User talk:Cerulean

Add topic
From Looney Pyramid Games Wiki

Changing Page Titles To Initial Caps[edit source]

If you're really up for the task of hitting every page you affect, go ahead with your changing "Sentence case" (the wiki default) to "Initial Caps Case". Otherwise, I wouldn't bother; page naming conventions were discussed and dropped a while back; and folks generally aren't diligent enough to manually make Initial Caps for everything, to be consistent (whereas folks ARE lazy enough to do "all lower case" chat/e-mail-style naming, which the wiki automatically puts into Sentence case). In short, you're setting us up for a LOT of redirect pages and clean-up behind other users. Better if we focus on, say, a usable clear navigation method with complete and accurate games indexes than on how pages are titled (remember: you can always use pipe syntax to change the appearance of a link to a Sentence case page name!). HTH—David Artman 12:07, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Blog RSS[edit source]

added your blog to be syndicated, so I can read it in livejournal - --[[User:scottobear|scottobear] 10:35 21 September 2007 (EST)

David Artman 13:44, 20 February 2008 (EST)[edit source]

I replied to your points about Chicken Run.

Field promotion[edit source]

Wanna be an admin? - misuba 17:00, 1 March 2008 (EST)

Please see the response I sent via Gibberish. - Cerulean 10:41, 3 March 2008 (EST)

You're Admin? Awesome! (IGDC infobox)[edit source]

David Artman writes: So, wow, you're an admin? We've finally got another admin! Could you please add What Can I Play? to the left panel navigation, above Existing Games? I think it's a significant Level 1 Page--more so than Existing Games, which offers no real guidance to new players--and so we want to drive folks into it first and foremost.

Also, there's quite a few delete pages out there at the moment--check Special pages?

Next, could you please protect the IGDC Template boxes? I don't think Jorge is going to take "freedom of choice" for an answer; viz his last response, now deleted:

"Now, I'll be changing all the pages from the Winter 2008 contest except yours. Anyone can go against the wishes of the community [note how he defines "community": his cabal of four] (even if someone didn't vote, that's already saying something) [several things, actually: don't care, not aware, not a designer in the IGDC] and change the box back in their games [note how he thinks like a vandal: he's gonna do it and leave it to others to notice and change back], but after the poll is over (by this Sunday) we all will have stated our preference as a community [of four] and I for one will respect it (either way)."

Finally, could you just move that whole "discussion" to the IGDC Winter 2008 Talk page and protect it there, as that comp is over anyway? The main IGDC page needs to be open for the Coordinator to be able to make changes or announce a (valid) poll or what-not--in fact, we need to list the Notification Sites (places at which we advertise a new IGDC) in a new section of the Procedures. (edit: While you're at it, you can put my 'No' vote back in place, if not my 'It's Moot' vote--I deserve my vote, even if I become incensed by Jorge's willfulness. Plus, it shows how ironic and stupid the poll is: 4-3 "decides" to hide rankings which were "bad" because of... wait for it... too few ballots! I swear, the irony is hilarious, if it's source wasn't such an annoying git.)

Thanks! Glad to see an admin around these parts! --David Artman 11:55, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Please David, don't put words and extra meanings into my mouth... You managed to get the other page locked and now you continue flaming here... Are you blind and deaf? I won't answer your ridiculous insults and claims, but the poll is still up so it seems at least Ryan thinks it's valid... Now, as thanks to you no one else can vote, I'll proceed to implement the results. And for the record, the poll was open to everyone that wanted to vote, so if many people didn't vote, then they don't care about what box is up. So, changing the box will not go against their wishes. Jorge
Ryan, do you approve of Jorge moving his protestations to your User Talk page? I though part of the "rules" of this community is that you don't Talk about User Talk (else every "private" message is open to debate). I tried to help the poor boy out, by removing his impudent error, but apparently he insists upon running this into the ground (or having the last word, actually, as he has yet to offer any refutations of arguments, just repetitious opinions). If only it were possible to actually engage in debate with him--maybe he just can't follow logic in English?--we might actually be able to move forward positively, as you asked and I am trying to do (see below). I guess every community has a Weasel, just as every one has an Ogre (*bows*). --David Artman 14:46, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
Yeah David, keep on burying yourself by insulting others. Well Done. If there is indeed a policy as you mentioned, I'm sorry. I cannot see a mention about it at the Policies_and_Usage_Conventions page. BTW, if there was a legitimate reason to remove my comment, why didn't you mentioned it on the Summary? --Jorge
Looks like he insists upon the last word. He can have it (sure to come any second, now that I have dared to make a comment within sight of him). Still... if only that last word contained some shred of defense for his vandalizing games pages, it would be worth it. Worth more to me (and those who've e-mailed me with their agreement) would be the words "good bye forever." --David Artman 15:10, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Reply from David Artman[edit source]

I agree that choice is best for Boxes--recall that was my whole point in saying the poll was moot: designers will do what they wish.

RE flaming/banning: Whenever you've seen me flame, look back a few posts and you'll see one of two things (a) I have repeated myself more than once, to replies of "Nuh-uh," or (b) I have been directly insulted first. Believe it or not, I don't look for battles to fight... but I don't walk away from someone slapping my face, either. Prideful? Yes... but I don't consider having pride in oneself and being willing to fight for what one believes (including the belief that one deserves to be respected) to be wrong. Further, I'd point to my contributions over the years just as much as to my detractions: until the recent unpleasantness, I was putting in about ten hours a week on Various Things Looney (no more). Finally... go check the list archives (I have spent a few hours doing so): there's only one person I've "flamed" in the past half a year. One. FWIW, I have a few off-list e-mails commiserating with me and giving me thumbs-up for being as TOLERANT as I was; imagine! Before that (LONG before) I got pissy about how slow admin response was, here, and tried to get the Looneys to host the wiki, in the hopes that they'd assign more than one (busy) admin. In the interim, yes, I've expressed frustration at how under-represented Icehouse is; and at times I have gone over the top in efforts to rally support (i.e. to "prove" that Icehouse deserves as much business attention as Fluxx). Those efforts were... pointless, I now know (hence the reason I no long Demo).

RE consensus: I don't see any reason to try to reach it, excepting on the Main Page and navigation (i.e. Level 1 nav stuff). What Can I Play? Existing Games, News, Main, nav--that's about all we need. Beyond that, laissez faire, I say. (Yeah, IGDC design restrictions warrant some polling and voting... but the Coordinator should *still* make the decision, based on what's best for the brand and for the depth/breadth of offerings here--hence the reason I stuck to my guns on 2HOUSE, in spite of being harried by ONE person. Yep, same one.)

I'll keep it "cooler than ice," for sure, though: I am about utterly drained of desire to participate in anything involving this community, anymore; so my passions aren't likely to flare very high any time soon. Once I switch my own site to be wiki-based (I hate my CVS), I'll be moving my rules off, with external links to my inviolate pages (as others have done--I wonder if this is a cycle?). But don't ask me to let someone smack me publicly and just ignore it--I subscribe to "two eyes for an eye" justice. 13:57, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

IGDC (on a lighter note...)[edit source]

The page says that the public announcement of request for submissions should've happened recently. But I see no such announcement on the front page or the news page. Could it be hiding somewhere that I haven't thought to look? Are submissions being accepted? --Lardarse 03:22, 21 March 2008 (EDT) (Reply here, please)

I have updated the Site News page to point at the most recent IGDC planning page, and included some of the more pressing deadlines. I hope this clears up your question. Would it help future users like you to put an IGDC link on the Main Page? - Cerulean 08:55, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks![edit source]

Thanks for the navigation panel addition! It's been a long time coming (since its inception date).

Could you unprotect the IGDC Talk page, and move the award box(es) "discussion" to the Winter 2008 IGDC Talk page where it belongs? Going forward, the box(es) will be whatever each designer chooses, so there is no longer any reason to poll or talk about it, and there's even less reason to keep it prominently displayed on the main IGDC Talk page. Further, the Coordinator might need that space for Summer. - Artman

IGDC Talk page is unprotected now. Feel free to move the discussion. - Cerulean 10:09, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Pyramid icons - how to integrate with rest of site?[edit source]

Hello! I don't know if you read the Icehouse mailing list, but I just uploaded a bunch of icons of pyramids for use in game diagrams. I wrote a page about them, Pyramid Icons for Diagrams, but I don't know if that's the best name for it or where to link that page in from elsewhere in the site. Any suggestions? DenisMoskowitz 14:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I added a link to Pyramid Icons for Diagrams under Resources in Icehouse In General. Please see if there are any categories that your page could be part of. - Cerulean 12:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
None of the current categories seem appropriate. Is there a page about writing game rules pages? DenisMoskowitz 21:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Activate the notification by mail[edit source]


Is there a way to activate the notification of modifications of pages in the watchlist and receive a mail ? It's an option of mediawiki as you can see here:$wgEnotifWatchlist

Thanks. Didier69 15:13, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[edit source]

Let me know if you or anyone other regular/moderator can help go through this long list of games. I've posted in my talk page on tips for finding the rules for any of the games not already on here.

Some games will be duds or too incomplete to include, but there are some really nice ones too. I just played Chivalry (not added yet), which works as a nice strategy chess board game (wish I knew of it before now).

"Existing Games" page[edit source]

I'm wondering what your philosophy is about the "Existing Games" category, which seems outdated when compared to the rest of the site (including the very useful "What Can I Play" page).

There are several reasons that the "Existing Games" page lags behind. One is that some designers simply never put their games on the community list, even after they remove the "in development" tag on their games' pages.

Other reasons include the hundreds of games that have been added by people other than the designers. I've been adding SLICK games (and other games I've found online; I keep finding new depositories) of late, but this issue preceeds my work. Also, some designers have left their games on the "in development" list AFTER taking down their "in development" tags and after competing and/or winning community awards. There are games that are still not on the list that are played regularly by icehouse players.

Falling behind as the community list is, I see no problem with adding all of the SLICK games that are listed on "SLICK" as "complete" (and, in fact, I have not been adding incomplete games from there to our wiki). It will be tougher with some of the games I've found from other sources. Also, I assume that a game that appears on many SC lists is worth including (they obviously "work")--with the assumption that the designer has simply stopped development and will probably never log back in.

I don't have the time to fix up the "existing game" list myself, but I'll do what I can to include finished games.

There has been much discussion on this topic here and here. Basically, designers aren't doing their jobs of pushing designs through the design spiral and into finished status. I've tried prodding the community to do their work for them, but nothing has come of this. (The Ice Awards is as close as we've gotten.) I think "What Can I Play" is far more useful than "existing games".
I propose a Big Change!
  • Rename "games in development" as "community games". (Games actually in development can still be singled out with categories.)
  • Split the "Existing Games" page into two pages, "published games" and "award-winning games".
  • Move the Community Games from "existing games" to the new "Community Games" page.
  • Update the navigation bar as appropriate.
That way we have the ever-helpful "what can I play", official LL games, and award-winners known to be good, while the community games (which always seem in perpetual playtest) have a page of their own, whether in development or not. - Cerulean 13:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Plutonian Poker[edit source]

Thanks for your comments on Plutonian Poker; I adjusted the point values as you suggested and hopefully will be able to playtest in the near-future - I know this comment/changes are rather belated but I didn't visit the site until today (life happens don't you know)!

Spamfighting[edit source]

Somebody should give you a medal for your spam-purging skills. You found every single spam image and erased them all, and you're quickly deleting every spam page I can find. I seriously appreciate your efforts. You rock! --Splooge169 17:31, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Abandoned Games/Old Non-Games Update[edit source]

Hey Cerulean. I'm new here, so I don't want to go and radically change the site around, but I've been running into a lot of games that have been "Under Development" for over 7 years now, many of which are still in the "Initial Design" stage. Could I start work on moving these games to the Abandoned section and also strip them of their Categories? I was thinking about moving games in the Initial Design Stage if they haven't been updated in 2 years and games that are "Nearly Complete"/"Playtesting" if they haven't been updated in 4 years. --MansterSoft (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2017 (PST)

I think that could be dangerous to drop them into an "abandoned" category, since, in many cases the game designer simply never took their game out of Playtesting (whether on principle or not). Many games in "Nearly complete" and quite a few in "Design Stage" are fully playable, and there some I can think of that are on some people's Starship Captain list. That said, I've got one of my games that I will happily put into the abandonware category (learned my lesson there). I think that, removing games, should require at least some agreement that the game isn't playable. That said, the "playtest" tag may be useless for many games at this point.--Nihilvor (talk) 23:06, 5 February 2017 (PST)