UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Kirsty cotton/2013-04-01 Promotion

Administration » Sysop Archives » Kirsty cotton » 2013-04-01 Promotion

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

Kirsty Cotton

• Kirsty_cotton (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | vndl data)

During my time on the wiki, I've worked hard to make improvements, be friendly and generally encourage civil discussion. I'm proud of my history of never over-analyzing wikilaw and being reasonable in past discussions. My janitorial work speaks for itself. But rather than just tell you wonderful things about myself, ask some questions and I'll respond with wonderful things about myself. --_K 12:43, 1 April 2013 (BST)

• Question Mahna Mahna? -- Spiderzed█ 15:16, 1 April 2013 (BST)

  Are you belittling my sysop jog? --_K 18:10, 1 April 2013 (BST)

• Against - April Fools jokes are so 2006--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:01, 2 April 2013 (BST)

  "Are so 2006?" You got any more zingers there, chief? I mean shit, I guess you came up with that, right? I've never heard it use that way. +1 for creativity. --_K 22:57, 2 April 2013 (BST)

• Question What's your daily occuptation? Do you work, go to highschool, college? --Thadeous Oakley Talk 14:34, 3 April 2013 (BST)
  • 'cause we've always cared so much about this in the past. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 08:17, 4 April 2013 (BST)
  • Creepy. -MHSstaff 21:20, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  I work. To possibly explain some of my wikilawyering, at my job I have to write in such a way as to be legally binding. For example, I learned an early lesson that should and shall aren't the same. --_K 22:51, 4 April 2013 (BST)

• Vouch - I butt heads with Kirsty but I like him/her. Doesn't take shit but in my experience hasn't lost their head during disputes. And I'm pretty sure he can't be Axe Hack. I'll be pretty upset if he's Axe Hack. A ZOMBIE ANT 08:05, 4 April 2013 (BST)
• Vouch - Sure, why not. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 08:17, 4 April 2013 (BST)
• Question Is this some last ditch attempt to keep you interested in this wiki? what happens if you fail this bid? why now? --User:Sexualharrison14:43, 4 April 2013

  Actually no. I fully expect to fail, just thought I'd see how it went. As for why, the recent drama, mostly my fault (sorry), has made me believe we need differing voices in the sysop team. --_K 22:51, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  While i think you are fun to play with I just don't think you have what it takes to be a sysop on this wiki. sorry Against--User:Sexualharrison23:42, 5 April 2013

• Question - Mind if I cycle this? I got a chuckle out of it when you posted it on April Fool's Day (I thought the self-deprecating humor was clever), but it's beginning to outstay its welcome. If you want for it to be treated as a serious bid, we'll need to post it to wiki news and start grilling you about the requirements, and that's no fun. —Aichon— 15:56, 4 April 2013 (BST)
  • I'm always for punishing jokes by fulfilling the fake requests, to me it makes them funnier. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 17:58, 4 April 2013 (BST)
  • ^^^^^ This is a win / win situation. Either you get a new sysop or the joke keeps on trucking past Funnyville right into Hilarioustopia. -MHSstaff 21:20, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  I'll take the grilling, as I previous stated, I have no expectation of success. But meh, what else am I doing. --_K 22:51, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  If this is serious, then okay. I know much of your bid was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, but it brings up several important points. Namely, what janitorial work or indication of prior interest in maintaining the wiki can you point towards? In looking through your contribs (note: we have to go back almost a year before we hit 500 of them, meaning you do not meet criteria 2), I don't see a large number tied to any janitorial work at all. You do have a leg up on the average wiki user, in that you've not been afraid to get involved with administrative matters. That said, you also poked fun at yourself and your wikilawyering tendencies in your own bid text (and have referenced your related real-life background), which makes sense, given the recent Misconduct case you filed (it bears repeating that I don't think you were in the wrong for filing that case, though I do think it was a bit on the extreme end of the options available to you).
  You also recently took a leave from the wiki for about a month, which is an indication that you may not be interested in it. What brought you back and what assurances do we have that you won't leave again? Related to your motivation, why do you want to be a sysop and what do you think you can uniquely add? You've mentioned that you think we "need differing voices in the sysop team", but I'm not sure of that. I think that dissension for its own sake is rarely productive, and that what we really need are people who are unafraid to voice opinions they've reached through independent, reasoned thought and who come from differing perspectives, which is something we already have (see #4 in the Drama Work section of my sysop guide). Even in the events related to the recent Misconduct case, several people commented on how unusual it was for the sysops to agree unanimously on a topic that was so controversial. And with the wiki as quiet as it is these days, adding someone to the team who comes up short in the sorts of tasks that we're doing 99% of the time just so that we can have them around on the off-chance that drama happens doesn't make for a compelling reason. —Aichon— 01:04, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  There is some truth in this and the recent motivation question is a concern but I think having a new sheriff in town who can have the sysop team perhaps take a step back, look at a decision and ask "Is this really consistent with policy? Are we handling this the best way we can and in a manner that is consistent with the expectations of the community?" is not necessary a bad thing. I see Kirsty as that person and I think the team could use that person. Lack of janitorial work is a concern but I think Kirsty is perfectly capable of doing those jobs. Look at this way: Either you gain another sysop who pitches in the janitorial duties, has experience and interest in improving the policy aspects of the wiki or you don't and they are booted at the next A/RE. Not a lot of risk here. -MHSstaff 02:20, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  The "give them a test drive" argument has never held much water with me, given that you could apply it equally well to pretty much any candidate. And Bob was side-by-side agreeing with Kirsty through a lot of the recent drama, so there's an argument to be made for saying that we already have someone filling that role. Moreover, asking those sorts of questions is not something that you need to be a sysop to do, which Kirsty has already demonstrated capably. Plus, the community expectations issue you cite seem rather hypothetical in nature, rather than grounded in reality. After all, the recent drama ensued because the sysops took actions that were allegedly contrary to the letter of the law in order to protect something that was clearly in line with the community's wishes. —Aichon— 07:22, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  Difference of opinion I suppose. There are people who I think could do the job (Pre-sysop Rev/Peralta/KC) but may fall short in some area (drama/experience/experience), and with the safeguards of misconduct and RE, I think the potential reward outweighs the risk. Yes, someone does not have to be a sysop to ask those sort of questions, but to me, it shows an interest in improving the wiki, an interest in the policies and background governance of the wiki, and a capacity to think and raise concerns about a challenging issue. Routine sysop tasks can be learned on the job. My only concern, especially with some of the recent comments, is interest in performing those duties and only KC can really answer that. -MHSstaff 19:39, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  I would perform the menial/tedious admin tasks. I can't say it seems like a super fun activity, but it is necessary for an orderly and well-kept wiki. I'm aware that 90%+ of what I'm asking is to get to ban spambits and delete or move pages on request. --_K 05:57, 6 April 2013 (BST)

  I was active in the MediaWiki_talk:Sidebar and UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Permaban_Appeal_Revisions discussions. As for janitorial work, I've got a bit of spambit hunting and that's about it. I believe I've shown some interest in maintaining the wiki through the aforementioned admin related discussions. I have also made some improvements to my wiki code knowledge (not much, but some), which serves me no purpose other than this wiki. As for my departure and return, I find the wiki an easy source of wasting time, which is the reasoning for both. I can't make any promise that I won't depart again. I have no plans to do so, but I can offer no guarantee RL won't mandate it. I'm not 100% on board that dissension for the sake of dissension is a bad idea. There is a value to dissension, so long as the goal is improvement to the wiki or procedures. It seems some policies and ways of doing things are hold overs from the good ole days when the wiki was a hotbed of drama. I don't honestly have any unique skills or abilities to offer. I could learn to do admin tasks, but I don't have any pressing project or really a specific need for the buttons. I think I hit all your questions? I'm well aware of my shortcoming in relation to being a sysop, and I feel I should do better selling myself. But, I think we all know I'm pitching a used kia, calling it a new mercedes isn't going to fool anyone.--_K 02:38, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  I wouldn't be that dismissive, and I have a lot of respect for people that are honest with themselves and others regarding what they have to offer and where they come up short. :D —Aichon— 07:22, 5 April 2013 (BST)

• Question - Do you have a preference of pronoun, and if so, what is it? I've been using "she" consistently because you primarily RP a female character, but should I be using "he", or each one in different circumstances (eg. in-game discussions v. wiki-related ones)? Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 17:36, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  I don't have a preference. Picking a female name basically took that option from me. If you want for RP reason to use one or the other that is fine --_K 22:51, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  Thanks. I'm going to against, both because it seems you're not that enthusiastic about the job, and because I'd like to see you make a more concerted effort towards wiki-improvement in the next few months. But if you do so, and bid again then, you'd likely have my support. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 01:48, 5 April 2013 (BST)

• Vouch - Kirsty would be a solid sysop. Knows the wiki, understands the community, and keeps it real. -MHSstaff 21:20, 4 April 2013 (BST)
• Question - Is this a serious bid to be a SysOP or not? I'm with Aichon. If this is now serious, let's take it seriously and remove all of the April fool's stuff. If you really want the job, I'd like to see you make an honest run at it. I don't think this sideways approach is the way to go if you're serious.-- 23:44, 4 April 2013 (BST)

  I can understand that, but this is what I got. --_K 02:38, 5 April 2013 (BST)

• Against ~ _{01:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)}

  Some justification since it came up during crat discussion. I care less about UDWiki politics and beaurocracy than I did a year ago. A lot less. Pretty much the way sysops have been running the place is fine by me. The reason for my against vote was because I saw it as a joke bid gone overly ripe and wasn't really convinced otherwise by the time I commented. Still not entirely convinced its not. I suppose there are also some personal misgivings. Conduct during the Izumi appeal, jabs here and there about how much the sysops suck. He even has a page devoted to that last subject in his user space. We're more or less polar opposites in regards to the wiki and those types of attitudes by others are one of the reasons I stepped down from sysop last year. In the end, this will probably all come down to a crat decsion and feel free to regard this as a "weak against" or "meh". ~ _{19:35, 13 April 2013 (UTC)}

• Vouch - Punish her!--RadicalWhig 02:16, 5 April 2013 (BST)
• Question – As follow-up to User:Spiderzed's question, what have you got against the Muppets and/or Swedish soft porn? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 02:31, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  Nothing, so long as they're together. --_K 02:40, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  That answer is acceptable. Other acceptable answers would have been CENSORED, DENIED or just plain ERADICATED. Casting Couch. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:44, 10 April 2013 (BST)

• What do you think could produce more interest in the wiki, wiki community, and/or game? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:46, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  I'll go with wiki community, although both. The game to wiki conversation rate is small, I guess (I have no idea how many unique players the active number represents). However, the new users who stop using the wiki are a 100% loss. I still find wiki navigation painful at times and although the wiki community in general is fun (if you get used to it), there is a steep welcome curve (see: User:Peralta). --_K 04:13, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  Indeed. The wiki has been historically not very welcoming to new users. Probably not much better nowadays.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:55, 5 April 2013 (BST)

  Funny actually, before it was general hostility and trolling, now it's apathy and self-righteous wanking, either make the same level of unfriendliness as the other did ;_; ;_; ;_; ;_; A ZOMBIE ANT 05:06, 6 April 2013 (BST)

  I think the project welcome revamp is helping (and much improved from the template), but yeah I'd generally agree with that assessment. --_K 05:57, 6 April 2013 (BST)

  This was nice. Vouch --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:20, 8 April 2013 (BST)

• Fuck it.--SA 15:02, 6 April 2013 (BST)
• Vouch →Son of Sin← 14:43, 8 April 2013 (BST)
• Vouch - Kirsty has good knowledge of the game, humor, and is very helpful and hard-working... when she feels like it. xD --Merondi^talk XII 20:37, 10 April 2013 (BST)

After two weeks of community discussion, we bureaucrats have decided to decline that bid for now. The community vote was a contested one, with both strong points for and against you. My personal recommendation would be that you should:

1. step up your contributions,
2. add a healthy dose of janitorial gnomewerk to your contribs, and
3. improve your knowledge of wikilaw.

If you follow that advice, you should arrive at the point of being elegible within a few months. -- Spiderzed█ 22:36, 15 April 2013 (BST)

I'm just happy to make it 2 weeks without being cycled. Victory! --_K 23:51, 17 April 2013 (BST)

I think yours (and mine) have been delayed until we get to the A/PM part of the A/SA migration. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 00:04, 18 April 2013 (BST)

Why ya ruining my moment? --_K 00:19, 18 April 2013 (BST)

Oops, didn't realize it was your moment XD Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 03:40, 18 April 2013 (BST)