KGS 2017 - new owners and wishlists@SL [#3967]
: KGS 2017 - new owners and wishlists@SL
(2017-06-03 19:35) [#10960]
Is it known whether the new owners of KGS have any intention to consult these pages?
WMS used to frequent the wishlists here at one point and this was justification enough to keep them, but if they are not, these pages have no merit in itself, in my opinion.
188.8.131.52: Re: KGS 2017 - new owners and wishlists@SL
(2017-06-04 16:38) [#10961]
Maybe other developers of servers/clients look here? If I would work on software of that or similar kind - I would look here for interesting hints and tips. RueLue
2001:067c:2d50:0000: KGS 2017 - new owners and wishlists@SL... Remove of wishlist pages
(2019-02-19 10:24) [#11327]
Please don't remove the pages! While it may be true, that KGS isn't developed anymore - you just wrote, that the developer(s) don't look at these pages - these pages have many ideas about featues of a client or a server. The ideas may help developers of other Go servers or clients. These pages are similar to e.g. Go software for the future, a collection of ideas for developers. The pages could be renamed to e.g. Go Server Wishlist.
: ((no subject))
(2019-02-19 12:41) [#11332]
I admit that the tremendous effort you put into these pages makes me hesitate the most. I don't even believe (after kaya.gs debacle) that catering to the whims of the most verbose users is a good thing to do for developers of new go servers.
My point: KGS is not developed by wms anymore. Wms used to consult these pages and even contributed / answered. The new owners have shown no interest at all, so there is no reason to maintain the whole wishlist cluster pretending it were still relevant to development of KGS. And plenty of the wishes refer to unique KGS features. E.g. rating, ?, -, everyones fav escaper policy.
Happy to wait for more feedback.
: Don't delete. Rename to clarify archival status.
(2019-02-19 14:54) [#11333]
I don't agree that deleting this lot is for the best. Yes the overall title is misleading, as there is an implication that the developers of KGS might pay attention to it. So rename it to title that more accurately reflects the current true reality.
The content is a reasonably coherent set of possible ideas that have occurred to people. Some people will have put a lot of work into their ideas.
There isn't a text or number of pages limitation for human typed text on SL. We have the space for archiving Go related ideas that may be of interest to someone in the future. There is plenty of sand on the beach for different people to build more sand castles.
: Re: Don't delete. Rename to clarify archival status.
(2019-02-20 10:06) [#11334]
No sand castle stands forever. Constant, natural removal of sand castles is a feature of all the beaches I have visited. Imo, this is a sunk cost fallacy. We spent so much time on building now obsolete pages that we should keep them. I did edit them myself, added proposals etc. I even used the same argument (no lack of space) in another case once. I am not so sure now, a wiki sized beyond maintenance abilities is going to fall into disrepair.
2001:067c:2d50:0000: Static or read only status of pages
(2019-02-20 14:08) [#11335]
I assume, there was already a discussion about setting pages to static/read only (any of the "meta" pages - Arno surely knows where); as I've seen, the wishlist pages are now seldom edited, some pages have had their last edits about 5 years ago. There would be sense in a static status for possibly many pages, where a change of meaning and content is not to be expected. In the end this would need a software change in the wiki software (or only a configuration?).
Besides static or not: as long as KGS as a Go server exists, these pages have a right to exist. We as KGS users want and still see the chance of a further development. (Oh - when was my last game on KGS...?) RueLue (RuediRf? on KGS)
: Static pages - general information
(2019-02-20 21:56) [#11336]
Apart from a few key pages the only area locked (and thus read only to normal users) is the old RGG Go FAQ that is meant to be for historical reference. Any librarian can lock pages.