Almost every old members of sites are trolly, I can take mAI as an example

Kopeke wrote:
Almost every old members of sites are trolly, I can take myself as an example

I made it a wiki on suggestion on several members in the early stages of the site.

With so much disagreement about it, I'm beginning to question that decision, though.

If we're going for something less wiki-oriented, it would be perfectly possible for me to create pages similar to the Forum rules page that have the PHPBB header and footer but different midpage content. I could probably also make a form for uploading articles and autocreating threads for them.

I don't want to do any of that unless we're sure we don't like the wiki format, though.

On the wiki note, I might do a tutorial for elevators from scratch, though I will be busy this weekend.

Hey everybody. Chill. Chilled yet? Ok. Thanks. Here's my solution. Read it through to the end and then commence raging.

I think one of the things that's causing the most strife over this whole wiki thing is time pressure; we want to have everything ready when new members start joining up. Some people are saying 'but nobody's joining up!' This is causing a bit of a problem, because nobody has any deadline. In my opinion, we have kind of a while - long enough to rest on our laurels for a while. The deadline for our wiki or tutorial set is the moment we 'go gold:' the moment the map/mod database comes online (Its all on you, p0p! ). Without feeling like we're going to have users rushing in here any minute, maybe we can take a step back now.

The original goal of the wiki was to replace the tutorial section of mAL. We wanted to be able to edit it easier, so it became a wiki.

Final thought: We don't need to have a huge section on how to use a brush or how to texture a side of something. Valve's community already has it stated straight up front. Link them to that, because it works fine. Its not a competing fan site, either. If they came here for Portal and we gave them good information, they'll be back. So what do we put into our tutorials? The things that only we know how to do. Our community seems to have people who specialize in doing certain specific things with maps. Grox, for example, takes pride in his destroyed environments. Rather than recreate what's already been done a hundred times over, let's play to our collective strengths to bring people something they can actually learn from. For the basics, send them to VDW.

vanSulli wrote:
Hey everybody. Chill. Chilled yet? Ok. Thanks. Here's my solution. Read it through to the end and then commence raging.

I think one of the things that's causing the most strife over this whole wiki thing is time pressure; we want to have everything ready when new members start joining up. Some people are saying 'but nobody's joining up!' This is causing a bit of a problem, because nobody has any deadline. In my opinion, we have kind of a while - long enough to rest on our laurels for a while. The deadline for our wiki or tutorial set is the moment we 'go gold:' the moment the map/mod database comes online (Its all on you, p0p! ). Without feeling like we're going to have users rushing in here any minute, maybe we can take a step back now.

^exactly what I said. yet I was shunned for it

on the note of the actual post, I don't think a wiki, purely for tutorials, is needed. If we are to do that, I highly advise a personalised section of this site. for admins, to moderate a forum and wiki would be very hard, especially if the wiki's just for tutorials.

Wikis are nice looking and clean. They are easy to edit. The search feature will just pop you to a page with that title if one exists, which a forum does and cannot. From what I've seen of people contributing to the wiki so far, there's very little need for moderation at all at the moment. If we find that there are shitty tutorials when people start joining up, then we can restrict access to who is allowed to contribute. To add something, you'd just write a nice email that says 'I'd like to write about this. You can see what I've done about it here.' That keeps the quality high, the content nice and clean, and everybody gets a nice even shot at it.

vanSulli wrote:
Wikis are nice looking and clean. They are easy to edit. The search feature will just pop you to a page with that title if one exists, which a forum does and cannot. From what I've seen of people contributing to the wiki so far, there's very little need for moderation at all at the moment. If we find that there are shitty tutorials when people start joining up, then we can restrict access to who is allowed to contribute. To add something, you'd just write a nice email that says 'I'd like to write about this. You can see what I've done about it here.' That keeps the quality high, the content nice and clean, and everybody gets a nice even shot at it.

Maybe a "whitelist" could be added? like only the founders (aka mAL's vetran member) could edit the wiki?

Also, > Kizzycocoa wrote:

vanSulli wrote:
Hey everybody. Chill. Chilled yet? Ok. Thanks. Here's my solution. Read it through to the end and then commence raging.

I think one of the things that's causing the most strife over this whole wiki thing is time pressure; we want to have everything ready when new members start joining up. Some people are saying 'but nobody's joining up!' This is causing a bit of a problem, because nobody has any deadline. In my opinion, we have kind of a while - long enough to rest on our laurels for a while. The deadline for our wiki or tutorial set is the moment we 'go gold:' the moment the map/mod database comes online (Its all on you, p0p! ). Without feeling like we're going to have users rushing in here any minute, maybe we can take a step back now.>
^exactly what I said. yet I was shunned for it

That's because Van didn't try to use his rank as an argument

It seems that some people are assuming that the wiki would have to follow a certain format.

It's possible we could adopt a sort of half-wiki. That is, a wiki-like editing structure, but with only approved members being able to edit, and more of a list of articles/tutorials than a network of interlinked articles about every single thing.

p0rtalplayer wrote:

It's possible we could adopt a sort of half-wiki. That is, a wiki-like editing structure, but with only approved members being able to edit, and more of a list of articles/tutorials than a network of interlinked articles about every single thing.

I like the idea. The goal is to have a out-of-forum tutorial section, and a "colsed" wiki is the best way to go IMO.

Kopeke wrote:
That's because Van didn't try to use his rank as an argument

Van's rank is unspoken yet known always.

@wiki idea: I like a specific-group half-wiki. This would both give us no need to moderate it (extensively anyway), and we'd have a very nice, useable tutorial and guide database.

Kopeke wrote:
That's because Van didn't try to use his rank as an argument

I have no rank here, other than founder. I mention my wiki experience because, surprisingly,we are talking about making a wiki.

Of course, if you want my two years of wiki adminship to never be mentioned, so my experience does not attempt to help mAI, please, do ask. But I mentioned it primarily to try to help lend what I have learned.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Of course, if you want my two years of wiki adminship to never be mentioned, so my experience does not attempt to help mAI, please, do ask. But I mentioned it primarily to try to help lend what I have learned.

All this experience, and all you've done is told us a wiki would be extra work and that we need 100% original content that is available three times over in other wiki's.

Jomonay wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Of course, if you want my two years of wiki adminship to never be mentioned, so my experience does not attempt to help mAI, please, do ask. But I mentioned it primarily to try to help lend what I have learned.>
All this experience, and all you've done is told us a wiki would be extra work and that we need 100% original content that is available three times over in other wiki's.

You really do not like me. Still not seen a single positive comment

Regarding the comment, we aren't even sure what the wiki is about, yet we've got an affiliate lined up, plan to link to the VDC and have our own wiki up. We've jumped the gun so much, the bullet's miles and miles behind us.

Al I'm asking is for all of it to slow down. I want mAI to succeed, as much as all of you. And I see this wiki stuff being a major issue if done wrong.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

You really do not like me. Still not seen a single positive comment

Regarding the comment, we aren't even sure what the wiki is about, yet we've got an affiliate lined up, plan to link to the VDC and have our own wiki up. We've jumped the gun so much, the bullet's miles and miles behind us.

Al I'm asking is for all of it to slow down. I want mAI to succeed, as much as all of you. And I see this wiki stuff being a major issue if done wrong.

I'll be positive when there's something to be positive about. This whole situation has been blown massively out of proportion.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Kopeke wrote:
That's because Van didn't try to use his rank as an argument>

I have no rank here, other than founder. I mention my wiki experience because, surprisingly,we are talking about making a wiki.

Of course, if you want my two years of wiki adminship to never be mentioned, so my experience does not attempt to help mAI, please, do ask. But I mentioned it primarily to try to help lend what I have learned.

Your flaunting your wiki admin status again...

Also we HAVE asked. A lot.

Please try to argue WITHOUT using the wiki admin thing, because you've said it so many times now i'm not sure anyone cares anymore.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Regarding the comment, we aren't even sure what the wiki is about

Everybody agrees it will be about portal and portal 2 mapping, mainly tutorials on specific topics.

Kizzycocoa wrote:
we've got an affiliate lined up

One person mentioned that theportalwiki might give us some templates, and not many people seemed to like the idea.

Kizzycocoa wrote:
plan to link to the VDC

It was an idea to make the wiki more comprehensive for a new hammer user. And it's not necessarily happening, though I still don't see why it's a bad thing to provide users with better content.

Kizzycocoa wrote:
We've jumped the gun so much, the bullet's miles and miles behind us.

There's no gun. No bullets. The time scale for this thing is completely flexible. I'm having some difficulties getting myself familiar enough with PHP to create a whole download database from scratch, so it could be some time yet.

Just relax. This isn't going to be a million-user site on the first day. We do have a valvetime reporter who we're gonna notify when the site's ready, but I don't expect more than maybe a hundred users from that.

We're not an official site. We do want to be professional, but I very much doubt that implies the rigorous planning and infrastructure you seem to think it does.

I have some experience with M$ Visual Web Developer and SQL. I can try to bash something out of that after my exams are finished if you like.

groxkiller585 wrote:
Your flaunting your wiki admin status again..

You know what? I give up.

Is it a CRIME to say you have a lot of experience in a field? Gfdi.

You know what, fine. I won't put any more input here as obviously everyone knows enough to not give a shit. I'll just leave my oh-so obvious flaunting out of this. Because as everyone knows, I flaunt everything. Im a goddamn supermodel of Internet flaunting, obviously. That's totally how my personality is and we all know it obviously.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

groxkiller585 wrote:
Your flaunting your wiki admin status again..>
You know what? I give up.

Is it a CRIME to say you have a lot of experience in a field? Gfdi.

You know what, fine. I won't put any more input here as obviously everyone knows enough to not give a shit. I'll just leave my oh-so obvious flaunting out of this. Because as everyone knows, I flaunt everything. Im a goddamn supermodel of Internet flaunting, obviously. That's totally how my personality is and we all know it obviously.

No, you just flaunt your admin status. Which is true. We've told you multiple times to stop telling us about it. If you established it once then stopped that'd be fine, but you bring it up way too much. All I ask is you stop bringing that up for your counterarguments. Use examples! Show why you are right and we are wrong. If you can do that, much less of us will bitch about you telling us constantly your an admin.