From TheKolWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Don't you think we could put the Altar of Literacy as just one balloon requirement up at the top and not repeat it all down the page??? (And there do seem to be ways to override that requirement) --jin 22:41, 30 May 2005 (Central Daylight Time)

  • I don't know, my instinct tells me that for channels like mod, dev and the channel that does not exist, you don't technically need to do the altar. of course, it's not like anybody who's in one of those channels hasn't done it anyway, and they all have very select membership anyway, so whatever, it's all good.--Yiab 03:13, 1 Jun 2005 (Central Daylight Time)
  • I have been able to accidentally log into /c newbie with multis of mine who haven't done the altar quest. If I have a character logged into chat on server 2 and then open a second tab to log in another character, if that second character logs into server 2, the chat pane in the first tab switches to whatever channel the second character would have access to, usually newbie. It's caught me off guard a few times to think I'm logged into villa but there are red mod warnings and lots of people I've never seen before. As for those others, membership is so elite, they do their own 'approval' method that's even tougher than the altar quest. --jin 17:57, 1 Jun 2005 (Central Daylight Time)

It really annoys me how people are shamelessly adding their names to the "channel regulars" sections. Isn't the point of it to show famous regulars? --Barnaby36 21:11, 14 Oct 2005 (MDT)

I made a few changes to some stuff on /valhalla and one bit on /hardcore. Changes:

  • Added "Completing The Altar of Literacy" to the requirements for /valhalla and /hardcore" [1]
  • Added the "bukkake rly?" quote to /valhalla. Anyone who is a regular in the channel knows all about that

[1] It's there for the other catagories, why not there? Also, what happened to the Regulars section? --Scorpios 00:07, 10 March 2006 (CST)

I feel that the in-jokes should be explained rather than just listed. Otherwise it turns into too much of a vanity page. Anyone opposed to me revamping this part in the near future? Also, fuck salt, Scorpios. --LucySpace (Talk|Cntrb) 13:26, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

/kwe: listen-only?

What does listen-only mean: You get banned if you post a chat message, or you just can't? How does that work? --Adam 12:07, 14 May 2006 (CDT)

Chat effects?

Perhaps this page would be a convenient place to list the various effects which alter your chat text - Canadianity, Gothy, Jazz Hands, Wanged, drunkenness, and The Gray Plague (now cured). --Quietust 12:26, 8 June 2006 (CDT)


How do you make link to peoples profiles or link to other websites in the chat? --Repelex 16:26, 27 September 2006 (CDT)

Chat Channel Players

Is it really fair to mention players in the chat channel traditions page, when it's just one person's opinion that that player is an important member of that channel? For instance: "Many, such as Arwen48, like to refer to work as w***." could be changed to: "Many /games regulars like to refer to work as w****."--Jubbers14 04:42, 13 November 2006 (CST)


Referring to work as w** is more of a /haiku tradition,with players often being berated harsly by other people currently in haiku for saying "work", and haiku oracle, for instance, having a specific programmed reaction to it.--Kiltan 19:26, 11 December 2006 (CST)

Name specific entries under the traditions sections

I restored the name specific verbiage under the public chat channel descriptions. Those are part of KoL lore and should not have been removed.

  • Jubbers: "it's difficult to revert a player adding a vanity without taking into account all the other similar vanities that have been added. We need to either create strict rules for this, or (preferably) just remove player and clan names from the page altogether." Basically either we let everyone talk about themselves in main namespace pages or we let no one. As it stands, even Category:Players and the clans under Category:Clan Stuff are just barely safe from question.--Dehstil (t|c) 22:03, 14 December 2006 (CST)
    • What would be the point of having a section pertaining to each channel labelled "In-jokes and traditions" if you overgeneralize everything? Many things are single-user-oriented, and I hardly doubt anyone was so vain as to add themselves to the lore of their frequented channels. The page isn't just about chat mechanics, as (obviously) in-jokes and traditions != mechanics. Said section is there to give readers an idea of the goings-on in each channel, and just because you don't fit into any of the lore doesn't give you right to bitch about anyone's presence in their respective sections. They've made a name for themselves, and are recognized as such. Removal is unnecessary, as the presence of such material is rather vital to the channels' histories. Keep it as it's been since before most of us can even remember, and don't let little pet peeves of yours obstruct the reason that the page exists. --Antipode 13:14, 15 December 2006 (CST)
    • I didn't personally attack you... :( Anyways, do as you wish; as it stands it's 2 vs. 2 and I never use this page anyways.--Dehstil (t|c) 16:42, 15 December 2006 (CST)
    • As they are right now, those player references seem rather pointless to me. I've never seen any of that stuff happen in the chat, even though the page seems to indicate that it happens all the time. Admittedly I don't sit in the chat every day, so it's entirely possible that those are somewhat common. If the active chatters feel that such players should be noted, then some further detail about them would be nice. I don't even recognize more than two of them. For example, why is this Arwen48 important enough to be mentioned? I can't find any references to that player anywhere else in this wiki... --Andemon 17:11, 15 December 2006 (CST)
    • Personal names are a bad idea because it opens up a huge doorway to arguments....if irrelevant names start being added or the page becomes to long because of the names listed then something should be done. At this point there are too few names to really matter but I will say that they make this page more useless than it already by making it unprofessional as well. Honestly, it makes KoL chat seem very cliquey which in my mind is not something that should be portrayed to the type of player which would probably stumble upon this page not knowing the in's and out's of chat.--SomeStranger (t|c) 19:16, 15 December 2006 (CST)
      • I'd hardly call most of the references on other pages on this site professional, either, as many are added without much regard to research. Regardless, I wouldn't call this a particularly important page in the wiki, as it's a short summary of the goings-on in individual channels in addition to the main point - the chat functions. If this page needs to be split, that's not a very difficult procedure. Y'know, if you just want to bury the pertaining info one more level. I think that the brief lore and current things that happen with a certain regularity should be noted, primarily if a channel gains a certain notoriety because of one or more people. This is one of the few pages that has rather flexible input. Chat isn't an item. It's a life form in and of itself, and this page should change when needed to reflect that. Fork the page if you must, but all information should stay until (if and when) it's forked. --Antipode 20:57, 15 December 2006 (CST)
      • I always thought of the wiki as a place for documentation and analysis of the game itself, and less of a cultural hive for its players, except for the user pages and the occasional links to communal efforts elsewhere. I'm not saying its a bad idea (or a good one), but if we change our minds, we're going to have to revise our mission statement: Project:About. Personally, I'd find addition of said data more cumbersome than useful for my purposes when searching the wiki for information.--Dehstil (t|c) 22:46, 15 December 2006 (CST)


The commands, /romans, /countrymen, and /friends work the same, similar to SHakespeare's Julius Caesar. I don't know if it's in the article or not, but maybe we should include that as a reference?


When I try to go onto /newbie (or anyother chat channel for that matter) it won't work. Isyou 09:37, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

  • You have to type /c or /channel before the channel you wish to go to. For example, /c newbie will take you to the newbie channel. --TheDotGamer 09:42, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Oh. Thank you. Isyou 09:52, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Missing channels

There are 18 channels, the 3 missing on this page are Harem, Dev, and Mod.--Benjiboi 13:34, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

  • That's like saying your user name has no b, j, or i. Look again. --JRSiebz (|§|) 14:17, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

Does this page need a rewrite?

Although there are a lot of functions in chat which need to be addressed, I'm curious if anyone else thinks this page should be abridged and more lengthly categories be broken down into their own pages? I would be willing to do this myself, just wondering how the community would react. --Thoughtstipated 11:38, 22 August 2007 (CDT)

I have reorganized this page into several other pages. I have not yet made this page redirect to the new layout yet as I haven't heard any feedback yet. You can see the new layout by going to Chat Guide: Basics but continue discussion on this page for the time being. --Thoughtstipated 14:53, 22 August 2007 (CDT)

  • I agree that the original was getting long/unwieldy. For the most part, I like the way you've split things up. However, the Chat Guide: Options page is kind of short, and the bulk of it is just the headings of a separate, fairly short page. P'raps you could combine it with, say, the Chat Guide: Basics page or do a similar rehashing of the subpages? --Bagatelle 22:03, 22 August 2007 (CDT)
The Options page is now merged with Basics. I think the original options page was a little small too. Thanks for the suggestion. --Thoughtstipated 01:00, 23 August 2007 (CDT)