UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Karek/2008-01-06 Promotion

From The Urban Dead Wiki
< UDWiki:Administration‎ | Sysop Archives‎ | Karek
Revision as of 19:36, 21 January 2008 by A Helpful Little Gnome (talk | contribs) (Protected "UDWiki:Administration/Promotions/Karek": scheduled protection [edit=sysop:move=sysop])
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Template:PromSuc

Karek

I've been here for a while now, I'm not sure how long exactly, and in that time I've made some 5000 edits, without the assistance of wiki projects like Welcome Newbie or Location Blocks. Most recently I have been working on a policy to rework how Arbitration is dealt with on the wiki (currently under voting). I helped design the current rules used on Talk:Suggestions for cycling suggestions including the standard template and method for moving the content to the talk pages of suggestions under voting along with being the one who cycles Talk:Suggestions daily and sees to it's maintenance. You can find edits of mine all over the wiki, I really don't know what else to put here but I'd be more than happy to answer any questions asked.--Karekmaps?! 07:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


  • Vouch - You have around 8,000 edits in total, and your first edit was on 15:05, 20 March 2007 as according to your contributions. You are a solid member of the community, and I really do think you easily deserve SysOp status. I can't see any reason why not. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 07:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I also have a few questions I'd like to be answered in light of recent events:

  • Have you ever used alternative accounts to edit the UD Wiki?
    • I have not, I once used a different name from this account, Vecusum, but I have never made another account.--Karekmaps?! 20:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • A SysOp has blocked an editor and you disagree with the block. What is the policy about unblocking and do you intend to adhere to it?
    • Guidelines Rehashed is the only reference I see to unbanning a user, it requires a Misconduct case against the banning Sysop. I intend to adhere to the policies set up regardless of the cases or my views on them, it's my job as a Sysop to implement the policies as they are not what I think they should be.
  • Tell me how you got those 8,000 edits in only a year or so.
    • Cycling Talk:Suggestions has gotten me a few, so has participating on the Suggestions pages. I also frequent the administrative areas to make requests or provide assistance when possible. Although I fear that the majority of them are probably from User_Talk pages.--Karekmaps?! 20:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Do you disagree with any of the current policies and guidelines (Besides your own one you're cooking up)? If so, why, and how would you propose to improve them?
    • Not really, no. I disagree with the way Arbitration is set up, and I don't think the Sysops are not Moderators policy was really necessary but, other than that nothing comes to mind.--Karekmaps?! 20:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks in advance for your answers. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 07:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Vouch - There are people with the right stuff, and you are one of them. A sensible, responsible editor who has taken a definite interest in not only participating as part of the community, but in helping to maintain it and improve its infrastructure. Yours are the kind of sensible maintence tasks that are needed. Not silly location block spam. not trivial template spammage, but actual construction, design, and commitment to churning out the the stuff this wiki needs. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 08:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC) Edited to add: My my my. Its amazing how the people karek has successfully argued against are coming out of the woodwork with the weak "assumes bad faith" argument. I doubt they would have even come up with it had Misianian not been sore from his sound thrashing on the misconduct talk and assumed it. Its hate rationalised after the fact, not hate built upon rationalisation. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 00:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - even though we disagree frequently, you are undoubtedly committed to improving the wiki, and seem to have a good grasp of the day to day workings of it. I was considering nominating you myself (why doesn't anyone else do that?). My only concern is your derision towards "spam" type contributions to the wiki, such as location blocking, welcomenewbie templating and categorisation of pages. Would you try to stop any such contributions if made a sysops? -- boxy talk • i 08:54 6 January 2008 (BST)
  • I would not, I understand that it is essentially a conflict of interest and I am sadly in the minority with my views on those things.--Karekmaps?! 20:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Third Vouch received at 08:54 6 January 2008 (BST)

  • Vouch - A good user, worthy of sysop status. I would be interested to see how you answer the questions, though.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 10:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Abstain - you're a good contributor and know good what should be where and such stuff, but i just don't think you... Hm... ok, i cannot formulate my concerns, so i'll abstain for now. Common question then, What would you do once you become sysop? --~~~~ [talk] 12:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    I'd perform sysop duties, specifically emptying the request queue on Administration pages where/when it needs emptying.--Karekmaps?! 20:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    Do you have any specific pages in mind that, in your opinion, require extra sysop reviewing (comparing to current situation)? --~~~~ [talk] 20:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
    A/SD, A/MR, and UDWiki:Administration/Protections--Karekmaps?! 20:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Too quick to assume bad faith. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 13:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Received Midianian's disapproval. <serious>Is one of the few users left capable of objective thinking.</serious> --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 15:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Has proven time and time again that he is capable of doing the job. His work on the suggestions talkpage, for example. Balanced and rational in most of the discussions I have seen him involved in, clearly dedicated to the wiki. Can't think of a stronger candidate, off the top of my head.--SeventythreeTalk 16:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Copycat. Don't have anything else to say, at the momment. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
First off, I'm a little surprised that Karek put himself forward, I haven't really seen any indication... and if this is an attempt to get more "sysop authority" for policy discussion, you don't need it. Anyways, I think it's a good idea lot's of people are putting themselves up now, it helps to despell that feeling of "we're special" or "we're better". Like what is mentioned on Wikipedia, it's only a technical matter. And before anyone starts thinking "we have too many sydoops!" that is untrue. We really only have about 5? active ones and that's pitiful for a wiki of this size and that is still growing in membership. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
We have about 8 or 12 active, half of those only semi-active. I'm quickly forming the opinion of 'the more, the better' as so many are inactive. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 00:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
He did it because i suggested it to him and encouraged him, and did so because i thought he would do a brilliant job. Personally, i think he is more interested in the responsibility than the power. Some people dont strive towards sysophood like you did. They dont see it as a badge of authority. They are smart enough to know it comes with more than a few burdens heavy burdens (As you will discover soon). --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 01:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - There's no doubt that you are a dedicated editor and that you have helped the community a lot. However, you seem to kind of...I don't know...crabby. I mean seriously, you're never very nice to Jon Pyre. --Hhal 16:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    That's not exactly a mark against him. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 17:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    A lot of people aren't very nice to Jon. That said, SysOps aren't meant to be nice to people, just responsible janitors. Using that as your reason not to give him SysOp powers is kind of stupid.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    Well, the way I see it, a crabby person is not a good choice for a leader because the ideal leader will not bite a person's head off just for making a bad suggestion. --Hhal 02:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    Oh God, not the sysops-aren't-moderators argument again. I can't take it any more. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 02:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    Uhh...what? I don't believe I wrote "sysops-aren't-moderators". --Hhal 17:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    It was going that way. You seem to believe that sysops should be "leaders of the community", when in fact they are "janitors of the community". --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 21:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against Karek is too "Jump-the-gun" with his decision, which would prove detrimental in Vandal Banning. Also, he does not need sysop powers to edit and create these pages as he is doing. Remember, The Promotions page is a place to request Sysop powers in order to aid in editing. He does not need these to create templates and pages. --User:Axe27/Sig 19:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against As above.  Nalikill  TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI  20:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC) Vouch I realize now that before, I had based my vote on bias and misperception. As boxy, he's dedicated to improving the wiki. Can he be ill tempered? Yes. Isn't everyone? Heck yes.  Nalikill  TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI  11:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - my only consern has already been stated. you tend to jump the gun at times. try and curve this behavior, and try again in a little while.--'BPTmz 20:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - a marked tendency to assume bad faith, and to refuse to compromise. We don't need another bull dog sysop. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 20:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    I've only made 8 A/VB reports ever, 4 of which were ruled vandalism, one of which was the result of a minor mistake in time of the edit and about the privacy policy not good or bad faith, one of which was me assuming bad faith, and the last two were against Kamden, here and here, the second which the ruling Sysop even commented that it was an essentially an act of leniency that he wasn't ruling Vandalism. According to my history I've only assumed Bad Faith once.--Karekmaps?! 12:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    A fair response, which, along with support from many users I respect, means that I'm changing to a Vouch. My personal experience of you is of someone too prone to intransigence, but I'm willing to admit (for what it's worth) that it's probably due to a personality clash, rather than an intrinsic fault of your character / ability to fairly carry out the duties of sysop. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 20:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    Damnation - it's back to Against again. I know, I know, I'm being inconsistent, but that's because now new people are turning up with their personal horror stories of Karek's behaviour towards them (so it's not just me), and then other people are supporting him purely on the grounds that he will be rude, aggressive and intransigent. I just can't vote for that, whatever I think of his deeper motives. Sorry, but there it is. A baby with a rattle is one thing: but don't give it a box of hand grenades, please! --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 15:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Although I think that you could be more compassionate at times, you have done excellent work and are an integral part of this community; therefore, you would make a good sysop. --Z. slay3r •  Talk  21:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - There is always Misconduct if he fucks up.--Thekooks 22:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - 'Cause I know he can do the job pretty damn well.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 23:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - i dont know why i have this thing in my mind that keeps saying me that karek was a sysop already. Vouching because my subconcious make me do so. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 02:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - You contribute a hell of a lot and I have no doubt that you can do most of the required work but I just don't think we need another Grim... When we have a few more "liberal" sysops to form a balance then you might be able to convince me.--Abstain I don't feel that my previous comments were particularly fair... while I still do not think now is the time to promote another abrasive sysop, his attitude towards some users does not mean he will do a bad job. If I thought he would keep away from contentious issues for a while his hard work alone would gain my vouch.--Honestmistake 20:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
    Discussion moved to talk page. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 12:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - too quick to delete other people's posts without an attempt to find a middle ground. This causes needless antagonism. Which is a pity, as for me it overshadows the positive things he's tried to do. MoyesT RPM 11:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    Might you be referring to this edit?--Karekmaps?! 12:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    In part of course I am, as it was at this point I first heard of you. And when I visited your talk page to discuss it with you I discovered you have somewhat of a penchant for unilateral deleting. Anyway, to your credit you explained yourself even if I still disagree with you :)MoyesT RPM 12:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
    discussion moved to talk page. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 13:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - argumentative, quick to anger, and sometimes insulting we need less people like this in any position of responsibility on the wiki.--Kristi of the Dead 12:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Sure. Why not?--Thari TжFedCom is BFI! 12:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Abstain - You have very strong opinions, which is alright in and of itself- but you also frequently defend them with insults and extremely bitter argument, and can be too quick to make some edits. You're perfectly capable of being a very nice, and very helpful person, but you frequently choose to be rude instead. That said, we obviously need more sysops here, and you're a highly active user. How's a guy to vote?--FT MCDU: Black Knights 20:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Against - There are certainly other good candidates. IMO, Karek is not a good candidate, and I hope the decision makers recognize that.--FT MCDU: Black Knights 23:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Quick to argue. --Toejam 20:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Don't need another Grim. Omega 21:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Worse than Grim, and that is saying something. Already boorish and bossy without any authority, will only do more damage to the reputation of the wiki in a position of privilege. --Dylan Mak Tyme 02:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - He'll be awesome! --Kashara 04:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Yes he can be abrupt, but I've always found him to be helpful. -- Bisfan 05:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - After reading through the comments above and glancing at your contributions I realized that you are actually some sort of demonic love spawn of Lucifer and the Urban Dead Wikipedia's very own Grim s. Needless to say that fact alone was more than enough to lock in my support for you. The hair trigger temper, abrasive personality, extreme potty mouth, and unshakable belief that every action of the human race is Bad Faith simply serve as icing on the cake. --Barroom Hero 05:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm not overly sure how to take that but as an editor I respect Grim s' views and his passion for the wiki/game, even if it doesn't make him many friends he cares more than most.--Karekmaps?! 05:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I really should work on my Wiki sarcasm. Honestly, you are a useful contributer, and I think the WIKI would be better with you as a sysop. --Barroom Hero 06:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - Perhaps you're not very friendly, but you've been helpful and respectful and I think you'd be a better asset as a Sysop. --PdeqTalk* 06:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - while he is angry, he means well. so as above----SexualharrisonStarofdavid2.png Boobs.gif 23:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - I was surprised when I initially read this, as I thought you were already a Sysop; you show on a daily basis that you obviously have the knowledge and background for the role. Sometimes you say things that I disagree with, and sometimes it is the way you say it. Still, you defend your opinions fervently and I have yet to see you back down to nothing less than well argued logic. --Ryiis 14:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch Karek spent my first week online deleting everthing I did and waving madly at everything i put on the suggestions talk page. Even now, whenever I do ANYTHING wrong he tells me. Which at first pissed me off. But now I realise that in his angry kinda way he's helping make us all better wikiers. As for those people saying we don't want another Grim, of course we do. Look at the world, barring the constant threat of nuclear destruction it was much better when we had two fueding superpowers.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 18:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I fear the threat of mutually assured destruction was what kept the world safe.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 20:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Too quick with the nuclear option, to use the above superpower analogy. What kept the world "safe" in the cold war, rosslessness, was among other things the superpowers' ability to negotiate. Karek is obstinately intractable, and I don't think the school of wiki mgt he subscribes to is in this wiki's best interest. There are better ways to facilitate good wiki conduct that Karek's approach, which I'll wager is more often discouraging and turns potential contributors away than not. Besides, he might as well be Sonny's puppet.--The Envoy 20:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against I agree with most of the against comments. --Happy doodle 02:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - He seems sane enough, decently nice, and an excellent contributer. Might as well give him some powers to help out more. Also, blah blah blah, wiki is survivor biased, blah blah blah.--Lachryma☭ 06:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - In agreement with Happy doodle 2 votes above this. Also...I have bad ties with Karek. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 20:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch - As per Ryiis. --Chauntie 00:04, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Against - Karek has his pro's, being a good contributor and all, but I'd rather don't have this temperamental guy making the calls on anything of great importance without a comitee's backup. He's easily angered, obstinate when cornered and sometimes can't be trusted to develop an unbiased oppinion: something that made me wonder whom does this puppet belong to? when he first came to the wiki. Karek, I understood for a while now that you're actually nobody's puppet, but that you're easily mistaken as one is yet another proof of your little originality and why's everyone calling you "another Grim" on this bid. Not a good choice as a Sysop if you ask me. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 06:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
    Sorry but I'm gonna have to call bullshit on the bias thing, unless you can show somewhere where I have actually done that and you can back up claims to it being because of a bias. All the claims to me being "somebodies puppet" have been twice, The Envoy when he was harassing Sonny, see talk page for more info on that, and Akule in an arbitration case in which he misinterpreted what I said. Maybe you thought I was a puppet when I first interacted with you, but maybe that's because our first interactions were over Project Welcome.--Karekmaps?! 07:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch- I'll vouch for you for... pretty much no reason. -- BKM 04:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Vouch – Experienced, longtime player and wiki-contributor, highly active in the community and on wiki. Frequently active on admin pages reporting vandalism, listing items for deletion and the like (which shows he knows what sysop powers are for, unlike some of the current crop), and active in policy development. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says, but I can rely on his opinion being reasoned and usually strongly researched. Maybe a touch blunt and undiplomatic at times (I think that may be where the "another Grim" comments are coming from), but IMO he tends to be right on wiki-matters, and would make a valuable addition to the sysop team. (I could write more, but I seem to remember this promo thingie ends soon… hope I'm not too late here? Is my coupon still valid?) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
    Yep, today is actually the last day. and no, your coupon is no longer applicable. You can still purchase the kittens for 200 a head though.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 17:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Sysop_Archives/Karek/2008-01-06_Promotion&oldid=990952"