Difference between revisions of "Talk:LSL Portal Style"
m |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* We should have detailed descriptions of bugs in the LSL articles. I will be revising the Issues sections to support this. Linking to the JIRA entries is not enough, it's saying "You must leave here to read about a bug that effects how this works." It's a slap in the face, it's like saying {{HoverText|RTFM|Read The Fucking Manual}}. | * We should have detailed descriptions of bugs in the LSL articles. I will be revising the Issues sections to support this. Linking to the JIRA entries is not enough, it's saying "You must leave here to read about a bug that effects how this works." It's a slap in the face, it's like saying {{HoverText|RTFM|Read The Fucking Manual}}. | ||
* If we give recommendations we need to | * If we give recommendations we need to point out the connection between the advice and it's reasons. We cannot just say "this is a bad idea" we MUST give reasons and the connection must be plain. | ||
-- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 06:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC) | -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 06:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:49, 5 April 2009
I had an interesting experience this evening, I went to play work on another wiki for a different language (which I have used for years). With LSL I've always felt something like one of it's developers (hey, I wrote the feature suggestion for llGetInventoryType, and they implemented it the way I suggested... I'm sorry) on of it's authors. It always made sense to me. Anyway In this other language I don't consider myself a true expert, there are aspects of it that are honestly a black box and beyond me. I consider myself a user in this other language, I still think like a user. Anyway they do things differently there... their wiki gnomes have different ideas but they do some things the same. It was a shock how the mirror of some of my own well intentioned policies I found insulting. So here I am writing this so I will have a record of it before the memories and the feelings fade. You are only a user once.
- We should have detailed descriptions of bugs in the LSL articles. I will be revising the Issues sections to support this. Linking to the JIRA entries is not enough, it's saying "You must leave here to read about a bug that effects how this works." It's a slap in the face, it's like saying RTFM.
- If we give recommendations we need to point out the connection between the advice and it's reasons. We cannot just say "this is a bad idea" we MUST give reasons and the connection must be plain.