Name: Garrett Gallegos, aka "Chee-eee-eeze"
E mail Address: gmail at garrettg dot com
Phone Number: 707-555-YOUR-MOM
Office: My Car
Personality: I'm an Aries. I like walking on hot coals, throwing sticks at Davis Townies, and making kitten-pot pies!
Formerly I was a resident of the MU, spending much of my time there.
Look me up on MySpace or Facebook if you care enough... But don't Add me unless I know who you are, or else you'll get the SHAFT!
If you (for some reason?) do not like me, feel free to leave some anonymous (or not!) productive criticisms (and I DO NOT expect them to be "Politically Correct" - in fact, I would hope that they aren't!)...
I am sure some people think I am "not nice" because of my comments on this wiki. The fact is that this wiki has a lot less average users than when I started using it, and a lot more wiki-trolls who care about irrelevant details or making it "pretty". I would first like to say that I am very, very nice guy who tries to contribute valuable information to this wiki from time to time. My contributions are all intended to benefit the greater community of Davis, I'm not going around saying "you're wrong" or "you're formatting is wrong" or things like that - my intentions are only to benefit Davis.
Sometimes you smell like mothballs and bacon. —JillBenciWoodward
- mental note, throw a stick at you, random: nice facebook/myspace policy —StevenDaubert
2010-09-29 15:38:15 I'm sorry I "snapped" at you, but this is very misleading and confusing: "Organizers were hoping to get more than 4,000 people to join Davis's effort to break the record of 3,515 bicycles (See below). Knowing that Davis had very little chance of breaking that, Guinness agreed to create a brand-new World's Record Book category called "Longest Single Line of Bicycles" with a minimum count of 1,000 bikes." It was the larger record that they thought they had no chance of breaking. I appreciate your seeking out the facts, and don't know what to make of the disconnect between them and what has been reported in the Enterprise (and I assume the Enterprise got the info directly from the Davis Odd Fellows). Also, don't feel as though opinions need to be banished to the comments section — they are welcome anywhere on the page. If someone has a different opinion, they are welcome to add that, too. —CovertProfessor
- Professor, no problem at all. I actually did not write that sentence you mentioned, I modified that to be more correct. I realized this morning that the current records were completely incorrect, so I decided to correct all of it. It took some time to figure out where the numbers were coming from, and I still haven't confirmed where the 3,515 came from. I'm not relying on the Enterprise, they've been wrong before, I need an actual source - I was able to confirm the other 2 records via Guinness directly - one via the Website, one via the Google Book for the current 2010 records book.
- My point is that when you modified the sentence and changed the number to 3,515, the sentence (which I think I wrote) no longer makes sense. It was the 48,615 number that they had very little chance of breaking. If DOF thought that 48,615 was the number to beat (even if they were wrong about that), then that explains the change to the new category. The way you have the sentence now, the new category makes no sense at all. —CovertProfessor
- Professor, I see what you mean now. It's confusing because the 48,615 isn't even from the "Parade" category, so they didn't have to beat that! I'm still not sure where that number even comes into play. They only had to beat the 3,515, and that number isn't confirmed, so really I think they only had to beat 1,901.
- Well, the whole situation is definitely very confusing because Guinness (apparently) agreed to the new category, so why would they have done that if they only had to beat 1,901 or 3,515? Anyway, if you agree it is confusing, I will try to fix it. —CovertProfessor
- Exactly my point. I am just confused at the whole thing, I started making changes in the first place just to clarify it for myself, when is when I realized something was amiss. I would LOVE for someone to figure this out. I think what happened is the organizers didn't know how to run it good enough to beat 3,515, so they used 48k as an excuse for a new category. Back in 2007 they only got about 900 bikes I think, which is pretty weak. They just need to open it up, drop the fee (fee prevents 1000's of people from coming) and make it as close to the same day as possible every year, and just try to grow it by 10-20% every year until we beat some record. At the very least, an "interesting" and more "different" category than the one they chose, maybe longest single line of bikes tied together with rope...? Most bikes swerving around randomly? Most people riding bikes without hands? (haha, that's right D.P.D., everyone rides around with no hands, listening to headphones in both ears, in the dark without a light, just accept it)
2010-10-01 16:38:31 Hey Garrett, minor request: please be sure to preview before submitting an edit. Lots and lots of minor edits can make for a pretty messy page history (and recent changes page). —TomGarberson
- Tom, I'm going to be honest without trying to sound rude even though I know it will sound rude: I appreciate your contribution to the wiki just as much as everyone else's, but this is the kind of thing that turns normal community members off to the idea of a Wiki. The wiki isn't going to survive if people complain to contributors about minor, irrelevant, insignificant problems. If I am going to spend my free time editing information, I do not care in the least how many "edit" notice there are on some info page, it's totally irrelevant to the purpose of the wiki, it's absolutely unimportant to me, and hell it's not even on the main page, so who cares. What the wiki needs is more people spending just 5 minutes here and there, so if you'd rather me just leave the typo's for you to fix - that's fine with me. I re-read and preview posts before I post them, but if changes need to be made, they will be made. I type a lot, I'm all jacked up on coffee, and there will be ALWAYS be type-o's, or other things that need adjustment, it is the very nature of the wiki, so whatever. I'd rather get some information up that will help the community, rather than worry about the *freaking* info page or the changes feed. If it's so important, program a checkbox that says "minor edit or type-o fix" and make those not display into the feed. The purpose of the wiki isn't to be "pretty".
2010-10-01 17:11:09 I for one found also found the stop torrenting suggestion laughable, but refrained from sharing said thought until now... —StevenDaubert
- Steven, thank you for your contributions to the Wiki as well, I honestly do appreciate everyone's contributions. Saying something is "laughable" obviously isn't productive, so if I have a choice between putting a "laughable" suggestion up, or doing nothing at all, I will choose the former every time. It's funny how you are yet another person to discount this (without explaining why) and provide no helpful thoughts whatsoever. The outage notice was up for some time before I added that, and it was only a hail-mary, if you're internet is going out intermittently for 2 weeks I'm sure you'd be doing the same thing. I am a developer connected to a dozen sites or more at any one time, and every disconnect seriously screws me up. I honestly almost had to have a different line installed because of this. Although it's probably not going to help, it might. I really don't understand why everyone thinks bandwidth is limitless, I guess the laws of physics don't apply to the Internet? And I don't understand why it's "laughable". If you think it's "laughable" I would LOVE to hear some actual constructive ideas that "might" be more accurate or productive, because so far the only other ideas anyone has thrown out are "get repair guys to come out as much as possible to make Comcast waste money" (ps: that's our money). I also don't claim to be a networking expert like every single computer nerd to ever live in Davis. You can argue about fiber lines, hubs, other equipment that I don't know the name of, but going down at peak times is an absolutely undeniable sign that bandwidth is limited, not a difficult concept. Networking is incredibly complex, yet everyone in Davis wants to act like they are the know-all-expert on that subject. Humility is much more important to me, I am happy to say "This MIGHT be the problem" rather than "This can't the problem". Apparently wiki trolls don't know the different between "humility" and being a "know-it-all". My suggestions were to 1) Call Comcast and complain 2) Tweet about it (Because Comcast watches Twitter) and 3) reduce overall network traffic so if at all possible, traffic can be routed through working equipment. In my honest opinion, all 3 of those are very good suggestions, and more importantly - all 3, including the "laughable" one, are things are the community can actually do to attempt to address the problem at hand. I have received nothing but complaints from Wiki Trolls about formatting, or this torrent being incorrect, and yet no helpful, productive suggestions whatsoever. This is the state of the modern day Davis Wiki, nothing like when I started using several years ago. In my opinion, it has become a hindrance for small and medium contributors like myself, and it seems to be centered around obeying the whim of the dozen-or-so Wiki Trolls who are on every edit like flies on you know what. That's not very community-oriented.
tl;dr. My nerd friends do nerd things then tell me comcast is terrible and provide data / stories to support this. Comcast should have enough bandwith to handle anything, let alone a bunch of slapdicks torrenting, I don't claim to know comcast network topology but getting no synch clearly isn't a not enough bandwith too much traffic issue. Besides problems or not people shouldn't have to jump thru hoops or modify how they use the connection they pay for... I dunno, it looks like your suffering Jason Aller eque burnout on the wiki, bummer Daubert
- I can't help but to comment on this. What I think is actually laughable is that when you're asked "why" you said something is laughable, by a post that clearly took a few minutes to write and is skeptical of wiki trolls, you reply "meh...cuz my friends said so!" Come on... (Unfortunately I'm stuck in a loop here...yes, I realize I'm essentially making a trollish comment on a trollish comment. Sorry.) -ES
2010-10-01 17:11:18 Sorry if I was a little brusque, or if my comment came at a bad time. I appreciate your contributions to the wiki, and didn't mean to troll. My point is that previewing to cut down on the number of edits, as well as commenting on the changes you're making (e.g. "minor" or "grammar" or "reply to X") make things easier on the Davis Wiki community because A) it makes it far easier for people following a conversation or series of edits to track what's going on; and B) it makes it far easier later on for someone who wants to find information that was changed, figure out who said something, track a conversation, or whatever else. I probably should have explained initially, but it wasn't just (I don't think) a gripe about your editing style. It was intended to be a constructive suggestion. —TomGarberson
- Tom, Apology accepted, still not constructive. Again, I appreciate your contribution to the wiki just as much as everyone else's. Wiki is not for "discussions" or "conversations" - if it was it would be called the "DavisForum". It's not that your comment came at a bad time, and I am completely, 100% open to constructive criticism, it's just every time I edit this wiki, one of you trolls complain about formatting, about me being wrong (I try to be humble and play the "i'm not sure but it might be true" card), or something else totally irrelevant. Thank you but no thank you.
2010-10-02 00:52:49 Comcast and the Telecommunications Commission are the only groups with any authority over the problems. The Commission even has an opening right now, so you could have a chance at being appointed. The Comcast page right now just seems like the blind leading the blind. —NickSchmalenberger
2010-10-02 15:14:38 "Correlation is not causation" really applies to comcast's problems here. There is so much nobody besides Comcast knows about it, that its totally pointless to speculate. How is talking to the Telecommunications Commission not a productive suggestion? Or buying a Comcast worker whos actually working on the problem a beer? I think Comcast and the Commission are the only groups who have any chance of knowing the real story about these problems. Comcast could probably blow off the commission too, but at least its their job to try to know about these things and kick Comcast's ass when they're not good enough. Thats not the wiki's job, and the wiki is a dead end for finding real information about this, its a great place to put the info though. —NickSchmalenberger
2010-10-02 17:06:55 Mr. Gallegos, you shouldn't attack Comcast the way you are. They're a great company, and by besmirching their good name you make yourself look silly. Please stop the slander! I've been using comcast for years, and haven't had a single outage. Clearly, you're just working for a competitor and trying to ruin their reputation with your outrageous claims. —ComcastBob
- "Clearly, you're just working for a competitor". Wow, Are you serious? Are you COMPLETELY stupid? Apparently so. Comcast is terrible because their service has had MANY problems over the years, because their customer service is TERRIBLE, and because this whole problem is RIDICULOUS and has been going on over 3 weeks. Read how many Davis people agree with me. There is nothing SLANDEROUS about this as it's all COMPLETELY true. The only reason anyone gets Comcast around here is because SBC/AT&T sucks worse.
2010-10-02 18:10:27 I was thinking you might be able to talk to an actual Comcast technician working in Davis, because maybe if they visited you they gave you a business card with their cell phone number? Usually they do this in case theres a problem with that job, and maybe that wasn't the case here, but you might have gotten their business card anyway. If you do get some real information from somebody who has actually worked on this problem when they weren't going to peoples houses reassuring them that they are working on fixing the problem, maybe you could post the info on the wiki? Thanks! —NickSchmalenberger
- Myself and others have already had technicians out and posted every piece of info we got from them, so thanks anyway Nick.
2010-10-02 18:25:11 Garrett, just because people disagree with you or your "solutions" (to a problem that doesn't exist) doesn't mean they're trolls. —ComcastBob
- It doesn't have any to do with disagreement, it has to do with them not providing ANY productive information, not providing any useful information, or complaining about formatting, as you are doing you TROLL.
- PS: I didn't even see this before: "(to a problem that doesn't exist)". You are officially an idiot, I may even have to make an Idiot Certificate and put it on your wiki page. DOZENS of people are having problems, SOME comcast reps have admitted to these problems, you are just a plain, old douchebag.
2010-10-03 12:36:44 Garrett, I think Bob's point was that there's a difference between disagreeing/making suggestions ("please preview" or "torrenting isn't causing the problem") and trolling ("you work for a competitor" or "there is no problem"). The first is other editors contributing in their way, by trying to improve the content of a page or trying to help people improve the usefulness of their editing. The second is trolling. In other words, prior to Bob, none of the people you called trolls were trolling you—even if you didn't think there was any value to what they had to say. —TomGarberson
2010-10-03 13:02:06 While ComcastBob is clearly (and admittedly) a troll account created specifically to illustrate to you the difference between a troll and people with different opinions, please do not make personal attacks on the wiki. We can disagree without calling each other names. —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards
2010-10-03 13:10:55 Tip—don't feed teh trolls. —OliviaY
- You are right, but even if I don't feed the trolls, they will come searching for food like sewer rats. -garrett
2010-10-08 21:39:00 Garrett, I thought we had been over this: just because someone disagrees with you (e.g. "the guy's not douchey, he did something cool" could conceivably be an honest opinion, despite the fact that it's different from yours) doesn't mean they're trolling you. If someone is trolling, they're not trying to contribute a thing, they're just trying to be an ass, make life more difficult, and provoke a reaction. By calling someone a troll, you're insulting their opinion and calling their edit worthless. How about instead of effectively telling people they're worthless because they disagree with you, just acknowledging their opinion, disagreeing, and moving on? Anything else might just be douchey. —TomGarberson
- Tom, I think you are just mad because you are one of the biggest trolls on this wiki and you know you need to kick the habit. If you took your own advice, you wouldn't be commenting here. And if you read my comment, I actually didn't call him a troll, I suggested it was one possible reason for him complaining about correct english - of all things to complain about, and MM could have left it alone, but he didn't, he TROLLED and complained - all on his own, and you decided to follow up all on your own. see, I can't even leave an honest comment on the wiki without getting a complaint from a troll about correct english - something totally irrelevant. ps: "By calling someone a troll, you're insulting their opinion and calling their edit worthless." - no Tom - actually that is completely incorrect, an absolute logical fallacy - by calling someone a troll - i am only calling them a troll - nothing more. i never called anyone or anyone's edits "worthless", i don't appreciate people putting words into my mouth. i left my opinion on that page, he didn't have to disagree with me - he didn't have to further disagree about correct english - he was trolling - as are you. Go troll someone else's page. -garrett
- You realize that by being so obnoxious to your fellow editors, you make them want to actually troll you, right? —tg
- Tom, you guys are trolling with no help from me. In fact, you found me and commented on my page - twice, not vice versa. Our first interaction was because you were asking me to make fewer edits, because you read the changes feed and don't like too many edits? I didn't have to do anything but contribute to the wiki in order to draw your trolling attention. Can I ask you an honest, non-rhetorical question? Why do you care about the changes feed/info pages so much? It took you more time to comment to me about it than to glance over and ignore it with your eyeballs. -gg
2010-10-11 13:28:24 Since this is a pointless digression, I'll post it here. As you could have seen by looking at my user page, I did not study computer science at UC Davis. I studied electrical engineering. By hardware, I don't mean being an IT wonk (though I did that in a past life). I'm talking about designing hardware, which isn't necessarily a general purpose computer. —WilliamLewis
- I see, what exactly is it that you design/are interested in? Not a rhetorical question here, trying to turn this conversation into a more positive note. -gg
2010-10-11 13:45:33 It was a playful jab at software development in general. Whatever, dude. And you completely misunderstood what I said, to boot. —WilliamLewis
- I didn't misunderstand anything you said, but the winky-smiley didn't help. It's all about software to me, we've already figured out how to run electrons through silicon. Robots 'n stuff are cool, i guess, but i'm sure not going to spend my life building stuff like the Roomba. If that's your thing, more power to ya man, but I didn't hunt you out and insult your hardware (even jokingly) - I was commenting on a request page for software features - not hardware features. -gg
Even if we're just talking about computation, general purpose computers (which is what your software runs on, after all) aren't the end-all, be-all people make them out to be. Encode any video lately? It's incredibly slow because CPUs aren't well suited to the task. General purpose computers are jacks of all trade, masters of none. It's the reason, for example, that we've have graphics cards. If we build a chip for a single purpose, we can design the datapath for the task at hand and make things really efficient. There are way more opportunities for parallelism. You can implement important algorithms and operations in hardware. One example that I like to use is the example of inverting the order of a 32 bit word. How many clock cycles would that take on, say, an ARM (king of all things not desktop) or x86-64 processor? I don't know offhand, but on a chip, we just wire up the word in reverse and the operation is done in less than a picosecond (the time it takes for the signal to propagate through the wires). In a 3.4 GHz processor, a clock cycle is approximately 300 picoseconds. The CPU can't beat that, even with a special purpose instruction. —wl
- Honestly, I don't know a lot about hardware, and you've successfully out-nerded me there by a mile, but this wasn't exactly a hardware discussion or nerd-off, on the contrary I don't know jack about hardware - nor do I need to. If you read the comment before this one, I was curious why you were into that field, and what specifically you are into building, technical discussion aside. I don't find it particularly exciting myself, there are millions of people all over the world, and it's almost impossible to get your foot in the door without a PHD or two, at least, that's how it was with the engineers I've worked with... I personally like the web because I have an immediate effect on tons of people, it's fun creating things that get out there to the masses. I was honestly just curious, not trying to get into a nerd-off. There are millions of developers too, but most of them have no idea what is going on. -gg
2010-10-11 14:26:11 Please stop misusing the word trolling. You and Tom got off on the wrong foot. Hell, I seem to recall you and I got off on the wrong foot (if so, sorry about that — details are hazy in my mind in any case). If you take a step back you'd see that he is a very well-meaning editor who generally bends over backwards to be fair. When he tries to get a page back on topic — when he is trying to keep a page organized — that is being a wiki gnome, but not a troll. A troll is someone who is just trying to get a reaction out of someone else. Trust me, that is NOT Tom. If he does something, it's because he genuinely believes in it, not because he wants to start an argument for arguments' sake. You are welcome to disagree with him, and with me, and with anyone you like, but it doesn't help to call people trolls who simply disagree with you, or who are trying to edit the wiki to make it better. —CovertProfessor
- I would like to believe what you are saying, but he has never done anything productive in response to my own edits. In fact, he seems to target me. He is a troll - no doubt. You are almost a troll but I like you a lot more. -gg
- PS: I know he has made a lot of productive edits in the past, for that I am thankful, but that doesn't mean he isn't a troll. If he (or anyone else) doesn't like the word troll - then stop trolling and I won't need to use it. I didn't create the Trolls page, but I know what a troll is. -gg
- Ok, let me explain the particular edit that he just made. He felt that the page should just be a clean list of people's software preferences and that the comments were making it hard to see people's preferences. So, he moved (not deleted) your discussion with William to another page Wiki Community/Future/Software Features/Talk. In doing so, yes, he mistakenly deleted some of the changes you had made to your preferences. But again, it had become very hard to follow the page — I don't think it was intentional. And yes, many of us do follow page edits; it's part of being a wiki gnome and trying to keep the wiki in good shape. You say you know what a troll is, but again, he had a reason for what he did. A reason you might disagree with, but it's a reason, not just trying to get your goat. I think the two of you just got off on the wrong foot, and if you gave it another try, you could get along. —CovertProfessor
- Professor, I hear what you're saying, you don't need to explain that to me, but I don't hear what Tom is saying - because he is all nonsense. He didn't remove/cleanup the page (ps: I just did, much nicer now), he just set it back, probably because he didn't like my response to his suggestions. He has so much time to troll, he could have fixed that page, but he didn't, he reverted it because he didn't like it. If he spent less time trolling, he would have had time to clean it up - rather than revert it. -gg
- All I ask is that you consider that there might be an alternate explanation — that you and he got off on the wrong foot, and that he made a mistake in the way that he edited the page. —CovertProfessor
- Professor, honestly, i hear you, i get it, but it wasn't a mistake. He did it 100% intentionally. Perhaps because he didn't like what I said about his 2 suggestions (that they are basically dumb, phrased differently, which I still agree with). -gg
- Ok, well, only he can clarify his intentions at this point. Meanwhile, I've called for a truce, in case you didn't see it. I hope you both take me up on it. You both have a lot to contribute to the wiki, but if you're always fighting each other that won't happen (or won't happen as well as it could). —CovertProfessor
- That page is only going to inflame the situation, please delete it now before it gets out of hand. Tom searched me about and bugged me about dumb things, I NEVER went to him, then he removed my edits outright which is completely against the ideals of the wiki. He has made a lot more edits in the past than me and knows a lot more about editing, if he reverted back - rather than cleaning it up, it was COMPLETELY, 100% intentional. Tom, I thank you for your contributions, but I think in the past there was a lot of information missing from the Wiki that could be added, which is probably why you started contributing. Today, there is so much information on there, that even I have a hard time even finding a page to add to. I feel like you are just looking for things to do. Please spend your time in more valuable ways. -gg
- Again, I am asking you — both of you — to let the past go. Start with a clean slate and try to move forward in productive directions toward the common goal of improving the wiki. —CovertProfessor
2010-10-11 17:01:03 Hi Garrett, let's try a reboot. First, welcome to the wiki. I'm Tom, it's nice to meet you. When interacting with editors, please remember to treat them with the same respect you would like. Calling people trolls when they mean well—even if you don't think they're being productive—isn't very nice. They might think their edits are productive.
For the record, my suggestion regarding previews and including edit notes was intended to be helpful. As a programmer, I'm sure you're familiar with the idea behind best practices. The wiki is built upon collaborative editing. One editor will contribute something, another will come along and touch it up or add something else, building upon what the first editor did. Having a concise history of annotated changes helps the process along greatly. —TomGarberson
- Tom, appreciated, *deep breaths* over here, trying to stay respectful... I feel like those changes you mention were targeted at the editors who spend a lot more time on here - yourself, in essence. I think for this to be successful, as it was when I started using the Wiki, more community members need to feel comfortable coming on here. The entire process of editing is a turn off for many people, and if they had a box that said "enter some information or upload some pictures that you would like added to the wiki, and our professional, awesome editors will take care of the rest", then many people would be more inclined to help - without having to research formatting, learn the nuances, etc. Willy said my suggestion was dumb because all editors are equal and he completely missed my point - so maybe you will understand me: Saying something like that doesn't help, because it puts the responsibility to edit on the community - you can hope for that all you want, doesn't mean it's gonna happen. If the software had better features for end-users, making it DIRT-EASY to contribute, that's what important. I am a programmer and I can't stand wiki markup. I understand why it's there, I just don't like it. I hate WYSIWYS because they sometimes cause more harm than good. Traditionally, until recently, I only make a few edits, then leave the wiki alone completely for months. I forget the wiki markup quickly, as my brain fills up with other code. With as much information as is already on the Wiki, there need to be changes to "encourage" more contributions, rather than relying on the 1% of people like you who like to edit - it's putting too much burden on you all, and not getting enough interaction from the community. My Awesome Example: The mystery pics on the front page are outdated, and when the homepage looks exactly the same every time, I get the sense that it hasn't changed and I feel less like I want to come back. If the Request Queue I talk about was in place, then anyone could send pictures in, QUICKLY, EASILY, and a new one could be added every single day by Editors with time to do so - rather than relying on those editors to go take the Pictures. If Willy had tried to understand my Queue, he wouldn't think it's so stupid. Instead, users have to actually go put pics on the homepage themselves, figure out what's going on with all of that, how to upload, how to edit, and in all honesty it's a pain in the donkey. Honestly, I hate changing the homepage - even though I only ever change the Featured Page once in a great, great while (3 times ever I think). It's not something I am comfortable doing, either because I will get heckled about incorrect edits, or just because I am scared I will mess something up - which I definitely don't want to do. There is no reason why users who just have a good Mystery Picture should have to go through all that. Sure it's easy once you've done it 50 times, but what if you've never done it? What if you only want to do it once, and contribute 1 picture? Like they say, "easier said than done". The homepage is also clogged as hell and I don't even want to start talking about that. I have 11 years of experience specifically developing for end-users on the web (in the real world, not at school), and I assure you, all of my admittedly dick-ish behavior is with the best intentions are were intended to kick-start the development of a few awesome features, because simply the features getting requested need some serious thought before spending 5 minutes on them. i've become frustrated because in my years as a member, i've seen almost no changes to the wiki, and I didn't sign up yesterday. i understand why you think those suggestions are helpful, i respectfully disagree because it really only benefits the main editors. it seems to me that you can edit just fine with the current feature set, it's not perfect, but what is? and that getting new people using and contributing should be a priority, rather than making life easier for yourselves. when you start talking about threading of messages, you're getting into building a forum and that just scares me more, imagine if the differences between me and you were running rampant across the entire wiki.... those are my thoughts. -gg
You're incorrect in your assumptions about my feature requests. They have nothing to do with wanting to turn this into a forum, and everything to do with making it easier to clean up messes and contribute to ongoing issues.
Notifications would be enormously valuable in staving off the problems that arise on a very regular basis with new editors who probably just aren't familiar with the wiki's business restrictions and that sort of thing. Business owners who make an advertisement page and move on, come back 6 months later and see that their advertisement has been changed, only to rewrite the advertisement and leave again, and so on. People who leave suspect reviews are often asked for more information. Often, though, those same people either don't swing by the wiki in the next week or, if they do, they don't log in. So more information never comes. For why this is a problem, see Strelitzia Flower Co for the racist accusation incident (it's one of many problems along those lines).
A useful threading system, both within a page and across pages, comes up when there are sizable discussions. Particularly when people don't annotate their edits, it can be pretty tough to figure out who is talking to whom without rereading the entire discussion. It's really not the same if you aren't trying to follow it while it's still in progress, but try going through the edit history on March 4, 2010 Public Education protest to see what I mean. Likewise with the California National Primate Research Center and associated talk page. Contrary to what you've repeatedly said, discussions frequently contribute to the Wiki in and of themselves, because they add content, context, and perspectives. If they're too difficult to follow, that value can be lost. And I guarantee you that any difficulties experienced by regular editors ten times worse for new editors. The public education protest brought in many new editors, and things got exceptionally muddled after the first couple of hours.
The other feature I've requested in a few different places is a decent IP address lookup/cross-reference system that would allow you to see which IP addresses a given user has used, which users have used a given IP address, and so on. I'm sure that one also fits into your "dumb" suggestions category, but it comes up on a regular basis with sockpuppets and bogus reviews, and would be a very useful tool in trying to protect the wiki from whitewashing, false information, and other forms of vandalism.
Not trying to spread anything bad, but I do tend to agree with tg as far as the features go. As for having only a handful of editors who control everything on the Wiki... Not true at all. Yes, there are definitely a handful who are much more active than most, but if you look it up there are quite a few who put themselves out there in the effort to inform and maintain this site. It isn't declining it is only growing. — Wes-P
Just to add some context, Garrett — it happened the page was created during a time when the wiki was being inundated with some editors causing problems (as Tom alludes to — accusations of racism, overly advertise-y pages, personal insults and profanity), and all of us were pulling our hair out trying to get these new editors' attention. That little yellow flag in the upper corner — not everyone sees it, apparently. We *wanted* to work with new editors, to see if we could turn things around, but we couldn't contact them. That's why the page is so focused on gnome tools. For whatever reason, things have been a little quieter in those areas lately. That being said, I think you raise some important points about ways to help get more new editors. Personally, I didn't have any trouble learning the markup, but you are 100% right that many are intimidated by it. This is what the Local Wiki project is partly about, though. You should definitely get involved if you have ideas for ways to make it easier for people to edit the wiki. I know you expressed skepticism about a complete re-write, but if you get in there, listen to what others have to say, you can either be convinced by their reasons or try to convince them otherwise, and in any case, have your ideas heard and perhaps acted on. Just remember that people won't generally won't want to work with someone if they feel they are being insulted. :-) —CovertProfessor
2011-10-28 18:50:16 Howdy, Mr. Gallegos! How's Comcast treating you these days?
I kid, I kid. I don't even need to ask, of course they're treating you great! Such a great company. I just love their customer service, don't you? —ComcastBob