} away to streamline the page. --Toejam 13:37, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- My opinion - get rid of this page (main and discussion) altogether, and replace it with the new system's main page. It's really odd having two "main" suggestion pages. People can browse that new page to see what suggestions are newest (the big list at the bottom), and they can vote on the ones they click to - getting away from the current mess and potential for edit issues - which is one of the things I thought the new system would rid us of. Sure, a few people will say "I liked the old system better", but the new system was voted on with a huge mandate by the people who use this page the most. Reduce confusion - delete/replace this page. --Funt Solo
14:39, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- Agreed, with the caveat that there still needs to be some way to do "developing suggestions". Currently that is this talk page. The system I suggest above could be used with other pages, though. Its basically just a "lets offload each developing suggestion to its own page, and paste it into the right spot(s) using curly brackets" idea. Which really, people could do already, and you'd never notice the difference, visually. (I'm getting a fetish for curly brackets inserts of non-template pages, I think.) --Seb_Wiers VeM 23:53, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- Couldn't the discussion stuff just be moved to the Category:Current Suggestions talk page? --Funt Solo 15:55, 15 May 2007 (BST)
- I suppose. However, there's currently a fair bit of discussion about the category page itself there, which is, after all, the purpose of a talk page. I think it looks junky having both developing suggestion ideas and policy / procedure questions and discussion on the same page. Why not just have a dedicated suggestion development page / category, and get it out of the "talk page ghetto"? --Seb_Wiers VeM 23:39, 15 May 2007 (BST)
- The Category page could be for new suggestions, it's talk page for discussion of how it's working. This (old suggestions page) could become dedicated to developing suggestions, and the talk page (this one) be dedicated to suggestion policy discussions. I think that would work -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 04:28, 16 May 2007 (BST)
- I suppose. However, there's currently a fair bit of discussion about the category page itself there, which is, after all, the purpose of a talk page. I think it looks junky having both developing suggestion ideas and policy / procedure questions and discussion on the same page. Why not just have a dedicated suggestion development page / category, and get it out of the "talk page ghetto"? --Seb_Wiers VeM 23:39, 15 May 2007 (BST)
- Couldn't the discussion stuff just be moved to the Category:Current Suggestions talk page? --Funt Solo
- Agreed, with the caveat that there still needs to be some way to do "developing suggestions". Currently that is this talk page. The system I suggest above could be used with other pages, though. Its basically just a "lets offload each developing suggestion to its own page, and paste it into the right spot(s) using curly brackets" idea. Which really, people could do already, and you'd never notice the difference, visually. (I'm getting a fetish for curly brackets inserts of non-template pages, I think.) --Seb_Wiers VeM 23:53, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- My opinion - get rid of this page (main and discussion) altogether, and replace it with the new system's main page. It's really odd having two "main" suggestion pages. People can browse that new page to see what suggestions are newest (the big list at the bottom), and they can vote on the ones they click to - getting away from the current mess and potential for edit issues - which is one of the things I thought the new system would rid us of. Sure, a few people will say "I liked the old system better", but the new system was voted on with a huge mandate by the people who use this page the most. Reduce confusion - delete/replace this page. --Funt Solo
Most people who voted for the new style page did so because those who did the maintenace wanted it and there was a real danger of them quiting if it remained so hard to maintain. This talk page though needs more publicity not scrapping. suggestions with a tiny amount of value have appeared here and the feed back has resulted in genuinely good suggestions. Sadly it does seem to be the haunt of about a dozen hard core suggestion addicts but it still serves a purpose! --Honestmistake 01:25, 15 May 2007 (BST)
- I know what you mean. Even the really bad suggestions serve as a good example of what not to do, and for the most part the feedback from these suggestions has led to bigger and better things. --Uncle Bill 04:36, 16 May 2007 (BST)
- I still think that Developing Suggestions are not worth archiving. In addition, a Suggestion under vote should stand on its own two feet without any previous discussion it may have had in Developing. If there is to be an automatic transfer of the pre-vote Discussion to the vote Talk page, I think it should be given the header "Pre-vote Discussion" (or something like that) and another header should be automatically be placed above this stating "Active Discussion". My 2 cents worth.--SporeSore 14:01, 18 May 2007 (BST)
- I think we better keep this clutter and that the feedback here is really, really good. It serves a purpose, it should be kept. Is it possible to reverse your desicion and get rid of those "5 day warnings"?--ShadowScope 19:23, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- I still think that Developing Suggestions are not worth archiving. In addition, a Suggestion under vote should stand on its own two feet without any previous discussion it may have had in Developing. If there is to be an automatic transfer of the pre-vote Discussion to the vote Talk page, I think it should be given the header "Pre-vote Discussion" (or something like that) and another header should be automatically be placed above this stating "Active Discussion". My 2 cents worth.--SporeSore 14:01, 18 May 2007 (BST)
Processing?
Everybody seems to be so much into the new suggesting/voting system, but i haven't seen much of things being proccessed to PR pages... There are even month old lying in here uncycled. And so what's the sense of suggesting if suggestions don't get anywhere. Anyone is going to get to them? --Duke GarlandLCD 14:59, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- Well, I think it was once up to a backlog of over six months worth of suggestions. Is that right, Jedaz? Something like that, anyway. When I used to do the cycling, there was at least two months of backlog. If nobody does it, it backs up. At least the new suggestion system makes that old back-up scenario go by the wayside. Oh, and if nobody else has cycled the suggestions from April, rather than just pointing it out, you could always learn the system yourself? Just a thought.--Funt Solo 16:09, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- well, i was waiting for such sort of reply. if there would be noone who usually does it - i'll get there myself eventually. --Duke GarlandLCD 20:16, 14 May 2007 (BST)
- My Who's Packing suggestion was the first one to go on a solo page, I think. It's not done being voted on yet- its got 2 more days, I think. So in 2 days, I'll cycle it. --Seb_Wiers VeM 23:57, 14 May 2007 (BST)
I break the page every time i do more than a simple edit so you are not dragging me into this... still someone competant needs to deal with this! --Honestmistake 01:27, 15 May 2007 (BST)
- That's because you are drunk, Honest. --SporeSore 13:22, 18 May 2007 (BST)
- I resent that! its because i am Inept and drunk ;-) --Honestmistake 18:31, 18 May 2007 (BST)
hello, it's me again with same issues =) I've noticed how some oldest suggestions in new system were closed with changing categories. Groovy!.. But the PR pages were not updated mostly. So the question is - should they? --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 18:16, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- I dunno. I did a bit of editing to my suggestions page to make it include decently on the PR page, and the newer formats would work easier, but its still a bit of a PITA. I think that's more than is needed; having an organized, compiled list of suggestions with links to their pages is (IMO) actually better than having one massive page with loads of full text suggestion descriptions. --Seb_Wiers VeM 18:28, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- That's exactly what the categories are supposed to do. The pages are automatically included in them, making a list of links to the pages. Including the pages in a big page of suggestions is no easier (probably harder) than the old system -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:12, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- So there should be some marks added to PR pages accordingly. To make things clear --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 20:37, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- That's exactly what the categories are supposed to do. The pages are automatically included in them, making a list of links to the pages. Including the pages in a big page of suggestions is no easier (probably harder) than the old system -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:12, 21 May 2007 (BST)
Just a question, is anyone actualy going to cycle the suggestions from the old system? If it's not done in a months time when I finish exams I might do it, but I'ld suggest that someone else do it before then. - JedazΣT MC ΞD CT SR: 01:23, 22 May 2007 (GMT)
- I'm in mood to do some stuff, so yeah... will do at least something. By the way, March sugestions are archieved but with not yet cycled tags. lots of work. --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 16:12, 22 May 2007 (BST)
Duping
Duping an otherwise good suggestion with one that is already in peer rejected seems to be a waste. Could we have a system where you qualify your dupe vote with a "Dupe/keep, if this gets into a higher category of suggestion archiving, change my vote to keep as long as the old one is removed, and this one is added to the higher category". Then, if successful, the new one goes in, the old one gets cut out (perhaps added to the new ones talk page?). If unsuccessful in getting into a higher archive than the old one, the new suggestion is duped (if it gets enough dupe votes). If you don't want to "dupe/keep", you can still vote "dupe" which would be an automatic "dupe/kill" -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 04:25, 17 May 2007 (BST)
- Kevan reads all suggestions, so a duped suggestion is not really necessary. A person already came up with an idea long ago...so Kevan does not need to see that same idea again. It's not a waste, because a Peer Rejected suggestion was rejected long ago, but Kevan actually use suggestions from that area much more than he uses suggestions from Peer Reveiwed. I don't see any problems with the current system.--ShadowScope 23:29, 18 May 2007 (BST)
- Kevan does read the suggestions and he does indeed seem to implement a good number that have faced rejection here. That doesn't mean its not worthwhile for us to show that we still like a suggetion after a good 6 months! Repeated approval suggests that the player base are keen on an idea and that might be enough to make Kevan think about a suggestion in a focussed way! Problem with using the dupe vote is that in many cases the game has moved on and what was once not right for the game may now be very very good. Dupe is often used on suggestions for good reason but it can be problematic if the game has changed and those changes reflect on the alledged dupe! --Honestmistake 01:21, 19 May 2007 (BST)
- How about this? You can dupe Peer Reviewed suggestions, keeping the same rules of how you determine what is Dupe and what is not. Peer Rejected suggestions can be re-submitted over and over again and just get reguarlly Spammed out of existence.--ShadowScope 18:27, 19 May 2007 (BST) EDIT: Bad news is this: Some suggestions that was once Peer Reviewed...are now so incredibly stupid considering the new changes that it would be Peer Rejected. Still, I think Kevan would be smart enough not to use those Peer Reviewed suggestions...--ShadowScope 18:28, 19 May 2007 (BST)
- You make good points. I think we need to have a system of re-evaluating old suggestions with subsequent game updates in mind... with the option of both moving them into, and out of peer reviewed if new game mechanics mean they're useable, or break them -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 06:58, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- I disagree, a bit. Once a suggestion is in Peer Review, it should just stay there, and bask in its fame, without any more referendum, and then get duped out of existence when it get resuggested. No need to have any more referendums on the merits of that suggestion, since Kevan would see that suggestion, and be able to secretly decide "Yes" or "No". The goal of the dupe is to prevent Kevan from seeing too many EXACT SAME suggestions. Hence the reason why he did this suggestion page to begin with.--ShadowScope 21:49, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- Well, if you were reevaluating an old suggestion, obviously they'd have to be immune to duping. It's just that it's pretty pointless having old suggestions left in PR if subsequent game changes have made them redundant/broken. Left to "bask in it's fame"? To what point? For the original suggesters ego to be stroked? The suggestion system is supposed to make finding the useful suggestions easier... trimming out the redundant will help that goal -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:09, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- Not exactly. Kevan could get very, very bored and look at these obivously broken suggestions and use them as inspiration for something that isn't broken at all. I just want to help Kevan out, really, so leaving suggestions over there in case Kevan gets around to read them is the best method. Remember, he is the one that decides what is reduntant/broken...not us.--ShadowScope 10:51, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- Yeah, fair enough. We shouldn't worry about voting on any suggestions... it's all up to "the man" anyway! Meh, if something is broken due to game rule changes, it doesn't deserve a place in peer reviewed any more... improve it, or bin it... simple as that -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 15:06, 26 May 2007 (BST)
- Not exactly. Kevan could get very, very bored and look at these obivously broken suggestions and use them as inspiration for something that isn't broken at all. I just want to help Kevan out, really, so leaving suggestions over there in case Kevan gets around to read them is the best method. Remember, he is the one that decides what is reduntant/broken...not us.--ShadowScope 10:51, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- Well, if you were reevaluating an old suggestion, obviously they'd have to be immune to duping. It's just that it's pretty pointless having old suggestions left in PR if subsequent game changes have made them redundant/broken. Left to "bask in it's fame"? To what point? For the original suggesters ego to be stroked? The suggestion system is supposed to make finding the useful suggestions easier... trimming out the redundant will help that goal -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 03:09, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- I disagree, a bit. Once a suggestion is in Peer Review, it should just stay there, and bask in its fame, without any more referendum, and then get duped out of existence when it get resuggested. No need to have any more referendums on the merits of that suggestion, since Kevan would see that suggestion, and be able to secretly decide "Yes" or "No". The goal of the dupe is to prevent Kevan from seeing too many EXACT SAME suggestions. Hence the reason why he did this suggestion page to begin with.--ShadowScope 21:49, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- You make good points. I think we need to have a system of re-evaluating old suggestions with subsequent game updates in mind... with the option of both moving them into, and out of peer reviewed if new game mechanics mean they're useable, or break them -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 06:58, 20 May 2007 (BST)
- How about this? You can dupe Peer Reviewed suggestions, keeping the same rules of how you determine what is Dupe and what is not. Peer Rejected suggestions can be re-submitted over and over again and just get reguarlly Spammed out of existence.--ShadowScope 18:27, 19 May 2007 (BST) EDIT: Bad news is this: Some suggestions that was once Peer Reviewed...are now so incredibly stupid considering the new changes that it would be Peer Rejected. Still, I think Kevan would be smart enough not to use those Peer Reviewed suggestions...--ShadowScope 18:28, 19 May 2007 (BST)
- Kevan does read the suggestions and he does indeed seem to implement a good number that have faced rejection here. That doesn't mean its not worthwhile for us to show that we still like a suggetion after a good 6 months! Repeated approval suggests that the player base are keen on an idea and that might be enough to make Kevan think about a suggestion in a focussed way! Problem with using the dupe vote is that in many cases the game has moved on and what was once not right for the game may now be very very good. Dupe is often used on suggestions for good reason but it can be problematic if the game has changed and those changes reflect on the alledged dupe! --Honestmistake 01:21, 19 May 2007 (BST)
I think the answer could be to prefix a duped suggestion with an outline of how the game has changed. After all for a dupe to be valid the suggestion has to be substantialy the same, if the rule/mechanic that it deals with is different then it is not a dupe because it is seeking to affect something significantly different... Thats not to say it won't be SPAM but... --Honestmistake 10:31, 21 May 2007 (BST)
- It's far too subjective and open to debate for it to be useful at all. Far better to have a timelimit. After 3 months, the suggestion is no longer a dupe, due to changing cirmustances.--ShadowScope 19:25, 21 May 2007 (BST) EDIT: I think I'd prefer that to duping only PR suggestions, if only to stop people resubmitting broken ideas over and over again within those 3 months.--ShadowScope 22:51, 21 May 2007 (BST)
Category:Removed Suggestions
I created this category for use with removed suggestions, so they can still be found —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Swiers (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.
- And I added it to the template, so you don't have to put it in manually. Also, there are now templates for peer reviewed, undecided and rejected suggestions. All are placed into the respective categories... however if they need to go into further categories, you'll have to do that manually -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 06:54, 20 May 2007 (BST)
Low Reviewed Suggestions
While processing old-system suggestions into PR pages i found something that looks like a problem for me. There were 2 suggestions ( this and this) that are got into the Peer Reviewed, but had only 8 and 7 votes over all. Can it be thought as a good review? There were quite strong arguements in Kill and if there were more usual 20 number of voters, it's not that obvious to make it to Reviewed. I'd like to propose a policy that there was a min number of votes for suggestion to get through. --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 19:14, 24 May 2007 (BST)
- Well thats quite a few when you consider that this suggestion got through with only 3 votes. Anyway I don't think that a miniumum amount of votes would be good. It just makes things more complicated then they need to be. These are rare exceptions, so I wouldn't worry about it. Especialy considering that these days all suggestions get at least 7 votes (those to spam them) with the exception of dupes, and even then they still get at a few votes. - JedazΣT MC ΞD CT SR: 10:35, 26 May 2007 (GMT)
- I don't think that is a good idea. Some suggestions are quite good, but are technical enough that few people understand them. Besides, consider the case of 2 suggestions; A gets 7 keep votes, and B gets 6 keep / 3 spam. Both currently qualify as peer revived; B got more total votes than A, but is clearly less popular! --Seb_Wiers VeM 14:48, 26 May 2007 (BST)
- Situation with 6 keeps and 3 spams and no kills at all is truly hypothetical. Anyway, from my experience with processing - community isn't really reliable except some standard cases - Keep Train and Kill Train (extreme verson of which is spamination). There are sometimes small amount of contra-votes, but overall it is obvious that suggestion is either excellent or awfull. In middle cases review isn't good and unbiased. There can be good suggestion getting 40% kills due to some technical nuances or biased opinions of voters and it doesn't get to PRev-d. Or there can be not enough Killers to doubtfull suggestion - there are examples.... That's why Kevan looks in all categories... By the way in those i processed the one implemented was from rejected, and checking it, i found those kill votes were not quite logical. Anyway, returning to the topic - i think i'll agree with Jedaz - it's quite rare case. Thank you for attention. --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 17:07, 26 May 2007 (BST)
Policy Votes
This area is for formal policy votes concerning the suggestions page. All policies, along with their associated votes and discussions, are governed by the Voting Guidelines established for this section.
