UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/Revenant/2010-07-05 Promotion

Administration » Sysop Archives » Revenant » 2010-07-05 Promotion

This page is an archive of Revenant's Promotions candidacy, which was unsuccessful. If you wish to speak with this candidate, please use their Talk page.

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

Two can play at this game. I only accept if revenant accepts. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:49, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Sigh. But I just archived it. I'll stop editing a while, so you two can come to an understanding. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Accept – HARH! Fine! You'll rue this day, you bastard. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:56, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Campaign statement

Revenant Sysop Campaign Assets

№	Title	Content
00001	Logo
00002	Theme	"We Care A Lot" by Faith No More
00004	Dossier	"Any questions?" (alternate title) by Revenant
00005	Slogan	"If you want a thing done well, do it yourself." (Proverb)

Authorised by ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Note

For the record (and because DDR expressed this concern below), I would like to note that I have resumed full-time study as of this week and am unable to check UDWiki from my current campus (at least until I set up an SSL proxy at home). However, a lot of the stuff I plan to do for UDWiki dovetails into my studies, so regardless of the outcome of this bid I plan to be around more and working on stuff to improve the wiki. Having the sysop buttons would make it easier, but then it's not much more difficult to have another sysop implement changes, and following best practices I should be getting consensus for anything sysop-only anyway. This is more of a FYI than anything, and delivered for the sake of openness. Back to your regularly-scheduled whatever! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 09:40, 18 July 2010 (BST)

Questions, vouches, et cetera

• Vouch. Revenant has shown himself to be commited and dedicated, and has a strong sense of right and left. 16:53, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Question - Would you do a coup? A coup, would you do?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Considering I advised against the original, and predicted the result, I'm going to say the answer to this should be self evident. The only method of government overthrow I support is via anarchy/direct democracy, not tyranny. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:05, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Real Question - What areas of the wiki do you think need imporvement?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I will answer your question by directing you to my #Campaign statement. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Question - You mention a list of plans somewhere down the page. Would it be possible to give us a vague idea of such plans?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:06, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Done. (Vague, as requested. :P) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain - Moar work at the admin sections plz. --Thadeous Oakley 17:41, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Also does not meet criteria. Spam bid. --Thadeous Oakley 17:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I've been busy. I now have more time on my hands and am getting to work on some projects I've nto had time for. If elected, I will probably work on as many fixes and reforms as I can, and then drop back to a general "maintenance" level of activity. I do already have pretty much the "Drama Pages" watched and know a lot more about wiki software and this wiki in particular than probably half the currently serving sysops. For what that's worth. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:57, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch – Now we are tied again, fucker. i still haven't forgiven you for this. Expect something epic The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:20, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  But of course! I'll be waiting. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 18:23, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Against -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 18:37, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch because bringing Grim back might be just about the most positive thing anyone has done around here since the crotchety old git left ;) --Honestmistake 18:50, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Simply because you are the number one person I love to do voiceover work for when you are drunk and can't figure out a mic.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:17, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I know Revenant well, and I can say that he cares about the rules, not just following them but also questioning and reforming them when necessary. Moreover, he's cool-headed, fair, not afraid to stand up for what he thinks is right, and not afraid to back down when he's wrong. Also, he has extensive wiki experience, not just with the UD wiki but also with other wikis, and as such he can provide an objective outsider's point of view that the sysop team would otherwise lack. In short, he's an excellent choice. ~ AphelionT 19:58, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Follow them rulz! -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Incidentally, he did follow the rules! If you look at the vandalism policy page, his actions were not in violation, but this is an argument for that page, not this one. ~ AphelionT 20:13, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  For what he was originally charged with. Regardless, he still recieved a warning for vandalism. You can't dispute that. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:24, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He did, but it's my hope that it'll be overturned. The warning was unjust. But again, that discussion is for A/VB. ~ AphelionT 20:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  It won't be. That aside though,... I look at it this way. It's only a warning. It's no big deal. He'll be able to have it struck in two months if he's active enough, and if he isn't,... he shouldn't have this job anyway. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You are wrong. I *am* disputing it. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:32, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  further discussion on the talk page --

   

   

   

   

  10:27, 10 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - Your recent vandalisums (lolz fail spelling) have made me lose faith in your abilitys.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  What's even funnier is that he recieved a warning for something unrelated to what was originally brought up in A/A. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:05, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I am a political prisoner and the victim of sysop bias. Hence my running against psyop corruption. Consider the source: I have never even been brought to A/VB before, whereas the ruling sysop is not only involved in the case but has a history of being brought there. (Also, as Poodle.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 20:11, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You are the Nelson Mandela of this wiki.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:47, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He can't, and shouldn't, be balmed for being in a position you put him in Rev. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:51, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  He is the master of his fate, and the captain of his soul--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 20:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  ¤Ṱḫḝ Ḩḗḷḹ?¤ ^©® -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 20:59, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Allow me to elaborate: last I checked, DDR was a sentient being responsible for his own actions. Am I wrong? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:35, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  So if I were to massivly vandalise the wiki, say, I took images and that were masivly used, linked to on thousands of pages,... And edited their pages to include {{Subst:User Talk:Poodle of doom}}, severly hindering the wiki's performance, and did that on all the op's pages as well, not a one of them could rule vandalism, because they'd all be involved? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 21:56, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  …No. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:16, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  further discussion on the talk page --

   

   

   

   

  10:27, 10 July 2010 (BST)

  Precisely, AS. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 21:32, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch I have always liked revs.. he answers my stupid questions. and mostly does what i ask.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 22:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch Rev is one of the most respected and influential people in Urban Dead. He's an RG Mod, ZL Mod, and he's a member in high standing of far too many groups to name. I can't think of anyone else better suited for the Administration on this wiki. -- Goribus 22:46, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - is awesome just the way he is. don't want him wrecked by adminality.xoxo 02:51, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  I know that you only have my best interests at heart, Eris bless your soul. But I am already an admin at way too many places – it's far too late for me. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:58, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - I think Rev is a pretty cool guy. eh does work and doesnt afraid of anything. -- Jelly Otter 06:39, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch No, for realz. You seem like a good candidate. Oidar 08:09, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Barhah! --Kooks 14:58, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against -- For his obviously joking nomination, above. Asheets 16:26, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  I am as serious as cancer. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:38, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Revenant has done more for the actual game than anyone sysop I can see. I think it would be good to have more sysops that actually do stuff that is beneficial for the game community and are actually respected instead of just jacking off on a power trip and wasting bandwidth. --Rapture 14:58, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - He does the ZL and works for the RG. I don't see the wiki being that much harder. --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 00:31, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Yeah... -- » JS talk contribs » 02:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Even if he didn't fail criterion 2 and 3, his knowledge and understanding of this wiki is only as abysmal as his attempts to rectify it with his wikilawyering, of which his talent is about on par with that of Poodle. Also, if he's going to behave like shit and piss every time something goes against him, it's probably best he not have buttons. However, this week's escapade whilst annoying was totally fucking worth it because he managed to bring back Grim. But you can only revive grim once, friend. --
   
   
   
   
  04:50, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Hey, funny coincidence: that first link is actually on my list of things to fix. I should probably write that list down so I remember to write up the policy. Cheers! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:36, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  That's also another reason I'm against your promotion, you've just hit the number 1 reason on my "why not to vouch" list. As per your comment "I've been busy. I now have more time on my hands and am getting to work on some projects I've nto had time for. If elected, I will probably work on as many fixes and reforms as I can, and then drop back to a general "maintenance" level of activity. I do already have pretty much the "Drama Pages" watched and know a lot more about wiki software and this wiki in particular than probably half the currently serving sysops. For what that's worth.", empty promises of the future with no evidence to assure us you'll go through with them isn't something that flys well on this wiki for obvious reasons; You haven't fulfilled criterion 2 on the sheet above and before you all say "If a user is highly exemplary in one criterion blah blah", no. Not achieving 500 edits in 6 months is poor for a wiki where the last 8 or 9 (moree) promoted users all were promoted with edits in the thousands during that time frame, we've come to expect a bit more. As it stands, you're around, it's true. But you're barely around, you barely qualify for sysop in a quantitative state and this bid is only the product of a retaliatory drama-filled event which is ridiculously poor form for a "budding sysop", so I don't even know why I'm taking it as seriously as I am, so I guess you've got me there. --

   

   

   

   

  12:18, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  I'd rather spend an hour or three fixing a page properly in a single edit than make 500 tiny edits. Edit whoring is pointless. I could do it, but I'd rather spend my time, y'know, making the place better. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:30, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, please don't you tell me why I did something. Projection is an ugly habit. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:32, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  This defence has the same effect if you'd called me a troll by this point. Using such an argument is ignorance not because it's plausible as a viewpoint, you're simply trying to scramble for excuses for your noncontribution. You find solace in saying such edits were "spam edits" when they in fact weren't, you are more than happy to look through any of these (maybe not SA's) edits and notice that at leased 95% of them were contributive. Yours on the other hand, well, I think yesterdays fiasco speaks enough words. --

   

   

   

   

  14:01, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Please, do yourself a favour and lay off the ad hominem attacks – I have a hard time taking you seriously when you resort to logical fallacies with every comment. Can we just talk calmly, rationally, and civilly, please, and cease casting aspersions on each others' intentions? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  No prob, but I really have nothing more to say, i've already said how I feel about the bid. --

   

   

   

   

  04:06, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Can I hold you to that? I've already got it in writing. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:14, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - I'm failing to find a sufficient activity and perhaps interest in the wiki during the last weeks/months. And no, this is not a matter of making major edits in contrast to lots of minor ones since apart from recent mayor stuff those "fixing a page properly"-edits seem to be rare as well. G F J 12:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  To tell the truth, I've not had much time for Urban Dead in general or the wiki specifically for a while until very recently. Partly because I've been ridiculously busy IRL, and partly because there is so much that needs fixing that I've simply written it off as a Sisyphean task. Left to my own devices, I may or may not have run for psyop eventually, but certainly not so soon. However, I am not one to back down from a challenge (especially one I am fairly prepared for anyway), and if Grim or anyone else thinks so, they are welcome to be proven wrong. Hope that addresses your misgivings. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:06, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Drama retardant. --VVV ^RPMBG 18:54, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  You'll go far with that sense of humour! ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:57, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Question/Statement - Despite this week's actions which I disagree with, and the fact that he doesn't quite meet all of the guidelines, I do believe Revenant is a capable and extremely contributive member to the meta-game, including the wiki. While I see him as having quite a bit of disdain for the rules around the wiki, I also see that as a good thing, inasmuch as he can help to challenge them and reform them (and they are desperately in need of rethinking, so fresh perspectives are welcome). And if he gets too far out of line while doing so, there's always A/M to handle that. So, my question: do you plan to work from within the system to change it, or do you plan to merely use your new authority to circumvent the system to bring about change? —Aichon— 20:31, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  I believe I have answered this with my response to Yonnua, above. (Work within the system to reform the system.) And I would say that rather than disdain for the rules, per se, I have disdain for people who believe that unwritten rules take precedence over both rational thought and those rules the community has written, examined, voted on, and approved. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:57, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Vouch - This is a sincere and honest vouch, not meant in jest or otherwise, 'crats. While Revenant is by no means perfect (who is?), I do think he would be an asset to the team and would give us some much-needed perspective. We've been reading far too much into the letter of the law recently and really do need to be getting back to the roots that were the basis for those rules, rather than the monstrosities that they've become. I trust that he can bring a viewpoint that is valuable. Rev, if accepted, you definitely need to work a bit on your tact, just so you know. :P —Aichon— 04:38, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Tact? Aich', I hate to tell you this, but I have been: normally I think too much that I don't say, but I have found that the philosophy of "not giving a fuck" gets much better results and leaves me much less stressed. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:46, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch only because. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• I don't doubt that if promoted, Rev would be an asset to the team - as others have alluded to, he's very active in the metagame (which can't really be said for many sysops,) has good skills with computers, and simply isn't a dickhead. Like Aichon, I agree that a fresh perspective would be good for the wiki, especially if (him/we) finally get around to overhauling the rules. That said, he's never been terribly active here - unlike DDR, I don't think every sysop needs to have several thousand edits before they can be considered for a promotion, but at the same time, a prospective sysop needs to understand the day-to-day workings of the wiki, and a bit of it's history (even if they plan to change them.) That said, I've always suspected Revenant has been lurking around here, but not editing. Oh, and a Question - do you have any plans at the moment on how your would potentially reform the system? Linkthewindow  Talk  05:07, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Thank you. And yes. (Please see my reply to Yonnua, above.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 05:37, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Saw that, was wondering if you had anything a little more specific in mind ;). Still, my above comments above stand. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:21, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Either you did not dig deep (or late) enough, or you are posting in the wrong place. :P Also, thanks, man. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:50, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• vouch - You're not a faggot, and thus better than every other sysops in power right now.--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 10:10, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  <3 (no homo) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:16, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• against - From what little I can glean by recent edits, my impression of Revenant is that he fights relentlessly to the last word on any dispute, and he makes a big stink/crusade when something doesn't go his way. Conversations and votes often tilt the wrong direction here, and I'd like to trust that a sysop can let those things roll of their back and remain objective. Maybe my impression is all wrong, but I can just see Rev misusing sysop powers because he was so sure in his mind that he was right. If I could see more examples of Revenant taking disagreements in stride I would feel happier about vouching for him.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 13:00, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  I would rather be corrected and proven wrong than continue to be wrong. Possibly as a result of this philosophy, I have a certificate from a duly appointed government official that says <real name censored> Is Always Right. What can I say? If you contend that I am wrong, I want you to prove it. It's the most honest way. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:04, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, BTW, I proved Grim wrong on the case that became "Grimgate" and he backed down. Of course, by then it was too late because the mob were already baying for blood, but I pride myself on being able to resolve disputed by rational discourse. Tell me that's not something this wiki could use more of. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 14:15, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  You see the problem with the wiki is that there is often a fine line between "right" and "wrong" and being able to "prove" such things. Mostly, it's all just users butting heads and the best action relies on what users most agree with, and you've shown considerable problems accepting this factor on the wiki, say for example, the recent sysop vote (note vote though you still seemed to find me at fault) to have you warned on A/VB. For all we know you could be the most accepting person in the world once they've been proven wrong, but expecting to be "proven" wrong when we are simply offering the best option to compensate for the lack of a perfect result is something I think you have to learn to work with. --

   

   

   

   

  15:39, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  It's true, I often expect people to be smarter than they are. P.S. I knew you couldn't resist commenting. <3 ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:20, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - A good guy, but not sysopy.-- Adward  23:25, 8 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch Yay Rev! --Michael Barnaby 00:38, 9 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Literally retarded. Cyberbob  Talk  12:42, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 15:23, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  "what is hyperbole?? what is a comedic device??? please help me to understand these concepts as I am 12 years old" --u Cyberbob  Talk  16:31, 12 July 2010 (BST)

  i dun geddit? plz to b xplainin kthx ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:30, 16 July 2010 (BST)

• Abstain Never really heard good Or bad of you.-- Jerrel tlk _{(82nd!) (Project Unwelcome!)}. 05:48, 13 July 2010 (BST)

  where the fuck have you been the last 5 or so years? not playing UD i guess.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 04:47, 16 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch - Rev has promised to air mail me cookies, and, quite frankly, I really have the munchies at the moment. ----Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 23:41, 13 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - He is needed, too. --Grogh 21:34, 17 July 2010 (BST)

The community discussion is now closed. The bureaucrats will make their decision.-- Adward  18:00, 19 July 2010 (BST)

So, yeah. After the usual discussion with boxy the decision has made to deny the bid. However Rev is very active in the community, and if, as he states elsewhere he does contribute more to the wiki over the next few months, a future bid will be looked on more favourably. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:40, 21 July 2010 (BST)