UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/MisterGame/2011-01-24 Promotion

Administration » Sysop Archives » MisterGame » 2011-01-24 Promotion

This page is an archive of MisterGame's Promotions candidacy. If you wish to speak with this candidate, please use their Talk page. If you believe that the candidate has abused the abilities and privileges granted them by this promotion, please report them for misconduct.

Thadeous Oakley

• MisterGame (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | vndl data)

Time to give this another go.

It's been at least half a year now since my last serious attempt. (I highly recommend reading it). Most of what I said there still stands. I haven't changed that much as a person since then, and if I would tell you about my history, or who I am I would be pretty much repeating my previous bid.

Ever since then I have continued my activity, in again most of the drama-prone areas. And drama there has been, some of which I was personally involved. Still I handled myself during those times well enough I believe. Again, referring to my old bid, experience in A/A, A/VB and A/M since 2008. I'll say what I think, directly and honestly. There have been some moments, especially in my troubled past, where I was a bit too compassionate leading me into (personal) conflicts but I put those times past me. I try to be open to criticism, but in the end the skill that I deem most important to have in drama sections, is the ability to get along with people you just had an incredible heated discussion with. To overcome each others disagreements is the key to any sort of harmony and respect needed in a community of any sorts. This issue was certainly something in the last six months. If you want to compare me to the other sysops, I have somewhat common ground with probably...DDR (hope he doesn't feel offended now) minus a lot of (life) experience. Not because I necessarily always agree with him (I don't) but more in his approach of things. Moving on:

I chipped in here and there with some paper work contributions. Deletions, protections, created a policy (that was eventually shot down) fixing some stuff. However, as a janitor these things were mostly minor, and certainly not anything spectacular. I'll always do my share of this stuff, as regular user and as potential sysops, but I'm not going sugarcoat this, I'm nothing more then average as a janitor.

Not much has changed, and you may ask yourself if that's good time considering my last bid failed. Well, I think I did actually almost nailed a promotion last time. Grown a bit wiser too. Not to mention my vandal history is now...history. My last infraction being in December 09, I think I have overcome most of my devious flaws. Still not perfect, never will too, but I think I can handle the job and responsibilities.

Sincerely, --Thadeous Oakley Talk 11:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S There are 2 small activity gaps in my contributions from the past 6 months. These were real-life related. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 11:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

• Question Why do you want to be a sysop? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 14:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  For pretty much the same reasons last time around. I still would like a more prominent voice on the admin sections, curious how I would do it as sysops, be an asset to the team, and if won't work out likely demote/early re-evaluate myself. You may wonder why it took so long since my first attempt, and the truth is, I do too. Time has flown, and so much happened during that time both here and in real-life I guess lost track of my ambitions for a while. It was trouble finding a good moment too, but yeah here I am now. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 15:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

• Follow up. How have you dealt with the issues raised in your last two appearances on this page? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Two main issues I could find was lack of paper work/janitor/maintenance and some people (Like Boxy, but he wasn't the only one) were still a bit of worried about past mistakes (see vandal history, conflicts, zerg etc). I think I have firmly proven the latter to be a thing of the past. I handle myself better in drama, I don't think I have a conflict with anyone (right guys?), no vandal infraction in over a year, no cheating etc.
  

  As for the former, I tried to tackle it by doing more helpful tasks. I did some varied stuff but like I said, it's not my most exceptional quality. I don't consider that bad though, I have done a share over the months in pretty much in any section and I know how these systems work. Might need to pull the leeway card though. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 18:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

• Question How do you feel you've fulfilled the following criteria, particularly the section I've bolded?
• Prior interest in maintaining the community.

We define this as clear evidence that the candidate is already performing maintenance tasks and taking leadership roles on the wiki. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Depends on the definition of leadership on a wiki. Sometimes I chip along on what other people have started, sometimes I take the initiative (like starting a policy, nominate someone, take someone to A/VB). I do take charge if I think it is needed. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 10:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• Question - I've given off in the past about absenteeism (cf/General, Cheese). Do you forsee these absences being a repeated occurence or just relative one-offs? 15:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Not entirely sure what you mean here. The General is unlikely to ever return after his demotion, (pretty obvious he was only here for the powers) as for Cheese, well, his absence was repeated at least once after his last re-evaluation. On his current evaluation I'm slightly leaning towards keeping Cheese to his promise by letting him prove his activeness as a regular user.
  

  As for the issue of absence itself, some people don't mind but some do. I know I do mind. If your inactive for a long period of time, then just demote yourself. If you're not here you don't need the powers. All that happens if you don't resign and you come back after months, you'll likely have missed important stuff, don't recognize the new faces, you got rusty, and generally lost touch with the community. Trying to carry on like that is asking for mistakes. While if you did resign, and you were truly a capable sysops this wouldn't happen. Example: Linkthewindow, great op back in the day, comes back and reacquaints himself with everyone, does a few tasks here and there, and goes up for re-promotion within 3 weeks. No problem, and the issue of absence doesn't play a role. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 15:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  I meant your own inactivity - is it likely to continue, or is it pretty much done with? I was simply referring to the others to show I've a history of not tolerating it. 16:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Oh! Well I don't think going up for promotion only to be inactive works, so yeah pretty much done with it. Also those 2 periods lasted 2 weeks? Certainly not months, and I actually still checked almost daily, it's just that I didn't had the time for discussions. If it ever came to something like months, I'd demote myself for that time period. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 18:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

• Against - Looking through your contributions of the last few months, you hang out a lot on the opinion pages, but do little maintenance. There would have been the perfect opportunity right now to get back into the janitorial stuff with GSGM11, which you completely missed but for adding some blank lines. A sys-op is a janitor first and foremost, an area you direly need to get back in to be an asset. Get your hands dirty for a bit and return then. Not a minute earlier. -- Spiderzed▋ 16:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Thanks for reminding me of that, there was something I wanted to do relating to the GSGM, namely moving a talkpage discussion which I forgot. As for the actual work, this is a silly excuse, but before I managed to look into it, most of the work was done, and almost all group were contacted. Which is impressive, considering the thing started 2 days ago. But you're right, I'm haven't done too much maintenance. Like I said in my statement, it's a weak point. I can promise improvement, I'll certainly use protection and deletions powers, but that's not doing anything for my bid now, and you're free to against, but I wouldn't call it an all defying trait. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 18:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  SE-3 and parts of NW-2 are still up for grabs. And I'd actually call a lack of janitorial activity an all defying trait for a prospective op, because maintenance should be 80+ percent of what you should do with your op buttons. -- Spiderzed▋ 18:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Not what I saw. NW-2 and SE-3 just haven't been claimed yet by respectively Mis and Maverick. I can try checking after two weeks and help with clean-up, but that's beside this discussion. Anyhow, you're right, you aren't always ruling, you'd be doing a good bit of maintenance as a sysops. But it's easier to protect and delete stuff, then it is to rule. Don't get me wrong, janitoring is hard enough work, taking patience and time. But it's not as easily learned as maneuvering through the minefields of A/VB and A/M. Precedence, understanding of rules, ethics, (im)partially, policy and of course conflicts, it takes a while getting your head wrapped around it. I guess I'm kinda the opposite of Vapor there. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 18:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Fuck I can't read. Scratch that first bit, mistook the 2010 template for the one of 2011. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 18:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  Have seen that you have now jumped on the GSGM bandwagon. I mulled about changing my vote, but I've decided that I explicitely won't change to Abstain or Vouch, but will stick with my Against. I shouldn't have needed to tell you to in the first place, but as a sys-op, you should pro-actively detect and fill out such gaps, rather than to have others nagging you and pulling you on the nosering to janitorial work. After this show, I have serious doubts that you will keep up the actual work, but am rather under the impression that you will start again to slack as soon as you have the op title in your pocket, only to break out into another surge of janitorial activity no sooner than the incoming A/RE. I'd feel far, far more comfortable if you would have a continuous track record of janitorial work. If you need ideas on that, look here. While day-to-day maintenance on UDwiki is well served, there is still enough stuff in that list that suffers regularly from slacking, such as creating the new A/VB and A/SD page and archiving the old one each month, cycling old DS/Developing Guides, cycling old suburb news or cycling outdated recruitment ads. Of course, they are all served right now... Which is just another reason to let you better wait for another few months to see if you keep up the work, rather than to decide solely on your current surge. -- Spiderzed▋ 19:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

• As Spidey, except this is an Abstain. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Promote - I'm actually going to mostly agree with what spiderzed said. You should really get involved in the janitor stuff, as any active member of the community should. But I think it would be fun to see you mucking about in A/VB as I'm sure you wouldn't be afraid to go with your opinions there. Also if you're this committed to running for sysop you should be given a chance to show your stuff. Good luck to you, sir.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 20:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - I wasn't ready to offer a vouch last time, but I am this time. Thad has been a constant and helpful voice in the admin sections for many months now. When he has an opinion on a matter, he isn't afraid to voice it, and he's capable of acknowledging when he misunderstood something or simply made a bad call, which are both absolutely invaluable traits. He doesn't disagree just for the sake of disagreeing, and has offered a lot of useful insight into various matters. His janitorial work could use some improvement, sure, but, I'd trust him with the admin section already, and we could use another voice or two on A/VB, honestly. —Aichon— 20:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - See how he does on the job. -MHSstaff 21:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - Thad's a good guy. He knows what he's doing, and he's certainly restrained himself a lot where he might not have done a year ago. Brilliant example of a user who's reformed and is now the ideal sysop candidate; active, cares about the wiki, willing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch - Actiive member of the community, been around for a reasambly long time as well.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 22:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Voooouch - I mulled things over, looked at contribs and the old vandal cases. Seems like Thad has matured a lot and I think he can be trusted with the buttons. He speaks his mind and I respect that. He's active and has been active for some time now. I wouldn't mind at all having him on the team. ~ 07:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
• Thad is the type of person who screams at me "trying too hard". Either you have the personality to be a mod, or you dont. He doesn't. I would trust him with admin duties, such as deletions, or moves... but not oversight pages like A/VB or A/M, and it seems obvious that they are the areas he is most interested in. He has an opinion on everything, and far too often they are poorly thought through -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 13:42 25 January 2011 (BST)

  No offense, but I call bullshit. Personality? We have seen so many different people handle the job over the years, it's just a joke to think that persons couldn't handle the job, just because they are who they are. Regarding point deux, it's exactly the opposite; most things I do are thought out so extensively it's almost a disease. I took me an hour to write my promotion bid. I over-think so much making it almost a weak-point. Anyway, I can't help it if you disagree with most that I say, but this is an issue of different perspectives we have, certainly not one of poor thought or "personality". --Thadeous Oakley Talk 20:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  Yes, personality. You have the type of personality that brings out the worst in people, and doesn't have the capacity to walk away when you're just making things worse... ie. the "overthinking" thang -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:08 3 February 2011 (BST)

• Against. No offence, you do seem to edit quite a lot and are quite active, but 'making arbitration cases for the sake of amusing themselves (Aka "Joke")' says it all for me. The last thing the wiki needs is another gun jumping humourless sysop. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 18:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  Not that I'm implying current sysops are humourless, more I've encountered my fair share that were in the past. --Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 18:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
  

  Perhaps I was a bit rash in my actions, however from experience stuff like you did tends to grow out of control. I do like a bit of mischief from time to time, but not of that kind, and preferably not on admin pages; It creates a mess, which the team then has to clean. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 20:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  Mess? You obviously not seen the first joke Arby case of Misanthropy vs Axe Hack... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

• Vouch --^A_O^R_D^M_O^P_R^I _! ^T 21:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
• Question - What is your favourite biscuit? Please note that as a meatpuppet, I make up a key voting demographic. --Karloth Vois ^¯\(°_o)/¯ 21:27, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  Meatpuppetry means dick in A/PM, but regardless, I'm a fan of chocolate and cheese biscuits myself. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 21:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

  Meatpuppets are a key voting democratic. Nothing happens on this wiki without the meatpuppet mafia allowing it to happen. I must know, because I am Karl's meatpuppet. -- Spiderzed▋ 19:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

• Against You want the title so it gives you a greater say but that is the wrong reason and explicitly against the idea of this wiki's sysop status. Sysops are supposed to be janitors 1st, being a voice of authority should come waaay down the list. --Honestmistake 18:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
• Vouch seems like he really wants it, who am I to turn down a positive nature --C Whitty 22:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
• NEVER mistergamer is a zerger. someone who wants more responsibility around here? broke the one real rule we have? lousy cheater. i don't care how help full you have become, you can't handle real drama, i disagree with anything you say 90% of the time. fuck you! can't wait to see all the umbrella meat puppets, i wonder how many were you're alts?.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 15:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
• I was kind of reluctant to write here, mostly because of my sheer inactivity between his last bid and this one. Anyway, I'm basically going to retype what I wrote last time - Thad's a good guy, he's been an asshat in the past, but still has the best interests of the wiki at heart, and would make a good sysop. Read what Aich said, as I agree with that as well. This "vote" (note quotation marks) also carries the condition that Thad, if promoted, replaces the main page with "Europeans, don't forget to VOTE" in large, blinking text at the next EU election . Linkthewindow  Talk  14:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

  I'll definitely campaign for next European election although 2014 is still far away. I'll keep your suggestion in mind, seems worth the escalation. Looking back at last time, my campaign sig was ugly and probably quite annoying so I have something to make up for. .--Thadeous Oakley Talk 16:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

• Delete Vouch - Yeah why not. He's improved greatly since his last bid and I have no reservations over him having the extra buttons. -- Cheese 15:38, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
• weak against - we have some okay candidates that I think would make better ops than Thad. Only wanting to have the power so his opinion to have more weight isn't the best reason for ops, and I'd know because my third bid was mostly about that and it split the community pretty badly. While I don't often have a problem with thad's opinions, I tend to think the best ops are the ones with both, or one of either two qualities; they are proactive in maintenance tasks and maintain a large workload, or they are very good at staying neutral and logical in day to day conflicts/issues of any size. Since I don't really consider thad to do either, I'm worried about how he'd be as an op. Since no one like thad has really been promoted, I'm not completely certain how he'll be so in reality I'm more indifferent than you may think, but unfortunately since his workload and motive remind me a lot more of our older less favoured ex-ops, my hopes aren't particularly high just now, though I won't be unpleased if proven wrong. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 10:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  You say I'm not neutral or logical. How do you mean? And what exactly are you worried about if I would be Sysops? --Thadeous Oakley Talk 11:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC) --Thadeous Oakley Talk 11:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  in layman's terms.. he said you were a dick. i second that.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 13:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

  You just jump into every fray on the wiki. And the only reason you want op position is so when you jump into the fray your punches are heavier. I don't remember ever having someone in your situation promoted. Even conndraka had more going for him when he applied. A big thing about promotions is trust and I'm not certain you'd be a favourable mod within 6 months time, that is all. I could be wrong and very easily at that, and I won't mind if I am. But those are my thoughts. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 00:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

  It's not the only reason, and you interpreting it wrong. As as sysops, you can delete, protect and move stuff besides of course holding the right to rule on A/VB and A/M. Beyond that, I would still be a normal user. I can't go into a discussion and be like "oh hai guis, look I'm sysops, look at ma shiny badge, so you betta listen to me" like your almost suggesting. That's abuse of authority and ground for misconduct as you know. You know what I want? A fair chance. I have been here for so long, done enough, I know this place, I like it, and I want to be a sysops. That should be enough. Desire to be a System Operator, it's a criteria, it's a good thing, not a bad one. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 10:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• Against - For being a buttfucking faggot. Sincurely yours, --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 20:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

  seconded. ahh how i've missed you sonny.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 04:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

  OMFG! Sonny thinks you fuck butt. That's so totally relevant! -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:04 3 February 2011 (BST)

• Vouch I have no particular reason not to...Asheets 16:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
• Don't have any reason not to, either... but, for reasons I can't quite put put my finger on, don't have any reason to vouch for you. This bid kinda reminds me of dezonus' bid. (although you are way more experienced, something about you just reminds me of him... Ah! it's the eagerness to be sysop! Plus, you're a teeny bit too opinionated Scratch that, doesn't really matter) Maybe I'd settle for a weak against as ddr. -- †  talk ? f.u. 13:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
• SUPER VOUCH Promote this guy now. He's so unbiased and hard working. You should just go ahead and make a new sysop position to give him: King Sysop. Give this position power over the Bureaucrats. May as well make it over Kevan too. That way he can leave all that silly janitorial to his minions and just concentrate on flaming the lessor sub-beings. Everyone knows Zergs make the best sysops anyway, and this guy is the master. There's just no downside to this, man. Make it so, bitches.--
  
  | T | BALLS! | 14:43 7 February 2011(UTC)

This was a tough bid on a personal level for me and Ross because neither of us personally think you're the type of sysop we'd want on the team. Ross in particular was unhappy with your bid, but didn't use his veto right during or after our long discussion. Because the issues I had (and to an extent, Ross as well) were pre-emptively addressed by many of our users (particularly the regulars), and since Thad has recieved indicated trust where it matters, we've promoted Thadeous. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 07:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to thank everyone who offered constructive input. I'm happy to make it as a sysops, and I look forward to proving my worth to everyone. --Thadeous Oakley Talk 09:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC)