NSwiki

[Erastide]

Clearly there will always be lots of sites that would benefit from tags. I don't see why this means they should be limited to only one site, though. Programming them requires very little time or effort, and there are a good number of sites that would benefit from them, such as WS and, as mentioned earlier, the more popular economy sites.

It also takes very little effort to use the standard url function. Personally, there's already more than enough little boxes above my post, I don't use/need most of them and I'd never use wiki/economy based ones.

Dread lady Nathicana: As fascinating as it is, your off topic chit chat doesn't address the issue at hand.

And... someone needs to chill.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Clearly there will always be lots of sites that would benefit from tags. I don't see why this means they should be limited to only one site, though. Programming them requires very little time or effort, and there are a good number of sites that would benefit from them, such as WS and, as mentioned earlier, the more popular economy sites.

It also takes very little effort to use the standard url function. Personally, there's already more than enough little boxes above my post, I don't use/need most of them and I'd never use wiki/economy based ones.

Hence my very much on-topic comment about putting information in signatures, as has been done for a very, very long time now. Sure, like you said, we could have a plethora of little quick-link boxes above that do, as previously stated, nothing but take you to the base site - not, as some would likely find more useful, their own informational sites. The latter, one would think, being somewhat more ... useful, as it pertains to one's own actual information/stats/things one wants seen by others?

Dread lady Nathicana: As fascinating as it is, your off topic chit chat doesn't address the issue at hand.

And... someone needs to chill.

Actually Erastide, I think someone is still mad over publicly stated opinions over something that happened what, years ago? And here I thought he and the rest left over that. I mean, their sigs said they did. Or would. Or something Anyways.

I agree - we don't need a ton more little boxes for things players can easily show reference for in their own signatures - something easily done and thoughtfully provided for on the forums via the User Control Panel. If the Moderators/Max want to put in handy links for folks, great - be happy with what you get for all your mon-- oh that's right. Its a FREE SERVICE PROVIDED AS A COURTESY WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO IT AT ALL. So while input as always, seems to be welcome ... yeah. Its just nice to have working forums where our own mods can have control over things, and all the players can post on for a change. All the little inconsequential details are just extra gravy.

Previous statement proved rather succinctly about 'can't please everyone'.

[Olmedreca]

I would say that neither wiki needs special tag, although if one has then logically other should have too.

[Ardchoille]

It's a widget. Some say yes, some say no. I think enough people have given enough opinions, both ways, to help the admins decide whether the widget stays or goes. Hence. iLock.