The Elder Scrolls Wiki:Moot/Log October 2017


 * 20:08:57: Atvelonis: We're just starting now
 * 20:08:58: ShawnCognitionCP: Can we simply spam topics we want supported until they are, now?
 * 20:09:14: ShawnCognitionCP: If so, moots will become redundant quickly.
 * 20:09:18: Atvelonis: C@ or Amulet or whoever, you can start us off.
 * 20:09:44: KINMUNE: Hello there, The Rim of the Sky!
 * 20:09:49: Aquila2002: ESO Morrowind categories. Need more of 'em.
 * 20:09:50: The Cat Master: i have two proposal i wanted to discuss.
 * 20:10:20: Aramithius: OK, can we deal with Cat's first, rather than having multiple points going on at once?
 * 20:10:41: Atvelonis: Cat can present first.
 * 20:10:47: Atvelonis: Hi Rim
 * 20:11:03: The cheese lord of nirn: flight, can u turn KINMUNE off?
 * 20:11:13: Flightmare: !tw
 * 20:11:14: KINMUNE: Welcome users: False
 * 20:12:23: Aquila2002: Right then. Waiting on C@ to present his topic.
 * 20:12:52: The Cat Master: the first one regards long location ids in infoboxes. We started using on some when the ID is too long to fit in the space, however it was called to my attention that people who are older or have poor eyesight have a hard time reading the smaller text.
 * 20:13:21: RenzXVI: mobile people might have problems too
 * 20:13:33: Flightmare: They'd ignore the tag
 * 20:13:39: Flightmare: and render like it renders right now
 * 20:13:46: The cheese lord of nirn: as a mobile user, i agree, it is small
 * 20:13:47: Aquila2002: Perhaps some can be changed into simple letter representations? easy ones, of course.
 * 20:13:58: Aramithius: Is there not a master size thing somewhere in the app? So you can make stuff bigger if you need it?
 * 20:14:04: Flightmare: If there isn't enough space we can go full width like our sound bars are Alduin_(Skyrim)
 * 20:14:07: The Cat Master: I propose using a pulldown similar to the one on book infoboxes for location IDs in morrowind, oblivion an skyrim location infoboxes.
 * 20:14:42: Atvelonis: If we can get it to full width I think that would be preferable to using
 * 20:14:56: Aramithius: Can you ping a page with an example of that drop-down?
 * 20:14:56: Flightmare: Fus_Ro_Dah is probably a better example of full width
 * 20:15:02: Flightmare: minus the 3 cols thing
 * 20:15:08: Flightmare: it'd be just one with a header directly above it
 * 20:15:15: Flightmare: exactly what sound looks like
 * 20:15:57: The Cat Master: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/The_Lusty_Argonian_Maid
 * 20:16:28: Aramithius: Ah yes, I see now
 * 20:16:29: Aramithius: Thanks
 * 20:16:34: The Cat Master: This page has an example of a pulldown like im proposing
 * 20:16:35: Atvelonis: Would it be better to add a dropdown or to just keep it full width with no dropdown?
 * 20:17:02: Flightmare: adding a dropdown will only decrease readability
 * 20:17:06: Flightmare: as it will require an extra action
 * 20:17:35: Flightmare: Plus it doesn't fix the issue, it only hides it.
 * 20:17:51: Aramithius: But the drop-down would have full-size text, wouldn't it?
 * 20:18:06: Flightmare: It would
 * 20:18:08: Flightmare: I assume
 * 20:18:46: RenzXVI: I agree with the full width, some people neglect drop down clicking.
 * 20:18:53: Aramithius: Then readability is surely improved, over the small text, isn't it?
 * 20:19:27: Flightmare: Do you have a worst offender example page for this behaviour?
 * 20:19:42: Flightmare: The overflows
 * 20:19:52: Atvelonis: Something like http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Rosentia_Gallenus%27s_House
 * 20:20:30: The Cat Master: Actually a full length line like the part we place audio samples sounds like a good idea.
 * 20:22:02: Atvelonis: Should be easy to add into the templates too, I'm sure
 * 20:22:15: Atvelonis: Just two lines on
 * 20:22:33: Aquila2002: So, is there a simple way to avoid this issue, or would it be more complex than that?
 * 20:22:42: Aquila2002: Regarding ID.
 * 20:23:15: Atvelonis: We should be able to avoid it with a full-width field for IDs only
 * 20:23:34: Aquila2002: That sounds like a good idea. No overflows, yes?
 * 20:23:47: Aramithius: Sounds good to me
 * 20:23:55: Atvelonis: Any other things to add or should we vote on this?
 * 20:24:04: The Cat Master: Vote
 * 20:24:12: Aquila2002: I say Vote.
 * 20:24:16: The cheese lord of nirn: (=)
 * 20:24:24: Atvelonis: (+) in support of adding a full-width field for the IDs on location infoboxes
 * 20:24:26: The Cat Master: (+)
 * 20:24:28: RenzXVI: (+)
 * 20:24:33: Atvelonis: 3-1-0
 * 20:24:35: Aramithius: (=)
 * 20:24:44: Amulet of Kings: =
 * 20:24:47: Aquila2002: Uh...
 * 20:24:56: Flightmare: (+)
 * 20:25:02: Aquila2002: +
 * 20:25:04: Atvelonis: (=) or + or - to vote
 * 20:25:06: Aquila2002: Good enough.
 * 20:25:07: Ordinator076: +
 * 20:25:15: Kora Stormblade: Guys it's just ( + ) but no space
 * 20:25:24: Aquila2002: (+)
 * 20:25:28: Ordinator076: (+)
 * 20:25:29: Atvelonis: 5-3-0
 * 20:25:29: Amulet of Kings: (=)
 * 20:25:32: Aquila2002: Ah. Got it, thanks.
 * 20:25:38: The Rim of the Sky: What are we voting on
 * 20:26:02: Atvelonis: 6-3-0 rather
 * 20:26:09: The cheese lord of nirn: full length info boxes
 * 20:26:09: The Cat Master: full length field for long location ids
 * 20:26:13: Atvelonis: to avoid overflow
 * 20:26:34: The Rim of the Sky: I'll abstain since I pretty much just hotbed here
 * 20:26:45: The Rim of the Sky: wtf autocotrct
 * 20:26:46: The Rim of the Sky:
 * 20:26:52: Atvelonis: Any other votes?
 * 20:26:52: The Rim of the Sky: got here*
 * 20:27:52: The Cat Master: should i move on to my second topic?
 * 20:28:10: Aquila2002: Think so.
 * 20:28:14: Atvelonis: Sure. This topic passes 6-3-0.
 * 20:30:03: Starkiller131: Moot
 * 20:30:27: Amulet of Kings: Home sweet home
 * 20:30:44: Atvelonis: Hi Star
 * 20:30:52: Kora Stormblade: hey guys
 * 20:30:54: Atvelonis: Hi Otto
 * 20:30:56: The Cat Master: the other thing i want to bring up is the creation club. I know we decided not to include it, but i have the feeling people will want to keep creating page for its content. I think we need to discuss how we should handle that
 * 20:31:00: Ottoman Hold: Sorry for tardiness
 * 20:31:20: The cheese lord of nirn: i see more and more posts in the /D about creation club
 * 20:31:33: Atvelonis: I think we should have an article about the Creation Club, but we should not document the mods themselves. They aren't canonical and we cannot practically document them anyway.
 * 20:31:35: Starkiller131: All these staff, atvel being the most corrupt
 * 20:31:41: Aquila2002: Hmm. Creation Club is the whole "paid mods" thing, I presume?
 * 20:31:41: Flightmare: Rosentia Gallenus's House
 * 20:31:46: Aramithius: Yes
 * 20:31:55: Starkiller131: ,;)
 * 20:31:55: Ordinator076: It is official Elder Scrolls content is it? I see no reason to not have it as its own page.
 * 20:31:57: Flightmare: That's what it looks like.
 * 20:32:02: Atvelonis: Text-align: center?
 * 20:32:16: Flightmare: It's styled that way.
 * 20:32:17: Aquila2002: I say ignore it. Ignore all of it. Throw it into the Void and never bring it up again.
 * 20:32:18: The cheese lord of nirn: its its Bethesda created stuff, i say that there should be pages for it
 * 20:32:18: Aramithius: Is it worth having the article on the Club itself, and then a list of links to individual mods in the Elder Scrolls Mods Wiki?
 * 20:32:24: Flightmare: By default
 * 20:32:30: The Rim of the Sky: I would recommend creating just the page Creation Club for now
 * 20:32:50: Ottoman Hold: Maybe there should be a list of the mods on that page that are involved, but none of them in any detail
 * 20:32:56: Aramithius: It's Bethesda-sanctioned stuff, not all created by them
 * 20:33:08: The Rim of the Sky: As for mods/"creations", we shouldn't document them right now, but keep the idea open in the future to see how it turns out
 * 20:33:09: Atvelonis: I don't think we should list any mods at all
 * 20:33:10: Atvelonis: Just link to mods
 * 20:33:30: RhodiumOdi: Yeah, make the page for the CC, but no pages for individual mods
 * 20:33:34: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, so if its sanctioned then maybe we should have it in its own section
 * 20:33:37: Aquila2002: I second this.
 * 20:33:45: Flightmare: we could have interwiki links to w:c:tes-mods
 * 20:33:47: Atvelonis: There's an entire wiki dedicated just for TES mods. Should be their job to document the individual pages
 * 20:33:48: Atvelonis: Yes
 * 20:33:48: The Rim of the Sky: List all the current mods on one page, and link their pages to the TES Mods Wiki
 * 20:34:06: Flightmare: from the CC article
 * 20:34:09: Aquila2002: Sounds god.
 * 20:34:13: Aquila2002: good*
 * 20:34:17: The Cat Master: I agree with doing that
 * 20:34:22: Aramithius: Yes. That's what I was suggesting, in a vary garbled fashion
 * 20:34:27: The cheese lord of nirn: i like that as well
 * 20:34:28: RhodiumOdi: Seems fine
 * 20:34:30: Flightmare: Perhaps including a banner that says dump all your stuff there
 * 20:34:33: Atvelonis: @Flightmare: can you update that for all the location templates?
 * 20:34:47: Flightmare: I changed it for everything already
 * 20:34:57: Flightmare: All of our templates use inheritance
 * 20:35:00: Flightmare: So we have parents and children
 * 20:35:06: Flightmare: I modified a parent
 * 20:35:15: Aramithius: Where would the banner be? Just in the Creation Club article, or a general one for all wiki pages for a limited time, until people get used to it?
 * 20:35:17: Flightmare: All games are children
 * 20:35:17: Atvelonis: Aha, nice
 * 20:35:46: Flightmare: For starters at the top of the CC article?
 * 20:35:58: Flightmare: Just to announce to move stuff out.
 * 20:36:02: Flightmare: to w:c:tes-mods
 * 20:36:23: Flightmare: throw-it-over-the-fence
 * 20:36:32: Aramithius: Although, unless it's done more generally, won't that mean more fire-fighting for patrollers anyway?
 * 20:36:51: Aquila2002: maybe for a shot while, Ara.
 * 20:36:55: Atvelonis: Possibly, but I think the hype for this will die down soon enough
 * 20:37:02: Aramithius: Fair enough
 * 20:37:03: Kora Stormblade: Is this about CC stuff?
 * 20:37:03: The cheese lord of nirn: i don't think firefighting is the general term to use there ara
 * 20:37:05: Aquila2002: Short*. Short being roughly 6 months.
 * 20:37:06: Kora Stormblade: Sorry I just got back
 * 20:37:18: The cheese lord of nirn: as i used to be one
 * 20:37:37: Ottoman Hold: Yes Kora
 * 20:37:49: Aramithius: Apologies for any offence caused.
 * 20:37:50: Kora Stormblade: Yea I read what atv said and I agree
 * 20:37:56: Sakaratte: We found over at Fallout that there has been a 50/50 divide over CC. Its been difficult for us to reach a decision on how to handle the content for that reason.
 * 20:38:01: Kora Stormblade: If we document mods it would be utter chaos to keep up
 * 20:38:03: DarkVaultBoy: o mi
 * 20:38:17: Aramithius: Divide in what way?
 * 20:38:26: Aquila2002: Perhaps we nag the Mod Wiki on that behalf? Less work for us.
 * 20:38:32: The cheese lord of nirn: as i don't use mods, shouldn't the partrollers also be using mods as well
 * 20:38:33: RhodiumOdi: Yeah, keeping track of it would be hell
 * 20:38:36: Kora Stormblade: Though it is worth acknowledging in some way, so one article describing what it is etc should suffice
 * 20:38:47: Kora Stormblade: Well that and we aren't a mod wiki
 * 20:38:48: Flightmare: Well we could start creatorsclub.wikia.com (kappa)
 * 20:38:56: Flightmare: and have a joint dump
 * 20:38:56: Aramithius: Blech
 * 20:38:57: Kora Stormblade: It's basically paid mods no matter how it's worder
 * 20:38:59: Kora Stormblade: *worded
 * 20:38:59: Flightmare: for both FO and TES
 * 20:39:08: Aquila2002: Heh. why not, Flight? We may as well.
 * 20:39:10: Sakaratte: Essentially we agreed to cover CC, but we have a group who want to reduce it to a single page and those who want to fully flesh it.
 * 20:39:16: RhodiumOdi: "Have a problem? Make another Wiki!"
 * 20:39:23: The cheese lord of nirn: i say that it should be a single page
 * 20:39:30: Kora Stormblade: I think a single page is best
 * 20:39:55: Ordinator076: Agreed a single page would be better
 * 20:40:00: Aquila2002: A single page means most patrollers will have to get off their arse to patroll it. So I say...sure?
 * 20:40:06: The Rim of the Sky: TES Mods wiki is pretty dead, they wouldn't mind anyways
 * 20:40:09: Sakaratte: A joint dump might actually be a good idea
 * 20:40:12: Kora Stormblade: Because it would be only another thing we'd have to keep up with and record constantly, that and even if it's made by the company, it's still technically not canon things
 * 20:40:14: Aramithius: I do think it's worth checking with Elder Scrolls Mods Wiki to see what they're doing with it
 * 20:40:18: Flightmare: Patrolling isn't about checking that single CC page
 * 20:40:21: RenzXVI: Wait, why are we voting for what to do with fallout? O_o
 * 20:40:27: Flightmare: it is about checking Special:NewPages for potential mods
 * 20:40:37: Kora Stormblade: We're voting for us here, renz
 * 20:40:43: Amulet of Kings: If Bethesda admited TES and Fallout are in the same universe would we join both wikis? I don't think so, why add the mods which are only an excuse to milk Skyrim?
 * 20:40:44: Aquila2002: Yes, but either way, more work for them.
 * 20:40:49: Kora Stormblade: Fallout just happens to have the same issue
 * 20:40:49: The Rim of the Sky: @RenzXVI canonize all Fallout lore
 * 20:40:50: Sakaratte: I just brought up that we have had the same issue
 * 20:41:17: Sakaratte: It might actually benefit both wiki's to have a joint solution
 * 20:41:28: Aquila2002: @Sakaratte would a "joint dump" be a good direction to follow through?
 * 20:41:42: Kora Stormblade: what is a "joint dump" again?
 * 20:41:52: Flightmare: A new wiki that bypasses tes-mods
 * 20:41:53: Aquila2002: One wiki for FO and TES CC Mods.
 * 20:42:02: Aramithius: A single "Creation Club wiki" for both FO and TES
 * 20:42:05: Kora Stormblade: To cover CC content?
 * 20:42:08: Flightmare: Yes
 * 20:42:09: Aquila2002: Yes.
 * 20:42:20: Kora Stormblade: Maybe, but I would wonder how the tesmods wiki would feel over it
 * 20:42:23: Sakaratte: As much as people may feel it is going to go away, I doubt it will. Bethesda will push it. If we can push it as its own platform we can link in and out of, it might get the editors it needs and keep it away from both our wikis
 * 20:42:25: RenzXVI: Sounds like a lot of work.
 * 20:42:25: The Rim of the Sky: Flightmare you better claim creationclub.wikia.com before someone else does
 * 20:42:31: Kora Stormblade: They may already be considering it
 * 20:42:36: Kora Stormblade: And I second renz' point
 * 20:42:40: Flightmare: Don't worry I'll nuke it and then restart it.
 * 20:42:44: The Cat Master: that's an interesting idea
 * 20:42:45: Flightmare: :P
 * 20:42:46: RenzXVI: I agree with Kora's point.
 * 20:42:54: Kora Stormblade: ye
 * 20:43:04: RhodiumOdi: I'd say the Mod Wiki would be miffed if we didn't at least ask what they're doing first
 * 20:43:05: RenzXVI: Think of Mods wiki feelings.
 * 20:43:14: Aramithius: ^^ True
 * 20:43:24: Flightmare: You can have duplicates
 * 20:43:31: Flightmare: They can write about the same mods all they want.
 * 20:43:34: Kora Stormblade: Yea I'd rather ask though
 * 20:43:44: Flightmare: is SS still there?
 * 20:43:46: Atvelonis: eh
 * 20:43:46: Kora Stormblade: Just feels like a polite thing to do in general honestly
 * 20:43:54: Flightmare: At least if you poke someone poke Yaell
 * 20:43:57: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, how bout we ask them then if they are ok we implement
 * 20:44:00: The Rim of the Sky: Does the TES Mods Wiki even have active admins?
 * 20:44:05: Flightmare: And keep Renz locked up in the process.
 * 20:44:06: Kora Stormblade: But I still dont really see much benefit in joint wiki, people would have to dedicate a lot of time to it
 * 20:44:09: RhodiumOdi: Hardly the point Flight, I just mean it'd be polite
 * 20:44:29: Aquila2002: Duping it wouldn't be a problem, but checking in on the Mod Wiki may just be a good gesture on our part, to say the least.
 * 20:44:29: Kora Stormblade: and if tesmods wiki plans on covering it, whos to say the traffic wont all go to them instead of our new wiki?
 * 20:44:37: The Rim of the Sky: SS isn't staff on that wiki but he sometimes edits it
 * 20:45:06: Atvelonis: As long as we aren't dealing with the Creation Club stuff, I don't really care where it's documented.
 * 20:45:17: RhodiumOdi: ^Agreed
 * 20:45:31: Amulet of Kings: But it is a way to avoid editing about it
 * 20:45:38: RenzXVI: I don't like the joint dump thing.
 * 20:45:51: Amulet of Kings: In our wiki
 * 20:46:00: Aquila2002: I suppose we could "redirect" people if they come to us looking for that content. Tell them to check the dumpster, or somethin'.
 * 20:46:01: Aramithius: OK, so should we agree to a single page for now, reach out to ESMods in the meantime, and take any further action after another moot?
 * 20:46:07: Flightmare: It's very likely to either backfire or die out though.
 * 20:46:33: RenzXVI: We just make one page for CC here then pray away the g... I mean forget about where it goes.
 * 20:46:37: The cheese lord of nirn: @ara, i at we get the page started, but talk
 * 20:46:48: Ordinator076: I like the idea of a single page
 * 20:46:55: The Cat Master: Me too
 * 20:47:01: Kora Stormblade: I don't see CC even lasting longer than maybe a year considering all the backlash it gets already anyways, and not many people in general agree with it. There'd be only a minority checking out any pages on it, I feel, so I don't think it's worth a large amount of effort
 * 20:47:05: Kora Stormblade: And yea same
 * 20:47:34: Aquila2002: Backlash will get shat on by Bethesda. They don't care for public opinion. Not anymore.
 * 20:47:40: Aramithius: So what are we voting on, single page with a mod list that may or may not link somewhere at some point int the future? If so (+)
 * 20:47:47: Flightmare: You're probably wrong because of PS4 users Kora.
 * 20:48:00: Kora Stormblade: Maybe, but I still dont agree with recording all the mods
 * 20:48:02: Flightmare: CC is a way of getting assets on PS4 consoles.
 * 20:48:06: Kora Stormblade: Which are constantly changing and growing
 * 20:48:16: Kora Stormblade: Yea
 * 20:48:16: Flightmare: Because it sanctions them as 'Bethesda' content according to Sony.
 * 20:48:40: Flightmare: So the PS4 platform and all its mainstream plebs will make CC a success.
 * 20:48:52: Kora Stormblade: I think a single page describing when it was released, general info about it and what it is, etc., and that should be it
 * 20:49:05: The cheese lord of nirn: ^agree
 * 20:49:17: Ordinator076: ^^ Agreed
 * 20:49:32: Kora Stormblade: A mod list would be basically the same thing as trying to keep up with actual articles over it. If we want to look like a reliable and up to date source, we'd have to change the list a lot of the time
 * 20:49:33: Aquila2002: People know CC is a money schythe, but PS4 users will still buy it, because they don't care. Hence the propblem.
 * 20:49:37: Flightmare: And a large section about the controversy hah.
 * 20:49:38: Aquila2002: *problem
 * 20:49:46: Kora Stormblade: Yea that too xD
 * 20:50:21: Amulet of Kings: If only updating the page would be a mess I can't imagine documenting each Mod...
 * 20:51:00: Aquila2002: I agree with AoK. it'll be a heated mess, but I think one page would work well.
 * 20:51:10: Aramithius: OK, so can we have a final vote for keeping all Creation Club content to a single page?
 * 20:51:21: Aquila2002: I think so.
 * 20:51:21: RenzXVI: (+)
 * 20:51:22: Kora Stormblade: (+)
 * 20:51:26: Aramithius: (+)
 * 20:51:26: Amulet of Kings: (+)
 * 20:51:26: Aquila2002: (+)
 * 20:51:30: Flightmare: (+)
 * 20:51:31: The cheese lord of nirn: (+)
 * 20:51:31: The Rim of the Sky: (+)
 * 20:51:33: The Cat Master: It can't be worse than the crown store page. That can be a pain in the ass to update.
 * 20:51:34: Ordinator076: (+)
 * 20:51:36: Sakaratte: (=)
 * 20:51:39: Kora Stormblade: 9-1-0
 * 20:51:47: Ottoman Hold: (+)
 * 20:51:48: The Cat Master: (+)
 * 20:51:51: Atvelonis: (+)
 * 20:52:00: Aramithius: 12-1-0
 * 20:52:06: Kora Stormblade: Is that all the votes?
 * 20:52:20: Kora Stormblade: Alright, what's the next topic?
 * 20:52:24: Aramithius: Apart from Shawn, that's everyone who's online
 * 20:52:25: Aquila2002: The Crown Store would be an easy page to update, for people like me who check it everyday, but the tediousness would be very, very real.
 * 20:52:26: Atvelonis: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Creation_Club
 * 20:52:31: RenzXVI: Revamp Kora's feelings?
 * 20:52:35: RenzXVI: I mean personality
 * 20:52:41: Kora Stormblade: muh feelingz
 * 20:52:52: Atvelonis: I would have gotten a PNG but that doesn't really work with our background
 * 20:53:14: Amulet of Kings: unanimity
 * 20:53:46: Sakaratte: Something I just raised on our end with CC. Because of the issues its may create more admin work. We're considering moving our patrollers to the Content moderator role to assist
 * 20:53:53: The Cat Master: @Atv I think that page will work
 * 20:53:54: Flightmare: You can still have PNG files without transparency
 * 20:54:15: RenzXVI: Just make the white background the same gray we have on the wiki?
 * 20:54:21: RenzXVI: I doubt that alters the logo.
 * 20:54:24: Atvelonis: Only non-transparent ones I could find were JPG
 * 20:54:45: Flightmare: Open transparent one in gimp, add background layer
 * 20:54:48: Flightmare: that's how it works :)
 * 20:54:56: Flightmare: OR disable alpha channel
 * 20:55:02: Flightmare: which is slightly harder
 * 20:55:27: Atvelonis: I don't feel like reinstalling Gimp right now, someone else do that
 * 20:55:36: Atvelonis: Anyway we're done with this topic, let's move on
 * 20:55:41: Aramithius: The post is right that "Personality" sections are subjective, but some of the descriptions in "interactions" sections can be the same. If subjectivity in the responses is a problem, I don't really see that the sections are salvageable, really.
 * 20:55:48: The Rim of the Sky: I can make it transparent
 * 20:56:14: Aquila2002: What other topic should we talk about, then?
 * 20:56:21: Atvelonis: We'd have to invert the colors to make it transparent and that isn't true to the source material
 * 20:56:34: Atvelonis: if we made it transparent and left the colors alone it would blend in with our background
 * 20:57:02: Aramithius: The proposal about whether "Personality" sections need changing, I think, was kinda started. Kora?
 * 20:57:36: The cheese lord of nirn: where is todays list
 * 20:57:43: Kora Stormblade: The way we judge personality when it comes to skyrim or tes characters in general is entirely subjective. It's like with ulfric, one person can say one thing, and another person can completely disagree. I also don't find much benefit at all in having them. Most personality quirks can be judged by the reader themselves when they choose to read through dialogue
 * 20:57:43: RenzXVI: Yeah, let's go with the topic of Revamping Kora's Personality issue.
 * 20:57:51: Amulet of Kings: The_Elder_Scrolls_Wiki:Moot
 * 20:58:04: The Rim of the Sky: I think they're kind of needed
 * 20:58:16: The Rim of the Sky: TES is a roleplaying game after all
 * 20:58:25: Kora Stormblade: I just personally feel that they are somewhat aligned with a speculation section. It's not actual fact, it's a matter of opinion
 * 20:58:26: Aramithius: So what kind of style guide to we need for assessing personality, then?
 * 20:58:46: Aquila2002: Personality adds more detail to an article, and the fact that the TES series has a focus on immersion, I think it would be good to have that.
 * 20:58:56: The Rim of the Sky: Enforce a stronger neutrality guideline for them
 * 20:58:57: Atvelonis: Ehm
 * 20:59:07: The Rim of the Sky: ^ I agree with Aquilla
 * 20:59:08: The cheese lord of nirn: brb
 * 20:59:10: Kora Stormblade: I don't think we need any personality section at all,honestly. As I mentioned, what /can/ be judged is seen from dialogue, and it's not us making the decision about what we feel the character is or is not
 * 20:59:24: Atvelonis: You absolutely need to include the personality section. Most users don't have the time to read through the dialogue.
 * 20:59:34: Atvelonis: We document it for those who want to nitpick specific points
 * 20:59:40: The Rim of the Sky: So are our trivia sections, that's why we have to patrol them to prevent that
 * 20:59:43: Atvelonis: But the idea with the wiki in general is to summarize this inforamtion
 * 20:59:47: Aramithius: So how do we judge where the speculation begins?
 * 21:00:04: Atvelonis: Can you provide some examples on the Ulfric page that are biased, Kora?
 * 21:00:06: Aquila2002: And dialogue is the biggest pain in the ass. takes arround 3 hours to documnt a single quest page.
 * 21:00:08: Kora Stormblade: The personality section is literally all opinion based, though. Someone can think one person is rather rude and careless and another can think that they are charming and sweet
 * 21:00:20: Atvelonis: But if it's cited from in-game then it's not made-up information.
 * 21:00:27: Atvelonis: It's different viewpoints from the game itself
 * 21:00:30: Kora Stormblade: I just used ulfric as an example of just showing how conflicting the feelings are about him in general
 * 21:00:44: Kora Stormblade: I can try and find a page I edited where I saw this issue though, if I can
 * 21:00:53: RenzXVI: Yeah, people love and hate him in the game itself.
 * 21:00:58: Aquila2002: structure may be important here. Personality snip, then dialogue to prove it, the more info on it.
 * 21:01:12: Atvelonis: I don't think the issue is the personality section (Ulfric actually doesn't even have one), I think it's more that some articles have been neglected in regards to neutrality
 * 21:01:31: Atvelonis: But that can be fixed by providing additional information
 * 21:01:34: Atvelonis: We don't have to remove it
 * 21:01:48: Kora Stormblade: But even still, judging someone's personality is entirely up to whoever views it imo
 * 21:01:52: Kora Stormblade: This happens in reallife all the time
 * 21:01:57: Aquila2002: Perhaps characters with clearer personalities should be addressed? Such as Naryu Virian?
 * 21:02:16: Aramithius: But that has the same problem. What's a "clear personality"?
 * 21:02:20: Amulet of Kings: Neloth has an undeniable personality
 * 21:02:31: Atvelonis: You could argue the same thing for any topic in the lore
 * 21:02:44: Aquila2002: A personality that can be easily addressed, or perhaps through the use of the "16 personalities test"?
 * 21:02:49: Atvelonis: It's our job as the historians here to figure out what needs to be included
 * 21:02:55: Aramithius: @Atv, True enough, I guess.
 * 21:02:56: Atvelonis: We can't just stop doing that because it's difficult
 * 21:03:38: Aquila2002: Naryu Virian literally flirts with the Vestige, and calls herself sexy. That shouldn't be hard o define.
 * 21:03:39: Kora Stormblade: Im not saying it's "difficult and we shouldn't do it", Im saying personality really isn't something that can be accurately judged here
 * 21:03:46: Atvelonis: No, they can be accurately judged
 * 21:03:50: Atvelonis: With in-game sources, anything can be
 * 21:03:58: Aquila2002: ^
 * 21:04:14: Atvelonis: If something is cited from dialogue or a book as an indication of their personality, that belongs there
 * 21:04:29: The Rim of the Sky: State the indisputable facts, and the opinions of a character that other NPCs in the game have about them
 * 21:04:30: Atvelonis: I have seen a few spurious claims about character personalities that editors have just invented
 * 21:04:32: Aquila2002: We should use quotes to prove the justifications. Anything else would need a citation proving, or be deleted.
 * 21:04:35: Kora Stormblade: Yes but what we /judge/ based off of that dialogue
 * 21:04:45: Atvelonis: What Rim said
 * 21:04:47: RenzXVI: Yeah, even people with conflicting personalities described by people who love/hate them could just be listed like that.
 * 21:05:20: Atvelonis: People should avoid inserting their own opinions about the NPCs, and instead just use the information in the games themselves
 * 21:05:25: The cheese lord of nirn: its kind of difficult to show personality through riting
 * 21:05:38: Kora Stormblade: If it's things from what other characters have said I guess that's fine, I've just seen articles where theyve described the character as "grumpy and corrupted" and that's not what belongs there
 * 21:05:39: The cheese lord of nirn: is there away to include audio clips to
 * 21:06:01: Atvelonis: @Kora: If they're described that way in-game, it belongs there
 * 21:06:07: Atvelonis: Although perhaps it should be framed as a specific viewpoint
 * 21:06:10: Kora Stormblade: It didn't provide any sources
 * 21:06:28: Atvelonis: That's just an editor's opinion, then.
 * 21:06:35: Atvelonis: I agree that that shouldn't be included.
 * 21:06:45: Atvelonis: At least not without sources
 * 21:06:54: Atvelonis: You can make a judgment based off the dialogue but it shouldn't be too opinionated
 * 21:07:13: Kora Stormblade: I don't know, I still just don't see any reason to have it there. Yes, it saves time for the reader, but a lot of these sections can easily be fuddled up with unwanted opinions
 * 21:07:37: The Rim of the Sky: It's kind of our job to keep them in check
 * 21:07:41: Aramithius: In that case, what's a source? Is a simple link to a note saying "TESV: Skyrim" enough? Do we start doing in-article quotes for each point, as Aquila said/
 * 21:07:41: The Rim of the Sky: as patrollers
 * 21:07:44: Kora Stormblade: Yea I know it is
 * 21:07:54: Atvelonis: No we have to make specific dialogue references, Ara
 * 21:07:57: Aquila2002: those opinions could be countered with the way an NPC presents it. A lot of trust would need to be put into an editor to assure that, though.
 * 21:07:59: Atvelonis: "Dialogue with ____"
 * 21:08:07: Kora Stormblade: I just don't see a point in having it there if it's something which can easily be seen off of just dialogue itself
 * 21:08:15: Atvelonis: It really depends on the character
 * 21:08:15: RenzXVI: So if the personality sections remain, are there any changes to be made for them?
 * 21:08:51: Atvelonis: I think there are a few articles where a personality section is not strictly necessary
 * 21:08:51: Kora Stormblade: And if were using dialogue as our sources then there really isnt much of a point in the section anyways, honestly
 * 21:09:10: The Rim of the Sky: Make them fairly neutral, cite what NPCs and books say about characters to describe their personality and viewpoints about them
 * 21:09:26: Aquila2002: Perhaps we can keep personality as a rivial point, instead of something more serious?
 * 21:09:34: Aquila2002: trivial*
 * 21:09:55: Atvelonis: @Kora: in some articles I agree
 * 21:09:58: The Rim of the Sky: Our Trivia sections are already packed and crowded enough
 * 21:10:25: Atvelonis: if there's an NPC who no other NPCs talk about, then the personality section would purely be based off their own quotes
 * 21:10:38: Atvelonis: We should make an effort to summarize these quotes to some extent, probably in the lead
 * 21:10:38: The Rim of the Sky: I'm very much considering adding a "Behind the scenes" section to a lot of pages to clear them up, but that's for another's CT
 * 21:10:56: Atvelonis: But I agree that just saying "this person has a rude personality" is kind of dumb
 * 21:11:02: Atvelonis: @Rim: clunky header
 * 21:11:18: Aquila2002: Perhaps just barrier the personality to the character's dialogue?
 * 21:11:37: Atvelonis: We basically have to summarize their dialogue, that's our job as custodians of a wiki. It's also our job to do this impartially: so we can't insert our own viewpoints.
 * 21:11:50: Atvelonis: The only viewpoints we would insert on such articles would be the ones the NPC themselves have.
 * 21:11:52: Amulet of Kings: Wouldn't a source from the game also be subjective?
 * 21:12:06: Aquila2002: potentially.
 * 21:12:06: Atvelonis: Yes and in the case of controversial figures we have to balance both sides
 * 21:12:09: Atvelonis: e.g. ulfric
 * 21:12:14: Atvelonis: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Ulfric_Stormcloak_(Skyrim)
 * 21:12:23: Kora Stormblade: Yea, because if we're using dialogue as sources already then the reader can read off of it themselves. They usually don't go straight to an article just to see if so-and-so character has a certain personality either, I dont think
 * 21:12:35: Aquila2002: The unreliable narrator isn't just a subject lore-wise. It's to do with personality, and how others view it as well.
 * 21:12:38: Kora Stormblade: And already have dialogue sections for that
 * 21:12:38: Atvelonis: So I think this is really situational
 * 21:12:40: Kora Stormblade: *and we
 * 21:13:00: Atvelonis: The personality section can be very useful for NPCs whom a lot of sources mention
 * 21:13:16: Atvelonis: But for the less relevant ones, their beliefs can be summed up more succinctly in the lead
 * 21:13:28: Atvelonis: without editor opinions
 * 21:13:41: Aquila2002: Perhaps keep "personality" for the more important/unique characters.
 * 21:13:51: The Rim of the Sky: I'd probably cite Varen Aquilarios as a page with a well-written Personality section
 * 21:14:03: Kora Stormblade: Then how are we going to sort which ones need it and which ones shouldn't? Where do we put the line between what makes a character important and what makes them not?
 * 21:14:10: Ordinator076: ^^^ I agree with that
 * 21:14:25: Atvelonis: @Rim: That one is fine, it's cited and everything
 * 21:14:29: Atvelonis: @Kora: case-by-case basis.
 * 21:14:41: Atvelonis: There's almost nothing objective about lore
 * 21:14:58: The Rim of the Sky: @Kora That's not really something that policy can describe
 * 21:15:17: RenzXVI: THe problem is you can't decide which would get one or not, some characters in game have other NPCs describing them and some don't so there's nothing much to write on a personality section.
 * 21:15:27: Aquila2002: @ Kora generic characters don't get personality. But characters such as Cicero, Ulfric, Paarthunax, Ayrenn etc, should get it.
 * 21:15:59: Kora Stormblade: So characters which are involved in the major quests then?
 * 21:16:05: Atvelonis: Not necessarily
 * 21:16:05: The Rim of the Sky: And for somebody like Cicero, personality is very much needed
 * 21:16:10: The cheese lord of nirn: yes, that would work
 * 21:16:23: Atvelonis: Sort of, but people can have a lot to say about a character even if they aren't critical to the story
 * 21:16:34: Aramithius: In which case, isn't it easier just to leave policy as it is, and have patrollers remove opinions etc, which they should be doing anyway?
 * 21:16:34: Kora Stormblade: Because us deciding which characters are and arent important is also subjective in itself, we can't just pick and choose with it
 * 21:16:34: Atvelonis: like the Battle-Borns or something are only involved in like 1 quest
 * 21:16:38: The cheese lord of nirn: and yes, personality should be included for ESSENTIAL i think
 * 21:16:42: Atvelonis: No, we actually can
 * 21:16:45: Atvelonis: It's our job to pick and choose
 * 21:16:52: Amulet of Kings: Can you give me an example of a page with a bad personality description?
 * 21:17:00: Atvelonis: Historians have to decide how to format this information to the best of their ability
 * 21:17:03: Aquila2002: As Atvelonis said, not necesarily. Just an "odd" character will do. Someone who clearly stands out. Like that argonian in Oblivion, or "By AZURA, By AZURA, By AZURA!"
 * 21:17:09: Kora Stormblade: I know it's our job atv, Im just saying it's also subjective here
 * 21:17:15: Atvelonis: Yes but that's not a reason not to do it
 * 21:17:49: Kora Stormblade: This can all be judged off of just the dialogue section which is provided/should be provided for all characters already. I just feel this isnt really needed
 * 21:18:01: Atvelonis: Again, it definitely is needed a lot of the time
 * 21:18:12: The Rim of the Sky: Should we vote already?
 * 21:18:15: Atvelonis: For NPCs who have a LOT of dialogue, and for those whom other NPCs talk about a lot, we need to summarize it
 * 21:18:16: Aquila2002: These characters can be gathered up into a potential list. When it comes to ESO, the quests get so deep that every character can get a personality, so that's one down-side.
 * 21:18:18: Atvelonis: Like Ulfric
 * 21:18:20: The cheese lord of nirn: (=)
 * 21:18:29: Atvelonis: There is information in his personality section that is not explained in his dialogue
 * 21:18:33: Atvelonis: because other NPCs have said it
 * 21:19:06: Aramithius: (-)
 * 21:19:12: Aquila2002: Alright. Should we vote? We are starting to squeeze dry this topic.
 * 21:19:15: The Rim of the Sky: (-)
 * 21:19:21: Aquila2002: (+)
 * 21:19:28: Ordinator076: (+)
 * 21:19:30: Atvelonis: stop
 * 21:19:39: The Cat Master: (=)
 * 21:19:44: RenzXVI: I am not sure how we are voting.
 * 21:19:48: Atvelonis: ^
 * 21:19:58: Atvelonis: We haven't reached a conclusion really?
 * 21:20:12: Aquila2002: (+) is agree. (-) is disagree, and (=) is...something.
 * 21:20:16: Atvelonis: agree with what?
 * 21:20:21: Atvelonis: We need to state this before just flinging out votes.
 * 21:20:22: The cheese lord of nirn: (=) is neutral
 * 21:20:34: Amulet of Kings: My Wifi turned off, what happened?
 * 21:20:35: Kora Stormblade: Agree with it personality sections to be removed I assume
 * 21:20:41: Aquila2002: Agree to personality in specific Char pages.
 * 21:20:42: Kora Stormblade: *-it
 * 21:20:46: Kora Stormblade: Ah
 * 21:20:55: The cheese lord of nirn: deciding how tro vote
 * 21:21:01: Aquila2002: emphasis on *Specific*
 * 21:21:09: Aramithius: OK, we haven't actually got a proposal as yet, then
 * 21:21:28: Ordinator076: so we're going by Aquilla's conclusion?
 * 21:21:41: Atvelonis: So the proposal to vote upon would be "Record character personality more impartially and only use a personality section in articles which actually require it"
 * 21:21:46: Aramithius: And I need to be off, as we have an early start tomorrow. Night all
 * 21:21:48: Atvelonis: or something to that effect
 * 21:21:52: Atvelonis: night
 * 21:22:01: Ordinator076: goodnight
 * 21:22:03: Aquila2002: Yes, Atvelonis.
 * 21:22:07: Amulet of Kings: goodnight
 * 21:22:10: The cheese lord of nirn: clarify, aquilas is what
 * 21:22:40: Atvelonis: If we're going off the definition I mentioned above then I support (+)
 * 21:22:46: Aquila2002: Adding Personality to char pages that need it, but ignore those that don't, to simply put.
 * 21:22:58: Amulet of Kings: (+)
 * 21:22:59: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, i agree with that
 * 21:23:01: Aquila2002: (+). I support as well.
 * 21:23:05: RenzXVI: (+)
 * 21:23:08: Ordinator076: (+)
 * 21:23:08: Kora Stormblade: (=)
 * 21:23:09: The cheese lord of nirn: (+)
 * 21:23:09: Kora Stormblade: yo o.
 * 21:23:13: Flightmare: (=)
 * 21:23:17: Sakaratte: (+) just because it makes sense from a wiki style
 * 21:23:17: Atvelonis: 5-2-0
 * 21:23:20: Atvelonis: 6-2-0
 * 21:23:25: The Rim of the Sky: (+) with Atvelonis
 * 21:23:25: Ottoman Hold: (=)
 * 21:23:51: Nekyn Alb: Hey
 * 21:23:52: The Cat Master: (=)
 * 21:24:04: Nekyn Alb: Moot still going?
 * 21:24:06: Aquila2002: Some Char's with good personalities: Barbas, Vivec, Cicero, Veya Releth, Naryu Virian, etc.
 * 21:24:07: Atvelonis: Yes
 * 21:24:07: Kora Stormblade: Yea
 * 21:24:18: Atvelonis: 7-4-0
 * 21:24:21: Atvelonis: Any remaining votes?
 * 21:24:52: Kora Stormblade: Guess not
 * 21:25:01: The cheese lord of nirn: can i ask why my proposal was skipped over?
 * 21:25:14: Aquila2002: Example: In ESO, Barbas steals Summa'rah, and uses Vivec's divine energy to float up, like Vivec does, to mock him. Clear personality right there, and great depth.
 * 21:25:16: Atvelonis: 8-4-0 rather
 * 21:25:23: RenzXVI: You have presented your proposal? I didn't notice.
 * 21:25:27: Kora Stormblade: You didn't offer it in chat?
 * 21:25:31: Atvelonis: It wasn't skipped, Cheese. You just didn't say anything.
 * 21:25:52: The cheese lord of nirn: cat started first, thought we were his ideas first
 * 21:25:53: Sakaratte: Cheese, I know you're itching, but do you mind if I go next? its 10:30pm here
 * 21:25:56: Kora Stormblade: We aren't going down the list we're basically choosing based off of who wants to speak
 * 21:26:02: The cheese lord of nirn: thought we were going in order like last time
 * 21:26:05: The cheese lord of nirn: ok
 * 21:26:20: Atvelonis: Go ahead Sakaratte
 * 21:26:21: Amulet of Kings: Its 23:26 here and I am the last in the list
 * 21:26:23: Aquila2002: Right, so we've agreed on a (+)?
 * 21:26:53: Sakaratte: I am speaking on behalf of Qahn here, his proposal is to introduce an official Discord channel.
 * 21:27:16: Aquila2002: Oh. Hmm. That's interesting.
 * 21:27:29: Ordinator076: I don't see why one would be needed but it's an interesting thought.
 * 21:27:30: Aquila2002: I don't think we need one. We have chat.
 * 21:27:45: Sakaratte: Over at Fallout we brought it in as a means to deal with some issues we have been having, then extended it out to our userbase. What we have seen is Chat dry up and Discord become busier as a channel
 * 21:28:07: Atvelonis: If we were to make it official I'd like to have it logged on the wiki
 * 21:28:09: RenzXVI: Both are dead here.
 * 21:28:19: The Rim of the Sky: "Discord, so hot right now" -Mugatu, Zoolander
 * 21:28:38: The Rim of the Sky: A Discord is kind and necessary at this point
 * 21:28:42: Aquila2002: I believe the French Zeldapedia has a discord embedded in their main page. That may be a good idea to go about it.
 * 21:28:44: Sakaratte: At present our Discord has 13 active users, 3 patrollors, 1 chat mod and 4 admins
 * 21:29:03: Kora Stormblade: I thought we already had a wiki discord, though?
 * 21:29:05: Sakaratte: Ours just lives on our mainpage and it drives traffic nicely
 * 21:29:06: Sakaratte: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Wiki
 * 21:29:07: Atvelonis: I'm not opposed to this. We have a Discord already with several members on it but it's not official
 * 21:29:11: Atvelonis: But I want logs
 * 21:29:24: Atvelonis: And we need to somehow make a bot log Discord stuff and upload that to the wiki
 * 21:29:26: Kora Stormblade: So it's basically just a chat away from the wiki?
 * 21:29:30: Atvelonis: Yes
 * 21:29:39: Sakaratte: Everything is logged in discord and you can introduce bots for additional moderation/logging purposes
 * 21:30:23: Flightmare: So then we have to ban everyone twice?
 * 21:30:28: Aquila2002: Yep.
 * 21:30:36: Sakaratte: That is the only issue we have.
 * 21:30:38: Atvelonis: If it were to become official then yes?
 * 21:30:44: RenzXVI: Bans here apply there?
 * 21:31:04: RenzXVI: But the easy accounts there make that close to impossible.
 * 21:31:11: Aquila2002: It wouldn't take long Plus, people are generally well-behaved here.
 * 21:31:16: Sakaratte: That is how we operate.

The only other issue we have is verifying users to accounts too
 * 21:31:24: Kora Stormblade: Yea, we'd have to handle sockpuppetry there too
 * 21:31:54: Atvelonis: hmm
 * 21:31:56: Kora Stormblade: Atleast I'm assuming that's how it would work if we were to double ban users
 * 21:31:59: Aquila2002: And moderation will have to be split between the two.
 * 21:32:01: Sakaratte: There is several tiers of verification, from nothing to email, to text
 * 21:32:13: Kora Stormblade: There's not much point having a banned user on discord and them not have access to chat either ways
 * 21:32:22: Ordinator076: It seems like a lot of unnecessary work to me since we already have a chat.
 * 21:32:22: The cheese lord of nirn: if that was to happen, wouldn't there need to be additional mods?
 * 21:32:28: Kora Stormblade: I agree
 * 21:32:39: Amulet of Kings: How does discord work? Is it like kik where you don't have to give your phone number?
 * 21:32:43: RenzXVI: Discord does have more mods than here.
 * 21:32:46: Atvelonis: It's a ripoff of Slack
 * 21:32:50: Atvelonis: more or less
 * 21:32:52: Aquila2002: Discord is confusing.
 * 21:33:02: Kora Stormblade: Or atleast, I would like for chat traffic to still be a possibilty of growing, instead of everyone flocking to the discord
 * 21:33:10: Nekyn Alb: It's like a fusion of Skype and TeamSpeak
 * 21:33:36: The Rim of the Sky: I gotta go. now, but (+$ for making an official discord from me
 * 21:33:36: Atvelonis: I'm split on this. I like the Discord channel, but I'm not sure we have the capacity to handle it becoming official right now
 * 21:33:41: Sakaratte: The biggest perk we have had from it is better intergration of our discussions users with our editors
 * 21:33:42: Amulet of Kings: But do you have to give any sort of personal information (e-mail...)
 * 21:33:51: Sakaratte: Only to Discord
 * 21:33:55: Sakaratte: We don't get that info
 * 21:34:05: Aquila2002: Yes, AoK. I had to, for UESP.
 * 21:34:11: Amulet of Kings: Ok
 * 21:34:13: Kora Stormblade: Can't other's see it though or no?
 * 21:34:17: Nekyn Alb: Nope
 * 21:34:17: RenzXVI: no
 * 21:34:19: Sakaratte: they can't
 * 21:34:21: Kora Stormblade: Ah alright
 * 21:34:29: RenzXVI: Its just for registration.
 * 21:34:29: Flightmare: It's the same like on Wikia
 * 21:34:32: Aquila2002: I have about 5 e-mail's, though, so it doesn't bother me.
 * 21:34:40: Flightmare: one account for everywhere and only I can see your personal details.
 * 21:34:48: Flightmare: Except for I can't on discord.
 * 21:34:51: Nekyn Alb: Others only see your changable username
 * 21:35:02: Atvelonis: The changing usernames make this iffy for me
 * 21:35:08: Kora Stormblade: I do feel it would be quite difficult to manage if we weren't able to keep up, though, considering blocking and moderation would apply there as well
 * 21:35:12: Kora Stormblade: And yea that too
 * 21:35:30: The cheese lord of nirn: atv, can i ask you for siome input on this please
 * 21:35:52: RenzXVI: It's hard enough to track sockpuppets here, banning the same person from here and there is impossible, since names there can be anything and can be changed on a whim.
 * 21:35:56: Kora Stormblade: ^
 * 21:36:05: Aquila2002: Personally, I see no use for a Discord channel. More work has to be put in to sustain it.
 * 21:36:06: Kora Stormblade: That and Im about that and the traffic dying here
 * 21:36:07: The cheese lord of nirn: i know that ppl have to have 250 edits to apply for mod postistion, if this is put in effect would those need to be changed
 * 21:36:22: Ordinator076: I agree with Aquila.
 * 21:36:23: The cheese lord of nirn: to try to have a few exytra mods
 * 21:36:23: Flightmare: This chat would die out even more.
 * 21:36:24: Kora Stormblade: Albeit traffic dies here sometimes anyways, a discord would be a nail in the coffin I feel
 * 21:36:25: Atvelonis: @Cheese: the Discord has no bearing on the 250 rule
 * 21:36:30: The cheese lord of nirn: ok
 * 21:36:31: Kora Stormblade: Yea exactly flight
 * 21:36:47: Atvelonis: Yeah I'm reluctant to kill the chat. It's logged and is tied directly to the wiki.
 * 21:36:49: RenzXVI: There is a use for another chat, this chat breaks A LOT.
 * 21:36:57: Nekyn Alb: Users could just write their username on their wikiaprofile to confirm themselves, but the changing is a problem, yeah
 * 21:37:11: Atvelonis: I think the place for the Discord channel is more of a social area with some editing channels
 * 21:37:30: Atvelonis: I don't want it to replace the Chat
 * 21:37:36: Kora Stormblade: Im fine with us having our discord already, but if it's official then new users would instantly go there instead of bothering with chat
 * 21:37:37: The cheese lord of nirn: i agree
 * 21:37:43: Aquila2002: Should we vote on it?
 * 21:37:47: Kora Stormblade: How?
 * 21:37:56: RenzXVI: I actually don't want it official lol
 * 21:38:02: RenzXVI: Even though I made the thing.
 * 21:38:06: Kora Stormblade: We already have a discord, just not official
 * 21:38:06: Aquila2002: (-), from me.
 * 21:38:16: The cheese lord of nirn: (-)
 * 21:38:17: Kora Stormblade: I think now, atleast for the time being, this is sufficient enough
 * 21:38:20: Atvelonis: Aquila we haven't made a proposal statement yet
 * 21:38:21: Kora Stormblade: Wait guys stop
 * 21:38:21: Atvelonis: You can't vote
 * 21:38:33: ShawnCognitionCP: Discord is objectively a better format than chat.
 * 21:38:35: ShawnCognitionCP: More stable.
 * 21:38:37: Aquila2002: Apologies.
 * 21:38:42: ShawnCognitionCP: Better private messaging system.
 * 21:38:48: ShawnCognitionCP: No maintenance hours that take it down.
 * 21:38:56: ShawnCognitionCP: Faster service.
 * 21:38:59: Kora Stormblade: We already have one
 * 21:39:02: ShawnCognitionCP: More responsive administrators.
 * 21:39:04: RenzXVI: It's good we have Discord and chat as of now. There aren't any problems, both exist. It's good as is.
 * 21:39:06: ShawnCognitionCP: I'm aware, I'm in it.
 * 21:39:13: RenzXVI: Making it official is what would add problems.
 * 21:39:14: Ordinator076: It might be more stable but I bet monitoring Discord would take a lot of time/resources.
 * 21:39:15: ShawnCognitionCP: I'm responding to your "not bother with chat" comment.
 * 21:39:35: Amulet of Kings: I don't think there is any need to make it official
 * 21:40:23: RenzXVI: My main purpose of making it is for it to be a backup to chat when this breaks. It was also why people suggested I make it.
 * 21:40:42: Kora Stormblade: Yea because I don't want chat to become obsolete after that. Would we hold moots there instead? Would we need more chat mods to handle the extra work load? I don't see much point in having it being official since we already have one to begin with and that gives us all the benefits with none of the cons
 * 21:41:01: Kora Stormblade: Hello o.
 * 21:41:05: Sage McKaw: holy shit
 * 21:41:08: Sage McKaw: chat is fucking lit
 * 21:41:09: Sage McKaw: lol
 * 21:41:12: The cheese lord of nirn: moot
 * 21:41:13: Kora Stormblade: We're in a moot
 * 21:41:17: Sage McKaw: moot?
 * 21:41:21: Atvelonis: TES:Moot
 * 21:41:22: Aquila2002: Moo.
 * 21:41:23: Sage McKaw: sry remind me what that is
 * 21:41:28: Atvelonis: Monthly policy meeting
 * 21:41:34: Sakaratte: We haven't seen a need to increase CM's ourselves
 * 21:41:46: Sage McKaw: aaa gotcha
 * 21:42:22: Sage McKaw: so um
 * 21:42:26: Sakaratte: If anything I've been doing the bulk of the moderating with occassional interjection from others.
 * 21:42:31: The cheese lord of nirn: so, r we gonna vote
 * 21:42:43: Sage McKaw: what exactly are you voting for?
 * 21:42:48: Kora Stormblade: We have few to begin with here though, and I know uesp is filled with dozens far as I recall and they aren't as popular as we are. That, and I do feel sockpuppetry and the double block thing would make it more difficult to control
 * 21:42:55: Ordinator076: A discord server @Sage
 * 21:43:00: Atvelonis: Whether or not to make the Discord channel an official extension of the wiki
 * 21:43:09: Sage McKaw: ok
 * 21:43:12: Sage McKaw: that would be cool
 * 21:43:19: Kora Stormblade: We do already have a discord, though
 * 21:43:23: Kora Stormblade: It just isn't official
 * 21:43:25: Sage McKaw: oh ok
 * 21:43:37: Sage McKaw: well then what are the downsides of it being official?
 * 21:43:39: Aquila2002: I disagree. Too many finicky problems that would need to be dealt with.
 * 21:43:48: Atvelonis: It's not connected to the wiki in any way
 * 21:43:52: RenzXVI: So vote to make it official?
 * 21:43:56: Atvelonis: Meaning we would have to block people twice etc.
 * 21:44:05: The cheese lord of nirn: i recommend a vote
 * 21:44:07: Ordinator076: Wont there be a need for more mods? I guess some of the mods could monitor the Discord server but what if they don't have access to it?
 * 21:44:11: Sage McKaw: right but whats wrong with the discord being official?
 * 21:44:15: The cheese lord of nirn: we would need more mods
 * 21:44:19: Sage McKaw: oh ok
 * 21:44:20: RenzXVI: It has way more mods than here.
 * 21:44:23: Kora Stormblade: Read what we've been saying, sage
 * 21:44:33: Sage McKaw: sorry my bad
 * 21:44:38: Atvelonis: I think I'm leaning towards no
 * 21:44:39: Kora Stormblade: It's alright
 * 21:44:45: Kora Stormblade: I am as well here
 * 21:44:54: RenzXVI: (-)
 * 21:44:57: The cheese lord of nirn: (-)
 * 21:44:57: Atvelonis: (-)
 * 21:45:00: Aquila2002: (-)
 * 21:45:02: Flightmare: (-)
 * 21:45:05: Kora Stormblade: I just forsee the double block and sockpuppetry, and the dying of chat even more being a major issue
 * 21:45:07: Kora Stormblade: (-)
 * 21:45:08: Ordinator076: (-)
 * 21:45:10: Atvelonis: 0-0-7
 * 21:45:12: The Cat Master: (-)
 * 21:45:23: Atvelonis: 0-0-8
 * 21:45:23: Kora Stormblade: Rim said support, so it's 1-0-8
 * 21:45:26: Sage McKaw: I think thats a no lol
 * 21:45:26: Atvelonis: ah
 * 21:45:28: Kora Stormblade: Though his support doesnt do much here
 * 21:45:35: Kora Stormblade: Tbh, since it's very outnumbered
 * 21:45:42: Aquila2002: Standing at 1-0-8
 * 21:45:49: Kora Stormblade: Yep
 * 21:45:50: Amulet of Kings: (-)
 * 21:45:57: Aquila2002: 1-0-9
 * 21:46:10: Sage McKaw: how do I get notified when moots are?
 * 21:46:19: Atvelonis: They're the first saturday of every month
 * 21:46:20: The cheese lord of nirn: every 1st Saturday, 4pm est
 * 21:46:21: Kora Stormblade: They are in the weekly updates
 * 21:46:24: Kora Stormblade: As well
 * 21:46:25: Sage McKaw: ok
 * 21:46:27: Kora Stormblade: and yea what atv said
 * 21:46:36: The Cat Master: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_Wiki%3AMoot
 * 21:46:37: The cheese lord of nirn: so, it was denied i take iy
 * 21:46:43: Amulet of Kings: The_Elder_Scrolls_Wiki:Moot
 * 21:46:53: Kora Stormblade: Yes, it didn't pass
 * 21:47:07: Ottoman Hold: (=) for discord
 * 21:47:08: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, next topic?
 * 21:47:15: Ordinator076: Are we going to talk about Cheese his topic now?
 * 21:47:17: Sakaratte: Alright, with that I am going to run off. I'll probably join you next moot if CC is on the books o/
 * 21:47:20: Kora Stormblade: o.
 * 21:47:21: Aquila2002: 1-1-9
 * 21:47:31: Amulet of Kings: I think I'm the next
 * 21:47:37: Ordinator076: Oh okay
 * 21:47:41: The cheese lord of nirn: i haven't done my topic yet
 * 21:48:09: Amulet of Kings: Sorry, true, I thought it was yours
 * 21:48:22: The cheese lord of nirn: may i start mine
 * 21:48:27: Ordinator076: Go ahead.
 * 21:48:31: Aquila2002: Shoot.
 * 21:48:34: Sage McKaw: So does everyone just get to introduce their own topic?
 * 21:48:50: Amulet of Kings: Read the page for the moot The_Elder_Scrolls_Wiki:Moot
 * 21:48:57: Sage McKaw: ok sorry one sec
 * 21:49:34: The cheese lord of nirn: i propse that the off topic be brought back. rhodium did do one for this month, and it has been successful, but i know it isn't allowed.  i propose a 1x a month off topic post that is actively moderated, as the current one is
 * 21:50:00: Aquila2002: I wouldn't call it "successful" yet. More of a mess.
 * 21:50:08: Atvelonis: I don't have an opinion on that. If the Discussions moderators think it's going well, I'm fine with continuing it
 * 21:50:14: Sage McKaw: I still dont understand how its a mess
 * 21:50:16: Sage McKaw: I thought it was fun
 * 21:50:24: Atvelonis: If they think it's becoming too much of a nuisance to moderate, I would prefer not to continue it
 * 21:50:29: Aquila2002: Looks more like a reason to p/r hunt.
 * 21:50:34: Atvelonis: @Amulet thoughts?
 * 21:50:36: Ordinator076: I agree with Aquila. A lot of low effort post in it that can be avoided.
 * 21:50:40: Amulet of Kings: I think its fine, the conversations there are interesting and they haven't gone out of control
 * 21:51:00: Sage McKaw: but theres already so many low effort posts on the d
 * 21:51:06: Ottoman Hold: We have to worry about the reason we shut them down last time though
 * 21:51:14: The cheese lord of nirn: we actually have had some fun posts, like hell i found out aramithius is a Green Bay Packers fan
 * 21:51:22: Sage McKaw: Yeah
 * 21:51:31: Ordinator076: Last time was the worst. It should never be like that ever again.
 * 21:51:41: Sage McKaw: can you give a reason ordinator?
 * 21:51:45: The cheese lord of nirn: i say that if the posts get oiut of hand then we can stop it
 * 21:51:51: Sage McKaw: I agree
 * 21:51:51: Ordinator076: It became a chat?
 * 21:52:04: Amulet of Kings: And people began to RP
 * 21:52:09: Sage McKaw: I guess but this time maybe we can moderate it a bit more harshly
 * 21:52:16: Ordinator076: You were holding party's?
 * 21:52:18: The cheese lord of nirn: i know this current post has not become a chat, nor a RP
 * 21:52:21: Sage McKaw: really bring across the message that its not a chat
 * 21:52:53: Sage McKaw: Yeah ordinator I guess your right about that. This time it should different though.
 * 21:52:54: Ordinator076: Do you understand what I'm trying to say about the last off topic sage? It was bad.
 * 21:52:58: Sage McKaw: I understand
 * 21:53:02: Ordinator076: OK
 * 21:53:09: Sage McKaw: I just think that with proper moderation it can be ok again
 * 21:56:59: Sage McKaw: what just happened lol
 * 21:57:00: The cheese lord of nirn: wow
 * 21:57:05: Flightmare: oh that was fast
 * 21:57:11: Kora Stormblade: o hi kinny
 * 21:57:12: Flightmare: I didn't even get the chance to open the terminal
 * 21:57:16: Atvelonis: I hate when that happens
 * 21:57:19: Ordinator076: Okay, anyways I was typing something. I'd like to hear what the /d mods think of constantly monitoring the monthly off topic post.
 * 21:57:21: RenzXVI: /d was the topic and chat died... (kappa)
 * 21:57:26: Kora Stormblade: Flight I have no idea what any of that stuff means but it sounds smart xD
 * 21:57:26: Aquila2002: Spooky.
 * 21:57:29: KINMUNE: Hello there, Nekyn Alb!
 * 21:57:30: Atvelonis: It must be a sign!
 * 21:57:32: Atvelonis: Hey Nekyn
 * 21:57:34: Sage McKaw: lol
 * 21:57:37: Nekyn Alb: lol
 * 21:57:40: Nekyn Alb: Hi again
 * 21:57:42: RenzXVI: When an offtopic thread is allowed, some will always post bad comments and if those are removed then people get annoyed and all whining starts again.
 * 21:57:45: Flightmare: the terminal is that thing from the matrix
 * 21:57:48: Flightmare: with the green thingies
 * 21:57:52: Flightmare: falling down
 * 21:57:56: Aquila2002: Ah.
 * 21:57:57: Sage McKaw: renz theres already so much whining lets be honest
 * 21:57:59: Kora Stormblade: uh
 * 21:58:00: Kora Stormblade: ok
 * 21:58:01: Kora Stormblade: xD
 * 21:58:07: Flightmare: Go watch the movie.
 * 21:58:12: Kora Stormblade: I did but it confused me :(
 * 21:58:13: KINMUNE: Hello there, Hail the Empire!
 * 21:58:19: Sage McKaw: I dont think that whining is a problem
 * 21:58:27: Kora Stormblade: I know the matrix from our calculator work in algebra ehh xd
 * 21:58:29: Kora Stormblade: hello o.
 * 21:58:36: Hail the Empire: Hello
 * 21:58:37: Sage McKaw: are we still doing the moot lol
 * 21:58:37: Aquila2002: Green things faling down are too confusing. Let's stick with https://soundcloud.com/essential_music/chinese-man-ive-got-that-tune-tha-trickaz-remixhttps://soundcloud.com/essential_music/chinese-man-ive-got-that-tune-tha-trickaz-remixSkyrim.
 * 21:58:42: Atvelonis: Back on topic
 * 21:58:47: Aquila2002: What the fuck
 * 21:58:50: Amulet of Kings: Yes please
 * 21:58:51: Sage McKaw: I agree atv
 * 21:58:57: Sage McKaw: I wanna discuss this lol
 * 21:59:07: Atvelonis: Does anyone else have other thoughts about this?
 * 21:59:09: Hail the Empire: so, what's the topic of the moot
 * 21:59:17: Ordinator076: I'd say the rules should be made very clear and people should constantly be corrected if they are doing something against the rules of Off Topic. I hope that by doing this people won't do something against the Off topic rules.
 * 21:59:19: Atvelonis: Reinstating off-topic post
 * 21:59:19: Amulet of Kings: Offtopic post
 * 21:59:23: RenzXVI: Sage, that's the point, mods just run it and ignore the whining. Like ignore the people who says the place needs to be more fun, all people want is for it to have fun instead of /d being an actual forum with useful info.
 * 21:59:29: RenzXVI: It's not a forum at all.
 * 21:59:30: Sage McKaw: I agree with ordinator
 * 21:59:40: Hail the Empire: seeing as I'm never on the /d anymore you don't have to worry about me ruining it again
 * 21:59:55: Sage McKaw: well then can we get mods for the d that will fix the problem?
 * 22:00:05: Sage McKaw: I feel like there not doing there job if their just ignoring it
 * 22:00:07: Aquila2002: The whiners are always ignored.
 * 22:00:07: Ordinator076: I don't think that's necessary
 * 22:00:13: Kora Stormblade: That's not what he meant
 * 22:00:15: KINMUNE: Hello there, The cheese lord of nirn!
 * 22:00:20: Kora Stormblade: Least I don't think it was
 * 22:00:25: The cheese lord of nirn: wow, talk aboiyt a computer freeze
 * 22:00:31: Sage McKaw: Oh wait
 * 22:00:35: Sage McKaw: I understand
 * 22:00:45: Amulet of Kings: @Sage McKaw Do you think it is not being moderated correctly?
 * 22:00:57: The cheese lord of nirn: I think that it is
 * 22:00:58: Sage McKaw: yes to be honest
 * 22:01:07: Sage McKaw: so many low effort posts are made
 * 22:01:10: Aquila2002: Nope.
 * 22:01:11: Sage McKaw: It bugs me
 * 22:01:19: Ordinator076: But wouldnt it take a lot of recourses for mods to check the off topic post every hour for a whole month until the other post starts?
 * 22:01:19: RenzXVI: I meant run the /d as is and not entertain the whining. /d is still meant to be an informational forum, people never remember that, they treat the thing like an entertainment chat.
 * 22:01:23: The cheese lord of nirn: sage, I havnt seen u in iot
 * 22:01:23: Aquila2002: It's a heated mess.
 * 22:01:41: Sage McKaw: I would be in a lot more nirn if it was used correctly
 * 22:01:46: Kora Stormblade: Then if that's the issue, I don't think off topic will make it better
 * 22:01:49: Sage McKaw: but all I see is low effort posts and complaining
 * 22:01:51: Nekyn Alb: That's because wikia sucks at presenting the chat
 * 22:01:54: Sage McKaw: maybe
 * 22:02:13: Sage McKaw: I guess your right but I still kinda wish the d was a little more controlled
 * 22:02:47: Ordinator076: Thats another topic let's stay on the topic of the monthly off topic.
 * 22:02:59: Sage McKaw: right
 * 22:03:00: Kora Stormblade: Then people complain about it being too controlled. Its a give and take relationship in a way, which is why I think /d moderators have a difficult job as is
 * 22:03:06: Hail the Empire: As long as it's not abused like before then it should be back
 * 22:03:07: Atvelonis: I think this is more a decision that the /d mods should make
 * 22:03:11: KINMUNE: Hello there, Aquila2002!
 * 22:03:12: Kora Stormblade: And yea agreed
 * 22:03:22: Sage McKaw: It is being abused though
 * 22:03:24: Kora Stormblade: They're the ones actually having to deal with that sort of stuff
 * 22:03:26: Sage McKaw: thats why it bugs me
 * 22:03:27: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, off topic post4
 * 22:03:31: RenzXVI: I am just stating my opinion, I have no intention of voting for any /d stuff.
 * 22:03:32: Kora Stormblade: What is being abused?
 * 22:03:41: Sage McKaw: the entire discussions
 * 22:03:46: Sage McKaw: let me explain one se
 * 22:03:49: Sage McKaw: sec*
 * 22:03:50: Kora Stormblade: And yea same renz
 * 22:03:53: KINMUNE: Hello there, The Cat Master!
 * 22:04:18: Kora Stormblade: I do feel that it is more of a decision meant for them though. Im not involved so I can't support or oppose something I won't be helping with
 * 22:04:30: Kora Stormblade: Not really fair in that way
 * 22:04:40: Sage McKaw: i started with discussions so I care about it
 * 22:04:45: Aquila2002: I've been on the /d for a long time, and so I vote against.
 * 22:05:02: Ordinator076: On the monthly off topic: I think monthly off topic should be a thing as long as post like "lol" or "haha" should be deleted as they do not offer any type of discussion and are mostly for post farming.
 * 22:05:13: The cheese lord of nirn: that I can agree with
 * 22:05:27: Sage McKaw: exactly ordinator
 * 22:05:30: Kora Stormblade: Thing is is Im sure there are also a few grey areas with that when it comes to discussions
 * 22:05:31: Sage McKaw: or emojis
 * 22:05:34: Aquila2002: Most things on an Off-T.opic thread are post/reply farmings
 * 22:05:44: Sage McKaw: Thats why it needs to be controlled
 * 22:05:54: Kora Stormblade: Because the same could also be said for statements, and people get upset when those are taken down
 * 22:06:05: The cheese lord of nirn: amulet, what is the current comment count of the post please, with deleted posts
 * 22:06:10: Ordinator076: @Aquila true but as you may have seen some people actually hold some discussions in there with effort
 * 22:06:16: Sage McKaw: but doing one thing will upset one person and please another
 * 22:06:40: Amulet of Kings: @The cheese lord of nirn 1244 posts
 * 22:06:41: Sage McKaw: In this case I believe taking down the one sentence posts will help people who actually care about the discussions
 * 22:06:44: Kora Stormblade: Yea, but weren;t you talking about people complaining too much and that it was a problem? I don't see how that would help it
 * 22:06:51: Aquila2002: Ignore the whiners on the /d. It's what has been done for ages, and will continue to be so.
 * 22:06:54: The cheese lord of nirn: ok and I see 1217
 * 22:07:07: The cheese lord of nirn: so we have a total of 27 deleted posts
 * 22:07:17: Sage McKaw: Yeah
 * 22:07:17: Atvelonis: deleted also includes comments you've made on a post that was deleted
 * 22:07:20: RenzXVI: IMO, the whole thing is a gray area, /d users want the off-topic thing to be a release for the strictness but at the same time, mods have to strictly monitor the thing and take up all the effort. It's pretty stupid. I propose either the off-topic threads die forever or if it's implemented, it shouldn't need too much moderating.
 * 22:07:21: Atvelonis: even if the comment itself wasn;t
 * 22:07:23: Atvelonis: *wasn't
 * 22:07:28: Amulet of Kings: I read one by one all of them
 * 22:07:38: Kora Stormblade: Yea I;m with renz here honestly
 * 22:07:42: Sage McKaw: thats good moderating then amulet
 * 22:07:53: Sage McKaw: thats what I hope if off topic comes back
 * 22:07:55: The cheese lord of nirn: well, if it gets too out of hand, u guys can lock it
 * 22:08:06: Amulet of Kings: I only remove the ones that clearly break the rules
 * 22:08:20: The cheese lord of nirn: and didn't one person get a 3day while in the off topic
 * 22:08:21: Aquila2002: I'm going. When it comes to the vote, count me as (-). \o
 * 22:08:26: Kora Stormblade: For?
 * 22:08:31: Atvelonis: How about we just let the Discussions mods figure this out?
 * 22:08:34: Kora Stormblade: Oppose off topic coming back?
 * 22:08:36: Atvelonis: I don't think it's really moot material
 * 22:08:41: Kora Stormblade: And yea I agree
 * 22:08:41: Sage McKaw: I still want to discuss it atv
 * 22:08:46: Sage McKaw: because I care about it
 * 22:08:47: Atvelonis: Many of us aren't active on Discussions
 * 22:08:49: KINMUNE: Hello there, Ottoman Hold!
 * 22:08:50: Kora Stormblade: I dont think it's fair to have a vote on this
 * 22:08:50: Atvelonis: Hi Otto
 * 22:08:55: Kora Stormblade: For what atv said
 * 22:08:57: Kora Stormblade: hey ott
 * 22:08:59: Ottoman Hold: I got booted out
 * 22:09:04: Kora Stormblade: yeet
 * 22:09:05: Sage McKaw: can you be a mod for discussions and not for the actual wiki?
 * 22:09:15: RenzXVI: Actually, no/
 * 22:09:20: Atvelonis: Not in a technical sense
 * 22:09:21: Ottoman Hold: Is this still about off-topic posts?
 * 22:09:22: Sage McKaw: no?
 * 22:09:25: Atvelonis: Though most mods choose one or the other
 * 22:09:27: Amulet of Kings: Massive abstention?
 * 22:09:29: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, so I can see this. the /d mods make the post and control it  if it gets out of hand, they stoip
 * 22:09:30: RenzXVI: It's a bundle, forum mod + /d mod + chat mod.
 * 22:09:32: Kora Stormblade: Yea, but we probably won't vote on it, ott
 * 22:09:37: Kora Stormblade: Since it's more of a /d mods issue
 * 22:09:49: Sage McKaw: where can I discuss this outside of the chat?
 * 22:09:51: The cheese lord of nirn: i can agree with that
 * 22:10:01: Sage McKaw: Becuase I still want to talk about discussions
 * 22:10:01: Ottoman Hold: I never really understood the need for the off-topic posts, personally.
 * 22:10:04: Atvelonis: @Sage: the actual usergroup gives you rights to the Forums and /d, but most mods don't do both
 * 22:10:12: Sage McKaw: ok
 * 22:10:21: RenzXVI: Nirn, if that is the case, I am 100% positive it will end up stopping.
 * 22:10:27: Sage McKaw: If I was a mod I would probably do discussions just cuz its easier for me
 * 22:10:32: Sage McKaw: and I go on a lot more then the wiki
 * 22:10:35: Kora Stormblade: I understand the want for it, but I also do find it has much more grey areas and thus makes it difficult to deal with
 * 22:10:38: Ottoman Hold: I'm the only mod who is on both semi-frequently
 * 22:10:40: Kora Stormblade: Atleast, for discussions
 * 22:10:45: Ordinator076: I'm kind of neutral on this one. For one I can see why people want it gone and I kind of agree since it takes a lot of resources to monitor. But some people like to have discussions that are not about TES. But I guess you can argue with that that they could go to the chat.
 * 22:11:28: The cheese lord of nirn: ok, i recommend we move on to amulets topic. i also have one more item i woul dlike to bring up
 * 22:11:45: Sage McKaw: Ok. where could I go to further talk about discussions?
 * 22:11:58: Amulet of Kings: Can I start?
 * 22:11:59: Sage McKaw: also are there any discussion mods on right now?
 * 22:12:13: Kora Stormblade: Unofficial discord, or facebook, or talkpage message or thread
 * 22:12:17: Ordinator076: Go ahead AoK.
 * 22:12:18: Atvelonis: Amulet is on, Sage
 * 22:12:22: Sage McKaw: ok sorry
 * 22:12:30: Atvelonis: Otto is also a mod
 * 22:12:54: Kora Stormblade: Although the actual decision I think is agreed should be left for the /d mods
 * 22:13:05: Amulet of Kings: I propose changing the references of Infernal City and Lord of Souls
 * 22:13:27: Nekyn Alb: Yo Atvel, I'm gonna steal the coloured tables from here, yeah? Will probably change the colours a bit because we're darker
 * 22:13:43: Amulet of Kings: In many articles the references tell the page where the information was taken from
 * 22:14:26: Amulet of Kings: But people using an e-book like me have an issue with it, since changing the font size changes the number of àges
 * 22:14:31: Amulet of Kings: *pages
 * 22:14:49: The cheese lord of nirn: that is a problem i aslo get
 * 22:14:52: Atvelonis: Sure Nekyn
 * 22:14:57: Nekyn Alb: Thanks
 * 22:15:08: Amulet of Kings: I propose giving the part and the chapter the info was taken from
 * 22:15:10: The cheese lord of nirn: amulet, do u use a Kindle?
 * 22:15:40: Amulet of Kings: For example Ghol references the info as I propose
 * 22:16:10: Amulet of Kings: No, it is a BQ Cervantes
 * 22:16:30: Atvelonis: That's a good idea, I've had the same issue myself
 * 22:16:33: The cheese lord of nirn: does it have a location tyope thing at the bottom, like the picture i am about to send u in KIK
 * 22:16:37: Atvelonis: Since the different physical editions have different pages
 * 22:16:41: Nekyn Alb: Just reference the chapter
 * 22:16:44: Atvelonis: e.g. the American edition is not the same as the English edition
 * 22:17:02: Nekyn Alb: German is different as well, obviously
 * 22:17:05: Amulet of Kings: I could take care of changing the references
 * 22:17:28: Atvelonis: I don't have any objections to that
 * 22:17:49: The cheese lord of nirn: i would agree with that
 * 22:17:51: Ordinator076: I think we can all agree to this then? I see no problems with it.
 * 22:17:53: Atvelonis: Vote on this new format? Citing by chapter instead of page (which varies depending on the format)
 * 22:17:55: Atvelonis: (+)
 * 22:18:02: Ordinator076: (+)
 * 22:18:02: The cheese lord of nirn: (+)
 * 22:18:07: Amulet of Kings: (+)
 * 22:18:38: The Cat Master: (+)
 * 22:18:44: Atvelonis: 5-0-0
 * 22:19:03: Atvelonis: Flight, Kora, Nekyn, Otto?
 * 22:19:08: Atvelonis: renz?
 * 22:19:13: RenzXVI: (+)
 * 22:19:19: Kora Stormblade: (+)
 * 22:19:23: Nekyn Alb: (+)
 * 22:19:34: Kora Stormblade: I think it would be less confusing if they differ from pages in different areas
 * 22:20:02: Kora Stormblade: *since
 * 22:20:05: Kora Stormblade: not if, my bad
 * 22:20:14: Atvelonis: 8-0-0
 * 22:20:36: Flightmare: I have to go now actually so I can't catch up this part right now.
 * 22:20:47: Flightmare: Bye
 * 22:20:48: Atvelonis: Alright, goodnight then o/
 * 22:20:49: RenzXVI: I think moot is done, actually.
 * 22:20:55: The cheese lord of nirn: i have one more item
 * 22:20:57: Nekyn Alb: o/
 * 22:21:00: RenzXVI: All that is left in the list is to oppose Abdus' stuff.
 * 22:21:00: The cheese lord of nirn: o.
 * 22:21:13: Amulet of Kings: I need to sleep, goodnight
 * 22:21:19: Kora Stormblade: o.
 * 22:21:26: Ordinator076: Goodnight
 * 22:21:29: The cheese lord of nirn: gn
 * 22:21:31: Kora Stormblade: I'd just say we can scrap those tbh...
 * 22:21:32: Atvelonis: I can handle the update this weekend