User talk:Onlyashadow

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Builds[edit source]

take a look at [GuildWiki:Style and formatting/Builds], they even have a template you can copy out. --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 09:03, 11 August 2006 (CDT)

Yay I'm slowly coming out of my wiki ignorance, ty.Onlyashadow 09:05, 11 August 2006 (CDT)


Well that was relativly easy an pain free...I think I'll post some more of my builds ^_^-Onlyashadow 09:32, 11 August 2006 (CDT)

ya, but wait till skuld gets his voting hammer out. please try to test some builds while your at it Category:Untested builds is full to overflowing, and we need three votes either way to move them. --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 09:51, 11 August 2006 (CDT)

Why is My build [Rt/N Gift of Creation] in the list of your builds? I made it. --Elizabeth Hoover

'Sins[edit source]

Hullo! I've had a go at sorting out the Assassin page. Could you take a look for me? Thanks. JP 13:35, 14 August 2006 (CDT)

Looks fine to me, gj-Onlyashadow 14:39, 14 August 2006 (CDT)

I think I have a problem[edit source]

Over the past week I've found myself clicking the "recent changes" button over and over again waiting for something to pop up...Onlyashadow 09:33, 15 August 2006 (CDT)

Well won't it be exciting when you see the yellow "You have new messages" box? :P --Xasxas256 09:35, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
If you need something to do, look at my list of things to do. --Gem-icon-sm.png (talk) 09:44, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
just wait till you figure out that you can click the timestamp in recent changes and see all the changes since the last time you loaded the page. i've got 1500 edits in the two weeks since i learned that, and 500 in the 4 months before. i'm not addicted, i can quit any time... as soon as the PvP builds are sorted, and the IAS skills updated. --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 10:20, 15 August 2006 (CDT)

Gem, you have my sympathies GL with the list. I think I'll stick to the builds area...Onlyashadow 10:29, 15 August 2006 (CDT)

Categories[edit source]

I don't normally edit peoples user pages but I changed the two category entries as user pages should not normally be in categories. --Xasxas256 18:22, 21 August 2006 (CDT)

and again ;) --Xasxas256 05:06, 25 October 2006 (CDT)
My fault — Skuld 05:15, 25 October 2006 (CDT)
'Twas too, well you fixed a link on my test page so I can't be too grumpy :) --Xasxas256 05:30, 25 October 2006 (CDT)

The sick person who bolded the "i"...[edit source]

...is Pansola. :) The reason is to distinguish "Elonia" from "Elona" that the issue in that section is about whether or not Elonia and Elona are the same thing. i.e. Whether the "i" means something. --Karlos 08:55, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

Omg, I thought some sadistic vandal did that...my bad ^_^-Onlyashadow 09:05, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

Isn't Elonia the new area coming in Nightfall? --I Follow The Blind 11:22, 21 September 2006 (CDT)

Talk:W/any Enraged Smasher[edit source]

so what does "boo" mean? --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 12:22, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

See Booing.-Onlyashadow 12:32, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

ok, mr smartypants, why are you booing that build? and don't you dare say "because it deserves a boo". i expect a logical reason, mister.--Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 12:47, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

No IAS (Bad idea for a hammer), ONE useful attack, an addition useless attack, and no self heal. Low DPS with a hammer isn't FTW.-Onlyashadow 13:15, 25 August 2006 (CDT) Oh and it deserves a "boo"-Onlyashadow 13:16, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

see? was that so hard? now could you copy that in instead of "boo" so people know exactly what you don't like about the build? --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 13:31, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Oh I'll copy it, but "Boo" will remain as the head of my vote. Jeering FTW.-Onlyashadow 13:34, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Now if you could ask the people who voted for that "build" why they like it, I'd be impressed if any of them had an answer.-Onlyashadow 13:37, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Your response is requested here. Thanks. --Vortexsam 19:53, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

Ban[edit source]

for reference, you can place Template:ban on a user page to request a ban against someone, but only admins can actually inact the block. see Special:log/block --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 12:47, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

I need a hug[edit source]

Anyone?

<script type="text/javascript" src="/wiki?title=User:Onlyashadow/monobook.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=

I'm not sure what that's supposed to do but what you should do is move your user page out of Category:Users/Language and into Category:Users/Language/en-N I might give you a hug then :P --Xasxas256 09:43, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

/Cheer! --Xasxas256 09:50, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

I demand a hug.-Onlyashadow 09:51, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

But you didn't add the right category. You can just add {{:Category:Users/Language/en-N}} and that'll sort it out. Also is that AoC thing because I mentioned it somewhere!? --Xasxas256 09:53, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

AoC thing?-Onlyashadow 10:13, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Ok I'm correctly labeled, now hug me.-Onlyashadow 10:27, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Age of Concent, I wrote about it somewhere. I'm not sure my arms would reach you are you in Australia? Can't I just give you a mould-friendly thumbs up!? :P --Xasxas256 22:56, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Oh, no that was from my own research although if I had known you had put something up it would have saved me a bit of time. btw

  • d('-'d) That's how you give me a thumbs up.-Onlyashadow 08:06, 15 September 2006 (CDT)
Could u take a look at the new A/N Solid Interupter and the talk page? Maybe remove the old voting thingy and vote on the new one. Just tell your opinion. --I Follow The Blind 11:22, 21 September 2006 (CDT)
Oh and i almost forgot d('-'d)
sure, I'll take a look in a couple mins.-Onlyashadow 11:23, 21 September 2006 (CDT)

A little help?[edit source]

I can't see any updates to guildwiki, the latest change in "recent changes" is "Ahbri‎; 15:44 . . MRA (Talk | contribs) (scaled the image down (a bit))" sooo if anyone knows what's going on feel free to let me in on it.-Onlyashadow 11:22, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

What happens? Infinate load, error code? Try press f5 — Skuld 11:31, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

I think it's just recent changes and "my contrib" pages but for some reason they don't show anything new f5 isn't doing anything either :(-Onlyashadow 11:33, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

nvm it's all the pages and f5 does work, my bad...although can I just refresh them all at once, maybe?-Onlyashadow 11:35, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

Tampering with votes[edit source]

Talk:W/any_Enraged_Smasher#Rate-a-Build

3 votes in unfavoured, by first time IPs, in the space of 6 minutes, which look to be proxies.

You were dumb enough to forget to log in as yourself again: here you posted with one of the socks you just used to give a vote.

Besides the obvious, you left a "gg" comment, i've seen these left all over talk pages by yourself.

I'm imposing a 1 week block, take some time to think about not trying to cheat again — Skuld 10:46, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Again? What about here and here? -Savio 11:00, 3 October 2006 (CDT)
While I don't contribute to the builds section as a personal decision, this seems to reach beyond the realm of builds and turns again to the banning of IP randomizers. As, I myself, do not have time to do anything other than this little bit, no digging or starting a new discussion off this user's talk page, but on the surface it looks rather grim. It is disappointing to see an experienced contributor doing something like this. — Gares 11:21, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

/Crackneck Ahhh, much better. Time to get to play ^_^-Onlyashadow 10:54, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Gift of creation[edit source]

Moved to: User:Onlyashadow/Saved builds to avoid deletion , whoever the original author you can go ahead and put that on your space if you want.-Onlyashadow 11:37, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Because I don't know which category this would fall under..[edit source]

Lol, thanks for the compliment. That was a friend of mine who just randomly picked up an empty poptart box I had in my room (Yeah, I'm not exactly the cleanest guy in the world. Though I hate leaving food particles around. Boxes and other containers that carry food are okay, as long as they don't leave any type of residue that will reek of Oberan the Reviled.) And muh pretteh kitteh just happened to be inside. She's so curious, you know.. And her name is Momo. :X And to answer your other question.. Perhaps..? o.o

Lmao I'm so sorry I'm posting this in here, but uh I'll let you mess around with it. Sorry!! X_X;--Xenethan 13:44, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Lol, wish I wasn't allergic to cats...they are so cute...

>_>
<_<

anyway! Xenethan, I assume you are talking about the build...so I'll just look after it till nightfall releases.-Onlyashadow 13:49, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Oh and one other thing. That I added to the other post on my discussion board and failed to produce it here in time before you responded (which you certainly responded quite fast.. o.o) Is.... Actually, what I meant by "I'm willing to take it a step further.." was if I could either become a part of the Guild Wiki Team or better yet, I'd like to become a part of A-Net and aid them to the best of my abilities. I believe I owe them that much at the very least.. But, friendship is something I lack, and I'd like to start with one with anyone. Since I move and I don't meet very many people, (mostly because I'm not a very outgoing kind of guy)I tend to become somewhat lonely. But, that's what I'm asking for by being apathetic and detached from society, right? If you want to speak with me on MSN (which is the only instant messaging program I use) my contact email is sauron_xenethan@hotmail.com.. God I'm so not used to this signing crap.. -_- --Xenethan 13:52, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Everyone at guildwiki is part of the guildwiki team! d('-'d) /goteam *

I know how that whole "moving" thing can go, moved a bunch of times myself but yay internets keeping me in contact with old friends!-Onlyashadow 14:08, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

Guildwiki problems?[edit source]

Is anyone else having trouble viewing and editing pages? For some reason I can't even get most of the pages to show up w/o being on an IP anonymizer... very strange.

I took out the anonymiser's extra / for you. Yes the GuildWiki is having problems atm, we've had a pretty good run in terms of server stability in recent times up until now though. I guess nothing to do but sit tight and wait for Gravewit to fix it. --203.214.83.190 08:33, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

Struck out votes..[edit source]

You asked Skuld to unstrike them, he said no, Fyren also supported his decision. Please do not just go and unstrike votes again. You just came off a ban. --Karlos 14:34, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

  • Note: I didn't ask him to unstrike, I simply asked "Why?".

Although I was unaware breaking "only revert once" policy was a bannable offense(maybe that should be put somewhere on the page) I have engaged in convorsation as per the policy to discuss the conflict and sort it out. And however pseudo-hostile your comment is, I appreciate your concern.-Onlyashadow 14:40, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

Let me explain... Striking out votes is an "administrative" action. No average joe should go do it. As such, unstriking votes is also an administrative action. The fact that you agree or disagree with the striking is completely irrelevant. Only skuld or another admin can unstrike them. Striking them was taken as an administrative procedure.
And yes, breaking 1 RV, deliberately, knowingly and with no justification is a bannable offense. And your own track record is in consideration in such things. Yours being less than exemplary. --Karlos 15:00, 12 October 2006 (CDT)
For all of these rules that can get you banned esp. on voting, voting on builds, and other actions it is absolutly fascinating how none of them are written down or made public until, the "offender" is under the scrutiny of an administrator.../. Once again, aside from the near-hostile behavoir, I appreciate you(finally) alerting me to these rules and their grave consequences.-Onlyashadow 15:07, 12 October 2006 (CDT)
Nothing new about it. The only revert once policy {GW:1RV) was first documented in January of this year. From the Main Page there is a link to GuildWiki:Policy, you can also view Category:Policy for all articles in that space. Violating any policy is potentially a bannable offense, although it's at the admins discretion to determine the severity and to determine if its justified in the particular situation. (Karlos recently did an edit to spell it out, although violation of site policies should be self evident to be potentially bannable offence). --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 15:55, 12 October 2006 (CDT)
While breaking site policies shouldn't be done how about the rules that aren't policy or even written down? I think if you are going to take action as an admin against a user for breaking a rule, the rule should at least be an official rule...one that could be known to the user before he is being banned for it. Just seems rather idiotic to punish someone for something they didn't know was a punishable "offense".-Onlyashadow 15:17, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
Some level of common sense is expected on the part of the user. Disrupting or subverting the vote process (or any element of GuildWiki) should be self evident to be a violation. Note also that GW:ADMIN states Administrators can ban users at will. This is usually done in cases of vandalism, and permanent bans are usually reserved for spambots. However, if an administrator feels it prudent, he may remove a user from the wiki for any reason, or no reason at all. I have never seen an admin of this site to abuse this power. Even if one day it is abused, admins have been known to lessen or remove bans of other admins in some cases when they disagree with the reasoning behind a ban. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 15:33, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
I "lol" at that policy.-Onlyashadow 09:48, 16 October 2006 (CDT)

Going home now[edit source]

A welcome reprieve from the epic debate, I bid you good day guildwiki.-Onlyashadow 15:24, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

Testing Sig[edit source]

Sig'd-My guild is now in the top 100 ranked guilds! Woot! 10:53, 16 October 2006 (CDT)

Try again?-[[User:Onlyashadow [[User talk:Onlyashadow]] My guild is now in the top 100 ranked guilds! Woot!]] 10:55, 16 October 2006 (CDT)

Eek-My guild is now top 100! WooT! 08:39, 17 October 2006 (CDT)

Read the build again...[edit source]

I removed your comment from Talk:W/E_Shocking_Flurry because no one is supposed to debate and argue votes in the rate a build section or that will make the section unreadable and probably break the numbering too.

I usually move the comment to a section in the talk page, but in this case I removed it because you already had that cynical response in the talk page to someone who complained that the build does not work. I would recommend though that you try and give them a better a response because as more and more of them say that, your build will likely end up unfavored despite your conviction that it's their low IQ that's making it not work. --Karlos 09:04, 18 October 2006 (CDT)

I doubt it's low IQ, but since most warrior builds rely on a single strong hit to do most of their damage (evis, devastating hammer+fierce blow) I felt it was nessacary(sp escapes me) to add that note, I have put it out of the way of voting but so it is still noticable-Onlyashadow, Top 100 09:07, 18 October 2006 (CDT)

Edit summary[edit source]

[1] I don't get this, what do you mean by that? 12:29, 23 October 2006 (CDT)

A made-you-look kinda thing. I do that from time to time.-Onlyashadow, Top 100 Guild 12:41, 23 October 2006 (CDT)

Ok. Please don't — Skuld 14:06, 23 October 2006 (CDT)
(

W/E Shocking Flurry[edit source]

I'm quite disgusted by your piss-poor attitude throughout the entire process of that build. And what's worse, you continuously insult voters, their ability to read and comprehend "english," and their ability to play. Here's what I suggest: if you can't deal with having a build voted against, don't submit it. If all you can do is retaliate with mean and degrading comments, take your build somewhere else; the wiki doesn't want it, and you aren't doing anyone a favor by being such an asshole. If you want people to help make your build better, and get it vetted, be nice; they'll be more responsive. If you knock their criticisms of the build, they will be less likely to comment in the future, therefore reducing the potential of the build.
It doesn't stop there. You remove the unfavored tag yourself, even though it was clearly unfavored, because you don't like it being unfavored. Then, you wipe clear the talk page *without improving the build one bit*. If you want to get the build vetted, make it better; if not, let it die. Fighting over this (poor) build is foolish, and it has already been unfavored. Unless you make some major improvements (I'd suggest more damage), it will stay unfavored.
While everything about you has seethed arrogance (see also: "top 100" in your sig), I'm willing to deal with you as long as your contributions are great. As soon as your contributions start lacking, then I have that *and* your arrogance to deal with; not a pretty picture. I could go on for quite awhile, but my main point remains: The build sucks, it's been unfavored, and I don't care how much that hurts your pride; it isn't a good reason to treat others like shit. -Auron My Talk 22:26, 27 October 2006 (CDT)

Speaking of piss-poor attitudes...

I have no problem with my build being voted against so long as the votes make some form of sense. When people can't follow simple 1-2-3-4-5 step directions, I can't help but assume that they have a challenging time dressing themselves in the morning. Furthermore I tried being nice, and more people voted against it for the same dumb reasons, so then I got frustrated. Obviously this pattern of behavoir isn't a regular thing with me and I don't enjoy getting that way so if everyone could just pitch in and read and vote intelligently then we can all avoid another ugly circumstance. The build is quite good, but since most of the people who voted didn't bother to read the usage section they couldn't use it properly and therefor they think it sucks. Also I will have you know that I'm not "arrogant" and that I frequently help newbs and my guildmates learn to pvp(pve isn't my thing) a little better. My "Top 100" signature is pride in my team that we did better than the other(however many) competitive guilds and got to that standing.

I can basically equate your entire rage-o-graph into: This is the internet, where serious business happens. So if you don't behave the way I approve of I will make ambiguous threats until you submit! -Onlyashadow, Top 100 Guild 08:32, 30 October 2006 (CST)
You could try to equate my paragraph into a one-liner, but you'd fail miserably. I'll start by knocking the logical fallacy here... "When people can't follow simple 1-2-3-4-5 step directions, I can't help but assume that they have a challenging time dressing themselves in the morning." When the simple 1-2-3-4-5 step directions suck ass, and people follow them and they fail, the fault is not the testers'. They followed the directions. The problem? The directions sucked. Hundred Blades does little damage. Sun and Moon is another hundred blades, but without the mana cost. 4 hits, tops, doing about 30-40 damage (including conjure lightning) followed by the only "spike" in the build, which rarely finishes off an opponent with 200 HP left.
Next... "Furthermore I tried being nice, and more people voted against it for the same dumb reasons, so then I got frustrated." I don't ever see a point in that build process where you tried being nice. You started insulting others' intelligence immediately after the negative votes started flowing.
"The build is quite good, but since most of the people who voted didn't bother to read the usage section they couldn't use it properly and therefor they think it sucks." You assume way too much. If a build sucks, no matter how well they follow the "usage section," it will suck. That's the case with this build. I probably play warrior more than any other class in PvP, and you can be assured I read the usage section. It still sucks.
Next (damn, I haven't had this much to talk about in a long time), you removed the votes I added and put them in Archive 2. I see two major problems with that. One, you're trying to dodge the fact that 6 people have already said this build sucked ass by making their votes and voices invisible, shoved into an archive (you lied the first time you archived by claiming the skill balance update buffed the build. You didn't bother making up a lie the second time, you just archived). Two, you aren't trying to improve the build. If you were honestly concerned about this build, you'd improve it. But because you spend your effort making perfectly valid votes disappear, the build will *never* improve.
Lastly, there is a clearcut line between pride and arrogance. If my guild won the world championships, or my alliance took over Cavalon, my sig wouldn't change. Would I have a blurb on my userpage? Most likely. That way, if anyone gave a shit, they'd go read about it. If I put it in my sig, I'm shoving my ego down everyone's throat every time I post and sign. -Auron My Talk 01:38, 1 November 2006 (CST)
  • Section 1:When the simple 1-2-3-4-5 step directions suck ass, and people follow them and they fail
The directions do not suck ass. They are simple and easy to follow, but it's clear most guildwikians can't manage to follow them correctly. I believe you are trying to insult the build.
  • Section 2:Hundred Blades does little damage. Sun and Moon is another hundred blades, but without the mana cost. 4 hits, tops, doing about 30-40 damage (including conjure lightning) followed by the only "spike" in the build, which rarely finishes off an opponent with 200 HP left.
I want you to put your swordsmanship to 15 or 16 I then want you to build your adrenaline on the 100 or 80 Practice target then hit the Squishy target and then activate Frenzy, Shock, Hundred Blades, Sun and Moon Slash, then Final Thrust. If the target isn't dead or left with a silver of life, you seriously must be doing something wrong.
  • Section 3:You started insulting others' intelligence immediately after the negative votes started flowing.
    "The build is quite good, but since most of the people who voted didn't bother to read the usage section they couldn't use it properly and therefor they think it sucks."
I was trying to be nice! Don't make fun of me ;.;
  • Section 4:"The build is quite good, but since most of the people who voted didn't bother to read the usage section they couldn't use it properly and therefor they think it sucks." You assume way too much. If a build sucks, no matter how well they follow the "usage section," it will suck. That's the case with this build. I probably play warrior more than any other class in PvP, and you can be assured I read the usage section. It still sucks.
Just because you read the usage section doesn't mean you actually preformed it correctly or even at all, and from your review the former or latter may apply at this point.
  • Section 5:"Next (damn, I haven't had this much to talk about in a long time)"
I'm glad I've given you something to do in your boredom.
  • Section 6:Next (above),you removed the votes I added and put them in Archive 2. I see two major problems with that. One, you're trying to dodge the fact that 6 people have already said this build sucked ass by making their votes and voices invisible, shoved into an archive (you lied the first time you archived by claiming the skill balance update buffed the build. You didn't bother making up a lie the second time, you just archived).
(I believe the "testers" (at least the first few) were more tasteful(however, mostly misjudging) in their critism.)
Attempts to review the archives have failed since apparently "Guildwiki has a problem"(Duh, but which ones?) But I do believe I left a comment in the archive, check the history, if not I recall(somewhat) what I said and would be happy to repeat it...which I might as well do here and now, meh a summary will do(lucky you, no sarcasm)
"("used loosely)The buff to conjure lightning, the builds greatest strength(damage!) and weakness(Removal:() affects greatly(well pretty largely) of how well this build will preform, it is now half the recharge(30 sec, 60 sec duration) and a bunch of points more damage(which add up due to the nature of the build) means it's not going to hurt as bad if it gets removed and it's going to hurt the enemy worse then before. Also since the skillbar has been changed around, some of the votes don't apply (raptas "flurry is poo" vote) as well as the person who agreed with rapta and skulds original vote, while I asked him about his new one I haven't been able to check for an answer yet.
  • Section 7:" Two, you aren't trying to improve the build. If you were honestly concerned about this build, you'd improve it. But because you spend your effort making perfectly valid votes disappear, the build will *never* improve."
I did...took out both flurry and tiger's stance (tee hee) and replaced with rush and frenzy. I also haven't been able to get at it over the weekend and I do need to change the attributes around a bit, as well as make some minor changes. Although if changing skills, equipment, and attributes according to tester suggestions isn't "Improving" then alas, it's a wiki, knock yourself out.
  • Section 8:"Lastly, there is a clearcut line between pride and arrogance. If my guild won the world championships, or my alliance took over Cavalon, my sig wouldn't change. Would I have a blurb on my userpage? Most likely. That way, if anyone gave a shit, they'd go read about it. If I put it in my sig, I'm shoving my ego down everyone's throat every time I post and sign."
If you wanted to put a little something in your signature, I don't think three small words would be "shoving it(w/e that may be) down everyones throat" It's not as though I have -Onlyashadow THIS GUY PWNS YOUR FACE OFF YOU ANGELNUBCAKE 'CAUSE I'M IN THE TOP GUILDEZZ now I think that would be offensive, Top 100 Guild doesn't seem that bad at all. That would be like saying "Get that "My child is an honor student @ some school" bumper sticker off your car! It's so...arrogant! To think that I have to see that everytime I'm on the street behind you! Gaaaaaaaah!" Seriously if 3 words and one or two scenes of frustration tell you that I'm arrogant, get counciling.
I wait for your undoubtly slightly lengthier reply.-Onlyashadow, Top 100 Guild 09:36, 1 November 2006 (CST)
Simply because I was disgusted at you as a person, I stopped myself from responding a month ago. I felt that any response I'd give would be too hurtful, and made for the wrong reasons. So, I waited a month; didn't touch you, read your userpage, or the W/E build.

So here I am, a month later and with a much clearer head. I waded through your typo'd-to-death response (for example, the clever quip that I need "counciling," whatever that may be. Tried it in Dictionary.com and it told me you were trying to say "counseling." GG typo'ing your insults), and found nothing of import; basically, you re-insult the testers, you re-affirm that you think you're omniscient and the build can't possibly suck, and you show, yet again, your lack of understanding subtlety. Either way, the build remains unfavored (even after all of the vote-moving and unnecessary archiving and whatever other dirty/uncouth voting altercations that took place), my opinion if you hasn't changed (if anything, it's been re-affirmed by your responses to me and others), and I'd hoped we'd never have to interact again.
However... I noticed that you tried to steal credit for someone else's build. Being the open-minded person that I am, I waited for you to clear it all up (saying that it was a mistake, or possibly presenting evidence as to it being your build after all). But no, you blanked the question and insulted the user by doing so. After Jyro took the time to revert your dodging of a perfectly legitimate question, you re-reverted to blank it again. While I tried to believe that there was some mistake that you'd clear up, your shifty actions and non-response cause me to think otherwise. -Auron My Talk 12:35, 4 December 2006 (CST)

I don't have the time to read through all the junk above, but I've read a significant portion of it. My analysis (if either of you care) is that you both have "piss-poor attitudes", you're both being petty, and you both need to drop it.

Auron, it's a talk page, not part of the main userspace. Typos aren't going to be noticed by the majority of visitors. Not only that, it's a user page, meaning pretty much anything goes. Don't be so proud of yourself that you can type so perfectly; for all we know you're using a browser with a spellchecker. Not only that, but when your spelling skills start to degrade, you're gonna DIE. (Trust me, it's happening to me right now.)

Shadow, it looks from my end - and I've looked at the build pages and a couple of the archive pages, but not the history pages - like you need to learn to deal with the processes of the wiki better. Yes, we all hate unfavored votes that aren't appropriate (I can't TELL you how many times I've wanted to strike all the votes on some MM builds because it's "another mm? zomgwtfbbq we don't need more mms". BUT, you don't strike votes (you talk about it at the build vetting procedure discussion, which I've forgotten the link to right now), and you CERTAINLY don't remove an unfavored tag. NO EXCEPTIONS. That does more than tell people whether or not the build works, that changes the categories around. If someone like me is going through [:Category:Unfavored builds] looking for ways to improve them, I'm not going to find it, and the debate is going to keep going on and on and on.

Both of you: Calm down, even if you think you're calm. If you're going to debate something, for god's sake be mature, think before you type, and attack the argument, not the arguer. Seeing as I'm an atheist, that's a pretty serious comment there. All this is doing is causing tension on the wiki - I honestly can't see anything productive getting done. If the two of you have such serious problems interracting, maybe you should avoid each other.

And I only came on looking for where to cap Spoil Victor... --Armond Warblade Warrior(talk) 14:17, 26 December 2006 (CST)

Changing Builds[edit source]

Dude, don't be so fast to alter peoples builds. I put up [R/W Rampaging Thumper] and you changed one of the optionals to Bestial Mauling in 5 minutes. Few things on that. First of all, thats a terrible skill, and secondly, how about you let the build be judged for what it is before you start changing skills. Banito 14:55, 30 October 2006 (CST)

It's a stub you fucking moron.-Onlyashadow, Top 100 Guild 09:52, 2 November 2006 (CST)

Please watch your language, there's very little swearing on the GuildWiki and it's not appreciated. Using language such as your above two posts shows a marked lack of respect for your fellow contributors, you don't need to swear to get your points accross so please don't. Thanks. --Xasxas256 17:19, 2 November 2006 (CST)
I try not to swear on the guildwiki, and there have been instances where I've said it shouldn't be allowed and some admins told me it should(and is) allowed...the reply to banito was the result of a bad morning followed by an idiotic comment. Howerever I cannot find where it happened a second time, unless you mean me "quoting" Aurons message to me. I have a lack of respect for stubborn ignorant people, not fellow contributors.-67.80.155.17 03:53, 3 November 2006 (CST)
Odd that you haven't signed in...anyway as long as you're aware of it and make an effort, it's something that's worthwile doing because it makes contributing here a lot more pleasant for everyone. --Xasxas256 22:47, 3 November 2006 (CST)

Wiki Policy[edit source]

Please stop breaking GuildWiki policy towards other users and specifically our beliefs in the builds portal. If you continue to display the type of attitude that I've seen from you, I'm going to recommend you for banning. Note: I didn't say I was going to get you banned, and I'd like to see you stay here if your general attitude can improve. But, I definately don't approve of your harsh language and arrogant attitude towards other wikians simply because they don't agree with you. Bligerant vulgarity is in no way a method to win a conflict and will almost always result in you coming out with the short straw. Please just try and adjust your attitude and take more notes on accepting criticism positively and learning how to take that criticism and use it to your advantage in improving your articles/builds.

I really don't want to see you leave the wiki because I honestly think you're capable of wonderful contributions but please please please don't make me recommend you for a block. Thank you. — Jyro X Darkgrin.jpg 11:42, 19 November 2006 (CST)

Stealing other peopl build?[edit source]

At one point there was a ridiculous question here. R.I.P. Oddly enough, you broke *another* rule by deleting the perfectly valid question more than once. The question was "What the hell do you think youre doing? Under "Build you have made" you put my build Rt/N Feast of Creation, you are taking credit from other peoples work, thats really low!" Posted by User:Elizabeth Hoover.
Instead of answering this perfectly valid question, you removed it from your talk page. Can we say dodgy? I'd like to hear an answer to it. -Auron My Talk 12:12, 4 December 2006 (CST)

I don't think hes claiming credit for it ~.~ — Skuld 12:18, 4 December 2006 (CST)

Claiming credit for it or not, he's re-reverting other's reverts AND deleting other peoples' questions/posts. I'm pretty sure that's not allowed here at the GuildWiki. — Jyro X Darkgrin.jpg 12:57, 4 December 2006 (CST)
That would be true if it were on an article or build, or its associated talk page - but this is the talk page for his user space. He could blank it out entirely if he wanted. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 13:05, 4 December 2006 (CST)
I thought talk pages were treated just like article talk pages where all content needed to be preserved? — Jyro X Darkgrin.jpg 22:09, 4 December 2006 (CST)
Personally I'd like to see when users what to remove something from their talk page they archive it but that's just me. I've argued this point before and come off second best so I'll just reiterate that our official policy is that a user can do what they like with their user and discussion page (within reason, ie no porn, gold sellers) and this includes blanking a section. Selectively removing posts from a section might be frowned upon though but that's not what happened here. --Xasxas256 23:40, 4 December 2006 (CST)
Jyro X - that's true on article talk pages, not user talk pages. As long as he's not selectively editing the text to change the meaning of a post from another user, and abides by the other general guidelines mentioned by Xas, blanking by the specific user is acceptable in the User or User_talk spaces (but he can't blank other users talk pages).
Xas - I prefer archiving as well; but I can accept blanking in user-talk as the previously agreed-to practice. It's still retained in history, just harder to find. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 10:32, 5 December 2006 (CST)

[Build:R/W Rampaging Thumper][edit source]

User:Siberian struck out your unfavored vote. I don't want to change it back without consulting you first (as Siberian might be a friend in-game or something) but you seemed as taken-aback as I was. -Auron My Talk 23:37, 30 December 2006 (CST)

I reverted it, as it's always questionable when a vote is struck out by a third party, with no explaination in the talk or post summary. If you did indeed mean to have it struck out, please do so. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 23:38, 30 December 2006 (CST)

I'm back[edit source]

To anyone that cares or remembers me I'm back. And for anyone that wants to know, WoW turned out to be almost painfuly boring to play and I'm nevar going back. That is all.

Hah, wow. It sure has been awhile. I saw your name in recent changes, and thought "...can it be?" -Auron My Talk 04:15, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
Wb. Solus SOJsig.jpg 04:18, 9 April 2007 (CDT)

Is this really you?! From the good old days? :P -- Nova Neo-NovaSmall.jpg -- (contribs) 15:44, 28 June 2007 (CDT)

Things you hate[edit source]

you don't hate the horrible nerfage of necros, that continues to continue!?! *GASP* 76.19.223.231 15:17, 22 April 2007 (CDT)

Necros need more nerfing esp. in the hexes area.-Onlyashadow, Top 100 Guild 08:26, 23 April 2007 (CDT)