UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Xoid/2006-08-19 Bureaucrat Promotion

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Administration » Sysop Archives » Xoid » 2006-08-19 Bureaucrat 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
Bureaucrat Election Archive
2006

Jul | Aug | Sep

2007

Apr | Jul | Sep | Dec

2008

Mar | Jun | Oct (1) | Oct (2) | Dec

2009

Feb | May | Sep (1) | Sep (2)

2010

Jan | Apr | Jul | Oct

2011

Jan | May | Aug | Dec

2012

Mar | Jul | Oct

2013

Feb | May | Sep | Dec

2014

Mar | Jul | Oct

2015

Feb | Jun | Sep | Dec

2016

Jun | Dec

2017

Jun | Dec

These were the users who put themselves forward to fill the vacant Bureaucrat position left by Vista. This promotion round started 30 July 2006 and ended 15 August 2006. Vista promoted Xoid.


BobHammero

I've been here for around four months, and I've done quite a bit of work, both as a normal user and as a moderator. I have made well over 4,000 edits (somewhere between 4,300 and 5,000 at this point). If you're interested in seeing all of my major contributions, you can do so here, but I won't bother to list them here, because they don't seem really relevant to a Bureaucrat promotion. In addition to all of my contributions, I've also done quite a bit of work in my role as a moderator here, and I think I've demonstrated through that position that I am impartial and hard-working.

I would like to become a Bureaucrat because I think I would be good for the job, and we need a new Bureaucrat since Vista left. I'm not sure what else is really required for Bureaucrat bids, but I'd be happy to answer any questions that people have. I think you all probably are familiar with my work, so I hope that you think of me as neutral and trustworthy enough for the role. Thanks. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 08:55, 30 July 2006 (BST)

  • Against - I don't think we've really seen enough of you as a moderator, yet, to make you a bureaucrat.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 09:06, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    • Fair enough. I'm mainly running because we need someone as a Bureaucrat (in addition to Kevan, obviously). If someone more suitable than me steps up to the plate, I'm all for it. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 09:10, 30 July 2006 (BST)
      • I would step up, but I don't feel that I've spent quite enough time as a mod myself. Anyway does anyone know whats happened with Vista exactly? I was told that he's very busy at the moment by the General, but it appears that he's left the wiki by the looks of his user page. - Jedaz 09:19, 30 July 2006 (BST)
        • Yup. He has left for good, I think. I don't quite know why. Cyberbob  Talk  09:21, 30 July 2006 (BST)
          • The extra value a resident bureaucrat has over kevan is that a resident bureaucrat usually knows the user asking for promotion better. The next couple of months I'll be too busy to check on this wiki regularly enough to have a clear picture of the users both asking and vouching for promotions. I don't believe having two largely absent bureaucrats is good for this wiki. So I thought that somebody else whould be better suited for my role.--Vista 10:08, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - This can't possibly come as a surprise to anyone. In case anybody needs a recap, Bob's hardworking, level-headed, and intelligent. In addition, he's repeatedly demonstrated his capability to seperate his personal preferences and prejudices from his mod actions to a degree which very few people on this wiki seem capable of. This is, to my mind, one of the prime qualities any candidate for modship must have. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 09:55, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Definitely. Bob has worked his arse off around the wiki. He deserves this bigtime. Cyberbob  Talk  09:59, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I trust Bob's judgement. I'd prefer to see him have a little more time as a moderator first, but from Hammero's previous work, his work ethic, and his attitude, I think he'd make a good bureaucrat. –Xoid STFU! 10:18, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Bob is always on and always working hard. He'd do a great job. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 15:53, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - For the many edits that make things run smoother now and in the future. --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 03:46, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - levelheaded and intelligent--Gage 16:29, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Yeah. I can't see why not. --Niilomaan 20:15, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - One of the few people who actualy cares about the suggestions page, which without a vigilant eye can quickly fall into disrepair. - Jedaz 14:36, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - An all around good guy. --Paradox244 16:04, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Nope, needs more time and presence on the wiki. Maybe next time or something. Wooyah 03:44, 5 August 2006 (BST)
    • Excuse me? Who are you to speak, Mr. Started Contributing Today? –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 06:01, 5 August 2006 (BST)
      • I never claimed that I have done my fair share of contributions but I have been around long enough to make a judgement on you I would think. Wooyah 19:56, 5 August 2006 (BST)
        • Almost an entire day. Obviously you're been around far longer than me. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 20:19, 5 August 2006 (BST)
          • There you go making assumptions, I am what is known as a lurker. I have "been around" since about January. Wooyah 20:29, 5 August 2006 (BST)
            • Bob is the wiki god. He is omnipresent. DO NOT DENY HIM!--Gage 01:57, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - --CaptainM 06:38, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - "Jokes" about racial issues. Personally, that doesn't seem befitting of somebody I'd trust the Wiki to. Level headed? Getting his sick kicks from pretending to be racist doesn't seem very level headed. Grim44 01:10, 11 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He may be an asshole on the ASS page, but hey, that's his job. He's level headed, and stable, which is surprising, seeing who he's had to deal with, from Amazing, to the Fifth Horseman. I feel he would make an excellent bureaucrat. (God, I hate that word. So annoying to spell.) - Flareblade77 RKZHUDORIS 02:23 11 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - The Lord's mind boggles at the thought of Bob Hammero with more power. -- (The Lord God) Pray 18:28, 14 August 2006 (BST)
    Invalid vote struck. Was made after the deadline. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
Final Tally: 11 Vouch 3 Against --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)

Xoid

I've been on this wiki since April, and have managed to amount 7,937 edits (including this one). To toot my own horn: I've written policies, I've made templates, I've fixed templates, I ban adbots, I process deletions. I'm a jack of all trades who does their job. I've decided to be in the running for this promotion due to the fact that I'm one of the most active moderators the wiki has. I'm in this for the long haul folks, and I don't see myself leaving any time soon. –Xoid STFU! 09:58, 30 July 2006 (BST)

  • Vouch - Another excellent choice. If I'm not promoted, I'd want it to be Xoid. Cyberbob  Talk  10:01, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Xoid has demonstrated his trust and work ethic time and time again, and I have absolutely no doubt that he would be a stellar Bureaucrat. If anyone vouches against him, they are Satan in disguise and should be shot on sight. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 10:06, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Very active, a bit abrasive at times. But has good judgement.--Vista 10:10, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Very Active, gets the job done, and is fair. --DarkStar2374383 Talk | LDY | LOE 10:24, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He's banned me once for good reason, and he never mistreats my monkey! I like him... but only as a friend --The Godfather of Resensitized Anime Sucks 10:39, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I'm all tired now, so we'll cut this down to Homeboy Vouch FTW. And Bob, you're totally ripping off my Hitler bit there. For shame. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 12:30, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Probably my top choice for bureaucratship.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 13:21, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Same as Bob, always on and always working hard. He'd do a great job. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 15:54, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Always helpful, always knowledgeable, and always active. There is no other user I would more like to be a bureaucrat. YbborT 00:02, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Quite abrasive - but that seems to be part of his charm. He is on nearly all the time, doesn't overreact, and makes generally fair decisions, as well as admitting when he's wrong. He is the best candidate for promotion. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 01:50, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Hard, but fair --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 03:18, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - For stating a commitment to the long haul. --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 03:44, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He has done a lot to keep the wiki under control. And he is very level-headed. Definitely a good choice. --Absolution 05:34, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Good luck Xoid.--Tico 13:29, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He seems on top of shit, reverted our group page befor we even knew some one had messed with it. Dudes good by me. Bullgod 13:34, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Darn tootin' --SirensT RR 13:38, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - absolutely--Gage 14:42, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - didn't want to break the bad-grammar chain. --Swmono talk - W! - P! - SGP 16:50, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Active, hardworking and fair. I can definitely see him as a bureaucrat. --Nob666 17:40, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Hell yeah! If you must pick someone, them pick him. --Niilomaan 20:13, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I can't think of anyone more qualified for the position, he's always been helpfull and kind to those willing to learn --CaptainM 06:59, 1 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch -Dog Deever TNec 23:20, 1 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He deserves it more than anyone. --Paradox244 16:07, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I've been lurking around the Wiki for a while, and I think Xoid would make a great Bureaucrat. -Ruar 21:41, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He's good natured and understanding. Very politically correct and sympathetic to new "experts"... Yes, I'm kidding, he's smart, hard working, abrasive, and doesn't put up with crap. I'll vouch for that any day. --ERNesbitt 16:26, 3 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I couldn't think of anybody more fit for the position. EMAG TRESNI 18:48, 3 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Xoid is the best for the job. I have yet to see something by him that isn't proof he'd be great. --Gold Blade 02:59, 4 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - He is... ok for a mod I guess, but there have been a couple VB cases that I don't think he handled well enough or with good enough Judgement to prove that he would be a good Bureaucrat Wooyah 03:42, 5 August 2006 (BST)
    • Which cases are you referring to? –Xoid STFU! 04:57, 5 August 2006 (BST)
      • Your comments and mod involvement on the Bonefiver (I think that was his name) case a little while back to name one. But I think overall you just tend to assume the worst in people to much. Wooyah 05:38, 5 August 2006 (BST)
        • The problem with using that particular case as an example is that I did what a moderator should. Look at the situation and act upon it accordingly. Bonefiver's edit changed the meaning of the sentence and thus could not be considered a maintenance edit. Bonefiver's claim that he had permission could not be backed up with any semblence of proof whatsoever. When Crossbow spoke up to confirm Bonefiver's claim that he had permission to edit his user page I retracted the warning. The fact that Bonefiver was innocent is irrelevant: I acted upon the knowledge available at the time which indicated his guilt. Crossbow might very well have been one of the majority of wiki users who logs on occasionally at most. Does that mean if someone alters the wording on another user's page that we should wait two or three weeks until we can confirm a claim that the suspected vandal had permission? Certainly not. –Xoid STFU! 06:12, 5 August 2006 (BST)
          • Abstain- I think that if someone claims innocence and says he has proof then at least in the cases of where a warning would be given (instead of when a ban would be given because a warning has less immediate effect) then yes I would say a week or 2 should be given to the offending party, but I do see your point. Wooyah 19:50, 5 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I don't really think I really need to say any more about him then has been said here. - Jedaz 14:29, 6 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch -Xoid has done a lot of work on the wiki and shown that he is very responsible. Go for it.--Brendoshi 17:18, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch I was new to wikipedia and he sorted my pages. The only thing I can fault him on is a lack of communication with the people whose pages he's editing --Nuke Texas 21:43, 7th August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch Xoid has been very helpful, When I needed help on the wiki. --Empress of Moldovi 19:37, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch I haven't seen much, but my personal experience is that he's too immature. If someone can show me some better things he did I'll change my vote. --Rogue 21:37, 9 August 2006 (BST)
    • Funny. I recall you arguing for something because "the majority agreed". The majority of the voters here agree that I'm an excellent candidate, could it be that the majority isn't always right? Ironic, when it comes down to it. Anyway. To the point: I've fixed more location pages than you can name. I fixed disambiguation pages. I've reverted vandalism. I've written policies that have passed, none to this date have failed. I've fixed templates. I've made templates. I've helped out newbies (shock! horror!). I've made several fixes to the MediaWiki namespace. I've fixed categories. I'm easily the most active participant on this wiki. I permaban constant vandals before they can even get halfway through causing trouble. When someone can counter my logic with their own, I will listen to them, regardless of who they are. I admit my flaws, and admit when I am wrong. –Xoid STFU! 06:50, 10 August 2006 (BST)
      • Then you've earned it, One Vouch from me.

--Rogue 08:01, 11 August 2006 (BST)

  • Vouch - Has been helpful to me in the past, really nothing more to add that what has been already. Pillsy 12:15, 10 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I only use the suggestions page, but he's helpful and concise there, and I'd be happy with him as bureaucrat. Fair and intelligent. Plus, he's good with bad puns. --Burgan 16:17, 14 August 2006 (BST)+
    Invalid vote struck. Was made after the deadline. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - After careful consideration and inspection of the wiki, the Lord God is now prepared to vouch for Xoid. -- (The Lord God) Pray 02:27, 15 August 2006 (BST)
    Invalid vote struck. Was made after the deadline. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
Final Tally: 33 Vouch, 0 Against, 1 Abstain. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)

Cyberbob240

Well, I wasn't going to put myself up here, but I didn't want to leave Bob all by himself. :P Anyways, I've worked quite a fair bit on the wiki during my time here. WAY too many Deletions (twitch) and the like. I also singlehandedly cleaned up more than half of the Locations disambiguation pages about two weeks ago. Let me tell you (and as I'm sure any of the people that work on Locations), that wasn't fun. At all. I've worked on and upgraded a number of standard locations pages as well.

Now, I know there will be people who won't want me as a Bureaucrat for myriad reasons, most of them perfectly valid, but all I ask is that you bring them up politely, so I may address them in kind. Thank you. Cyberbob  Talk  09:13, 30 July 2006 (BST)

  • Vouch - Cyberbob has demonstrated his trustworthiness to this wiki, and I would be happy to have him as a bureaucrat. I have no doubt that he would faithfully carry out the responsibility afforded to that role. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 10:03, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Very active but has poor judgement and too little maturity for this role.--Vista 10:12, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    • Maturity? Are you still pissed about that MSN conversation. And Vista, it's extremely rich for you to be criticising people on their level of activity, no matter how valid your reasons for absence. Cyberbob  Talk  22:26, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Cyberbob may seem like a poor choice for bureaucrat, but people need to look beyond his rare lapses of good judgement, he is willing to listen to logic and reason, something that I admire, and something that is vital for a position of authority. –Xoid STFU! 10:26, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - How could I not vouch for a Close Personal Friend of Anime Sucks.... He seems fair and balanced to me!--The Godfather of Resensitized Anime Sucks 10:41, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Cyberbob has been very active in the time ive been on the wiki, and not only does he seem reasonable, but he has put alot of significant insight on certain topics. --DarkStar2374383 Talk | LDY | LOE 10:53, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Works for the wiki, and when he screws up he owns up. Definitely a good choice. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 12:32, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - He appears to have been less active recently and has, in my opinion, shown poor judgement on several occasions.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 13:22, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    • Almost as poor as your judgement when you chose to support Amazing, would you say? And I've had a ton of homework recently; I haven't physically had much time for anything UD-related. Cyberbob  Talk  22:24, 30 July 2006 (BST)
      • Yeap, almost as poor as some of my desisions in the Amazing era. You're right, but that doesn't change my vote.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 08:06, 31 July 2006 (BST)
        • Would you like to give an example of my poor judgement, then? Cyberbob  Talk  08:08, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - An excellent moderator. He get's work done right. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 22:41, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Seems to have issues with criticism as evidenced by his lashing out against all people who are against. It's not about rules, it's about maturity and ability to handle yourself.--Agent White 00:51, 31 July 2006 (BST)
    • An example of this being...? Cyberbob  Talk  07:02, 31 July 2006 (BST)
      • Like... you remarking on every against vote to make it look bad... --Agent White 19:07, 31 July 2006 (BST)
        • I'm not trying to make them look bad. Well, maybe just a little. But I did say I would be addressing your concerns, didn't I? And I can't do that if all you do is make broad, general statements without backing them up. Cyberbob  Talk  21:47, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Likes to jump in boots and all, even in situations that need careful consideration. --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 03:16, 31 July 2006 (BST)
    • Like...? Cyberbob  Talk  07:02, 31 July 2006 (BST)
      • Like the way you try to misuse the vandal banning process to try to get your "enemies" warned, via frivolous complaints. I'm not on the wiki that much, but even I've seen you jump in and revert edits, report it as vandalism, only to be shown up to be a complete dick, because you didn't check to see what the guy was actually editing out. The one I remember was the same guy you're hassling there again now, taking out a category link he himself had added by mistake less than a minute before, and you reported him for vandalism... because you hate the guy --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 14:19, 31 July 2006 (BST)
        • OK. I admit it. I didn't fully check the page history. But I didn't do it because I dislike him. Really. Cyberbob  Talk  14:21, 31 July 2006 (BST)
          • I'd just like to see you take the warning system a bit more seriously. I know a lot of vandalism goes on here. Just be a bit more aware, and ease off on the trigger finger. Give those obvious vandals hell, but long term members... make sure you're on solid ground before giving it to them, eh :) --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 14:34, 31 July 2006 (BST)
            • That was a wake up call, really. Since then, I don't think I've had one false report (well, one, but it wasn't frivolous) or one overturned/contested ruling. Cyberbob  Talk  14:39, 31 July 2006 (BST)
              • The way you're carrying on in the General's beurocrat bid area only reinforces my view. Neither of you deserve promotion --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 12:01, 2 August 2006 (BST)
                • Geez. A guy has a single (pleasant) argument, and is automatically unsuitable? You might want to have a look at a few of Xoid's escapades, then. Cyberbob  Talk  12:17, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - For being so ever present. When does he sleep? --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 03:54, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Not as good as those two others, but way better than most. --Niilomaan 20:30, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I've known CB a long time in the CDF, and I've seen him grow a lot. I think he'll do well. Not that I'm a wiki expert or anything--this is more of a character reference. Enoch the Watcher 21:18, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I don't see him around too often and, in my opinion, that's the best way for a mod to work. There's no high-flying self-righteousness or delicious wikidrama here. --Ron Burgundy 22:38, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch --SirensT RR 02:29, 1 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against sorry, Bob, too much antagonism and knee jerk reactions for this, though i've got no personal problem with you at all. Dog Deever TNec 23:26, 1 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - The only candidate that I'm actually against. I don't need to say any more about his character then has already been said here. - Jedaz 14:32, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Many Bothans died to bring you this vouching... anyway, he's a good guy and I trust him.

--Paradox244 16:05, 2 August 2006 (BST)

  • Vouch - i'd consider cyberbob a friend of mine --DJSMITHCDF 03:21, 3 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Very active, see what he does with more responsibility. --ERNesbitt 05:15, 5 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Immature, patronising, condescending, and unhelpful. Far too power mad. --Nuke Texas 17:47, 7th August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - he has been downright spiteful to me lately. As Nuke Texas. --Gage 01:28, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - The Lord God spake through previous mortals who voiced his thoughts on this subject. -- (The Lord God) Pray 02:28, 15 August 2006 (BST)
    Invalid vote struck. Was made after the deadline. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
Final Tally: 14 Vouch, 8 Against, 0 Abstain. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)

The General

What the hell, i'll throw myself in. I have been here since the 26th November 2005, and i've made over 2000 edits, since the last purge, and I have made one peer reviewed suggetion, with several others in the works. I've been hanging around the suggestions page for quite a while, voting on suggestions. I also have a policy change which I hope to suggest soon. I was cycling the suggestions pages, until Grim s took over. I have, naturally, been performing moderator duties such as banning vandals. I have also made several templates. I am probably one of the longest serving, currently active, moderator on this wiki and I believe that I would be a good choice for bureaucratship.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 13:25, 30 July 2006 (BST)

  • Against - No one can deny that The General has been here for a long while. However, I simply do not think that he is neutral enough for the role of Bureaucrat. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 18:14, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: You still worried about the Amazing thing?--The General T Sys U! P! F! 18:16, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: Well, now that you bring it up, I still don't understand how you could have a modicum of sympathy for him given his hateful and divisive behavior on the wiki. It's things like that that make me uneasy, because to me — and I suspect many others as well — his actions were completely indefensible. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 19:12, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - He appears to have been less active recently and has, in my opinion, shown poor judgement on several occasions. Cyberbob  Talk  21:50, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - No offence but I think you're impartial too. You have a set of people you support and a set of people you don't. A bureaucrat shouldn't really do that. A bureaucrat should see no sides to everything, just neutral. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 22:40, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: I assume you meant "partial," not "impartial"? –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 22:46, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: Yeah. I wasn't thinking good when I said that. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 01:03, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I am willing to vouch for the General. I vouched for him in his earlier Bureaucrat attempt and I'll vote for him again. In my opinion, he would make an excellent bureaucrat. -- Krazy Monkey W! 23:01, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Not a chance in hell. Same basic objections I outlined here, plus his general (no pun intended) tendency towards partiality. Worst choice put forth so far. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 00:31, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - This guy suggested starting a petition[1] to ban someone. That's not the sort of guy who should have power. --Ron Burgundy 02:11, 31 July 2006 (BST)
    • Discussion moved to talk page
  • Against - From my talks with you off the wiki you've indicated that you are seriously considering leaving. Why should you be given bureaucratship if you aren't going to be around? Apart from that, Burgundy makes an excellent point. I'll expand upon that by saying that I remember when you railed against a similiar petition "on principle". I find it strange that you later decided a petition would be a good idea in Reptilius' case. –Xoid STFU! 02:49, 31 July 2006 (BST)
    • Discussion moved to talk page
      • Abstain - I've talked with him often enough, and while his judgement is not the best, it's certainly far from the worst. He has not screwed up any more than other mods have, and I think people are giving him a hard time over his past association with Amazing. In retrospect, I have no major qualms with his becoming a bureaucrat, but I am not willing to give him my full support on this due to internal doubts. Make of that what you will, I'll speak no more of this. –Xoid STFU! 02:35, 4 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - the least qualified sysop in terms of judgement--Gage 14:21, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Heard he hated monkeys... --The Godfather of Resensitized Anime Sucks 09:27, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - I've had no problem with the General, always seemed to do his job, without too much fuss, but the way the arguements are going above, looks like he's too willing to argue with wiki drama queens. I'd have no confidence in either of those guys being able to "just do their job" anymore. Get over Amazing already guys, he's gone --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 12:07, 2 August 2006 (BST)
    • I have, you'll notice I wasn't the one to first mention Amazing.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 12:10, 2 August 2006 (BST)
      • Changed my mind, haven't seen enough of this from you to actually be against you. But, "never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience" --  boxy  TtaMe  ~~~~~ 15:13, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Le sigh. To much drama surrounds him. --SirensT RR 13:48, 2 August 2006 (BST)
    • Discussion moved to talk page
  • Vouch - I support his decisions. He is a level headed moderator IMO and would make a great Bureaucrat. - Jedaz 14:40, 2 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I like The General, I think he would be an awesome buerocrat. I just don't think that most people can get past his minor relations with Amazing. Nachoos 00:00, 4 August 2006 (BST)
    You've gotta sign. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 21:32, 3 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - A la last time. --Lucero Talk U! 19:40, 4 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - What can I say, he is a cool guy. Wooyah 03:40, 5 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I love this guy and the way that he acts. Has alot of experience. Supaman 03:46, 5 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - i don't trust his judgement, really--Gage 21:55, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  • Against - Really dont trust his judgement, or his ability to be impartial, and I find his association with Amazing, someone who nearly tore the wiki apart, quite worrisome. --Outstanding 02:18, 11 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - The Lord God has seen no reason to vote against this user in his short time with the wiki. He has however seen a moderate approach befitting a moderator. The Lord God has reviewed what archives are available and gives his blessing. -- (The Lord God) Pray 02:31, 15 August 2006 (BST)
    Invalid vote struck. Was made after the deadline. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
Final Tally: 5 Vouch, 11 Against, 1 Abstain. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)

Jedaz

Well I've decided that I might give being a Bureaucrat a shot. Most of my work has been with the suggestions page and eliminating the back-log of previous days suggestions which I have now completed. I have successfully purposed a change to how the suggestions page policy votes are done with the help of Xoid and Vista. I'm on the wiki everyday cycling the suggestions and moving them off to their appropiate place. Other then that theres not much else I can say about myself, if you've interacted with me you'll see that in most cases I try and be level headed and calm which is whats needed for a Bureaucrat. If you haven't seen me then ask me a few questions and I'll answer them to the best of my ability. - Jedaz 09:50, 30 July 2006 (BST)

  • Against - Jedaz has been working excellently on the Suggestions page. However, of late he's become.... a little slow. His spelling and grammar has slipped to primary school levels, and his defence of Gage's patently flawed anti-bot suggestion has left me pondering whether he'd be able to comprehend the fact that he had been promoted. Cyberbob  Talk  10:04, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    • I never claimed to be perfect with language, however I definitly have a better grasp of laguages then most 12 year olds, and I belive that I am able to communicate in such a way that most people would be able to understand me so I can't see that being an issue. Gage's idea, although flawed, actually had positive factors that I was trying to point out rather then people saying that there was no good in it at all. Just because you don't understand someones line of thought or reasoning don't automaticaly assume that they are "slow". - Jedaz 14:20, 6 August 2006 (BST)
      • Er... no. Your lines of "thought" and "reasoning" have been known to be so convoluted, that you have ended up restating a point that you already made in the one reply. Cyberbob  Talk  09:54, 12 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - Jedaz assurance would've made it an abstain, but it was the rest of his reply that made this a vouch. I'm willing to give him a chance. I do not think you are fit for this role. From what I've seen of you, you are moderate, yes, but I don't think we need another moderate, uninformed bureaucrat. –Xoid STFU! 10:10, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  • Abstain - Pretty much, I'm not sure. I'm not completely against him, but I haven't seen him anywhere other than the suggestions page (which he has done a great job on). –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 06:45, 5 August 2006 (BST)Against - At one time I would have happily vouched for Jedaz, but lately I find that his neutrality and critical thinking leaving much to be desired. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 10:11, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    • You and Xoid bring up fair points. I realize that I don't know everything but I'm willing to listen and learn. I'm not quite sure why Xoids against a moderate bureaucrat, I would have thought that would be more desirable, but I'm sure he has his own reasons. Other than the suggestions page I can't think of where else I would be particuarly helpful that people arn't already contributing to. However I can understand why you are vouching against me. - Jedaz 08:17, 5 August 2006 (BST)
      • It has a lot to do with how the last two moderate bureaucrats were. One crumbled under the pressure and made a greivious error of judgement, the other has decided to move on after barely settling into the role. I'm not sure if I want to choose another nice guy, if you notice almost every moderate moderator has disappeared or become so inactive as to appear glacial. If you could give me an assurance that you are willing to stick this out, I'll change my vote to abstain. I'm certain that I'll never see exactly eye-to-eye with you, we are two very different people and while I think you could make an excellent bureaucrat, I am not of the opinion that you would make an excellent bureaucrat. –Xoid STFU! 04:40, 6 August 2006 (BST)
        • I can assure you that I would stay around, and although I may be a nice guy I'm no push over. I try and think about what I say and do before I act, and if for some reason I make a mistake as we all do at some point then I'm willing to face up to it and try and fix it as best I can. But I can understand your reservations given the history of previous bureaucrats. - Jedaz 09:17, 6 August 2006 (BST)
    • Geeze I must have done my job well, nobody else has noticed me or this bid. I would appreciate it if people would say something even if they are against me. - Jedaz 06:40, 5 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - He does good work on the suggestions page, and I really like how he stays out of a lot of the drama, whether or not it is intentional.--Gage 01:26, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  • Vouch - I have to say that I was trying to stay out of this Bureaucrat promotion, I really was... but seeing that Jedaz just needed this vouch to at least made it to the other section, I had to do it. He's a good guy, works like a mule in the Suggestions page hardly getting a "thanks" for it, and stays out of the drama wonderfully like Gage said. One of the last remaining "moderate" moderators. It's kinda unfair not to see him getting as much support as some of the other moderators (that I think did a good job too, but as I said I want to stay out of this as much as I can) so this vouch comes for greater justice, and because voting against Jedaz wuold be like voting against myself. Go Jedaz! --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 20:22, 8 August 2006 (BST)
    • Thanks alot, I find it odd that there are so few people commenting on my bid when it's been up just as long as everyone elses. Just one of the mysterys of life I guess. - Jedaz 08:35, 9 August 2006 (BST)
      • You are much less visible than some of these other mods, who are all up in the spotlight--Gage 11:48, 9 August 2006 (BST)
Final Tally: 3 Vouch, 1 Against, 1 Abstain. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 02:57, 15 August 2006 (BST)
Personal tools
advertisements