User:Soi Sticker

Need moar sand

Shit I listen to

best satire ever
<!--

Explain to me what...

 * 1.Elitism is, and how it applies to PvX mentality.
 * Implying there's a "PvX mentality"  RąʂKɭɘş ♣  14/f/japan  05:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Mentality is answering questions with overused memes. You lost the game. Soi Sticker 15:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I could go on a huge tirade about elitism, to be quite honest. But, I don't think you should presume that there is a PvX mentality anymore. Back in the day, PvX itself didn't essentially have an elitist mentality. It was simply an extension of elitism from GW mentality. This site itself is nothing without GW, and while some people may try to vote balance or exploit any sort of policy, it's not due to being an elitist, but rather that they hold insecurities or/and are retarded. Vincent Evan [Air Henchman]  [[Image:vincels.jpg|19px]] 15:39, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What? PvX was much more elitist in the past. Everyone is a carebear these days.-- Relyk 19:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think pvx was ever elitist. we all suck at the game. if you vote shittily on a good build, or good no a shitty build, you're just subjectively an idiot. removing things that are wrong isn't elitist &mdash;  ska  05:23, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * 2.If Miku as a new hero is a hint that melee AI buff is on the horizon, would that have any impact on their viability in PvE?
 * It's meaningless until the update actually happens and the new AI can be tested. -- Toraen   confer  08:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * For it to be "fixed", we know what that would entail. Whether or not it has been implemented, we know what we want out of melee heroes. Spam attacks, train targets when you call and maybe go into some defensive kiting mode when they reach 25%~ health. Maybe that can fix dagger chains and JS-FF-DB spam on a hero would be viable. Soi Sticker 15:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well if they basically acted like a competent player they would be more viable, of course. There's no real evidence that this will be the case though. -- Toraen   confer  16:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * also would be great if we could call targets for individual heroes! Fianchetto 16:20, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You can already Target Lock all heroes, but there is no keyboard shortcut; you have to manually click the target button on the micro panel. Fine for one or two heroes, I guess, but tedious. Soi Sticker 16:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * that's for pets. but i guess they could copy-paste some pet programming onto hero panels.
 * Heroes have it too :P go see. Soi Sticker 17:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Give melee heroes the ability to go ball up a mob :P go go.. Chieftain Alex 19:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The ability to let heroes ball, nah, anet sucks too much to complete that. Shadow  [TC] HA Squad  19:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * well if they ever do, i'd gladly trash sac scythe and starburst! (DwG still good just because spirit spamming is boring.) in the meanwhile, we still need ele, mes, and monk ball builds. Fianchetto 02:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

(Reset Indent)Nah, ArenaNet honestly couldn't be bothered to futher improve physical melee capabilities. Although, WotA heroes are fairly decent as they are. Vincent Evan [Air Henchman]   01:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Magnetic Aura: Elite Enchantment Spell. Foes within earshot shadowstep and remain adjacent to target hero for seconds. &#9823;Fianchetto [[Image:Mending.jpg|19px|link=User_talk:Fianchetto]] 23:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * 3.Would PvX benefit from users having no identifiable ID? i.e "Anonymous".
 * Keeping track of conversations, or revision history, or anything else that makes a wiki work would not be fun. Also we'd still need to be able to warn/ban those who are violating policy, which means separate contact for different users and thus some form of ID. Technically, your username is a pseudonymous identifier: no personally identifiable information related to it is visible to other users (except Admins via checkuser) and you could use a name and email unique to this site that you do not use elsewhere (and not give out your GW character names if you were worried about tracing through that). True anonymity doesn't work with a wiki because then there would be no way to enforce policy or prevent vandalism short of locking a page entirely. -- Toraen   confer  01:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You could ask the opposite: "Would PvX not benefit from users using pseudonyms?"-- Relyk 01:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking more along the lines of flattening circlejerks, reputation and e-peen. Only the facts will be contested, nothing to do with previous ideas made by the poster. There would of course be a system, and perhaps you would still sign in, but names would be locked to Anonymous or so, but the username is still visible to admin. You will also be, obviously, identifiable on your userpage, but when it comes to build space (where it matters slightly more)... You get vandals even with ID tags. Mostly looking for attention and e-peen. Soi Sticker 01:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * but but but then how are the sheep going to keep track of who to think for them :( &#9823;Fianchetto [[Image:Mending.jpg|19px|link=User_talk:Fianchetto]] 02:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, so how would disputes be handled in a transparent manner in this system? It would be a lot easier for an admin to abuse their privileges, since regular users cannot check the admin decisions. Ban logs wouldn't show who was banned or no contributions would be linked to that name under your hypothetical system - everyone would have to take the admin's word for it. Also, this wouldn't stop circlejerks, as anyone wanting to bring friends along for arguments and voting can coordinate outside of PvX. Reputation being gone is not inherently a good thing, there's a reason Frosty, Tahiri, and the other MCs have that position: they are recognized as understanding the PvP metagame. Admins are also selected based on their reputation as being helpful and trustworthy. Community input is important in determining who should lead the community. We're not a democracy, but we aren't going for an oligarchy either. Having full anonymity also won't necessarily result in people discussing more rationally than with our current system. The users who do make half-baked arguments and meme responses do that because they are not skilled at argumentation, not because they're relying on circlejerks (the latter is just another symptom of the former). -- Toraen   confer  03:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


 * 4.Has changed for PvX in the past six years? Negatively or positively.
 * PvXwiki is defined by the people who contribute to it and changes as people come and go and interact together. I wouldn't say define changes as negative or positive, rather that the wiki is constantly evolving for the better. I view a day where RC has more than 20 edits a day as positive; any change is better than no change. The only possible negative change is when someone stops contributing to the site.-- Relyk 13:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd say there's been an overall improvement in the environment of PvX over 6 years, seeing as the worst trolling occurred well before I was admin but you don't see that level of terrible posting anymore. We've made things more accessible with Build Packs, organized builds better with more specific categories and consistent naming (an ever-ongoing project though), and actually hold people to use coherent reasoning in votes now. However, the decreased editor count has hurt the wiki. It's harder to keep things updated, especially PvP, when the small userbase left barely has any interested editors. Also, while the move from wikia was warranted (meddling in user rights and the skin changes) it was handled unprofessionally and hurt our reputation and wikia's willingness to aid the split/transfer. -- Toraen   confer  15:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So, what deterred the interest of the editors? Soi Sticker 22:17, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A better question would be "what has changed for pvx in the last three months". Chieftain Alex  22:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The last 3 months haven't seen huge decreases in the number of active editors. I was referring mostly to the gradual leaving of editors over PvX's lifetime as they lost interest in GW and thus PvX. No one steps up from anonymity to replace them largely because everyone remaining is elitist and stubborn (even when they're bad/wrong). It's definitely a barrier to entry, and we don't attract skilled players because of our reputation and the fact that skilled players don't need the wiki. -- Toraen   confer  01:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think Alex was alluding to something else Toraen :P  With Love ♣  RąʂKɭɘş  02:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I got the impression Toraen was alluding to something as well Rask :P Chieftain Alex  18:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * We have no lack of stubborn contributors for sure.-- Relyk 19:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * 5. Can we tell how many views PvX gets per day or how many views a page gets? If not, why not?
 * We did, but those that existed were Wikia features iirc; you have the alexa rank. (Waits for toraen to reply)-- Relyk 01:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's probably a feature you can enable in a mediawiki install, or maybe an extension is available for it. I have no idea though because I thought we did have it here. I just don't look at the footer all that much. -- Toraen   confer  01:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be a pretty decent feature. ~Soi_ɹәʞɔ!ʇs 01:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)--!>