User talk:DKS012616

build
seeing that u have a ranger, can you post me some builds concentrating on pets. Grishnakh7 08:15, 14 January 2007 (CST)

Paragon
Just noticed your paragon has the same armor and hair as mi mine :D(cept for dye color, which is similar)--Blade (talk|contribs) 17:44, 30 January 2007 (CST)

You're a Ranger fan?
Check out The Ranger's Beacon 2. Give me a ping in game too if you're ever looking to chill with another Ranger fan. Swap strategies//builds and what not. Crenel 02:52, 27 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Reikai's retired now :/  A few weeks ago he finally threw in the towel after a few months of limited activity. Arashi's also thought about quitting a few times now, and he's been inactive as of late. So it's up to Selena, Ric, and me to run the place. Oh well, we've got a successful International guild in-game now. I'm the leader, so if you ever feel the need to play around with about 17 other rangers, give me a ring in-game. Crenel 16:35, 27 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Yeah, I knew Reikai had retired, didn't know Arashi was thinking about it too though. Ahh well, as long as everyone doesn't retire the site shall go on, hehe. DKS01 16:53, 27 March 2007 (CDT)

Thanks!
Just wanted to say thanks for the vote of confidence. --Armond Warblade (talk) 00:45, 17 April 2007 (CDT)

Sorry man
just thought the template for your characters was cool and was going to add the same to mine, so I unconsiously started puting in my own information before I forgot that it was still on your page. Sorry, didn't mean any harm.--Angelus 17:30, 2 May 2007 (CDT)

Talus Shute Discussion
I'm trying to clear up the difference we seem to have regarding the pop-ups in Talus Chute. First and foremost I have the quest Seeking the Seer active which may or not affect spawns. I re-vanquished the area on another char specifically looking for pop-ups. Only location I found (in both runs) was just south of Camp Rankor. If you still believe there are other pop-up locations could you plz describe the specific location? There is a slim chance i just have never triggered them and dont even know they are there. Rcollins779x 21:34, 21 May 2007 (CDT)

See thats why we are confused, because Talus Chute only exits to Camp Rankor, Droknar's Forge, Ice Caves of Sorrow and Icedome. Maybe instead of Grenth's Footprint you meant Icedome?? Rcollins779x 00:07, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

GW:NPA
This is a warning. Posts like this one are not acceptable, even in response to sarcasm. - Auron 02:20, 16 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Guy was an asshole, I called him on it. Wasn't worried about if my response was "acceptable" or not. DKS01 02:52, 16 June 2007 (CDT)
 * I didn't say you were wrong, I said you violated NPA. - Auron 02:54, 16 June 2007 (CDT)
 * LOL, that line alone made it all worthwhile. In that case, I'll be good then. DKS01 03:21, 16 June 2007 (CDT)
 * i like that you speak your mind and NPA really stands for BS... more power to you bud!--Schlumpy 06:57, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Puzzle Pirates
FTW. Though I only play for Poker and spades. :D

Builds Wipe
Just now, I read with interest your archived posts on the topic. You raise a lot of points I am sure I would have raised at the time (I wasn't playing GW then), and it is very enlightening to read all of that with proper hindsight. Has your position on the builds wipe changed much since then? --◄mendel► 15:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Attitude
When I asked you to please lose the attitude, I wasn't really asking. Being bad at GW isn't a bannable offense, but being an ass on wiki is. You are welcome to express your opinions, but if you can't do it in a manner that isn't overly aggressive/assholish then you won't be able to post them at all. Given that there is a similar discussion 3 sections up, you really ought to know what I'm talking about. -- Shadowcrest  13:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh QQ more please. I really don't care what you do, I'm not gonna post differently because some oversensitive kid got their feelings hurt. Oh and hey, I didn't actually make any personal attacks, so no, I actually didn't violate any rules, so, bite me :D DKS01 19:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I repeat, being an ass on wiki is a bannable offense. You don't need to make personal attacks in order to be blocked- see trolling and asshattery for more information. Also, the meaning of the above message was not "please change how you post," it was "if you don't change how you post, you will be banned." -- Shadowcrest  14:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome, 1 wikipedia link that is...totally irrelevant, and another that has nothing to do with Gwiki, skilled linkage there dude, very impressive. There has been no trolling, and since when has "being an ass" become a bannable offense as long as I'm not making personal attacks? And frankly, if being an "asshat" IS a bannable offense, why the hell are you and half the other admins still here? FFS dude, quit crying about my posts(especially in my userpage), and get a fucking hobby already, preferably one that doesn't involve me. I mean, it's kinda cute that you have this interest in annoying me, but you're really getting boring with it now, and while the "I can ban you!" e-peen flexing may impress some people, I'm really not one of them, so just do it or give it a rest already. Since you didn't seem to grasp this the first time, I'm NOT GOING TO POST DIFFERENTLY, I'll post what's on my mind, and if you go and tear up over it again, so be it. If one of my posts hurts your feelings and you ban me for it, I really don't CARE, I sorta thought I spelled that out in my last reply, but I guess it didn't sink in. You see, I don't post here that often and don't even play GW that much anymore either, so it's not like it's some huge disaster or anything to get blocked(nor is it like bans are all that hard to get around anyways if I felt some dire need to post something). So yeah, I got that you weren't asking me to change how I post, you were TELLING me to change how I post. I in turn said I didn't care what you were telling me, I would continue to post as I see fit. So hey, feel free to closely watch my edits, monitor my replies, and if you get really lucky, you just might get a chance to whip that e-peen out, ban me, and at least for a brief moment, feel like you have some real power. DKS01 23:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "I'll post what's on my mind" -- just a tad less aggressively, please, and if Shadowcrest would do the same we'd get the same place with less effort drama for all involved. DKS01, you need to decide whether you want to come across as an asshole making a point, or a reasonable person making a point, that's all. :) It's all about style, about how to package your content. You never answered my question one section up. -- ◄mendel► 00:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, I already said I'm not changing how I post. If someone warrants an asshole comment, that's what I'm gonna give em. I've been warned before(see a couple sections up) and I've been banned before, I really, honestly, don't care. I'd rather be honest and speak how I feel and get banned for it than change how I post cause some whiny chump gets all butthurt over it. And to answer your question above no, my opinion on it hasn't changed, but apparently GWiki's did since they ended up adopting PvX anyways. DKS01 11:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, referring to Shadowcrest as "some whiny chump gets all butthurt over it" is asking for it, so I'll just comply with your request and give you a 3 day block for GW:NPA. :) -- ◄mendel► 16:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You forgot me calling him a tool, joker, clown, and asshat. I thought I'd called him a douche too, but reading back it seems I'd forgotten to mention it. Guess I'll save that one for next time. Anyways, you shoulda let him do it, give him a chance to feel big for a change. DKS01 08:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That's exactly why I didn't "let him do it"; you got blocked because you chose to behave like an asshole, hence treated as one; you did not get banned because a "tin-plated dictator with delusions of godhood" (OBloodyHell) needed to stretch his e-peen. I like for our admins to not be the ones issueing the block when they've been attacked, for precisely that reason. -- ◄mendel► 14:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes it's a bannable offense. Also, that WOT may count as a personal attack. "get a fucking hobby already". I'm not going to get into this, as I havn't seen the edit in question, but you both need to cool down, or this will go into a souting match, etc. From your contribs you don't seem angry or rude. Random Time  00:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that part pretty much WAS a personal attack. It'd be annoying enough if he'd just responded to me in the article that had him crying in the first place, but then this clown comes to my page all flexing his e-peen and "telling" me what to do like I'm supposed to be scared of him or something? Sure, in my contribs I post reasonably when it's warranted, but when someone acts like a tool that's how I treat them. And frankly, I wasn't even that bad in the response that this joker came to my page to harass me about to begin with so I don't even know what his deal is. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by DKS01 (contribs) 11:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC).

Builds Wipe and PvX
Quote: ''And to answer your question above no, my opinion on it hasn't changed, but apparently GWiki's did since they ended up adopting PvX anyways. DKS01 11:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)''
 * Gwiki never adopted PvX. Wikia did; We are a part of Wikia, not Wikia itself. Just an FYI. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  14:53, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well whatever, still a link to it on GWiki frontpage, describing it as a "Guildwiki fork", so sounds like an adoption to me anyway. DKS01 08:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed. A fork. It actually started here, but at some point the Gwiki community decided to stop hosting builds. The PvX community split off (forked) to create a separate wiki.
 * If PvX started independantly (i.e. if Gwiki never hosted builds), it wouldn't be a fork. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  10:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, so we're saying, they came from here to begin with, and we link to them on our frontpage, clearly not opposed to them or opposed to...supporting builds, even though we don't list them here directly. So yeah, still sounds like adopting em to me. DKS01 13:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The left us.
 * Then we joined Wikia.
 * Then they joined Wikia.
 * So, no, we didn't do anything to adopt them, in any way. Wikia sites often link to others regarding the same topic, we're a site about Guild Wars on Wikia... so are they.
 * You might, and of course are entitled to, think that we adoped them. That just makes you wrong. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 14:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And the fact that we've linked to and endorsed them prior to Wikia's involvement with either site factors into your point about how we link to them because of Wikia...how, exactly? Other than negating it, I mean. DKS01 04:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * AFKwn, Wikia doesn't come into it. The link to PvXwiki has been on our mainpage for [ two years] now, or in other terms, 3 weeks after the builds wipe, or a good month after PvXwiki was created. I read DKS01's point to be that this is a sign that GuildWiki has always thought the builds were useful. Thus it was a bad idea to wipe them in the first place? -- ◄mendel► 14:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it was a good idea, and still is. The build section was like a cancer taking over the wiki. There was no good way to manage them (voting took place on the talkpage, by simply adding your name), tons of people were banned because they could not reply in a civil manner when someone criticized their build, and the admins could not keep up with the sheer amount of new builds, trolling, and personal attacks, and manage the rest of the wiki at the same time. It literally required a new wiki to fix these problems. A place for documenting builds is indeed useful, but it didn't work when it was hosted here. --Macros 15:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

(Resetting indent as I'm getting lost) It factors in as you were talking about us "adopting" them, so I saw no reason to go further than that. I thought you were talking about when they moved to Wikia. Viper's messages led me to that, and your responses to him did nothing to disillusion me of the idea. If that's not it, please tell me when (timewise) we "adopted" them, and I'll prepare a more appropriate response - sorry if my last one was ineffective. Mendel, I thought that we would pretty much *have to* now, no? That's what I was thinking of at the time. I never said it was a new feature, but I've no idea when, or indeed what, DKS01 is talking 'bout atm A F K When Needed 10:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We "adopted" them when we started LINKING TO THEM ON OUR FRONT PAGE AND OPENLY SUPPORTING THEM. They branched off because GWiki didn't support a builds listing and had no interest in supporting one, then a few weeks later, we link to the one that left here and begin...openly supporting them. And BTW, there's been like nothing in this discussion, OTHER than your comments, that even remotely relate to Wikia, so not sure how you reached the conclusion that THAT was what we were talking about... DKS01 22:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say we openly support them; personally, I tell people to go away when they ask about PvX stuff. We share a sizable userbase with PvX though, which did inevitably grow once both wikis were assimilated into the Wikia database, but those people choose to be active on both wikis of their own volition. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 22:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually there is. Read the very second line in this section again. You didn't exactly tell Viper "durr, wasn't talkin' 'bout that" A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 22:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see how we could have "adopted" them when in reality they spawned from us. Usually when you adopt something it was created independent from you. Insert innuendo here. Anyway, we naturally supported them, because we wanted people to stop posting builds on this wiki. Everytime someone did, we'd tell them "plz go here instead." The reasons why it took a while is because they had to 1) create the site (it WAS independent from Wikia at the time, after all), 2) choose sysops, 3) create policies (most important one, as the former build section had no policies, a major reason for all the bad things that happened), and 4) port all of the existing builds on Gwiki to PvX (using a bot.) Once the site was ready, then we started advertising it on the mainpage. If you look at some of the old discussions from when the wiki was first created, they even wanted to keep the wiki secret for as long as possible so they could have time to create the infrastructure before "going live." --Macros 02:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * So linking to PvX means that we've adopted them? If I add a link to google.com, does that mean we've adopted Google?  Do they get any say in whether they've been adopted?  Quizzical 03:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Linking to on our frontpage and openly supporting them? Yes, that means we've adopted them as part of our group. And no, they get no say. DKS01 11:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it means we acknowledge that they exist. A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 11:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Quizzical, does that mean we get monies from Google? :D A_F_K_sig_2.jpg A F K When Needed 09:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)