Actually what was the reasoning for this anyway? Like Taliseth said it would turn away a lot of new editors, especially people who create an account to fix a mistake, which is a majority of the editors and how some of us long-time editors started as well.
The only reason I could see is preventing vandals like the Todd Howard guy, but I doubt this will do much. Todd Howard guy is a persistent vandal and has been vandalizing the wiki for a while now, way longer than 4 days, so I doubt this would do anything for him. If he's this persistent he's just going to create accounts 4 days ahead of time and use them one by one.
True, but why make an account and then wait four days to attack?
Vandals like to attack whenever they feel the need to vandalize. Unless Todd Howard Collective is invested in vandalizing us, I believe he wouldn't do so. His persistence may more or less just be outrages to vent his "vandalism" needs, and sadly this wiki is his outlet (but probably other wikis too). Adding at least one obstacle to the Collective's attacks may, more or less, direct them to another wiki (and let them deal with it) or it just might defuse the problem in general. You never know
Of course a huge influx of editors and edits are going to drop, but I guess that's the cost. I mean I did suggest range banning, but Wikia staff suggested new editor protecting since they couldn't find a correlation between all the vandals.
Do you have another way of dealing with the Todd Howard Collective?
You can simply revert the edits like we've been doing. In a sense, blocking new users is also part of the success for vandals, since they are still affecting the wiki negatively by stopping useful contributions. If this wiki is the Todd Howard Collective's outlet, again, he could just vandalize whenever he wants, just four days later after creating his account. He's also a global vandal so he could just vandalize on other wikis, and re-use old accounts for example.
Reverting the edits only takes a couple minutes of our time, but this block wastes four days for new editors. Stopping vandals should not take precedence over the needs of editors, especially new ones who could become long-time editors.
Are some of the editors that have made minor edits and/or have not stayed for very long. Pocket Camp isn't the most active and information "leaking" game out there. Not a lot of new things have been implemented from New Leaf, and things that are new have already been added to the wiki and have pages that are well fleshed out. The cost isn't such a high price to pay.
If the Todd Howard Collective was invested, he could vandalize while admins are away or something. Allowing for massive terrifying edits that could give the wiki more of a burden to our wiki readers for being unable to find viable information, and wiki editors who will do their best to undo the vandals edits. The already established wiki editors and wiki readers will have a harder time with this wiki vandal then just the minor grammatical error or minor mistake.
So here is my compromise, lets leave this on for a while and turn it off when the time is right! (See Discord for more information)...
some of the editors that have made minor edits and/or have not stayed for very long.
That is exactly my point, the fact that they don't stay for long is one reason why we shouldn't prevent new editors from editing. Whatever they wanted to change or fix will be lost forever if they don't want to go through the inconvenience of waiting a couple of days, which is already enough, on top of having to make an account since anonymous editing is disabled.
This has nothing to do with Pocket Camp's newness or anything like that. All contributions are helpful, and there's always things to do or mistakes to fix on the wiki.
If the Todd Howard Collective was invested, he could vandalize while admins are away or something.
This fact does not change even with the 4 day restriction. He can do this whether or not his vandalism is offset by 4 days or not.
The scales are also not in the favor of vandals, he has to make a new account which is already tedious enough, change his IP, then click on a bunch of pages and find a bunch of text to copy paste or come up with to vandalize. Todd Howard Collective also uploads images so he has to waste time on that. Contrast that to us, who just have to click a couple of buttons to completely revert all his edits or just one button (if you have an extension installed for example). Same thing for normal wiki editors, the effort to undo an edit is already way less than it took for Todd Howard Collective to vandalize it. This change lowers the wiki's quality (preventing edits), but it doesn't do much to stop the vandals. I think the cost outweighs the benefit.
Emilysara wrote: True, but why make an account and then wait four days to attack?
Similarly, why make an account and wait four days to make an important edit or addition.
Thing is, I see that trolls are more likely to persist over time and actually wait the 4 days, while genuine editors are likely to go "huh, well okay then" and just forget about the site or loose interest in making the edits. That seems more harmful, if I had to make an opinion.
y'all'll notice that the guy's stopped vandalising though
I actually thought this statement was against the block at first (implying something along the lines of it was basically pointless) but it could be taken as support so I'm just going to say this. It's been less than a month since the restriction. Todd has been vandalising since Feburary with gaps longer than this. Even if that wasn't the case any activity or lack of cannot be conclusively used for anything.
Like Taliseth said, dedicated vandals are more likely to persist over time instead of regular editors. The whole reason you put this restriction into place was because of a dedicated vandal. There's no need to go to such lengths for a one-off vandal. Like I also said, vandal edits are easily revertible as well. This change is more harmful than it is good.
Downsides of this restriction:
Contributions by new editors potentially lost forever.
My opinion is pretty much summed up as follows: You are thinking about the lack of vandalism edits that you see, but I think we should be more concerned about the good edits that we don't see. Vandalism can be reverted, but if good edits are never made, then that's that.
hey you left chat before I could say something, anyway
is this giant autoplay video robyn's idea? Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp
I don't know why I assume everything is Robyn's idea
It's not, don't worry, well maybe you should worry, anyway it's Wikia's idea as usual. I don't know why but it's funny to me that they got someone to actually read our articles and then make a video about it.
There's a thread about the videos on HOA's wall here: Thread:138138
Hello! I am a member of FANDOM and I left a thread regarding Discussions in your Forum several days ago. If you and your fellow admins could take a minute to read and reply, that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
It was for combined sysop/admin + bcrat which was put in place a long time ago. There were users that were sysop or bcrat but not both, so viscount was for the combination of both. But Robyn and others who would have actually had it didn't use it so it became redundant. RIP.