Talk: Kingclyde

Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11

RE: KAGBot

Haha, no probs, I had completely forgotten about it myself. Thanks for getting it flagged, lets me get back to running the iw script on the wiki.

-=KAG=-^{YELL AT ME} 16:04, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sannse gave us bureaucrats the possibility to add bot rights now. I just gave Kristoffer's bot the requested rights. Jspoel 01:45, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

Cupcakes

I wondered what the false information for blocking Cupcakes was. Her saying she's married to Honkblargh? Jspoel 20:42, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

Talk page issue

Clyde, thanks for stepping in and handling the issues with the talk page vote. After closure, a better alternative has been suggested on the original forum page here that I believe takes into consideration all of the concerns from both sides of the issue. I have no problem with the implementation of this, and others opposed have weighed in positively also. I'd be interested in your view on the alternative. The Gunny 21:13, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

Patroller rights request

I would like to request Patroller rights if you see fit to grant them. Thank you, The Gunny 16:16, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

10,000 edits!

Congratulations on edit nr. 10,000! Have beer on me. As you always say: cheers! Jspoel 16:20, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Voting

I went ahead and just voted on both. :P I just posted the link in case you didn't know. ^Skål! 21:17, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

I already made a new thread, now we have two the same. And I may have forgotten to protect the old one, but I considered it closed with the poll time ended. Now it's confusing for everyone. I'll leave it up to you to work that out. Jspoel 21:20, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Now I see where it went wrong. Already thought I protected it, but it was the wrong forum thread with the general discussion, Forum:User talk pages. I meant to protect the old vote forum thread. Jspoel 21:28, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!

A present, just for you! 17:44, 4th March 2012 You have been given your very own eyebot. Your efforts and diligence have not gone unnoticed, and you have been given a small token of appreciation. To help keep an eye on all those who might oppose you! Skål!

I'm in a present giving mood. :3 ^Skål! 23:42, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Nemerian

Clyde, I implore you to go through at look at seem of them and see how unecessary they are. Some are simply changing words to homonyms. He has only performed one edit a day for months. We can presume, In fact, I am sure, that this is so he can obtain the badge for an editing streak.-- 00:22, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Ok then, I don't have a problem with his "editing" style so much as I have a problem with him coming on here once a night to make a bs edit for past months. What else would the reasoning behind that be? Have you looked through his edits? -- 04:11, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree. I mean, just look at these for a few examples: [1][2][3] Essentially, all of his edits are like those lately and it means he's only getting on once a day to make one edit to pretty much change or add in one word. He's either abusing the achievement system, or is unusually unambitious in his edits here. ^Skål! 04:17, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

I was under the impression that he was going for the x amount of edits in x amount of days achievements. This is supported by his message to Jspoel when one of said achievements didn't register for him and by the fact that he only missed one day after months and months of making the same small-time edits. (The 25th.) ^Skål! 05:37, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, I correct myself. I don't believe he has missed a day, as I bet any missing days in his contributions list aren't showing because edits he made on those days were reverted. ^Skål! 05:46, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

That makes more sense, I suppose. ^Skål! 05:50, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

The problem with your counter Clyde is that you're comparing two different types of boosting. His edits are outrageous. I just fixed one a minute ago, where he added a word in a quote that was never said! -- 05:42, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Partnership Wasteland wiki

Hey Clyde. What you think about this? Asking the Wasteland wiki for a more official status as a partner? At current they have a link below our sister sites (so we already have a long time relationship), but I was thinking to add their logo on our main page, so more high profiled. They have a game on the way and we're without a current one active. And it will be a while before a new Fallout game. We have a lot of visitors and seeing that logo will direct their attention to the Wasteland wiki. They can use the help and editors. Only 2 bureaucrats active by my knowledge there. And with them adding our logo on their wiki will promote us again. They will attract some attention anyway because of the revival of a classic game. What you think about it? Oh, and we also got a request for another partnership, you can read it on your former talkpage. Jspoel 14:40, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

I'll do the work on that then and ask the 2 newly appointed bureaucrats if they feel for a partnership! Jspoel 23:12, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Forum

Look now. It was a lesson, nothing more. Φύλαξ ^{[~μίλησε μου~]} 23:04, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

The entire thing was extremely thought-through, and I was not able to tell that from what you said. However, I can see the issue, and I'll go and change that. Φύλαξ ^{[~μίλησε μου~]} 23:22, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

I beg to differ in closing that thread. I won't have my very hardfought bureaucrat position put up for grabs by a vote set up by an admin, even if it was a tester for us all. And now looks what he's done, an argument between you and me. Jspoel 23:35, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Fallen Rock Cave

My apologies, I read that as hollowed out log. I didn't even realize there were any hollowed out rocks in HH. Never came across any in my multiple play-throughs. ^Skål! 06:02, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

My tolerance is running thin old friend

Right, first things first. You do realise that calling someone a dick is a dick move in itself, you might want to read up on the link you posted me yourself. And what is with all the bolding, what do you think I am, a 5 years old. If you want an adult child conversation, I am more than happy to provide you with one.

With that aside, if the topic is moved you might want to have put a comment at the bottom as to where it was moved to. It is a bit confusing when people keeping opening topics on the same subject all over the place (Hell, we have 2 votes on the same subject as is), instead of continuing it on the one place. The fact that people still wish to continue the topic for discussion by opening new topics, pretty much shows that it has not been fully discussed. I will admit I did not notice that it was closed, something that is happening an alarming amount of times as of late.

Now for the comments and you calling me a liar, "calls for just implementing rules as certain people see fit" = "I'm even half tempted to implement the rule without a vote." By J does not ring hollow. "Certain people are just trying to subvert the whole process to get things the way they want it, pushing throw change at any cost, it is like a load of mini dictators running the insane asylum", nice way to take it out of context. You forget to post the parts above above people calling to bend/ignore the guidelines and policies of the wiki. This is the very definition of the word subvert - "Undermine the power and authority of (an established system or institution)." So the fact that people have said that the rule should just be implemented without a vote, or bending the rules for the whole voting process is undermining an already established system and the core principles of said system for implementing new policies. So if you're going to call me a liar for that, then I shall take that as a direct insult towards me, as the evidence is right there to be read. The thing that gets me, is how can such people sit there and choice or discuss when to follow the rules and when not to, yet expect others to follow them at all times. That to me is the very core of the meaning dictatorship (third definition), when the leadership of the wiki are unrestricted by the very polices they govern and enforce on others. It is as if those with any kind of authority here think they are above the rules and policies of this wiki, which is not the case. Admins etc. are not above the rules in there own actions, as evident by User:AreYouGoingToEatThatNuke?. You may very well be disappointed in me, but at present I am very disappoint with a lot of people. If I have to be a dick to do what is right for the community (and not just the admins etc.) then I shall be a dick, because I am not going to stop doing what is the best for the community. You can write this off as slander and the assumption of bad faith, you can drop the ban hammer. But that doesn't stop the facts of the matter from existing or the truth of the matter being a real issue. Bury your head in the sand if you so wish, but the issues will still be there to be dealt with.

If you want this place to be a dictatorship, then that is far enough, but don't for one second ever pretend it is any but that. There is a fine line that is being walked at the moment, sooner or later it has to be dealt with. 13:33, March 7, 2012 (UTC)