Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron

Archives
Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron/Archive 1 Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron/Archive 2 Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron/Archive 3

Filter
Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә    ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 09:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ilu, k? Will WoT later. — Raine Valen 7:10, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not actually a supportive opinion.
 * Support. Seems to get the job done. G R E E N E R 07:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a supportive opinion.
 * Support. I was considering Oppose just to shut Scythe up, but I see no reason to lose a good sysop here.--ne shot.9:32, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not actually a supportive opinion.
 * Support. Fanclub, yeah? - Mini Me 08:27, 2 September, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not actually a supportive opinion.
 * Support. Auron deals with trolls efficiently (if you've noticed, only the trolls are the ones that bawwwwww at Auron), he does his janitorial duties, and is rather objective concerning disputes. King Neoterikos 09:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a supportive opinion, albeit unnecessarily rude, promoting a negative atmosphere.
 * Support. Performs his job as sysop well. ShadowRunner 10:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a supportive opinion.
 * Support. Auron doesn't avoid confrontation as much as most other Sysops. While this occasionally results in people getting upset/offended, this also makes him an invaluable member of the sysop team. Moreover, when he does use his Sysop tools, he does so for the good of the wiki, not to serve his own agenda. I fail to see any bias in his actions whatsoever. — WhyUser talk:Why 11:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a supportive opinion.
 * Just so you don't remain completely ignorant forever, RFAs aren't done on "votes" - it's not a democratic "who has the most votes wins" (or in this case, the who is the support and oppose). Your oppose is just as useless as the supports you criticise. King Neoterikos 09:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Just so you don't remain completely rude forever, how about explaining how an RFA works or maybe even refraining from this bullshit? Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 09:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's be nice to one another, alright? Also, the "3 to 1" ratio is more of a guideline for the Bureaucrats. Sure, community support is important, but they'll also factor in the argumentation brought to the RfA. So indeed, if you want to support or oppose it's best done with good argumentation. (Furthermore, shall I just add that my support vote is actually a supportive opinion backed by argumentation?) &mdash; Why [[Image:User Why s.png|User talk:Why]] 11:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should read RFA and learn how an RFA works before you begin criticizing votes and demanding explanations of the process. Learning to do things yourself will endear you to the community. Raging at people for not handing you easily available information will piss people off. Jake--168.122.167.202 15:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * How dare you suggest that people read on a wiki, Jake. Gosh. Karate [[File:User Karate Jesus KJ for sig.png]] Jesus  15:19, 2 September 2010  (UTC)
 * It does seem like a bit of an excessive suggestion, doesn't it? My deepest apologies. Jake--168.122.167.202 15:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Community? Where?  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 19:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Also why bother having an RFA every year if you're all so convinced that the opposition doesn't know what they're talking about and you're sure to win. "effectiveness is the most important aspect of a sysop" sounds a lot like some Nazi mentality, if that's how you want things to be, you go right ahead.  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Godwin's Law already? Karate [[File:User Karate Jesus KJ for sig.png]] Jesus  20:06, 2 September 2010  (UTC)
 * And look, there is the propaganda, i'm very impressed! Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to point out that "Will WoT later" is obviously not reasoning, but a placeholder for such (which I've now provided, by the way). &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  20:08, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, an entire whole paragraph... But I think you made your "point" much more clear with your original "ilu". Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Your mistake is the assumption that I'm supporting Auron because I like him; this is not the case. Auron has many qualities that make him a good sysop; these same qualities are likable, in my opinion.  Conversely, there are many qualities that I find likable that would not make a good sysop; for example, I would oppose Adrin's RfA with "ilu, k?".  &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  21:44, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is a trick question: what separates a good sysop from a bad one?  Koda  [[Image:User_Koda_Kumi_UT.jpeg‎|19px]]  Kumi  22:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Effectiveness at performing their sysop tasks? &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  22:19, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * The correct answer is perspective. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 22:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Touché. From a philosophical standpoint, though, isn't that what defines every subjective matter?  &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  22:26, 2 Sep 2010 (UTC)
 * Not if you're Immanuel Kant. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 22:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Felix gets to play for the fridge. Raine, you are the weakest link. Goodbye!  Koda  [[Image:User_Koda_Kumi_UT.jpeg‎|19px]]  Kumi  22:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"Fanclub yeah?" Yep. -- Master   Briar   11:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Then write a better reason to oppose. This page is only a guideline for proper judgment so the bureaucrats can get a clear view of the positive contributions and if they weigh up against the negative ones. The amount of supports and opposes is only part of the judgment (and for a proper judgment, not important at all.)  Koda  [[Image:User_Koda_Kumi_UT.jpeg‎|19px]]  Kumi  12:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Briar's name in the oppose section should be enough for anyone to disregard everything written there anyway. :p -Cursed Angel [[Image:User Cursed Angel Signature2.jpg|19px|Q.Q]] 12:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have changed my vote, you should probably read the last part of it. - Mini Me  13:05, 3 September, 2010 (UTC)

User:Halogod35's comment
This sounds a lot like it's been written by Ariyen. It talks about things that don't even apply to Halogod ("As per him jumping the gun on admin talk on my ban", "He did when he did a sudden jump to try to get me permabanned. *yawns* Just look at those questioning him.", "His comments in the admin history (archive) of the admin talk (noticeboard talk) was attacking me."; this is probably about Guild Wars Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard/Archive 8). Many Ariyenisms are used ("his contributes" as a noun, "So, Assumptions - not a good thing to do."), though that's not exactly definitive proof.

Yesterday, Halogod made a neutral post with the summary "There you go Lori" (Lori being Ariyen's real name). The post is written completely differently and actually approves of Auron's adminship. It was then removed minutes later. -- pling 16:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And I was wondering why I didn't understand a word of it, lol. I never did quite get Ariyen's style of writing. - Reanimated X 17:05, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It will be several more years before we find the Arisetta Stone, I'm afraid. So we can assume the first post was Halogod's actual opinion, and the second was Ariyen's proxy. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 05:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

RfR
Hi, why? - Mini Me  21:44, 4 November, 2010 (UTC)