FANDOM

Go ahead and talk to me ^_^
InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk

I'm waiting for my welcome... lol InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk

Welcome to the wiki. ~~ User Frvwfr2 signature frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 15:44, 2 August 2007 (CEST)

Sig

Welcome. Your sig needs to be changed, unfortunately - you need to use the code {{subst:User:MrMetalFLower/Sig}} instead of just {{User:MrMetalFLower/Sig}}. If you could go and do that to all your sigs (a list of them can be found here - all the ones with "inclusion" next to the link) that'd be great. You'll also need to change the code in your preferences, under "nickname".

What this does is prevents someone from changing User:MrMetalFLower/Sig and forcing the entire wiki to reload your sig everywhere for everyone that uses the wiki (which, over a hundred people at once - not unrealistic, I think you'll agree - can cause some serious lag on the server). You've got it better than I do - I didn't find out until I had my sig on at least a couple dozen pages!

If you could also start signing your comments with four tildes (~~~~), that would be good too. This adds a timestamp at the end of your sig. Currently it appears that you're signing with three tildes (~~~), which does not add the timestamp. (If you are signing with four, we'll have to figure out some way to get the timestamp in - it's really helpful.)

Thanks for your help,

-- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{sysop}} 16:06, 2 August 2007 (CEST)



Hey! Thanks for the rating on Build: N/any Discordant Technobabbler! I have been completely surprised by some people's response to it... I guess there are asshats no matter where you go online, eh? As for your comment about needing builds that create new meta, I couldn't agree more! I'll even go one further and say we need builds that define new rolls for existing professions, especially ones who don't hold up so well in HM, like Ritualists and Eles for example. Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 14:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem is the asshats are somewhat concentrated on this site. People are too busy with their own stupid preconceived notions on meta that maybe meta might even stop coming out of this site. All new ideas are frowned upon. Everything that's not essentially guaranteed to win is voted 0-0-0. Man, this place needs some big changes. Anyway, it's cool that there are people like you on here that are actually friendly and all that, so yeah, hi :P --InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk 14:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
People don't come on PvX looking for a new meta uber build in Trial and Testing, they make it up themselves in-game. PvX doesn't dictate the meta, we follow it. Oh, and people are asshats on PvX.--Paralyzing GazeLiger414 Liger414 talk 16:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

translation of your user page

"BAWWWW MY BUILD GOT TRASHED", meta is created by good players you know, you're not one of them. --Anonimous. D: 18:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

No mate, it's just communicating how pissed I am that even good builds are deleted on here. InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk 19:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Erm generally if they're deleted it's because they're not good or there are better alternatives.--Paralyzing GazeLiger414 Liger414 talk 22:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
"Generally" there isn't child porn on the internet. InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk 09:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
OMG lol. Creating meta probably doesn't happen on PvX for some of the reasons you mentioned above. In general, there are a lot of 16 yr olds here with overinflated ideas about their own worth because of being marginally (or better) successful in a video game. The sad thing is that they help write the community rating rules and then don't follow them, or bother to think about things logically. Builds maintaining a solid 60+ DPS are rated other (because they are too generic for example) and builds where the sole purpose is to knock stuff down every 12 seconds are rated "good" (because they can knock stuff down!) so you decide what that means about the way ratings work. The more intelligent users will be happy to admit that the rating system is a mess, but few of the admins/BMs seem to have much interest (or perhaps time) to actually try and fix it. I'm seeing more and more people in game stop using PvX for some of those very reasons and instead turn to guides and builds on site like Guildwarsguru.com. Maybe they are right to do so, but I think it's at least a good idea to TRY and get people to think about their actions. Mostly I get ignored though :) Maybe you can do better. Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 05:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Vote balancing

Saying "I'm not vote balancing" and then giving the build a high rating with no reason is pretty obvious vote balancing. Giving a real reason or your vote will be removed. --☭Guild*talk* 20:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

You're quick to remove a vote balancing vote but when people give it 0-0-0 you just leave it as it is? InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk 21:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Your vote here

Ether Renewal has a PvE version that lasts longer. I agree with your other reasons, but ER lasting only 7 seconds is wrong. Toraen 15:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah cool, my bad. It still wouldn't be enough for maintenance though :P InfernoMrMetalFLower-...tlk 16:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.