User talk:Entropy/Archive 27

Archives

[Add an archive]

1. ~November, 2006 - February 3, 2007
2. February 4 - February 26
3. February 27 - April 2
4. April 3 - April 18
5. April 19 - May 3
6. May 4 - July 21
7. July 22 - August 5
8. August 6 - September 16
9. September 17 - September 22
10. September 23 - September 30
11. September 31 - November 2
12. November 3 - November 11
13. November 12 - November 16
14. November 17 - November 24
15. November 25 - December 5
16. December 6 - December 14
17. December 15 - December 31
18. December 31, 2007 - January 18, 2008
19. January 19 - March 3
20. March 4 - March 26
21. March 27 - May 6
22. May 7 - May 31
23. June 1 - August 13
24. August 14 - September 28 (note: last C/P archive)
25. September 29 - November 2
26. November 3 - November 21
27. November 22 - December 18
28. December 19 - December 20
29. December 21 - December 28
30. December 29, 2008 - January 25, 2009
31. January 26 - March 12
32. March 13 - April 18
33. April 19 - July 18
34. July 19, 2009 - January 28, 2010

[Add an archive]

New Project

I propose we publish a tiers list for the monsters of Guild Wars. Seeing as this is a huge number of monsters, maybe we could limit this to just special enemies like bosses. Tiers would be campaign-centered, so we'd have one for Prophecies, Factions, Nightfall, and Eye of the North. I know that I already did this with a poll (which had ~100? votes) but an official unofficial list would be fun too. (T/C) 05:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

That comes dangerously close to build wars, although levels and monster skills would also come into play... it's an interesting thought. 05:32, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I voted

This user voted. Why didn't you?

--◄mendel► 15:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Ahh the irony... voted. Silver Sunlight (T/C) 21:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

See, it's really ironic because on the poll for comparing strongest bosses, 114 people voted...and on the poll for whether INAFR or LAME was more famous, that was 91 votes. Right now there is only a pansy 30 or so. :p Clearly, people care more about Guild Wars than the democratic process! (T/C) 20:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Or those polls existed for a longer time, thus allowing more people to vote. --- -- (contribs) (talk) 20:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

...in America. (T/C) 20:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

...in general. Bosses and INAFR/LAME have been there for a multitude of days, if not weeks, and the "VOTE YES OR DO NOT VOTE" has been there for a mere day. --- -- (contribs) (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

But...this is the public forums. It's like, me that we're talking about. D: (T/C) 20:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

BTW Yu-Gi-Oh abridged reference. Silver Sunlight (T/C) 12:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Nowai. 15:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Oversighters

I've been meaning to ask about this for a while, but could we bug Kyle to have some (or all) of the admins added to the Oversighters group? That would make it real easy for us to selectively delete certain excessively vulgar vandalisms like this one, instead of having to delete the whole article, then restore all but that one revision. —Dr Ishmael 18:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I did not even know that such a feature existed. To know that such a power is being denied to me because of silly usergroups is unacceptable. I will most certainly go bug Kyle about it.

...oh yeah, and you other sysops can get it too, I suppose. (T/C) 18:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Brought up at GuildWiki:Admin_noticeboard#Oversight_deletion_request before. --JonTheMon 18:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I thought it had been, but couldn't remember where. —Dr Ishmael 18:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I knew it sounded familiar. This also would need a new userbox, by the way. Something with a link to Overseer Boktek or such. (T/C) 18:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

User talk:KyleH#Spawn more Oversighters. Sorry :p (T/C) 20:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That's evidence - not to be oversighted away. It's hidden away enough from the kiddies unless some clever people link to it O.O --◄mendel► 23:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Evidence? For what? —Dr Ishmael 23:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

For blocks and such. --◄mendel► 23:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think any evidence is needed for that username. >.> And the deleted revision itself still shows up on the user's contributions, see Special:Contributions/KyleH; the fact that it was hidden would be evidence enough, I'd think. —Dr Ishmael 23:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

i dont get it

how did u make evryone <3 u so much? whoru neway?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.113.154.83 (contribs) .

No u. (T/C) 21:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Random note: I like how /. calls all unregistered posters "Anonymous Coward". Maybe we should modify our unsigned template to do that, too... —Dr Ishmael 21:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Needs moar GW:AGF / GW:YAV. (T/C) 22:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Awww. Well, how about "Anonymous Person-Who-Might-Be-a-Coward-But-Might-Just-Have-Forgotten-to-Log-In"? :P —Dr Ishmael 22:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

No one ever "forgets" to log in, they choose to do so. Also, I see what you did there. (T/C) 22:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

So slashdot is anti-4chan? 22:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Remember anons are braver in a way. Showing your IP is way more dangerous than having a username,and they still have talkpages.reanor 00:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Also remember that most people don't realize that, so we have anons that think they're being smarter by only showing their IP. And anons could be using proxies, too. —Dr Ishmael 00:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I am quite impressed with your conduct. You are the epitome of what a sysop should be; not perfect, but willing to make mistakes and learn from them. Even when you're wrong on an issue (which isn't often tbh), you take the time to describe in detail why you came to the conclusion you did; that helps everyone involved understand the situation, and reduces the chances someone will be overly offended by your actions.

I was afraid you'd be hurt by my leaving; I tried not to insinuate you in my accusations, but it might have happened regardless. I do not think you cause GuildWiki any harm; rather, you're one of the few users left who really understand what a wiki means and what it needs to succeed. Hell, people on this wiki don't even understand that, so I'd say you're doing pretty good. I wish you (and PanSola and Gem) luck in keeping GuildWiki a friendly and fun place to contribute. -Auron 04:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

^k thar. I win. End of discussion. (T/C) 10:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Air of Superiority

Wikia totally wins over ANet for two things:

1. Being able to embed YouTube videos.
2. The almighty Poll extention.

"You never appreciate something until you have lost it." <- Believe it! (T/C) 10:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Prodding ANet tech ftw? These extensions can be installed on any MW install, you know. But then again they're probably IM-worthy, so I dunno. --◄mendel► 10:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC) & 10:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

But it's spreading democracy! Surely that is an important goal to ANet? :) I'm just saying it is kind of ironic because the GWW has always prided itself on having the superior technology and firepower (which they usually do), but in this case we have them beat. And I can't pass up that kind of opportunity. :) (T/C) 10:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

[1]reanor 14:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh I'm very aware of that Ereanor; I've said it myself before that votes (~= polls) mean absolutely nothing towards consensus and meaningful discussion. That's why I have always opposed them pretty strongly for anything that mattered (builds, RfA, probably some other things).

Teh point was more how I cannot use polls to interact with the community/make statements/be crazy on GWW/GW2W as I use them currently on my userpage. For example, I really wanted to port over my "DEMOCRACY IN ACTION" thing and see if anyone screamed at me for a policy violation. :p And of course there are just more people in general there, so a srs bsns question such as "Split builds with 3 attribs is gud" could get more decisive results. Finally, even if everyone on GuildWiki agrees that an NPC should be named after me, that doesn't do a whole lot of good since ANet doesn't check here (as far as we know, anyway) :) (T/C) 14:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

GWW not having the polling or embedding features doesn't mean it's technologically inferior; the fact that they're not available there is because it hasn't been requested for/it's been rejected (I believe we've had a discussion about youtube embedding and decided against it). In fact, the only reason GuildWiki has it is because Wikia has it for every one of their wikis :P. Wikia's given GuildWiki way more trouble than ArenaNet's given GWW :) --R Phalange 18:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

*GuildWiki's given Wikia way more trouble than GWW's given ANet, tbvh :) I thought about it some more, and considering the general crowd on GWW (this is not directed at anyone in particular) I could see how the polls may get abused. We had fears about embedding YouTube videos here, but so far they have proven to be mostly baseless...the only one I can remember is that guy who kept putting video on Gate of Madness (mission). Other than that people have just been using it to share and bond n shit like that. So it's mostly harmless. That's my thinking anyway. (T/C) 18:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

From what I've seen here, I'd agree. However, GWW has less of a socialising air to it (not to say that it doesn't exist, but things are just more.. GW/wiki-related and less MyGWWSpace-related.) --R Phalange 18:50, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

From what I've seen, socialism, and therefore communism, are the best government forms that exist, because it's all about who you are and what you can do and not what you have or who's a$$ you have to lick. --Alf's Hitman 19:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That is a fascinating observation. 20:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You know what the best example of functioning socialism is? Roads and the rules relating to them --Gimmethegepgun 20:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about socialism there, btw. --R Phalange 21:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

YOU ARE NOW. 22:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

THIS! IS! GUILDWIKI (AAAAAHHHHHHHH)!!! Original topics do not exist, and headers are largely to separate by date, not by subject --Gimmethegepgun 01:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

So I heard spam pyramids will be back in style with the spring.--Łô√ë îğáturkey 03:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

O

Rly?

It's

already

spring

where

I

live

reanor 15:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Most of the population lives north of the equator though, so you're really in fall, it just so happens that it's getting warmer --Gimmethegepgun 15:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm south >_> Silver Sunlight (T/C) 15:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I live in south america you wiseass lol.reanor 16:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

democracy

Polls are just opium for the masses. Polls can be used to gauge the effects of democratic debate, but they can't replace it. --◄mendel► 11:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Poll moved to userpage

"Sí" goes with the "´".reanor 19:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Give me a context. Democracy theory or practice? In practice, they do replace it. --Alf's Hitman 19:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

oO(Marx ain't seen nothin' yet.) (T/C) 20:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

He's right, but we can all wish they could --Gimmethegepgun 02:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Quote: Polls, like votes, don't solve anything; and a wiki is not a democracy. Famous words from every smart leader from Tanaric on down. --◄mendel► 05:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I never said I was trying to solve important Wiki Issues, nor did I imply that the Wiki as a whole is run by democratic principles. (Besides, you know that I and my talkpage am exempt from all policies and precedents, including my own. After all, I've taken up the cross of democracy. Surely you're not an enemy of freedom?) (T/C) 05:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

My existence is testament to freedom. --◄mendel► 05:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

But it's not yet an act of rebellion, so you need to try harder. <3 (T/C) 05:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Mendel doesn't need no stinking causes.--Łô√ë îğáturkey 05:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

But he does need causeways - what would Germany be without the Autobahn? Completely inaccessible, that's what. And in any case, IRC jokes fail on wiki. (T/C) 06:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Wat

I had this theory that all the frequent visitors to IRC had over 9,000 edits, and that would have made for a great userbox, but it seems that only Warwick and myself qualify by any decent margin. D: The Doctor has enough for two, though, at 21,000+ and counting. >.> Then again I still wonder if the editcount is broken or not... (T/C) 08:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

If you count M.Marvin for me, I have that. --◄mendel► 15:02, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

 !! I completely forgot to also count socks and shoes. D: (T/C) 15:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, that didn't do too much, but I learned that the Doctor's bot also has enough edits all by itself at 12,000+. >.> (T/C) 16:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Why am I popular

Go on, tell me. Why do you love me? How did I get to where I am today? Why am I trusted? Why do you let me get away with anything? :)

This isn't a callout to boost self-esteem or anything like that. It arose from a question that Salad asked me, and that neither I nor Mendel could answer satisfactorily: "Why does the community love you? >.> I'm just curious how it came out."

This is a serious business question, so I'll be removing anything I deem irrelevant. (That means no 9,000+ contribs references etc.) Answers below the line, please.

Oh, and just to make it fun, best answer (decided by me of course) gets you a...prize.

(T/C) 08:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

---

Hmm, I found my answer satisfactory. But we'll see, I guess. --◄mendel► 14:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Oooh, opinions... I guess it partially has to do with the fact you are one of the Old Wise Wikians, and nigh everyone has your pages watchlisted (either exclusively, or as one of the many hundreds of interesting possibilities). You also have a reputation as reasonable, sociable and popular (vicious circle, mrite). Humans are flock animals, and when a lot of people use a page as a public forum, other people will join. It's just like suicide bombing buying a popular brand of clothes/accesories/etc.

Oh, and to answer question 1 and 4: Probably cause you're a woman. Human nature/instincts and stuff ;)

You got to the point where you are because you didn't /rage nor switch over to GWW, but stuck to the smaller fanbase userbase.

You're as trusted as you are because you are often enough right, and if you aren't, you're the first to admit it (well, unless you get EC'd). You can formulate opinions and reasons very well (WoT fight go go), and generally refrain from flaming (up to a certain point, I guess).

Sure, it doesn't explain everything, but how's that possible, for a human? Only Ishy and Wizardboy can answer all of that;they're beyond human.

Or, to put it simply: Because we can. --- -- (contribs) (talk) 15:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Expect no long answer from humble Linebeck. I simply like you because you are a friendly person in an administrative position, which is a rare commodity. You have always been kind in instances when we have spoken and I respect you for that. You usually deal with problems in a short and sweet manner, without much fanfare. Oh, well I suppose that was a bit long. Not as long as Vipers so I'm counting it as a win. 16:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Mostly what Viper said. Basically, you're Auron minus the asshattery and plus the wisdom to realize that you're not always right. —Dr Ishmael 17:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

And female. 17:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the (lack of) asshattery is a bigger factor than gender. —Dr Ishmael 17:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

This is true, but gender is indeed something else that sets her apart from Auron. I was being....thorough, I suppose is the word? 17:11, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

You suffer from a rare condition called leadership. Wich, contrary to popular belief, has a lot less to do with yourself, and a lot more to do with us, your followers. I'll go out on a limb here, but I'd guess you don't always find yourself in such a position (as in, situations other than the wiki, or even inside it at times). And that's what leadership is, a position; there are no "born leaders", nor can a person just become one by fulfilling certain conditons (like, as it is commonly put, ppl skills, strong personality, etc). In other words, it's the result of our interactions, we put you there, you put us here, you let us put you there, we let you put us here. The decisions we make and the actions we take together happen that way because that's the way we have historically constructed our leader-followers relationship. How that came to be is a bot-job that we probably won't get into (our beloved DrIshy might get into doing that reasearch lol), but even so, it is irrelevant. What's important is that we love you and trust you, and thanks to that we can achieve our goals together. Such a state of things is actually so fragile (despite the general view) that taken advatage of it's contingency if far more necessary than diggin into it's historicity and causes. It's very unlikely that we'll find the causes of the phenomena in question, because the variables are many and much complex. And even if we do find them, as incomplete as that would probably be, there won't much to learn from it that we wouldn't better learn from our present.reanor 17:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Facetious is the word you are looking for. 18:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

/spellfail: "Her userpage smells of rich mahogeny."

• Mahogany. —Dr Ishmael 14:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

You just had to do that, didn't you? >.> (T/C) 15:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)