UDWiki talk:Administration/Promotions

Archive

• Archive1 - ??? - Jan 2007
• Archive2 - Feb - Oct 2007
• Archive3 - Oct 2007 - Apr 2008
• Archive4 - Apr 2008 - May 2010

Discussion

from main page

User:Jerrel Yokotory

Jerrel Yokotory (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

I'll be straightforward here, I don't think this is going to work, but here goes.
I nominate myself for sysop(I think?)
The reason I believe I should be, is because I am more involved in wiki matters,
and I do make edits in good faith.
I may not be the best formating guy, but I'm learning.
Well, that's about it.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 03:35, 13 July 2010 (BST)

Campaign statement

Jerrel Sysop Campaign Assets

№	Title	Content
00001	Logo
00002	Theme	"Never Gunna give you up" by Rick Astley
00004	Slogan	"Hell is my Helmet."
00005	The Truth	Jerrel is awesome, and that's the truth!-anomoyus

Authorised by -- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 03:35, 13 July 2010 (BST)

"Ask not what you can do for Jerrel, Ask what Jerrel can do for you" —Jerrel

Discussion

• Against - The simple fact that you have been unable to read this page and place your request in the right header is a striking example of why you're just not qualified to have buttons and responsibilities that I frankly don't believe you'll be capable of coping with. 03:40, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  There's buttons! Oh I love buttons. No, I know what it's like to be in control. I'm the leader of the 82nd, remember? And I run and change our forum. It's just wiki formatting I'm having trouble with.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 04:05, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  So why should we give you administrative powers when you're not ready for them? Your enthusiasm exists, but it's just not backed up by any actual presence in the admin sections. Chime in on deletion requests, discuss community events, and so on, and try to pick up the technical know-how around the wiki - perhaps find a personal project you can use to gain these skills, such as picking up tabling and alignment with some group templates, or understanding redirects by fixing any extraneous ones you encounter, that kind of thing. While it's true that nothing lights a fire under your ass quite like the heavy spotlight of responsibility, it's always been necessary to have sufficient grounding in the actual workings of the system before being put in a position of power within it. At present, I just don't feel that you'll be able to achieve enough with the buttons, and given that the workload on the current team is incredibly light, I feel that now is a time where any promotions taking place should really only be handed to those with a genuine knack for wiki coding and operation, who might make a difference on the team. I don't think you're there yet, by quite a bit, but it's not a gap you can't recoup if you put the effort into it. tl;dr lurk less contribute moar 04:13, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  Understood. You know, I keep on getting more reasons why I shouldn't be a sysop. Is there one why I Should be one?-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 04:22, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  No, there isn't Cyberbob  Talk  06:09, 13 July 2010 (BST)

• Against There's nothing wrong with trying, but you're not ready yet. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 03:43, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - I disagree with Poodle. This is a glaring example of what's wrong with trying. --VVV ^RPGMBCWS 03:54, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - While you may be learning still, you haven't reached a point of competency in wiki matters (Misanthropy's example being another point in case). Couple that with the fact that we have to go back over a year and a half before we reach 500 edits for you you don't even have 250 edits in over a year and a half, that you don't seem to be a regular contributor to any sort of project or maintenance around here (which demonstrates your lack of "prior interest in maintaining the community"), that you don't have a real presence on the admin pages where we can get to know you and your thought processes, and that you seem prone to stuff like this (see the stuff under jorm's vote, #22 Against) and this (a case of misdirected antagonism due to a misreading of the policy being discussed), and I'm afraid I can't support you. —Aichon— 04:10, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  Understood. I'm just, let's say, Defensive is all.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 04:22, 13 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - lol Cyberbob  Talk  05:15, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Read those guidelines up above, and then do that. Get a wiki-project.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:57, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  Does not posting count as a wiki-project because if so I have just the thing for him Cyberbob  Talk  08:05, 13 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - I'm not going to bother saying what others already mentioned above. --Thadeous Oakley 11:05, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Needs more activity--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 11:25, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - A bit overkill, but.. Technical Pacifist 11:32, 13 July 2010 (BST)

Revenant

• question - what's changed since your last bid? not a lot by the looks of it. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:08, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  I am active on the wiki, have the free time to work on wiki projects, and have not been nominated as a joke by Grim. As I said in my bid above. Got any questions I haven't already answered? Oh, and I've now got mobile internets access, so I can edit and (assuming this bid goes well) psyop while out, too. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:13, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  If you want to use your free time helping out the UD community, why do you have to be an op? To be honest and not as offensive as I probably sound, the only reason that springs to mind is that there's some sort of lol quota on a forum somewhere which needs meeting. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 04:17, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  That's also on the to-do list, TBH. And I'll respond more fully when I get the chance, just heading out the door ATM. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:26, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  That's cool, no hurry. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:19, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  Also, I have another question. How come when you (and other non-'wiki addicts', if you're cool speaking on their behalf) run for promotion, you feel the need to meatpuppet the crap out of the bid? Before anyone judges please note I'm of course not against meatpuppeting, nor for it, I'm just curious why you do it when A/PM is a system that is designed to diametrically oppose the influence of meatpuppets? -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 12:31, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  Eh, none of my vouches were meatpuppets, except for the one that couldn't read and voted me by mistake. Or, if they were puppets then I had no knowledge of it. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 14:34, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  "Meatpuppet" is such an ugly word. This may come as a shock to you, but the wiki is hardly the centre of the UD-verse. In fact, most people play quite happily without consulting it much if at all. Instead, I would say that I am attempting to reach out to the broader Urban Dead community and encourage participation from different demographics. In fact, I can name at least one person who has returned from at least ~3 years of absence due to my linking this on Facebook. How can that be a bad thing? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 15:13, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  So basically meatpuppet is an ugly word, but you basically deconstruct your actions as getting people who don't use the wiki much at all but know what it is, to bring support to your bid where they would otherwise be spending that time (for example ~3 years) away from the wiki? Doesn't sound like meatpuppeting at all. You didn't even answer my question either? -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 22:27, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  I don't think he voted for me – he can't stand the wiki – just started playing again. Also, like I said, UD community and UD Wiki community have overlap but are by no means identical. If you only post on the wiki you disenfranchise those who do not spend much time on here but still have an interest in favour of the more vocal minority. Also, I thought I sorta answered it in one of my other responses below? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:59, 29 March 2011 (BST)

  Wait, so the reason you get people here in hordes is not to dogpile your promotions bid, but to extend other metagaming media to ud players who don't wiki much? -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 04:26, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  Have you ever thought that there's a reason a lot of people avoid the wiki like the plague? These people know me and what I stand for. I'm not telling them what to write, as I'm sure you can see. I'd point to Toast's Against as an example but he's busy avoiding the place like despite my encouragement. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 05:02, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  I couldn't care less about why people avoid the wiki TBH. I would like for his place to be used lots, and I am always trying to help out people who have a keen interest in the place where I can, but if people don't come here that's just how it is. Having you ask them once every month to come here and support someone/thing they don't care about won't improve the situation, lest you being promoted. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:50, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  Yes, I can see that… ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:24, 31 March 2011 (BST)

  I said people who have a keen interest in the place, not people who come here cause they're asked and fail the one thing they have to do right to have their vote counted. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 07:39, 31 March 2011 (BST)

  I have no idea who that is and as far as I know I've never spoken to them before. (Sorry if you're someone I should know, Keira!) I was just being helpful and friendly to someone who clearly has not done much wiki-ing before but is just as clearly interested. You know, serving the wiki community, like being a sysop is supposed to be about. :) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:27, 31 March 2011 (BST)

  Wow. So, you just went and undid all my effort to help that person out because you want to swing the vote your way? (See what I'm doing right here, casting aspersions on your motives? The difference is, I think you genuinely believe it when you do it.) That's, uh… that's something, right there. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 23:18, 31 March 2011 (BST)

  Are you capable of reading rules? The rules say the only valid votes MUST end with a four tilde timestamp. If they can't manage that, then it's illegitimate. You cannot also replace it with anything that will suffice a four-tilde timestamp done by the user who is making the vote. If I voted for Liberal last week, by smearing my shit all over the ballot paper, would it have counted if you just wiped the shit away and place the vote I wanted yourself? Nooooo. And you'll also notice the rules that it says "it will be stricken by a moderator". It is my duty, I have to do it to every instance of illegal signage and I do- not just to ones that don't vote the same way I do (check the history you idiotic bellend). Couldn't give less of a shit if CK got in. But on that topic, seriously? Am I a devil because I do my job and it stops a vote going against what I voted? Does it make me a saint if they voted the same way then? Holy shit your idea of bias is as childish as Cybebob's. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:15, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  I can read; can you? I repeat: show me in the rules. (Hint: It's not there.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:33, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  Template:HistoricalVotingRules --VVV ^RPGMBCWS 03:41, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  Thank you, TripleU, for having actually the decency to provide a fucking link instead of vague references. Don't know how I missed that – well, it's not in the rules at the top, must've skimmed past – but it's stupid bureaucratic bullshit and needs to be changed. I'll add that to the to-do list. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:42, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  Also, emailed the user in question as a courtesy, since not everyone has talk page notifications. As she did go to the effort of voting, it'd be a shame to see that go to waste because of obsession with red tape. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:44, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  Sorry for thinking "As is said in the rulebox to the right of your vote" is not good enough for something so obvious -.- -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 12:43, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  I see nothing in the rules for conducting voting (at the top of the page, which I linked) which requires that template be displayed, but I already conceded this point. PROTIP: Learn to stop arguing after you've won; nobody likes a sore winner. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:32, 2 April 2011 (BST)

  -___________________________- -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:48, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  It means that a very very large part of the player base knows and supports Revenant and is willing to vouch for him. Stop trying to make out like being respected by most/a large part of the game community means he's not trustworthy, it's shit and it's a part of how the wiki's lost the community. I mean shit, the guy is a mod on all four major metagame boards somehow and you think he's untrustworthy? --Karek^maps?! 05:09, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  I ctrl+f'd this entire conversation and didn't find the word "trust" or "untrustworthy" in any of the above dialogue, so I don't know what you're talking about. Didn't find Karek either, odd. Can he be trusted? Why not. Will he be able to do the job properly? Eeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhh. The only time I've seen Revenant deal with rules and policy on this wiki he's tried appallingly to just rules-lawyer his way through the argument to get his way. Granted, sometimes he stands down if told/proven/argued to be wrong. But some times, he chucks colossal shitties, then creates drama across multiple admin pages just incase the fallout wasn't crap enough, let alone the crying we had to read when he wanted to be deescalated too. Ugh. Given, I haven't had him act like this since, but given a new conflict of interest come along I won't hold my breath for a changed man, sorry Rev. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:47, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  You quoted me in your ruling for that case and let me tell you, there was nothing wrong or drama-full about his arguments there. They actually bring up some good points that a more rationally minded group probably could have used for a discussion on the extensions of specific vandalism rules and precedents and their relevance to blatantly meta roleplaying. In that case specifically he was escalated for something that we normally always used for people trying to recruit for groups without any basis as to interest not users who have entered into a discussion or vote being swayed to change it(which we've actually always overlooked when done on promotions, policy, etc. when the user had already voted and thus shown involvement in discussion). Well that and claiming that a blatant joke about a user that would never ever ever be repromoted or, probably, unbanned being nominated for promotion as a sysop. That's crap and no more vandalism, drama mongering, or bad judgement than, say, a promotion attempt by a recently escalated vandal who was involved in a poorly handled sysop ruling that partially mocks the reasons for one of the sysops involved. The only drama in either of those is generated largely by the user who didn't assume good faith or good humor and when that's relevant to the reason why he would be beneficial to the team(he doesn't start at the assumption that all rules violations are vandalism) that's nothing but a good reason to promote him. It's like if we'd denied promoting you because you knew and were involved in some of the dramas of Jed and Nallan simply because we'd decided that you're magically incapable of understanding or enforcing rules. --Karek^maps?! 06:03, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  The arguments behind that case are irrelevant in this context (though I feel forced to, for the 4000th time, discredit 80% of the personal shit you just said on the basis of the sysop team are the ones that ruled on the case rather than the one man who brought it there and didn't rule). If he thinks he's wrong there are more mature ways to deal with it than immature. He hit about 75% of the immature ways head on. If you're going to butt in with conversations and try and argue over the subsequent tangents can you please stop and address some of the things I said? Otherwise please just deal with this elsewhere like my talk or talk:A/PM or let Revenant deal with it here himself. Please. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 06:25, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  How have I not done that, you brought up that discussion as immature and drama mongering because as an involved party, and the person who brought the case, you viewed it as such. You brought it up as your reason for why you feel he can't do the job. You brought up the Grim case as him drama mongering even, I pointed out it wasn't drama but a very blatant joke. You brought up claims of him meatpuppeting, I pointed out that he's trusted by these communities and people being willing to vouch for him from communities he's moderated is the exact opposite of meatpuppeting and is the point of this page. You brought up concerns about his ability to do the job because of these cases, I pointed out that we had the same concerns about you but faith enough that you knew the rules and had a valuable viewpoint that we, while not always in agreement with, thought would be a useful contribution to the administrative discussion. Put all of the personal crap aside, he's a good levelheaded user that's shown himself trusted by the community and able to work with diverse groups of the playerbase quite amicably, that alone should be reason enough.--Karek^maps?! 06:38, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  How can I possibly be the biased one when you attempt to discredit the ENTIRE event as not drama mongering (or, stupider yet, not drama at all) because it was in good humour? What? Why the hell do you think I'm not going to promote him just because I think/know he'll do a shit job? Why the fuck are you still even here, can you go 10 contribs without trying to butt heads with me via walls of texts over shit that has nothing to do with you? Are you going to go for promotions now so you can just have your say via one bolded word and be done with it, rather than waste my time with your fucking arguing? Holy fucking god Karek.

  Back onto the topic, I don't think you have the right definition of meatpuppet to work off. Google it, if Rev recruited them simply for this function it is most definitely meatpuppetting. Again, I'm pretty indifferent to whether he does it or not (I am one of the two people on this wiki who has the power to nullify every single one of them if I so wished and no that is not a threat or prediction of my future actions so don't bother complaining about it), I was just curious as to why he should bother doing it, then tried to make a point of how hollow his excuse was and its righteousness. Again, to re-iterate, if they wouldn't have given input on this without a nudge from Revenant, it's meatpuppeting, regardless of good faith by the users or their genuinity (both of which, I agree with you, are genuine). I also discussed the drama mongering above too so I guess I'm done with this reply. awaiting another 1,900 characters of time waste -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 06:51, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  I guess the standard for claiming I'm around just to butt heads with someone has gotten pretty small if all it takes these days is to try and have a discussion relevant to one A/VB case about how it was dealt with and one promotions bid about how you're distorting his actions with your views of them/how he's shown community trust. It's actually kinda sad really, there was a time where you were at least sorta reasonable enough to listen to someone outside your head. --Karek^maps?! 07:06, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  You're breakin my heart. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 07:17, 30 March 2011 (BST)

  For the record, DDR, I still consider that a bullshit call and a glaring example of assuming bad faith when none was intended. Another reason I am making this bid is I think we could use some more considered opinions on the sysop team with experience in a broader variety of wiki (and other) environments who realise just how hostile and insular this environment is. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:27, 31 March 2011 (BST)

  You mean more people to bail out the cool klub? As if the team hadn't become a drama fest with all the newbies coming in already -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:21, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  The only “cool klub” I can think of on this wiki is your mates, “2 Cool”, but I'm guessing you meant something else seeing as I haven't seem them around for a while. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:42, 1 April 2011 (BST)

User:Axe Hack

OK, guys...last time I checked, the nomination does not get moved under Community Discussion until the nominee accepts the bid. I have not accept the bid yet, and have been moving it back to Still Requiring Vouches as the bid has not yet been accepted. I'm not moving it back up a third time now... -_- --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

That's true, I completely forgot about the accepting bit. Sorry! -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 04:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Piss, or get off the pot -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 05:19 4 February 2011 (BST)

User:Spiderzed

• Onoz meet pupptz. Just because I stick up for someone when you sling mud wrongly, does not mean I'm hounding anyone, especially when I'm responding to you doing something that's pretty much what you've just accused me of. 20:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  Sorry, when did anybody even vaguely mention meatpuppetry. This is about my opinion on a sysop candidate, and the fact that whenever i put forward an opinion you don't like, you spew out hundreds of characters of attack. Get a life.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  I took the liberty to take this to the talk page, as it seemed to be more about the personal feud between two third-parties, and to 0% about the actual bid. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

  Makes sense to me.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

As "victim" of said flaming, I'll make a short remark: Stupid comments aimed at offending me by guys like Harrison and Zombielord is fine. If they want to look idiots than that's their choice. I'll either ignore or mock them, since taking them seriously isn't worth it. That said, your comment (looking at you Spider) where you basically go through the possibilities of an early demotion and actually encourage him to continue his flaming isn't something I take to good-faith :/. His question was retarded, don't start taking it seriously unless you're fine with his tone.

Oh, despite your sarcastic remark at this, I actually would consider a demotion or early re-evaluation if people were to express that I wasn't doing my job right. I stated this at both my bids, since I do consider community support to be of vital importance when being 'Op. I think Yonn makes a good point, and I hope you provide me your stand on the points I raised. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 22:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Calling him a friend would probably go too far, but I'm definitively on friendly terms with Harisson, so I've viewed it as the right thing to do to answer his question.

It should be blatant that both us aren't fans of your bid, and at least I'm still under the impression that you primarily wanted to put the title into your pocket without the workload that is usually expected from an op. If you disprove us on the job, all the better (I'd rather have another useful op to enhance the wiki and be proven wrong, than to have a lazy or useless op and be proven right). But as of now, I still have my doubts, and especially doubt that you'd be the type to consider an early demotion/RE if it would be sensible.

(On an unrelated note, this discussion should be on the actual bid as it concerns it, not on the talk page. What was moved here was the continuing personal banter between Yon and Mis, not Yon's original objection and Mis' replies that concern it directly.) -- Spiderzed▋ 23:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't asking about my bid. I was asking if you think encouraging flaming is a good idea. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 07:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

As long as no rules get broken, people are free to do what they want on UDWiki. If someone asks a rules question, I answer it to the best of my ability. I consider the job of an op as that of a public service go-to man (whether on wiki-coding, rules or whatever else), not to act as a judge or moderator outside of strictly defined administrative processes as A/VB or A/PM. -- Spiderzed▋ 14:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I personally disagree. In the strictest sense of the word, you're right, people can say whatever they want as long as it confines within the rules. However, just because there isn't a civility policy is no reason for being uncivil. While it's not a task for Sysops (as they are indeed not Moderators) I still believe flaming should be discouraged, for the sake of a more mature and friendly community. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 16:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, harassment is a bannable offence - Iscariot recieved a weeks ban for it back in June 2009, iirc.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Well that was more a case of abusing admin pages maliciously. Too many bullshit A/M or A/VB cases will get you escalated, general hostility will not, as a general rule of thumb. 19:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Iscariot did receive an escalation for overall hostility, but that was indeed more of an exception. There definitely is a line that you can cross, but that would be extreme situations. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 19:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

It was a very dodgy case in general, but I think others have been done for continued harassment against specific targets. I'll have a delve in to archives at some time, because a list of precedents is obviously such a bad idea.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I know it make VERY little difference but just in case it's worth mentioning, the week ban should have been for 24 hours. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 22:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

That it was.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Karek might have mentioned harassment, but the case seemed rather to be about flooding A/M and A/VB, as Mis already pointed out (especially as the same action by SA was reported to both A/M and A/VB). Plus, that case generally wasn't the greatest hour of sysopping the wiki has ever seen, looking alone at the double standard about the sigs, so it should only be used as precedent when no other straw can be grabbed.
Spamming admin pages is a different thing than harassment (as most recently seen in the Cornholioo cases, where posting on his talk page against his notice wasn't vandalism (at least not without arbies backing it up), but him spamming admin pages with anti-semitic garbage was).
As for flaming, I'm not anyone's nanny. The users here are either grown up or at least spoiled beyond my help, so I don't see the point in making them behave. Unless their behaviour disrupts the wiki or the rules, which is already well covered by A/VB or arbies.
tl;dr: When Harisson is mean to you, don't come crying to me because I carry a badge and should use "mah authoritee" to discourage flaming. Take it instead to arbies and get him out of your hair (or escalated when he uses your talk page). That has always been the standard way to deal with such drama. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually it was more of a combination of the two and isn't an applicable precedent for most cases. Specifically Iscariot had been, over the course of about 2 years frequently making misconduct cases and A/VB cases over literally every little thing targeted at specific sysops whom he didn't like, this can be seen in links coming from mine or SA's pages to A/VB easiest. In this specific case he went so far as to, after getting a unanimous ruling of Not Vandalism, report SA to A/M for exactly the same thing to try and get a different result/overturn the previous ruling. It was clearly an agenda against the user and simply an attempt to get him escalated for the sake of getting him escalated. It wasn't particularly questionable beyond the perma-ban attempt which is what all of the drama largely related to it was over and, as the reporter I'll gladly admit, far beyond the scope of the case. It was shitting up the admin pages like he was prone to but it was also because he was prone to do it in a harassment manner and is a precedent for harassment reporting escalation not spamming admin pages escalation should anyone ever try to tell you otherwise. --Karek^maps?! 14:19, 2 April 2011 (BST)

Meatpuppets? Unwarranted confidence votes? What is this fatheaded nonsense? Spiderzed is cautious, perceptive (enough to catch sneaky zergs who don't want to be caught), and thinks before he types. Mis is only two of those things, and look where he is. Eh's a pretty cool guy and doesn't afraid of anything. Also, Free Iscariot. And furthermore: Ban Harrison. --DT^PK 04:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

fuck you DT. and cry me a river mistergamer. damnit i was traveling and didn't notice any of this.-- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

bitch 12:30 2 April 2011 (UTC)

DevilAsh

Nice comeback man! Keep it up, you'll be a great wiki member in no time. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 22:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

This is a discussion point and so, not suitable for the main page. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 23:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Jerrel

• Jerrel Yokotory (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | vndl data)

Jerrel Sysop Campaign Assets

№	Title	Content
00001	Logo
00002	Theme	"You Haven't Seen The Last Of Me" by Jer (born Jerrelyn Sarkisian)
09453	Personal quote	"I may not be the best formating guy, but I'm learning."
00174	Campaign Cartoon	"The Tom and Jerrel Show" Realistic depiction of Jerrel's constant conflict with the downpressing cats. All the violence in this show is based on actual A/VB and A/A drama.
00001	The Truth	In 2 weeks from now, it will be April 15. And Jerrel will be a sysop by that date.

I'm really amazed at the fact that this hasn't been put up any earlier. While there have been very good reasons to criticise Jerrel in the past, he has massively shaped up ever since.

He hasn't done a single bad edit in months - not in five months, not in six months, no, in friggin' seven months! That beats even Ross' track record, who has been put up on A/VB once during that time.

Apart of that, he is a nice guy who actively fights cussing on the wiki.

What could possibly go wrong by promoting someone like him? -- Spiderzed▋ 15:21, 1 April 2011 (BST)

• Strong Vouch - I like his campaign cartoon. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:21, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  ha! love the time stamp on this-- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

  

  bitch 15:34 1 April 2011 (UTC)

  Rather start to vouch for Jerrel and his anti-cussing campaign, you massively retarded faggot. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:36, 1 April 2011 (BST)

  how about you both go fuck yourselfs twice with thads fat head.-- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

  

  bitch 15:41 1 April 2011 (UTC)

• Against might be an even bigger tool than thad if that's at all possible -- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking
  
  bitch 15:35 1 April 2011 (UTC)

weak vouch oh yer right. i am massively retarded.-- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

bitch 15:46 1 April 2011 (UTC)

• Strong Vouch - As Spider. ~ _{15:44, 1 April 2011}
• Incredible Hulkingly Strong Vouch - His sound advice and patience in our many long chats on IRC encouraged me to keep playing UD when I was at my lowest. And, he can fly. I love him. ~ Kempy “YaketyYak” | ◆◆◆ | CAPD |
   
  16:09, 1 April 2011 (BST)
• Against - way to biest for his own good --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 16:46, 1 April 2011 (BST)
• Who? er... MULTIPLE ORGASM VOUCH - I heard he was working on a time machine, so everything is kosher. Well, except for the time machine, I heard there was meat next to cheese. --THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 17:42, 1 April 2011 (BST)
• Questions
  1. What is different this time from the previous times you've asked for promotion?
  2. I notice on your talk page that you said that you wouldn't run again. What made you change your mind? Asheets 20:04, 1 April 2011 (BST)

     he hasn't acceptced the bid yet any way ash -- The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking

     

     bitch 00:31 2 April 2011 (UTC)

• With a campaign this awesome, how could he possibly steer us wrong‽ Jerrel for Mod Sysop Bureaucrat God! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:23, 2 April 2011 (BST)
• Fucking Against - he "fights cussing on the wiki"? Fuck that! --  ▧  ^{: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :} 08:32, 2 April 2011 (BST)

It's no longer April fools... so that'll be quite enough of that. The user is unlikely to accept, given their last post was in August -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:52 2 April 2011 (BST)