2,519
pages
ALL POSTSEpisode Leaks
<p>Hello everyone now if you may or may not know an actual staff member, Matt Burnett, has visited the wiki and actually made an edit! Now you can imagine how humbling and great it is to know that an actual show staff member has visited a fansite for said show (just imagine how I must feel having a show staff member visit a wiki that I created less then 3 years ago).
</p><p>Matt's edit was a request which is more then reasonable and thus should be acted upon and upheld. He, and the other show staff, would like for us to stop episode leaks before they're officially announced because "[The Crewniverse]" spends a lot of time on these episodes to present the story in a very specific way, in a way they think is special, so it’s incredibly frustrating and disappointing to see information just get dumped online".
</p><p>Due to this many of the users in chat and I have decided to make this thread so that we may all figure out a way to properly address this issue at hand. One user in chat came up with the idea that we have a new group of users with the position to stop any and all episode leaks from occurring and for the person posting them to be notified or banned should the situation result in that.
</p><p>Anyways if this does happen I think that the users in that position would be given patroller and/or rollback rights. I agree completely with this and I would like to know if any other users think it's a good idea as well or have some other ideas that will help us to uphold the staff's request. Either way please know that episode leaks are going to be handled more seriously and will be put to a stop.
</p>
(Edited by administrators)
<div class="quote"><i>Fokkusu1991 wrote:
Really guys? <p>All of the leaks on Stevenbomb 3 <i>ARE FROM THE SAME PERSON</i>. </p><p>Tell that person to stop, and if they don't, ban them. Then post an announcement that <i>ACTUALLY EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEAKS AND SPOILERS</i> (which no one has bothered to officially agree on here) so that people won't repost leaked info. Rollback/report edits containing leaks when you see them. Problem solved. </p><p>The way this wiki is run looks like a train wreck. You don't need new staff to solve a problem that doesn't exist, in this case pervasive leaks, because this happens about as frequently as Hell freezing over and once again <i>it's all coming from one person</i>. What you DO need are locks on certain pages and some <i>FORUM MODS.</i> </p><p>Get your act together. </p> </i></div>
<p>Well first of all you didn't have to be as harsh as you were about it, and secondly when the idea was first brought up it wasn't known that the leaks were coming from one source. </p>
Really guys? <p>All of the leaks on Stevenbomb 3 <i>ARE FROM THE SAME PERSON</i>. </p><p>Tell that person to stop, and if they don't, ban them. Then post an announcement that <i>ACTUALLY EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEAKS AND SPOILERS</i> (which no one has bothered to officially agree on here) so that people won't repost leaked info. Rollback/report edits containing leaks when you see them. Problem solved. </p><p>The way this wiki is run looks like a train wreck. You don't need new staff to solve a problem that doesn't exist, in this case pervasive leaks, because this happens about as frequently as Hell freezing over and once again <i>it's all coming from one person</i>. What you DO need are locks on certain pages and some <i>FORUM MODS.</i> </p><p>Get your act together. </p> </i></div>
<p>Well first of all you didn't have to be as harsh as you were about it, and secondly when the idea was first brought up it wasn't known that the leaks were coming from one source. </p>
(Edited by Killer365)
1
<div class="quote"><i>Fokkusu1991 wrote:
Really guys? <p>All of the leaks on Stevenbomb 3 <i>ARE FROM THE SAME PERSON</i>. </p><p>Tell that person to stop, and if they don't, ban them. Then post an announcement that <i>ACTUALLY EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEAKS AND SPOILERS</i> (which no one has bothered to officially agree on here) so that people won't repost leaked info. Rollback/report edits containing leaks when you see them. Problem solved. </p><p>The way this wiki is run looks like a train wreck. You don't need new staff to solve a problem that doesn't exist, in this case pervasive leaks, because this happens about as frequently as Hell freezing over and once again <i>it's all coming from one person</i>. What you DO need are locks on certain pages and some <i>FORUM MODS.</i> </p><p>Get your act together. </p> </i></div>
<p>Guess what? The person who leaked the information has already stopped when Matt posted on his message wall. This discussion is for things yet to come. A lot of people are always eager to post things that they find on other social media sites. And Matt said something along the lines of not being able to stop people from sharing what they want and he's right. The wiki's only one part of a bigger picture. </p><p>Also, you said that the wiki doesn't need new staff but proceeds to say we need forum mods. . . what? </p><p>The only leaked episode was "We Need To Talk", we added the info accordingly since everyone with an internet connection could already see it. Plus it was only leaked some hours before its initial airing. </p><p>Information leaks don't quite happen as often as you think. The only two episodes whose info was leaked were "Cry for Help" and a little of "Keystone Motel" and that's about it. The official pages for it were constantly edited to remove leaks but the forums and message sections weren't as cleaned, as regular users can't edit other people's comments. </p><p>It's as if you're new to <i>this</i> wiki. </p>
Really guys? <p>All of the leaks on Stevenbomb 3 <i>ARE FROM THE SAME PERSON</i>. </p><p>Tell that person to stop, and if they don't, ban them. Then post an announcement that <i>ACTUALLY EXPLAINS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEAKS AND SPOILERS</i> (which no one has bothered to officially agree on here) so that people won't repost leaked info. Rollback/report edits containing leaks when you see them. Problem solved. </p><p>The way this wiki is run looks like a train wreck. You don't need new staff to solve a problem that doesn't exist, in this case pervasive leaks, because this happens about as frequently as Hell freezing over and once again <i>it's all coming from one person</i>. What you DO need are locks on certain pages and some <i>FORUM MODS.</i> </p><p>Get your act together. </p> </i></div>
<p>Guess what? The person who leaked the information has already stopped when Matt posted on his message wall. This discussion is for things yet to come. A lot of people are always eager to post things that they find on other social media sites. And Matt said something along the lines of not being able to stop people from sharing what they want and he's right. The wiki's only one part of a bigger picture. </p><p>Also, you said that the wiki doesn't need new staff but proceeds to say we need forum mods. . . what? </p><p>The only leaked episode was "We Need To Talk", we added the info accordingly since everyone with an internet connection could already see it. Plus it was only leaked some hours before its initial airing. </p><p>Information leaks don't quite happen as often as you think. The only two episodes whose info was leaked were "Cry for Help" and a little of "Keystone Motel" and that's about it. The official pages for it were constantly edited to remove leaks but the forums and message sections weren't as cleaned, as regular users can't edit other people's comments. </p><p>It's as if you're new to <i>this</i> wiki. </p>
(Edited by Iudexkoo)
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Vogel100 wrote:
Making a staff position is completely pointless. There are far too few leaks.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p>
(Edited by Terrsolpix)
1
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Terrsolpix wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Vogel100 wrote:
Making a staff position is completely pointless. There are far too few leaks.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p>
(Edited by Mattwo)
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Mattwo wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Terrsolpix wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Vogel100 wrote:
Making a staff position is completely pointless. There are far too few leaks.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p> </div> <p>It is better than locking pages, what if we have issues or we start looking unprofessional. Plus, it is a lot mor fun and practical to have new positions. </p>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p> </div> <p>It is better than locking pages, what if we have issues or we start looking unprofessional. Plus, it is a lot mor fun and practical to have new positions. </p>
(Edited by Terrsolpix)
1
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Judgekoo wrote:
</p><p><span style="line-height:1.5em;">Guess what? The person who leaked the information has already stopped when Matt posted on his message wall. This discussion is for things yet to come. A lot of people are always eager to post things that they find on other social media sites. And Matt said something along the lines of not being able to stop people from sharing what they want and he's right. The wiki's only one part of a bigger picture.</span>
</p><p>Also, you said that the wiki doesn't need new staff but proceeds to say we need forum mods. . . what?
</p><p>The only leaked episode was "We Need To Talk", we added the info accordingly since everyone with an internet connection could already see it. Plus it was only leaked some hours before its initial airing.
</p><p>Information leaks don't quite happen as often as you think. The only two episodes whose info was leaked were "Cry for Help" and a little of "Keystone Motel" and that's about it. The official pages for it were constantly edited to remove leaks but the forums and message sections weren't as cleaned, as regular users can't edit other people's comments.
</p><p>It's as if you're new to <i>this</i> wiki.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>Good, then all that is needed at this point is an announcement telling people not to leak/spread leaked info. Leaks are so rare anyway that this whole "we need leak police" reaction is completely overblown. </p><p>I said that we don't need new staff <i>SPECIFICALLY FOR LEAKS</i>. We DO need forum mods. Reading comprehension. </p><p>I said, in the post <i>YOU QUOTED</i>, that leaks hardly ever happen. Again: Reading comprehension. </p><p>
</p><p>I'm actually not being particularly brutal with my criticisms of how the wiki is run. I've formerly been active in communities where people have held community-consuming monster-sized flame wars over admins or mods. I've been in communities where admins themselves have vandalized the community to the point where you can't even log in, when they don't even own the site or the servers. No, this is not the worst-run community I've ever been in. It's still... not great in various ways. I really,<i> really</i> don't want to see things taking a turn for the worse because people can't decide/agree on how they want to do things, a handful of people go on a power trip, etc. I've seen it happen before elsewhere. </p><p>It's absolutely astounding to me that people are suggesting an entirely new, entirely unnecessary class of staff while neglecting the fact that part of this community (the forums) is very much <i>under</i>staffed. </p>
<p>Good, then all that is needed at this point is an announcement telling people not to leak/spread leaked info. Leaks are so rare anyway that this whole "we need leak police" reaction is completely overblown. </p><p>I said that we don't need new staff <i>SPECIFICALLY FOR LEAKS</i>. We DO need forum mods. Reading comprehension. </p><p>I said, in the post <i>YOU QUOTED</i>, that leaks hardly ever happen. Again: Reading comprehension. </p><p>
</p><p>I'm actually not being particularly brutal with my criticisms of how the wiki is run. I've formerly been active in communities where people have held community-consuming monster-sized flame wars over admins or mods. I've been in communities where admins themselves have vandalized the community to the point where you can't even log in, when they don't even own the site or the servers. No, this is not the worst-run community I've ever been in. It's still... not great in various ways. I really,<i> really</i> don't want to see things taking a turn for the worse because people can't decide/agree on how they want to do things, a handful of people go on a power trip, etc. I've seen it happen before elsewhere. </p><p>It's absolutely astounding to me that people are suggesting an entirely new, entirely unnecessary class of staff while neglecting the fact that part of this community (the forums) is very much <i>under</i>staffed. </p>
(Edited by Noildoof)
1
<div class="quote"><i>Fokkusu1991 wrote:
<p>Good, then all that is needed at this point is an announcement telling people not to leak/spread leaked info. Leaks are so rare anyway that this whole "we need leak police" reaction is completely overblown.
</p><p>I said that we don't need new staff <i>SPECIFICALLY FOR LEAKS</i>. We DO need forum mods. Reading comprehension.
</p><p>I said, in the post <i>YOU QUOTED</i>, that leaks hardly ever happen. Again: Reading comprehension.
</p><p>
</p><p>I'm actually not being particularly brutal with my criticisms of how the wiki is run. I've formerly been active in communities where people have held community-consuming monster-sized flame wars over admins or mods. I've been in communities where admins themselves have vandalized the community to the point where you can't even log in, when they don't even own the site or the servers. No, this is not the worst-run community I've ever been in. It's still... not great in various ways. I really,<i> really</i> don't want to see things taking a turn for the worse because people can't decide/agree on how they want to do things, a handful of people go on a power trip, etc. I've seen it happen before elsewhere. </p><p>It's absolutely astounding to me that people are suggesting an entirely new, entirely unnecessary class of staff while neglecting the fact that part of this community (the forums) is very much <i>under</i>staffed. </p> </i></div>
<p>This wiki doesn't take too kindly to those who abuse their powers. Notable mentions of staff from the past. </p><p>Well, I might have confused the idiom "hell freezing over" for something else :> but your attitude and sentence construction needs improvement as well. </p><p>When you say that the wiki doesn't need new staff, you're saying that the wiki's current staff is enough. Which obviously it isn't. What you ought to say is that the wiki doesn't need new staff <i>positions</i> as the ones that are already here will suffice. Staff are the users. Staff positions are the titles that the member of the staff holds, with each title having a different job than the other. </p><p>Also, if you actually took a part of your time and see what's happening in the community, you'd see that the wiki's been hiring new staff (at a very slow rate, btw). We're done with the chat mod elections, the wiki now has 8 chat mods. And we're in the process of hiring patrollers. Next up are moderators and image control. Having a strong and compassionate sense of justice is one thing, being patient is another. And seeing that leaks hardly ever happen, patience is what is needed right now. </p>
</p><p>I'm actually not being particularly brutal with my criticisms of how the wiki is run. I've formerly been active in communities where people have held community-consuming monster-sized flame wars over admins or mods. I've been in communities where admins themselves have vandalized the community to the point where you can't even log in, when they don't even own the site or the servers. No, this is not the worst-run community I've ever been in. It's still... not great in various ways. I really,<i> really</i> don't want to see things taking a turn for the worse because people can't decide/agree on how they want to do things, a handful of people go on a power trip, etc. I've seen it happen before elsewhere. </p><p>It's absolutely astounding to me that people are suggesting an entirely new, entirely unnecessary class of staff while neglecting the fact that part of this community (the forums) is very much <i>under</i>staffed. </p> </i></div>
<p>This wiki doesn't take too kindly to those who abuse their powers. Notable mentions of staff from the past. </p><p>Well, I might have confused the idiom "hell freezing over" for something else :> but your attitude and sentence construction needs improvement as well. </p><p>When you say that the wiki doesn't need new staff, you're saying that the wiki's current staff is enough. Which obviously it isn't. What you ought to say is that the wiki doesn't need new staff <i>positions</i> as the ones that are already here will suffice. Staff are the users. Staff positions are the titles that the member of the staff holds, with each title having a different job than the other. </p><p>Also, if you actually took a part of your time and see what's happening in the community, you'd see that the wiki's been hiring new staff (at a very slow rate, btw). We're done with the chat mod elections, the wiki now has 8 chat mods. And we're in the process of hiring patrollers. Next up are moderators and image control. Having a strong and compassionate sense of justice is one thing, being patient is another. And seeing that leaks hardly ever happen, patience is what is needed right now. </p>
(Edited by Iudexkoo)
I totally agree to this.
(Edited by Sardonyxfan)
1
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Terrsolpix wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Mattwo wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Terrsolpix wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>Vogel100 wrote:
Making a staff position is completely pointless. There are far too few leaks.
</p>
</i></div>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p> </div> <p>It is better than locking pages, what if we have issues or we start looking unprofessional. Plus, it is a lot mor fun and practical to have new positions. </p> </div> <p>You're going to look a LOT less professional if you don't immediately revert leaks and false info. Besides, that's what the "trusted editor" group I suggested is there for. Not as a temporary position, but a group of regular users who <i>consistently</i> have the ability to edit locked pages. </p>
<p>They could be a temporary position give out before Stevenbombs, conventions and season premiers. </p> </div> <p>Locking the pages is a lot simpler than giving out a bunch of <i>temporary</i> staff positions. </p> </div> <p>It is better than locking pages, what if we have issues or we start looking unprofessional. Plus, it is a lot mor fun and practical to have new positions. </p> </div> <p>You're going to look a LOT less professional if you don't immediately revert leaks and false info. Besides, that's what the "trusted editor" group I suggested is there for. Not as a temporary position, but a group of regular users who <i>consistently</i> have the ability to edit locked pages. </p>
(Edited by Mattwo)
<p>as long as it shows the time the episode comes out that's all that I want, I don't need the other information when i click on the name
</p>
(Edited by SonGokuSSJ9000)