Talk: Entropy/Archive 22

THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE AND SHOULD NOT BE EDITED

From May 7 to May 31.

First[]

Header. Only ~99.5 more kb to go. Lord Belar 03:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Huh...I must have a slow computer, I can actually edit this page now. :P

(T/C) 03:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Or a slow internet connection. I just use the section headers. :P Lord Belar 03:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:Entropy/Archive_21#Mehably[]

For the builds wipe, it appears that Fyren ran a bot on his account, instead of using Fyrenbot. I don't think bots ever could delete without being sysopped. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 21:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for looking into that.

(T/C) 10:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Calculus[]

Want help? 牛Correct仔Jeans裤 01:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Test is over, but I appreciate the sentiment.

(T/C) 10:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Angelic[]

This user got through the Wikia migration without losing watchlist, contribs, prefs, uesrname, or anything else. Even though they don't have a Wikia account. :P And no, I'm not back yet. (T/C) 10:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Why not? AP tests are over now. At least mine are. :P Lord Belar 21:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Special:Whatlinkshere/User[]

All of those link except for User:GW-Asmodius and his userbox page are linked to because of either of our nerf/buff templates. Do you have any idea how to fix? --Shadowcrest 22:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Make a null edit on each page to refresh the wiki's link tables (click "Edit", click "Save Page" - won't show up in history). Edits to templates are supposed to add entries to the job queue for every page that includes the template, but I've noticed that this doesn't always happen: when I was adding concise descriptions to skills, it only rarely removed the skill from the "Missing concise description" category automatically. —Dr Ishmael

00:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You can purge as well no? That's be faster, like the link on Category:Candidates for banning --Xasxas256 01:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Fixed, you ought to check for actual links next time. :\

(T/C) 07:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed them (thanks to Ishmael), except for Asmodius' because they're actual links and I didn't want to touch his userpage :P --Shadowcrest 19:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

D:[]

You're unneded. 00:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Whats the dictionary definition of 'unneded'? 牛Correct仔Jeans裤 00:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If there was a point to this post I've lost it.

(T/C) 00:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Did you check your pockets?

00:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

C'mon Felix, I'm doing serious business right now. :(

(T/C) 00:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to delete after reading[]

(You stopped editing my page so i dont know if you read my reply) Thanks for the heads up and i resolved the issue :) Aura of Holy Might 01:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the weird way that wikis work means you always have to assume someone read your reply, even if they don't actually respond. It's strange like that. I read what you wrote, but I didn't feel I could say anything else useful, so I didn't make another edit. I know how it feels; my earlier days on wiki were sometimes awkward also. With other communication forms like e-mail or instant messaging etc. this sort of thing doesn't usually happen. I dunno. Part of it is probably because I was getting bad lag issues / edit conflicts, which discouraged any unnecessary posts.

(T/C) 05:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

lol[]

I see you haven't lost your touch. I was worried that you were becoming senile since you became a bureaucrat b.r // talk 06:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Wut?

Also, you're the same as ever. Missed your special brand of posting :).

(T/C) 06:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Eh? If I'm the same as ever then how could you miss my special brand of posting? b.r // talk 06:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You left for quite a long time and I'd given you up for dead. So I was somewhat pleased to see your name in my Watchlist again few weeks ago. The monster descriptions issue made me laugh; it was classic. I remember how I used to defend your behavior when vandals would say stuff like, "look at what Blue Rellik does, my stuff is liek not as bad as that, forgive me and ban him too!" or whatever. Though you seem to have lost some of your bluntless over time.

(T/C) 06:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? Vandals would actually mention me? Oh my god, Entropy you just made my day. Wait no, scratch that, you just made my month. Another point of interest, when you're talking about my monster descriptions, do you mean my actual descriptions or when I bought it up to the noticeboard? Why am I on your watchlist? And the reason for my lack of 'bluntness' is because I've met someone that's changing me, that and I haven't seen many things that deserve my wrath. I am still very capable of bringing down the thunder and lightning.

That last sentence makes me sound so cool. I think I'll print-screen it, print it out and then stick it on my wall. b.r // talk 06:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. That was a long time ago, but yeah, I am pretty sure such incident happened at least once. At the very least I am positive you were considered for administrative action more than once. ;) The monster descriptions...well, the descriptions themselves were OK but I really laughed at the "Up yours squares!" thing. That was just classic Blue Rellik. You're on my watchlist because most of the active users are on my watchlist and you used to be fairly active. Never bothered to remove you for whatever reason.

Oh, that sounds...intriguing. Good luck with that. :)

(T/C) 06:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

When you said 'administrative action', do you mean block/bans? b.r // talk 06:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the business end.

(T/C) 07:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Blinding Flash[]

Erk, I just came back to Monobook from Monaco Gaming skin, and damn that's bright! But I can finally see things like colors and formatting and sigs clearly again. :P (T/C) 07:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I just looked at Isk8's page under the Gaming skin and I couldn't read anything b.r // talk 07:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

sorryfelix.jpg[]

was used during a particularly nasty flamewar where he kept telling rellik he was looking for excuses to ban him. felix deleted the talk page/article where the discussion took place. i don't have the energy to get upset for the 'libel?' thing because it's a fair assumption. just letting you know. 08:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 08:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, that wasn't directed at you necessarily, but the content gave me some clue that it was involved in bad things. I haven't been totally active lately and so I have no idea what flames you are talking of (especially if it was deleted, of course)...but thank you for notifying me. I'll look into it by checking deleted pages.

(T/C) 08:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to publicly apologize for Felix' behavior since I was the person who promoted him and I feel responsible. Although I was aware that Felix had...strong opinions on certain users before being promoted, I trusted his good judgment and self-restraint to not do anything stupid like this. Clearly I may have been overhasty; I am doubting my choice. Felix has many redeeming qualities, and I believe he has otherwise done a perfectly decent job, yet this inability to separate personal emotions from the powers of office is troubling. I am glad that you chose to post; and I'm glad I decided to delete the image - otherwise I may have let this incident be swept under the rug. Which would be wrong.

(T/C) 08:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

happy belated mother's day[]

because you are the mommy of guildwiki! (in the you care for it and nurture it way; not the gave birth to it way you know.)—♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 10:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Felix's blocking[]

I don't agree with your blocking of Felix for a week. While from a personal perspective, it really was sticking in my craw that he would bring a friend of mine into this but in the end what was actually done was relatively light. I was the one that chose to bring it to the next level. Aside from him adding my friend and my names to that list, he has been fairly tolerant of my actions and has very rarely (if ever) used his powers against me out of spite (he did block me but it can be justified and it was also only for a day).

While I can see that he made that page out of frustration and lacked of control on his emotions, he was also able to show enough humility and apologise for what he did, which to be honest shows that he at least learnt his lesson. To be honest, I consider what happened here much less than what Marco did many moons ago (you know what I'm talking about).

At the very least reduce his blocking time because a message from you probably has a similar (if not greater) effect and he'll still be here to help the wiki. If not then I believe that you should be more fair in your sentencing and block me as well, I am a long-time contributor of this wiki and thus should have known better than ignite the situation like I did, knowing full well what would have most likely have happened. b.r // talk 12:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you know the entire reason he was banned? I think you're missing a few details. -Auron 12:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Was he banned for inappropriate behaviour? If he was, I deserve at least the double. Yikey HURRRR 12:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

For one, he was banned for "conduct unbefitting of an admin." Unless you guys are admins, I don't think comparing your actions are relevant. They might still be bad, but Entropy isn't required to ban five other people just to ban Felix. -Auron 12:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm an admin...in my own little wooooorld Yikey HURRRR 12:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The result of his banning was a direct result of the escalation of the feud between us b.r // talk 14:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't entirely. User:Warwick is also heavily (~~probably~~possibly moreso than you[changing response, based on felix's page i hadn't seen]) involved. --Shadowcrest 19:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe it is related to the Felix's/Noobs page and the arguement that we had on the talk page. As far as I'm aware of, Warwick is not involved unless there was something that Felix did which Entropy didn't mention b.r // talk 02:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd say check Warwick's archives, but they're impossible to navigate through and many of them aren't even on her archive box. Anyway, Warwick and Felix got into a bunch of arguments about a bunch of stuff, and Felix's attitude was less than perfect. You're definitely a big part of the picture, just not the whole picture, methinks. --Shadowcrest 02:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

All of my archives are in my archivebox now. I'll have a scan through and look through them. Felix, I have to say, seems to be acting somewhat abusively towards his sysop powers. I dont know if it was just me, or that no-one else noticed, but to me it seemed he'd been getting over himself, and acting like his opinion mattered oh-so-much more after his adminship. But its not my place to judge, really. He once said to me on msn "I could ban you right now, and no-one would care". I said "You wouldn't, anyway" and he responded "But I could, and I would.", or somthing similar. Silly me, I forgot to screenshot that. I'll be back within 20 mins with the archive. And rats, I was hoping there was FINALLY some drama I wasnt involved in. —

Warw/Wick 10:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a idea of which archive it could have been? I would like to see what happened, if you don't mind b.r // talk 10:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not totally certain what archive it was. It may have been User talk:Warwick/Archive 44#Botting, which was partly Felix trying to antagonise me..? —

Warw/Wick 10:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps User talk:Warwick/Archive 43, in the hidden area? —

Warw/Wick 10:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

So Felix has been toying with the idea of banning you as well for 'no reason'? Hmmmm, this does change my view on the subject somewhat b.r // talk 11:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Think of it as a strike system with increasing penalties. There has been at least one incident similar to this in the past where I reprimanded Felix for overstepping the bounds of good taste, which is magnified when you're an admin and thus supposedly a "role model". That time I gave him a warning notice but otherwise took no action. Now, when this incident occurred, in my mind it was worse than the last one because things came rather close to actual bans and it was a three-user dispute rather than a general "everyone hates me" and Felix happened to join in too strongly. This was much closer to personal issues becoming Wiki-drama. Thus, I gave a much stronger message this time and also reinforced that with a block. The next time (I hope there is no next time), I will move to desysoption. Behavior like this is not only dangerous in that some users may be unfairly treated, but also in that it furthers the divide between admins and normal users; it fragments the community. Forgive me for saying such a thing, May, but basically this is why I have never promoted you to sysop: I fear this exact sort of thing would happen. I trusted Felix to rise above his better controlled but similar such tendencies. Mostly he has, but these sorts of incidents...

Oh, and with all due respect Mr. Rellik, Marco got desysoped for his actions (well, he resigned I guess)...and I was one of the people who played a part in that issue. I had helped Marco get elected. I gave him a strong telling-off for his actions and agreed that maybe he wasn't ready yet. And then I helped secure him a second chance to be an admin. And I have also overseen other difficulties he experienced. Yet I wasn't bureaucrat yet. Biro was. So I think I know what I'm doing.

Nevertheless, I appreciate your apology, and as much as I admire you wanting to take the blame solely upon yourself I still feel that it wasn't your fault. You may have consciously chosen to so escalate the situation, but consider two things. For one, it's in your nature; I've known you here as a contributor here for a long time, and I have eventually come to excuse you for the way in which you post, since I believe it is the intent which counts. You have a good heart and almost always post in good faith, despite the rough exterior. Yes, we all need a reminder now and then of just how far we can push NPA, but I don't think it does any good to punish when someone had good motives/dire circumstances "because that's the laws". It makes Tanaric look like a martyr, sure, but for other users it serves little purpose.

Most importantly, though, I want you to consider this: Regardless of what you or Maui did, it was Felix's decision how to respond and what actions to take. Not all of us can be gods among men, but part of being a good sysop is knowing how to not crack under pressure and peacefully diffuse a situation. Going in guns blazing (aka banhammer) is almost never the solution. (T/C) 13:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I dont blame you, I'm somewhat.. well, tempermental. I'd hope nothing like this would happen, because I do try to stay undetatched from the situations. Though now I've realised that dispite what I think, its the communitys decision- And for the most part, yours. I like to hope if I were sysoped, somthing like this wouldn't happen, but meh. I have trouble getting people to trust me with this sort of thing. RT only gave me adminz on logd because I convinced him to give me a chance. I lie a lot.. Yeah, not much of a rolemodel. (By the way, I'm only answering the part where you said no offense may ;) ). —

Warw/Wick 14:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

"I lie a lot.." I'm going to store that on a safe location. At least you seem able to admit it. --

14:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Haha, not the serious stuff, jokingly. I told somone that a scythe was worth 300k once, because I couldn't be bothered to go check guru. Everyone knows to look for confirmation when I say somthing nowdays ;) —

Warw/Wick 14:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

OMG[]

Is it possible that there was drama that I wasnt involved in? What happened — Warw/Wick 20:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Maui#memo. And you were involved, but not in this particular page. Indirectly, I guess. --Shadowcrest 20:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I was? Phew, thats a relief. Gotta keep standards up . How was I involved? —

Warw/Wick 20:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Past actions of Felix's. --Shadowcrest 20:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, but not directly in any way. Yay. —

Warw/Wick 20:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it happened in May (month):P

reanor 01:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I actually think that I have a hand in this too, as I created the section on Felix's talk page, after he banned B.R. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 02:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

May, while I considered past incidents in my current decision, you were not personally involved in any way. And Isk, that's a far stretch. I must say though, it amuses me to see that we are all very anxious to take the blame in some way...I think it just reflects on how ultimately we wish that bans and punishments were not necessary. If at all possible we would prefer to explain away misdeeds so that people don't get hurt. Even if we have personal disagreements, Felix is a part of the community and on that level it never feels good to hurt your comrade.

(T/C) 13:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Eh.. I didnt figure that it was possible to have drama I was involved in.. Perhaps I am wrong.. occasionally ;). —

Warw/Wick 14:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL[]

At the "less serious note".reanor 22:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I really feel like I somehow missed something. 牛Correct仔Jeans裤 15:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

All seriousness and no play makes Userpage a very dull place to be. By the way, Jeans, something in your sig is messing up the line spacing; it is like you are typing on 1.5 or something. Perhaps it is the Chinese characters? I do not mind that much, but it could be a problem someday, especially on a larger post...

(T/C) 04:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Entropy/bureaucrat[]

Sorry - I haven't been on the wiki much in the past week and a bit - and never saw any links to this surface when I was on - I've had a look into it now. The phrase " I was expecting a little bit more attention from the general public" did sound quite harsh though. Random Time 05:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Really? Perhaps I should have left out the italics. I just figured this would be an issue of great general interest. Maybe it is me being vain, but it's on my userpage and talkpage, and if past history says anything those are two of the "hot" pages to watch. I suppose putting it to the community portal or sitenotice or such would not hurt...

I really did not intend the notice to be a criticism or sound harsh...I seem to be wording everything badly these days. Sorry about that.

(T/C) 05:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Entropy thought she was talking to Blue Rellik? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 118.138.160.57 (contribs) .

(edit conflict) don't worry - I was thinking of putting a requested policy of request for B'crat in a few days - you've saved me the embarrassment of doing it and then you contact me. Random Time 05:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you just overlooked my contribution, Entropy. I gave my opinion in Pan's, but I don't feel that I know Auron well enough to come up with something to input just yet. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 13:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Gave my opinion in both now. Sorry, but I haven't been active most of the time recently, didn't know that YOU weren't either, and certainly didn't know about a possible new bcrat.--

(Talk) (Contr.) 18:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I've commented on Auron; I need a bit to reconsider PanSola because of the points brought up there. If I haven't posted in a couple days, don't hesitate to remind me. --Shadowcrest 22:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Isk, I was just running down the list without checking except for memory of who had posted something already. I must have forgot. :S

(T/C) 23:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Your "Old" Userpage[]

I rather miss your old userpage, any chance you will be bringing it back anytime soon? :D -- User:Isk8 (T/C) 15:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

My userpage is still there, I just choose to hide it with <includeonly> tags since that reduces load time a lot. Also because I have a message there which I think is important for others to see at this time. I will go back to normal userpage once this is over, I guess.

(T/C) 23:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

User Rights Management[]

Hi Entropy. I just wanted to let you know that are re-adding the ability for bureaucrats to remove the sysop flag as well as add or remove the bot flag. You should see the change some time in the next few days. I'll follow-up with you once the change has been made to make sure that everything works properly. Thanks for being so patient. -- KyleH (talk) 21:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that's great news! Thanks for working on this, Kyle, and I appreciate the heads-up. Even if Wikia may break some things with updates and changes, you folks are always willing to work and resolve the problems.

(T/C) 23:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

felix would[]

like me to, quote, "Post something about checking e-mail on Entropy's talk page." So here I am. 23:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it took me awhile to understand what was being asked. My AIM broke so I had to reinstall it...but first I tried to locate the mystical "MSN" messenger thing since apparently Felix detests AIM. I don't know, it took awhile and so I guess some time passed without me noticing. AIM is up and running now, but Felix took my silence as being unwilling to talk, and so he's logged off now and also I think he missed my explanatory e-mail. And in any case, I don't know how to add a contact for AIM. So I'd still be stuck.

I hate to make you middlewoman again, but if you'd be so kind as to relay this information to Felix, and also tell him that I will be available tomorrow...I'd be much obliged. Technology can sure be a bitch sometimes...I will try and solve my IM incompetence in the mean time. Thanks a bunch...

(T/C) 01:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Felix jumped offline. I was relaying everything to him. We were on Aim, then he tells me to get on msn, only to have my realize I didn't have him added. By the time I finally get to send him a message, he was offline. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 01:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah well, tomorrow then. Although I fear I may have offended him unintentionally. :( Can you tell me what is "MSN"? I found a thing called "Windows Live Messenger" but I think that is different.

(T/C) 01:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that's it. --Shadowcrest 01:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I think MSN messenger is now windows live messenger, I could be mistaken tho as I don't trust many of microsofts software...--

01:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is it. And I don't think Felix is offended at all. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 02:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Gamer Skin[]

Perhaps you can help here, since you seem to use the skin. I have a few color clashes with the skin that bother me, and I have really no idea how to use .css directory in the slightest. I originally had Pan correct a few things in one of the talk pages (can't quite remember where that was, and I don't feel like digging for it right now.) Ok, first... The pastel light blue link on gray colored tabs (Typically User and talk page tabs). It is a little hard to see at times. And probably my biggest pet peeve is trying to look at copyright boxes in this skin. The white text on white background doesn't work so well :P. Wondering if you have done any personal customization towards any of these color mishaps, and if so, you could perhaps enlighten me on what I can possibly do. Thanks. -- User:Isk8 (T/C) 16:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Change the default background using the .css like I have. :p —

Warw/Wick 16:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Also when looking at different revisions, the white on yellow pastel on the prior revision is impossible to see.

And May, I don't understand enough coding to edit the .css. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 16:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Give me access to your account, and I'll edit it for you then! (lol). —

Warw/Wick 16:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Entropy/Archive 22#Blinding Flash, sorry

(T/C) 22:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

BAH! Looks like I will have to post in that one section that I need to find again, to try to see if I can get Pan to adjust the couple of issues I see, (though I hate to bug him with it). And yes Monobook is bright. I'll stick with my monaco skins. --

User:Isk8 (T/C) 03:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiki-Drama[]

Thank ~~god~~ lack-of-a-greater-being I did not get involved in that.-- (Talk) (Contr.) 22:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

God? That doesn't offend me any more than godhaters. Anyway, yeah, being inactive has definite advantages like that. It's not something that I can afford often...definitely one of the things that I miss about being a "normal user". As you get promoted, the Wiki has a tendency to either suck you in even more, or you finally get up the courage to become inactive forever. It's strange like that.

(T/C) 22:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Naw I only changed god cuz I don't believe in god, but yet I hear myself say "Thank god" and "Bless you" a lot in real life. Weird how I've been caught in the middle of those two consequences of being promoted; I've been fairly inactive, yet I can't help but come back every time.--

(Talk) (Contr.) 22:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Since this is related to the drama, I'll just put it here... I am sorry for overreacting (twice) in my attempts to preserve order on Warwick's talk page today. Granted, I am just getting my feet wet on the whole "user arbitration" aspect of my position, so it doesn't surprise me that I'm making mistakes. I will try to use better discretion in the future. —Dr Ishmael 22:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't think you need to apologize much, that is hardly a huge overreaction. Well, not the second thing at least: my arguments against that are personal belief at best. Throwing around bans is usually a bad thing, but even though I disagree with it in this case, I would not have reverted the bans instantly either. Ultimately you were in the right, that no further discussion can improve the situation; I just think that's the wrong way to achieve the goal. And yeah, you are just getting started with this. Don't worry about it much.

(T/C) 23:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess the key to being a good admin is finding the balance between doing nothing and going "I has Banhammer, WHEEEEE!!!", isn't it? XD Ah well, I'm learning, and I'll find that balance eventually. —Dr Ishmael

23:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, tbh, often doing nothing is a very good idea :P

(T/C) 06:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

GW:SCREENS[]

Ok, so you have no internet untill tuesday, so i could probably have picked a better time, but meh. I notice that you wrote most of the current proposed version of GW:SCREENS which has sat around in the 'proposed' category for ages and not gone anywhere. I agreed with the sentiment of most of that policy but people seemed to feel it conflicted with AGF. I then noticed your comment about simply making it an addition to AGF, but nothing seemed to come of that. As such, I have tentatively written a Proposed Addendum hopefully something along the lines of the general idea behind GW:SCREENS. This seems a good place to post to draw attention to this and therefore gain criticism/support/proposed modifications. I have a feeling I may well end up getting flamed for this, especially as i had a far better way of writing it in my head which swiftly disapeared as soon as i started typing, but meh, it will hopefully atleast give me some arguments to respond to for awhile, which will fill some time :-)-- - (Talk/Contribs) 19:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Ohi[]

It's not Tuesday. 03:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

lol.

reanor 03:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Three hours too late? Lord Belar 03:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It's 8:00 PM Monday on the west coast. Anyway, I'd like to direct your attention to User_talk:Auron_of_Neon#Here_is_a_question?, Special:Log/block, User talk:Felix Omni#NPA, User_talk:Auron_of_Neon#Please_just_ignore_him, and your e-mail.

03:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you have to face all of this just after getting back. If it makes you feel any better, this just further proves the wiki would fall apart without you. Lord Belar 03:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I may be back early, but I do NOT want to deal with this crap at the moment. I've read all the e-mails and I've seen the many instances pointed out to me of problems. Give me time to at least eat some dinner and get settled in again. :(

On a more pleasant note. Las Vegas is just too much for a simple country girl like me. I may not be from Hicksville, Arkansas...but my town is by no means large. Too much rabid consumerism and...humans...in one place is shocking. Welcome back to you too.

(T/C) 03:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I just keep a safe distance from Las Vegas, personally. Unless it's Las Vegas, New Mexico, which is a nice little town. :P Lord Belar 03:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Felix, just let it go. You were pretty much flaming Auron's talk page before he blocked you. I think it was inappropriate for him to do the block, and I wouldn't personally block you for those comments, but I would also not oppose any other admin for blocking you based on what you were writing. Your actions were very troll-baity. Auron took the bait, but instead of trolling you in response, he blocked you. -User:PanSola (talk to the

) 03:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It certainly is unpleasant to return from a trip you didn't enjoy and find out the wiki has exploded, isn't it? Take your time.

03:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Auron may entertain himself with drama, but I would call your above statement very borderline breaking of AGF. This is a wiki, and the greatest extent one can misrepresent what has happened on the wiki is via the sysop tools that will ring sirens on everyone's radar. I think your concern is unfounded and illustrates an inappropriate amount of bias. It's ok for you to distrust Auron's motives due to his lack of disclosure; but to worry about Auron might misrepresent things, you are both greatly underestimating Entropy and the community's intelligence, and taking your distrust in Auron way too far. -User:PanSola (talk to the

) 04:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Fine. I'm not starting another argument.

04:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I get the irony.

However, unlike The Convention From Hell, I actually managed to enjoy myself somewhat. If nothing else, they have good food in Vegas. Day 1: Dinner at "Emperor's Garden", pleasant Szechuan restaurant. Day 2: Breakfast buffet; lunch, "Terra Viole" (or somesuch Italian name), very haute cuisine and higher price, yet good; in the afternoon, unlimited Happy Hour small stuff; dinner, buffet at MGM Casino. Damn good Alaskan King Crab. Day 3: Dinner buffet at the Bellagio. Delicious smoked trout and other uncommon goodies.

And then I ate stale Cheerios on the car ride home. So yeah, it wasn't so bad.

(T/C) 04:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I just got back from Maine, but I didn't get any lobster. :( Lord Belar 04:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's good that you managed to salvage a memorable experience from it. Tonight would be an excellent time to be on MSN, once you've finished dinner and everything.

04:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I feel I must comment[]

Hi, Entropy; I hope you had a nice trip and that all is well. Vegas can get a bit rough sometimes, I have been twice and it is far to much noise for me lol. Although I do agree they have some amazing food there :D!

Ok now to get to the not so fun part. I would have posted this on Auron's talk page, but I am respecting his wishes as he does not want me to any longer. You made a the comment, "I should have followed your advice. Simply making a decision without creating some bastard page would have avoided this whole mess and been much more effective"; personally imho that would have been a very bad idea. How do you think people would have reacted if you would have promoted a bcrat without consent from the active community of any kind? A possible flashback maybe? People did not seem very happy when he suddenly made a major change and informed no one. Yes, yes, I know what you are going to say; selling a wiki without active community consent is different then promoting a bcrat without any active community consent. However, I think something similar could have happened (maybe less hate mail and talk page rants, but you get my drift). It obviously has been made clear that major changes shoulld not be done with out active community consent, I think (and others would agree) that promoting a user to bcrat is a pretty big thing as it effects the entire wiki and not just a few select users.

I hope that you got the overall thing that I am trying to say here. Anywho, I am glad you are back and hope all is well. Toodles :o) --Shadowphoenix 04:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I thank you for expressing your concern, yet I have to disagree on three major counts.

Firstly - the community does not have to give its consent to anything that I or another sysop or in fact any user does. While that is almost always the preferred way to go about things, you must understand that if every single significant development had to undergo the amount of rigorous critique as this "election" (for lack of a more understandable word) is, nothing would ever get done. As uncomfortable as it feels, sometimes it is necessary to take unilateral action. You can already see how bogged down the whole "debate" has become - it is totally perverted from what I had originally intended as the purpose of the page. I could never have anticipated such fury and emotion over something so inocuous. You will also admit that because of the creation of that page, Wiki-drama has been created and there was a miniature sysop war. ALL the ugly mess of the past week or so could have been easily avoided if I had skipped making that page. Simple as that.

And secondly, even more importantly - the people of GuildWiki will abide by my decision, no matter who it may be. Even though it is a piss-poor tool for doing so, you can see from the bureaucrat page that for any given candidate, there is always some people who approve. Moreover, as far as I know there is not a single user on this Wiki who has serious disagreements with me or the way I run things. (User:Warwick may not like me one bit, but she will cede to my authority at the least...) I don't mean to put on airs or sound pretentious in saying that, not at all. But it is a generally true statement that "I am the boss, and everyone likes me". Even my modesty will no longer allow me to refute such a claim outright - countless examples could be brought up to show how it is true. ... The point is, that if I simply promoted someone, without saying anything. There would not be nearly so much outcry as you suppose. A few users would probably be upset, sure - the ones who would disapprove of that candidate. However, they would not storm off the Wiki muttering about "favoritism" and "admin elite" and crap like that. People know me too well to think in such ways. I will grant that I have recently gone out of my way to defend Auron. Yes, part of that is the bias of friendship. But for the most part, as Auron says, "[I am] defending the truth." I hate slander/libel as much as the next person, and the fact that Auron happens to be partial in my regard is simple coincidence. You have to admit that no other user has been attacked so voraciously during this event; I have not had an opportunity to so defend another. Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that you overestimate the volatility of the community.

Finally, comparing this petty matter to the Gravewit fiasco...I can't even begin to describe how out of proportion that is. You allude to it somewhat, but that is literally like comparing a speck of dust to a Solar System, both in terms of impact and how much people care. Do you honestly think there will be another Mass Exodus of users to GWW etc. due to this "election"? No. Frankly, I believe you attribute far too much importance to bureaucrats and sysops in general - while they are certainly important, this is just business as usual, and hardly something of such earth-shaking magnitude. Heck, on some RFA's you only get like five comments, and I will promote anyway - and no one complains about a lack of consensus even if they opposed. Bureaucrats are not so much more important than sysops that they warrant this level of scrutiny.

(T/C) 05:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I won't presume to speak on Entropy's behalf; however, I thought I might share a little bit of my insight on the matter:

When you come right down to it, it's all a question of perception. I would start by saying that I do believe that your mention of Gravewit is something of a red herring, I also believe that the two situations are dissimilar for another reason. Gravewit's unilateral decision to sell GuildWiki effectively blindsided users who had understood there to be an implicit agreement between Gravewit and the users that they shared a stake in GuildWiki's future. RfA's (yes, we're not talking about an RfA, but the same principle applies) are another matter entirely. RfA's, in my experience, serve two purposes. First, they can, at times, bring to light previously unrealized revelations regarding a particular candidate, and in this way, they can help influence the final decision. Second, they act as a... regulator of perception. I had, for quite some time, as my MSN Messenger signature, "RfAs: the opiate of the wiki masses." That particular message was aimed at PvX's RfA, but I believe the same principle holds true. We would like to believe (if nothing else) that we are "part of the process." And RfAs perform that particular function admirably to be honest. However, at no time has Entropy indicated that this is a "vote" or anything along those lines; she has always made it clear that it is her decision to make (and, notably, I haven't noticed anyone challenge that notion). So, hopefully you'll agree with me that at least part of the value of an RfA lies in the notion of perception. Now, what happens when that RfA becomes the source of wiki-drama (and, to be honest, ridicule)? In short, it becomes more of a liability than a valuable tool. Well... that's my opinion at least. Please ignore various rambling elements and incoherency (as I pointed out to Felix on my talk page, it's late).

*Defiant Elements* +talk 05:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Well... Entropy's response just rendered mine entirely moot, but I figured I'd also point out that (I believe) there's precedent for a Bureaucrat making an essentially unilateral decision to promote a replacement (i.e. Tanaric choosing Biro). Someone who was actually around back in those days (*cough* Auron *cough*) can correct me if I'm wrong.

*Defiant Elements* +talk 05:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

DE, you've always had a knack for summarizing others' walloftext arguments to more readable and smaller paragraphs. I can see that you have not lost your touch. :) And you bring up a great point with Tanaric choosing Biro - it's exactly the same reason I am looking for someone (possible inactivity -> find active copilot) yet that transition went by incredibly smoothly. (Yeah, I was there too!) There was no (public) discussion about it whatsoever, and if I remember correctly, Tanaric had barely even made mention that he was retiring either. So I guess I made a mistake.

(T/C) 06:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Really? I wasn't aware of that knack. Hmmm... I'll have to show this to all those PvXers and GWWers who get made at me for making talk pages unreadable due to walls of text :).

*Defiant Elements* +talk 06:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (edit conflict) (Edit Conflict, damn it) (-.-) (ok now it is just annoying) You are missing my point. As a leader you should take a very very very low amount of chances that could end up in mutiny, so to speak. Bcrat promotion is IS A MAJOR CHOICE THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE, whether you think it is or not; and you most certainly can not under any circumstances let personal bias get in the way of your choice. That would be like me making my sister Community Manager of Arizona because she is my sister, when she knows nothing about Arizona and has never even been there and I did not bother to gather anyones opinions on it. True you make the final choice, but it takes one bad choice for you to end up "walking the plank" (yes I know the pirate puns are awful). Would you promote someone to sysop if all but you and two other users supported him, while the rest of the active community opposed? I think not, because the community's opinions are important there (if not then strike this out and elminate the adminship policy). You obviously wanted feedback on who the active community wants their "new leader" to be, otherwise you would not have created the page at all. I agree u are liked and your choices have never been "ftl" but there is always that possibility and you shoudl always keep it in mind. I do take "elections" and RfA's very seriously, because I dont want a person who keeps this place running to be a complete troll or some to the like (not going further into that). Just so u know I think Tanaric made a bad choice there (I mean not having public discussion that is, as Brio is great and muffins are uber cool). --Shadowphoenix 06:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe just on GuildWiki at least...that's what my memory tells me. It is a shame that so many of your best speeches were erased in the Builds Wipe, DE...I think that is what really first built my admiration for you.

Back to the relevant topic, I want to make another point - you speak of the "community consent", Shadowphoenix, but I have to question that from two angles. On the one hand, what is community consent? If you mean most of the active users not disapproving of something...well, that is hardly "the community", nor would I call that "consent" unless it was unanimous. And it is very rare to see such a situation anyways. And on the other hand, has community consent ever been present in RfA's in the past? Not that I am aware of. Community consent is a concept which is invoked when speaking of things like GWiki2, PvE/PvP skills split, and the April Fools Day joke. But when a new sysop or bureaucrat is being elected, any such pages like an RfA are not votes, nor a place to gather consent. As DE says, as Auron says, as Tanaric says, as I have said...basically, as countless people have said over and over again throughout history. An RfA is not a vote whereby the community "approves" of a candidate. Instead it is a place where the bureaucrats in power can get a sense of what people think about a particular candidate. Maybe there is some well-hidden Wikidrama in their past that speaks ill of their character. Perhaps they always post in a certain way that makes others feel inferior. Possibly they go out of their way to help new users and make them feel comfortable. All of these things require knowing the candidate on a more personal level than the bureaucrats can discover through the basic research tools, like searching the logs or probing past contributions. Yet they are important aspects of character that are taken into consideration. That is the role of an RfA.

(T/C) 06:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm confused... when did user bias enter the discussion? I think now might be an appropriate time to link you to circumstantial ad hominem. Besides, everyone's biased, so opening the floor to the community doesn't reduce the amount of bias; indeed, it just multiplies the sources of bias (resulting as we have seen in wiki drama). Now... on to your other comments. First of all... that's the whole point I was trying to make. Take a look at old PvX archives regarding RfAs, particularly comments made by User:Sefre. Sefre demanded that PvX institute RfAs. We relented, not necessarily because we believed that RfAs were inherently useful, but because people were more content with RfAs and because we did not feel there was any harm in doing so (since we always reserved the right to make our decisions). In this case, the "RfA" has done just the opposite. I would be inclined to argue that this RfA makes it more likely that Entropy will be forced to "walk the plank" if anything. Now that people have gone to such lengths to express their opinions, I would contend that there is likely to be greater outrage if Entropy doesn't pick a candidate seen as having the most community support (I can only imagine the bickering that will ensue). Furthermore, take a look at Skakid's PvX RfA (or my GuildWiki RfA for that matter). In both cases, the "votes" were heavily biased toward the candidate. However, in both cases, the Bureaucrats decided not to promote the candidate. Did they act against the will of the community? Perhaps. Did they act against the good of the community? Certainly not. Indeed, I would be inclined to say that in both cases, the Bureaucrats would have made grievous errors had they promoted the candidate. To be honest, I take this "RfA" less seriously (due to its nature) then I would have a simple statement by Entropy saying that she had picked User:X as her replacement. The more diverse the opinions that you bring into a debate the greater the risk you run of having a decision made not by logic but by emotion/bias.

*Defiant Elements* +talk 06:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

You really think too highly of me. The ONLY reason I created that page was that I was bored and looking for some entertainment. I did NOT want to get community feedback - A lively and civil debate about a relevant matter is interesting to me. As you can see, this plan has backfired and now I have this enormous amount of drama on my hands. Wow, some fun that is! No, seriously - A simple statement is the best way; I knew that, I was told that by Auron and others, yet I went ahead anyway because I was naive and did not think things would reach this level.

Think of that what you will. (T/C) 06:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I find this particular discussion wonderfully amusing. I'm not sure what I would do for entertainment if I didn't edit Wikis. Indeed, I become rapidly bored with Wikis that lack at least a spark of either wiki drama or heated discussion (there's a reason I'm drawn to policy discussion). That may be in part why I decided to check on the goings on here (PvX is really quite dull and I just finished a somewhat drawn out policy debate on GWW regarding their election policy).

*Defiant Elements* +talk 06:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I dont not like you. (User:Warwick may not like me one bit, but she will cede to my authority at the least...). Untrue. —

Warw/Wick 09:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi[]

First and foremost, how dare you suggest- yet again!- that my comments are influenced by my emotions? I will not pretend that I'm not somewhat disgusted and disillusioned at the moment, but I am not bitter. I do not agree with Defiant Elements' views, and I reserve the right, as always, to express my opinion to the best of my ability. Indeed, if you were not so busy writing thought-out and informative essays, you would have noticed that my comment was made before your request on KyleH's talk page. To suggest that I am bitter- that I am petty and vicious and stupid enough to somehow seek "revenge" on you, let alone through one of your friends! It is that comment which hurts me the most.

Next, my view on your choice to desysop me. I will of course abide by it. I feel that you have been unduly influenced by your personal feelings in this matter, but of course there are no other bureaucrats, so any actions that are taken must be taken by you. I don't blame you for this, I don't hate you, I don't hold it against you. I try to always act as I see fit, and I trust that you do the same. It's a pity that we never saw things exactly the same.

Now my views on Auron. The first time I ever heard of him was an instance several months ago, where by circumstances too trivial to go into, I came across some guru threads about in-game banning. In them, Auron was protesting that a friend of his got unfairly banned for a few days for racist remarks- but Auron was not protesting that his friend did not deserve a ban. Rather, he was complaining that the system Anet uses to determine who deserves a ban was broken, because it was Auron who actually made those racist remarks, not his friend. He repeated pretty much the same thing in a number of places, coupled with various inflammatory remarks about various people and things. I decided that this fellow was a loudmouth firebrand, as well as of rather inferior moral character. (Note that this is an anecdote, not a personal attack.) Imagine my shock, then, when during the Warwick Debates I discovered that this very same individual was none other than a sysop on this wiki- and what's more, his user page was essentially flipping off the entire community. "What the fuck is this guy's problem," I said to myself. (Still anecdote mode.) Since that moment, the only comments I've seen from Auron that did not cause me to repeat the previous phrase were ones directed to his personal friends. I strongly opposed the possibility of Auron's bureaucracy both because I truly believe he does not have the requisite capabilities and because I much preferred spending time on the wiki when he was inactive.

Incidentally, it also irritated me that people from years ago who said things like "Auron is part of the backbone of this community" failed to take into account that there was precious little by which any of the more recent users could judge Auron, and if they saw only the same things I did, I'm sure they would feel the same way I do (in varying degrees of course.)

As for your relationship with Auron, I don't know anything about it and I don't care. It has fundamentally influenced your opinion of him.

I am not abandoning GuildWiki, regardless of what happens. I have made too many friends here, gotten into too many arguments, reverted too many vandals to simply pack up and leave. It's a part of my life now, regardless of how silly that sounds in light of the fact that this is the internet. It will be a pain to have to go back to using {{ban|blah}} and {{delete|bloh}} tags, and I will miss rollback. What I will not miss is the constant scrutiny and the unshakable feeling that no matter what I do, someone's going to show up and make a fool out of me. And truth be told, I was not good at mediating arguments, preventing trolling, or making impartial decisions anyway, so it will be much easier to get by when no one expects me to do such things. I sincerely hope nothing which I have stated here merits another ban. 06:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Just stop. Please. I feel bad enough about desysopping you; you could at least have a shred of decency in your heart and go down silently. While you are always free to express your opinions, and I welcome criticism, your remarks hurt more than you can imagine. I only have one heart, and you can't break what's already broken.

(T/C) 07:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Defiant Elements gives Entropy the aforementioned moral support he promised.

*Defiant Elements* +talk 07:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Felix, "mediating arguments, preventing trolling, or making impartial decisions" are on the list of "having absolutely nothing to do with sysop status". I am afraid that I will do the best I can (and have time for) to continue remind this generation of GuildWiki users of that fact, and encourage normal users and anons to take part in such activities. I would like to be able to expect any experienced users/anons on this wiki to be able to do such things. GuildWars as a game might be dead in 15 years, but certain things learned from being a part of a wiki can be a priceless experience for the rest of your life. -User:PanSola (talk to the

) 09:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I will be writing a comprehensive response to this later, on a separate page. I still feel the need to explain myself. (T/C) 05:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

"I am the boss, and everyone likes me"[]

I think that's the root of the problem:

The kids (defined by relative "age" on this wiki and lack of knowledge of how things used to run in the long past) now expects Bcrat to be someone likable by everybody (note: I am not advocating you to start become less popular). Thus it's a big deal to them to find a candidate they don't like.
The kids expect the Bcrat to be the boss, the fearless leader of the community, when the Bcrat is just the person entrusted with the duties/powers of promoting and demoting sysops and other Bcrats. They are giving way too much importance to this "job", and feel too much is at stake.

These two things are exactly what perverted the "RfB" process. Much of the vocal community is losing the "bottom-up" spirit that was the driving force of the early days of the wiki. Well, the "mistaking a vocal minority as the voice the the community" is another part of the problem. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 09:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your evaluation; you hit the nail on the head, Pan. Sometimes I surely do feel like a fossil here...still, like Auron says, it was not a total loss as long as I learned from the experience. Which I most certainly did. Failures are the best lessons, etc. (T/C) 05:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

WTF[]

Er, i assume by what you just posted on my talkpage you mean you recived my e-mail but wernt able to reply, er, you certainly didn't piss ME off - maybe microsoft though - they have a thing against G-mail apparently. Thats quite worrying though. I created cobalt.wiki@gmail.com - perhaps try that, unless you just lost a massive load of text when that email failed (that is the kind of thing that usually happens to me :P). BTW - all my user emails received from guildwiki now default to my junk folder, for some reason, despite me telling hotmail they are not junk, microsuck phailz :(-- - (Talk/Contribs) 10:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I was bit worried for awhile there that you or I had done something wrong. The mail was not of any special importance, but I was just alarmed to get such a message from the mail-daemon. What if something really had gone wrong so that no more e-mail send by me was ever received? Or to UK addresses at least? This is why I don't like Microsoft much.

(T/C) 05:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Well[]

with that bolded notice, we probably should congratulate you, no? Happy birthday to you. --- -- (s)talkpage 14:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

21 is better than 18 imho *cough*. Anyway, Happy Birthday =D lol --Shadowphoenix 14:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

HAPPY BIRTHYDAY![]

Seriously, you don't get enough respect and loving here. You're basically the quintessential glue that holds us ungrateful pricks and whiners together, if you weren't here then we would all de-evolve back into chimps and stand around all day picking our bums, scratching ourselves and breaking GW:NPA (not that I wouldn't mind it or anything, that sounds like a pretty awesome way to live life to be honest). You're only 18 (EIGHTTEEN!!!!11!!) yet you're at least three times more mature than me and as loath I am to say it, you are certainly much smarter than me as well as well as being a better person fullstop. Really you're the model GWiki person here, you're popular and most people respect you for what you do. Being the lone Bcrat after everything that has happened here can't be easy, especially since you have your own personal problems (which you professionally mask when dealing with our hissy fits) but you can always be counted on to come back and lay down the law with your signiture walls of text (I think I can actually read them without having to pull out a dictionary now). So yeah, you really deserve more respect and love, I know you're doing a excellent job here as does everyone else here (the people that think you suck are worthless anyway, their opinions are officially dirt). When The Entropy-Chan arrives then people know it's time for cheeks (ours) to meet backhands (yours). That last sentence was a bit sensationalized (only a bit) but I really like saying it. I really admire the fact that someone younger than me can manage all the crap that happens here and still be quite level-headed, even though we're all bickering and causing strife like there's no tommorow, totally ignoring your own personal feelings and emotions you can come down and still do what's needed. Kudos Entropy, Kudos.

On a more personal level, I believe that it is only right that I thank you. Thank you for 'defending my actions' from other vandals, thank you for tolerating my 'rough-exterior' and seeing through my jerkishness to say that I have a good heart, it really did make me feel this foreign emotion that I've never felt before (I think some people would call it 'joy' but I'm not sure). That last part was too mushy for me, when I finish posting this I'm going to punch myself in the face as hard as possible. For most of my time here, you have been a good and reliable friend and talking to my precious Entropy-chan always brightens my day (not that I get sad or anything, relliks don't get sad, they break NPA). I also do agree with your assessment with Defiant Elements and I also think fondly at times about the 'good ol days' (however I'm a baby here compared to you so the 'good ol days' for me is like last week for you). I miss the days when it was yourself, Kale, Fletchette and myself just talking about crap (you guys were talking about crap, I was just there being awesome) or Kale beating us down with his far superior knowledge of GWars or Fletchette wanting to be as awesome as myself (that last part may or may not be fictional) so basically it's was a huge relief to see that at least you're still here doing that which you do (excluding getting into very very verbal fights with me on the talk pages of Savannah Heat) after I returned from my hiatus.

While I certainly can't give you any physical presents, I did take some pictures that I thought might be nice.

Please excuse my atrocious spelling and the fact that some letters are back-to-front, writing on my arm with my left-hand while looking in the mirror is not fun, not fun at all (though it's more fun than using Ursan Blessing, stupid bear. Go die in a fire). I took like fifty photos but settled on these ones because I wanted some that not only had the '<3 Entropy Chan' shown clearly but also ones that hid my fearsome visage while at the same time giving the impression that I actually have muscles (when in actual fact I am a small scrawny little kid that is like a leaf in the wind when it gets windy). If you still play GWars then I could probably give you some stuff on that as well to help cheer you up.

So in closing, you're 18! If you lived Down Under you'd oficially be an adult now, so ummmmm.....yeah! Keep fighting the good fight, I appreciate each and every single thing you do and would totally support just about anything you do because I know you will do what's needed, when it's needed.

- b.r // talk 04:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

^^suck up. also, happy bday my sweet. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 05:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It's true, I really want to be bcrat :( - b.r // talk 05:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday. Lord Belar 05:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC) She is officially and adult now, she just can't legally drink or smoke. :P

Actually, except for a few specific states which don't include California, 18 is the legal age to buy tobacco in the US. So happy birthday Entropy, you can now cope with your stress by chain-smoking legally! ^^;; Srsly... I was really surprised when I first realized you were 17. Dealing with everything here on top of all the pressures of highschool and teenage life... Wow. You are awesome. —Dr Ishmael

05:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday ;) —

Warw/Wick 11:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I hadn't realized I was older than you. Only by a week and a half, but still :P Happy Birthday! ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 13:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy Bday! =] Lยкץ๒๏ץ talk 13:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy Bday, hope you have a good one :) Jennalee 13:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

"Wow. You are awesome." Quoted for truth :) ---

-- (s)talkpage 14:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Generic Birthday greeting! Happy Birthday!

Entrea [Talk] 19:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Sniff...thanks a lot, everyone. You really are what keeps me going in this job from day to day...after all, I am dedicated to GuildWiki, and what is GuildWiki without a community? Just an empty shell of information. This means so much to me, and I can't express my gratitude fully on the Internetz...all I can say is that I really appreciate such support.

Yes, and I am a legal adult now. One more reason not to post pics: less protection under the law. I can't decide whether to :P or :S to that. Nevertheless, I would like to state here and now that I will upload some picture, someday...eventually. (T/C) 05:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Whoo - you can now drink beer - In England Random Time 21:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Right, cos age is the only thing stopping people from drinking. --Dr R. Phalange 21:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Legally yes :P --Shadowcrest 21:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot Flag Request[]

I currently have a bot at User:PhoenixBot and was wondering if I could get a bot flag for it. The bot is AWB and will only be used at request or by tasks that have been approved. :o) --Shadowphoenix 19:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Q: is there a reason that "you specifically" feel you need the bot as opposed to just proposing tasks and allowing another bot to run it? I'm not against you having a bot per se, just wondering if its necessary. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 19:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Because I feel that you can never have to many bots, it is always a good idea to have a hefty amount of bots just incase. I am usually on a odd hours when other bot operators are not and could do things with my bot that other may not be able to do because of RL and time :) --PhoenixBot 19:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm opposed to having a stupidly high amount of bots. I think we've got enough tbh, if not too many now. I do think there is a limit, because bots will probably end up edit conflicting each other. May I also ask a) what you're going to run and b) what you're going to do with your bot. —

Warw/Wick 19:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

A) Most likely the Guild Wars News thing for a start, it seems like it would be a worthy task to complete. I think that cleaning up Deadendpages is a good idea.

B) What ever I am asked to, correcting links, adding repetive stuff to articles, etc. --Shadowphoenix 20:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Tbh, any other bot could do those. And also, what are you planning on running? What bot? |||

User:PhoenixBot AWB.... See above --Shadowphoenix 20:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC):

The choice may not be up to me, but I have to say, having a stupidly high amount of bots is just.. Pointless. Recategorization, currently, will not work with AWB, nor will any special: pages on Gwiki. I plan on pulling an ishmael, and learning how to code with perl ;p. AWB is borked on GWiki, so its pointless to give any more AWB bots bot flags. :| —

Warw/Wick 20:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

May I ask why you created one then? --Shadowphoenix 20:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Because AWB wasnt bork'd when I started. —

Warw/Wick 20:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I would not say it is borked, I have used it a few times and it works perfectly fine for me :) --Shadowphoenix 20:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think its merely boked for GuildWiki. Cats, special pages.. All things apart from what links here etc are borked. —

Warw/Wick 20:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Hmmm, I think I will go test that. --Shadowphoenix 20:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

So AWB worked before you made your bot, May... and didn't after. Is it possible that you broke it?

20:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I've tried reinstalling AWB, it doesnt work properly. —

Warw/Wick 20:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Well on the topic of moarbots, I don't see any reason for Phoenix's bot to exist at the moment, but I also see no reason for it not to. Therefore, may as well give it bot status now (as a low-priority type deal), and see if it comes in handy in the future.

20:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

If AWB doesnt get fixed, and I dont think it will be because its been quite a while, I see no point in giving anyone else who is planning on using awb bot status. —

Warw/Wick 20:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, from what I just tested the Category listr maker does not work. However, I tested everything else and it works perfectly fine. I see no reason why we should not give another AWB a bot flag if the only thing that is wrong is the Category list, as that can be done manually (I just did it) --PhoenixBot 20:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Most sort of things that bots can do, revolves around categories, and of course tagiging pages in things like special:uncategorized/unused images. and neither of them work. Admittedly, I have very little imagination, but thats all i can see bots being used for atm. —

Warw/Wick 20:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Special pages work finw with mine --PhoenixBot 20:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Try compiling a list from special:uncategorized/unused images. It shouldn't work. —

Warw/Wick 20:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll be honest SP, while I don't think you'd ever use a bot in an intentionally malicious manner, speaking for myself, (this is of course entirely irrelevant since the final decision is Entropy's) I'm not sure I could trust you with a bot flagged account (a la Aiiane's concern on GWW). Besides, from what I've seen (even in the short time I've been back) GuildWiki seems to have plenty of bot accounts. *Defiant Elements* +talk 20:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Aiiane's concerns made no sense to me whatsoever, and when I asked her to explain over MSN I got no response. I have never made and harmful edits to Guild Wars Wiki or GuildWiki yet I have been looked upon as if I did. Why would you not be able to trust me with a bot account? I have never ever done anything wrong on the wikis, sure I have had my fair share of breaking policy by mistake and misinterpreting policies but who has not? I am a great contributor to both wikis and everyone should know that I can respect concencus when it comes right down to it (and if I get a link to GWW:BDAY or something, I have explained that b4). I really do not understand how I have become public enemy #1 in some peoples eye when there are worse people then me on both wikis, and I have never really done anything wrong. I am here to help and if you will not accept my help then I can respect that. I hope that Entropy can see that I made PhoenixBot to help the wikis whether others believe it or not... --Shadowphoenix 20:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that you dont understand. If you dont understand now, you won't understand at all. —

Warw/Wick 21:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What don't I understand May? --Shadowphoenix 21:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Why it is that we're somewhat against it. I dont want to state it for fear of death by wikidrama :| —

Warw/Wick 21:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

How am I supposed to understand it if you will not say? I would greatly appreciate if you did :o) --Shadowphoenix 21:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain the allusion to Aiiane? We don't all follow GWW affairs.

21:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[1] Lord Belar 21:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ehh, okay. I was more hoping for an explanation as to why this person's opinion would matter here.

21:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Because SP is the same on both wikis, and doubts about her ability to handle a bot there just as easily apply here. Lord Belar 21:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but I do not see why there are doubts.... --Shadowphoenix 21:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) What aspects of handling a bot are doubted? Her technical abilities, her judgment? The bit you linked to didn't specify anything.

21:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[2] My judgement I guess --Shadowphoenix 21:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

SP is correct. I doubt her judgment.

*Defiant Elements* +talk 21:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Let me ask this. Do you think that I would do something with my bot that people did not approve of? --Shadowphoenix 21:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Lord Belar 21:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Then you obviously know nothing about me Belar... --Shadowphoenix 21:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you would so intentionally (i.e. with the intent of doing something malicious or of which people would not approve), but I would worry about you doing so unintentionally.

*Defiant Elements* +talk 21:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you explain, do you mean that I would determine concenus myself? I do not have the right to do that, only the community (and on this wiki the admins) have the right to determine that. --Shadowphoenix 21:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes, you act without fully exploring the potential consequences and inadvertently cause harm to others and to your reputation. Lord Belar 21:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like links to confirm, but I think I know what you are talking about (past bites me in the ass yet again). If you a refering to the bot testing I did over at GWW today, I admit I did not even remeber that those were highly watched pages I was just testing the image capabilities of my bot --Shadowphoenix 21:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

That's exactly the problem. You do not alway think through your actions. Take the time to prove to people that you can be responsible, then come back to request bot status again. Lord Belar 21:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, bot requests rarely get this amount of attention. Must have been a real big issue on GWW. Even if Shadowphoenix and I do not see eye-to-eye about many things, I have no real reason to think granting bot status would cause big harm. Since she has already stated that she would follow specifically assigned duties, I have little fears of a rogue bot or such...etc. I do not understand how <5 is a "stupidly high amount of bots" either.

However, because there seem to be strong feelings, I will wait a bit and do some research before saying yes. The News thing is not terribly high priority either, mostly a convenience issue. (T/C) 06:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to consider this, I do hope you allow my bot to recieve the bot flag :o) --Shadowphoenix 00:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have looked things over and I am willing to at least give you a chance. Before I give the final authorization, please post here saying exactly and specifically what jobs you are going to have the bot run - just so we are totally clear on it. (T/C) 05:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Currently the only job available for an AWB bot is GuildWiki:Bot tasks/Add link to all GuildWars.com news articles the rest are for Perl and Java; I am sure that there will be plenty more in the future though. My bot has the capabilities to add categories to articles, remove them, replace them, remove templates, add templates, and replace templates. I can also do things like the Guild Wars News subject and some other things as well. So PhoenixBot is loaded and ready when it will be needed :o). I can assure you that no edits will be made by PhoenixBot that have not been approved (except for general testing which will be confined to mine and PhoenixBot's userspace). --Shadowphoenix 05:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright then, you have my permission to work on the News project. Let's start with that first. I am not very familiar with what problems the bots have been having; something about compiling lists from Special pages? If that has been fixed now, anything which is on the "Massive To-Do List" (see top of my talkpage) that has to do with adding/removing categories or templates is free game also. Just remember to add it to the Bot Tasks page so we don't get any redundancy by accident.

(T/C) 05:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

While you guys do that, I'll get ready the cleanup-after-bot page asap. --Dr R. Phalange 17:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

That was rude and not needed --Shadowphoenix 19:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

But nonetheless true and appropriate. --Dr R. Phalange 20:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Last I checked, May is not Shadowphoenix. That was uncalled for. --Shadowcrest 20:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

And that was uncalled for, crest. He's referring to the spelling errors in her summary, methinks. —

Warw/Wick 20:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the link pointed to GuildWiki:Cleanup after Maybot, not PhoenixBot. --Shadowcrest 21:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, I did have a spelling error in the summary but I locked it and did not notice that. The point is that auto thinking that my bot will require a cleanup page is very rude and should not have been stated, just because I had a spelling error in the summary does not mean that you will have to go back and undo every edit PhoenixBot made last night, the summary does not affect the actual content that was added to the articles. --Shadowphoenix 21:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

sarcasm ftw! poke | talk 22:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)