User talk:Dave Vanderburg

Sysop Confirmation

• Hi, I'd just like to confirm whether or not you're a MouseHunt staff or a player volunteering Sysop. Thanks! Eepeng 14:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

If you go to Lore then Game Credits, you will find that Dave Vanderburg appears under game development as a coder/designer of HitGrab. So yes, it is confirmed that Dave is part of MouseHunt's staff. --Peter888 20:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Reporting

Hey Dave.

Wondering if you wouldn't mind if I setup a page where people can report vandals? It's quite non-wiki skilled people friendly too.

What I'll use looks like this ... well, it IS this, I'll just copy/reword to MHWiki and adapt for the images until image uploads are available.

Daworm 03:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Tools Page

I recently found out that the tools page has listed or has had listed some abusive tools, which is why it's not linked to from the main page or links page. What is considered abusive, and can we get rid of them and maintain links to useful, non-abusive tools? Thanks --Navarr 20:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism by user - please ban

Dave, any chance you can ban Kevster402? Every one of his edits (link) since 15 Nov 2008 has been to vandalize the wiki. Thanks. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 01:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

• Please also consider the edits by Madrocker to the Mole Mouse page (see page history) This user continues to remove blocks of legitimate information from the page despite requests to stop or at least discuss the changes. Attempts to contact the user via his Talk page have been met with silence and deletion of said requests. Thanks. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 16:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Overenthusiastic editor

Hi Dave,

On a couple of occasions I've tried to contribute to this Wiki in order to improve it, but the user Brossrow has seen fit to admonish me for my changes, even though they were a clear improvement. For example, my first edit was changing the title of a page from "Pages", which was quite enigmatic, to "Plankrun's Pages", a clear improvement. But minutes later he changed it, telling me "They are NOT called Plankrun's Pages in-game!" I don't believe that is an appropriate tone for an editor to be taking, and I was quite offended by it.

I then asked him, "Was Plankrun's Pages not a thousand times better than just Pages? If it was so critical to have it exactly right, why didn't you do it before instead of waiting to jump all over the next person who tried to improve it? Editing is one thing, but this is something else entirely. I've made many changes to wikipedia and of course revisions are made on top of mine, but not once have I encountered something like this. Enjoy your little wiki." Brossrow is so clearly possessive of this wiki that I just assumed it was his!

His response to me was, "Yeesh. I can't quantify how much 'better' your page name change was (10x? 100x? 1000x?), but I can tell you it was 100% incorrect. I changed it soon after your move because it showed up at the top of the Recent Changes page, which I check once in awhile [sic] to see what changes are being made. If I see something wrong, I fix it as quickly as possible. Would you have preferred I let it sit for 24 hours so I didn't tread on your toes? You're clearly taking it personally, so maybe it is time you take a break from editing; stress over a game is silly. And by the way, it's not my wiki."

I'm writing to you not to whinge about being wronged or anything like that. But if you look over the history of his talk page, as well as the history of various pages all over the wiki, you will see that this is indicative of a pattern. My concern is that if he is constantly berating people for honestly trying to help, and in fact improving the site (even if the improvement isn't quantifiable), then he will be discouraging other users from ever trying to make contributions. And it is my understanding that wikis are set up so that all members of the community may contribute, and of course improve with time as one user corrects or revises another. But to have a bully who sets himself up as the law of the land is in my opinion highly counterproductive.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I do hope you consider it in the community spirit in which it is offered.

Sincerely,

--robodok 06:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree, he lives on the wiki and seems to remove any edits by other people. his attitude does not seem friendly to other users.

he had a go at me for adding a speechmark (") because there was one missing and it was very confusing to read. He is a self proclaimed "King of the wiki" lol. this wiki should be editable by anybody, and i don't see why one person can make himself the boss.

Fair enough, he has done a nice job of tidying up some of the wiki, but things have gone a bit far now, as people are getting really angry about being patronised and having Brossow's "degrees" pushed in their face if they make a slight mistake or an edit that brossow does not like.

This wiki should be free for anybody who wants to use it.

--Chong McBong 13:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll admit I've had difficulty relating with Brossow at times in the past, but I've never taken our disagreements personally because we're all here to maintain and improve this place. He's done more than anybody else for it and usually knows what he's talking about. If you're thinking about making significant edits like relocating articles, use discussion pages first. Revengeance 13:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Let's be a little more objective here. Robodok has made 2 substantial edits to the wiki so far. First edit was to move Pages to Plankrun's Pages on 13 January. This was ultimately moved to Torn Pages of Plankrun's Journal by Brossow. At no point during this period did Robodok bring up any objection to the changes. 22 January, an edit was made to Mole Mouse. Unfortunately, the edit was made over a very poorly worded edit by Madrocker which overwrote proper text by Brossow. It was subsequently rolled back, and Robodok mistook it as a personal attack, and which started off this chain of events.

Firstly, this issue should never have been brought up to the Admins because it was never properly discussed on the respective Talk pages. If every editor started running to the Admins because they couldn't spend the time to defend or explain the rationale behind their edits, the Admins are really going to have their hands full.

Secondly, some editors need to spend more time learning the tools available in the wiki. A quick browse through the recent history would have revealed that Madrocker's edit to the Mole Mouse page made little sense compared to the previous version. Pointless editing would have been avoided.

Thirdly, Brossow is far from being a bully, but perhaps more willing than the most of us to spend the time and effort to keep the wiki in good shape, and to push his point across. Neither did he make himself the boss, nor is he stopping other editors from making legitimate changes. Of course some might recall the "" incident, which provided some laughs and a reminder to wiki contributors that we sometimes spend too much time over trivial issues.

Lastly, while Brossow might not get an award for the most friendly MH wiki editor, his replies have usually been straight and to the (sometimes wordy) point, and are not directed at the user but rather at the edit. People really, really need to stop taking edits personally. -- Grexx 19:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I've not had any real problems. Perhaps "over enthusiastic" is one way to put it, but you could just say they are being close to OCD/perfectionist on grammar, consistency, or whatever. This is no real problem, a bit invasive when you feel pride in making the last legitimate edit, but nothing striking. -AzureOwl 08:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, end of discussion. --Dave Vanderburg 05:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Catacombs info

Sorry to bug you, Dave, but a detailed description of the Catacombs was recently posted to that page. It seems very hard to believe someone has access to it several days before anyone else and it comes across as a hoax. Can you comment? I don't want to have removed legitimate info, but in the interest of accuracy I pulled the info until we can find out if it's legit. -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 02:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Greater RB potions inconsistencies

Sorry to bug you, Dave, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of an apparent issue with Greater RB potions. The talk page has links to info, but in a nutshell it seems that the number the game says will be created and the number that are actually created are not the same. Thanks! -- B.Rossow ^talk_contr 15:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

This is a known bug that we have in our tracking system still. --Dave Vanderburg 16:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Loot FAQ - Loot Drop Frequency

Hi Dave, there's a question on the FAQ that I feel is carrying inaccurate information and would like your input as it is impossible for any player to verify. It's the first question under the Loot section here. Explaining loot drops, there's a portion that reads:

"... It's the fact that thousands of players join MH every day, adding to the numbers, and the percentage of mice who drop loot stay the same, so over time, thousands of other players are catching the mice that drop loot. Thus, as the number of MH players grows, the number of mice you catch with loot naturally becomes more infrequent."

It contradicts the loot frequency information that you had mentioned on the various Mouse pages, which implies that loot is based on a chance roll on each mouse catch. -- Grexx 17:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I have removed that reference in the FAQ. The number of players in a location/the game has absolutely no effect on the odds of getting loot. It's all just dice-rolls, meaning there is no "finite number" of mice or loot per location. --Dave Vanderburg 16:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)