User talk:Gildan Bladeborn

I'm going to save whoever feels compelled to post something here the trouble of creating the page by starting it myself. Don't say I never did nothing for ya. - Gildan Bladeborn

GILDAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Shade Griffin 18:29, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
 * ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hmm, now I wonder if Ulf has a page. -Gildan Bladeborn 03:27, 27 April 2007 (CDT)

Where did you get the SNOB userbar?
Where did u get the snob user bar, gilly?
 * I stole it! Ha ha, actually I took the EMHW one from Bladh's page and just changed the text.  Just like I did with the one about Mystic Regeneration. -Gildan Bladeborn 22:42, 6 June 2007 (CDT)

Bows
You should probably discussed that topic on the pvp reward page instead of spreading the discussion everywhere.&mdash; ├ A ratak ┤  12:29, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
 * I did that as well actually. I created the original discussion pages before realizing the problem was on multiple pages related to that topic.  Once we confirm what skin those rewards should be linking to I highly suggest deleting those pages as they serve no useful purpose (since the items "sharing" the same skin aren't). -Gildan Bladeborn 12:52, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

show preview
Use the show preview button please, your spamming recent changes. -- Xeon 14:08, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
 * The problem was I used the Edit option on a subsection, before realizing I could fix similar problems article wide. That said, there's an awful lot of PvP rewards to glance over all at once, and which ones are broken isn't readily apparent just glancing at the code.  I do make an effort to get as many things finished as possible before saving changes. -Gildan Bladeborn 14:28, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Dont mind me :p, im just warning people that are unaware of the fact that changes made are recorded in the recent changes and mass editing of one article really makes the recent change list very ugly. -- Xeon 14:31, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Hopefully the article is less ugly now. -Gildan Bladeborn 14:35, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

I just soo happened
To be loooking at newly edited pages and yours was there.
 * And who is this pray tell? You weren't logged in, so even if you had signed this I'd still ask, heh. -Gildan Bladeborn 23:26, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I was bored, so I poked around my history and went tracking user contributions. Lo and behold, none other then Shade Griffon wrote this.  Remember to log in more often Shade, ha ha. -Gildan Bladeborn 18:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

About the c4 removal
you compared all those articles to the current ingame content before you removed the tag? -- Xeon 12:59, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes I did. Nothing I found conflicted with the state of the game after release, though some could certainly use more information/better formatting.  But that's another matter altogether. -Gildan Bladeborn 13:40, 9 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Ok, thank you. -- Xeon 00:47, 10 September 2007 (CDT)

Why my friend Sanarl needs new armor

 * Old and busted vs New hotness



Wikia move and the resulting hysterics
Mein got im himmel! I realize we live in a highly litigious society, but the furor over selling the www.guildwiki.org domain name is unreal! I'm not an especially prolific contributor to this wiki, mostly minor edits or corrections here and there, comments on discussion pages, things of that nature. I'm glad that's the case because it seems the "community" consists mainly of vengeful, petty, vindictive, and vitriolic people I would prefer to never meet in real life. We contribute here because we love information, and want an accurate source to find it. It didn't cost me anything to use it, so why on earth would I even CARE about how my "contributions" are licensed? I made them for free in my spare time, because it's way easier to keep this wiki accurate then to create my own knowledge base.

Perhaps if I'd donated money to help pay the initial operation costs I'd feel differently, but I rather doubt that would be the case even then. Donations aren't investments, making them for any other reason then the knowledge that you were instrumental in keeping a site afloat strikes me as entirely the wrong spirit. But for everyone else who's never once contributed money towards this site's operation costs, what on earth are you complaining about? Do you even read the details before accusing guildwiki of selling out and pulling the "take my ball and go home" routine?


 * Fact: You pay nothing to use this site.
 * Fact: You contributed towards the site in the knowledge that you will never be compensated for those contributions, apart from the satisfaction you personally derive from doing so.
 * Fact: In terms of actual impact to the users, information, and purpose of this wiki, the move has no impact on you whatsoever.
 * Conclusion(?!): Somebody selling the use of a site name and thus the potential ad revenues (which you weren't getting to start with) is bad, rawr! Death to capitalism, corporations are evil, everything should like totally be free man, you know?

I literally have to stop reading the discussion page on the subject because almost everyone writing on it comes across exactly like annoying college hippies or indie-rock fans (whichever you find more annoying). It's the same bloody site either way! Information doesn't somehow become less valid if the company hosting it changes! If you're going to do work for free, knowing from the outset that it's for free, then why on earth should you care if somebody makes money in part because of work you did for free? Nobody is stealing your "intellectual property" (I hate that phrase so much, modern copyright laws are so far from the original intent it's literally painful) and passing it off as their own here. It's the same information, at the same site name, with the same people!

I realize this is the internet, where reasoned discourse, civility, and other social niceties are for the most part AWOL. That doesn't make the vicious infighting and self righteous moralizing any easier to swallow. Reading the discussion page for the Wikia move as a first time user would be enough to convince me that I never want to be a part of this "community". As a long time minor contributor it's practically enough to kill my desire to work on this site. It's ugly, not at all praiseworthy, and something I earnestly wish I could strike from my mind. If this is really the community people are concerned about preserving, why even bother?

I suppose it's a good thing I don't actually feel any sense of community with the other members of this site then. Leave if you want to, you won't be missed. I'm staying here in spite of the "community", not because of it. Messed up politics are something I'm exceedingly grateful can be entirely ignored: In the end information is king. My devotion to that thankfully outweighs my revulsion for it's other gatekeepers. -Gildan Bladeborn 12:27, 20 September 2007 (CDT)

Wow, A Lot of Cartographer Titles!
Somebody likes mapping! Nice job ^ ^ --Ctran 16:39, 21 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Thanks, it's kind of my obsession. -Gildan Bladeborn 18:24, 21 September 2007 (CDT)

Armor
It just occurred to me that none of your characters wear Obsidian Armor, guess you've got nice taste. -- 21:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice of you to point that out. Obsidian is ugly ugly stuff that I've long ago deemed a complete waste of time and effort.  I do like the obsidian Ritualist armor though, it's the exception to the rule apparently. -Gildan Bladeborn 22:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the only worthwhile obsidian is Ritalist. Still, I think the worst part about obsidian armors is that you see them too often, it's possibly more common then regular elite armor. --[[Image:OrgXSignature.jpg]] 22:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

English scholar
my name new for joo, lol j/k you catch the smallest mistakes though. <--that's your reward. :D Lost-Blue 16:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ha ha, that just made my day. I was actually just looking through the recent changes and noticed somebody else was updating unique item pages with skin descriptions in the template, and that got me noticing inconsistencies among the various unique item pages.  So now I'm just looking at all of them, huzzah. -Gildan Bladeborn 17:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * lol thx, i did it first then Entrenea or w/e spelling (sorry dude or dudet) started doing it I did almost all foci so like good job anyways xD im so spastic today last night was crazy, lol dont ask dont tell. Lost-Blue 17:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:I eat skin.jpg]] Lost-Blue 17:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Greens
The wiki appreciates the help in the crusade, but when you edit the template to add the skin info, could you please remove the old notes that say "uses the X skin dyed X?" Thanks. --Macros 16:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, hadn't actually thought of that, I was mostly looking for info that was missing as I glanced through them. I shall add that step to my process, though I must say having those notes saved me an awful lot of research.  Way easier to determine what skin and dye something is if some helpful person added a note telling me that, heh. -Gildan Bladeborn 16:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No doubt the notes are useful, but a little redundant once it's added to the template. :) --Macros 16:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I feel a bit better having noticed I wasn't the only one overlooking that step. Anyhow, all unique item pages should now have a skin listed, and no more redundant descriptions. -Gildan Bladeborn 18:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)