A Vs Battles Discord chat function

[Ryukama]

I'm in agreement with what Ever and Matt brought up.

As well as being alright with Sera becoming a chat mod. She's active enough and has constantly reported trolls.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I agree with Chat Mod Sera.

 

[Antvasima]

What about asking the Fandom staff for greater chat restrictions?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I am okay. Can I make Sera a mod?

 

[Antvasima]

I will fix it. Somebody needs to adjust her username colour though.

 

[Ryukama]

I have changed her username and added her to the staff page.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks. The colour does not seem to have changed yet though.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Thank you.

 

[Antvasima]

Now the colour change has started to work.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

@Antvasima, Ryukama, Everlasting

I have returned from one day of rest from chat. I was away and enjoyed a family event for the holidays. I will admit, I should settle down with the constant monitoring. I do need more sleep. Thankfullly, however, I got my sleep back in order, and tomorrow I can continue chat monitoring duties. I will total it down to about 10 hours tops, so I can enjoy my evenings with out Alt+Tab'ing between my video games and other activities for just chat.

@Thread/All

I would like us to switch to Discord chat for a main purpose. And for very new users who wish to speak, we have multiple boards for that. We should also re-implement the Chat Rules into Discord. Oh, another thing. If we use a Discord, I already have an account set up there and would gladly shift over from this chat. I would just need to adjust to the interface, as it's been months since I've used Discord.

 

[Antvasima]

Sera might be able to get the staff to install a waiting period into the current chat function, so no temporary spam accounts can use it:

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/538687

 

[Sera_EX]

I am also requesting if we can get a Chat Bot like Community Central has. One that always eliminates/bans any user that posts a huge wall of text of a certain size we can specify. With a 24 hour chat bat in place. There's no need to worry about spammers.

 

[Sera_EX]

But we will have to be careful about how much text we post in chat ourselves.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, a waiting period would be much better.

 

[Sera_EX]

Ok. I am working to see if it is possible to implement one giving the status of our wiki chat.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for the help.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

A waiting period isn't needed.

A chatbot very much is, however.

 

[Antvasima]

I strongly disagree. A waiting period would be ideal to automatically get rid of trolls and spammers.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

2 Weeks is an extreme period, however.

And the more you try to restrict and control people of their freedom, comfort and usability of the chat, the less people it will attact, and we will be effectively smothering the feature to death rather than patching it up.

 

[Antvasima]

Again, even if we install a lesser waiting period, we definitely need one, and I strongly doubt that limiting the feature, to the people who have at least first had to acquaint themselves somewhat with the wiki, would remotely smother it to death.

If we can easily severely limit the staff workload, so we can instead focus more on the actual wiki work, then we gain much more than we lose in the trade.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

I'm nuetral about a wait period, but like I said, I am against a bot. That's like replacing us rather than helping us. Also a bot can't be as accurate or smart

 

[Antvasima]

I am personally more for a brief waiting period than a bot. Would 4 days be more acceptable?

 

[Austrian-Man-Meat]

Just to let you know, there is nothing to lose if we have the discord be public. If trolls really do come in droves (which they probably wont) and it does my head in I can easily just re-adjust it to invite-only. Where you only have access through a link only the staff present there have. Do keep in mind that one of my primary objectives is to create a chat suitable for new users. And making them go through some tedious process of private messaging staff is quite counter productive.

 

[Antvasima]

The Discord train seems to have passed. We are keeping the regular chat function instead.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

Antvasima wrote:
I am personally more for a brief waiting period than a bot. Would 4 days be more acceptable? I do not know.

 

[Sera_EX]

As I said, that is against the terms of use. They have told me that would only be implemented if we didn't have enough staff and we were smaller. We are large enough to handle ourselves. We just need to be on guard more instead of being so casual and AFK most of the time.

 

[Austrian-Man-Meat]

What are you talking about? There are still about five staff members who agree that the discord would be a good alternative. I also didnt want to replace the regular chat anyways (as my proposal states.) I'm just requesting that the discord chat gets some sort of promotion on the wikia (like this) thats all there is to it.

I find it somewhat frustrating that this thread basically got derailed via some discussion about constructing a waiting period (I disagree with btw) for the regular chat even though Sera linked a thread which would better suit such talk.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Discord as an alternative is fine.

What isn't fine is closing off normal Chat forever.

 

[Sera_EX]

I am okay with discord being an alternative, as Austrian has originally stated, and that's been his intention. But I don't want normal chat gone forever/replaced.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

Agreed with AMM and Matt. Still in favor of Discord, we just got off topic all. I do not think we should say its off the table just yet.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, maintaining two chat functions simultaneously seems too splintered, and harder for the staff to keep in order.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

It would be, but if we only had one, that'd be no problem. Personally I feel I could manage that easily, especially Discord since they have an app and that allows me to do it remotely.

 

[Austrian-Man-Meat]

It's not a back-breaking job, just a place for me to chat in. With that said, I can manage it just fine on my own. No need to worry.

 

[Antvasima]

I am still against keeping two official chat functions, as it seems too impractical. My apologies. If you alone maintained it, it would likely require almost all of your time, and leave none over for any other tasks in this wiki.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

We could still try to do it without the Wiki's chat. We can always reinstate it if Discord never takes off, and there would be no feasible harm done that I can percieve.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

If we have to choose between Regular and Discord, I prefer regular. But that's just me.

 

[The_Everlasting]

If we have to choose between Regular and Discord, I prefer regular. But that's just me.

^

This. It's really the same for me.

 

[Antvasima]

Discord without an invitation only function, would also likely draw in lots of previously banned members.

 

[Professor_Voodoo]

I am not likely to use Discord at least in the forseeable future, but i do support the notion of Discord being an alternative for the more reliable and well known users.

Edit: And keeping it invite only is the best plan.

 

[Antvasima]

If it is an invite-only alternative, I suppose that it would not cause any harm, but still be kind of superfluous.