User talk:Azroth1071

Personal Policy
Any section that is stagnant for a week will be archived here.

Truce?
While I commend your efforts to forge a "truce" between me and 55, I was not aware that there is a war. He wants to paint this as some personal dispute, I do not know this person, I have never been involved with him in any discussion prior to that incident and I have only been laying down the law. You can cater to his theory that there is a personal war going on, but there really isn't. I saw a request for admin intervention on Tanaric's page and I decided to investigate. That is all there is to it. --Karlos 05:28, 10 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I understand that (believe me), but I think that at this point this has escalated to more that just a user getting punished for bad behavior by an admin. More and more people are getting involved in this, and taking shots at 55.  As a result this is becoming a war, not between u and him so much as between him and several other members of the wiki.  The truce isn’t so much for your benefit as it would be for his and the wiki's.  As it stands this continues to go on because people keep attacking him and he keeps fighting back.  But if he and you agreed to the truce, then he would be bound by its terms to not respond to any more of these comments about him, so this whole thing would just die and we could all get past this event.  Besides that however, if even one good policy change came out of an official page for this discussion it would benefit the wiki and would mean that something good had come out of this whole ordeal.  Would it be possible for you to comply to the terms of the truce, or am I assuming admins have more power here than they actually do?--Azroth 12:19, 10 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Again, I don't even understand how can there be a truce when there is no feud. So, he promises not to do that again and I do what? Give him a cookie? Put a medal icon on his user page? You are talking about making changes to the build vetting process. This is sweet and dandy, but any changes to the build veting process will be a result of those who care about it and are working on improving it (on Guildwiki talk:Builds and talk:Builds), not an overhaul by Karlos just to make 55 feel better. Do you understand why the terms of this truce are not even acceptable? On the one hand, one user "promises" to "behave" in a certain way... On the other, an admin just goes in and changes the build process. There are a LOT of people working on the build process and I am not chief among them (like Xeeron). I have no business stepping and changing it to your liking or to the terms of that truce. That would make a mockery of all the work they ever did and actually make his precedent of "vandalism for change" successful.
 * So, in conclusion, I appreciate your efforts to intervene, but there are a few points to think about as I think you should place your efforts elsewhere:
 * There is no war going on between me and 55. There was poor action and disciplinary/penal action. I welcome your input on my user talke page if you felt the disciplinary action was bad/ineffective/so forth. But your portrayal that it was personal only serves to undermine the value of the disciplinary action itself.
 * If 55 is having problems with others because he vandalized build pages (not because he got banned), then that is a result of his own edits that he will need to deal with. You are welcome to step in and ask for cooler heads and I hope your calls are heeded. However, I don't think my ban was what made people upset at him, judging by their edits. My involvemnt in this part would be to make sure no one steps out of line or assaults the other people's characters.
 * The basic concept of your truce is that I just go ahead and do certain things you are suggesting to the builds process as some sort of extending an olive branch. This is categorically rejected as I will not go about making changes to the process in the wiki to make a user feel better (about a ban I feel he deserved to begin with). Changes take place in the wiki because people championed them and made a case for them. Not as a consolation for hurt feelings.
 * Thank you. --Karlos 14:10, 10 September 2006 (CDT)

Alright, I see your point, but I feel you slightly misinterpreted what I was suggesting. I never intended to make it sound like you should just go in and carve up the build section as "a consolation for hurt feelings". What I meant was that it seems like the discussions about the build vetting process seemed to be scattered across the wiki. I was merely suggesting that you (or anyone with the power to really) should try to consolidate all those discussions into one location so that everyone involved in this ongoing debate (about builds, not 55) could have one place to express their feelings about it and hear what everyone else has to say. If it looks like the only discussion on this issue is already consolidated to one page then I guess there is no need for this. My proposal was based on the assumption that all the scattered debates I stumbled across were still on going. The other half was only a suggestion, I tried to word it so that it wasn't mandatory, but only something to consider as it seemed that most of the complains that I've seen since I stumbled upon the wiki tended to be about the kind of votes that 55 seemed so pissed about.

I never meant for any of it to be you doing something for 55. My actual intention was that by consolidating the debates on vetting and the build process in general you could kill two birds with one stone. You said that "Changes take place in the wiki because people championed them and made a case for them." My only intention was that by consolidating the discussion, these people who have championed change can be better heard by the rest; and that by doing so 55 would have no reason to take any other extreme action. I do agree that what he did was the wrong way to go about making a point, and that you were within your rights to ban him, I was just merely proposing a solution to 55's problem that could benefit everyone. The reason I called it a truce between you and him was not because arguments were sprouting up about you banning him, but because it seemed that in the previous categories on 55's page, all arguments spawned off of 55 saying one thing, you replying, and then several people jumping in and taking sides. I didn't include you because banning him was the problem, I included you because it seemed that by the mere action of continuing to try and explain yourself to him, and put and end to the problem, the opposite was happening and more people were taking sides (all of them against 55 it would seem) and just causing this to spiral into a situation where he felt it was him against the world. All I was trying to do was find a way in which to end the escalation of an argument which never should have started (but 55 seems to be a little bull headed). That’s all. Sorry about the length of this but I felt I needed to clear this up a bit and better explain my intentions before you banned me for being uncooperative :P jk jk jk jk jk(nothing personal, I probably would have banned him too).--Azroth 15:04, 10 September 2006 (CDT)

Anyway, if you are talking about me taking side, i didn't. I'm just thinking that 55 demand an apologies from the public/community is unreasonable. No one person insults him, we tried to explain to him but he/she never listen. whatever, im not going to involve in this debate anymore. -- Cwingnam2000 16:34, 10 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Probably for the best. As it stands I'm about 3 posts (assuming no headway is made) away from giving up here.--Azroth 16:38, 10 September 2006 (CDT)

Hey, sorry, I should have added this here too. No more talk is rly needed, I've contacted tanaric on the matter and he'll decide. (Not a fifty five 16:46, 10 September 2006 (CDT))


 * Ok, just promise me that that no matter what Tanaric decides, you'll take it as the Final statement in this issue and not persue it any farther, no matter what. Ok?--Azroth 17:00, 10 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Ayup tho we're currently currently discussing it, the admins and I. They're pretty much saying they can ban me for picking my nose if they wanted, I'm not sure why they didnt tell me that before setting up an arbitration o.O.  Anyways mind if I move this to my page? It kinda clutters yours up >.< (Not a fifty five 14:03, 12 September 2006 (CDT))

Sorry I didn't respond earlier, another user's change covered up yours while I was checking my page so I didn't notice this one. As for your request, You can copy it to your page if you want, but I still want to keep it as well just as a reference (I've got an archive so I'll just put it there ina few days to save space). That ok?--Azroth 17:01, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

Touch Elementalist-Experimental
This build is really interesting. I like how you sidestep Ether Prodigy's enchantment loss side effect. And you have all my favorite blood magic spells too (used in a way i hadn't imagined). I'm curious if Ether Prodigy is enough energy management for all those spells? Also I wonder if an elementalist's armor is a bit soft for going into touch range? Or are those more like emergency skills? Do you use this build for PvE or PvP?

I'm new on Guildwiki so I hope this is the appropriate way to provide feedback. I was also wondering if I could borrow your layout for my user page as I don't really know what I'm doing enough to create my own, but I'm interested in getting some feedback on build ideas. Thanks. -- Mt Heart Attack 12:31, 12 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks, I appreciate that you like the build and my page. However, I can't give you permission to use it as I didn't create it.  I've only been here for about a month myself.  I got the format for my page from Helena.  So you should post a message on her talk page if you want to use this format.  Other than that though, the energy management seems about even to how a Touch Ranger players because the extra energy regen makes this build perform similarly to having Expertise.  There is a problem however if you go against too many people too quickly.  Touch Rangers have Offering of Blood to add extra energy when their pool gets low, where as this doesn't.  So as it stands, a ranger is a bit better at this job than an Elementalist, but in PvP, no one would be expecting a touch Ele so it has some advantages, where as if an opponent sees a R/N they expect to be fighting a toucher and adjust their playing style accordingly.  The armor doesn’t make too much of a difference as you keep regenerating health throughout the battle.  Oh, and welcome to the wiki.--Azroth 13:38, 12 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah I'd imagine the surprise factor would be fun. Thanks for the tip, I will leave Helena a message. -- Mt Heart Attack 14:40, 12 September 2006 (CDT)