UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Mia Kristos/2006-04-24 Promotion

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Administration » Sysop Archives » Mia Kristos » 2006-04-24 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 | 2019

This page is an archive of Mia Kristos's Promotions candidacy, which was withdrawn.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

Mia Kristos

This whole thing is bound to get messy, disorganised and chaotic, so use this system I set up, even if it ain't official. Your regularily scheduled bid for moderator begins after the double lines. –Xoid STFU! 04:28, 10 May 2006 (BST)

I've been here for a decent chunk of time now, though I don't remember specifically how long. A while back someone had put me up for moderation, but I withdrew for various reasons, one of those being me feeling I wasn't deserving due to minor contributions to the Wiki. Since then I've done quite a bit of work on the Help area, and I plan to keep it up.

Since I know it's comming eventually, I'll post my answers to the questionaire:

Q: What Moderator duties do you see yourself focusing on, as a rule?

A: I would be more than willing to help settle disputes, and keep the various moderation pages going, and help out where asked. You know, the usual modly things. I'd also be willing to look at things should anyone reach out and poke me.

Q: How do you react to criticism online?

A: Honestly? Depends on the critism. I always react to constructive critism well, but non-constructive critism really depends on what mood I'm in. Everybody has thier bad days, and I'm no exception. I do try and recognize this in other people though.

Q: What is your current attitude to the moderators, as a group?

A: I think highly of most of the moderators, and have especially high opinions of Zaruthustra (who I find to be amusing and helpful) and Odd Starter (who I find to be hardworking and just as helpful). I'm probably forgetting a few others, but those two stand out immediatly in my mind.

Q: Have you had any previous position of responsibility in any other online communities, and if so, elaborate?

A: Twisted Worlds - I hold the position of Super Moderator there, and have helped the webmaster in numerous projects. I know he'll vouch for me. I'm also a mod on the RRF Forums, and I work hard to greet new members and recommend thier placement within the horde, should they decide to join.

  • Hell No. Admitted troll and massive antagonizer. Contributes to the drama as opposed to trying to solve it. Will probably become a Moderator in no time flat. Contributions and Experience minimal and dwarfed by negative behavior. Also an admitted liar. -- Amazing 21:09, 24 April 2006 (BST) (Now neutral. Neither for nor against. Decline to vote.) -- Amazing 03:39, 12 May 2006 (BST)
    • Ironoically, my personal code of conduct would prevent me from trolling you if I became mod. But, meh, it's not like youre not allowed to voice your opinion. --SirensT RR 21:19, 24 April 2006 (BST)
      • I do not believe you have a personal code of conduct in any positive capacity. That said, the very fact that you've said you'd stop trolling me when you become a Mod shows you really should not be a Mod in the first place. -- Amazing 21:21, 24 April 2006 (BST)
        • I hope that you appreciate the irony of this statement, Amazing. -- Rueful 20:16, 26 April 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - She's perfectly reasonable, and I can see her as an excellent moderator. - CthulhuFhtagn 21:12, 24 April 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Mia is cool and very active. --Sindai 21:59, 24 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against - when you asked me on the IRC if it would wise to try for mod again, i said you to wait a little. As for now, i cant vounch you for mod mia. I did it in the past (as far as i remember), but the recent events surronding wikigate and you doesnt make me feel so secure on having you as a mod. Change your behaviour a little, forget about amazing for a while and start doing things to improve the wiki, not to further the whole drama that is already settled on it. Sorry for that Mia, try again next month. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 00:21, 25 April 2006 (BST)
    • Vouch - i would like to change my vote to vouch. Mia has shows more interest in the wiki itself than in drama over the past weeks. And, as far as i could follow, has tried to even solve her problems with Amazing. Thumbs up. --hagnat mod 19:27, 9 May 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I had a long conversation with Mia about this (in which I probably annoyed the hell out of her), but having recieved promises from her concerning certain issues, I feel that she is qualified and capable of performing the duties she would have to take on. BuncyTheFrog Talk GBP 03:51, 25 April 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - This didn't require a second thought. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 04:25, 25 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against - I have to say no. Same reason as hagnat, and i dont think she has her drama shields well tuned, as there have been some incidents in IRC with her losing her temper (In a manner that makes me doubt her viability as a candidate). --Grim s-Mod 05:31, 25 April 2006 (BST) Edit - Furthermore it has recently come to light that she doesnt understand the position and responsibilities of a moderator on the wiki, and she is not internally consistent, leading to contradictions in her opinions and actions. --Grim s-Mod 12:37, 7 May 2006 (BST)
  • Against - She is very active, and has done quite a lot for this wiki. However some of what she has done shows questionable insight. She is not only susceptible to drama, but started and added to it. I also find it troubling that her second bid for moderator she has received harsher criticism then the on her first bid although seeing the votes on the first you would expect less. If her personal conduct now is markedly different from her personal code of conduct as a mod, I would advice her to show us that code of conduct for a sustained period of time first so we can have an informed opinion on how she will act as an moderator. --Vista W! 11:15, 25 April 2006 (BST)
    • Will do. --SirensT RR 12:17, 25 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Considering the present circumstances, I am sorry to say that I cannot now vouch for her.--The General W! Mod 19:01, 25 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against, although this user has done quite a service for the wiki, I feel as if she should, as Vista mentioned previously, demonstrate an improvement in behavior before being eligible for modship, especially with regards to all the recent hullabaloo. --LibrarianBrent 06:04, 26 April 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch, Mia seems level-headed and able to act appropriately when faced with wikidiots(such as myself) -- Rueful 20:16, 26 April 2006 (BST)
  • For Even if she is sometimes's overcome by emotions and other women's issues I think she's done a fine job at being a voice of reason and working hard to improve the wiki. If she's gotten caught up in some nonsense by other user's, I can't blame her, as its mighty easy to do, and not a deal breaker, for me at least. Also, it would make the mod list like, five hundred times more in line with affirmative action. -Banana Bear4 20:29, 26 April 2006 (BST)
    • It's about time someone understands! Mind if I quote this? --SirensT RR 02:59, 27 April 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch Prosperina 8:52 26 April 2006
      • From what I've seen, everyone here loses their tempers some times, I've seen a good few of the moderators act questionably at some times, yet that does not mean that they are bad moderators. The importance is whether they will abuse that power solely on their own interests. If a moderator would be disqualitifed solely for their exhibition of emotion that I believe that no one would ever be able to be moderator. She has shown repeatedly that she is able and does put aside her own personal opinions to give someone a fair chance or do what she feels is an acceptable action for the situation. Friendliness and kindness doesn't make a moderator, promienent activity, willingness and inaction of the enforcement of community standards reguardless of personal feelings does. Prosperina 02:30, 14 May 2006 (BST)

*Vouch - All hail queen mia! but seriously, she does a lot of maintaining of some of the information pages, and has been trying to mellow out. She has made a point of avoiding drama as of late--Bermudez 17:34, 29 April 2006 (BST) certain episodes tonight have made me realize she would not be a good candidate.--Bermudez 05:23, 14 May 2006 (BST)

  • Vouch - Mia has been doing an… amazing — insert childish snigger here. — job at revamping some areas that needed some attention, and has been an all round useful contributor. Also, see Banana Bear4's comments. –Xoid STFU! 19:50, 29 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Too much drama currently.-Velkrin 22:50, 29 April 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Hasn't been consistently friendly or moderate in her use of the wiki to permit additional powers and responsibility. --Karlsbad 19:27, 30 April 2006 (BST) (No Change --Karlsbad 08:12, 13 May 2006 (BST))
  • Against - I'm getting the impression that she sees the wiki as almost a toy right now. Further, I am exceedingly non-plussed by the degree of drama that has been following her like a cloud.--Jorm 07:30, 5 May 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Due to the current events happening on the wiki, I don't thing this is a particularly wise time for Mia to resubmit herself for Mod, doubly so with the intent to focus on disputes. At this point in time I don't feel that I can vouch for her. Sorry. – Nubis NWO 21:13, 24 April 2006 (BST)
    • I also feel that her opinions of how the Wiki should be moderated (Weak Moderators is not one that would benefit the community, and clouts my opinion of how she would moderate. – Nubis NWO 20:07, 9 May 2006 (BST)
      • Mia's opinion about this were not a first. I wrote this long before she created that policy thing. --hagnat mod 20:33, 9 May 2006 (BST)
      • It's not like it's an unusual stance, really, and as hagnat shows we have promoted those with these beliefs before. I think it's probably a stroke against her, but honestly, Mia has been doing some pretty significant work on the wiki recently, and I honestly don't think she'd abuse the powers if she received them (which is my main criterion - Anything else is forgiveable). Going back to the Weak Moderators discussion, she does seem to identify that Mods shouldn't be all-powerful beings within the community, I think more likely that she's frustrated over the seemingly out-of-control drama on the wiki, and fishing for possible ways to prevent it. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 01:55, 10 May 2006 (BST)
        • She has contributed plenty to the Wiki. However most of her contributions that fall under what would be considered 'Moderator' jurisdiction, namely the Petition to Remove Amazing, in my opinion, aren't something the Wiki needs. Fleshing out the Help pages and Locations stubs does not make a moderator by itself, and what I've seen that isn't that is mainly drama. – Nubis NWO 02:03, 10 May 2006 (BST)
  • Against This was a Vouch until the whole scinfaxi racist drama. And then she stole my IRC channel >:( The previous sentence was a joke.Resume your wikidrama at the beep. BEEEP--Hypnotoad U! 17:06, 13 May 2006 (BST) Bah. After a little bit of thought I say....BAN MIA! Or mod her. Whichever seems more dramatic--Hypnotoad U! 18:56, 13 May 2006 (BST) After seeing her drunken wiki usage I say she's in no way fit to mod, AND she needs at least a warning--Hypnotoad U! 05:21, 14 May 2006 (BST)


This gives a tally of 8 in favour to 9 against, the against votes including a lot of respected wiki users. I'll leave this here to see if people want to change or expand upon their votes, although if Mia wants to retract this and issue a fresh bid for moderator status instead, that'd work as well. --Kevan 09:24, 9 May 2006 (BST)

If you don't want to mod Mia, fine, but there are 9 in favour, and 9 against.
Xoid STFU! 09:48, 9 May 2006 (BST)
Ah, my mistake. Although this isn't about a straight majority vote, or about whether I personally want to promote her, it's about assessing someone based on their perceived suitability for the role, and this number of serious reservations should be taken seriously. I'm assuming the drama's probably cooled down a bit since late-March, but wouldn't want to promote someone on the basis of assumption alone - I'd rather see what the against-voters had to say now. --Kevan 10:00, 9 May 2006 (BST)

Current Tally


  1. If you want to change your vote…
    1. Strikeout your current vote. Every single bit of it.
    2. Add your new vote as a bullet point indented off your original vote.
  2. If you've changed your vote…
    1. Remove your name from where it currently appears on the list.
    2. Add your name to the appropriate section, after the last name. (Without any fancy crap. No custom sigs.)
    3. Update the "NUMBERx VOTE", where VOTE is the stance you take (the bold word at the beginning of a vote.), and where NUMBER is how many people take that stance.
    4. Update the 'Last Updated' field. "Last Updated: TIMESTAMP by [[User:NAME|NAME]]", where NAME is your user name (Without any fancy crap. No custom sigs.) and TIMESTAMP is 5 tildes (like this ~~~~~).
In Favour

Last Updated: Sonny Corleone 05:33, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Personal tools