Can't we use dates like 2005-11-02? They make more sense. :-) Also, today is 2005-11-02 in my time zone but 2005-11-01 in the server's. What do we do about that? --Jonathan 19:11, 1 November 2005 (CST)

Use GMT? Ill format the dates like that, when we decide if were gonna use GMT or not i'll change that around to ;). EDIT: since the ~~~~ thing is in CST, why dont we use that?

TiTnAsS 22:21, 1 November 2005 (CST)

Also, how come im the only one whos added any news? O_O lol

TiTnAsS 22:32, 1 November 2005 (CST)

(any guidelines on responding to old messages? I've seen another wiki use nested bullet lists)

  • That's a good idea. We should probably sign each level of nesting, eh? --Lucifer 02:29, 2 November 2005 (CST)

At least the zone used should be clear, and preferably consistent and relatively widely-known (UTC/GMT?). No, this line isn't meant to be specific to dates people put on pages.

--Jonathan 07:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I was thinking dates should include a zone and offset, so for example I'd mark my own entires with CST (-6). (I think it's -6 here, I could be mistaken). Americans and anyone else who knows can see I'm in central time and do the math if they'd like, everyone else can fall back to the offset given and work off UTC with it. I definitely think the local time zone for who posts the news item is more important than putting a UTC timestamp on it.

Otherwise, if anyone knows if there's a macro or something to insert the date, that should probably be used. Then we can let mediawiki figure it out. --Lucifer 02:29, 2 November 2005 (CST)

I'm really surprised there is no simple macro for dates that renders them according to the reader's taste... --Luke-Jr 12:43, 2 November 2005 (CST)

Does anybody feel like coding one? It should look like ¿¡ISO 8601 date here!?, where the ¿¡!? are replaced with more suitable opening and closing tags. --Jonathan 13:50, 2 November 2005 (CST)

Uhh if i can do it in Python with what i've already learned, luci can judge if ive learned enough, i'll give it a shot..

TiTnAsS 18:16, 2 November 2005 (CST)

  • Has to be php, the wiki is in php. I'm not sure if you know enough or not, depends on how much of what you know you've been able to both internalize and generalize.  ;) Times listed are in CST because the server is in CST, but the time a user posts an item makes a difference independently from the server's time. I think it's useful to know if the crazy German posted at 3am his time or not, and I'd rather see that and an offset from UTC rather than a CST time and a username. --Lucifer
    • Of course, ~~~~ can be changed to generate times in the editor's time zone, including offset. The reader can then set his preferences in his preferences. :-) --Jonathan 19:27, 2 November 2005 (CST)
      • Better to make it a more general case change, have it store in UTC and then change it to the user's preference. --Lucifer 19:33, 2 November 2005 (CST)
        • You contradicted the last sentence at the first bullet level. --Jonathan 20:01, 2 November 2005 (CST)
          • And your point is _____? There's no contradiction. In the first bullet I was talking about a time that the user manually enters, in the more recent bullet I was talking about a time that the wiki stores and then computes for display. Since I was talking about two different things, there's no contradiction. --Lucifer 20:18, 2 November 2005 (CST)
          • Pardon me, in the first bullet I was talking about a time that the wiki computes when the record is stored, and in the second a time that the wiki converts to UTC when the record is stored, and 'then' converts again when its displayed. I'm still wondering what your point is, though. --Lucifer 20:20, 2 November 2005 (CST)
            • I may have misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to know the time in the editor's time zone? (and of course the wiki should be able to display anything in any zone based on the viewer's preferences) --Jonathan 20:34, 2 November 2005 (CST)
              • Ah, there's several comments that aren't combined that might need to be.  :) If we have to manually enter the date, then the most reasonable compromise I can think of is for the editor to put his timezone and its offset. If the wiki is going to process a macro when the item is written (the same way our signatures are processed), then it should be put in the editor's timezone with an offset. Because in that situation the wiki is just doing a more automated version of what the user does manually entering the time. However, if the wiki is going to store a time to show when the news item was made, timestamping it, then it should be timestamped with UTC. From there we can decide, should it show according to the editor's time zone or should it show according to the reader's time zone, or according to the server's timezone? This last decision should be in User:Preferences and have a reasonable default. --Lucifer 20:40, 2 November 2005 (CST)
              • PS: I don't know what the wiki does, but if it currently transforms ~~~~ into a hardcoded time stamp, then I think that should be changed to store a UTC as well.  :)

On a different note, can we get more accurate news reporting? Labyrinth isn't a "test" server, I'm intending it to be permanent. The settings might change, but I want a maze server, and there it is.  :) Also, Belly of the Beast isn't down "temporarily", it's down "indefinitely". I may or may not bring it back up. If I bring up a fortress server, it will probably be called "Belly of the Beast", and it's likely it'll use maps generated from the maze generator program.  :) Anyway, nitpicks mostly, but I've noticed other inaccuracies I haven't a chance to correct that are more important than these.

--Lucifer 18:23, 2 November 2005 (CST)

Tell me any of these of inaccuracies so i can fix em O_o. Ill fix those ones right now. Also, when get around to it I think ill try to write that for PHP, i'll have it include GMT, then their local timezone after, and note which is which. I don't mind fixing anything you have a problem with, but i cant unless you tell me it :-/

TiTnAsS 21:12, 2 November 2005 (CST)

  • Don't take this the wrong way, but that's not news.  :) The fundamental question that determines what's news and what isn't is "Does it matter to readers?" A forum post with this announcement would probably be more appropriate, but I don't think a post is needed until there's actual code. Then, you announce when it's implemented on the wiki and ask for testing.  ;) --Lucifer 21:29, 2 November 2005 (CST)

What happened? --Jonathan 14:52, 11 December 2005 (CST)

  • A spammer hit the page. I actually couldn't see the spam, only when I looked at the diff could I see it. It was at the bottom after a few hundred line breaks. --nemostultae 15:26, 11 December 2005 (CST)
    • Oops, I didn't look down (like on the other page) and only saw the " stuff. P.S. What's the matter with the wiki? It's soooooooo slow. --Jonathan 17:12, 11 December 2005 (CST)