Your response to my condemnation of the way in which Monday's lockdown was handled:
DaNASCAT wrote: To be clear, the read-only time on Monday was an emergency measure that we enacted due to time constraints and the nature of our technical problems. There are two types of lockdowns: emergency and planned maintenance. In cases of emergency, we obviously don't have the luxury of communication planning. However, we have a clear action plan that relies heavily upon posting on our Facebook and Twitter pages to keep the community informed. There is no way to communicate these outages on the Wikia site itself because of the database read-only status.
Since both situations this week - a compromised staff account causing some URL havoc on Sunday and resulting effects on Monday leading to downtime - have been resolved by our staff, and we believe the site to be stable, I am going to go ahead and close this thread. We are continuing to investigate the cause of this incident and we will communicate more about this incident with our community later today in our weekly tech update.
Now which is it? Either you "obviously don't have the luxury of communication planning" or you "have a clear action plan that relies heavily upon posting on (y)our Facebook and Twitter pages to keep the community informed". And what sort of action plan is that? When I'm working hard to prepare a wiki for the impending season premiere of the show that it honors, I do not have the luxury of time to monitor other websites for news of upcoming maintenance. Do you understand the tools that you have at your disposal? How would read-only status effect a timely push notification to the entire community? You act as if the decision to perform this maintenance was a split-second decision. I don't believe that for a split-second.
If maintenance is planned, then we have a communication strategy in which we send on-Wikia messages (through the message bubbles) to our users as well as post forum threads and warnings in our Technical Updates thread. We try to nail down specific periods of read-only a week in advance.
When technical issues arise, sometimes we have to take the site to read-only. There is no way to know when this will occur - this is the meaning of emergency. Still, because other communication methods are accessible - such as Twitter or Facebook - we try to make sure we use every tool we have to inform users. There is a plan in place on how, where, and when to communicate to users both in cases of planned maintenance and emergencies.
Read-only, just to be clear, also does not mean that Wikia is inaccessible. We have 99.99% uptime; this means that our site is readable, even if not editable. Read-only periods are very rare - I don't have a percentage of that handy, but I feel comfortable saying should be near 99% or higher as well.
As for Monday's emergency, you can read more about what happened in this blog on the matter. You will see after reading that this truly was an emergency. We had to put the site into read-only to prevent any damage from an attacker.
After reading the linked blog post I do indeed see that it truly was an emergency and that staff was justified in immediate and focused action. Good work.
However, your definition of "read-only" maps fully onto what I already assumed; so I'm still at a loss as to how it is relevant. You've explained why no notification was given pre-lockdown but that still leaves everything that was communicated before and since.
I cannot stress enough the value I place on efficient communication and how I feel that Wikia staff should match if not exceed that value. I first heard about Sunday's hack from my fellow admin, who is in frequent consultation with staff, and he provided the link to the thread on this wiki. Since then the only communication has been on this wiki and presumably Facebook and Twitter. But most wiki users, including the rest on my own, do not have an inside-man to give them a heads-up. Again I ask why such an important matter has not been addressed through push-notifications to the entire community. You've made it clear that you are aware of them. Please add these to your "clear action plan" and it will be much clearer.
Im having trouble with my theme designer on my other wiki. i change the theme and colour to what i want and when i click "save im done" it freezes on the button and dosnt show my new colour, it just stays white? please help
There was a message in the block notice for you. Basically we want to make sure that your account isn't compromised. It's probably okay anyway, but we're going to reset it just to be sure. It will be unblocked as soon as we've done that, and you will just need to reset your password to get back in.
I've recently come across a user group that I'm not entirely sure about. It's the group "codeadmin". From what I can wager, this group seems to have a user right that allows only editing .js (and .css?) pages. However there's a few things I am unclear on:
Is the group global or local?
If local, is there a requirement for a user to obtain it other than, say, a request from a local admin/crat? (since it seems only staff can actually manipulate the group)
1. The group is globally defined -aka it is available everywhere, but it only affects users on a wikia-by-wikia basis.
2. We are reviewing all requests via Special:Contact for addition to that group. It is only being used as a temporary measure until we finish the JS review process implementation.
Actually, this feature raises a different (but somewhat related) question. What about JS that is already on the wiki from before the feature's implementation? Will it be reviewed or even perhaps looked at for suggestions on how to fix anything?