Guild Wars Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard/Archive 10

Well wishes for Linsey

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard#Well wishes for Linsey

Satanael: why not set up something in your own user space? You can let Linsey know about it through email (and let wikians know about it through pages like this).  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:24, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, setting something up in my own space just doesn't seem like it will get through, especially since she doesn't seem to have even responded in her own space since last year. Also, I don't think opening it up for a couple of days would really invite that much bullshit, since most people who don't pay attention won't notice it anyway. (Satanael | talk) 07:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Set it up in your feedback space; that way, if her page does open up, the page can be moved to a subpage of hers (no worries about legal issues). If not, then it still might have better visibility to the rest of the ANet staff than anywhere else on the wiki. (The best reason: you can start it now, without waiting for admins here to discuss/debate/decide.) Good luck.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 07:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see the current contents of Linsey's page moved to a locked temp page, and open up her talk page to new comments. I believe there would have to be more oversight however, to stop any discussion about Live Team issues that are no longer her responsibility. Putting this in someone else's userspace/feedback space, just doesn't make any sense. -- Wyn talk 21:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Wyn. — Raine Valen 22:47, 2 Aug 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. We have no sign that Linsey even bothers to read her talkpage anymore, or that she has any interest left on the wiki (as expected). Opening her page again would only fill it with extremely long discussions between players with no input from Linsey herself (again), and any sysop oversight in order to prevent such behavior would be a waste of time as Linsey is likely not going to read it anyway.

In other words, too little, too late. Linsey is gone, and I doubt she will be back. Erasculio 00:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Erasculio has a point. If we open up that page, there may be some well wishes, but I get the feeling it will be overrun by off-topic convos and trolling by day's end. There may be positive output, but it will probably be greatly outweighed by off-topic randomness. Her inactivity on the wiki is enough reason for me, but the above cements it. -- Wandering Traveler 01:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

"I believe there would have to be more oversight however, to stop any discussion about Live Team issues that are no longer her responsibility." What part of that wasn't clear? There should be no player discussion about Live Team issues that are no longer her responsibility. As for indication that she reads her wiki page? Well, just how do you know Eras? It's been locked for a long time. I'm sure she read it all, she simply didn't have time to respond, so, it stayed locked. I don't see any harm in unlocking it to allow players to offer their best wishes on her new position, and/or thanks for her efforts on the Live Team. I personally think she would really like that. Oh.. and if the community is really so stupid that your predictions come true, then it just gets locked again.. end of discussion. -- Wyn talk 03:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

But why should we devote time and resources to moving topics and policing the page just to lock it again in the end? You can e-mail Linsey if you want to wish her well. That is not the wiki's function. elix Omni 05:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Just a completely neutral comment: The lock status of the talk page says nothing about Linsey's activity. She is able to edit the page when it is locked too. poke | talk 20:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I didn't really want to create any undue drama with this suggestion, the idea is just to show our appreciation for Linsey, as a community. Taking considerations for abuse and utility are all fine and good when talking about more functional or permanent aspects of the wiki, but I'm talking about one subsection of a single talk page, to be opened up temporarily. Just open it up for a couple of days so we can say "congratulations, and thanks for all your hard work." This should not be a complicated decision, nor should it be controversial. It's a simple decision: are we a community that cares enough about the developers who dedicate their lives to giving our community purpose to provide them with a simple "thank you for your service", or aren't we? The fact that it's taken us over a week to even make this decision is absurd and, frankly, very disappointing. (Satanael | talk) 04:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I think we are a community smart enough to not talk to someone who's not there to listen at all. Erasculio 05:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

That's where you are wrong. Look at how her page has developed up to the point it was locked, twice. Look at Regina's page. She's not posted in a month, but users still go to her page, knowing she probably won't answer, and post anyway. Those desperate for attention will post there, regardless of any warnings. While the idea is good, there are simply too many who would use the opportunity to fill the page with questions that will not be answered.-- Pyron Sy 11:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

People gave up on Izzy eventually. Misery 12:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Just a note here. After speaking with Linsey, I believe this issue will probably be taken out of our hands (seeing as she has the ability to unlock the page), as she indicated that now that the wedding is past, and she's settling in to her new position, she has plans to deal with her talk page herself. So, I suggest we just table this discussion for the time being. -- Wyn talk 13:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. elix Omni 02:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Nope... Guess again. She basically just said her new 60 hr/week schedule begins anew! ...I take this to mean she's been shifted back to the Gw2 team for whatever they were going to use Phinney for. That means all this Gw1 talk might as well be opened and culled by the community b/c she won't be getting around to it. Most of it infact could be moved piece-by-piece to the various Update note pages each section pertains to... Wanna give that a try since it's all just mothballs now anyway? --ilr 16:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Raine Valen & User:Oneshot

Telling someone to shut up is not a personal attack.
Also, I don't see anything even remotely resembling a personal attack in Raine's vote? Unless you mean 'butthurt', but wtf? - Mini Me 19:36, 2 September, 2010 (UTC)

This is why people can't take you seriously. — Raine Valen 19:37, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)

+1 ShadowRunner 19:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

FFS scythe, why can't you just leave things alone? You "KNOW" that anything you say "stirs the pot". Knowing that, you still talk, which derails legitimate conversations and functions here at the wiki. Why can't you see that stopping completely and abstaining yourself from anything related to auron is not only good for the wiki, but also good for you? --Lania 19:45, 02 September 2010 (UTC)

This is only more proof that this wiki needs Auron. Guys, he's an attention whoring troll. And he's terrible at it. You should see his stuff on PvX. Just ignore him and don't give him the satisfaction. Karate Jesus 19:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

If the community consensus determines that Scythe is nothing more than a constant troll with nothing positive to offer to the wiki, then he should be perma-banned. --Lania 19:49, 02 September 2010 (UTC)

Then alert the community :/ Karate Jesus 19:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

i think we have established, KJ, that i am neither a dedicated troll (if i create drama the initial comment serves a legitimate purpose), and off-wiki actions dont belong here — Scythe 20:03, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)

As the first admin to respond on the noticeboard, I have given my judgment of the situation. I don't think much more needs to be said. --JonTheMon 20:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

i thought this was done too, came to the talk page to explain what i considered a personal attack, however i dont feel like being trolled & creating that much drama, so, yeah... this is dead now — Scythe 20:10, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Problem: Not enough people are on our bandwagon.

Solution: Threaten them with death or permanent exile. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Scythe

Really, how much longer are we going to have to deal with this? Karate Jesus 21:55, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

As long as Auron is an admin. --Master Briar 11:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Clearly you've got it wrong. The more Auron we've got, the less retards can stay around semi-trolling, provoke attention and cry like this whenever they realize how nobody likes them. -Cursed Angel 12:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand me. As long as Auron is in a position to ban people and delete pages there will always be people he pisses off. Its something he does rather well in case you haven't noticed. Not everyone he pisses off will just roll over and take it. There will always be someone opposing Auron, and doing it vehemently, as long as he is opposable. Same shit, different signature. --Master Briar 12:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I could count those very valueable members of the community on my hand. You, Scythe, Alice? Happens to be my top 3 list of respectable and important people. -Cursed Angel 12:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm so phased. Truly. Point stands. Oh and if you can count all of them on one hand your either very bad at counting or gifted with a very strange hand Because I can think of quite a few more than 5. --Master Briar 13:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

[1]&[2]. There are the logs for deleting and blocking. Tell me which of those actions you(or those "other people") are objecting to and I will take your accusations seriously. Otherwise I have to assume your problem with Auron has nothing to do with his ability to block and delete pages in which case you are either very poor at expressing yourself or just attempting to stir up drama. Misery 13:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Been done before. And I'm glad to see that you're taking this in a semi-serious tone. But the fact remains. As long as Auron remains in adminship, he will continue to do what he does best, piss people off. People will continue to fight back. It may not be me and it may not be scythe and it may not be alice and it may not be max and it may not be blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. But some one will always be pissed off at Auron and ranting about it. Bringing me back to my original point, as long as he is an admin. --Master Briar 13:27, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

As long as someone does his job, there will be people pissed off. End of story. - Reanimated X 13:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Briar, he asked a simple question. Link to Auron abusing his sysop tools (deletion or block log) or stfu. Karate Jesus 13:30, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

KJ, its a simple answer, been done before. So stfu. <3 --Master Briar 13:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Then link to it being done before, or it didn't happen. In any case, any events from before his previous reconfirmation are hardly relevant during this reconfirmation. At the moment people are claiming that he is only keeping his sysop rights because of a fan club, but it appears that the people who want him gone want him gone purely because they don't like him. Provide evidence to back up your claims or they will be ignored. Misery 13:37, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Briar, it hasn't. Not once. You know why the question keeps getting answered? Because the best you can come up with is some mundane shit. Dominator matrix attempted to answer once and the best he could come up with was me voting neutral on his RfA with the reasoning "meh." The best scythe can come up with is links to movie references as evidence that I'm racist (and this is without providing evidence that my supposed racism interferes with my sysop duties).

The question remains. More importantly, it remains unanswered. Every time evidence has been called for, anything provided has been laughable. So if by "it has been done before," you are trying to say "people have provided links to shit that doesn't matter," then yes, it has been done before. But if you are trying to sit here and say that people have provided a single solid case against my work as sysop, complete with links to back it up, then I will sit right here and call you a liar.

The ball, as always, is in your court. The problem your crowd has had so far is you don't know what the fuck to do with the ball now that you have it. -Auron 13:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry did you think I was playing this game? Let me clear that up for you, I'm not. I'm done with you and your game Auron. I saw a question that I had the answer to, I answered it. And they all lived happily ever after, the end. --Master Briar 13:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

An addendum to my previous statement, Its obvious what I think of auron both as a person and as a sysop. Anyone can figure that out. Its not hard. But I don't care anymore. Whether or not he's a good sysop is someone elses deal now, because its not mine. I don't care anymore. Take it up with someone else because it doesn't matter to me anymore. I'm going to contribute when I can. But as for this little feud between myself and Auron (indeed anyone on this site). Its over. done. End of story, goodnight folks, Tip your waitresses and have a safe drive home. --Master Briar 14:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok.....or you could just link something, like you were asked. You know instead of making grandiose/ridiculous speeches. Seriously, just linking your evidence would prove him wrong. That's all you have to do. Karate Jesus 14:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

But that would be contributing to a feud thats long since been done. Which I'm refusing to do. --Master Briar 14:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok.....I wasn't aware that 15 minutes was a long time, but whatever. If you get evidence, it would still be wise to present it. Otherwise you just look like you hate Auron, which is baseless for your accusations and really just makes you look like a dick. Karate Jesus 14:21, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) would you care to take this to my talk page or yours? this doesn't really seem to be the place for it. In response though, I'm perfectly aware that I'm a dick. In all actuality I'm quite comfortable with that fact. Think Perry Cox in the earlier seasons of Scrubs. And I'm pretty sure that by now, anyone who knows anything about me (on this site) is well aware that I dislike Auron with an intensity that could possibly border on hate, but that just seems like to strong a word for some one that I view in the way I view Auron. As for this ridiculousness about "All you have to do is link it". I'm not going to. Why? Because thats far to much effort for little to no results. I've provided all manner of evidence before. Be it links, Ban records, Deletion records, Emails, Every correspondence that I've ever found distasteful. And it got me...? Nowhere. So I'm done. Not happening. If your so intent on finding something however, I'm sure that if you check this pages archives and my subsequent ban records You'll find at least 1 or 2 discrepancies.--Master Briar 14:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Like I have said on Auron's RfR page, nobody is going to dig through 50+ pages of block logs to find something that might resemble abuse of power. And even if someone does, it is highly subjective so it is pointless. 82.217.189.101 15:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

It's amusing how you're saying "it's been done before", while being completely aware that everyone who's done it before have failed to provide any actual proof. Effectively making you look dumb, as usual with you. -Cursed Angel 16:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The reason people generally have trouble linking specific things is because nearly every one of Auron's contributions lies somewhere on the assy spectrum. People have become so desensitized to it that they no longer react, and when something is linked they simply say "So what? That's nothing unusual." elix Omni 23:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, Auron's behavior has been pretty much the same since before he was elected bcrat a long time ago. Even knowing this, people still elected him admin after that due to his performance as bureaucrat.

It's not a matter of people becoming desensitized, it's just that people elected him precisely because of his non-carebear/asshat-borderline behavior.--Fighterdoken 23:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I have to disagree. Auron failed two RfAs in a row, and the main objection was his behavior. His behavior certainly hasn't improved since then, so it must be another factor that led to his eventual success. And although I can't seem to find the successful RfA (archives 1 and 2 both failed, and archive 3 is a RfR), I suggest that the reason was simply that he stayed around for so long that people became accustomed to it. elix Omni 00:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't around for the first two RfAs. I've read a lot of walls of text, but I'm not willing to go back 3 years to see everything that might have annoyed people and I cannot offer an opinion about whether his behavior is improved. But, isn't that completely and utterly moot? Isn't the question asked by an RfR, "does this wiki still want/need someone like this as an admin?" And it's easier to judge because we can actually see how they moderate, not just guess based on how they behaved as a contributor. In fact, I didn't support his last RfA because, at the time, I didn't think that someone who was vulgar and rude — or who seemed to hate the game so much — that someone like that was likely to put that aside to be a fair moderator.

I'm pleased to be wrong, especially after reviewing his actual actions as an admin. In part, Auron is good at handling certain types of trolling b/c he doesn't care if it pisses people off. But, that would lead to disaster if it wasn't tempered by his genuine desire to protect the wiki and the community. Much as a teacher has to isolate the disruptive kids in a class so that everyone else can learn. I respect what he does for the wiki.

I still think Auron is vulgar and rude; I'm not accustomed to it. If I were a b'crat or admin here, I imagine I would suspend him for the times he crosses the line as a contributor. I can separate that out from his efforts as an admin, with which I can find little to fault...and much to commend. (As noted, I'm willing to admit I might have missed an important event or three; I'm willing to read more WoTs if people post links.)

I can also see why not everyone is willing to distinguish Auron-admin from Auron-user. (Then again, he's not the only admin who likes to bait others on the website, he's not the only one who is sometimes rude, he's not the only one who has crossed such a line.)  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Climbin' on ur noticeboard, reportin' yo people up

This is getting really, really old, really, really fast. Can someone, like, do something? — Raine Valen 0:22, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

If I were an sysop I'd perma-ban him, but I'm not, and I don't plan to be. --Lania 00:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

there are two things stopping me from banning him, im not an admin, for one, and two i'd be personally involved, so; yeah it belongs on the AN... — Scythe 0:48, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Raine means you, not me. 207.182.131.34 01:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

you'd ban yourself if you were an admin? brb supporting. -Auron 01:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

no, i'd take a break from the wiki tho — Scythe 2:07, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

How long would that break be? - Mini Me 08:43, 11 September, 2010 (UTC)

So you'd become an admin then leave? I don't see the sense there, but it's been absent as a whole lately anyway. ShadowRunner 09:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Someone just start an arbcomm already and let's get it over with. Karate Jesus 19:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AThe_Scythe_Has_Fallen - Tanetris 19:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Close enough. Karate Jesus 19:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

???

I think Adrin's comment wasn't preaching anything. But i do agree Auron blocking Silven for that is absurd... - J.P.Talk 11:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Because nobody cares. 83.163.190.111 22:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Because things here are so corrupt it makes government look like nuns. Ghosst • Talk •

Ryuu Desu

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard

Permaban. Gogo. Ryuu - Matters. ≡ 06:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Both of you can just cool it. You're not exactly innocent here, Zesbeer, but your response isn't appropriate either, Ryuu. Consider yourselves both warned. - Tanetris 06:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Or you could just permaban me for people obviously just trying to start trouble at any given opportunity where they might have a feasible case. Ryuu - Matters. ≡ 06:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Since your block log is totally blank, we'll call this an official warning. Watch it in the future, pls. — Raine Valen 6:57, 27 Nov 2010 (UTC)

Zes, seriously. You can't act the way you've been acting, then call NPA when your feelings get hurt. — Raine Valen 6:57, 27 Nov 2010 (UTC)

my feelings are beside the point ryuu violated the npa. also any way that i am acting is in the eye of the beholder.- Zesbeer 06:59, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

So, you're saying you don't feel personally attacked, but because your monitor suggests that perhaps you should feel personally attacked, your are thus personally attacked? Okay. Ryuu - Matters. ≡ 07:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) To expand on that, your block log isn't quite so flawless: you've apparently got a history of "disruption; asshattery" (as per your block log). We'll call this a (second? Third? Last!) official warning: please knock it off. Thanks. — Raine Valen 7:10, 27 Nov 2010 (UTC)

what dose that block have anything to do with this oh that's right nothing. +Auron was abusing power and that block was uncalled for.- Zesbeer 07:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

You are being disruptive and acting like an asshat. It seems very relevant, to me. So, again, knock it off. Thanks. — Raine Valen 7:21, 27 Nov 2010 (UTC)

how am i being disruptive? or a asshat? all i am doing is pointing out that they violated npa.- Zesbeer 07:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Shut the hell up. It's been dealt with. elix Omni 07:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

No. This kind of shit is why I opposed Raine, and this shows why I was right. Equal people means equal judgment. Just because Ryuu is Raine's buddy does not mean he is not my equal. Proper judgment means observing the violation and making a punishment based on that. Being impartial. I do not see anything like that here. Koda Kumi 11:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

i didnt even know raine was one and if i would have known she was requesting 2 months ago i would have opposed i also like that she put that up and got confirmed in about 9 days seems very short. didn't realize that is how it is ftl- Zesbeer 12:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

i know i cant speak for myself here, but, Comas? --Neil • 12:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

don't care.- Zesbeer 12:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, stop posting here unless you have something to add. Thanks! -Auron 13:00, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

wtb archive

i would do it my self but feel like someone would yell at me..- Zesbeer 09:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Isn't there some kinda policy about being bold? --BriarThe Spider 09:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

didnt mean this page meant the admin notice board....- Zesbeer 09:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Guess thats what I get for being bold eh? The humor in it is not lost on me. :D --BriarThe Spider 09:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. — Why 15:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Formal complaint

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard#Formal complaint

Borderline discussion, however, needs to be said, now that I can again. If you are unaware you are blocked because you sign on and see nothing, then are told you are blocked for trying to bypass one, how is that fair again? The first time I saw a block was when I supposedly tried to bypass it. Since I wasn't even aware of one, and I wasn't trying to bypass anything, I didn't look to see the adjusted date, which wasn't fairly in place anyway. Then the second time was the same thing, not aware of a block, and didn't try to bypass something I had no idea about. And yet, this time the block was extended yet again. (And before you try to get on me about *discussing*, also remember you need to do the same to Tanetris.)

You cannot e-mail someone (I will take your word for it about the b-crats) who is a regular level system admin (or lower) without an account, because the system will not let you. I tried. And if you sign in with an account that is blocked, no matter the ISP number used, then you are still blocked. As best I was able to tell, including requesting a review of an unfair block extention, if you cannot edit pages because of being blocked, then you are pretty much screwed. Unless, of course, you wish to take something that far as to involve a bureaucrat, which I didn't see the need to do, thinking that just talking to another admin of the same level would be able to resolve the problem. Either way, my complaint stands. 69.182.147.69 08:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I moved this to the talk page so it can be discussed properly. — Why 14:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Did you try logging in then using the email feature? Account blocks prevent page editing, but we only lock email privileges in cases where spam or abuse is likely. -Auron 15:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Salome?

→ moved from User talk:Salome

Can you check the page here: [[3]] is this guy one of you? If so could you ask him to not tell people "you just suck" based on a simple disagreement please? Rogueonion 14:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

My apologies I meant to mention his "warning like yours," at the bottom of the page in the above. Rogueonion 14:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Salome for your troubles I took this to another, no worries. Rogueonion 15:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

First of all, if you read the above segment, you would know Salome is not the right person to address this issue with at the moment. Second, I find it quite pathetic that you have to knock on a sysop's door when someone sees through your straw man fallacies. Learn to see that different people have different views, and that his view is not wrong and yours is right. Koda Kumi 20:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes ty for pointing that out Koda, it makes me respect you that little bit less to see how you approach this. if you notice my last post you will see where I said sorry for Salome's troubles and took it elsewhere. but that is ok because I stated my conversation was my opinion. but thats because Your attitude proves that we really do need another bout of voting. perhaps the entire sysop team should take a hit and instead of treating us with venom and rudeness. Be polite. I never said his view was wrong. Just stood by mine, and that of course makes me wrong in your eyes. It is ok. your attitude will eventually return to you 10fold from all sides. Rogueonion 21:27, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Two things - Koda isn't a sysop, and stop being a douche. It is a bannable offense. At the very least, if you're going to be a douche, be right about it; checking the list of sysops isn't very fucking hard. -Auron 22:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Isn't calling me a douche a personal attack? Thanks for proving my point for me. Rogueonion 22:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your point that Koda is a sysop? Funny, last time I checked, your name was supposed to be on the list of sysops if you were a sysop. Times change, I guess. -Auron 06:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Guys, I don't think Salome needs this right now. Auron, you know what personal attacks are, so don't make them (and then warn about bannable offences after). Rogue, not everyone is a sysop, so please make sure you inform yourself about who they are before you call for their removal: see GWW:ADMINS.

If you want to say anything more, please take it to another talk page. pling 15:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

You people should know better than to start petty arguments like this on a user page of someone who is clearly having a hard time to say rhe least, you should be ashamed of yourselves. In all my time lurking here I would not have expected you to do that kind of stuff Auron. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.203.109.183 (talk).

Dear IP, please heed your own advice. There was no reason to continue this conversation there. — Why 15:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) About the original argument, there's a list of sysops available on the admin noticeboard. And everyone, cut back on the passive aggressiveness please, I'm sure we can have reasonable debates without baiting flames. This applies to pretty much everyone in this section except Pling. — Why 15:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

And do not forget about the TPS report guys. I will have a memo sent right over. Thanks yea I would like to point out above where, I stated "Sorry for your Troubles Salome, I will take this elsewhere. I would have reverted the page but that would have gotten be banned. sorry for all of this ^ It was only my intention to learn a little bit more about the wiki froma sysop and request (which is stated in the wiki rules god I need to find the page...> help from a sysop if there is a problem. Thanks guys, RO. 108.75.73.62 03:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) OMFG, he really QQd about this? And here, of all places? Wow, this takes me back and tickles my soul. Nice hypocrisy, btw. Definitely comedic. Try not to whine about things you're not just as guilty of. Also, sorry to Salome and admins for expressing my amusement here of all places and now of all times. Teddy Dan, yo. 09:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

71.194.87.164

71.194.87.164 (talk • contribs • logs • block log) What is this wiki's stance on such numerous and pointless spams of article talk pages? Checking up on a new edit to a talk page – and finding such off-topic posts – is rather defeating, especially when I'm checking the pages to see if someone has a genuine comment/problem/concern. GWW:TALK states that obvious cases of spam can be removed, or should these topics just be moved to the troll's talk page? G R E E N E R 02:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

They should be discouraged but not really punished. The note you left on his talk page is fine. elix Omni 04:34, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to re-report this if they continue and I'll chime in on that talk page as well. — Why 14:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

'tis back. Almost feel sympathetic for him having such a narrow focus on the wiki. Then again, I can't get Humans off of my mind. G R E E N E R 05:42, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I used my one free ticket to undo the pointless edits. It's someone else's turn if they come back. Ghosst • Talk •

Old but embarrassing

Last February (2010), Asima daiyu (talk • contribs [deleted] • logs • block log • abuse filter log) edited Lunar Fortune/Drop rate so that the header for one of the drop rate tables was intended to be a pointer to a spam site. I caught this by accident when I created the table for this year's drop rates. This user only made one contribution using that ID, but they were not (apparently) blocked.

My concern is that a vandalistic edit managed to remain unnoticed and/or unchallenged for a year. Is there any easy way to find out, if...

• ...hat same person (under cover of a different ID) make any other edits?
• ...there are other edits like that one hidden in javascript elsewhere on the site?

See also: Whois info about the site

 — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Check user returned nothing of use that I could see. The second hidden link was just a copy/paste situation. I can find no other use of "onMouseOver" which may be harmful on the wiki. G R E E N E R 02:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Super. Thanks for checking. (Probably means we have a stellar team of sysops and vandal watchers ;-)  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 03:37, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Misery#I stumbled upon this today b/c raine wanted a story

Maybe I don't get it but I fail to see how this is pornographic. There are no pictures in the linked page and the content of the story it self is IMO rather mild as it lacks graphic anatomical details. I really don't see the harm in just leaving it, but I guess I'm kinda curious how it is inappropriate content for someone's user talk page? --Lania 22:24, 09 March 2011 (UTC)

^ Wow. What wiki are you on Lania? Sardaukar 22:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

GWW's policies and Anet's ToS and RoC clearly state that pornographic material and offensive content is prohibited. That said, there seems to be a very wide range of opinions on the wiki and world-wide as to what constitutes as pornographic and offensive material. I don't really care if they delete the link, and to be honest, it's probably the best thing to do to simply delete it. But I'm curious as to what line was crossed for that link to be a porno/offensive material on a user page. Using words like fuck which is offensive and considered vile by some people is allowed, but a story containing some sexual content is not. It really is kinda of a grey area IMO. I mean there is already an apparent split in opinions among the active users/sysops. Felix seems to think it's borderline, ie. a toss up. Why wants it deleted. While others like Raine and probably Misery is okay with it... and of course Tahiri and Dandy would want to keep it. --Lania 22:59, 09 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not shocked by the content or whatever, but people have been blocked for less. I don't think we (a wiki about a videogame) should sport such content, be it linked or actually on the servers. I'll just remove it since apparently Raine either doesn't care or doesn't read the noticeboard. — Why 23:11, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok. First, the story is pornographic. Pictures aren't required for something to be pornographic and a story that contains incest, rape and brutality is. And regardless of how people here feel about that, there’s simply the fact that it has no place on this wiki. This isn’t a wiki for amateur porn writing, and talk pages should be primarily for discussing how to further the purpose of this wiki which is to document the game.

It doesn’t help the situation when the link is on a sysop’s page and another sysop is contributing to the discussion and writing of the story. I find that more troubling then the story. Sardaukar 23:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

This seems similar to Mgrinshpon's stories; the main difference (which in my view is relatively insignificant) is that he posted the stories on GWW itself. His stuff was deleted and he was blocked. -- pling 23:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I hope you'll understand that all of my care is currently directed elsewhere. — Raine Valen 23:42, 9 Mar 2011 (UTC)

If you're referring to your recent 12h block and its aftermath, your first comment in the thread we're discussing here was yesterday. I would've appreciated if you had taken action then, rather than now. I don't have a strong opinion on what's going on on your talk page, but the fact that you didn't take action on Misery's talk page when you had the chance is disappointing to say the least. — Why 23:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

After checking some timestamps, it seems that you didn't express your potential disappointment until after said block; why you would have expected me to remove it, previously, I am not sure. — Raine Valen 0:05, 10 Mar 2011 (UTC)

Because you commented on the section three times before your block and before Felix put it on the noticeboard? -- pling 00:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes; that's what I'm saying: given that, why would one expect a sudden change in behavior? — Raine Valen 0:13, 10 Mar 2011 (UTC)

I don't expect a sudden change in behavior, I expect you to be a sysop, even when things aren't yet reported on the noticeboard. But I'll stop arguing, clearly our interpretation of the role differs. — Why 00:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Gtn

Regarding Gtn (talk • contribs • logs • block log) - I disagree with the block, explanation at User talk:Defiant Elements. DE's still semi-active, so I brought it up here too. It's not exactly an important or crucial matter, but blocks should be given out fairly whoever the target. -- pling 22:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

C'était un petit erreur. Gtn made a guild page where it shouldn't have been. I've created the guild (mirroring the alliance's format). DE can talk either here or with me about my removal of the block. G R E E N E R 22:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

yea i think his ban was kind of hasty and not really thought out it seemed that he was just confused and didn't know where to make his guild page. as wyn pointed out on his talk page.- Zesbeer 01:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Admins aren't always fair in their use of the ban. I've experienced that, first-hand. While I agree that it should be fair, it's simply impossible. Until each individual sysop is held accountable for unjust actions, there's no need to worry about consequences. A system supported by logic and truth rather than popularity and elitism. But... feeling threatened/challenged/opposed/whatever, most sysops will only bare fangs and mercilessly attack such an idea. So, unjust blocks will inevitably continue to occur without anybody willing to prevent them. Unless... Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Anyway, I agree that Gtn's block was "earned" probably by simple misunderstanding. When I first started, I almost accidentally turned the main page into my user page. It's a good thing I saw the "Show preview" button. To err is human, but bad habits should be fixed. Bad habits like reckless haste and unjust banning, for example. Teddy Dan 12:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Thread necromancy: -1 --JonTheMon 12:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Cool story. However, Relevance: +1. Let's not goad me into another unjust ban. After all, this is a talk page and my contribution was relevant on more than one count. Teddy Dan 13:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do not post here unless there is a need to discuss an issue further. This section has already been addressed. Poorly hiding another personal agenda in an unrelated topic both derails the original topic and creates general disruption.

If you wish to have your own pulpit, use your own user page (and please read GWW:NPA). Otherwise, use this page only when there is a topic which the admin need to be contacted about. G R E E N E R 15:22, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

People moving valid discussions,

→ moved from Admin Noticeboard

I would like you to look here and realize your "valid discussion" was misplaced. Be sure to read the whole thing before you reply. elix Omni 21:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like to report Felix for discussing here where there should be no discussions. I also would like to point out that Making the statement of fact that "Mesmer has received nothing other than buffs over the last year" hardly qualifies as a suggestion. 108.75.73.62 21:15, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I would also like to report Jonthemon for removing my comments from a page for no reason other than his personal wants. 108.75.73.62 21:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of how ridiculously petty this conversation is, it has become something of a problem lately, almost everything is getting moved, regardless of its validity, or the validity of the OP. --BriarThe Spider 21:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Validity is entirely immaterial. elix Omni 21:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I guess regarding a comment made on greeners page that I need to clarify, I am only reporting jon for removing a comment I made entirely from a page because of his personal disagreeance with that comment. He did not A. move the comment, he re-moved the comment entirely. A sysop should know better than to do such a thing. 108.75.73.62 21:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

When did Jon ever state anything to the contrary? elix Omni 21:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Somebody accused me of blaming jon fully for your actions as well as his own. He(jon) whether a sysop or not should not go around completely reverting a comment that he disagrees with. and You should not have moved a page that is not a suggestion but a discussion based upon a fact. 108.75.73.62 21:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Guild Wars Wiki talk:Feedback organization. Please read it before you keep arguing, because the entire wiki disagrees with you. elix Omni 21:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

How does the comment "mesmers have received nothing other than buffs for a year" create a suggestion? I do not see that. I am sorry you are wrong here. 108.75.73.62 21:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

if you bothered to read that huage wall of text it somewhere in there talks about how live team dev's talk pages get flooded with random comments. i think the move was thus such a case here.- Zesbeer 22:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

It also states in that wall of text that suggestions would be removed, I reiterate- nowhere in my conversation did I make a suggestion. 108.75.73.62 22:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Proof that Jon removed my comment entirely from a page: [[4]] 108.75.73.62 22:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

i am guessing you don't know how to read "flooded with random comments"- Zesbeer 22:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I am guessing that you guys are just on a power trip. I am asking that whomever moved/removed my comments are removed from sysop status or given some form of punishment for abuse of their sysop powers. 108.75.73.62 22:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Felix and Jon

(copied from notice board for context) I am asking that they be dealt with regarding the threat of blocking me for not breaking any rules, and removing my comment from a page for no reason. This is trolling from a sysop (I am not sure what felix is he says he is an "admin" whatever that is. I feel that if I have to follow the rules so also should they. They are censoring who can talk to the devs by moving conversations that are not suggestions off page. 108.75.73.62 23:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

→ moved from admin notice board

From my previous conversations with you, I am sure that you have no intent to be disruptive, but your posts are disrupting things nonetheless: your point has already been made elsewhere (although, of course, using different words) and it has been addressed (although perhaps not in the way in which you had hoped). Admins are always justified in reverting any attempt to end-run their decision removing the post in the first place.

Sysops are entitled, even required, to preemptively move disruptive posts from ANet staff talk pages. I was originally on the fence about the initial {{move}} today; the discussion above (particularly your own arguments) have changed my mind: I now believe that the decision to move your post was also justified.

tl;dr Jon and Felix are not censoring you; they are not trolling; they are following the appropriate rules/guidelines.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe you are wrong I respectfully disagree. No, I had not intended to be disruptive, however they are censoring people from talking with the devs. I think that a year is a long time and John Stumme may not be aware that every mesmer skill (included in updates for pve) has been a buff to mesmers and was noting that so that it could be looked at from a bigger perspective. Removing my comments is censoring by not allowing me to post. It is ok to disagree however the method to which they are removing comments from not only the devs pages but also proper feedback spaces is alarming to the extent that they indeed ARE censoring people from having a say. Nowhere did I make a suggestion and nowhere did I try to start an argument. They did so by censoring my attempt to be heard regarding the seemingly overly buffed mesmer and the seemingly overly nerfed everything else over the last year. It is what it is, and the wiki is the wrong place for Anet to be in discussion with us regarding anything to do with this game as the fans who are considered "sysops" will always censor those fans that they disagree with, that is human nature. Thanks anyway have a good day. 108.75.73.62 23:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

NO ONE "REMOVED" YOUR COMMENTS. THEY GOT MOVED.- Zesbeer 23:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Jonthemon removed a comment I made after the other conversation had been moved. 108.75.73.62 23:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Erm, no. He reverted your attempt to ignore the move. I am sorry that you equate this with censorship. Your idea has been put forward; it's not going to get any more attention from ANet than it already has.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:57, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I wish you could understand that I am not asking them to nerf anything, I was just attempting to point out that over the last year that have super buffed a class that did not need such super buffs, considering that everything else is receiving nerfs at the same time. Anyway I give you you go ahead and censor everyone who you disagree with I could care less, I do know however that anet is losing money because the common player cannot be heard do to the censorship of other players. 108.75.73.62 23:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So it would seem that this conversation has covered numerous pages, a few varied topics, and repeats itself a more than once. Since I don't want to go to all of these pages, I'm going to respond here and try to cut to the chase.

108, your point that mesmers never received the general back-swing from the buff/nerf pendulum is true. It's something that I hope the developers are aware of and have taken under consideration. If you feel that it's a topic they may have over-looked (or more likely a topic they should take a second look at), please bring it up on a feedback page. As Anet has pointed out on blogs, forums, official website and in interviews, iteration is one of their core philosophies. Good feedback is good business for them. Give back to a game you love on a topic you care about, and do so in the most effective method we as players have available.

The best I can offer you is the following: Create an account on the wiki. Come to my talk page again and let me know that it's you. I'll create your feedback page and help you set up the suggestion with the appropriate text and categories. G R E E N E R 03:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Spam bots

For the admin who haven't read up on wikimedia's vandalbot info, using this link is a great place to start. Just change the IP address/name in the URL to the contributor you wish, then click on the "rollbacks" to hide both their edits and your edit from the Recent Changes page.

For the other great wikier's that have helped so far tonight, while I'm around, I can do the rollbacks and stop much of the spam. Thanks! G R E E N E R 04:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

nice job trowing down the hammer...it seems like everything is getting hit hard with spam i mentioned portal2 on twitter and got 50 @zesbeer's from bots then today i see all this botting. its quite ftl- Zesbeer 05:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

No prob. Only 2.3 million IPs or so to block, then I'll get some rest. G R E E N E R 05:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Alright folks, my eyes have been closing for too lengthy of periods. I'm off for the night. G R E E N E R 07:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps not merely innapropriate...

... but this user may be just another vandal, only less of a bot. So far, its only contribution that I've seen has been a gif which seems to me to imply emphasis on the innuendo of the username. Teddy Dan 11:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I just saw a contribution from this user. The legitimacy of their existence as a wiki user is proven, only the potentially inappropriate nature of their name remains in question. Teddy Dan 13:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from discussing here! (read the rules)

so with the new Vector skin that text box for firefox 4+ appears behind the search and other stuff, dono if there is a fix for this maybe just have it show up lower on the screen?- Zesbeer 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm that it's a problem in FF4 and 5. -- Hong 13:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard#Personal attacks

I just wanted to follow up briefly on what TEF said and I thought as we're getting more into discussion that I would move over to the talk page here. The two IPs that I blocked were blocked solely for their comments in User talk:Nathe#Augury Rock and etc, not for anything they might have said/done in the section above it (User talk:Nathe#Well done!). As Jon had posted in the Well done! section, I didn't take anything in that section that the IPs might have said into consideration. I considered that section dealt with by Jon.

In my mind what the IPs posted was purely trolling, they were both trolling Nathe. In theory I could have blocked both Vili and Nathe for ignoring Jon's warning to let it go, but using my own personal judgment (you know what sysops/admins are supposed to use in addition to the wiki rules), I decided not to. I didn't block Vili as his comments seemed to me to be well thought out and with the possible exception of his post script, not confrontational in any way. I didn't block Nathe because I am loathe to block people for responding to comments on their own talk pages, unless they are violating some other rule. I hope that clears up any questions, but if not let me know and I'll do my best to answer them when I can. --Rainith 05:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)