UDWiki:Administration/Promotions

Shortcut:
A/PM

Candidates still requiring vouches

There are no candidates currently requiring vouches.

Candidates currently under community discussion

User:Grim s

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

Per this and this, I hereby nominate:

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." —H.L. Mencken

Come on, Grim, you know you want to. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:42, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Fuck you Revenant. Fuck. you. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:44, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Now that's one hell of an opening edit. Ill cycle this as unaccepted. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:46, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Not so fast bucko. Revenant has a decision to make. The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

right. I'll leave the existing copy in unaccepted until you two decide if you're running. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:55, 5 July 2010 (BST)

oh... fuck you. I hope you get it. fine, guess I Accept too. let the circus commence The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Because some bombs need to be dropped:

	Grim is a God
	This User or Group believes that Grim should be nominated for sainthood, and placed on a pedestal with the other greats of our time.

This user fears his wiki overlord(s).

	Grim's Coup d'etat
	This user survived and remembers the Great Wiki Coup of October 9, 2008 by the all powerful Grim s!

	Good Night Sweet Prince
	2005-2008

Brought to you by the Know Your Evil Initiative. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:31, 5 July 2010 (BST)

Discussion

• Vouch. Grim deserves a chance to prove to the people of the world that he is in fact a cuddly little teddy bear. 16:57, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Question - Would you do a coup, a coup, would you do?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:59, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Answer: Only if you made me crat The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:02, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Well that's my next crat vote sorted. Real Question: Are you even vaugely up to date with wiki-events?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:03, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  the only answer to that is "Not in the slightest". Although revenant kept dropping references to it, that sly fucker. should have known he was up to something The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:22, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Right, I seem to recall you proposing a split of Arbitration in to Arbitration and mediation, for editting and personal conflicts respectively. It's always interested me as a policy, and would you be likely to persue this policy if you hang around?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:27, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  If he doesn't, I will, so we'll probably be making use of his brain one way or another. (In a jar, if necessary.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 20:06, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Question Upon your last appearance you felt that the wiki, its policies and administration team were inherently broken (probably massively paraphrasing and distorting you here, but hey). Has anything changed in the intervening time, or do you still feel only a complete restructuring of the wiki is the only solution? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:07, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I plan to work from within the system. The first thing on my agenda for restructuring is your face (do I know you?) The Grimch ^{U! E!} 17:52, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  Sorry, sometimes I forget we are different people. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 17:54, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Against - Too soon. Does not meet criteria. Spam bid. --Thadeous Oakley 17:39, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  You I vaguely remember. Something about fucking sheep. I wouldnt accept your approval anyway The Grimch ^{U! E!} 18:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch – Wait, do I have to do this or is it assumed since I made the nomination? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 18:14, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I'm at your disposal, Dark Overlord of the wiki... -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 18:36, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Where do I have to sign for this.--Thari ^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 18:40, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - No, seriously 100% VOUCH! --Honestmistake 18:48, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I think it was my idea?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:12, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Whatever his past, Grim has proven that he cares about this wiki and has its best interests at heart. ~ AphelionT 19:58, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I vouched for WOOT, Grim can't be much worse.--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:00, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Abstain - You're a mean one, Mr. Grimch. Also, I really don't think I've lived through enough wikidrama to have an educated opinion on this issue. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 21:49, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch mostly for all the memory's. and the impending drama storm that will come from it.----sexualharrison ¯\()/¯ 22:02, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch I, for one, look forward to being under the iron fist of our cruel Overlord Grim. Also he cares more about the wikipedia than any other single user. He'll be an excellent Administrator. -- Goribus 22:55, 5 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Terrible. The last time he was trusted with buttons he fucked up so bad that Kevan to come in and fix his mess. The fact that he didn't get permabanned is a joke, and this sysop bid is an even bigger joke, whether intentional or not. If he really "cares about the wiki" so much he can prove it by making positive contributions to the community. I suspect the only real reason he'd want to become sysop would be to see how bad he could screw up again.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 03:52, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - but a vouch for joke promotion campaigns. glad to see this one has slipped through the ever tightening net on wikifun.xoxo 04:00, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - Too soon. Even if he was serious, the wiki has changed a lot in the past year and a half. Linkthewindow  Talk  04:55, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  Also, as Giles. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:17, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch I'm always in for a good coup. Oidar 08:06, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - Level headed and rational, will make a fantastic sysop. --Kooks 14:57, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against -- As Giles. Asheets 16:22, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch -- The wiki has been missing Grim. MOAR GRIM FOR WIKI 10' -- Jelly Otter 19:41, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - until yesterday, there has been no activity since October 2008. Grim s is definitely not suited to be a SysOp. G F J 20:18, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  That was not Cuddly Bunny Grim's fault, though. 20:50, 6 July 2010 (BST)

  So? Doesn't change the fact he hasn't been active for a year and a half. Linkthewindow  Talk  12:17, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  Exactly. Someone with such an activity is simply not suited to become a SysOp, this is all that matters. G F J 12:42, 7 July 2010 (BST)

• Vouch -- Past deeds show he knows what is best for the wiki.-- Papa Jadkor ^{(RRF) (MotA) (MT11)} 20:26, 6 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch -- I'd be interested in seeing how "little Grim" mixes with Original Strength. --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 00:30, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - I don't see why not.-- » JS talk contribs » 02:43, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Vouch - he won't get it, but this is still fucking hilarious. --
   
   
   
   
  04:44, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - As Giles. He broke the number one rule of the wiki: never make Kevan do anything. --VVV ^RPMBG 18:54, 7 July 2010 (BST)
• Against - I could cite the guidelines, but I'm sure it would be pointed out that that's simply an argument from authority. Instead, I'll cite a better reason: I don't vouch for people I don't know. Every other candidate I've vouched for has been someone I've known, and even though we're not all friends, I at least know who they are and what I've come to expect of them. Grim, to me, is an unknown, and I don't vouch for things I don't know. It's a mistake for anyone to put their name on the line for an unknown. —Aichon— 20:21, 7 July 2010 (BST)

  fair enough... but some of us are voting in the full knowledge of who and what Grim is/was.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Honestmistake (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

  Of course. I was merely speaking for myself here and making a general statement about my opinion on the matter, but if you know Grim, then none of what I said applies to you. —Aichon— 00:09, 8 July 2010 (BST)

• You're one of my least favorite User here, but I'm still Vouching. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:02, 8 July 2010 (BST)

User:Revenant

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)

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)

  You're a dumb fuck. I didn't say you couldn't petition for it to be overturned. I said you couldn't deny the fact that it's been ruled vandalism, and you've been issued a warning. -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 22:02, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  It's funny, I could have sworn there was rational thought going on in there. And yet you continue to miss the point. Oh well. Not my problem, thank Eris. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:29, 5 July 2010 (BST)

  I thought the Goddess of Chaos/Discord was named Aeris, not Eris. But I looked it up and sure enough it's Eris. Thanks for inadvertantly teaching me something new Rev! :D -- Goribus 22:46, 5 July 2010 (BST)

You know Rev,.... you're right. It wasn't ruled vandalism, and you weren't given a warning based on something unrelated. Argue that all you want. Just one question,... how do you plan to fit in with the rest of the ops? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 23:20, 5 July 2010 (BST)

It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:23, 8 July 2010 (BST)

Should I get her now or later? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 04:33, 8 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)

  Well,... hows what I've suggested any different from you posting the topic of discussion on DDR's talk page, then telling him he can't rule because he's involved? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 04:33, 8 July 2010 (BST)

  Because he chose to involve himself well before I had done that. Also because the example you cite would be obviously massively bad faith vandalism with the intent to fuck up the wiki, whereas my actions were simply playing the game of politics. Y'know, trying to role-play a little on a role-playing section of the site. For a role-playing game . Sheesh, sometimes I think it's like you people take me seriously. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:38, 8 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)

Recently Concluded Bids

For more concluded bids, see Promotion Candidacies.

Archived Promotions

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