UDWiki talk:Administration/Bureaucrat Promotions

• Archive

Next election

Should be for boxy's slot since he is a mid season replacement for AHLG who was elected BEFORE Cheese. Don't let him slip in as Crat for Life. -- #99 ^DCC 13:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe the way the policy is worded is that it's the oldest 'crat's bid that gets put up. No reason why Cheese should get an extra long bid because Gnome stepped down.--Karek^maps?! 14:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I think its argued that its the last crat not to have their position voted on, and the election itself was a vote. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 14:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

So, if a crat whose position will be up for grabs in the next election is demoted two and half weeks before the end of his term, the crat who gets elected will only keep his position for half a week ? for someone who tries to appear smart, this was a really dumb idea, DCC. The guidelines for bureaucrat election are not hard to understand, and they are pretty clear about whose position will be voted on next time --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 15:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

'Crats come under default election if they go 12 months without one, so that saves the possibility of 'Crat for life, DCC. Linkthewindow  Talk  20:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

August 2011 round

A note to everyone that the next round will due in a week. -- Spiderzed█ 23:28, 7 August 2011 (BST)

archive this shit

In an unrlrelated note... can someone with sysop powers archive some of the headers from this talk page in their corresping archives ? Like 'boxy's so clever' header should go to the dec 2009 archive... i moved some, but others can has prutectiun --hagnat 00:04, 8 August 2011 (BST)

thanks mis. Now, if anyone could move the 'next election' section into the general archive, i'd be grateful --hagnat 03:15, 8 August 2011 (BST)

Shouldn't jerrels question have gone to April 2010. I know that's marginally unhelpful but I'm not on a copypasta friendly device at the moment. ~ _{03:20, 8 August 2011 (UTC)}

Oops... i blame them booze --hagnat 03:22, 8 August 2011 (BST)

Aw, I wanted that kept here as a permanent guideline. 03:49, 8 August 2011 (BST)

write the guideline and slap it in the FAQ... simple as that --hagnat 04:38, 8 August 2011 (BST)

Seems it was more of a misunderstanding of the guidelines to begin with. Also, it's now 8 months rather than 12 to prevent crat for life. ~ _{05:51, 8 August 2011 (UTC)}

Whatever... i just want this piece of talk from 3 years ago to be archived properly --hagnat 15:05, 8 August 2011 (BST)

Archive questions

Hey RC watchers/interested individuals, is it ok if I move the {{CratPromoArchive}} template so it's at the top of each archived promotion, for consistency? Or would people prefer the bottom? Thanks! Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 06:19, 5 April 2013 (BST)

Never mind, turns out Breadcrumbs makes the bottom template redundant. Will delete. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 06:28, 5 April 2013 (BST)

I never even noticed that there was a template on the bottom of any. I'd love to see that archive box redesigned though, since it's ugly and huge for how little content it has. —Aichon— 07:34, 5 April 2013 (BST)

WOW, that is fucking ugly as hell A ZOMBIE ANT 12:55, 5 April 2013 (BST)

Any chance we can address hagnat's suggestion and ignore Thad and Mis? Any option is better than what we are using atm ;_; A ZOMBIE ANT 12:58, 5 April 2013 (BST)

I've added another suggestion over there at Template talk:CratPromoArchive. We should probably move this convo over there. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 15:05, 5 April 2013 (BST)

DDR & AHLG

With my vote moved from DDR to stelar it would seem that there is a tie. You left too soon Aichon, unless stelar is to decide the outcome. -- 05:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Meh, not actually an issue, since I never gave me own vote and would have done so had I noticed the tie, given that I was online when voting concluded. —Aichon— 05:45, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Im just fucking with you. Safe travels, thanks for everything you did here! - 05:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Wow. I was eligible

Strange times indeed Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah it's best you don't get me started on complaining about that policy again. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 22:20, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Timestamps on votes

There is nothing in the "Rules on voting" regarding a valid voting signature requiring a timestamp. It doesn't seem to affect the results, this time, but it's rather uncouth to have hidden rules that will disenfranchise you. --Starlingt (talk) 00:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

My striking was based on my interpretation of "singing" in "Users vote for a candidate by signing under the preferred candidate's name" as performing the standard signing action, which is equivalent to four tildes (~~~~) and consists of the user's signature plus timestamp.

That said, I've looked back through the last several years of crat elections and found exactly one vote (one of these two of Revenant's) that had the name portion of the signature but not the timestamp, and it wasn't struck. (I also found a vote that was struck for invalid signature, although it included a timestamp; so signature issues in general are potentially strikeable.) Would love other sop input but am happy to reinstate the votes (one for Gnome and one for DDR, not changing the outcome) if that's the consensus. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 04:53, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

You're right. I made an assumption based on other parts of the wiki. Suggestions, Historical votes and Policy votes all have specific voting rules so I assumed this was the same. But the bureaucrat elections don't have them so I've placed the votes back. My apologies. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 14:22, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Certainly timestamps are important. It's clear who's voted for who, so I'd just add the timestamps in (otherwise we may lose that info if we get another history wipe). --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

👍 DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:20, 22 December 2019 (UTC)