User talk:Shadowcrest

y0
Hey, I know we have bad history, etc. but you have to do something about Semicolon and Clarinet Hawk. People are leaving this place because they choose to bully people they place in their negative opinion, this leads to things like RAN and I leaving this place. We were good contributors, and I did deserve my block for socking/asshattery, but RAN was actually helping (as much as he and I do not along). Major contributors leaving will make a dent in the wiki's community and its activity. You, Smoreking, and Miles do your best to keep this place organized, official, and in shape, but it seems like the two stooges mess all of that up. If you want proof of their actions, just ask me. I can rally up some links for you. This is a serious matter. If these two don't stop, they'll have to BE stopped. I'm surprised no one is bothered with this. I thought I might need to pitch in (someone unlocked the IP). Cheez provided the link to the blog (that was recently deleted) and I took a peek, which was the first "peek" in a while. You've had arguments with him before; you know how he is. He's basically me with power, to be brutally frank. I know I'm not the only one who sees this. No user can exist peacefully as an editor if they're being constantly harassed by admins, in which they can do nothing in their defense. 67.10.177.73 02:55, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, if you want something done about blog problems, contact Wikia's staff. 67.10.177.73 02:57, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * I need to go to sleep in like 3 minutes so I'll reply to your other post tomorrow or something but PoD contacted wikia this evening (afaik) so it should be resolved soon <3 Shadowcrest  02:58, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't need to disable blogs; we need to disable internet drama.  Miles ( talk)   03:23, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Miles: tbph, we need to disable blogs...
 * Shadowcrest: Yes, I contacted Wikia.
 * IP: I disagree - evidence would suggest that the slump that the wiki is in at the moment is not directly the fault of CHawk and/or Semi. Daily edit count has been coming down for quite a while now and there are fewer things to do round here so users leave as they feel they are no longer needed. How many users can you name who have been bullied off the wiki by CHawk and/or Semi?  Penguin  of  Death   14:02, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * IP, I'm presuming you are BNK. Here's a newsflash: if the wiki was actually important then users leaving would be a big deal. But it's not. It's a wiki. The content will remain preserved no matter what anybody does, and the content will remain if every user leaves. I'm not concerned about activity, because in truth, what else is there to do? And who really wants to spend hours of their life deleting or flagging crew/smasher pages? If that's your thing then go at it, but turns out that it's really dull and annoying and I don't blame anybody for not wanting to do it. I'm grateful when they do, but really, I don't give a damn about edits to character pages and trivia sections and trophies and what is more or less plaque on the actual pages people read. That's what RAN was doing in terms of "content" contributing, and when he wasn't editing talk pages pointlessly outside of that he was being a nuisance. Now, I think I know what this is really about, and it's not about the wiki. It's about you feeling spurned and angry at me/Chawk. Here's something you probably weren't expecting, but here it is: I'm sorry I was a douche to you. Half the time you didn't do anything to deserve the cruelty, but I was overly cruel on multiple occassions. I was still right most of the time I chastized you, but I didn't need to be so damn mean while making those points. But here's something else. If you feel spurned by this place then here's a life lesson: don't take it personally. It's the internet. Not real life. Real life matters, but only infrequently. The internet only matters if you make it matter. I don't bear any ill will to you, but the truth is you were a net-negative contributor. You added content, yes, but in general you caused a lot of wikidrama we didn't need. You made fusses about stuff that you should have let lie, and you acted personally affronted every time somebody said or did something nasty in your direction. I'm sorry you were emotionally injured by Smashwiki but it's time to move on. You can blame me for a decline in activity, but I'd like to see you prove it. I stopped coming here with any frequency last May. Back then the wiki was fine in terms of activity level. The truth is the activity level has gone down because there isn't anything else to write about. The game has been out for nearly 2 years and most of what can be written about it already has been. Is that so hard to believe? Semicolon (talk) 20:37, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, even I can respect the apology from Semicolon. Now that you mention it, there isn't much left to do on this wiki...  Kperfekt  BURN!!!   Revert That!  21:26, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Semicolon, I accept your apology. It's just sometimes you need to chill out when dealing with idiots. Wasn't it you who said that arguing with them only brings you down to their level? when an IP visits the wiki and makes blogs about fake glitches or vandalizes pages with "I like this character!", all you need to do is realize that that person IS an idiot and leave it at that. Block him for however long you feel necessary if he continues to be a vandal. I never knew RAN was a problem until now; usually SK or Cheezperson have positive feedback about him from IRC. Things have been written, but we can still re-word it better, too. I too am sorry for being an asshat.
 * Penguin, I didn't mean to sound as if I blamed Semicolon and Clarinet Hawk for the loss of users. In truth, people left due to the drama + nothing being able to be done (not a lot, at least). Clarinet Hawk and Semicolon's only problems were the way they handled users... OK, how they handled idiots. Most of that involved unnecessary flaming, etc., but hopefully from now on things will change. This place can be a network used by AiB's community; Miles has helped advertise it. Really, there wasn't much wrong with how you use your powers, it was how you talked to people. Like I said, let's hope for something more positive from here on out. :) And yes, I'm BNK. 67.10.177.73 23:19, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * I certainly have to chime in on this discussion. I understand and agree with everything this user has written, including his concession. I too, concede to my obvious shortcomings as a contributor. Lastly, I appreciate Semi's blanket apology. -But that's it.
 * The FACT is, These two mods rule this site with a douchebag fist. I've tried to come to terms with this, and I suppose I have, but the fact remains.
 * Semicolon, your apology is entirely neutralized by your established and direct mentality that "shit happens" and no one is to blame. In so much as you can tell others to get over it, they can also tell you off for it. The greater truth here is that: the internet, real life, and this website, ARE what PEOPLE MAKE THEM.
 * I know for a fact that people bitterly despise you two for your very poor manners. I can't speak for them, but I, for one, have most definitely decreased my activities on this site (which I still know has VERY much more potential) as a direct result of CHawk and Semicolon's relentless .... well, I can't even think of the word for their completely unneeded, unwanted, unappreciated, and down right unacceptable.... asshole-ness.
 * But I also know that what Shadowcrest has said is true: "Jerks will be jerks". These two are, through and through, jerks. -And they will never change. Therefor, it is entirely up to the rest of us to deal with them. Whether that means simply continued abuse, or justified reprimand; it's on us.
 * I do what I can for this site of the game I most love, which is ALL anyone can ask. Say what you will about me. I am NICE.
 * -Zixor (talk) 20:51, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I certainly have to chime in on this discussion. Zixor, let me give you some truth. Not every contributor contributes only valuable things, not every troll contributes only crap. A lot of the edits you made were disruptive or lacked a discernable point. I don't see decreased activity by people who made numerous edits of marginal value as a bad thing. If Platonism is real, then what I imagine in my head is the ideal, the true SmashWiki. Quoth the great philosopher Luke Skywalker 'If there's a bright center of the universe, you're on the planet that's farthest from'. Such is SmashWiki. You dig? Semicolon (talk) 23:42, February 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * "These two mods rule this site with a douchebag fist." Where have you been for the past six months? They hardly edit any more. The active Admins are now Shadowcrest, Smoreking, Miles and me, and we don't "rule this site with a douchebag fist". And cut out the PAs. This discussion was entirely civil, and even included two users who've been antagonizing each other for years apologize for their behavior, then you come along and start calling people jerks. I fail to see what made you think "I certainly have to chime in", and that your response was appropriate.  Penguin  of  Death   21:41, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I see that, as usual, my main points were disregarded. Semicolon, I do so love your "truths"; they are so educational. Especially the ones that are entirely obvious. As for my causing disruption or lacking points, I'd be quite pleased to go through each and every edit on a case by case basis, slowly trying to figure out how that could possibly be true. -Were my contributions what most would consider to be substantial? I greatly doubt it. -And if that was all that mattered in life (or, SW; as you seem to consider it a separate entity), the crap you dole out would be totally justified. I can of course assume that those people who made your standard of marginal edits were not also trolled to death by the likes of you, and so did continue to contribute. --I thought a mere one or two PA's of my own were entirely justified by your own, which still continue in a steady stream. Maybe I should try a different technique with such a ..."unique" foe.... : "I'm making fun of you. I'm right. You're a loser. That's the way it is. You're a loser." -Sound familiar?
 * -Penguin; I made it pretty clear where I haven't been recently, and why. (MAIN POINT). Though I have still monitored and made "various and marginal" edits, flying under the CH/SC radar (the ONLY two who have really ..."expressed" having a problem with me). If it's true that CHAWK AND SEMI have and will actually stop actively fucking with people (me), then I'll of course edit more. As for you not understanding the "chime", apology, resolve, or even point of my edit? -That really is your failing.
 * Zixor, here's an idea: if you really have so many problems with this site, stop coming to it.  Seriously, since the day you made your account all I have seen out of you is bitching about how this site is run/maintained/has a face.  If you really hate this site and the people on it, stop editing/coming.  But that's not all I have to say.  I'm really sick of your thought that we are going around bullying people.  I can count one person that I may have somewhat bullied to get to leave the site, and I will still contend that that was for the best, even if it's something I do regret doing and don't plan to ever do again.  Instead, your definition of bullying seems to include anyone who continuously argues their points that disagree with yours and uses actual rhetoric and logic is constructing their arguments.  Also, your "marginal edits" were not trolled until you basically refused to accept that there is a professional scene for this game.  Let me give you a little history lesson.  SmashWiki was started in part by smashboards (and also in part by wikia) before the merge.  In fact, it was intended to be an encyclopedia for Smash, including a large amount of information on the professional scene.  I will also take this moment to point out that information as it pertains to the high-level play is much easier to verify than some random idea/thought/technique from the casual circles.  So, yes, I do hold the professional scene in higher regard than the casual scene, even after only being a part of the latter for more than a year and only ever being tangentially associated with the professional scene.  I have an obligation to what this site was (is) about, and a large part of that means keeping the information to the standards that would be accepted on SmashBoards.  So when a user with two posts waltzes in and tells me that we should start talking about how things are "unfair" I really don't care.  Then we enter into a discussion about why I (and the wiki) shouldn't care, you provide no evidence except to restate your points, tell me that my evidence isn't valid because I'm using it to support my argument (what else am I supposed to do with it?), and then say that I am bullying you because I am winning the argument.  Yes, that pisses me off.  If me arguing my points with you and you not being able to refute what I am saying is "bullying" in your mind, then yes I am bullying you.  But that's not what bullying is.  By your logic, Obama bullied McCain, Lincoln bullied Douglas, and Clarance Darrow bullied every attorney he ever faced.  Oh, and when you say "I'd be quite pleased to go through each and every edit on a case by case basis" this is about the fifth time that I remember you saying something to the effect of "I could go through and provide examples and evidence, so you should accept my argument even though I'm not going to support it."  That's a great way to argue.  Good post.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 23:28, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't mean to butt in here but I would also like you to note, Zixor, that there are currently no active bans out on any users who commonly edited. BNK used to be, but frankly, BNK was and is, pound for pound, a much better contributor than you ever were. All you did was add useless suggestions to talk pages and never really helped the wiki become more informative. BNK has made serious contentful contributions to this wiki. That's my point. Your suggestions were not accomplishing anything. You would say 'I would like to see audio profiles of all the characters'. That's great. Who will help me grind the wheat, or bake the bread? You just wanted to eat the bread. If you seriously had ever wanted to make this wiki a better place, you would have taken your suggestions and turned them into action and legitimiate contributions. Instead you said you would have liked to see it which didn't help anybody. That's why I always 'bullied' you by telling you I didn't care about your suggestions. Because you weren't helping anyone. What is there for me to care about, or say about things like that? Would you have liked me to congratulate you? If you would like me to do that for you in the future I will. Semicolon (talk) 01:36, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * The sentence "They hardly edit any more." countered every one of your points, because your comment was attempting to make out that their behavior is currently causing serious problems on the wiki, when in fact they haven't been around enough to cause such mischief. Activity on the wiki has been declining, but, at the same time, CHawk and Semi's activity has been declining. Quick warning in response to the general tone of your comment: if you keep talking to people like that, CHawk and Semi won't be the only ones expressing having a problem with you. If you have a problem with the Administrators, lobby for a removal of their powers. Otherwise, either stop talking about how you don't trust them and continue editing the wiki, or leave. Simple as that.  Penguin  of  Death   21:58, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, see what happens when huge projects come along? I vanish, and stuff like this happens.  Anyway, Zixor, Penguin is right.  Semi and CHawk have been declining in activity, and have been declining even more in their so-called "ruling with a douchebag fist" or however it was you said it.  In hindsight, I can see how many people would have a problem with Semi and Clarinet.  However, as you can see above, Semicolon has since improved in overall kindness.  And to be honest, both are actually quite lenient.  Have you seen how many users ignore UTPG?  And how most don't even get a warning for it?  I think that's pretty good.  Now, by the looks of it, Clarinet Hawk and Semicolon don't really have a problem with you, they only will if you antagonize them. L33t   Silvie  I see wat u did thar... |undefined
 * *sigh* Fine, whatever. I sincerely apologize for all of my wrongdoings, useless suggestions and edits, and all other annoyances. From here on out: I will never comment on any talk page again. If you don't like my edit, undo it; I won't waste your time antagonizing with flawed logic. I will not defend. I will never take anything as a personal attack, nor make any. If there are any other problems, I will cease those as well. Zixor (talk) 15:04, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

It's finally getting to you, I see
The wiki is becoming self aware. Quickly, let's merge Spear Pillar with the main page or else stupidity will reign here forever lolololol Semicolon (talk) 07:08, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

tiers
You should add a disclaimer to all character's articles saying that things said in the article means nothing given the user's pure effectiveness with the character. It's in the wrong for someone who wants to learn about Ganondorf and finds nothing but complaints, then refuse to even touch him. It's also a disgrace to us Ganondorf fans.
 * There aren't "nothing but complaints", there are truths as to why Ganon sucks. His jump is short, no matter how good you are, etc.  Don't take it personally.  I main Zelda.  She's low tier too, and while I may somewhat disagree with her exact placement, I accept that she isn't the best character in the game and in a perfect skill balance, she loses to better characters.  But I know that I still play my best with her, so I deal with it.  You should learn to do the same with Ganon.  Oh, and tiers aren't meaningless in the face of skill.  Yes, skill can be more important, but you are a total idiot if you think that there is no way that the innate pros and cons of characters doesn't matter.  Here's an example.  My friend Shane is one hell of a hunter and a damn good shot.  So let's say he and I go head to head and he has a bow and arrow (which he is very good with) and I have a M4 (which, while I can shoot, I don't know that much about).  Even though the M4 is clearly better, my money is on Shane.  But now say I've got the Farsight from PerfectDark.  That thing is so much better (auto-aim, shoot through walls) that his skill don't mean crap.  The first example is kinda like the Zelda v. Ganon match-up, the second is basically Ganon v. Meta Knight.  Tiers exist whether you like them or not.  And the next time you say something to the effect of "you can ban me for saying this..." I will take it as you requesting to be banned.  If you think you are going to be banned for saying something, then you shouldn't be saying it.  And if you don't think you're going to be banned for saying it, why are you prefacing it with such nonsense in the first place?  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 05:11, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I propose that such a disclaimer would insinuate that the average user has no common sense. Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px]] eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  21:06, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * This wiki is meant to present information, not make you feel good about a crap character. Also, Toomai. Smoreking (T)  (c)  21:30, February 27, 2010 (UTC)