Forum:Should we create our own D&D trackers?

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Should we create our own D&D trackers?
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 27 March 2018 by JaydenKieran.

There are several Friends Chat channels that provide useful information. For example:

However, RS:PDDA apparently extends to FC channels as well. That means we can't list FC channels that would otherwise be useful. So I'm thinking: would it be difficult for us to implement our own D&D trackers? --Ixfd64 (talk) 18:45, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Discussion[edit source]

Comment - Those "trackers" are actually manually updated each day. It wouldn't necessarily be difficult to pull from data sources like forum threads and Google Docs, but RS:PDDA would somewhat prevent this. We discussed in November last year in Forum:Establishing rules for FCs that there's no way of naming FCs (and likewise pulling their data) in a neutral way without favouring different friend chats. jayden 18:57, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Does RS:PDDA apply to names in citations? I know we could just copy the information from the Friends Chats, but it's probably bad form to do so without giving them credit. --Ixfd64 (talk) 19:50, March 17, 2018 (UTC)
We'd either have to use all of the FCs' information to avoid bias, or pick just one and be accused of favouritism, and possibly invite an edit war from people changing it to what their preferred group is saying. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 22:47, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - This discussion brings forth the same potential problem I mentioned during the Forum:Establishing rules for FCs discussion. If we use information provided by a specifically named FC, it will appear we are favouring that FC over others that may exist for the same activity. I don't see how we can do this and remain unbiased and neutral at the same time. Pernix cowl detail.png MAGE-KIL-R (Talk)Zaros symbol.png 20:19, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Also there are D&D groups that don't use FCs. I'm pretty sure that they'd be displeased that the wiki favored fc-based info over forum/reddit-based info. --Saftzie (talk) 20:31, March 20, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Per Jayden and MAGE-KIL-R, don't have anything else to add to that. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 22:44, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Unless we could gather all utility FC's as they were made by people for utility it would be impossible to not show any bias whatsoever. Hazelmere's signet ring.pngRobbotRSOrlando Smith's hat.png 00:28, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - another idea: for activities with associated Friends Chats, how about add something like the following?

The official Minigames and D&Ds forum may have useful threads for this activity.

This would inform the player that there are useful player-run services without naming them, thus remaining neutral. --Ixfd64 (talk) 16:10, March 19, 2018 (UTC)

That could work. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 23:07, March 19, 2018 (UTC)
I'm happy to see that we may finally reach a compromise in this case. Unless anyone objects, I'll probably create a template soon. --Ixfd64 (talk) 03:34, March 20, 2018 (UTC)
FWIW, I don't see any "compromise" in this discussion. I don't see much discussion, either. I see a few random comments to a highly non-specific non-proposal. --Saftzie (talk) 19:32, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

Comment -Lots of work to make a RS character into a Dungeons and dragons character. But I did it.Blueturtle79 (talk) 16:26, March 24, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - As with Forum:Establishing rules for FCs, there is no consensus to do this. jayden 19:42, March 27, 2018 (UTC)