Rock Patch 1.10 development thread

[Renegade]

Then why edit the entire page or make it a redirect rather than just the slanderous parts? After all that was your advice to him when your origenal page was up. Im not pretending its a fact. If its not why wont you let him make his as he wants? Im not questioning the removal of his off comments about pd or yourself as they shouldnt have been there, but thats where the editing should have stopped.

How often do I have to repeat something until you understand it?
There. is. no. need. for. two. seperate. pages. on. the. same. topic. and. it. has. always. been. our. policy. to. merge. those. pages.
Two pages on RockPatch's versioning system are one two many. Not because I don't like the second one, but in general. Just as two pages on the Damage flag are enough, on RA2, or anything else.
Do you want to go to Warhead and split it? Make one Warhead (flag) and one Warhead (object)? 'cause that's exactly what you're advocating. One page for every point of view. One AIGenerals (TS), one AIGenerals (RA2), one AIGenerals (YR), one VKAIGenerals...

I understand very well that you run the this site. Im just questioning your methods of handling a creator who has a different point of view than your own. Where you can consider the editing/deleting of the aigenerals section and iscanine section vandalizing becouse he wont properly explain or prove these things. The editing of the versions page really is his place to edit. If he changed something on pds release order I could see that as vandaless but on what he has put out for the patch it is a product he is currently working on not yours not mine and should be able list his work as he pleases.

God. You _still_ didn't understand it, did you? There is no "his place". We generally rollback pages like status from other people's edits simply because no one but VK can say what the status is. That is not the case with versions. We all know what was released, and the future version names have been confirmed by, so they're public knowledge, too. Therefore, there is no need to make that page "VK only".

The only reason VK doesn't like my version of the official version list is it exposes how many revisions he had. And there is no logical reason why revisions should not be listed - not only did he himself list pd's "revisions" (while conveniently not listing his), but there's no use in this list at all if you can't look up a revision to see where in the release order it is.

C'mon. Gimme a logical reason why a page on RockPatch versions should not list that on 14.03.2007 a version of RPCE was released?
There is none. The only reason is that VK doesn't like the world to know that, while he decries pd's work as so crappy and buggy, pd had a maximum revision count of 2, while he's at 12 at the moment.

No your missleading through comments like this. I never said it was bad its just not how he wants his work on this project protraied or listed. You do dictate over what he displays hence his old page became a redirect to you merged page, and you said by posting anything else he was asking for another merge or did you forget you said this:

All you're setting up is another merge.

You may not like it but he wants his work presented in away you dont seem to like or understand so you dont let it happen. ...

How often do I have to repeat something until you understand it?
There. is. no. need. for. two. seperate. pages. on. the. same. topic. and. it. has. always. been. our. policy. to. merge. those. pages.
Two pages on RockPatch's versioning system are one two many. Not because I don't like the second one, but in general. Just as two pages on the Damage flag are enough, on RA2, or anything else.
Do you want to go to Warhead and split it? Make one Warhead (flag) and one Warhead (object)? 'cause that's exactly what you're advocating. One page for every point of view. One AIGenerals (TS), one AIGenerals (RA2), one AIGenerals (YR), one VKAIGenerals...

...You are the hypocrite here. Saying you dont stop him then turning around and reorganizing what he put up into your view rather than his. ...

"Reorganizing into my view"? How the hell does one do that?
Like, ordering 1 2 3 into 3 2 1 and saying "NOOO! 3 clearly comes before 1!!"?
Let's look at the posted information:

• VK posted: A list of RockPatch versions from 1.00 to Hells Edition, a note that RPCE is not 1.09, pd's "revisions", a whole lot of slander against pd.
  
• I posted: A list of RockPatch versions from 1.00 to Hells Edition, a note that RPCE is not 1.09 (according to VK), pd's "revisions", VK's revisions, a small history of the versioning system(s), a current → traditional mapping.
  

Hmm, scanning...scanning. Oh, I see.
...the only thing missing from VK's page is the slander against pd, that must be what you're talking about.

I thought it was okay to remove that? Hypocrite.

... Explain where I was being a hypocrite here please?

You mean other than the example right above?
You keep on pretending you were having a neutral view, while constantly ignoring my posts and re-posting already deconstructed parts of other people's posts.

Had you listened to anything I said, you'd have seen a hundred times over that I did nothing we haven't been doing for years. Removing vandalism, banning vandals, merging pages, expanding pages.
Encouraging discussion, discouraging useless stuff.

Instead you keep on pretending the past two years of active administration didn't happen, this is the first time I do all this, and therefore, I must be doing it to suppress VK.

Either come out as a VK-supporter and act like it, or give all opinions the same weight in your posts. But quit acting like I'm out to hunt VK just because I do the same stuff I did a dozen times last year.

If your going to try this as its the last thing said in that paragraph

But when he's misleading people by listing only pd's bugfix-versions and badmouthing only his versions, that's totally fine and not to worry about.

God you're such a hypocrite, it's disgusting.

Re read the post your quoting me from youll find I said this

Ofcourse if he puts it up with slander you can just go edit out said slander without mergeing or changeing anything else.

I have never condoned the pointless degredations thrown around by VK, and still do not. Did you over look that or just ignore it?

Do I have to copy/paste it, like the other stuff, or are you capable of scrolling up and reading?

Forceing him to go with your version of the versions page. You do not accept anything else.

Had you listened to anything I said, you'd have seen a hundred times over that I did nothing we haven't been doing for years. Removing vandalism, banning vandals, merging pages, expanding pages.
Encouraging discussion, discouraging useless stuff.

Instead you keep on pretending the past two years of active administration didn't happen, this is the first time I do all this, and therefore, I must be doing it to suppress VK.

Why would I not merge the pages? The current page shows, matter-of-factly, VK's versioning, and below it, clearly marked at not official, a logical mapping of that versioning to traditional numbers.
What would be the advantage of having this information separate?
What would be the advantage of leaving out VK's revisions?
What would be the advantage of taking out all the release dates, hierarchy and revision notes, and returning to a plain list format.

You can try and play the supporter all you want - there is no logical reason, no advantage of his design over mine or a two-page solution.
He's just crying because my page is better designed as his, and I dared to show that.?

No he crys becouse you consistantly rework his page rather than let it be. ...

Yeah...constantly! Like, where is the count now? Zero...one! What? ONE already?!?! OMFG I reworked his page ONCE!! I didn't know MediaWiki could even handle this many edits!

Do your lies know no bounds?

... On things like the slander and down play of pd I agree change it as it has no place there. ...

Yeah, we've seen that above.

... You dont stop there though you go the next step and start editing his view of the release info. He obiously doesnt want the fix revisions listed you insist that they be creating two completely different pages. It dosent matter if its logical or not.

Right. Fuck whether it's logical or not! If VK doesn't want everybody to see that he needs six times the revisions to create something the people regard as stable, where pd only needed two revisions, let him propagate that view already!

Oh FUCK the sarcasm. I'm sick of it. The only thing I'm curious about is whether you're actively trying to manipulate people onto VK's site, or if he just turned you without yourself noticing?

Do you even see what you're doing here? On one hand, you say "it's okay to remove the slander". On the other hand, you attack me for fixing the biased display of versions. And you ask why I'm calling you a hypocrite?

You are every single time you reword rework ...

Let's look at the posted information:

• VK posted: A list of RockPatch versions from 1.00 to Hells Edition, a note that RPCE is not 1.09, pd's "revisions", a whole lot of slander against pd.
  
• I posted: A list of RockPatch versions from 1.00 to Hells Edition, a note that RPCE is not 1.09 (according to VK), pd's "revisions", VK's revisions, a small history of the versioning system(s), a current → traditional mapping.
  

Hmm, scanning...scanning. Oh, I see.
...the only thing missing from VK's page is the slander against pd, that must be what you're talking about.

I thought it was okay to remove that? Hypocrite.

... or threaten to merge his page you are infact suppressing him. ...

How often do I have to repeat something until you understand it?
There. is. no. need. for. two. seperate. pages. on. the. same. topic. and. it. has. always. been. our. policy. to. merge. those. pages.
Two pages on RockPatch's versioning system are one two many. Not because I don't like the second one, but in general. Just as two pages on the Damage flag are enough, on RA2, or anything else.
Do you want to go to Warhead and split it? Make one Warhead (flag) and one Warhead (object)? 'cause that's exactly what you're advocating. One page for every point of view. One AIGenerals (TS), one AIGenerals (RA2), one AIGenerals (YR), one VKAIGenerals...

...Such as you are the hypocrit here. (and when I say reword Im not reffering to the senceless bad comments he makes)

Wait, you call me a hypocrite, only to bring up the slander in the same line?
Bold.
Stupid, but bold.

I dont see how I am a "imposter".

Entry Word: impostor
Function: noun
Text: or imposter
one who makes false claims of identity or expertise [...]

You pretend to be the neutral observer, yet exclusively spread VK's propaganda. If that's not a case of claiming false identity or expertise, I don't know what it is.

btw, notice how "impostor" is the main entry, while "imposter" is the alternative one. dictionary.com and wiktionary list the same hierarchy. Three dictionaries vs. your opinion. So much for correcting me.

I want VK to stop being childish about this and ignore your opinion thus continue work on the patch. Id also like to see him learn better way to discribe things so everything he has to say doesnt come out as a derogatory attack . I want you to stop being so insistant that your view is the onlyone that works and to see that his view may just be valid even if hes the only one thats sees it and its not logical. Those are the goals of my comments.

And, as usual, ending with the "I'm so neutral, I just want everything to work out." hypocrite foundation.
Usually, I'd guess that doesn't work anymore now, but given the blind eye the muppets have turned to my posts before, I assume they'll continue to buy it. Congrats on turning them into good little sheeple. Lord knows what would happen if they actually realized how you two are twisting reality here.

Actually, thinking about it, I think I know where you learned...keeping people in line, dictating the enemy despite all obvious evidence, re-writing the past, making people say stuff against there own opinions...

1984. You're The Party, VK is Big Brother.
Does that make me Emmanuel Goldstein?