Talk: Admin noticeboard/Archive 1

Discussion

Looks pretty good. ;). Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 05:26, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Should there be a division of the "issues" section into "User issues" and "Build issues"? — Rapta (talk|contribs) 05:28, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Rather than making this actual policy, I may simply add this to the Sidebar in a couple days assuming no one objects (although why anyone would have a problem with this, I don't know). *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:36, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Sounds good. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 05:46, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

I am against this, because I hate change! And I am lazy! :P Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 05:49, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Meh, the page does no harm and I cannot see any objections (other than insipid ones such as Readem's) to this page, so I'm just gonna go ahead and add it to the side bar. It also has the value of being easier to find than the variety of templates that are used for notifying Admins. *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:51, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Update: Added to side bar. Hope this helps. *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:53, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

DE, you know you can simply delete and then restore a build article to clear its votes, rather than manually deleting them one-by-one, right? - Krowman {{sysop}} 05:52, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Yeah. But I prefer my method :). Of course, it does clog up Recent ratings, but, I find it's faster actually (i.e. less work for me :P) *Defiant Elements* +talk 05:53, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Keep things consistent. IS it Admin Noticeboard or Admin noticeboard? Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 05:58, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

ULC, imo. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 05:58, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Done. *Defiant Elements* +talk 06:00, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

So do we just leave resolved issues on the page? or Admin noticeboard/Archive 1/Resolved? -- frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 06:07, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Leave them. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 06:07, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Once the page starts getting bogged down with resolved issues, we'll simply do what GWW does and archive the resolved issues. *Defiant Elements* +talk 06:16, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Sounds good. -- frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 06:18, 23 August 2007 (CEST)

Actual usage of this page

Wish I could make a flowchart of this...

1. Leave coding issue
   1. People debate
   2. Coding issue is eventually resolved
2. Leave IP/general concerns
   1. Admins look at it, tell who to stfu be more calm and respectful, situation resolved
3. Leave a build whose ratings need looking at
   1. Armond gets to it
      1. Armond argues about it
         1. Huge discussion over said vote is created

         Or

      2. Armond insta-removes votes
   2. Other admin gets to it
      1. Something appropriate happens

Imo. -- Armond Warblade{{sysop}} 07:01, 13 October 2007 (CEST)

Ye have so little faith in thyself. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 22:33, 13 October 2007 (CEST)

Psh, I subst: faith for confidence. -- Armond Warblade{{sysop}} 06:43, 15 October 2007 (CEST)

R/me Burning Area

I just posted it but it's not in untested builds but i posted it there... Woefpoef 16:10, 13 October 2007 (CEST)

You forgot the Build: part. I moved it for you. Tycn 16:24, 13 October 2007 (CEST)

Eloc Jcg is at it again...

posted 0-0-0 on http://www.pvxwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Build:E/Me_Obsidian_Mantra_SC_Runner&action=rate for other people making sock puppets. Gave no valid reason for a 0-0-0. I think his vote should be removed. Riff 09:35, 2 December 2007 (CET)

A) Post this on the actual noticeboard next time. B) It's a way of stopping imba-voting. I'd suggest getting used to it, no matter how unfair it may seem. It's how PvX works, and how the admins and other experienced users keep builds they know to be not-as-good out of higher sections. cedave _{(contributions_buildpage)} 17:18, 2 December 2007 (CET)

Correction: What Eloc did wasn't a balance vote. For an example of a balance vote scenario, go look at anything Rapta or Tycn voted on. Chances are it's a balance vote in some form or another. cedave _{(contributions_buildpage)} 17:21, 2 December 2007 (CET)

Wow, I totally feel loved. Anyways, it was an attempt to try and balance out the vote of the sockpuppet. If it's 5-5-5 a sockpuppet put, then I put a 0-0-0 in order for it to be nullified. I did no harm, it's just for an admin to see that there are sockpuppets. — ク Eloc 貢 21:48, 2 December 2007 (CET)

You should have posted that there were socks on that build on the admin noticeboard. 70.157.62.167 21:50, 2 December 2007 (CET)

- ::::(Ec)Is it that much trouble to just post the suspected socks on the admin noticeboard? You cause more trouble than you try to allay. Shen(contribs) 21:51, 2 December 2007 (CET)

These guys are right. In the future. don't do that. Just post the sock votes on the admin noticeboard for us to remove. Otherwise, we have to remove the sock vote, your 'balance' vote, and resolve any controversy surrounding the votes on top of that. - Krowman {{sysop}} 21:52, 2 December 2007 (CET)

Login Problems

My username is User: Grobie and I cant log in, nor get the form to send me my /a new password. If anyone capable of doing so could send me the password to the email speccified in my accound, or a workaround, or the correct place to go - I would realy appreciate this. 84.114.14.149 16:15, 5 December 2007 (CET)

Just make a new one, called like Grobie2 or something. I will perma ban that one so you are not suspected of socking. ~~ frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 20:57, 5 December 2007 (CET)

Done, thanks for the advice Grobilikesmudkips 14:04, 6 December 2007 (CET)

cripshot build vote

whats going on with this? this is allowed? my vote being deleted and being called names like this? look under the cripshot pleaseTalyyn Silent Wind 21:03, 20 December 2007 (EST)

Post on the actual noticeboard, not its talk page. Feel free to present a case rationalizing your contradictory vote. Stop revoting. Shen ^{has cookies} 21:07, 20 December 2007 (EST)

I didn't revote, fvr said that I could change it...Talyyn Silent Wind 21:27, 20 December 2007 (EST)

Which you didn't. Cripshot is a build that will stay in great. Period. It's not moving anywhere. You vote was wrong as was explained numerous places. Next time you break 1RV is a ban. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ 21:29, 20 December 2007 (EST)

I'm not disagreeing with you on this one Grinch, but please give a better reason for removing the vote other than grate means great or whatever. Maybe you have and you just got sick of retyping it. I'm probably missing something though, as you said you've explained numerous places. Whatever. I love you Grinch, and I miss GW for the time being. I'm getting EOTN for Christmas, so I'll see you around then. Cripshot is a great build, especially when you can get a good team to help you. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 00:01, 21 December 2007 (EST)

The short and long of it is, if you're told to revote, that means with a different reason, not the same one. -- Armond Warblade{{sysop}} 00:53, 21 December 2007 (EST)

See my talk. - Krowman {{sysop}} 20:26, 23 December 2007 (EST)

Clean up please

Serveral bugs has been fixed, so a nice clean up is needed. gcardinal 03:10, 21 December 2007 (EST)

Fixed. — Skakid HoHoHo 13:01, 22 December 2007 (EST)

Build Issues

Needs cleanup imo.Bob fregman 22:55, 6 January 2008 (EST)

Issues that remain appear to not have been resolved. Archived ones that I saw were done with. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 22:55, 7 January 2008 (EST)

Suggestions

Don't you think there should be a "Suggestions" area? Mainly for stuff that can't be improved by Wiki/PvXcode but could overall help the site. Stuff like become more public, etc. --GuildofDeals 12:57, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Could you be a bit more specific on this "stuff"? -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 13:34, 26 January 2008 (EST)

I think that would go under "General Issues". ~~ frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop) 13:45, 26 January 2008 (EST)

"This section may also be used for miscellaneous issues" frvwfr2 (T/C/Sysop)

Well I mean for suggestions for things that PvX could improve on. Everything seems to be "Issues" while we never have a section for suggestions. Something like adding a PvE Attributes Counter (like on the main page) would go under Suggestions. --GuildofDeals 16:23, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Reducing Clutter

I've noticed that there's a lot of clutter making navigating through the noticeboard somewhat troublesome. Here's a possible solution (to those experiencing the same problem) that simply modifies the sidebar, creating 4 "subheaders". This would allow for easier navigation for users and administrators, and, for example, BM's wouldn't have to go through the entire General Issues section while going to the Build Specific Issues section, and etc...

An example is on my userpage (of course, the instructions part would be rewritten). Tell me what you guys think. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 14:27, 27 January 2008 (EST)

That does look better than the curent one, but wouldn't it make more sense to jsut have some sort of Nav bar instead (like On every page of Grinchs..), jsut a thought....PheNaxKian (T/c) 14:34, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Perhaps, but having things laid out on the side allows for easier access to the various noticeboards. — Rapta (talk|contribs) 14:35, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Sorry if this is the wrong place

I'm not sure where this is supposed to go... PvX still confuses me with a lot of things. I recently made a build http://www.pvxwiki.com/wiki/Build:N/Me_SS_Punisher I got two votes that were excessively low (in my opinion, but still..) I answered one on my discussion page, but the vote is still there. Also, I have two skills that i use in the build but the build doesn't rely on them... i set them aside in the variants section but is that too obscure? any help/guidance would be appreciated...sorry if this is in the wrong spot Ace 14:12, 13 February 2008 (EST)

You are going to want to refrain from calling people twits. See N/Me SS Nuker. Backfire and Empathy aren't a good idea, mostly because it forces a less effective attribute split, but the cast times aren't practical either. If you're going to use the optional skills in an argument, put them in the main bar. Next time there's a build specific issue, post it on the "project page", that is, the actual noticeboard as opposed to its talk page. Make a heading like ==={{Build|N/Me SS Punisher}}=== under the Build section. -Shen 14:27, 13 February 2008 (EST)

The attribute split isn't horrible IMO, the loss in curses lowers the damage from SS by 6... The premise behind it is for it to be able to be used anywhere to punish enemies for casting/attacking, Which is why Backfire/Empathy are in the build, and the cast time of empathy is the same as SS... Backfire can be slightly prohibitive at times, but is nonetheless effective if placed properly (still does over 100 damage per affected cast). Cry of frustration is a very versatile interrupt, and the rest of the dom magic line can be thrown in as the situation calls for. I apologize for calling people twits... I was rather frustrated but it was still (mostly) uncalled for. And I'm going to change the skill bar for the rest of the domination magic skills I threw in. My stance still stands that a 1-0-0 rating is excessively low... It still has an effective SS and it CAN be used pretty much anywhere making it deserve much higher than 0 universality. Ace 14:54, 13 February 2008 (EST)

That's not what universality means. It doesn't mean that it can be used in a lot of different places, but that it adapts to its specific location well.— Cheese Slaya (Talk) 18:55, 13 February 2008 (EST)

"Universality", according to PvX:VETTING, refers to how well it can adapt to a scenario beyond its design intent; not how many places it can be used in. -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 00:31, 14 February 2008 (EST)

The design intent IS to be universal... Did you want to change the build to narrow mindedly target only one type of monster or one style of enemy..THEN change something to make it effective against something that it had already accounted for? It is built to be an acceptably effective build against ANYTHING... To move beyond the environment it's designed for... you would have to make it usable in less places first...thus defeating the purpose of the build - to be a GENERAL build. Ace 14:06, 16 February 2008 (EST)

You are saying a universal build is one that works for both PvE and PvP. We are saying a universal build is one that still functions admirably in less than favorable circumstances in the area it is intended for. -Shen 14:10, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I don't see anywhere where I mention PvP... The build is tagged for PvE General. And the area the build is intended for is pretty much anything in PvE along any of the four campaigns. And anything where you're being attacked can be considered "less than favorable" so you might want to be more specific.Ace 17:10, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Auron brought the issue up with me previously, and Ace has a point: you know what you are up against in PvE. If it is less than favourable to you, spec against it or use another build. Universality doesn't apply as easily to PvE as it does to PvP. -- Scottie_theNerd (argue/criticise/complain) 00:22, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I must have misread "to move beyond the environment it's designed for". I figure PvE is an environment in itself. -Shen 09:30, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Selfless spirit does not work in mini skill bar

Try it yourself, I've tried every possability except the right one.Frans 05:31, 18 February 2008 (EST)

<pvxbig>[Selfless Spirit]</pvxbig><font color="Black"> &mdash; <face="jokewood">Teh Uber Pwnzer</font></face> 05:41, 18 February 2008 (EST)