User talk:Akule

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Revision as of 02:20, 25 February 2011 by Rorybob (talk | contribs) (I have)
Jump to navigationJump to search
You've Been Schooled By:
navigation: main - talk - archive - sandbox - wine country - signature - navigation - Akule News - Cannibal Corps - Copyright Project - Journal
Because of two arbitration verdicts, the user The Fifth Horseman and Max Grivas are totally not allowed to post on or edit this page under any circumstances and user Grim s cannot post on this page in a non-official manner.

Please post new topics at the bottom of the page. Thanks!


Wai do you cum back only wen AS is in truble? :( --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 04:13, 17 June 2009 (BST)

I have him on retainer--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 06:07, 17 June 2009 (BST)
I was summoned for hunting down a zerger, and eventually that meant I would look at the wiki. So, how have you been? :D --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 00:24, 18 June 2009 (BST)
Tired and bored. On the positive note, I'm in the slow process of writing up a massive overhaul of the wiki's systems.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 02:33, 19 June 2009 (BST)

The Thing About Reevaluation

Is that we all already know what the views on the sysops are, all they do is allow for crats to have a reason to deny certain sysops the position for petty reasons. That being said the occasional cleaning of the house isn't a bad thing but when you have stuff like the open discussion vote that is so drastically different from the reality of the user's opinion as little as a month or two later then you've got your real issue with bringing the repromotion thing up at all. Basically these are things that should come after some real, qualitative, hard discussion on the parts of users in a neutral position to make that decision, sort of an arb com on sysops except there's no one in a chain that would be able to do that right now without being kevan, it's all to interconnected. 'Crats are basically sysops in control of promotions but they're far from neutral and have long had a tendency to behave in an agenda driven manner, sysops tend to have their own personal disputes with each other for personal or not so personal reasons almost always arising from opposing rulings, and the general users is far from discriminatory enough to have the required level of quality on the issue. If you really want to do it like that you'll probably want to set up a group of users specifically to that purpose, throw in ban review as one of their privs and just develop a whole chain, possibly make it so they have the final say on requests for starting a sysop reevaluation, a ban evaluation, and an arbitration ruling evaluation but have not power to start these, just basically the ability to say "Yeah, looks like there's enough reason to reopen this to discussion". --Karekmaps?! 01:19, 30 July 2009 (BST)

That's an interesting idea. Honestly, I wouldn't mind setting something like that up. We should set up an open discussion about the idea and see what people think of it. As for the reason for creating the re-evaluations, I noticed that it seems like it is something that the community wanted (and had wanted in the past, just not in the form of my previous policy). Oh, and it's not a vote. I set it up like the promotions bid where the community gets a chance to say something. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 19:45, 31 July 2009 (BST)
That's kinda the problem, the promotions system as of current is a vote unless you have someone that knows what is meant by that in the position, that's why Boxy basically had the position for life as 'crat. The current promotions system really isn't good for discovery of consensus, it tends to either being treated like a vote and the 'crats promoting based on that or like a personal battle ground and the 'crats deciding by personal opinion before the community weighs in, there's rarely any real discussion on a non-personal level. --Karekmaps?! 23:13, 31 July 2009 (BST)
You obviously don't know Link is all I'm going to say. Cyberbob  Talk  03:54, 1 August 2009 (BST)
I know link very well. --Karekmaps?! 04:24, 1 August 2009 (BST)
Please explain how you got the impression that he does anything other than what the promotions system was intended to be. It seems to me that you're setting up something of a catch-22; if a crat promotes someone and they just happen to have a majority of vouches it's OMG VOTING, if they do the same when they don't have a majority it's OMG PERSONAL OPINION NO TAKING ANYTHING ELSE INTO ACCOUNT. Cyberbob  Talk  04:30, 1 August 2009 (BST)
The thing you're missing here is that it's irrelevant so much as the proposed system is completely dependent on the good will of a basically randomly elected person to allow for real discussion on the validity of a reassessment and then it's only tied to promotions. There have been incidents of it in the past but even that isn't that relevant beyond that it's setting up a system that would both tempt and encourage misuse regardless of the character of the 'crat that is given that opportunity. I'm looking at a more full and real solution, one that allows uninvolved assessment of admin actions in a committee like structure so as to make it possible to have a true and universal wiki process review system. --Karekmaps?! 05:24, 1 August 2009 (BST)
Good luck but you're literally never going to make it work. Not because you're dumb or anything but it just won't happen due to physical impossibility. Cyberbob  Talk  05:30, 1 August 2009 (BST)
Well, that's the funny thing, the issue isn't getting it done so much as getting past the assumption that it can't be done. It's actually really simple once that is done and that's always been the major issue on this wiki. --Karekmaps?! 05:37, 1 August 2009 (BST)
I'm not making any assumptions. Cyberbob  Talk  05:49, 1 August 2009 (BST)
I'm up for setting up the discussion and seeing where it leads. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:44, 3 August 2009 (BST)

What users would you even suggest for something like this karek? I mean you say it's not the sysops and the vast majority of regular users who hang around and actually know whats going on are seen by the sysops as biased and establishment hating etc. I challenge you to come up with 3 potential users you think could actually fill this sort of position. --xoxo 01:36, 1 August 2009 (BST)

You, me, and Iscariot. :P --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 04:07, 1 August 2009 (BST)
You're posting on the page of at least one of them. --Karekmaps?! 04:24, 1 August 2009 (BST)
Which means me and jed aren't them. :(((-- High Overlord and Lead Conspirator of the Administrative Rebellion. Want help? 05:28, 1 August 2009 (BST)
This sounds like something that Matthew Fahrenheit was born to do.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 10:54, 1 August 2009 (BST)
No it doesn't. The only thing Matthew Fahrenheit was born to do was to whinge and whine and cry demagogue while doing the exact same thing himself. Hey, you should make him one of your "close personal friends"! Cyberbob  Talk  12:42, 1 August 2009 (BST)

My Crotch

Thanks!! <3 :D CROTCH GRABBING WILL PREVAIL! - Love from Swing XOXOXTalk 10:09, 11 August 2009 (BST)

My deletion request..

...was already there. O.o--Orange Talk 00:47, 18 August 2009 (BST)

Whoops. I apparently messaged the wrong person. Sorry about that. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 00:46, 19 August 2009 (BST)


They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Thank you for letting me know what the story was: this game has so many folks doing so many weird things. Actually the case in question led to me removing my Alt from the RHVP because of conflicts with DA's policy that I had been unaware of, so Mr Darkgrave is no longer my concern-although he is ruining the reputation of a good bunch of guys by not correcting his act and resolving the matter. He did say he would immediately stop zerging. Based on your info, it is hard to believe he will change his tune, but I would like to hope he would consider the group. In any case, it was very good of you to give me the heads up. Let me know if you need any info--Belisarius17 03:31, 24 June 2010 (BST)

I have

faint memories of A/VB cases to do with removing other peoples comments on admin pages or something, which is why I was tentative about removing your comment, but it seems I don't need to worry. Thanks for the heads up and removing the request, by the way. :3 -- Rahrah is pumped that he's going to lose YET ANOTHER Manhunt. 02:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)