User:Bicycle Wheel/RationalWikiWiki Treehouse archive 3

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Front page news[edit]

I'd like for us to have a discussion here about setting some criteria for what we think classifies something as "Front page-worthy" material. This goes for all articles, including the ones which are currently our "featured" articles. Thoughts? Punky McPunkersen 13:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok. discuss. Ty 15:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
No furries! Srsly, yiff in hell. Furries are creepy. :)--Brxbrx 16:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I posted a few ideas on main page talk last year. I couldn't get the randomiser to work properly. Rrose Selavy 17:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, if we can agree on a standard and on what pages to add/subtract, I could work on the implementation of it. I've worked a little bit with it after I added Human, and it is a huge swath code all over the Wiki that must be changed, but I can deal with the technical work if we can just agree on what we want to add/subtract. Punky McPunkersen 22:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Remove Shack, add MC, Trent(once expanded), Armondikov. Ty 04:08, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
no more furries on the front page--Brxbrx 02:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to Crundy[edit]

We have all just lost the game. Punky McPunkersen 14:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

He must be punished. I wonder if he would taste good in curry. Ty 14:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Marcus[edit]

I suggest that we put all his socks on one page and make the others redirects. Agree?--False Flag 19:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

for the record, I am not one of his socks.--Brxbrx 19:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Don't be stupid. Those are probably not his socks. It's just Neveruse being Neveruse as always. 89.135.100.67 19:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Agree with the confection, Occasionaluse probably isn't Marcus. Tha ASK socks were likely real, the others I don't think so.Ty 19:50, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
I'd bet my life that Occasionaluse is Marcus.--False Flag 20:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
While we're on the subject I'm certain that EdmundBurke is him and Theemporer is also obvious from way back. The others are borderline but all odd in some way. I've not seen enough of Brxbrx to comment. Hi Brxbrx.--False Flag 20:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
By the way Brxbrx one way in which Marcus gives his socks away is by having them argue with each other, complain about each other and block each other. If you don't want to be confused for a sock of Marcus then you know who to avoid.--False Flag 20:36, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. I wasn't there for the "Neveruse period" or much of theemperor. Someone has way too much time on his hands. Ty 20:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
dickweed occasionaluse listed me on his userpage as one of his socks--Brxbrx 20:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
I object to your disingenuous assertion that I am a sock of Marcus. I have yet to see any convincing proof that I am, in fact, an Irish college student living in Europe. -Theemperor
Ah! Ty is a sock of Marcus! Look how he always gets involved in the Marcus stuff.
Sigh, would you like me to make a video where I yell "I am not Marcus Cicero" at the camera? Ty 11:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
If you want to. Look at you talking to yourself on this page. Don't you see how pathetic you look Marcus?

DFTT[edit]

Anyone else concerned that this is being trotted out WAY too much? I mean, seriously, any time someone brings up a criticism of RW it's labelled as concern trolling. Either the point should be refuted or addressed - there is no other option that should be available. It might be worth unilaterally changing the DFTT template to giant red letters saying "FEED ME, SEYMOUR, FEED ME!" Armondikov 11:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Do it. Ty 11:44, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I think a lot of people seem to {{DFTT}} me rather than responding to my points. Maybe they don't want to talk about it any more. Fine, then don't, ignore me instead. But this whole "if you disagree with me you are a troll and hence no point answering you" philosophy is the same as what RW accuses CP of. And SuspectedReplicant with his mindless chant of "fuck off troll", "fuck off troll", "fuck off troll"... exactly the kind of behaviour a real troll would engage in.
(I will admit I've started using it myself, but only back at people who use it on me... as a way of saying, "hey, you want to play the troll-accusation game, I can too!"
So yes, Armondikov, I think you have a good idea. --Maratrean 11:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Fuck off, troll. SuspectedReplicant 12:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Now now, let's keep the peace. Punky McPunkersen 13:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Troll Ah, well... Armondikov 14:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree in principle, Armondiko, but I think that in this recent case, the criticism was indeed illegitimate and/or concern trolling. Liveware Problem 14:43, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Trolling is very specifically a repetitive thing. Based on that, I don't think it can ever be justified using some stupid template based on what is effectively someone's first post, whether you suspect sockpuppetry or not. Oh, and why are all of RW's critics suddenly the same person using socks? Isn't it possible that the site has attracted multiple critics? Though I suppose it's not my place considering my allergy to drama, 99% of the time I can actually restrain myself from flaming off in people's faces. Armondikov 14:59, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't believe it's all the same person wearing different socks - the personalities are too different so it's either a real troll meister or different people. Maratrean is a tedious dick trying to spam his stuff all around the site. He claims to be rational while spouting stuff that even Andy would blanche at. Continuing to come out with nonsequiturs, bloody tq posts and yet more unfalsifiable shite is trolling. DMorris was clearly the little man we know and love from CP, and his Florida Bureau of Who Gives a Fuck was patent trolling. SuspectedReplicant 15:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Again, Amy, there are times when you have to call a spade a spade. I was right in calling Duke an MC sock. However, I have not called anyone else an MC sock. So at whom are you levelling your criticism? Liveware Problem 15:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Probably the BoN above. Apparently I'm MC now. News to me.Ty 19:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
The accusations do tend to get repetitive after a while. I was shocked at first, but then it became unremarable fast. The only real problem comes when the accusations get leveled on your RWW page, because newbies then take them as fact and go around all "LOL UR MC", which gets rather annoying. 166.137.139.253 21:31, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Can't we all just get along? Please, folks, let's not fly off into an HCM here. I know those of us involved are better than that. Punky McPunkersen 15:45, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes!! We should all be nice to each other!--Honey 18:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Fuck off SuspectedReplicant, a person who levies accusations against others but isn't willing to engage in any discussion about whether those accusations are fair is not being rational, and is not worthy of any respect. You are the troll. --Maratrean 06:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

You have absolutely no concept of rationality as your idiotic trolling proves. Piss off to ASK where you and PJR can whisper sweet bullshit into each others' ears without bothering anybody else. SuspectedReplicant 07:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
You don't know what rationality even is. You don't understand the difference between rationality and agreeing with my own opinions. Move to Afghanistan, you'll fit in well over there. --Maratrean 07:32, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Seriously, fuck off. You and your made up bullshit are just pissing people off now. SuspectedReplicant 07:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
If you aren't interested in a discussion, why participate in it, why not just ignore it? Why get "pissed off"? Is it people expressing opinions radically different from your own which pisses you off? If it is made up bullshit as you claim, why not just ignore it? Yet, it seems to get under your skin - why? --Maratrean 10:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Because you keep spamming it everywhere. Like here, for instance. SuspectedReplicant 11:06, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
How am I spamming my religious views here? Nowhere on this page is any mention of what any of my religious views are, or any attempt to argue for them, or respond to objections to them. This page is purely discussing meta-issues. Armondikov began this discussion by suggesting that allegations of trolling are being made too liberally, too frequently and unfairly. I agree with that, because I think that is exactly how you have been treating me. Yet again, you refuse to engage with my substantive points, and just continue to argue by assertion. You then brought your claims that I am spamming into the discussion - claims that you have made previously, but have repeatedly refused to engage in any rational discussion of whether they are true. And Punky, your justification for blocking me from this site seems to be based on little more than disagreement with what I have to say. Isn't that what Conservapedia does? --Maratrean 00:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

This so needs to be covered at RWWW:WIGO RWW! humanUser talk:Human 06:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Whose bright idea[edit]

Was it to get rid of the "inactive" template and change it to an extension of the stalkbox template? I demand an answer, as you left a nice categorization mess that needs cleaning up. Conficker 00:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

that would be SuspectedReplicant.Ty 00:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
I can try to fix it as soon as my new battery gets here, hopefully tomorrow.Ty 01:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
In the interim, it gives us something to increase our edit counts with. Punky McPunkersen 02:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
What the hell? So not only does he have the most uselessly hypersensitive troll-dar on RW, but he makes edits fucking things up that he doesn't bother fixing? Guy needs to stick to upholding unpopular principles and writing WIGOs; that's all he's good for. Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" (cover your eyes!) 01:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
and acting like he's better than everybody (or just acting like he's better than me)--Brxbrx 01:28, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
It's already fixed so go fuck yourself Hans. 212.139.235.168 16:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

so[edit]

There's been some interesting dramz o'er at RW. I am too lazy was involved in it, so maybe I shouldn't write about it myself.--Brxbrx 05:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

What happened? I was lacking in internet. Ty 02:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Too lazy to even link? :/ Rrose Selavy 09:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
check out the chicken coop--Brxbrx 13:51, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Apart from when I summarised its contents for the RWW article, I try to stay well clear of the coop. Too much tl;dr drama-drama to pay attention to. Armondikov 14:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Slow[edit]

Is my connection fucked (though Opera Turbo isn't speeding it up despite being functional) or is RW getting slashdotted again? Armondikov 21:36, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, the widget on the tech blog popped up and says "very high", but that's based on the old server so isn't a great indication. Armondikov 21:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
It's slow for me to so I guess it's a server problem, DDoS (light version though] or some blogging group found a RW article with pink ponies again. --Ullhateme 21:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Slow for me too. Ty 21:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
... and now it is down for me. Ty 21:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

BORKEN! PFoster 22:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

We may need that server upgrade now, this is getting depressingly common. Ty 23:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
It is back! Ty 23:13, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Given our latest fundraiser's success, I think the RWF may want to visit Suspectedreplicant's point about increasing our traffic capacity. Maybe. Punky McPunkersen 01:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Trent says it should hold the baseline and the average spike, but as he said, there's no sense blowing the money on hosting that will see us through the biggest spikes that only happen occasionally. Of course, we want to survive the slashdot effects, but not at the expense of paying for capacity that we're not using 95% of the time. Armondikov 08:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
There are several things that can be done without spending money. Top of the list is killing off all the dynamic signatures. Everybody seems to agree this would be a good thing but nothing ever happens. #2 would be to look at a different search system - the MediaWiki default isn't great. UESP is probably going to replace it with Sphinx or something similar soon - see this.
The point with the slowdowns is that they're becoming more frequent and more severe. If RW keeps growing, that's going to keep happening. Sooner or later it's going to take money to fix the problem. SuspectedReplicant 18:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
RW uses the Lucene search engine. 89.135.100.67 19:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Well fair enough, that's one option gone. It just moves up the day when money must be spent. SuspectedReplicant 19:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
According to Trent's last email, the baseline traffic has shot up so we've upgraded the hosting to cope. This should last but the next level (considering RW is a dynamic rather than static site) is moving into considerably more complicated territory requiring multiple servers and backups and front end stuff bolted on. Armondikov 19:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, if I ever remember to get my will written, you can always kill me off, that should last RW about 25 years. Ty 19:36, 28 April 2011 (UTC)