Talk:FGMEMBERS

Keep this page (09/2015)?

In light of the recent developments, maybe this page should be temporarily removed then replaced by the statement currently being formulated on the mailing list?

I4dnf (talk) 12:36, 17 September 2015 (EDT)

No. It is still alive. Add the "statement" to a new page, but LEAVE THIS ONE ALONE (you could add it as a section?)

Legoboyvdlp (talk) 16:13, 17 September 2015 (EDT)

I blanked the page and protected it until further notice[1], if anybody still needs any of the original content, please use the article's history to retrieve an older version. The article may be restored/replaced once a consensus is reached. --Hooray (talk) 04:46, 21 September 2015 (EDT)

you blanked the page ? Thats like burning books. Blocking users. Deleting pages. Deleting Forum posts. This all makes me very sad/sick. Laserman (talk) 12:51, 21 September 2015 (EDT)

I beg to differ, it's all still there, not just in the history, but on the actual page (just view the source to see for yourself). Anyway, it seems that a number of key contributors have come to the conclusion that fgmembers proponents are better off setting up, and using, their own infrastructure given how this has evolved over time. So I haven't deleted anything. Originally, I suggested to set up a dedicated wiki article and to move fgmembers related discussions to a dedicated sub-forum, and preferably, document the whole effort in a neutral/factual way on the wiki, instead of spamming the forum/devel list. Obviously, this wasn't particularly fruitful - but originally I was one of the few proponents to give this a try, and even the creator of this article, long before anybody else. And according to the history of the article it took those fgmembers proponents 4+ months to actually contribute to this article. As can be read on the forum, I don't necessarily agree with what's going on on the forum, but to be absolutely fair, I am neither paying for the forum infrastructure, nor the wiki - so it is frankly not my call, and if/when some consensus is reached, we are well-advised to accept/enforce that for the sake of the project, whatever that means.--Hooray (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2015 (EDT)

Looking at the list of private hangars at FlightGear_hangars#Aircraft_hangars, no other hangar has its own dedicated article on the FG wiki. Independent of the action taken, I highly recommend that FGMEMBERS set up a Mediawiki-based wiki and copy all of this content for the benefit of FGMEMBERS users. Bugman (talk) 10:21, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

Agreed, just to be on the safe side, I copied the latest version, so that everything is now also preserved at: http://codepad.org/Vf1SfSzo Note that are there tons of free mediawiki-based hosting services [2]. --Hooray (talk) 10:56, 22 September 2015 (EDT)

Latest edit by Hooray (23 sept 2015)

I don't think this hide-and-seek game helps. Nor Flightgear reacting to any of their actions or inactions. Let them speak whatever on their forum, there's far worse stuff in there than the FUD that caused this reversal.

I4dnf (talk) 16:05, 22 September 2015 (EDT)