User talk:Defiant Elements/Archive 3

Example Builds Policy
Here, I'll try to make this as concise as possible:
 * All builds are required to be created in the stubs section.
 * Builds require nominations from X (1? 2? 3?) number of users in order to be moved from stubs to untested.
 * Nominators are responsible to make sure the formatting is correct, that the build is not too similar to an already submitted build (by objective means), and follows the guidelines for build submission etc. (only objective issues, not subjective).
 * Nominators are also responsible to ensure that the submitter is familiar with the vetting policies, and the submitter must agree in writing to relinquish ownership of the build.
 * Set a minimum number of required votes (5? 10?). A build stays in untested for a minimum period of time such as 2 weeks, but can stay there longer if minimum number of votes is not achieved yet.
 * Concise but constructive feedback is required in order to vote.
 * Votes should be tallied based on a percentage of total votes instead of a static number. For example a favoured rating of 70% or 80% could be required in order to be favored.  Builds below that threshold go to unfavored.  This tally could even be displayed on the talk page as part of the RAB, and serve as a "rating".
 * Set a deletion threshold (say below 20% or 30%). Build below this threshold should be deleted instead of unfavoured.
 * Votes can continue to be cast after initial voting, and a build's category can be changed at any time if the percentage no longer meets the appropriate threshold.
 * Now, this is a simple framework for a reasonable and intuitive system, that could easily be improved upon through collaboration and constructive feedback. But unfortunately, the same people who don't know how to collaborate or offer constructive feedback on builds, are the same people who have not been able to collaborate or offer constructive criticism to every proposal offered in the past, and the same thing would happen with this one. -- BrianG 17:10, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Just wanted to say, it looks pretty good. "Concise but constructive feedback" is a very general statement, unfortunately. I just don't know how we should go about deciding what feedback meets that criteria and what doesn't. It'd be nice if there was a way to prove that the user giving the feedback tested the build appropriately, and that they yield no bias. Spen 18:02, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes, its true, but even an attempt at constructive feedback is better than what is allowed right now. -- BrianG 18:17, 29 March 2007

(CDT)
 * That new vetting procedure is pretty cool, but what happens if the votes make no sense? You don't know HOW many noobs I've come across.Cheese Slaya 19:02, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Looks good except for the biggest problem... you still have a voting system. That means, you still have people who don't have any idea what they are talking about voting on builds, you have all of the policy violations, etc.  No system that actually requires voting is going to work unless we make some standard for voters like, users can only vote on GvG builds if they in a an X Ranked Guild or have X Champion points, they can only vote on HA builds if they have X rank.  Otherwise, you have too many of the problems associated with the current build section.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 19:08, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Its true, that will always be a problem. But at least in this policy, with more votes required and a higher level of consensus needed, the results should be more representative of a community opinion.  Everytime someone suggests that there be restrictions on who is allowed to vote or submit builds (a suggestion I have made at some point as well), everyone says it is "unwiki-like".  You can't have it both ways.  I would just like to at least try seeing how vetting works with a proper policy in place.  Its really hard to say that vetting will not work at all, when the only experience we have with it is from such a flawed system.  Besides, voting is used to determine consensus on policies.  Whats to stop people from voting on policies without knowing what they're talking about?  Apparently nothing.  Maybe we should implement requirements on who is allowed to vote on policies, and then see if we can design a build policy that is "viable".  ;) -- BrianG 19:44, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Go ahead Brian. Post it as an alternative to GW:VETTING.  I will support it.  I just think that realistically, from what I have heard from the Admins, none of them is going to implement that kind of policy.  I also think that the reasoning Tanaric gave on NightAngel's talk page is pretty sound though.  Well... I am gonna try to stay out of this, I can only work in the hopes I can help to steer this in the right direction.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 23:24, 29 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I wish they would decide on the policy that GuildWiki will use for the builds... I don't think it would be fair if only certain people were able to vote on the builds, there is no real way of telling if someone knows what he's talking about or if he ever realy tested it. Also, if the selected group is too small, the builds will take ages to get out of the stubs section. But I see your point on the voting of policies though, still, how do you decide who can vote and who can't? Silver Sunlight [[Image:SSunlight.jpg|19px]] 05:38, 30 March 2007 (CDT)

What you think about...
This? InfestedHydralisk  08:47, 31 March 2007 (CDT)

Build Collaboration
I like the idea a lot! Makes it easier to find the people who have builds on their user page by conviently putting the links in one place. I think because this is in your user page, you don't have to write an official policy for the builds or for the favoured/unfavoured votes, you can just decide how you want it to be and add it to the top of the Build Collaboration page. Despite the attempts from various people, the builds section will never die! :P Silver Sunlight 13:22, 31 March 2007 (CDT)
 * No, I know I could just write a policy and tell people how it was gonna work, but, I would prefer to have an unofficial policy that we agree upon. My hope is that if only people interested in builds are participating, we shouldn't have any problem agreeing on a little policy.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 14:46, 31 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I guess you're right that there has to be some type of policy, just to keep things in order. Since the policy is unofficial, will we have to sign it somewhere or will you asume that everyone will follow it? Silver Sunlight [[Image:SSunlight.jpg|19px]] 16:22, 31 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Hey looks really good. You work fast and thats exactly what I had in mind.  The only thing I'm not sure about is the unfavored section.  I'm not sure if you should bother with voting or anything, I like the idea of people just giving feedback, and then highlighting ones that turned out especially well.  See how it goes though. -- BrianG 17:02, 31 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Removed for now. Hopefully we can get some real consensus on these minor policy issues.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 22:58, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Word of the day
From what dark libraries do you get those words? haha i think there's a reason no one uses them, because no one can pronounce them. Silver Sunlight 19:14, 1 April 2007 (CDT)
 * No libraries, just random words I think of :) Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 22:16, 1 April 2007 (CDT)
 * The only thing I check is the spelling because I want to make sure. Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 23:23, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Pa-ra-skev-ide-katri-aphobia

I can kinda pronouce it. Solus  22:17, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

The actual pronunciation is: pair.uh.skee.vee.dek.uh.tree.uh.FOH.bee.uh Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 22:20, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Can tomorrows be Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis? Solus  23:06, 1 April 2007 (CDT)
 * You mean the disease of the lungs caused by silicon dust from volcanoes? And no, I did not look that up.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 23:07, 1 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Anyways, it usually spelled "pneumoconiosis" which isn't nearly as interesting. Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 23:08, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

"I'm sorry, your infected with Pneu...errr Cancer" Said the Doctor :) Solus   23:09, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

pneu·mo·no·ul·tra·mi·cro·scop·ic·sil·i·co·vol·ca·no·co·ni·o·sis Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 00:06, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

If only you pronounced it sooner, Little Timmy wouldn't have killed himself them... Solus  00:13, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Meh... it's long, 45 letters, the longest word. But, it was also expressly created to be the longest word and the commonly used term, pneumoconiosis, is much shorter. For more information, read this:. Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 00:15, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Wow...how many spelling bee championships do you have Defiant? If your RfA was still going on I'd change my vote. "Vote DE - He Knows Big Words!" "DE - The Smart Admin." "DE - Better Than Any Dictionary." ... You know what, you could probably do some fancy Wikicode thing that automagically does the Word of the Day for you. Code a list of words and definitions...make something like the Daily Calendar that updates automatically...use the random function. Hm, I can see a new popular template coming. (T/C) 00:21, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Four spelling bee championships to answer your question. I have won Regional and State once, lost in the Nationals and won a couple of minor ones.  Actually, for a period I acquired the nickname Dictionary, I have also been called Scrabble since I know some of the very obscure Scrabble words.    In terms of the template, I was thinking about something like that, but I wasn't sure if I wanted to try it yet.  Let me see what I can do.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:27, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Hehe, I thought so ^^ I'd love to play you sometime. Anytime a person thinks they have a large vocabulary, a good game of Scrabble is all it takes to send them back to the books...I wanna experience that at least once. ;) Btw: highest scoring two-letter Scrabble word is Nu. Or so the rumor goes. I don't get it myself, since there are more valuable tiles...but meh, haven't played in years. Maybe I should make a Scrabble userbox. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:30, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Hmmm... well, my best Scrabble word ever was Quixotic. The first "t" was already on the board (someone had played the word target the previous turn), and it stretched from the top left "triple word score" to the top midde "triple word score" + the 50 bonus points from the 7 letter word with double letter score on the "x."  Worth around 350 points as I recall.  Not bad huh?  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:34, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * That's pretty crazy. I managed to slap "Vicariously" across the same row, once...Vicar was already there. I don't think it was worth as many points since the letters are common ones, except for V...still won me the game though, heh. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:39, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * The crazy part is that I have a friend who is better than me at Scrabble. Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:41, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Defiant Elements lives at Yale College? Well, they aren't on the Wiki...(or are they?) Sounds like we should start a ScrabbleWiki. Hasbro Inc. would be very happy with that. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:43, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Chris with Lime. I don't think he is active much on GuildWiki anymore, but he beats me consistently at Scrabble.  Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:44, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * I wonder if there is a site where we can play online scrabble? We could get you, Chris, some random person, and me and have a big match.   Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:45, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Whoa...no way, it really is ScrabbleWiki :P Sadly playing online is never quite the same...just like with chess, it's best in real life, where you can feel the tension in the air and watch your opponents sweat imminent defeat! Ah well, I better go polish my game if I'm to compete with The Great Defiant Elements...and his master. ;) [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:48, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Chess, another game I enjoy quite a bit although I am not as good at it. <font color="DodgerBlue">Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 00:51, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Heh, then I guess I can still have something over you. ;) It's too bad noone in my family likes chess...and playing the computer is very predictable. :( Never much liked random online chess either, too many people playing who don't even know the basic rules of the game or /ragequit because I'm half-decent. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:56, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Got a new one: Arachibutyrofobie, means fear for penutbutter :P&mdash;<font color=#000000>Merry  (talk | contribs) 14:55, 2 April 2007 (CDT)


 * Hehe... how about  Arachibutyrophobia? Means "fear of peanut butter sticking to the roof of the mouth". Or  Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, which means "fear of long words". Phobias are my specialty (at least they are ever since I found that phobia-list website). Funny side note, most of these words aren't making it past my spell-check... guess there's a limit to how many words can fit in a computer dictionary... --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 15:19, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Quote of the Day?
how bout quote of the day? something like; Hardwork pays off in the future, but Laziness pays off now -- "Wings" 02:49, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

How bout no. Solus   02:50, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * how bout u shut up fool! *points to solus* -- [[Image:Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg]] "Wings" 02:51, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Pwnt. Solus  02:56, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * lol, not clicking on that stupid link, Fool! -- [[Image:Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg]] "Wings" 02:57, 2 April 2007 (CDT)


 * You already have :) Solus  [[image:Shield_of_Judgment.jpg|19px]] 03:05, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * no i just dont trust Fools! -- [[Image:Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg]] "Wings" 04:49, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * You guys having fun yet? Go ahead and click my link! It won't make anyone look stupid, you can trust me! *grins innocently* --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 04:51, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * NoOoOoOoOo... My curiousity won, I clicked on your link haha Silver Sunlight [[Image:SSunlight.jpg|19px]] 15:21, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Hmmm... what about a "Despair Poster" of the day. See www.despair.com, these things are hilarious.  <font color="DodgerBlue">Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 17:14, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * It is your user page isnt it? why you asking people lol -- [[Image:Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg]] "Wings" 21:39, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Big Red Button
Push it. -- <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 03:21, 2 April 2007 (CDT) *CRYS* why is that button so mean? -- "Wings" 07:19, 2 April 2007 (CDT)
 * probably because you clicked it. --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 09:33, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

but then is kept getting meanier so i got angry and clicked it, which made it more meanier and me more angry, then it added like 1000 little red dots *crys some more* -- "Wings" 21:40, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

If you're on...
A quick question: do you intend the Archetypal roles guide to apply to PvP as well? Do you want to include both? - Krowman (talk • contribs)  00:12, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Primarily, I intend the archetype guides for PvE since these guides will be less effective in PvP where more specific builds are normally required. I would say that NOB is a better policy for PvP documentation and the primary purpose of my policy was for PvE.  If however it becomes a successful policy/guideline, we could consider making PvP archetype guides.  <font color="DodgerBlue">Defiant Elements  (talk ~ contribs) 10:15, 3 April 2007 (CDT)

Your new signature
I finally got around to finishing the images for your new sig design... let me know how you like it, eh? I designed it to be unique; you actually have five signature images, which are switched out (only one in your signature at a time, of course). They all have identical file names, so you only need to change a single number to change your signature image. This is just my idea, here. you can either take it, or say "next" (in which case, I'll try to think up something different).

Signatures: "Heya everyone! GuildWiki rocks!" - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

"Hmm, I sure have a lot of messages on my talk page..." - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

"Hey, you! Stop reverting that! That's vandalism!" - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

"I can't believe you're insulting me because I unfavored your Echo-chain Mending build!" - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

"THAT'S IT, I'M DOING THE BUILD WIPE MYSELF YOU BASTARDS!" - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

Coding: Note the image title, "DE-S#.jpg". Simply change the "#" from 1 to 5, depending on your mood. This wil also let people check how pissed off you are whenever you post. - *Defiant Elements*  +talk

...here's hoping you never have to use level 5. -- <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 05:45, 3 April 2007 (CDT)


 * When I uploaded those pics I orginally intended for that usage because the wiki doesn't have a full set of emoticon pics. But I ditched the idea because it's messy to do and figured that I was better off trying to write more carefully than using thermometers to describe how I was feeling about something. Still it's hard to detect sarcasm, good natured ribbing etc. in text but I don't think these are the answer (I think this just happened on my last edit before this one actually). --Xasxas256 06:39, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
 * This is merely fun little idea, but I can see your point. :D I wasn't thinking to set it so you posted a different "mood" for every post, merely have the mini-stress icon match what's on your userpage. Not much use in it, just a fun little quirk.
 * Easiest setup would simply be a single icon, but the name "Defiant Elements" doesn't pop any pictures into my head (well, actually, I can see a tornado and a thunderstorm fighting a volcano, but that doesn't fit in a 19x50 space very well). DE, when you get the chance, mind helping me out a bit? :P --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 07:25, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
 * P.S.: And if I could, I would have already posted a full emoticon set, hehe. Can't quite code it to replace ":D" with " [[Image:smileyface.jpg]] " though...

It's like DEFCON for wiki users!--Nog64Talk 18:09, 3 April 2007 (CDT)

Hmmmm... I typed it into Preferences as a raw signature and it wouldn't accept it.
 * Really? Probably just some random missplaced character in there's pissing it off. I'll run a check through it later and see what's up. --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 23:55, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Don't worry, it works now. [[Image:DE-S3.jpg]] *Defiant Elements*   +talk  23:56, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
 * So what was it that was messing it up? Don't tell me it was just the dash in the front... --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 00:03, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
 * To be honest, I am still not sure what was screwing it up. [[Image:DE-S4.jpg]] *Defiant Elements*   +talk  00:04, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Hmm, strange. Coud have been anything, I suppose... maybe a copy + paste issue (something didn't get entirely copied, etc). No use in wondering though, don't want to jinx it! :P I guess you like the stress icons? If I can think of a simple, one-off icon for ya, I'll make it, but that might take a while. These ones look pretty nifty right now anyway, let me know in a week or so how annoying it is to change the stress icons, hehe. --[[image:GEO-logo.png]] <font color="#237d00">Jioruji Derako.> 00:08, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Yeah, first I tried just copying and pasting it in and it rejected it. Then, I created a separate page and substituted that for my custom signature and it worked.  Whatever.  [[Image:DE-S4.jpg]] *Defiant Elements*   +talk  00:12, 4 April 2007 (CDT)