Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2008-12 bureaucrat election/Tanetris

Why you again? ;-). You're good, stable, wise, experianced..but why you again? -- S ilverleaf    Don't assume, Know! 13:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * He's clueless with Wikicode so he's mostly harmless... ;) Vili [[Image:User Vili sig.jpg|User talk:Vili]] 13:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Bad Joke Vili :/. I'll wait for Tanetris to answer. -- S ilverleaf   [[Image:User Silverleaf sig.png]] Don't assume, Know! 13:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Tanetris has done good. I say, vote him back in. --Burning Freebies 17:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's true, I'm pretty clueless with Wikicode. Fortunately, Poke's around. So why me again? Well, I generally think "good, stable, wise, experienced" are useful qualities in a bcrat. Long story short, if you guys want me as bcrat for another term, I'm happy to do it. If not, I'm happy to go back to being a sysop. So I leave it up to you guys. - Tanetris 18:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not going to be voting for you because I would like to see another person fill the seat this time. Mini Me  18:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ..good reason...? --71.246.218.44 02:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure it's a good reason, if you want Auron in, don't vote for Tanetris, and since Mini Me nominated Auron... --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.128.201.234 (talk).
 * I wouldn't vote for him anyway even if I didn't nominate Auron. Mini Me  [[Image:User Mini Me sig.png|19px|talk]] 14:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

My oppose
I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea because of my vote. It's not that I don't think Tanetris has done a good job as Bureaucrat, he has, I just think the wiki needs him more as an active sysop. -- Wyn 11:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would be severely surprised if anyone thought different about your vote. You are a very well thought female player and sweet as can be. I think Tanetris knows that too. -- S ilverleaf   [[Image:User Silverleaf sig.png]] Don't assume, Know! 13:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not that I disagree with Wyn's vote, as I see and understand the point she's making. However I thought the bureaucrat role had been modified over the past 6 months to include elements of the Sysop role, so that we no longer have to lose a good active sysop to gain a good bureaucrat? However I would never doubt Wyn when it comes to policy issues as she is far more well read on these issues than I am. On a slightly different point, I would say, Quite aside from how "sweet" Wyn may be it is rather her capable, mature and impartial nature which would more compel people to see that she is voting in what she believes is the best interests of the wiki. Although I agree Silverleaf, she is very sweet. hides from Wyn before she slaps me for that last comment -- Salome  [[Image:User_salome_sig2.png|19px]] 14:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Are we voting for Wyn now, or why is everybody complimenting here? :D ( @Wyn) poke | talk 16:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I vote Wyn! Seriously, though, the policy has been changed so bureaucrats may do sysop-like stuff, but only in emergencies and if there isn't any sysop around. IMO that still means we lose a sysop when we get a bureaucrat (and that's still something I would like to change). Erasculio 17:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * She respectfully declined ;-).-- S ilverleaf   [[Image:User Silverleaf sig.png]] Don't assume, Know! 21:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)