DiabloFans

I'm thinking of making a story about Rexxar after he left the Old Horde and before he joined the New Horde...

Maybe add in how he meets and befriends Misha....

Quote from "Equinox" »

I don't think our mods require such a test.

I'd have to dissagree. Many of our mods are good, some are down right awsome, but for a few, it's a miracle that they were chosen to be a mod, and one must ask what (or who) they did to get Moderator/Administratorship...

But yea, most are good... Most...

Still...

Quote from "Jetrall" »

If you really want to be this disagreeable about a simple usage of semantics then we can do it via Personal Message. If you want to let it go and try to be a mature adult who is capable of reading just a little bit between the lines rather than being spoon-fed an explanation of my word choices, then by all means - please do.

I think the main problem he has is that they are leaving alot of wiggle room for mods to do as they please, meaning going after people they may or may not have a personal vendetta against, which may or may not have anything to do with the forums. Which is bad, as mods are supposed to put there personal feelings to the side when the moderate.

But that's what I'm getting out of his posts. Of course, I may be wrong and he may be meaning something completely different, but that's what I am seeing from his posts.

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

The rule exists to emphasize the difference between a healthy debate and one which is just flaming. It signifies that debating is not against the rules, and that disagreement is not forbidden so long as you adhere to the flaming rule.

Which is why I have gotten in trouble before for civilly dissagreeing with certain religous groups and certain Blizzard writters? Key word there is civilly.

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

I was talking about way back, 2007 and before.

I think we had them back in late '07 but not as an announcement...

Quote from "Magistrate" »

Sorry for the double post, but if I edited my last post, I don't think anyone would have ever read this, because it wouldn't show as a new post.

So, anyway, my question:

Say I have an image in my signature (which I do), but I want to add a bar- I'm not sure what they're called- like this:



I figured it's about the size of one line of text, and it's not really a signature "image" since its so short- is it okay if I have that and an image in my sig? The rules don't really say anything about having these little things in there, it just covers a main image and 3 lines of text. So I'm not sure if I'm supposed to interpret it as "only these are allowed" or not.

Honestly I think that some mods will say it's ok and others will be anal about it, so I think it'd probably be best if you just had one or the other...

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

Honestly, do you think anyone of us could ever muster the energy needed to run a project like this if everything we did and every ounce of work we put into it would be nothing more than an empty charade to keep up appearances and make people think we worked? I know I couldn't.

I think you're way too cynical. However you could probably call us too optimistic instead and change your idea of us from scheming manipulators to ihopeful moderators

No, not one of you could muster the energy to do this, but combined efforts could make it possible as well as plausible.

(And this is my optimistic side, my pessimistic side or cynical side would make everyone weep. :D)

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

It's a little bit of both actually. Who said we can't develop the most extensive diablo wiki on the net?

Considering this group's main focus is a forum, and there are multiple groups who's main focus is there wiki, I'd say that we would have a mighty handicap in that ambition. Not saying it's a good ambition to work towards though.

Quote from "Faustuss" »

Diablo I was released 12 years ago, you guys are kind of late in creating a wiki.

There's already a large and established Diablo wiki:

http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Diablo_Wiki

Having multiple wiki's for the same game just makes the quality of each worse. It's best for everyone to come together and focus on just one.

As I said, I believe our wiki is less for information and more to bring everyone together. It will not however be let known if that is true however as that would ruin the entire point, thus it only makes sense that moderators, administrators, and Umero/Mockery himself would state that it is for information. (That what I see from this all at least.)

I've not had a problem editing my posts.

Also, sorry, I thought you ment the forum editing, not wiki, as there were issues with forum editing.

But this is off topic, so if you want to talk about it let's take it to PM and return this to on topic discussion.

Quote from "Siaynoq" »

I already see some entries I'd like to edit.

Just noticed this. (Kinda off topic though.) If your refering to editing on the forums then I believe the original Speedvision skin still allows you to edit. I've yet to have a problem editing anything of mine.

Quote from name="Pablo Riser" »

What about site like this diablowiki and others. He have many interest information about game..
I dont undestend.. Why this project need us?

P.S. Anyway it is goood.
P.P.S. Sory for my grammar.

I THINK this is less about the information and the actual wiki and more about bringing the community together, as like you stated, there is already a Diablo Wiki that has been around for years, is just as easy to register to, and is already an established wiki.

But that's just my thought, and is in no way official. o.O

Quote from "Murderface" »

It is possible, just very lazy. Anyway, I'll definitely be contributing with the sin wars being fresh in my mind.

Hmm. I wouldn't so much say lazy as much as I would say effective time management.

That's neat.

Did you copy the stuff from Diablo Wiki onto our version? Seem's like we could save some time doing that. o.O

Not trying to be mean, I really think that we'd save time copying the Diablo Wiki's info into our wiki. Is that possible?

Yes Magistrate, that is what it means.

Anyway, have to memorize this set of rules now. Id absolutely hate to break a rule.

Quote from "Zkid" »

Merry Christmas all ^.^ not happy holidays...never happy holidays..:rolleyes:

Jesus rocks!

Happy Holidays to you too.

I've found that wishing people Happy Holidays rather then Merry Christmas/Merry Kwanzaa/Happy Hanukkah/Happy Winter Solstice/Merry Eid al-Adha/etc. Honestly, just easier to say Happy Holidays. You don't know what someone believes or is celebrating anyway, you could be insulting them.

When is it that NEW YORK is the voice of reason? Christmas Tree, Jewish Menorah, and Islamic Star and Crescent. Then the Catholic leader whines because he feel's Christianity isn't "included"... Wow... 'Tis the season...


Edit: Scratch that, the closest Islamic holiday is the Islamic New Year, Muharram, which lands on, this year, December the 29th. (As the Islamic calander isn't the same as the Julian one, the date of Muharram changes from year to year...

Quote from "deathMars" »

No no no. I said that to Equinox after he made a comment to me about me being a spammer.

But now when I actually think about it, I think this entire idea of X amount of posts and Y amount of months for an avatar seems kind of pointless since it kills the entire sense of identification which an avatar is supposed to bring. And I'm not just saying this because then my avatar privileges will be taken away.

No, I was talking about an animated avatar. I think everyone should get a plain avatar. I was just talking about the animated ones.

Quote from "kefka666333abc123" »

I think there should be a post/active time requirement for an avatar.....but w/e its not that big of a deal

That's basically what I am saying. If you have 200 posts in 2 months, 400 posts in 4 months, etc (Or something like this) then your going to be active and, in my opinion, deserving of an animated avatar.

Quote from "Thasador" »

And I understand that as well. But if it is a concern about bandwidth..having a post requirement would help out greatly.

Both post requirements and membership length solve the same problem. Only difference is membership length doesnt make a new problem, spam, while post requirements does.

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

Can it be combined? Like say, you both need to have been a member for two months and have 200 posts?

It could be combined, yes. That would actually be a good idea. Say, 500 posts and 5 months, so you can't just spam to 500 and you can't just make an account and let it sit. You have to be active for X amount of time.

Awsome idea!

Quote from "Equinox" »

Which is not a problem. First of all, it doesn't happen that much, nowhere where I posted. Second of all, mods are there to control spam...

I completely understand your point of view. My problem though is that while yes they are here to keep the forums in running order we don't have to dump more problems on them. There are easy solutions that don't cause more problems.

Quote from "deathMars" »

If you think so, may I have an explanation why?

Say Mr. X always makes shitty posts. Every time. He also has picture Y as his avatar. You are reading thread Z and see one of the posts has picture Y. You realize that post must belong to Mr. X thus you ignore the post all together.

That is the reasoning behind that thought process.

(I dissagree with it though, as anyone can change and you should always get the benefit of the doubt, even if your a worthless pos, you still deserve a second chance.)

Quote from "Thasador" »

Yea, i post requirement would probably help out though a 1000 seems a bit extreme. maybe along the lines of 500 would do.

My main problem with anything having a requirement about posts is that it pushes people to spam to get whatever it is.

That's why I always advocate a membership length requirement.

Why must everything go back to post count? What the hell does post count have to do with anything?

I suggest you make the requirement for animated avatars 10 months of being a member.