Suggestions for Althanas

[Serilliant]

Pursuant to the goal of redirecting this thread, I'll comment on a few of the technical issues that have been suggested here.

Althanas History/Wiki
I was greatly against this idea when it was originally proposed, but it has started to grow on me slightly. My biggest fear is that we lack the staff to properly moderate a Wiki. That combined with the immense amount of initial work in transferring the entirety of our canon (some of which is already written down, and some only exists in a select few heads) presents a daunting proposition. My biggest fear is that a Wiki would split our attentions and may ultimately be fruitless if it doesn't take.

I see its advantages, of course, but I think we could just as easily rope them in by making use of vBulletin's integrated FAQ system. There's already a great deal of history located there, we just need to resolve to beef it up and fill in the gaps.

Membership Purge
vBulletin has an integrated membership purging system that, when I tried to use it about a month ago, didn't do anything. Looking into why and figuring out how to make it work is on my todo list, but with very low priority. I will tend to it in the near future, though.

An Open/Close Mod
This gets suggested every once in a while and always seems to me to be a pretty good idea. We went through a relatively lengthy period where very few battles and quests were actually listed as "open" (most people were soloing or writing with only a small group, and those that were looking for new partners were doing so in the RPC before they even made the thread), but it seems like "open" threads are becoming more common again. I'll see if I can find a quick, easy way to make this happen and if not, I like the suggestion of putting an "O" and "C" graphic in the thread icons.

[Call me J]

Althanas History/Wiki
I was greatly against this idea when it was originally proposed, but it has started to grow on me slightly. My biggest fear is that we lack the staff to properly moderate a Wiki. That combined with the immense amount of initial work in transferring the entirety of our canon (some of which is already written down, and some only exists in a select few heads) presents a daunting proposition. My biggest fear is that a Wiki would split our attentions and may ultimately be fruitless if it doesn't take.

I see its advantages, of course, but I think we could just as easily rope them in by making use of vBulletin's integrated FAQ system. There's already a great deal of history located there, we just need to resolve to beef it up and fill in the gaps.

I like it in principle, but couldn't we have a separate staff for the Wiki? All someone needs to be able to do to mind the Wiki is care about Althanas. They don't need the same skills as a judge or an RoG mod.

[Cyrus the virus]

Now can we get back to the actual topic, please?

In a moment. First, I must suggest that if you think my writing *cackle* is similar to mocking people who wanted to join in an event, you should rethink the way you perceive a random poster's comments. It's a bit harsh to say people were "laughed at" when they wanted to join in on something, when that's just your own (wrong) impression.

I don't think it's ridiculous of me to have felt the need to comment on that.

Regarding the Althanas Wiki, I'm still not sure of how it works on an administrative level. How easy is it to recover data if someone decides to just wipe it all out?

[Call me J]

Perhaps we could have a wiki where only moderators and the original poster can delete, but anyone else can add? That way, no one can take out something unless it is it really needs to be taken out. Honestly, outside of spam, I don't see a need for us to have to delete much.

[Cyrus the virus]

If we can do that, it sounds super.

[Mathias]

That's not particularly the way a wiki works. When someone makes an edit, it appears in a log that anyone can access and compare to any other edit ever made (but usually compared to another edit in recent history.)

Therefore, if someone makes a vile, malicious, innacurate, or otherwise "bad," edit, then it can be reverted to a previous, "good," incarnation.

[Call me J]

That's not particularly the way a wiki works. When someone makes an edit, it appears in a log that anyone can access and compare to any other edit ever made (but usually compared to another edit in recent history.)

Therefore, if someone makes a vile, malicious, innacurate, or otherwise "bad," edit, then it can be reverted to a previous, "good," incarnation.

That'd probably work better then. I was just trying to brainstorm, knowing nothing about wikis. My only concern is what happens when two people have competing views about what happened? Lets say Bob and Chuck are both writing about Malice v Grey Braves. Bob remembers it being Malice who instigated it for no reason, Chuck remembers that the Grey Braves started it. What happens then?

[Broken Dragon]

That'd probably work better then. I was just trying to brainstorm, knowing nothing about wikis. My only concern is what happens when two people have competing views about what happened? Lets say Bob and Chuck are both writing about Malice v Grey Braves. Bob remembers it being Malice who instigated it for no reason, Chuck remembers that the Grey Braves started it. What happens then?

Knife fight to the death?

[Mathias]

They both must attempt to find evidence in order to support their arguments, just like a regular debate. On an actual wiki, like 'pedia, people will search through news databases, editorials, etc. and then properly cite them. I'd figure we'd have to be less formal, considering we don't have that kind of... documentation. (Which is what a wiki would solve, of course.)

So, the best we could offer is the actual thread itself, or someone who participated/judged or was active in a specific relation to the event in and of itself.

If nothing could be produced, it might be simply left as, "It's been forgotten who struck first, but what ensued was," yadda yadda blah blah so forth and so on.

EDIT:

I'll also say it again, if I haven't on here already. A Wiki runs itself, basically. And concerning the idea of "man power," it really wouldn't take much to run it; normal Althanians with downtime or boredom could do it, if they've nothing else to reply to. Also, as the wiki in and of itself develops and is improved upon, there would, in fact, be less to research, etc. etc. as we would get to a point where much of the information has been compiled, and all that is needed now is to develop new protocols for implementing new information, and then implementing that new information, in and of itself.

[Earthwalker]

Aye. From what I understand about Wikis, no one person would be able to wipe the thing out - that would take gross inaction on our part, in addition to a malicious individual.

Also, the most time would be invested into simply setting it up. Once it was there, it'd be fairly simple to maintain, and people would update their own data and all that.

Also, there is no reason that the mods on the wiki should be the same folks as here - but also, no reason they shouldn't be. Wiki-talented folks should run the wiki, and forum-talented folks should run the forum. If the fields overlap, then great - if they dont, the great.

Also, we should get together the group of people who want to run the Reader. Like, now to soon. Perhaps in a new thread, as to not clutter this one.

EDIT: Citing is good. Also, easy. Also, we should do it.

ALSO EDIT: I like the word Also.