UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Deathnut/2006-03-04 Promotion

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Administration » Sysop Archives » Deathnut » 2006-03-04 Promotion

Browse the Sysop Archives
Bureaucrat Promotions | Demotions | Misconduct (TBD) | Promotions | Re-Evaluations
2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018

This page is an archive of Deathnut's Promotions candidacy, which was withdrawn. If you wish to speak with this candidate, please use their Talk page.


I have withdrew my candidacy for now. I will wait a month or two and try again.

I have been around since sometime is early October and have made well over 1000 edits. I have been actively working on fixing vandalism throughout the wiki, made a few suggestions and created the McZeds template. If I became a moderator I will be working mainly on the vandal banning page and repairing vandalism on the wiki.

Edit I have been working on this project for a while and have now compleated it.

  • Sure, I'm vouching Deathnut Jack Well 15:16, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Yes, I will vouch for Deathnut YBME 19:41, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I'll vouch for Deathnut. He is very dedicated to the UD community. --Tokujin 22:51, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Another yes for Deathnut, he's the greatest! -Dick Upright 23:26, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I oppose this nomination. This person has shown himself to be heavily biased on the suggestions page, and this would almost certainly colour his efforts in any form of moderator action. Furthermore, i question his contributions to the wiki. Creating a template for a tab which is a novelty item for a couple of groups is not an improvement to the wiki, or taking on a leadership role. Also anyone can report vandalism and remove it, and there are many others who do far more work in this regard. In short, i do not believe this indicvidual is capable of retaining the impartiality required of a moderator, nor do i feel he has contributed anything of sufficient value to the wiki to warrant such a position. --Grim s 12:56, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Yes I am bias on the sugestions but as a moderator I will be impartial on moderatin or I shall remove my moderator status myself. I'll even revoke my status as the leader of the RAF to become a moderator if need be. --Deathnut RAF 14:56, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Bias in one leaks into Bias on the other, especially with bias as strong as yours (The only other person that beats you in that regard is Arcibi). And still you offer no counter to the claim that you havent done anything of value for the community. Also, your proposed work would be effectively no work at all, because absolutely everyone pitches in to remove vandalism, and it is already sufficiently patrolled by the existing moderators. Also, with your obvious bias, i would not want you to render verdict on anything, especially given what The General pointed out. --Grim s 00:55, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
      • If you want a counter for every thing you said than for you contribution comment, that is a personal opinion. Yes anyone can revert vandalism but everyone doesn't. And I would like to point out that you hate me. You even put my name on the ARSE list just because you hate me. So thank you for your opinions have a wonderful day. --Deathnut RAF 04:22, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
      • And another thing. Grim s I would like to point out that because you didn’t like me old self important wiki signature I changed it. I only voted Spam once after you asked me not to use spam as a strong kill and that was a suggestion that even you voted spam on. --Deathnut RAF 07:03, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
        • Deathnut, i dont hate you, you just arent a very likeable or trustworthy person, and posess such a huge bias in the game that prevents you from seeing balance, and until you can see that balance, you will not be fit to be a moderator. --Grim s 23:47, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I also oppose this nomination. Mainly because of his abuse of the Spam vote on the suggestions page and his general pigheadedness when this was pointed out to him. In my mind, this is not concistent with the values of a moderator.--The General 13:27, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
    • General since that spam/strong kill thing was pointed out I only used spam to finish off a suggestion for spamination. Since the change over in the spam rules I have hardly used spam. I do enjoy your criticism and look forward to what else comes out. --Deathnut RAF 07:03, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
      • No Deathnut, that change was recent, as in about the same time as you nominated yourself. For a period of at least a week after you were informed that what you were doing was an abuse of the spam vote you insisted on abusing it for anything you "Wanted gone". --Grim s 23:47, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I will vouch for Deathnut. Surely it is easy enough to be less biased when in a position where the responsibility requires you to do so. It is harsh to say that Deathnut is biased in all aspects of his life, based on his comments particular things in the past. Spudd|Talk|
  • I oppose the nomination, because i don't think he has the necessary language skills, and because i don't think he is gonna do a much impartial job. Nothing personal, but you don't seem the right person.--Denzel Washington 13:35, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Ok on my wiki page at that version it was bad. That’s why I use a word processor now for most of my posts. --Deathnut RAF 17:40, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Dnut is okay. Like I would support him for Mod but I'm not 100% sure if he is up for it. AllStarZ 00:53, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
  • recently I did notice a big change for the better in Deathnut, I would have no trouble with him being a mod if he continued in this way. But my problem is that the change is quite recent. (whether or not it is grounded in his ambition to be a mod I don't know nor do I think it is overly relevant) I'd have more faith in his abilities as a mod we had a track record that supports this behavior over a sustained period of time so we would know that the change is permanent. I'd ask him to reconsider for now and try again in a month or two.--Vista 17:03, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
    • I'm so glad someone noticed. The reason I changed is because playing a bad guy was no longer fun so I started to act more like my real self not my Deathnut character. Another reason for the change is the people pointing out how much of an ass I really was. I guess that only a few really noticed so I am officially withdrawing my candidacy to wait for a month or two. --Deathnut RAF 18:07, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
Personal tools
project wonderful