PvXwiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 8

Shadow Form
Should I go ahead and archive every SF build (about half of Pvxwiki)?-- 18:53, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * No the dev updates said theyll be monitoring it. First of all, this has no effect on running.  The way Im betting thisll go is that SF will totally fall out of use, A-net will be like "O SHIT!" and find a better way to nerf it. --- [[Image:Monk-icon-Ressmonkey.JPG|15px]]  Ressmonkey (talk)  19:00, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I archived a lot of them, but not all of them.--[[Image:Crossfire's Signature.JPG]] 19:03, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Stuff cna always be un-archived anyways. --- [[Image:Monk-icon-Ressmonkey.JPG|15px]] Ressmonkey (talk)  19:03, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * What'll happen is everyone will overreact and stop using SF entirely, we'll see a little BAAWWWWWWing on Izzy's page, and then in a few months people will start realizing, oops, it's still usable as long as you're careful, which is right how it should be. --71.229 19:05, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I dont think so. Half damage is rediculous.  For example, the dagger farmer in Tombs.  Was an extreemyl popular build.  It took about an hour and a half to complete tombs.  If its gonna take them 3 hours to do teh same thing, people will switch back to bp.  This update was intended to make SF on par with other famrers, but it made it highly inferior. --- [[Image:Monk-icon-Ressmonkey.JPG|15px]]  Ressmonkey (talk)  19:33, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Be that as it may, it was completely overpowered before and probably the most imba farming skill in all of guild wars. Although Anet may have overnerfed it, its better than an overbuff. [[image:IAmJebus_sig2.jpg|19px]] * Jebus  *   Is    I  21:17, 2 July 2008 (EDT)

PvX pick-up group page
Discuss. --71.229 17:17, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
 * lol &mdash;  Skakid  17:26, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
 * tbh I'm just sick of the clusterfucks involved in trying to organize a flist HA. --71.229 17:36, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
 * You're better off not HAing than playing with PvXers.  —ǥrɩɳsɧƴ ɖɩđđɭɘş  [[Image:Grinshpon blinky cake.gif|19px]] 17:28, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 * It's true. Each PvX user in your group increases your chance of losing by 50%. --[[Image:Ibreaktoilets_Signature.jpg|User:Ibreaktoilets|20px]]Tab  Moo  17:38, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Examples: Rawrawr and GoD. *cough* Tab *cough* [[image:IAmJebus_sig2.jpg|19px]] * Jebus  *   Is    I  19:07, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm an exception to that rule - having me makes you 100% more likely to lose. --[[Image:Ibreaktoilets_Signature.jpg|User:Ibreaktoilets|20px]]Tab  Moo  19:10, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 * That's because you'll just go "PvX group omg" and bring this:

[build prof=me/mo illusion=12+1+1 heal=12 prot=3][illusion of pain][drain delusions][aneurysm][heal area][Karei's Healing Circle][life attunement][blessed signet][unyielding aura][/build] --R ELYK   ʞlɐʇ ʎɯ  17:20, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

Main Page
Has 3 featured builds in each section (untested PvP, tested PvE, etc.). This does not seem to be enough, there is still a large amount of builds not being voted on. I suggest we increase it to 5, (so 5 untested PvP, 5 tested PvP, 5 untested PvE, 5 tested PvE.)  * Jebus  *   Is    I  23:22, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
 * You only need 5 votes to vet a build into a category and then move it out of untested features. I'd be willing to bet that if you're not getting 5 votes on three builds when they're featured on the main page then putting 5 builds up won't change that. - PANIC!  [[Image:Panic_sig4.png|50px|18px]]  sexiness!  19:17, 5 July 2008 (EDT)

Watchlist
Needs a section that alerts you whenever a build you are watching gets another vote/rollback/restore.  * Jebus  *   Is    I  12:50, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Rip, Shadow, and Power Axe
Why? They are all fucking Eviscerate. They don't need entire pages explaining how to use rip enchantment, powerspike, or DC. They are all pretty fucking self-explanatory skills. --Readem 03:08, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Aggravation. Do that with axes and we'll spend the next six months explaining why it would be a bad idea to do the same thing with Mbane/Cripshot/BA and such. --71.229 03:16, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * No, ranger builds are different. Some are split oriented, while others are for ganking NPC's. BHA is exclusively TA, and strong anti-caster pressure in conjunction with shock. They actually can warrant pages; Shock Axe doubles do not. --Readem 03:25, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Yeah, but constantly explaining that gets really old. I agree with you, I'm just not sure if it's worth the drama and the aggravation. --71.229 04:35, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Point: "We need to merge all these ranger builds!" Counterpoint: "No. We like them they way they are." - PANIC!  [[Image:Panic_sig4.png|50px|18px]]  sexiness!  04:40, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * This isn't about rangers. This is about the same bar, with 8 different pages with only minor variations. We don't need to explain how rip works; just read the skill description. Same with powerspike and the others. --Readem 04:43, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Ichigo made a Evis guide recently. Just redirect the build pages to it and voila. - PANIC!  [[Image:Panic_sig4.png|50px|18px]]  sexiness!  04:46, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * But why have them at all, is what I am asking? They are all worthless variations of shock axe, that make PvX look disorganized and scattered. --Readem 04:47, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * The links would be useful for new users to find them. If one Evis bar ends up in Good and another in Great, then users can see which are the better options in general. Also, someone looking specifically for Good/Great warrior builds would find the Evis bars listed in the Good/Great PvP builds listings. - PANIC!  [[Image:Panic_sig4.png|50px|18px]]  sexiness!  05:05, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * A guide is nice for Eviscerate, but without build deletion. Although it's a one skill difference, each can be meta enough to deserve they're own page (Shock Axe and Rip especially). --[[Image:GoD Wario Sig.PNG]] * Wah Wah  Wah! * 08:26, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * 1 skill difference, especially non elite, is pointless imo when it can easily be added to variants with a note on usage of said skill. Selket Shadowdancer 08:42, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree. I've seen quite a few guides/user articles about one universal Eviscerate build. Every time a new Eviscerate bar is submitted, God kills a kitten. I think just about the only Eviscerate bar to even slightly warrant a separate page would be the Archive:W/R Symbolic Warrior. ــмıкε  нaшк  09:32, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

"They are all worthless variations of shock axe, that make PvX look disorganized and scattered." PvX is disorganized and scattered :O  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ  13:32, 12 July 2008 (EDT)
 * "No. Doing that causes massive, massive, massive, articles. If it's more detailed to explain usage, it deserves it's own page" -Skakid Each bar is used differently I thought. Well the point was...--[[Image:Relyk Purifying Veil Sig.jpg|19px]]<font color="99CCFF">R ELYK   <font color="CCCCFF">ʞlɐʇ ʎɯ  17:15, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
 * That's the problem. They aren't. They're the same usage except for one short sentence that might need to be added for people who don't know what they should be shock/rip/pspike-ing. - PANIC!  [[Image:Panic_sig4.png|50px|18px]] <font color="#D70000"> sexiness!  17:20, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Well then why haven't they been put in a guide/disambiguation yet, seems like an obviously simple solution. Of course that's what is being discussed right?--[[Image:Relyk Purifying Veil Sig.jpg|19px]]<font color="99CCFF">R ELYK   <font color="CCCCFF">ʞlɐʇ ʎɯ  17:23, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

The overview
I wish the overview was automatically added on team builds instead of doing it all by hand, would it be in anyway feasible?--<font color="99CCFF">R ELYK   <font color="CCCCFF">ʞlɐʇ ʎɯ  23:36, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
 * See here. We would need a script for that. ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  23:40, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
 * What language would we need to script it in? Work's been slow lately, so I could probably find the time to write something, I'm sure. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  09:57, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm not quite sure. I don't think that templates can call scripts or not, so we need something like Special:PvXconvert. I don't know how that works, so you might want to ask User:Hhhippo or User:Gcardinal. ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  11:18, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I left him a note on his Talk page. Hopefully he can guide this a bit better. Search and Replace is rather painful, but as long as the name value is filled out in each build tag, it could be a lot easier. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  13:03, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Here's a thought: How does the ToC template do it? I mean, it'd be simpler than what we need, but it could be a good start. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  13:17, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Uh.. ToC is a magic word :/ ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  13:34, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Well, I know, but there's no reason we couldn't find how TOC works. :P [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  14:13, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Advertisements?
Well,if anyone has any, kindly put your links here...  BaineTheBotter  09:02, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
 * What?  11:50, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Theres an example on his user page lol--[[Image:Relyk Purifying Veil Sig.jpg|19px]]<font color="99CCFF">R ELYK   <font color="CCCCFF">ʞlɐʇ ʎɯ  23:00, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Ahh.  19:52, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Jade Arena Hfff
When I places my new build under Build:Team - Luxon HFFF I received a message that "Actually, I won't do anything, but you should move your comment to Team_-_Luxon_Recall_Faction_Farm, as that is the run in question. This deals with an entirely different quest, and it is a little bit easier at the expense of time" When I places the build info in Build:Team - Luxon Recall Faction Farm and received the message "I removed your edits because I believe that team build deserves its own article rather than being tacked onto this one"

I suggest several changes here

Azwildbill
 * 1 Since there is more than 1 way to Luxon HFFF the page called Build:Team - Luxon HFFF should be renamed Scout the Coast HFFF
 * 2 the page called Build:Team - Luxon Recall Faction Farm Should be renamed Jade Arena FFF
 * 3 A new page called Jade Arena HFFF should be made.
 * 4 The page Luxon HFFF should be a directing page to Scout the Coast HFFF and Jade Arena HFFF
 * I actually agree with the proposed name changes and I'll edit the recall FFF one right now seems I'm here. I do think your build deserves its own article though because while it does work in a similar way it involves diferent usage and notes pertaining to heroes that need to be put into an article which should probably be called Jade Arena HFFF and I don't think that anyone article here should be a main direct but probably a guide portal page for FFF in general which would include not only Luxon FFF but also Kurzick FFF. Selket Shadowdancer 11:58, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Archiving Archive:A/any Deadly Arts Spike Sin after update
I found out awhile ago that shadowstepping cancels out aftercast delay. The only way this can be done though is through augury of death and shadow walk because they both have instant activation. I found this out with an earth spike elementalist, which can be found in my sandbox/history:

When Aftershock was used (and hopefully brought them below 50%), augury activated and I was able to cast the next spell immediately. On another note, casting Obsidian Flame and following with Shadow Walk then Iron Palm showed no effects from Obsidian Flame's cast. Now to apply it do the DA sin. The res sig would be replaced with Shadow Walk, so it would be viable for AB or whatever.

For this, iron palm would take the 1 second disable from shadow walk, keeping the chain viable. Activating Shadow Walk immediately ofter Shadow Prison will cancel the aftercast and keep the chain as it was originally. The other option for room would be Twisting Fangs, which would then be for RA where Res is needed, though it would lose Vampiric Assault and Impale, but its RA.

The point is Shadow Walk cancels the ACD and would make the build viable. I haven't tested whether this works or not now, but it's worth a thought.-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 19:04, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

General Archival
Most anything pertaining to VoDways and a few skill changes in the new update need archival judgment. --<font color="Black"> * Wah <font color="DAA520">Wah  Wah! * 19:18, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
 * A lot of builds with Elites that are being updated may need to be archived because of so many functionality changes to those skills. I also suspect that the update will create a flow of builds duping each other. XD ــмıкε  нaшк  19:23, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
 * how do you even know what's being update =o? <B><font color="#4F94CD">~PheNaxKian </B> (<font color="Red">T /c) [[Image:Phenaxkian_sig_phoenix.jpg|19px]] 19:26, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
 * , and some other update that will have a huge impact on GvG (I didn't save the screen, though).  ــмıкε  нaшк  19:28, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
 * The update was just made. /excited ــмıкε  нaшк  19:54, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Yes, that'll be something users will be looking at in the coming weeks. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 15:12, 8 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Archive all the GvG builds that can't be adapted?-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 23:03, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

Boss Builds Category
Some Boss Builds make good Hero Builds. Can we have a Boss Build category? Kiteeye 22:54, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
 * No. Quit suggesting this.  08:24, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

Updated Ursan
People have posted the new ursan builds using oath shot or assassin's promise. Wouldn't it be better to just have people bring Air of Superiority?-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 16:43, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm pretty sure using AP or Oath Shot would require using two elites, so I'd have to say you have a point. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  22:53, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * That is, of course, if you, for some god-forsaken reason, can't come up with something better than Ursan to run with the numerous skills you probably have for your primary class. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  22:53, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Usually people dont-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 01:35, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

BMs Vote Removals
There are starting to be a lot of issues with people contesting vote removals. It's getting to where the only votes that remain are the ones that agree with a particular BM (and a nightmare happens when two BMs disagree and neither will back down). This doesn't seem to be in the spirit of what was intended here since BMs have weighted votes. i.e., they're weighted to counter poor votes. Why insist on driving people away (when they feel slighted because they rate based on how their test of the build performed) when a vote from a BM counters any votes they would've removed anyway? € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞ [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   13:36, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * There's also the problem that the majority of voters don't offer any decent/viable reasoning to go with their ratings, so a lot of them have to be removed. ــмıкε  нaшк  14:45, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * The 2 : 1 ratio of BM vote weighting to regular user vote weighting is disproportional to the 1 : 500 ratio of BM votes to bad votes. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 14:46, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * ...which can be solved by nerfing regular user votes to 1/500th of a BM vote, or instate 250 new BM's. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 14:48, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * 3 BMs deciding on whether the build is bad or good would solve that (through majority), but that's a lot of work just for one build, tbh. ــмıкε  нaшк  14:50, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * ...I wasn't being serious. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 16:07, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * (EC) @Mike: I'm not talking about asinine comments on votes or votes without any explanations. @Rapta: 1:500 is a bit exaggerated.  I can't believe BMs only count for two votes for one. Maybe a fix would be to increase to 5 votes (500%) since usually there aren't many more votes than that against a BM. This way people can stay happy about having explained votes kept, and BMs are happy knowing that they're getting the ratings to where they feel they should be.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   14:53, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * 500% weight is far, far too much. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  14:55, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * What makes you think so? It's the same as the procedure they're currently using: delete everything they disagree with.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   14:57, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I actually avoid naziing votes as much as possible. However, it's unavoidable alot of the time given the quality of voting here. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  14:59, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Which proves my point. People are getting pissed off and leaving because they feel that they have no say.  If the BMs votes are weighted higher, they still get their say, but the BM in question gets the final say.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:01, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Both ultimately acheive the main thing. However, the current implementation doesn't result in the BM's score being absolute, as it is there's alot of builds that get rated either higher or lower than the BM's vote by a considerable margin. 500% would just be too much, the majority of builds are vetted with around 5 - 8 votes. While removing a user's votes isn't the greatest way to make them want to stay on the wiki, it's pretty unavoidable. Besides, I fail to see why we should keep factually wrong votes up. Even with increased BM vote weight, bad voting still has a negative effect on the accuracy of the builds score. --<font color="Black">Tab   <font color="Black">Moo  15:09, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * STFU to this conversation. That is all I have to say, as these conversations are stupid and unending. --[[Image:GoD Wario Sig.PNG]]<font color="Black"> * Wah <font color="DAA520">Wah  Wah! * 15:14, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * (EC @Deals - that is to be used when people are pissed and before NPA is violated correct? Did it even get implemented as a valid procedure?)The BMs vote is absolute now.  The growing strategy they use is to remove anything not similar to their vote. Instead, simply delete any non-explained vote and let the other votes stay if they have valid reasoning and can back it up.  The end result is the same - the build gets rated the way the BM wants, but they aren't driving away users who are getting tired of explained votes being removed.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:17, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Valid reasoning is left on. Valid reasoning with an invalid score isn't. BMs don't remove anything that isn't the same as their vote, however you have to have a range of tolerance in scoring. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  15:20, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Again, it proves my point that BMs remove any vote they don't agree with. It was just a suggestion which doesn't affect me (since I rarely vote), so if the admins/BMs feel that they don't care about finding a workaround which accomplishes the same thing while keeping more people on pvx, then no skin off my nose  lol.   € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:22, 13 August 2008 (EDT)

{ri}}Tab beat me too it. It;s more about people giving wrong scores for the reasoning, or giving no reasoning what so ever (usually the latter being the main problem) which are removed. Valid reasoning and scores are always kept reguardless of a BM's or admins view, becasue it has the reasoning to back it up, it's only removed if the bm/admin can point out a flaw with your reasoning which means it doesn't deserve the score given. If you feel that a BM as removed some votes injustly, you can take it up with the Bm, and then if no conclusion is met, you can make an appeal to either another BM or an Admin, that is nutral in the situation. <B><font color="#4F94CD">~PheNaxKian </B> (<font color="Red">T /c) 15:26, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Again, that is a judgment call ending with the BM removing any vote he/she doesn't like. If the reasoning is adequate, let the BM outweigh the vote.  Anyway, I've stated what I think would be a good remedy so my job is done.  If you all don't agree with it, so be it.  Thanks for listening.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:31, 13 August 2008 (EDT)
 * You might want to check the votes that I've had removed. If you can find a flaw in my reasoning, explain it to me. Check builds such as... well, the GoR Sin thing was pretty epic. There's multiple others. I'll get links if I can. It's really just a matter that a number of ranking members around here seem to let opinion outweigh fact, or seem to believe that fact may not be fact at all. It's really just a bad way of doing things in general. I could point you to Rapta's and Zuranthium's Talk pages for starters. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  01:22, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying it's bad for votes to be rendered impotent (hence outweighing them with increased BM vote weight), but that removals blatantly undermine the will of the voters - better to do it behind the scenes so as to keep more people contributing to the wiki.  That is my only reason for suggesting the change.  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   01:43, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * This cycle just repeats itself every month or so. Just give up now. We've lost many a good contributor, and I've gained many a good friend and have been nearly banned or actually banned for many such reasons and circumstances. Here in Soviet Wiki, you had best learn to troll, or troll will learn you. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  01:54, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * As already said, simply suggesting a solution which will seem to remedy a problem of driving people off. I didn't think it would get taken seriously, but better to try than watch it continue and do nothing € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:17, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * There's another problem with removing votes, some may rate down a build because of minor issues, but it may not impact the overall performance all that much. This is frequent in Team builds, because you can not look at every member individually, but the team as a whole. I've noticed it a lot in Team builds; reasoning may be valid, but they could be missing the whole picture, or what the build is good at. It's like rating down a Monk build and saying: "lol, how do you kill anything?" Another thing I've seen, is that many users rate down builds based on issues that are easily fixed, which they could either do themselves or propose on the talk page. A build that's in Testing isn't necessarily finished, but the author might just have wanted more publicity.
 * I'm sure half of the senseless votes could be avoided if we included Featured Trial Builds on the Main Page, because unfinished builds (as in not the final product) see little help from others, and it's usually left to the author to do everything on their own. ــмıкε  нaшк  17:34, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

GvG Update
Start the archiving. <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  17:20, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Uh...why? It's the exact same as before but splitting is actually viable. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  17:21, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * gg, take 3 invincimonks, put them at stand, get rest of your team to directly split to GL, win, it's been proven by my guild; it works against horrible enemies. Brandnew.  17:23, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * lolpve. God  box    17:27, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * (EC)That would only work against total idiots... Send the monks back, and they'd gank your front probably...  17:28, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 * We were r3000 back then. Brandnew.  17:29, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Admins
Should be resolving issues on the wiki, not going around deleting "graceperiodexpireds". Just a suggesstion (probably a bad one) but what about assigning a member of the wiki janitorial powers for a week, then giving the powers to another member? These people can delete builds, revert spam, etc. Seems like a lot of trouble but admins arent clean-up people strictly, they should be resolving bigger issues. I is   * Je b us *    <font size=0.5>Enter my contest! 22:42, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * As long as it isn't someone that will vandalize the wiki and delete a bunch of good builds. XD ــмıкε  нaшк  22:52, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Then again, I probably wouldn't want the job of deleting trash builds, and nothing else. =/ ــмıкε  нaшк  22:53, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * It's good as it is, tbh. Assigning random people is often a terrible idea too.  — şąɀɀƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] 22:54, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * They definitely wouldn't be chosen at random, because it could result in abuse, but I still doubt that very many would enjoy mindless build deletion. XD ــмıкε  нaшк  23:01, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * No, not random, just build masters or trusted long-term members of the wiki who arent bms, admins, etc. I  is   * Je b us * [[image:IAmJebussig3.jpg|19px]]   <font size=0.5>Enter my contest! 23:15, 15 August 2008 (EDT)
 * why? ther's no point, there's nothing on the wiki that big an issue that requires us to do what your suggesting. BM's can remove votes an the AN and any they find while browsing, and are doing a good job at that, they might not say so on the AN but most of the issues will be resolved. There aren't really any major issues that require admin intervention anyway, provide an example please =). <B><font color="#4F94CD">~PheNaxKian </B> (<font color="Red">T /c) [[Image:Phenaxkian_sig_phoenix.jpg|19px]] 08:06, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

I'd say the admin team does a pretty good job already. There's no particular issues I've noticed that don't get resolved. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  08:10, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I think the point was to give Admins a break from build deletion and all that mindless stuff they need to do, so they can focus on more important issues. I don't really think it's necessary, however, because we have quite a few admins to do those jobs. ــмıкε  нaшк  10:07, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * because the whole 18 builds will be a pain in the arse -.- <B><font color="#4F94CD">~PheNaxKian </B> (<font color="Red">T /c) [[Image:Phenaxkian_sig_phoenix.jpg|19px]] 10:25, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * You should see it when it gets large. 200+ builds and their talk pages. Zzz... &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 17:32, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * That's why DE made Wizardboy tbh. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  17:35, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * And my point is that going to a special page and deleting the stuff on it once every week in no way is distracting them from their other duties. We have a sufficiently large and competant admin team to do both. --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  10:27, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

16.08.08 - Downtime
Sorry about downtime today. PvXwiki has been offline for like 4 hours... Admins got noticed right away but server was dead and we were unable to get it back online. Had to contact support guys from iWeb.ca to look into the problem. After a few hours of searching and a new RAID controller we are back online.

So far it looks like all data is safe and nothing were lost.

Until this downtime server had almost 100 days of uptime. Lets hope for another 100 days :) gcardinal 17:05, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I thought I was banned lol ــмıкε  нaшк  17:31, 16 August 2008 (EDT)


 * I have to say you guys are pretty good about getting right on the problem - and thanks...when I get bored (basically when the girls take naps), I have nowhere else to go lol. € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   20:46, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * ^ Someone's got a pretty active life. =P ــмıкε  нaшк  20:47, 16 August 2008 (EDT)


 * lol I do when they're awake...they run me ragged ;-)  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   20:50, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I almost commit suicide... ah the boredom. God  box    06:41, 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Rewrite template
The idea would be to slap the tag on builds fallen out of meta or outdated instead of archiving them. This way we could retain most builds and less builds would be archived. The tag should be used when the build is still used, but in another form. Of course, if some builds cannot be rewritten because of a nerf, those should be left alone. ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  12:49, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Agree. Such as changes in the functionality, but still viable... Soul Bind for example.  13:46, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I kind of like that template. - Auron 01:56, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Done. rewrite ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  06:08, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Isn't Build update or Proposed build change used for that purpose? Though that template looks awesome. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 13:27, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Well, I've never seen proposed build change used, and that needs a subpage with the changes which is tiresome. Build update is not referring to meta shift but rather game updates. ~ <font color="#444">ĐONT <font color="#444">* <font color="#444">SYSOP  13:32, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * The only occasion that I've used it in was on the Cruel Spear Paragon page. Though the subpage with the changes would probably be the talk page. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 13:54, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

2 questions

 * 1) Where does Innovation count towards the effectiveness of the build? If it doesnt, why have it anyway?
 * 2) Is this new innovation checkbox asking the "Is it meta?" question or the "Is it original?" question?

I is   * Je b us *    <font size=0.5>Enter my contest! 18:23, 18 August 2008 (EDT)


 * Innovation no long counts towards the effectivness of the build because it has no effect on how effective it is tbh (you can split hairs and say they've never seen it or w/e but that's jsut being nit picky). We keep it because we still want to encourage innovation and show that builds can be innovative.
 * it means is it innovative, is it original not the confusing real vetting explanation we had before. <B><font color="#4F94CD">~PheNaxKian </B> (<font color="Red">T /c) [[Image:Phenaxkian_sig_phoenix.jpg|19px]] 18:28, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
 * PvX doesnt really come up with really original ideas, tbh, they just bitch around obs mode and put down what is seen. Of course, it could be argued that the players have innovative ideas but if it becomes popular it is more suitable to use the meta description as opposed to the originality description. I  is   * Je b us * [[image:IAmJebussig3.jpg|19px]]   <font size=0.5>Enter my contest! 19:33, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
 * But it works just fine for PvE builds.[[Image:User Ereanor sig.jpg]]<strong style="color: black;">reanor 01:24, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
 * No, it's just none of the innovative builds get rated well because they aren't meta yet, usually, otherwise we have pretty much have all the most the effective builds anyways, there isn't much squiggle room between a couple WELLs. And Frosty is the only one that's really been bitching around in obs mode with all the Other/Good/Great builds he has.-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 01:26, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Disallow "fake" usernames?
I want to disallow fake usernames - i.e., the name at the top of a page isn't their actual username. For example, User:Wubliest. Oh, wait. That user doesn't exist. Hm. Userpages exist primarily for people to get in touch with you. If you, in the course of prettifying your page, compromise this primary goal of the concept of userspace, you are doing it wrong. User pages are still free to list whatever information that user wants, but absolutely no purpose is served by adding unneeded code to hide your username. If you want people to call you by a certain name (Wubliest instead of Godliest), tell them so, or make another account. Don't put code on your page to intentionally confuse people. It was a huge problem a month or two back, when every other userpage I'd load had something different put up. And the same user would have it say something different every other day. It was pretty bad then, but it still exists now, so IMO something needs to be done. Comments? - Auron 00:33, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Meh, you can always see their sig and rollover it to see that it links to Godliest, not Wubliest. It seems like nubs who arent familiar with the users around here will have problems (i for example did not know that tab and ibreaktoilets were the same person when i started). But its all their problem, not that hard to rollover their sig. I  is   * Je b us * [[image:IAmJebussig3.jpg|19px]]   <font size=0.5>Enter my contest! 00:37, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree with Auron, having opposed it back on GuildWiki. --<font face="vivaldi" size="2.5" color="Steelblue">Shadowcrest 00:40, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't have a problem with them, it's really not that much trouble to see if the URL matches the page title, but if you feel it's necessary, then go ahead. --71.229 01:02, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Please see User talk:Droks or User:Mgrinshpon/Epic lol-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 04:37, 22 August 2008 (EDT)


 * You could make it even more fun: Have it change everytime the page is loaded. Other than that: agreed. It may not be hard to rollover a sig, but it shouldn't be mandatory. -- ›[[Image:Many srs beans.png|Srs Bean Mafia.]] <font color="#27408B">Srs Beans R Srs  05:51, 22 August 2008 (EDT)

Your argument about the name showing in the URL bar is quite valid. It's a little more work than I'd like (I prefer to use inner-wiki links and not URL wiki links, and people displaying fake usernames make that impossible), but it's not the end of the world. Since that name at the top serves no other real purpose, I don't see a point in forging a policy to abate its abuse. - Auron 07:51, 23 August 2008 (EDT)

related sig discussion

 * At first I was 100% with Auron but now I'm not so sure (I think I was agreeing at first because it looks sloppy and a bit immature). If you're already at their user page, you know where you're at (that is if their sig is correct).  Once I started trying to think objectively, I couldn't come up with any downsides or causes for confusion.  Maybe I'm not trying hard enough though...?  € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞  [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   15:08, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * There are multiple sigs that give no indication (or minimal) of who the user is.


 * --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  = User:Ibreaktoilets?
 * -- € ╠╣ Ω¥†\╩/ ∞ [ ÞΩ┌┐Ð ]   - If I didn't know that you're Choytw I'd have no idea whatsoever who this was
 * -- — şąɀɀƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] - This one may just be my computer, but what I assume are supposed to be 'Z's load as tall thin boxes that resemble a lower-case L. Sallypooh = Saz?
 * -- Crow  McHumberbridge  - Crow McHumberbridge = User:PhatNThat?
 * --<font face="Old English Text MT" > ๔คгк [[Image:Stop1.png|18px]]  ςђค๏ร  △|▼ - Barely readable, I did have to hover over the link to find out who it was
 * -- ﮎHædõ๘ یíɳ [[image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG]] - Again, no idea who this was, had to link hover
 * -  ᅳʍęɢgąʈɧıçĸ [[Image:Manstick Sig.gif|19px]]  ʍąŋʂţǐçᶄ  - I didn't have to link-hover, but it could still be argued.
 * -- ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]]  - Reading upside-down is easier than a couple of the others here, but is still a tad irritating. Tied with megathick for easiest to read.

--<font face="vivaldi" size="2.5" color="Steelblue">Shadowcrest 18:06, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Maybe I'll make my sig just a picture of the upside-down thumb. Though, I get the feeling that anyone would still know it's me. Or be able to figure it out once they went to my user page. Also, should anons with variable IPs be banned then? [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  18:13, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * "Your signature should clearly identify the user, and not be disruptive to the talk pages." from PvXwiki:Sign_your_comments would mean that a quarter of the users Shadowcrest mentions would have to change their signatures (and even the font for Shadowcrest is barely legible XD) I've never found identifying users by their signatures a problem, tbh, and in all, I don't think it really matters. If admins want to enforce the signing policy, they could leave messages on those users talk pages, but I'm sure no one really cares that much. =/ ــмıкε  нaшк  18:24, 22 August 2008 (EDT)


 * It's just your computer. Most people see that as a Z. If you really believe most people can't see, I'm willing to change to ᶎ, ʐ or ⱬ (name the visible ones to you). For a picture of how my signature is supposed to be like, check here. Most of them are (very) readable, like shadowsin for one. Maybe you just need some glasses? Also, if you have checked Crow's page, you might've noticed several warnings that his signature needs to be a referral to your name. There just hasn't been taken any action about it yet.  — şąɀɀƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] 18:25, 22 August 2008 (EDT)

Oh man, how little of a brain must you have not to be able to understand my signature. Seriously.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ  18:27, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * He's probably just pissed off because of the whole drama around his signature.  — şąɀɀƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] 18:28, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh, I missed that.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 18:29, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * How the fuck can you justify shadowsin's sig needing changing when yours is 10 times worse and absolutely miniscule? O_O -- The proceeding Cute McPiplup was added by Rawr. 18:30, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * size of sig is directly proportional to size of brain --<font color="Black">Tab  <font color="Black">Moo  18:32, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Miniscule? ... To me it's just a regular lightblue signature. Or was this all before afformentioned drama?  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 18:43, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * He uses some font not everyone standard has. It also happens to be a srsly small font. To make up for that he used big tags which aren't allowed (would break line spacing if you didn't have the font installed), but he seems to have removed that now. So either you have the font installed and it's hardly readable or you don't have it and it looks normal/used to break spacing.  — şąɀɀƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] 18:46, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm gonna make my sig font white so I can be cool. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  19:10, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Personal attacks and other insults directed at my intelligence aside, my point still stands and- more importantly- so does Auron's, which people have ignored to troll me. As for "[that] would mean that a quarter of the users Shadowcrest mentions would have to change their signatures"- if I could quote wording on PvX:SIGN and actually have it enforced, I could probably get 80% of users here to change their signatures. To Saz: if it's just my computer, then your sig does cleary point out who you are, and I've crossed out the line about your sig not identifying who you are. (Though I would like to point out you used the same argument you just used to defend yourself against me yesterday, though if you're going to respond to this please do it on my talk page; the community portal doesn't need Shadowcrest flaming all over it.) Ricky- I never said I couldn't understand your sig. Even if for some reason I wasn't able to at first (I was), I would have already seen it and thus recognized who it is. Please do not assume I'm an ignorant moron without the ability to read upside-down and backwards, as I am quite capable of doing so. All I am saying is that it would be far easier to read if it were rightside up and read left to right. "Also, should anons with variable IPs be banned then?" Of course not. Their sig is easily readable and does in some way tell definitively who they are. If there are any other comments that do not include personal attack, I will be happy to field them to the best of my ability. --[[Image:Shadowcrest sig image.png]] 19:42, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * You're seriously nitpicking about this whole signature thing. I do agree that people with an entirely different name in their signature than their account name should change it accordingly, but signatures that are "hard to read" shouldn't be any problem. A signature is basically meant for people to know who left a comment somewhere, so the next time they see that signature they recognize it as the same person, so people can actually have conversations. The only time it's ncessary to be able to read a signature is when somebody has changed his/her signature, so it's easy to identify that certain person. I, for one, never had any problem with Tab's account actually being "Ibreaktoilets" simply because when somebody signs his comment with "Tab(insertrandombluewaterpokemonhere)" I know who it is. When you're finding it dificult to read a sig, or you're not sure what it actually says (which might also happen to people reading your sig for the first time) just hoover your mouse over the signature, look at the botom of your browser and read. It's not hard, really.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 20:17, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I respectfully disagree. Policies are instituted for a reason: if they were meant to be ignored, they wouldn't have been implemented. You don't put in rules to see how many people can break them. There are exceptions, of course, but I would be willing to argue this isn't one of them. If everyone were free to ignore policies as they wished, people would be left to govern themselves. And with no policies, admins wouldn't be able to back their blocks with anything, and I guarentee you someone would QQ about their block being unfair and it would probably snowball. Do you know what would happen if the community was left to themselves? While it would be rather amusing for a short time, seeing every pokemon listed in every possible format on every page would get very old, very fast :/
 * Also, any drama that occured yesterday involving my signature is completely irrelevant to my current arguments. If I am "seriously nitpicking about this whole signature thing," please understand that is not because it's related to signatures and not that I am somehow bitter towards PvX:SIGN now, it's the principle involved.
 * If I do nitpick about policies, it's because of the reasons in the section above. PvX:SIGN says that "Signature must show their user name or by other means make clear the user name." If I can't even read your signature then why should I be expected to know your username or who you are? For "A signature is basically meant for people to know who left a comment somewhere, so the next time they see that signature they recognize it as the same person, so people can actually have conversations," imagine if everyone you talk to was assigned a color, and they had to sign with a 50x19 solid block of their color. Would you be able to remember who everyone is? I wouldn't :/. As for not minding whether Ibreaktoilet's sig is Tab McPiplup or whatever, I understand your argument (I do it all the time), but new users wouldn't have a clue that Tab McPiplup actually means User:Ibreaktoilets. Finally, "When you're finding it dificult to read a sig [...] just hoover your mouse over the signature [...] It's not hard, really." While I can't come up with any logical reasons why this shouldn't be allowed, the best thing I have to argue with is "It may not be hard to rollover a sig, but it shouldn't be mandatory." --[[Image:Shadowcrest sig image.png]] 21:24, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * You don't have to remember every single user that leaves a comment. There are only a handful of people that are really worth remembering. All the others can change their Sig to whatever they like. If they're worth my memory I should know their names by then ;)  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 21:50, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * a) Add Shadowcrest's new sig to the list. b) Walls of text are baed. Do not do plz. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ cedave  (contributions☆buildpage)  22:14, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * If everyone's signature made it clear who they were it wouldn't matter how many users worth remembering there are :/
 * But even if there weren't a limited number of people whose names you consider worth remembering, it's still not fair to ask people to remember that Tab=Ibreaktoilets, Crow=PhatNThat, etc. etc. It's like someone creating a cypher for all the letters in the English alphabet and asking the whole PvX community (including new members who have no idea what's going on) to remember and be able to coherently use both English and Bilgherd :/
 * If I have to use a walloftext to defend a point, I'm going to. My record is +9261; if I have to break it, I will. --[[Image:Shadowcrest sig image.png]] 22:39, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I prove points better, tbh. [[Image:Cedave_bad.png|16px]] <font color="#AA226D" face="times new roman" size="2"> ツ terribad mcfail  (contributions☆buildpage)  22:42, 22 August 2008 (EDT)

PvX drama about random pointless shit is fucking hilarious.--<font color=#C68E17>Golden <font color=#C68E17>Star 22:44, 22 August 2008 (EDT)

I don't see why people don't just stick to using their standard username in the first place. Seems a lot more logical to me. Unless you have more than one personality (ie. like Tab), I don't see why people don't just keep with their regular name. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 22:50, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * But making drama over people's sig because they're "harder to read" is just...stupid.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 22:57, 22 August 2008 (EDT)


 * lets all just make 15 new users every time we want to make our name more recognisable or make an inside joke. tbh i cant read your sig shadowcrest. and what if im jewish and ricky's sig is only upside and not backwords? [[Image:Effinsig1.jpg|19px]] Effin Mc  Piplup  22:58, 22 August 2008 (EDT)

NOBODY GIVES A SHIT, JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, ROLL OVER THE FUCKING LINK AND READ THE NAME IF YOU REALLY CARE. – Ichigo 724  23:01, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * ^ winner [[Image:Effinsig1.jpg|19px]] Effin Mc  Piplup  23:02, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Image in your sig is too big, tbh.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 23:03, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Fail less, it isn't. – Ichigo 724 [[Image:Ichigo-signature.jpg]] 23:04, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * i think its mine[[Image:Effinsig1.jpg|19px]] Effin Mc  Piplup  23:05, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Notice a joke when you see one, tbh.  ɟoʇuɐʌ ʎʞɔıɹ [[Image:Panic_srsbsns.gif|37px]] 23:07, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I can feel the humor radiating from this section. – Ichigo 724 [[Image:Ichigo-signature.jpg]] 23:08, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * was gonna say, we'd need shadowcrests sig to start to measure 1px at a time.[[Image:Effinsig1.jpg|19px]] Effin Mc  Piplup  23:08, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * .... I can read all of those sigs just fine. The only one you actually have a valid point on, is Tab's, but even that is nitpicking. If you cant read them stop using IE tyvm. and Sazzy the only z you put up there that I can read is the one in the middle, the other 2 are ?. ﮎHædõ๘ یíɳ [[image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG]] 07:29, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
 * PS. I had to hover over your name to find out whoru cuz yours is so damn small and in fancy illegible writing. ﮎHædõ๘ یíɳ [[image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG]] 07:33, 23 August 2008 (EDT)

I agree with Auron. The point of having page titles is that you don't need to check the URL to know what you're looking at. Similarily, the point of signatures is to make clear who wrote what, you shouldn't need additional browser functions for that. That said, looking at the discussion I'm not sure if implementing/enforcing policies to that end is worth the effort. On a related note: we have 4605 pages (862 MB) in the Build namespace (incl. talk). We have 15534 pages (2051 MB) in User space. That makes you wonder if this is a place to discuss builds or rather a playground / web hosting service / trolling forum. But again, I don't see much we can do about that. –&thinsp;<font color="darkblue" face="times">H HHIPPO  &thinsp;&lsaquo;<font color="blue" size="-2">sysop &rsaquo; 07:39, 23 August 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I'm gonna have to agree with Shadowcrest here - for a few reasons, but mostly because everyone's attitude in response was simply dispicable. Instead of trying to refute his logic with logic, you resort immediately to personal attacks and mob tactics. Then you act like it's okay to be a total douche, and that violating policy is fine. Seriously, what the hell?
 * "Maybe you just need some glasses?"
 * Maybe you should make a signature that's readable? It sucks. I've downloaded about sixty language packs and most of those "z"s you've posted still appear as question marks.


 * "how little of a brain must you have not to be able to understand my signature"
 * Yes, I love having to turn my head upside down to read it. Thanks for insulting my intelligence because I'm not predisposed to getting neck cramps.


 * "He's probably just pissed off because of the whole drama around his signature"
 * That's nice. Does it invalidate his argument somehow? Stop it with the fallacies already, jesus.


 * "How the fuck can you justify shadowsin's sig needing changing when yours is 10 times worse and absolutely miniscule?"
 * More logical fallacy. His signature has nothing to do with shadowsin's signature. An ugly person can still call someone ugly - most of you would counter with something retarded like "look who's talking LOL C WUT I DID THAR IM SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FUNNY," but you'd be dead wrong to do so.


 * "NOBODY GIVES A SHIT"
 * I like you alot Ichigo, but read the fucking OP's comments. If he didn't care, he wouldn't have started it.

Anyway, because of the douchebaggery and lack of actual arguments shown, I'm going to have to agree with Shadowcrest's valid argument that nobody bothered to refute. People need to use immediately recognizable signatures. Remember, the intent of the signature isn't to show off - it's to let others identify you without trouble. If they have to turn their head upside down, install 60+ language packs, learn greek, or pull out a magnifying glass, it causes trouble. Also, while we're at it, cut it out with the fake unsigned messages line. You don't need it, and (for the same reason I jump on people for having the "new messages" thing on their userpage) replicating usually valid system messages needlessly confuses people.

Shadowcrest; I'll hit those users you've already posted. If you (or anyone) finds more people with signatures that are more difficult to read than plain english, leave a tell on my talk and I'll get it sorted out. - Auron 07:51, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I haven't installed a single language pack tbh -.- I also immediately offered to change it, I don't see what's the problem. How much my signature "sucks" is hardly the point.  — şąʐʐƴ  ƿooɧ [[Image:PinkNautical.jpg]] 08:00, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I havnt downloaded any either, and I checked IE my signature shows up fine on both.
 * As for no more fake userpage names, I agree its really ridiculous, if you wanted a different name then why did you choose the one you had? ﮎHædõ๘ یíɳ [[image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG]] 09:04, 23 August 2008 (EDT)

Argument: As far as having a different name on your signature, that should be disallowed as it is already a stipulation of PVX:SIGN. As far as signatures with different fonts go, The only user that is unrecognizable to me is Choyt <-Probably misspelled because I cant read it. I think users should only be required to change their signature if someone screen shots it with a ? that they viewed while trying to read whos it was. Such as Sazzy's was before about 5 minutes ago. ﮎHædõ๘ یíɳ  09:18, 23 August 2008 (EDT)

HB monk
Move one to HA or GvG prefix?-- R <font color="green" size="1"> e l y k 05:13, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Archive:Mo/E Healer's Boon Monk
 * Archive:Mo/Me Healer's Boon Monk
 * I don't see an issue. The /Me on a Healer's Boon bar obviously denotes HA usage already. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 15:10, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Not to mention that the bars are pretty damn different--<font color=#C68E17>Golden [[image:Goldenstar.JPG|19px]]<font color=#C68E17>Star 22:43, 22 August 2008 (EDT)
 * ^ I find no reason why they should be merged considering the differences in skills and areas. God  box    08:08, 23 August 2008 (EDT)