User talk:Tetris L

Please add new sections at the BOTTOM of the page (or simply click this link).

Old Stuff
Old stuff from this talk page has been moved to the archives:

Are you willing to be an administrator?
I'm looking to appoint another admin, but I'm not willing to do so with Gem. Are you willing and able? If you are, it would be best to go through RfA, but it's not essential that you do. I wasn't appointed via RfA, after all.

&mdash;Tanaric 15:09, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * ooh, I'll nominate and/or support. &mdash;[[image:Blastedt sig.png]]Blastedt 15:11, 31 January 2007 (CST)


 * Regardless of the outcome, thanks for considering me! I've been asked before, more than once even, and even though it was (and still is) flattering and tempting, I declined. It would be an honor, but it comes with responsibility and duty, and I'm not sure if I'm a good person for the job. So I think I have to ask back to you: What would you expect? There are things that I'm willing and able to do, and there are other things that I'm not (neither willing nor able).
 * Disclaimers:
 * I think I'm not cool-blooded and neutral enough to be good admin material. I'm quite affective, and tend to get involved into e-drama deeper than I should get. I'm a smartass, very stubborn, and a sore looser. I know that, so I try to stay out of heated discussions. That is the opposite of what a good admin should do.
 * Real life keeps me quite busy at times, so I cannot give any guarantee whatsoever that I'll be an active contributor in future. Just recently I've been rather inactive, and since I'm starting a new job in 2 weeks (same company, different department) I expect a phase of even less wiki activity. On top of that, there's always the risk that I may get bored with GuildWars alltogether, and stop playing, but that is a different matter, hard to predict.
 * There are certain sections of the wiki that I don't care much about, notably the whole build section. I'm not keen on getting involved in the difficlut discussions over there.
 * If you still want me despite these three big disclaimers, I'd feel honored and I'd be willing to be an admin. I wouldn't do much more than I've always done though: Patrol recent changes for trolls and vandals, chip in my 2 cents into discussions (incl. policy), and try to be an active contributor of original content. The only difference will be that I've got a few additional tools for quick reverts and banning people. No big deal.
 * If you don't want me after reading the disclaimers, no hard feelings at all. I'll simply continue to do what I've always done here, as a contributor. Not being an admin makes many things easier. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 16:06, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * P.S.: My nomination must be seen completely independent from Gem's. If there is ANY competition between me and Gem about who gets to be an admin and who doesn't, definetly count me out! --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 16:20, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * Give us TETRISL! Give us TETRISL for admin!! *roars* &mdash;[[image:Blastedt sig.png]]Blastedt 16:10, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * Please refrain from throwing underwear on the stage please. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 16:13, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * Gimme the L or Gimme teh death! *>.>* &mdash;[[image:Blastedt sig.png]]Blastedt 16:14, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * As I said on LordBiro's page - I'm neutral on if we even need an additional admin or not. Also, I tend to keep out of the RfA discussions unless there's someone I feel very strongly against (If I support or am neutral, I keep out and let the community choose and discuss without me), and I leave the final selection up to LordBiro and/or Tanaric, unless they specifically ask me for my opinion.
 * That said, I wanted to share my opinions on your disclaimers, to see if it impacts if your decision on being a potential candidate. On being cool-headed; the important thing is recognising that issue in yourself - as long as you have and you acknowledge it, then there's no reason you can't be an admin despite that tendancy.  For example, if I get into a heated discussion, I have several times gone to any other admin that I saw on at the time of the discussion and asked them to add their perspective, just to ensure that I'm not letting my personal bias cloud my judgement.
 * On availability - it varies for all the admins, and we all have gone through phases of more and less involvement. As for boredom with GuildWars - that's a danger for everyone, and shouldn't be an issue.  Last, on opinions on various wiki sections; many admins only reside on the furthest fringes of build issues.  Personally, I've distanced myself from most of the various build policy debates except when I see a proposal that conflicts with other site policies, and I primarilly only get involved in the builds section on the various templates/tools, and with issues that affect all parts of the wiki equally (vandalism, 1RV, etc).  I monitor build discussions and moderate when asked, but other than that, I prefer focussing in other areas of the wiki.
 * So, your issues listed aren't major stumbling blocks, and in my opinion shouldn't affect your decision on being a candidate. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:34, 31 January 2007 (CST)


 * Barek listed my thought comprehencively, so I'll just say that I wouldn't mind Tetris being made an admin. Actually, I have supported him for the position from the first time he was asked to. The RfA process isn't needed for making an admin as the decision is always made by a sysop. The RfA is just a tool to show which users the community would recommend.
 * The second thing which I will post about should not be mixed with anything conserning Tetris; It's a completely different matter. I could post on Tanarics talk page but I don't feel like posting on multiple pages now.
 * I'm slightly pissed by what you said Tanaric. If you have issues with making me an admin, why do you need to talk behind my back? Why can't you post in the RfA and clearly state what you think? I wouldn't be offended if you posted an oppose vote and explained why you don't think that I should be an admin. You have all the rights for any opinnion and I honor what ever you think. However, saying nothing in the RfA, but then posting on someone elses talk page something like you just did is far from understandable. I've often had the opposite opinnion in discussions than you, but I've always held your style in appreciation. Now I was sadly disappointed. If you are willing to explain yourself, please do so. If not, that's okay too, but please refrain from insulting other contributors in the future with similiar actions. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * pssst, Gem ... he posted on the RfA about three hours ago. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:28, 31 January 2007 (CST)
 * Woah, woops. I had allready gone through that in my watchlist and didn't notice. Thank you Barek for telling me and thank you Tanaric for posting there. Sorry for the unnecessary post. Feel free to continue discussion on Tetris. :) (Leaving the comment striked out for those who don't like to look at page histories) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2007 (CST)

I think my simplest response can only be: welcome aboard, sysop. :)

Of course, that would be a little unfair. No, your appointment had nothing to do with Gem's lack of appointment (or Skuld's removal from service). In my mind, there was an L-shaped hole that only you could fill. It's about damned time you accepted the job! &mdash;Tanaric 00:46, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * Oh, I didn't expect it to happen so quick! I accept, though. Let me test my new admin powers and randomly block a few users.


 * Having accepted, I still feel very uncomfortable that my appointment is somehow tied to Gem's (or rather, the lack of it). If there is the slightest suspicion that I was appointed instead of Gem, that would leave a very bad taste in my mouth. Even though you say it isn't so I'm afraight it's obvious that Gem's RFA was at least the trigger for my appointment. The number of supporters for Gem's adminship is overwhelming, and I'm one of them! I disagree with your negative assessment of his qualification. I'm particularry worried about your comment "Were admins here merely in charge of deleting and protection, he would be a great candidate." Because I feel that I'm not any better in that respect. Quite the opposite, I'm rather bad at mediating and arbitrating disputes (see my disclaimer #1). As I said myself above: "The only difference will be that I've got a few additional tools for quick reverts and banning people. No big deal."


 * On a side note, when did "Skuld's removal from service" happen, and why??? (OMGWTFBBQ!!eleven) I wasn't even aware of that, which shows that I didn't pay enough attention to the wiki community discussions recently. :/ --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 04:54, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * I am sure that my and your cases have nothing to do with eachother. You have been asked to be an admin a long long time ago way before I could have been even thought for the job. Don't feel guilty or anything. Besides, making me and admin is not the most important thing in my life and I wont suffer any mental injuries or anything. :D And congratulations for the well deserved adminship. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 07:02, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Thanks, Gem. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 11:06, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * I don't care if you're not involved in disputes/arbitration -- I wouldn't wish involvement in that mess on anybody. And, your appointment has nothing to do with Gem. In fact, I almost didn't look at RfA before asking you. Even if my personal reservations against appointing Gem weren't in effect, I would have asked you if you wanted the job. I've been trying to get you to accept for a year now! :) &mdash;Tanaric 13:37, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Congrats
Let me be the first to congratulate you. We've had a few moments but I've wondered myself why you've never been nominated for adminship, now we know why queue jumper :P No seriously well done, I'm looking forward to working with you and good luck ;) --Xasxas256 05:14, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Cheers, mate. I hope you, too, feel that the "moments" we had were nowhere near serious. How are the ants doing? :D --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 11:06, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Congrats Tetris, best of luck :) &mdash; Skuld 05:21, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Thanks, Skuld. I hope the coincidential change of your admin status will be worked out soon. :/ --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 11:06, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Congrats you old geezer. Hey we survived our little-epic clashes and are both admins now. :P Was a time when people would think "this wiki ain't big enough for the two of them." I always knew it work out. In the end, you and I both like to see this place succeed. I don't think you're as hard to work with as you describe yourself. And I certainly do not think you're a sore loser. Good to have you around, now I can engross myself even more in Titan Gem farming. :P Welcome aboard, old man. :) --Karlos 06:24, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Thanks, Karlos. These congrats from you mean a lot to me, probably more than anyone else's around here. I think we've grown up together on this wiki, and both learned a lot. But we're still both as stubborn as we ever were. I'll do my best to give you a hard time in the disputes ahead. :)
 * On a side note, I think it's about time that we finally meet ingame. I've had you on my friends list for ages, and I see you online very often, despite the time zone difference. Maybe you can give a newb like me a guided tour to the Domain of Anguish some day, just for fun?! --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 11:06, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * You are more than welcome to join in-game. We have a few people in our guild who DoA on Euro time, I can try and organize a run with you and them as well. Just PM me and let me know which chars you can bring. --Karlos 06:48, 4 February 2007 (CST)


 * Sort of belated congrats on your promotion. Not to steal your thunder, but becoming an uncle, it's official now :D, is keeping me away these past few days for the most part. Still catching up on everything, but noticed your first ban. I don't even need to say it, but I will. You will be a great admin. Nuff said ;) &mdash; Gares 11:12, 1 February 2007 (CST)

Congrats Tetris! Welcome aboard! I know it was offered to you in the past at least a couple times before I became an admin, I'm glad to see you finally accepted the position. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 12:00, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * Let me add my congratulations Tetris. :)  I knew after I agreed with you on something recently that that was probably an Earth shattering event and all chaos would erupt from it, little did I know what form that would take.  ;)  In all seriousness, it is good to see you finally becoming an Admin.  --Rainith 22:53, 1 February 2007 (CST)


 * Yeah, yeah, I know this is late, but in my own defense I was on a weekend break and missed Gems appointment and Skulds demotion as well (seems like I missed out on a lot of drama...oh well). Anyway, let my first post on your talk page (at least I think this is my first) be a positive one and I'll just end by saying...  Congratulations!!!  &mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  21:20, 4 February 2007 (CST)

Prophecies missons
Hi, about the s&f for those missions, should I place the cleanup-tag on those that need revising ? The tag can encourage other people to work on those but since I'm fairly new to editing on Wiki I thought I might as well ask first. Plus it keeps the angry people off my talk page :p In the meantime I'll start with the Ascalon missions, see how that works out... --Erszebet 10:23, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Nah, those mission articles aren't in such a bad shape that a clean-up tag is warranted, IMO. If you'd start working on them one by one that'd be great. I'll try to help, and maybe some other contributors will help too. We could add a checklist to GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Missions to keep track of the progress. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 10:41, 1 February 2007 (CST)
 * Since you were the last person to change the Mission s&f template, maybe you could take a look and give your opinion on the proposed changes on the talk page ? Especially about which dialogue to add on the mission pages. I'd recommend only text that's relevant to the mission's primary & bonus objectives. Any other NPC talk can stay on that NPC's own page. Just so we can have closure on the last little details. --Erszebet 10:07, 2 February 2007 (CST)
 * Sorry, I'm busy with real life at the moment. Probably won't comment until Monday. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 13:11, 2 February 2007 (CST)

Hi, are you Justin mark 2003? Just curious
No, but now I'm Sabotage

lol wtf
As of 1st of February 2007 I'm an admin on GuildWiki. Muuuaaahaha!! One step further on my way to world domination. My ego is growing to the size of Siberia. I lust for power, I ban arbitrary and revert edits at will. Ph34r m3!

I hope you don't mean this serious. You could be demoted by this. -- S i  g  m  A   12:48, 5 February 2007 (CST)
 * I agree, seems as if he's serious to me too. I think he should be demoted. Actually, I think he should be banned altogether, just to be safe; you never know with this kind of people. (Can I keep his L icon once he's banned? Please?) --Dirigible 15:14, 5 February 2007 (CST)
 * Sigma is the only one serious here. ;) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:27, 5 February 2007 (CST)
 * Of course I'm serious. I'm German, you know, which means I was born without any sense of humor, always dead serious. :| Now, let me ban Sigma for questioning my seriousness. :| --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 00:09, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * /wonders out loud I wonder if Fyren is German too...! --Xasxas256 07:37, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * All is proceeding according to plan. Joker will be pleased.  We will soon begin operation fahrenheit 451....All according to plan...  &mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  00:59, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Wow, apparently Sigm@ thinks I'm evil or stupid, or maybe both. :) &mdash;Tanaric 07:05, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Hey! Tanaric is neither evil nor stupid! He's somewhere in between the two ;) hehe  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 07:33, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Me am Bizarro Margaret Thatcher? :) &mdash;Tanaric 07:38, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Tanaric is merely Dr. Evil's Mini-Me. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 07:53, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * lol... You took things too far Tetris. That was low.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 08:48, 6 February 2007 (CST)
 * Oi, I was speaking in Tanaric's defense! I like Mini-Me, he pwnz. He's actually a very nice, innoscent person who takes the beating for the deeds of the evil mastermind behind him. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 09:10, 6 February 2007 (CST)
 * Are you implying what I think you're implying? If so lol, clever. :P &mdash; Hyperion` [[image:Hyperion_sig_icon.png]] (talk)

09:18, 6 February 2007 (CST)
 * If I'm right about what you think I'm implying, then no, I'm not implying that. I deny everything. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 09:23, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * It's too late now, Tetris, your feelings are clear! Expect immediate "desysoption"!  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 09:34, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Oh, shut up, Austin, or I'll steal your mojo. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 09:43, 6 February 2007 (CST)


 * Oh behave.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 10:01, 6 February 2007 (CST)
 * We should call him "Mini-Me" -- S i  g  m  A  [[image:Aura_of_Faith.jpg|19px|||My Talk]] 05:22, 7 February 2007 (CST)
 * No, we shouldn't. This talk thread has officialy gone bad and should be archived asap. Let it die already. It's declared closed. --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 06:18, 7 February 2007 (CST)
 * There aren't many things that can earn you a permaban from the GuildWiki, but calling me "Mini-Me" is assuredly one of them. :) &mdash;Tanaric 11:45, 7 February 2007 (CST)

GW:SIGN
You posted a question on this over at Gem's talk page. The policy on sigs is at GW:SIGN. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 13:52, 6 February 2007 (CST)

Cargo, ships, etc.
While I don't have anything to say to your comment in the context it was made, I feel compelled to comment to you on it out of band. I could just say "Ya, Me too", but then, I'm on the clock either way, and this should help me think through things.

My initial reaction to ANet's decision to operate their own wiki was a largely negative one. I don't see any important synergies, and I see a cost in terms of split community. On top of that, their decision to facilitate GWiki:Admin -> wiki.GW:Admin seems to me to be something of a crass political decision. However, my initial reactions aren't well considered, and if the goal is to provide the best resources to the GW clients as well as preserve the good community that we have a gwiki, then I think that can be achieved multiple ways (including a successful wiki.com which obviates the need for all the tertiary wikis out there).

That said, if we assume that wiki.com will be successful, then there will be 2 stages to that success, the first of which is where it is populated with content; A period of time where presumably people who are normally active on gwiki are spending the majority of their time on wiki.com. This is of course aggrivated by the big carrots offered by wiki.com in terms of adminship and the hope of adminship for more people who are just contributors now (people care about this stuff).

The second stage will be a populated wiki.com, which is in almost full competition with gwiki (with exception to builds or whatever they choose to leave off wiki.com). I don't know if that means this site folds or if you just split the community. Rolling the community over seems like it would work reasonably well (policy wise, wiki.com seems reasonable) but people here have said that wiki.com has no impact on gwiki (a statement which is woefully false/optimistic).

The only good news in all of this is that right now, gwiki is largely content complete. It can stand to lose a lot of attention as people focus on wiki.com without suffering much (except the builds section, which is always active here). When Chapter 4 comes out- that will be a test.

I guess my thoughts are in general that wiki.com is here whether we like it or not, and we have to decide what the best way to move forward is. Forks obviously work in the linux world, when there is enough differentiation between distributions, but I doubt that dual-adminship will work out long term if we end up with 2 wiki's competing for eyeballs. People have a finite amount of attention and any way you cut it, these wiki's compete for that attention.

About the only thing I really see that is positive about the development is that there are some people who would rather contribute to a GPL format than a privately owned non-commercial-share-alike format. (I don't know if the reverse is true).

Just my current thoughts on this. -- Oblio (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2007 (CST)


 * Hey, I wasn't on for around two or three days. Can you give me a link to where this new wiki was announced and all of this is being discussed.  Thanks. :)&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  16:19, 8 February 2007 (CST)