UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Third Bureaucrat

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

A third bureaucrat position will be created, in order that, in the event of disagreement, there can be a majority decision reached amongst the bureaucrat team.


Details:

  • If this policy passes, the third position will be voted for immediately.
  • The matter of any alterations to the current regulations regarding voting rounds is left for a future policy.

Voting Section

Voting Rules
Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms:
  • # comments ~~~~
    or
  • # ~~~~

Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Voting closes after 2 weeks of voting. In order to pass, a policy must receive a two-thirds majority and at least 20 total votes.

For

  1. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 20:00, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  2. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 20:09, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  3. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 20:12, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  4. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 20:29, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  5. --W 21:40, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  6. --Thekooks 21:47, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  7. --Nathan Blackwell 21:59, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  8. It only makes sense.--Skeeblix 23:17, 12 April 2008 (BST)
  9. --for the power of 3x3! --Honestmistake 00:00, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  10. --Hhal 00:15, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  11. A tie breaker. Plus, the more bureaucrats there are, the more likely that at least one of them will do it right.-- Quizzical  Quiz  Speak  01:07, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  12. Hagnat for Crat!.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 01:10, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  13. Acoustic Pie 01:15, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  14. Because it is broken.--Karekmaps?! 03:42, 13 April 2008 (BST)
    Broken, ha. The worst thing about the current promotion of sysops (pretty much a bureaucrats only responsibility) is that it's not able to be undone if it doesn't work out... not that there arn't enough people to make the decision -- boxy talk • i 04:40 13 April 2008 (BST)
    No, it's that the needed consensus is too easily reached.--Karekmaps?! 10:50, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  15. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 04:20, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  16. I was for it since the beginning. It's curious that the third, "tie-breaker" bureaucrat that will be elected will probably be a Sysop that claimed he will break any rule as long as he considers it's for the best of us all. It just adds awesomeness to this policy effects IMHO. --Starplatinum 04:29, 13 April 2008 (BST)
    discussion moved to talk page
  17. Moar Bureaucracy! --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 09:08, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  18. --PdeqTalk* 12:41, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  19. --Heretic144 02:23, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  20. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 03:17, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  21. --ZsL 17:31, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  22. --Randyest 00:23, 15 April 2008 (BST) seems reasonable to have a tie-breaker, yes?
  23. *taunts the dead*--CorndogheroT-S-Z 13:21, 15 April 2008 (BST)
  24. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 21:05, 15 April 2008 (BST)
  25. Aye. I reckons so. -- Cheese 18:10, 16 April 2008 (BST)
  26. FUCK YEAH!--Shakey60 18:00, 23 April 2008 (BST)

Against

  1. Uh...I would rather that we actually explain what will the promotion round be? Leaving it for future policy can lead to much more drama, and without a policy, that Bureaucrat will STAY bureaucrat...forever.--ShadowScope'the true enemy' 01:30, 13 April 2008 (BST)
    If you read the discussion page, you'll see that it's not the case (under the current system) that (even with three) any 'crat could remain so forever without a subsequent vote. Under the current system, it's possible to remain 'crat forever (well, until they die, at any rate) only through continual voting rounds, but this policy doesn't alter that. There is a separate policy discussion still open regarding alteration of the 'crat promotion system, which is why this one doesn't attempt to address it. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 01:36, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  2. Too much Wiki "position" circle-jerk not enough actual GAME RELATED updates or anything really. Also: BREAKING NEWS! FOURTH BUREAUCRAT TO BE ADDED SOON! This is why the Dead hate you.--Zardoz 02:51, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  3. pointless. it ain't broke. don't try fixin it. and oh yeah... like anyone really CARES what the dead think of them... --WanYao 03:22, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  4. There hasn't ever been any disagreement between bureaucrats as to whether to promote or not, that I know of, so a tie breaker just isn't needed. As far as I'm concerned, either of the 'crats has veto power, adding another is unneeded bureaucracy -- boxy talk • i 04:02 13 April 2008 (BST)
    I agree with what you said here, and believe that three are required to make a decision in the case of conflict. If both the current two have opposing veto, then stalemate is the result. (I'm thinking of future policy alterations, such as allowing for sysop demotion through Misconduct, on a scaled punishment system similar to A/VB, for example.) --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 09:49, 13 April 2008 (BST)
    Futher comments have been moved to the talk page.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 17:35, 13 April 2008 (BST)
  5. I fail to see why we even need two. It's not a demanding position. Why not scale it down to a single position again?-- Vista  +1  19:14, 13 April 2008 (BST)
    further discussion moved to talk page -- boxy talk • i 10:38 14 April 2008 (BST)
  6. -- BKM 16:36, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  7. Wiki needs three's company dynamics much like it needs a hole in the head. Do you guys put this stuff on your resume or what? --Riseabove 23:12, 14 April 2008 (BST)
    Only when trying not to get the job. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 23:49, 14 April 2008 (BST)
  8. --Toejam 09:55, 15 April 2008 (BST)
  9. I don't believe three are needed. Even when I was idle, I checked in periodically to see if my stamp was needed. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 05:40, 18 April 2008 (BST)
  10. Only because the pool of potential 3rd wheels is horrid.--DCC 23:21, 21 April 2008 (BST)
  11. /\/\/\/\/\You're assuming that the two we have are worth something. --Kid sinister 02:05, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  12. I don't think we need more. --Money 02:52, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  13. Nothing gets done anyways. Rudiger Jones 03:03, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  14. This wiki needs less bureaucracy --Deadtanian 09:00, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  15. --Janis petke 11:16, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  16. Bureaucracy is a dirty word for a reason --Killbottom 08:28, 22 April 2008 (EST)
  17. I would be in support were there good sysop candidates and if the bureaucrats actually did anything important enough to cause disagreement in the first place. Grarr 17:52, 22 April 2008 (BST)
  18. Against, though, as a diseased Goon, it is obviously irrelevent--DoohickeyBones 03:58, 23 April 2008 (BST)
  19. Mo' bureaucrats, mo' problems. The last thing we need is another jerk with power (unless that jerk is me, in which case I am all for it). カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) ;x You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild! @ 08:17, 23 April 2008 (BST)
  20. The box... says "No." --Jaster 08:31, 23 April 2008 (BST)
  21. No. --Black N Deckard 09:03, 23 April 2008 (BST)
  22. As a social anarchist I am against all bureaucracy. --Butters Scotch 16:46, 23 April 2008 (BST)
  23. TagUrIt 17:56, 23 April 2008 (BST)
    NOTE: Some Meatpuppetry struck--Karekmaps?! 16:05, 29 April 2008 (BST)
  24. I don't see why it's needed. The leaders shouldn't be voting, they should be finding consensus. If they disagree, NOTHING SHOULD HAPPEN UNTIL THEY AGREE. Iunnrais 20:07, 23 April 2008 (BST)
    This doesn't change that, there was a significant discussion about exactly that on this policies talk page.--Karekmaps?! 02:11, 24 April 2008 (BST)
  25. Maybe it they were constantly disagreeing, but they aren't.--xoxo 09:59, 26 April 2008 (BST)
Triple meh!----SexualharrisonStarofdavid2.png Boobs.gif 13:25, 28 April 2008 (BST) After closing of voting. -- Cheese 20:46, 28 April 2008 (BST)

Decision

  • Voting is closed, 26 For, 21 Against. --Karekmaps?! 16:05, 29 April 2008 (BST)
  • 26 - 25 after re-tallying for meat-puppet disagreement -- boxy talk • i 09:30 4 May 2008 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Third_Bureaucrat&oldid=1129604"