UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/The Rooster/2008-07-09 Promotion

Administration » Sysop Archives » The Rooster » 2008-07-09 Promotion

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

User:The Rooster

I'm going to nominate the Rooster for promotion. He's been around for a couple of months now and has already done quite a lot to help out the community. He's standardised Danger Reports and cleared out all the ones that are no longer needed. He's added Danger Reports were some were missing. And just looking through his contributions (both the full list and his own list of the main ones, you can see how much work he put into that. He's also put together several Bots in order to streamline some very tedious tasks.

All in all, I think he would be a very good sysop. He may not have been here very long, but the work he's done more than makes up for that. -- Cheese 20:17, 9 July 2008 (BST)

Nomination Accepted -- I've decided to accept the nomination, tis earlier than I would've nominated myself but since we're here might as well keep the ball rolling.--  RoosterDragon  20:18, 10 July 2008 (BST)

• Vouch - See above. -- Cheese 20:17, 9 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch Also above , Although I'm sure he'll politely decline. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:31, 9 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch Despite the issues with a couple of his bot-edits I had to go and fix, He's been helping a great deal. Conndraka^{mod TTBA CFT} 22:00, 9 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - as above. --Sir Bob Fortune ^RR 22:59, 9 July 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - I have seen him around. But feel I must abstain -- solely on basis that he needs a bit more time in the community... For the moment, if he continues to be a strong contributor that's fantastic -- but he doesn't need sysop powers to do that. --WanYao 23:19, 9 July 2008 (BST)
  • Question for the candidate: How would vote on this VB case? Please do your best to see past the frustration inherent in my words and get to the issue at hand: which I consider dealing with problematic users who consistently troll the wiki (including but not limited to Admin pages), yet are able to "slip through the cracks" of the rules and continue to be a disruptive influence. Thanks. --WanYao 22:32, 14 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch---BKM 01:10, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - I, for one, welcome our new wiki overlord. --Kikashie ^{Read the Dispatch!} 01:18, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - I'm gonna go against my heart and not Vouch, seems like a great guy and strong contributer, but I just haven't really seen him around... Needs to be more of a social butterfly... :P --/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 02:13, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - Mostly as Wan Yao. With as difficult as it is to demote a bad sysop I feel that handing out the privilege/responsibilities is not something to be taken lightly. If it was just the ability to move/delete etc. I wouldn't have a problem handing it out to people that put in a lot of work, but since there is also the added duty of deciding about vandalism and so on you want to see evidence of clear reasoning skills and the like. I don't see that in the scant few months you have been here.--– Nubis ^NWO 02:49, 10 July 2008 (BST)

  Your third sentence, I've been trying with those move/delete policies. Hasn't worked out. :( --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:13, 10 July 2008 (BST)

• Abstain - Partially because I haven't seen word from Rooster, and employs the use of robots to do his bidding (which I grudgingly must say: they look to be useful). However, Rooster has done an awful lot of work and seems friendly enough. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:13, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - As Wan. I don't see anything in his work that would be enhanced by sysop powers. --brb, church ^{DORIS CGR U!} 05:10, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - For the same demotion reasons as Nubis. I would most probably vouch if I had heard more of him. Also, another few months as a wiki user will only improve decision making for the future. Think of it as training--CyberRead240 06:12, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - I think I'd like to see him as a sysop some day, but I'd like him to have more time around the wiki first. --Pdeq^Talk* 06:18, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against How can I vouch for the trusworthiness of someone I have never heard of? Thats not to say he is not trustworthy... just that he is yet to demonstrate his judgement anywhere I have seen.--Honestmistake 09:13, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - While that resume is impressive, and people seem to be able to vouch for it, I'm going to go with Against. As the others, I have yet to see the man himself. Also, it seems like he's been here for the minimum of time, just about four days more. --Vandurn 14:22, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - Sure, he's made some very contributive edits on this wiki, but we're yet to see these bots run haywire. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:20, 10 July 2008 (BST)

  This is not IRobot, the bots wont go haywire, they just can't. I can't really think of anyway in which that could happen.--KOOKY 13:38, 14 July 2008 (BST)

• Vouch - Can't do any worse than the Bush administration.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:33, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Mostly because his name is analogous for The Cock. --Hardcore Rockabilly 20:06, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - As MichaelRead, and thus as Nubis and WanYao. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 22:10, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - Who is this person? What major policies/discussion into the future of the wiki has he helped? Why does he need the sysop buttons? Sysop status is not given away as a reward for doing good things, it is a position of trust that brings annoying responsibility, frankly anyone who actually wants the job isn't qualified on that basis. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:45, 10 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - I'm with Iscariot and Nubis. It is easy to promote a person who does a lot for the wiki, and I know it isn't fair to say 'we never see you, do more public work' because you have done plenty of work :) but being a sysop isn't all about wiki edits. It's about decision makers with powers of reasoning and control, and no extra title we give you could make you do your current job better. DanceDanceRevolution 04:12, 11 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - I think it is too easy to dismiss a person for the reason that they don't spend time in every corner of the wiki. The Rooster has obviously spent alot of time developing these bots, and in my opinion would be a worthy member of the sysop team. - Jedaz - 05:02/11/07/2008
• Vouch – This guy spends too much time making helpful contributions to the wiki and too little time stroking his ego, kissing ass, and being a condescending prick? The horror! Apparently being a sysop is sort of like being fucking Spider-Man with the added super power of being able to delete wiki pages (with great power comes great responsibility). May I also add that the little rooster in his signature is bad ass. --Paddy Dignam 06:12, 11 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch, because I hope he will be the sort of sysop that simply does his job without getting involved in the silly little wars of this wiki. - User:Whitehouse 19:04, 11 July 2008 (BST)
• Against I do not feel he has been here long enough or has done anything noteworthy enough to warrant this promotion; The guy does good work, maybe one day. Still... Too soon. --Marty Banks (aka. Mundane) <DHPD> 19:01, 12 July 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Helpful, Active, Good contributions, Loads of reasons. _■^■ 00:10, 13 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - He's a good user but I don't see the need of a promotion, it has a strange way of making good users stop helping.--Karek^maps?! 00:52, 14 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - Fantastic contributions, but not enough time in the community. That's the only negative I can see, but it's a big one. Keep it up, though - your work has already greatly affected my wiki experience.--Nallan (Talk) 11:42, 15 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - i agree with Karek.----Sexualharrison 18:04, 15 July 2008 (BST)
• Against - I do feel that you have not been around long enough to deserve sysopship, but stick around and you'll get a vouch vote from me.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  23:31, 15 July 2008 (BST)
• Against I also agree with Karek... Ummm, because Harrison told me to. --Hardcore Rockabilly 17:48, 16 July 2008 (BST)

  Isn't that your vouch above? --Paddy Dignam 22:29, 16 July 2008 (BST)

• Vouch - Hard working, doesn't dive into things without due consideration, has my full confidence. --Morgan Blair 05:24, 19 July 2008 (BST)

Current Tally 12 Vouch 13 Against 6 Abstain 16 July 2008 (BST)

Promotion Unsuccessful, for several reasons, which i feel i should do you all the courtesy of explaining:

First of all, we have no explaination from The Rooster as to why he wants to be promoted. Information about why a person wants to be promoted tells you something about them, and we unfortunately dont know anything about him except that he makes bots (And digging through his contribs is worse than useless due to all the bot edits in there), which leads me to my second, and most important reason, and the one upon which this decision was made:

We have absolutely no idea about the standards of his decisionmaking, or his knowledge of wiki policy. We cannot directly examine his judgement because, as far as i have been able to determine, there is nothing on this wiki that has demonstrated, for good or for ill, if he can make reasonable judgements or act in a fair and unbiased way. Given he impossibility of demoting someone who is terrible, this shortfall makes it impossible for me to, in good concience, promote him at all.

Finally, while his construction of bots may have been somewhat useful in certain sections of the wiki, this job requires more than simply programming something and letting it go each night to do your work for you. You do need to get involved in the interpersonal sections of the wiki so others can judge your character. As WanYao said, with his bots he is a good contributor, but as Wan, i do not see how being a sysop will in any way improve on that. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 20:28, 23 July 2008 (BST)

Way to unilaterally make the decision, Grim. But I concur. We've no idea how The Rooster would use the added abilities -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:17 24 July 2008 (BST)

So you make a fuss when i do it, but you have been comfortably doing it for more than a year. Hypocrite. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 11:14, 24 July 2008 (BST)

As a matter of fact, ever since you had a whinge about it to Kevan (when your man was up for promotion) I have contacted the other sysop before making a decision... and I think you'll find that Vantar has probably been the one to promote the sysops since. So rather than do what you think was right, and consult with the other sysop, you are the one that has no problem with making the decision yourself when you're the one with the ability to do so... mmmm, hypocrite does come to mind -- boxy ^{talk • i} 12:58 26 July 2008 (BST)

Boxy, you have had ample opportunity to attempt to contact me. You have utterly failed to do so. We only have your word that you have attempted to talk with other crats (Something you have utterly failed at here, and remains unsupported from my discussions with vantar prior to the karek promotion going through). For the record, id support a third crat anyway, but since you never attempted to contact me during voting i simply followed the lead you have displayed in public, with a major display of unilaterality (As its the only thing that can stop you from doing it yourself, beating you to the punch). Now, im not exactly hard to contact. I can be reached on IRC at any time because i am perpetually logged into it, my little email thingy works perfectly fine, and, if all else fails, you can send me a private message on a number of different forums. It would be nice if you actually... you know... tried. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 13:55, 26 July 2008 (BST)

trouble in paradise guys? ;) --xoxo 02:43, 26 July 2008 (BST)