Talk:History of the MicroWiki community

From MicroWiki, the micronational encyclopædia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Yablokogate

"A brief return of Robert Lethler results in the Yablokogate Scandal, and the rebirth of the GUM becoming public knowledge. Lethler publishes a dossier (endorsed by several other GUM members) revealing Yabloko to be at best a non-serious micronation and at worst little more than a forum-based game, with senior figures within it plotting to control the community. Lucas attempts to refute some of the claims, but controversy remains over Yabloko and its position in the community."

Doesn't seem very neutral. Should be fixed to reflect no subjective point of view. --Gishabrun (talk) 02:34, 6 June 2014 (BST)

This has already been fixed, I believe it was Wilary who took part in discussions to establish the current form of words. Message me on Skype if you want to further discuss it, though, as I'll reply a lot quicker than on here. Austenasia (talk) 07:20, 6 June 2014 (BST)

Update PLZ

Please update this I really want to know what is going on

Thank you kind sir!

-Baty1117

Resolving a Minor Edit Conflict

I have recently undone a couple of edits on this page, as following discussion with community members, there is no community consensus for a new era being made from my observations and dialogue with senior figures in the community. I gave a extensive note that may be viewed in the revision history. However, User:Austin Jaax has ended up reverting these edits once more. For the sake of preventing an accidental edit war, and reaching a dialogue/community consensus, I would like to discuss this here. I will be posting this on the #wiki channel on MicroWiki@Discord too so as to get a few more voices on board. To sum it up, there is no community consensus that there is a new era: in fact it is rather the opposite. Sertor (Chat) 22:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC

I would personally argue that while we are not in a new era, we are in a new period within the modern era. The April 2020 Micro Wiki community, and the October 2020 Micro Wiki community are quite different, which is something that I think that most people here would agree on. Austin (Chat) 6:58, 26 October 2020 (EST)

I quite concur with Austin, personally, the community changed drastically especially after Jon took a break, though personally, I wouldn't add Austin (as Microclub is still considered a very minor and new [in the terms of activity] server) to the leaders until Micro-Club gets really popular Jaydenfromcanada (talk) | Sent from Mail for Windows 10  these signature styles are terrible  | 23:49, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

After discussion, we have reached a compromise and have edited the page accordingly to merge two eras together, and to put back the latest one to August. Sertor (Chat) 00:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Late Discord update

It is clear that MicroWiki@Discord seems to default back to its community hub position with Micro Club being dead. Should the section be updated or should this statement be contested? Jaydenfromcanada (talk) | Sent from Mail for Windows 10  these signature styles are terrible  | 05:27, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

MW@D is still definitely the largest community gathering place and hub (Compare the levels of activity), whether its admins admit it or not. Also, I feel it does seem wrong to label this current time period as the "Late Discord era", since there haven't been any signs of new communication platforms that will rise over Discord. For all we know the "Late" Discord era could go on for several more years, or perhaps never end. Does anyone have any opinions on this? Sez (talk) 05:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

I shall concede that the title of the era is misleading, instead should have something like “Current” instead. However, the assumption that the era is solely focussed on the schism is false: that issue was resolved via editorial consensus last month. The start point of the era is in fact all the way back in August, with the general focus being akin to that of the events of June 2015.
I shall also note that this is not an era, but rather a subdivision of an existing one that has been ongoing since late 2018. Sertor (Chat) 19:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Bainbridge in Late era?

I do believe Bainbridge should be in the High Discord era instead of the Late era. He was debatably largely more influential during the High Discord, when he was GUM Chair, and served over and indirectly influenced the Morrisgate scandal which was heavy shock on the Discord. At the least add him to the High Discord era as well, as there is no reason for him to be omitted. Flag of New Eiffel.svg/Royal coat of arms of New Eiffel.svg Zed Zarel  My Talk Page  Contribs  8:32 p.m., 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Post-Jonathan Period

In the Discord era, I believe that the day Jonathan gave the operation of the Discord server to Karl Friedrich, Cameron Koehler and Andrew Creed should mark the beginning of a new period in the Discord era, as it marked a drastic change in many parts of the community. Flag of Australis.svgDaniel RoscoeEnquiriesMy Work 03:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

CA

I agree that the CA should get a mention on the article (which was long overdue in fact), but is "Basic law is consolidated in the Cupertino Alliance after the ratification of the Charter Act, 2020." really that notable for inclusion in an article of this nature? This is a history of notable events of the community after all. Also on that note, should Lycon, as Chairman of the CA, not be regarded as a community leader during the Splintering period? I believe he did a lot with CA activity and growth during August–November to deserve at least a single mention in that period. ★ ♥︎ Zed 。 (talk | edits) 20:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)