ToME Wiki wanted/needed?

Message

Neil · #91 Post by **Neil** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:07 pm

If you insist on using broken software and refuse to use the workaround I gave you, I guess you don't get to participate then.

Come back when you can tell me what's broken on my end.

Neil · #92 Post by **Neil** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:18 pm

Upon further review, the site works fine with the following:

w3m/0.4.2
Lynx Version 2.8.3rel.1 (23 Apr 2000)
Mozilla 1.6, Copyright (c) 2003 mozilla.org <developer build>
Konqueror: 3.2.2

I find it highly unlikely my end is doing something wrong. It's possible, sure, but just highly unlikely when http clients here are 4 for 4 in rendering it, and the w3c's validator approves it.

#93 Post by **darkgod** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 11:37 am

Neil, nobody says the wiki is broken, It surely is an IE problem.
But then as you sometimes told me "you want to be portable or not?" Well this applies here too.
The sucky browser is broken ? well the bad news is taht most of the world uses it, so we have to make it work anyway.

I do such things in my joob everyday, making a nicely created app work on suckily implements mobile handsets, but we have to make them work, because most people use the broken handsets, not the good ones.

Neil · #94 Post by **Neil** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 3:40 pm

C and HTML are two different things. I don't think the comparison is valid.

#95 Post by **darkgod** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:34 pm

It's java actually, but that doesnt makes the point any less valid.

Those users exist, they actually are teh majority of our users, we *HAVE* to support them.

Neil · #96 Post by **Neil** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:16 pm

I've made every reasonable effort to support them, but this one particular user (who's given me trouble before) refuses to do anything.

Atarlost · #97 Post by **Atarlost** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:03 am

Er, actually, I switched to mozilla weeks. I seem to recall comenting that that fixed it, but that you still really need to be MS compatible.

Artagas · #98 Post by **Artagas** » Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:18 pm

Hey, I have just heard it that Bill Gates has publicly announced that they are coming out with a Tome-Wiki patch for IE this summer! Aside of (probably not) fixing the textbox problem, the patch will also include three brand new security holes for the convenience of their most faithful Trojan designers!

Neil · #99 Post by **Neil** » Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:05 am

That's about all those users have to look forward to, thanks in part to the government actively working against them on the issue.

saberson · #100 Post by **saberson** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:31 pm

I would say use both guys, its just

1: Im so sad to here this forum has been hacked but this is where a while back I got all my info
2: Forum like discussions is most likely what made TOME big, for example how many times is there many questions you need to ask not answered on a wiki or the answer hidden amongst hordes of irrelevant stuff? On a forum however the old threads drop meaning that a user can get a personal up to date answer specific to that variant of tome and will grow more as part of the community because of a more personal touch pertaining to solving problems

In short while in my view a wiki is good a wiki shouldnt detract from the good points of having a forum, e.g active discussion. Im of the view I dont care if a newbie comes on and asks a question thats been asked before because well they are new and it can create a good active atmosphere. (So have both wiki and forum but I wouldnt like to see the forum going down the route where newbies get harrased for asking questions because there is a wiki)

Just a thought since I like the roguelike communitys and being able to speak to more experienced players one to one.

Okay

I'm back on tome after a long while so hopefully I'm not taking this out of context but I agree with this quote

By all means use the wiki, but as far as I'm concerned it makes documentation of the game no easier than before.
It might make spoilers a little more accessible I suppose, but there are plenty of those in-game and available on the web via oook and killerbunnies and the spoiler forum here.

Lord Estraven · #101 Post by **Lord Estraven** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:02 am

The wiki was quite nice IMHO, but now is so utterly overrun by spammers as to be useless.

To this end I suggest that a Captcha be required for posting anything on the wiki. That ought to put a halt to the bots. Failing that, perhaps we should simply require registration and block all anonymous editing and writing?

elcugo · #102 Post by **elcugo** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:22 am

Bots know how to create accounts too.

I wish we could use something similar to what we use at the forums here, i.e. a very easy question that any Tome player know, but no spambot can ever guess.

Nerdanel · #103 Post by **Nerdanel** » Mon Sep 21, 2009 3:56 pm

At the moment posting at the wiki doesn't even require an account.

Anyway, unlike at the forum, we have effective spamblocking at the wiki. The spammers can post links to spam sites, but we can add those links to a blacklist to prevent them from spamming the same site over and over. We also have banned a whole bunch of Chinese/Japanese/Russian symbols making it hard to spam the wiki in those languages and have blocked links to any and all Chinese domains.

All in all, the spam situation isn't nearly as bad as it used to be on the forums.

Lord Estraven · #104 Post by **Lord Estraven** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:20 pm

Which must be saying something about how the forums used to be because there is still a tremendous amount of spam.

#105 Post by **Yottle** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:36 pm

Last fall the forums were unusable. There were hundreds of spam messages every day. After the spam account block was put in I deleted about 6000 spam accounts.

ToME: the Tales of Maj'Eyal

ToME Wiki wanted/needed?

Do you want a ToME Wiki?