Guild Wars Wiki talk:Arbitration committee/2007-09-21-User:Karlos

Retalliatory ArbComm requests ftl

Wow, the guy gets to call me a suicide bomber, make fun of my ehtnicity, gets to tell me to buzz off and grow up in response to asking for administrative action and now tries to get me banned for it asking for administrative intervention. I think if this wiki has any semblance of dignity to preserve, this guy's request would be shot down faster than it gets created. But since I have very little faith in that, let's see what unfolds. I will make no further arguments for/against this. I really want to see how this one plays out. --Karlos 13:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I've done none of those things, yet I support this request. —Tanaric 01:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

A question...

On the talk page for the arbitration request regarding Skuld, it was mentioned how these requests should not become a matter of "one user versus another user" (as in, the user who requested the arbitration against the user who the arbitration is about). I agree with that, and in order to do so, I think those pages should have the community acting on them, saying why they agree or not with the request. I have already stated some reasons why I think Karlos' behavior has been disruptive on the page for the committee he asked against me; what should I do here, then? State why I think this arbitration should happen, or just be quiet in order to avoid escalating this whole mess more than it has already been escalated? Erasculio 14:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Post your evidence as if nothing has happened. I'm neutral enough to post evidence of trolling without bias, and you probably are as well. -Auron 01:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose Arbitration

I really don't know what is compelling me to oppose this arbitration, as Karlos has spoken to me oft condescendingly in the recent policy debates, but I feel that none of them are worth arbitration and the evidence presented on the project page is in no way significant enough to warrant arbitration. It seems that he's the odd man out and doesn't mince words about being so, and in turn takes flack from other sysops. Whether its something more, like that he's intentionally being the odd man out is beyond my line of sight right now as I'm not going to go through his history on the wiki.

My thought is this: I'm getting tired of all the petty squabbles between admins and between the admins and users. You guys seriously need to get it under control and work together. If nothing else, define your roles so that Gem isn't left feeling inadequate because certain unnamed expectations weren't met. I don't have a vendetta against any admin, and in fact there are certain qualities about each that I like. It might be worth it to divide the workload and specialize in something as admins- deletions for a couple people, blocks for a couple people... and maybe spend a little less free time on the wiki. If you have a job to do, thats fine, but contribution thousands of characters of arguments at a time is very tiring. Stop the soap opera.

As I've stated on my user page, I'm taking a hiatus from active wiki life, so now if you want to nominate me for arbitration- go for it. If you all are going to use it as a weapon then this wiki is doomed. In fact even without using it as such its doomed. -elviondale (tahlk) 15:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

"I'm getting tired of all the petty squabbles between admins" what squabbles between which admins are these? --Lemming 15:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

To make this more clear, none of Karlos, Gem, or Auron are admins. —Tanaric 01:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Nor Erasculio. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 01:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but at one time or another, most were. I know who the sysops are. @Lemming- keep reading the next 6 words. -elviondale (tahlk) 02:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Quite honestly, Elviondale, I think you're coming to a conclusion that isn't directly supported - yes, some of those who often get involved are or were admins, but the reason they tend to get involved is because they're some of the most active participants in policy discussion, something that simply happens to correlate with adminship. Neither causes they other, rather they both stem from another common factor. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

(That mystery other factor is, of course, being involved in the IRC channel.) :) —Tanaric 18:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The IRC channel should have nothing to do with this arbitration. Granted, it helps form opinions about content on the wiki, but in no way should this hinge on something clearly separate from this wiki. -elviondale (tahlk) 20:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I apologize -- I was joking, but this probably isn't the time or place. —Tanaric 20:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Dead or Alive?

The request that is. I feel it's a bad idea to leave these in a pending state. Backsword 13:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)