| Revision as of 02:43, 9 May 2007 editChick Bowen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,743 edits →Cloaks: not required← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:09, 9 May 2007 edit undoMDP23 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,211 edits →Cloaks: hmm?Next edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| Hopefully someone can clear this up for me - why are cloaks being required for access? <code>/cs access #wikipedia-en-admins add user 5</code> should work just as well whether cloaked or not. Would it not make sense just to require users to be identified? ]''']''' 20:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC) | Hopefully someone can clear this up for me - why are cloaks being required for access? <code>/cs access #wikipedia-en-admins add user 5</code> should work just as well whether cloaked or not. Would it not make sense just to require users to be identified? ]''']''' 20:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :Cloaks are not required (unless they are for new users). I don't have one. ] 02:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC) | :Cloaks are not required (unless they are for new users). I don't have one. ] 02:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::I know that they aren't required for physical access <code>/cs invite #wikipedia-en-admins</code>, but am wondering why they are being required on this page for no seemingly good reason... ]''']''' 06:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:09, 9 May 2007
Wording
Under "purpose", David Gerard prefers the wording, "You might be wrong!" Two other editors prefer, "You might be wrong about whether or not you really have a consensus, and you will be held responsible for anything you do, regardless of the IRC discussion that preceded it." Anyone else have an opinion? --Elonka 20:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Under "purpose", one of the channel wizards worded it a given way, and zero channel wizards disputed this - David Gerard 20:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Furthermore, please reread m:Instruction creep. If they don't understand already, they're not clueful enough to be admins. - David Gerard 20:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, that's way too harsh. Sorry for being asslike there. What I mean is, this is a description of what the channel is for, and that includes assuming good judgement already exists. If we have to detail good judgement, the reader shouldn't be on the channel. If we have to detail the penalties for cluelessness, the reader shouldn't be on the channel. If someone proves to be clueless on the channel, I kick them off - David Gerard 21:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Incomprehensible
I consider myself reasonably computer literate, but the instructions at Sean Whitton's toolserver start off by asking "Register your nickname on freenode using the information here. You must register and link an alternate nickname and set an e-mail address.". The associated link to http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#nicksetup advises that to register one needs to "/msg nickserv register <your-password>". I'm being dense here, but the page has no entry box to enter this into, nor gives any clue as to some other program to use... David Ruben 03:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Cloaks
Hopefully someone can clear this up for me - why are cloaks being required for access? /cs access #wikipedia-en-admins add user 5 should work just as well whether cloaked or not. Would it not make sense just to require users to be identified? Martinp23 20:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Cloaks are not required (unless they are for new users). I don't have one. Chick Bowen 02:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know that they aren't required for physical access
/cs invite #wikipedia-en-admins, but am wondering why they are being required on this page for no seemingly good reason... Martinp23 06:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know that they aren't required for physical access