Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2009-08 bureaucrat election/Karate Jesus

Good choice?

He admits he is "pseudo active", which he later says is once or twice a week. A bureaucrat should ideally be on pretty much every day of the week in case their emergency powers (clearing up vandalism etc when no other sysops are available etc) are needed. Im not sure this was a good pick for that reason. I mean, he hasnt even accepted, probably because he doesnt even know he has been chosen! Apart from that he seems like a nice guy.--Burning Freebies 19:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Activity really wouldn't be my number one concern for a bureaucrat, as long as he/she could be easily contacted. --67.240.83.137 19:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that "pseudo active" comment is directed towards my activity in GW, not here on the wiki. I'm on the wiki almost every day. The only reason I didn't see this is because I was on vacation last week with my wife. Karate Jesus 21:27, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Although, even on vacation I would have been accessible on MSN (which, I'll admit, is sad. But I'm a workaholic). Karate Jesus 21:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

@Burning, bureaucrats just need to be "reachable" really. Since they are just needed for puntual things, there is no real need for them to be active.

And by the way, they are "allowed" to act on emergency situations when no sysop is around, but they are not "mandated" to do so.--Fighterdoken 21:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

In which case, could you answer the following questions please:

• Why do you want to be a Bureaucrat and what qualities do you possess that you believe would make you a good Bureaucrat?
• What is your opinion on strictly literal interpretations of policy vs. "spirit of the policy" interpretations?
• How might your decisions in previous ArbComm decisions have differed from those given by the Bureaucrats?
• How would you define the Bureaucrat's role on GWW?
• What is your stance on trolling/disruption/incivility/harmfulness? How is that stance justified given the current status of those issues within our system and culture?
• What do you think the proper role of ArbComm is?
• How might you use the Bureaucrat position differently than other Bureaucrats have?
• In what way(s) would your decisions in arbitration be affected by the weight of a user's general history of valued contributions (or lack of such)? Would user valuable-ness reliably translate into some extra degree of leniency from you? (Copied from Lacky)--Burning Freebies 09:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Freebies, I just want you to know that I'm not ignoring your questions. I have a staff meeting in 20 mins (and I can't skip it, since I'm the director and all), and then a staff lunch after that. Once I finish those two things, I will answer all of your questions. Karate Jesus 14:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

No rush, we still have until the end of the month till voting ends. If you have you job to attend to, then its more important.--Burning Freebies 18:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Response to Freebies Questions

Figured I should make a new section since this is so long. Ok, I'll try to go point by point to answer your questions:

• "Why do you want to be a Bureaucrat?"

• I honestly could not say that I want to be a bcrat any more than anyone else. The only reason I agreed to do it when nominated is because I care greatly for the fair treatment of others, and as the arbcomm is the main duty of bcrats, I think I could do a fair job of interpreting users' actions and intentions.

• "What qualities do you possess that you believe would make you a good Bureaucrat?"

• Well, first, I tend to be an incredibly patient person. I've been working with teenagers for about 5-6 years now, and really I don't think I could do my job or really live my life w/o being incredibly patient. Second, I tend to have a pretty thick skin and I'm not easily shaken when it comes to personal scrutiny. Third, as I said earlier, I care deeply for the fair treatment of others. On the wiki, this means that I would do my best to be reasonable, fair, and kind when working with a user.

• "What is your opinion on strictly literal interpretations of policy vs. "spirit of the policy" interpretations?"

• I think the most important thing to remember when it comes to policy is not necessarily the policy itself, but rather the intent of the user. Often, on the wiki, users' actions can be misinterpreted for either good or harm and obviously the policies are there to protect both the wiki and the users. There are times when the policies should be interpreted literally, and there are times when they should be interpreted more loosely; however, I think that the basis on which type of interpretation should be used is entirely dependent upon the intent of the user in question.

• "How might your decisions in previous ArbComm decisions have differed from those given by the Bureaucrats?"

• Off the top of my head, I could not say that I would have differed with any other decisions. However, I will say that I was disappointed in the way the case against Shard was handled. At many times, the way the situation was handled became borderline inappropriate on both sides of the issue.

• "What is your stance on trolling/disruption/incivility/harmfulness? How is that stance justified given the current status of those issues within our system and culture?"

• As I have already said, I believe that the original intention of the user should always be considered; however, when it comes to general disruption and actions that have obvious harmful intentions behind them, I tend to take a stronger stance against them. As far as our culture and system are concerned, I could easily write a dissertation on those issues. The main thing I think you should know is that I care about the intent of the users involved and often harmful actions can be misinterpreted as good, and good actions can be misinterpreted as harmful.

• "What do you think the proper role of ArbComm is?"

• I think the three main purposes are well put in the policy itself, as:

1. The wiki being generally managed by the community
2. General fairness
3. Wiki stability and openness

Fairness, understanding that the wiki is a community of people, and wiki stability are the three main roles put forth for any arbcomm and should be considered first and foremost above every other issue.

• "How might you use the Bureaucrat position differently than other Bureaucrats have?"

• I think I have already spoken to how I would act as a bcrat, although, I could not honestly tell you how much my position would differ from any other bcrat.

• "In what way(s) would your decisions in arbitration be affected by the weight of a user's general history of valued contributions (or lack of such)? Would user valuable-ness reliably translate into some extra degree of leniency from you?"

• People do not change over night, unless they have a serious mental disorder, so I would obviously take into account each user's past actions when making decisions in arbitration. As I have already said, I would do my best to try to understand the original intent behind the actions and be fair. Users deserve to have their past actions considered during arbitration, whether those past actions will negatively or positively affect the outcome would depend entirely upon how they had acted rather than just how they are currently acting.

I think that's it. Let me know if you have any more questions or would like me to expound on my answers. Karate Jesus 19:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Care to elaborate on what you didn't like about how Shard's case was handled? Misery 13:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't necessarily anything that the bcrats did (that's why I said that I didn't know of any specific changes I would have made there). It was just a huge drama-fest, and someone probably should have stepped in earlier (again, not necessarily a bcrat). Oh, and just so everyone's aware, I know that I have practically no chance of winning against DE and Tanetris....so, yea. Karate Jesus 14:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Fairly good answers there.--Burning Freebies 15:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Can't say I'm surprised. Karate Jesus 20:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)