User talk:MindMaze5381

Archive:Me/any Lyssa's Degenerator
I removed the TA tag because it would never work there, so you should redo your vote. Welcome to PvX, BTW. --☭Guild *talk* 11:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, and when posting new topics on Talk pages, they go to the bottom. The easiest way of doing this is probably just hitting the "+" Tab next to Edit. --☭Guild *talk* 11:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I would just like to reiterate that, when adding comments to a talk page, do not add them to the top but to the bottom, ty. [[Image:Frostysig9000.jpg|19px]]Frosty  the Admin 14:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

last AN post
Before I explain I just want to point a couple of things out: Anyway explanations =): I guess you're wondering why I bolded "you" in that last point =). Basically we have an unwritten section to the WELL policy, we don't let Authors (or people who've contributed heavily) to an article remove a WELL tag, because they're clearly biased (for obvious reasons =p). looking through the history i also noted you removed the "trash-build" (trash-rating? I'm never completely certain what the templates are :/) and placed an untested tag on again. I'd ask you to not do this again. Firstly it has 5 votes, and falls into the Trash rating, as per our VETTING policy. Builds will remain in trash for a period of 2 weeks before being deleted, and you've posted on the AN about the votes, so someone will look at it before it's deleted and decide if the votes are fair =).  ~ PheNaxKian Sysop   16:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) you linked to the wrong build (I knew which one you meant so it doesn't matter to much)
 * 2) Please refrain from adding a new section for an existing issue (you posted an issue earlier about the same build, so it'd have been better if under that header you'd left a new comment (at the bottom =p) stating the new issue).
 * 1) Your build was Tagged for WELL, not deletion (at least not without consideration by an admin anyway).
 * It was tagged as inferior to another build (which doesn't exist so chances are an admin wouldn't have deleted it)
 * 1) The build has been tagged...3 times I think looking through the history, once yesterday which an admin can decide if the reasoning was valid, which you proceeded to remove. It was also added again earlier (different reasoning linking to a none existent article), which again you removed, that was reverted and you removed it again.
 * Actually Phen, it's written clearly in the WELL tag, Do not remove this tag from builds you authored unless a consensus has been reached on the talk page. The build people are referencing has been moved, I will correct the link shortly. [[Image:Misery_Cow.png|19x19px]] Misery Says Moo   16:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC
 * Is there a committee that meets and agrees to trash builds they don't like? I find people to be quite narrow minded, also having a look at other builds that were similarly trashed. Your policy mechanics encourages votes that are either 4/5 or 1. People don't vote realistically because they know 1 is going to get a build they dont like deleted. If this is what is desired, then you should remove the "good" build category (it is indeed very empty).


 * One justification for the policy is the "high standards of excellence". But why differentiate between excellent, good and other if you want to focus on "excellent" only? The process of submitting builds and discussing them is already tedious. Many good builds out there don't get posted even thought they would be useful because people make the experience of taking time to submit, documenting and discussing things and then their efforts get ridiculed by a trash / well tag within 2 hours??? There is something wrong happening on this database.


 * People have become too snob and can't see a recognize a useful build when they see it. It is either excellent or trash. There are many ways to be "quite good" and even "good" in RA and it is a shame that people who come here in search for more fun gameplay are served with stereotyped meta only. Let the meta builds coexist with the fun-to-play, does-the-job builds. Especially in RA there will always be a team that matches your build perfectly. For example, I may decide to use frustration+ineptitude+clumsiness+signet of clumsiness+2 hard interrupts. It is fun to play, has good damage, will make fools of ennemies, is original, and assuming a matching team is a relatively good build to play. Why not let such a build flow into the Good or Other categoy. The trash section isn't sorted by average rating and makes it hard to find the little gems that will give you a satisfying playing experience providing you are patient with RA draws. MindMaze 18:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Good lord, man. Learn to condense your comments or people here will never understand what you're saying. People on the internet don't read. Oh, and a good sign of an intelligent person is the ability to condense knowledge and make it simple to understand. So....um....be intelligent. [[Image:KJ needed a new sig....sig.png]] 17:39, 14 April 2009
 * Please remember to sign your comments with 4 ~'s ( ~ ), so people know who made a comment and when =p.  ~ PheNaxKian Sysop   17:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not a native speaker. I challenge you to condense your thoughts in French or German as well as I do. But let me try for you. Short, insulting comments = primitive < civil, elaborate comments = intelligent. Now you have coaxed me into a useless unfriendly comment. Maybe I won't heed your advice after all.MindMaze 18:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * could you put paragraphs in longer posts, just to make it easier to read please (so just every couple of sentences press enter/return a few times).  ~ PheNaxKian Sysop  
 * This at least is a fair comment. Done this for you darling.MindMaze 18:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Dude, I understood every word of what you said, I don't see what all the fuss about needing you to condense is about. You explained perfectly what you mean... As KJ said, half the peopl on the internet can't read, they also have no clue about builds and rate them according to what they think rather than actually trying the build themselves... I too like looking in the good builds section, I find more useful and exciting builds there than excellent... :) Anwyn 11:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

show preview button
use it - Auron 09:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * bro, look at the edit spam. use the show preview button so page histories and recent changes aren't clogged with a trillion menial edits. - Auron 09:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't realize my edits were being observed but it seems logical since I get emails on pages I have editted.MindMaze 10:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's called recent changes, but apparently it has escaped your notice.220.255.7.132 10:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As I said, it did. Thanks for moving the knife in the woundMindMaze 10:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * you're welcome. Now happy editing! ~ Big  [[Image:Big sadface sig.PNG]]  sysop  10:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)\
 * You don't seem to understand that email notices are very different from recent changes, that's why I had to move the knife to remind you why it is there in the first place. Also, I was under the impression you are masochist, judging by the way you repeatedly allow yourself to get stabbed by knives with respect to your recent activities.220.255.7.138 10:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is what everyone sees you doing. Navbox. Second to last. Check it. See why folks get irate with your not using show preview. ~ Big  [[Image:Big sadface sig.PNG]]  sysop  10:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I really think
that you really enjoy people "moving the knife in the wound". 6 edits in a row clearly shows you hadn't learnt how to use recent changes.

You are actually masochistic, right?

220.255.7.131 10:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You saw right though me. You have earned my favors as a tormentor.MindMaze 10:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

RA
Played against you in RA last night, I was bored and messing around... You were playing Lyssa Degen and I was on a WE Axe... I was the guy who asked you how you kept distortion up... ;) Anwyn Pvp Anwyn 11:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I did several tests yesterday evening. You could have met me with 5 different variants. I met several teams systematically rending and ripping the enchant, so against noob teams I was doing fine and but against a rending Lyssa Dervish and several necros I was constantly on the run struggling to cope with the energy demands and couldn't apply pressure and couldn't deny monk energy as well. Overall I did better with Distortion+Ether Feast and without Phantasm. Energy Drain and LA performed similarly with this setup. With Phantasm LA performed a bit better when not stripped and wose when it got stripped.
 * I played the Lyssa build lst night too, and I think outa the 10 games I played, 5 times I ran into stripping necros or shattering mesmers... Soo yeah, I also had a hard time with it hey... Energy Drain worked really well for me, altho I found the e-management not as good as LA. But, It couldn't be stripped and taking 9nrg from a monk ws totally wicked!!! Anwyn 05:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe you can vote for my build. People have trashed it (0 or 1...mehh). The Lyssa build has got 4,7 average and mine has got 1...it is unfair...Help me save the build from deletion.MindMaze 22:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I will vote when u learn to sign[[Image:Xtreme Hunter.png]] 22:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry I always forget.MindMaze 22:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I votes it dude, don't think it's gonna help... The majority of the community are o stuck in their ways it's not even funny! They'll never see the light... Anwyn 12:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)