UDWiki:Administration/Promotions

Shortcut:
A/PM

Candidates still requiring vouches

Place all new promotion bids under this header

Candidates currently under community discussion

hagnat

Most users know my past work as a sysop. Most users know my reason to quit my former status and fade from the wiki. That reason... is now gone. So i submit myself again for promotion. Even though i have a thesis to finish in the next months, I would also like to be able to return to my sysop duties --People's Commissar Hagnat ^talk 02:52, 15 October 2008 (BST)

• Vouch I... I... he's grown on me... *sigh*--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 02:55, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• vouch can be an ass but he has the skills and the dedication to make him a good target for promotion!--Honestmistake 03:03, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  wub ya too :* --People's Commissar Hagnat ^talk 03:05, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  Gonna make an addition to my vote as a direct response to Funts current firm opinion :) Hagnat is a long term editor and ex-sysop. he has made mistakes and he has acted like a total twat to a few users. However he has always acted in in what he saw as the best interest of this wiki... Those he hounded he did so because, right or wrong, he saw them as a problem. The corners he cut never, as far as i remember, caused any real problem. He dropped out as a sysop because this is a game and supposed to be fun.... Grim and others were making it a chore so who can blame him for putting the real world 1st? Basically to answer such questions i point out that he at least has the decency to stand up and accept responsibility for his mistakes and misdemeanors. His stupid policy on vandal amnesty shows the depth of his regret for those actions. His short cuts almost always did more good than harm and he has always been a firm advocate of sysop accountability (not the same as popularity votes, though many would have you believe it is!) What can I say? I do not know him personally, He has not bribed me to be nice (he didn't even put gold in the basket which all the cool kids used too!) I still think he can be an ass and, like Funt, i disagree with a lot of his policy discussions. All told though we need a roguish sysop like Hagnat to balance Cheeses "krazziness" AHG's niceness and Kareks "I AM THE LAW"ness He has long since proved he has the skill to do the job and i believe he has shown the judgement and maturity to be an excellent choice for sysop. I shudder to find that I agree with Akule (joke) "HAGNAT FOR 'CRAT!"--Honestmistake 17:47, 17 October 2008 (BST)

• Vouch The only problem I ever really had with you was rushing off to ban problem users. I'm willing to believe that you have cooled off a bit since then. We can used experienced sysops.--– Nubis ^NWO 03:34, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch – Welcome back ya big mug. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:53, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Go for it!--'BP^Tmz 04:15, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch As the oldest standing sysop I approve this candidate, although I do think he needs more practice in actual wiki edits. ;) Conndraka^{mod TAZM CFT} 05:44, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - so we can show them how to do a coup the right way.... oh shit.. did I just give up the secret plan?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 08:59, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - The guy was a rogue sysop last time, it took sustained effort to make him understand this and request his powers be removed. He randomly made up the job and justifications for his decisions ignoring both precedent and policy, modding as he saw fit. Since his 'return' there is no indication that any of this will change in any way. The guy had lost the community trust last time, and has certainly done nothing to replace it since. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:49, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  Lost community trust, does that include the community that is dominantly vouching him? Hehe. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 04:39, 17 October 2008 (BST)

• Abstain Against - For the moment, I need to see that you will be committed for the long haul, and not just throw in the towel when things aren't fun any more. I think you owe it to the community to show them you are committed by contributing to the wiki on a normal user basis for a while, rather than just walking back into the job when you feel like it. I am leaning towards against for that very reason, but I will mull this over when I have more time. I think you do a wonderful job, but I don't think anyone deserves to come back and have the privileged of being a sysop when they see fit. I know you had work to do and I understand that reasoning completely, however I would like to see a sustained effort on a user basis, or a strong statement, before my vote swings which way.--CyberRead240 10:00, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Well you haven't provided a strong statement, which makes me think you don't feel the need to earn vouches and just believe that being a sysop in the past will grant you an automatic walk on job this time around, and I have had time to think it over. I think that owning up is good, but how about just hanging round the wiki, proving you enjoy it and contribute to it just as much as a regular user, and proving to all of us that you are committed to it as a regular user, and I would vouch for you next time round. Against for now.--CyberRead240 08:55, 16 October 2008 (BST)

• Vouch - He may have bent the rules now and then, but he had good intentions and got the job done. Just promise to be good and you've got my support. -- Cheese 10:06, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - Spend some more time as a regular user. Learn to use the administration pages when you want something done and you'll get a vouch from me in a month or two. Until then, no. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 10:13, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Abstain - As Sexy. ohshi did I just say that --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 10:19, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Great guy, and when it comes down to it, that's all that really matters (It also helps that he knows the wiki as well haha) LemonHead7t7 *̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡|͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|]]| ̡̡̡ ̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡*̡͌l̡* ^{Talk/PDA/Red Rum/MOB} 10:22, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Against Abstain Vouch - Question: what editing do you do on this wiki that benefits the information that a player of the game finds useful? Question: why are you needed as a sysop? --Funt Solo ^QT 17:23, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  1st Question: You have got to be kidding, right ? Lemmesee... i made the suburb dangermap something useful and easy to edit, i have created MIC and its copy-pastas, the suburb template is also my creation, i have added the first time playing box on the main page, i created the clothes template (really useless, but its a thing)... there is so many stuff that i have done that i cant really remember them all

  2nd Question: I worked as a sysop for more two years (more or almost, i am not really sure). I believe i did a fair job at it, with the best interest of the wiki at mind in most occasions. Since i am a human being, i did my mistakes doing my job, some which i strongly feel ashsamed of now, but i often tried to grow with them, rather than blame others. But in the end, i think i did a good job before, and can do an even better job now --People's Commissar Hagnat ^talk 18:18, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  Thanks for answering my questions. Opinion/vote changed as a result. --Funt Solo ^QT 18:26, 15 October 2008 (BST)

  Final word: it's always good to have these two weeks to think about a candidate. To the 'crats making the final decision, then, this would appear to be a wave of popular support spinning out from the Grim demotion. Something akin to the wicked witch is dead, so let's put the scarecrow in charge of the Emerald City police force. The key complaints of many contributors here is that hagnat is readily willing to give up his position on a whim (see his self-imposed exile, and also his re-evaluation stunt), always ready to forgo what he sees as red tape but what other sysops have no apparent problem with. Now, in support of this bid (I assume) he's rushed forward three policy proposals: all of which are ill-thought out and will probably not succeed (if the discussion pages are anything to go by). We should note that he is no longer participating in those discussions. Do we need him as a sysop? Why is he so interested in regaining the position? Is it to push through the changes outlined in those policies? To unban all vandals? To allow sysops the ability to delete pages without reporting to the community? I hope that he does not succeed in gaining sysop on this attempt. He needs to learn some humility. --Funt Solo ^QT 16:24, 17 October 2008 (BST)

• Vouch - Thesis finishing: sabotaged! --Toejam 18:34, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - Sexy and Midianian nailed it. You need to rank a little bit more time as a regular user first, then you may have my vote.--SirArgo ^Talk 19:12, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Good luck with your thesis. Linkthewindow ^Talk 21:12, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Anyone who says hagnat needs to be a regular member longer eats penis. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 21:28, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - Now that Grim can't force him out (as he did others), there is nothing keeping him from doing the job. Hagnat for Crat! --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 22:22, 15 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - "i did my mistakes doing my job, some which i strongly feel ashsamed of now," I don't think I need to say more on this.--Karek^maps?! 04:44, 16 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - with mild reservations, but owning up to past mistakes counts for a lot. Just don't turn into a dick. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 05:22, 16 October 2008 (BST)
  • Against - nah, after thinking it over and viewing the arguments put forth by others below, I can't give my vouch anymore. I don't think hag needs "more time as a regular user" first, that's a pretty silly thing to demand of a former sysop. I have simply come to doubt that his heart is in the right place. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 20:49, 20 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch - I don't trust anyone more than Hagnat, he's fantastic. And I don't care about what people say about past actions. They don't apply in my mind. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 09:53, 16 October 2008 (BST)
  • You're going to be right at the top of my upcoming revamped Classification List. I've got the perfect label for you. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 10:01, 16 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch Recognizes past mistakes, will hopefully avoid the same mistakes, worth letting him have another go. - User:Whitehouse 13:56, 16 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch Since i am a human being, i did my mistakes doing my job, some which i strongly feel ashsamed of now, but i often tried to grow with them, rather than blame others. I'll hold you to that. --Private Mark 15:45, 16 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - as other against voters, pretty much. hagnat left under sketchy circumstances -- flaking out and repeatedly stretching policy, etc. well, shit happens and we're only human. so i might support his application next time, but first i want to see hagnat in action for a few months before i feel comfortable making a decision. --WanYao 16:03, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Also... look at hagnat's recent policy suggestions. While well intentioned, they're unfortunately somewhat sloppy. Honestly, I have nothing against hagnat... but there still seems to be a real lack of rigour in approach to policy... and that concerns me, because it's exactly what got him into trouble in the first place. He needs more time, and needs to reapply after a few more months. --WanYao 21:28, 18 October 2008 (BST)

• Vouch But lets see you use those Admin pages Y'hear? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:41, 16 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - I think you would do alright, but I'd really rather see you around on the admin pages for a little while longer. --ZsL 03:08, 17 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - I was really unsure which way to go with this one, hagnat had his moments as sysop but his abrupt departure (and just as abrupt return) leaves me slightly unsure as to exactly why he's so ready to become sysop again despite just a few short weeks under his belt on the wiki in the last few months (stupid history wipe...). The nail in hagnat's proverbial coffin for me was his poorly thrown together policies. It seemed clear these were designed to butter everyone up and answer the whole "what have you done since you returned" question, as Funt said, none of these will pass and your motivation for making them (excluding the MOAR power for sysops one) is far from clear. Wait another few months or so and try again. --xoxo 01:15, 19 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - As SLR.--Nallan (Talk) 05:44, 19 October 2008 (BST)
• Hagnat has been a great contributor to this wiki, and in everything he does, his intention is to make this a better place. However I'm not at all sure he should become a sysop again, now, as his main focus seems to be to not do the job as set out in current policy -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 13:01 20 October 2008 (BST)
• Against - I think it's time for some change. He may have his head on straight this time, and the mean ol Grimch isn't around to run him off again. But there are enough regular contributors who don't have nearly as much drama and baggage hanging off of them who can do the job. Being a sysop should not be an exclusive club. Edited to add: I had posted this before reading all the policy changes proposed by Hagnat. Now that I have read them I'd like to change my no vote to a HELL NO. If he cannot fashion together a cogent argument for any of these three kneejerk/useless policy changes, why should I believe that he'd be a worthy sysop? --Stephen Colbert DFA 16:53, 20 October 2008 (BST)
• Vouch --Zod Rhombus 00:13, 21 October 2008 (BST)

Archived Promotions

• Complete list of Promotion Requests
• Successful Promotions Candidacies
• Unsuccessful Promotions Candidacies
• Unaccepted Nominations
• Withdrawn Promotions Candidacies