View source for Separatists of the WUW

I AM ANGRY

''ANGRY ABOUT USERS''

ARE YOU TOO

Well, come here to discuss possible solutions to the obvious and not-so obvious problems in the WUW.

== MEMBER LIST ==

plain links only please

* [[Chwoka]]
*[[User:TheCheese|TheCheese]]
*{{u|JCM}}
*[[User:Shadow Scythe|Shadow Scythe]]
*[[User:Conchris|Conchris]]
*[[User:Skullbuggy|SkullB]]
*{{u|Lemon Demon43}}
*[[User:Chaosvii7|Chaos]]
*[[User:NachoMan|NachoMan]]
*[[User:Raiku|Raiku]]
*{{u|Aussie Evil}}
*[[User:The Noid|The Noid]]

== Discussion ==

===  Whirled ===

''Is it a bad thing? A good thing? Nothing at all? What should we do about the entire thing?''

Personally, I think it's inviting in a lot of terrible users. The people I've seen that come from Whirled are thick and dense. Including that one time I tried Whirled - it was like nobody knew how to type properly or ''not be annoying''. I think I'll be avoiding it from now on, but the users coming into here from there are just irritating. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
:Well, to tell you the truth, the only person I know that would go so far as to tell other Whirlers about this place would be Raiku, and he'd probably only invite them to the Entertainment Wiki, where you can easily find a link to here. Anyway, I haven't gone on Whirled for a while, as I'm not really a fan of multilayer games, but I can see how it can get addicting. All in all, it's not really bad, but shouldn't be a gateway to here. {{User:JCM/sig}} 23:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
::I don't really notice the new users, to be honest. If there are lame kids coming from Whirled and invading our wiki, so be it. We can't really fairly discriminate users that way. And it's not like we don't have our fair share of uncreative pre-teens anyway. So let them come. Chances are, a good number of them will leave over some stupid thing. [[User:Shadow Scythe|Shadow Scythe]] 00:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Whirled isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's not a good thing either, and this is coming from someone who waded into Whirled a while ago to see what it was all about, got addicted to it for somewhere around two months and then slowly lost interest because of the stupid fights going on, namely because I was in some silly group calling themselves the "Thing Army". If those people came from there to here, I wouldn't care for the most part unless they're really annoying and type like they weren't bothered to learn English (''Although those who have English as a second language are excused''). And I agree with what Shadow Scythe is saying here, it's not like we don't have a fair share of uncreative pre-teens stomping about here. In other words, Whirled users aren't necessarily bad, sometimes you'll get a good egg that would contribute and actually make good fanstuff, though I think EWiki having a link to here is a bit unnecessary, they can find this wiki on their own if they're smart enough. {{User:Conchris/sig}} 00:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Whirled is a terrible ploy to fuse every minigame-filled adventure site with the bogus pop-culture massacre crap unloaded upon by this century. Those don't mix. At all. And the fact of avatars and other customizable crap doesn't help it. What's worse is that the users here are dedicating whole pages to it. Though I respect Freedom of speech, I find it a waste of morals and bandwidth to fill up a page with images that say "ohai im so funny because my avi looks cool and i typed something funny". That being said, I don't hold the fact that most users play Whirled against them. I just hate it. It seems to work, though I'd rather it be done away with from this wiki. There have thus far only been a few users brought over by Whirled, which is the least of my worries, though I feel if these users hold their connections to Whirled longer, it will begin to run into the WUW headfirst, taking a much deadlier toll than that that has already been dealt by it's oppressive hammer of crap. I rest my case. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 04:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

=== Bandwagons ===
''Every time something in a new genre pops up, other, low-quality ones pop up in its wake. Do we need stricter quality control?''

This stuff takes up bandwidth, is generally useless, and may actually be fundamentally irritating to some. On the other hand, isn't creativity supposed to be unbridled? On the other hand, perhaps this is creativity in a raw form, and needs to be prepared through learning to express oneself in a more eloquent and original fashion. On the other hand, why do I have so many hands? {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
::Really, I don't think that this is a big a problem as people are making it. If someone copies off of you, it probably won't be as good, or as used, and will probably die out soon, in true WUW fashion. I think that direct rip-offs (like, I believe that two Total Drama Island interactives) should be stopped, but if they are just the same genre (i.e. Wiki User Talk Shows), then it can slide. Other Character Email was thought up by someone after all. Are we copying off of that person? [[User:TheCheese|TheCheese]] 04:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::This matter is entirely dependent on the quality, as there are those that try and succeed(16%), those that try and fail(69%) and those that parody solely to shame them for what they've created(15%;usually Chwoka, Bluebry, Noid, Vindi, TheCheese, Nachoman, and me). The 31% that have any chance are then put through another trial of staying in the loop, and of that 31%, thus far, none of them have been able to keep up, as most of the new crap is tossed away to hop on another, and the rest just dies out from lack of viewership ''because'' others hop on another bandwagon. Based off of this, I can safely say that every new thing rises and falls, some prosper, but these crappy new cheap bandwagons ones just crap the bed;end of story. There may not be a way to stop this, as the generation line dwindles in quality, knowledge, and originality. I fear that this may never end, and from those words, I end my statement. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 04:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

=== "Reduxites" ===
''Recently, there's been a large influx of newer users. These users seem to be more (and I hate saying this) n00by than the rest of the third gen. The grammar is poor, their culture is insulated, and seem to think this website is another kiddy-based site (not saying we're not kid-friendly, just that they're seeming to take the same attitude towards this as they would Whirled or Club Penguin). Me and some folks on IRC have dubbed this "Third Gen: Redux" because at the beginning of the third gen, they were enormous (urrrgh) n00bs themselves, and the users in it "Reduxites". Obviously, the quality of such things they have made a lot of people irritated. What should we do, if anything at all?''

Well, it's not like we can get rid of the new users. Perhaps whoever is inviting the new users could be a bit more selective, but that's even pushing it. I do like the name though, although a more linear line of names might be more practical. 1st gen, 2nd gen, 3rd gen, Reduxites is a little awkward. [[User:TheCheese|TheCheese]] 04:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:I suggested that since they joined during the purge, we could call them 4th Gens, but Denzel just got angry and couldn't see the forest through the trees. Anyway, I don't think we couldn't even get away with get rid of the users - that's immoral. What I'm thinking is we could find some way to help them improve in all ways. All of them. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
::I don't really think there's anything we can do except tell them to improve. So far, they seem to be a lot less prone to argument than most third gens, so explaining to them how to act shouldn't be too hard. I'm sure some of them will turn out to be gems and others will be trolls, but so be it. And reduxies is more like a subsection of the third or fourth gen, and they don't really define the whole generation, just like how "third gen" doesn't necessarily define someone who joined during the third generation. -- {{User:NachoMan/sig}} 04:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Ninja Pom-Pom is a sign of trouble, Strong Rad is a sign of promise, the rest are all inactive anyways, and Cutgirl-Chan is a girl. I needn't say anything else. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 04:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
::::What is the difference between NPP and Strong Rad? {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
:::::NPP is everything we don't want; unable to write transcripts, only really uploads JPEGS, usually ignores certain warnings, whereas Strong Rad is taking it much easier, and is picking thins up. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 04:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::I've noticed that users are generally better when they find the wiki on their own terms, instead of being invited by another user. These people treat the wiki more like myspace or something. The people who find the wiki on their own usually have more commitment, but that's just what happens on average. -- {{User:NachoMan/sig}} 04:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
If we are to help the users, how should we? {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
:Maybe we can give them tips? {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
::Tips on how to leave, maybe. {{User:Skullbuggy/sig}} 01:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Here's a tip for you, Raiku;Don't bring unwanted guests. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 01:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

=== FotF ===

''"The worth", if any, of this award is dwindling. Much like FotW, it appears to be entering a phase where anyone and anything can win, with a few exceptions.  Are we running out of good fanstuff? Is it an inherent problem with the system? Are people just not paying much attention?''
:I think we should get rid of it completely. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 04:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::I believe the problem with FotF is that anybody can choose--introducing the concept of bias. Say somebody extremely popular with the third generation (Chaos, Sephiroth, etc.) submitted an entry with... ''dubious'' effort put in. Meanwhile, a less popular user (Strong Rad, NPP) made an entry with considerable effort and submitted it. Regardless of effort, quality, or any other mitigating factors, the obvious winner will be the more popular one. Case in point? The notorious GAME 1 situation, in which many (if not all) second generation users on the WUW (and a couple third generation users) voted on it, completely blowing any other entries--some of which surpassed GAME 1 in quality--out of the water. This proves my hypothesis that this is merely a popularity contest. The only way to remedy this problem is to create a fanstuff nomination committee. Comprised of users from every end of the spectrum, they can give a result that will (hopefully) make sense--rather than having any Average Joe come up and give his opinion. Is this the democratic way? Of course not. However, in this situation, we may need to abandon the peoples' say. {{User:Skullbuggy/sig}} 05:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:::I completely agree with SkullB. I think that there should be a commitee. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

But before we do anything, we need to decide the ultimate purpose of FotF. Is it to honor the truly great fanstuff? Is it to direct new people (which we do not have much of) towards things they might like to read? These are not my words, but I am simply parroting Super Sam, though I feel it is relevant. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
:Good point. What it seems like, right now, is an "award" honoring the great fanstuff. Perhaps another idea is to change the purpose--make it like a "must-see" kind of deal, rather than a "this is the best you'll be getting here" thing. {{User:Skullbuggy/sig}} 05:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::Maybe, like a page mainly for ads. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:33, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:::I'm not quite understanding what you're saying there. Perhaps you could expand the concept beyond 1 sentences. Perhaps, even, to three! {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
::::Like, a page soley for ads about your fanstuff. Heck, there could be a pages that is added when new users join, along with the guidleines link, that links to good fanstuff. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:39, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:::::But if anyone could add ads, what use would that be? You would just have a sea of people talking about how good their fanstuff is. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
Didn't think of that. Well, I got another idea. If a fanstuff breaks two or more rules, that the fotf comittee (if we make one) can possibly remove it. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:That's already a rule and would not fix anything at all. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
::Oh. But still, a committee would fix everything. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

FOTF probably will never recover from the first three or so awards. It's a good idea in concept, but as Skull said, it just turns into a popularity contest where people like me are trying to screw with everybody and other people are voting for something with a thin, generic reason while their true reason is because they're friends. {{User:The Noid/sig}} 13:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

FOTF does not deserve to have a "commtitee", because, much like it's ancestors, there was no set group that could or couldn't vote for any reason. It was always by the people, for the people, and probably the only thing on the earth with such a rule that I like. It seems unfair to most of the user population to do this, anyways, because our overall quality is slipping drastically, calling for more and more "jumps down the hole", if you will. {{User:Chaosvii7/Sig}} 14:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

=== Moderators ===

''TheDenzel has brought this up before--moderators may not be as useful as they think. Should we keep them around, or should we abolish the group altogether, leaving only the sysops to protect?''
:I say nay--as a matter of fact, most sysops (not to offend) aren't as active as most of the moderators we have around. If we get rid of active moderators, how fast will it take for problems to be solved if sysops might not be around? {{User:Skullbuggy/sig}} 05:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::It's true. Only five have been on in the last two months; Shwoo, Bluebry, Scythe, Sam, and Mu. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 05:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:::Moderators are doing exactly what they were meant to do - be a compromise between user and sysop. However, a drawback of this is that some moderators can let user get in the way of sysop, which is a bad thing. However, it doesn't appear to be a problem for now, but if it does become one, I suggest weeding out incompetent mods. {{User:Chwoka/sig}}
:::You forgot me. --{{User:Aussie Evil/tag}} 06:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::::I'm talking about sysops. {{User:Raiku/siggy}} 06:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we need to change the selection process for moderator. For example, Homestar tiger was/is a mod, but shouldn't have been. We can't trust somebody who "left forever" over something incredibly silly with power like that. {{User:The Noid/sig}} 13:11, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Guys, half, if not more, of the active users here has mod powers. It's not really something big anymore, though, it was nice to have some of that power during my mod reign. {{User:JCM/sig}} 15:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
:Moderators let me sit back and abuse my powers rather than actually doing anything. I say we keep 'em. <('-'<) {{User:Shadow Scythe/sig}} 00:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)