User:AnticDevices/BuildWipe

Build Wipe
I'm against it.

Part of the reason is that it's annoying. Instead of one-stop shopping for Build inspiration, I'll have to hunt around on User pages to find them. If that's too much work then I probably won't bother. The problem is that I like looking at favored, unfavored, tested, untested, PvP, PvE, farming, running - oh the whole gamut of builds. I look for ideas. I look for new ideas. Sometimes I don't know what I'm looking for until I find it. With builds now being scattered across the wiki, I foresee build-browsing to become a thing of the past. If you don't know what you're looking for, odds are you won't find it. This is the absolute opposite of user-friendliness.

Another reason I'm against the wipe is because it's reactionary. The Build-vetting process isn't perfect. Ok. Granted. And the rest of the Wiki is? I mean, what's the standard of perfection we're shooting for here? Oh never mind, that's getting off-point. My point is that the motivation for the Build Wipe is an effort to force the development of a policy that's better than the current one. And that sort of behavior really is pretty much the definition of reactionary. "Look kids! You get no dressers or closets until you figure out how to put away your clothes properly!" Uh-huh. Seriously, it makes no sense. It's a not-very-subtle way of permanently discouraging the publishing of any builds on GuildWiki. While we have no Build page here, we're going to find another place to develop, share & publish builds. Once we find that place, what, exactly, is our incentive to come back here and implement a new Build section? You guessed it, zero.

In my view the Build Wipe is a left-handed and cowardly way of saying, "Look. No more builds here.  Buh-bye.  It's been fun having you noisy kids, but it's time for you to go.  Daddy's got a headache." I would have had more respect for it if the Admins had been up-front about not feeling like maintaining the section any more. The whole, "oh, you simply have to guess the double-secret more perfect-er Build-vetting policy and we'll be happy to put the Builds section back up" thing is really not the standard of maturity I was hoping for.

Ha! I'm looking for maturity on the internet. God, I'm an idiot. But my point is that complaining that people were being immature with the whole Build-voting, and then taking the ball away and letting no one play with it reminds me of the pot saying, oh kettle, thou art black.

Email to Tanaric
I emailed the following letter to Tanaric - or at least to the email address on that user page.

-- Tanaric,

I wanted to drop you a brief note and respectfully register my dissent with the build wipe policy.

My reasons are entirely selfish: I like the Builds section; I use it;  I don’t have any problem with it.

Do I think that it is perfect? Oh no. Honestly, I wish unfavored builds weren’t deleted. Other than that, I’m sure that there are improvements that could be made, but I don’t know what they are.

Do I think my argument is strong? No. It’s a hard argument to make. I’m a causual user. I am not a significant contributor. I’m a light consumer. I like to think that I’m very much like most of the 30k+ unique visitors to the site. I browse guildwiki primarily for skills, missions and builds. It was the well-organized build section that brought me back. Other sites have skill descriptions and mission walk-throughs. One-stop shopping for all of my GW needs is what I come to guildwiki for. Now at least a third (and honestly closer to 60-80%) of the reason visit guildwiki will be missing.

The thing I liked about the Builds section, as it was, *was* the arguing. Frequently it was passionate, but usually reasonably intelligent. I learned a lot from it.

I kind of feeling like I’m arguing with a developer. There’s this park I like. The build wipe proponents are the developers. They’re going to bulldoze the park and put up a parking garage. “I like the park,” I say “and I don’t drive.” “Oh some time soon we’ll build you a new park.” “When?” “Can’t say. Soon, hopefully.” “Hopefully?” “Yeah.” “‘Hopefully’ doesn’t sound good.” “Oh stop being pessimistic. You’ll like the new park.” “Will it be like the old park?” “No.” “But I liked the old park.” “The new one will be better.” “How?” “Don’t know yet.” “But I liked the old park just fine.” “Some people didn’t. They thought it was nasty.” sigh. What can I say to that?

Sorry Tanaric. I simply don’t see why I should loose the utility of the current build section because other people don’t like it. They are gettting at least some of what they want, and I’m getting none.

I hope you can at least appreciate why I find a policy that reduces collaboration on explictly game-related material to be disappointing. Yes, I can collaborate on policies. Look, I can only play for around 8-10 hours a week. I’m not going to collaborate on policies, my play-time is too limited. I’ll be happy to try new builds in-game, but writing policies just isn’t gonna happen. Yes, I’ll go to other sites for builds. Yes, I’ll poke around userpages for builds. Eventually I’ll find another place where I can efficiently browse a large number of builds. It may even be here. But until then…. The build wipe policy is costing me time I could be playing because I’m searching for builds; It’s costing me the potential fun of playing a build because I couldn’t find it. What is the cost to the people who are in favor? I don’t see it.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, Patrick (aka AnticDevices) -

If you're so smart, why don't you contribute something useful rather than whining?
Bleh. Good point. I'll think about it.