Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2009-02 bureaucrat election

Whose term is ending? Aiiane's, right? — Why 00:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. poke | talk 00:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Shard

Just curious, but where does it say banned users cannot be nominated? I don't expect him to win and I certainly won't be voting for him, but for the sake of fairness and transparency, shouldn't he be allowed to run? I'm not necessarily saying he should be allowed to make statements (although temporary unbanning purely for that purpose perhaps should be considered), but dismissing him as a candidate outright for a temporary ban that doesn't cover the entire term seems odd. I know he can't accept if he is banned, but my understanding from the policy is that he doesn't even have to accept the nomination to make it to the voting stage. Misery 17:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I would assume the general meaning behind it is that if you can't abide by the wiki's rules, how could anyone expect you to enforce them? So if you managed to get banned, you are obviously showing you can't follow the rules. Ghosst • Talk • 21:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

It's irrelevant to this election now seeing as Shard graciously declined rather than kicking up a fuss, but "breaking the rules" or not is often left up to sysop discretion. There have already been accusations of Wyn banning Shard to prevent his participation in the election, which are totally unfounded in my opinion, deciding what the policy actually is could prevent such occurences in the future. Unless the whole wiki goes to the trolls I don't think legitimately banned people will ever be elected as bcrats anyway, so why prevent them from running and open yourself to baseless accusations? Misery 09:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

If the user does not (/cannot) accept the nomination by the start of the next phase, it is automatically declined, right? -Auron 09:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

"Candidates who are nominated by another user are urged (but not required) to indicate a clear acceptance or declination before stage 2." --195.195.129.3 09:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hm, then they're technically not disqualified. -Auron 10:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, but Shard declined anyway. My policy suggestion is for the minimisation of drama llamas. While llamas are cute I prefer to restrict them to the bedroom. Misery 10:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think historically, any member who was not in good standing at the time of their nomination was automatically scratched, though a policy clarification may be in order. BTW, for all you drama queens, Shard sent me a very gracious (I know! Shard and gracious in the same sentence... whodathunkit?) email telling me he was in fact not the IP address posting grief on my election page (and I believe him), and wishing me luck. -- Wyn 10:19, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not within Shard's character to anonymously troll and mess with elections. His supporters tend to be more of that inclination. Misery 10:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the policy should be re/worded/written for clarity. --Antioch 17:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The discussion is more appropriately placed here. --Xeeron 23:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm

Not as large a candidate pool as elections past. Any particular reason? — THARKUN 04:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, lots of people declined. Misery 09:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the number is fine and there are still 3 users left that would make good bcrats. poke | talk 16:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree that Wynthyst is completely unsuited for the job, but was it really fair to go out and say it here? Misery 16:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

lol poke | talk 18:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

this term's election is a joke. - Y0_ich_halt 10:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I admit there was a distinct lack of choice, but that probably is largely to do with a large number of declined nominations. More people could have been nominated. That being said, of the three candidates the winner was relatively clear. Misery 10:29, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

All American Party for....

..the main candidates..how refreshing. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 19:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, nationalism rearing its ugly head. Vili 20:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

It's better than a bunch of unknowns running, or worse: a bunch of people who will abuse it. --Antioch 20:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Must be a conspiracy, right Silverleaf? It can't be based on the merits of the users, it must be about the country they live in. But let's ignore Love To Sync, because then we couldn't say we know they're all Americans. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Just stated "how refreshing". Guess these day's peeps see negative things in everything. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 20:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Since the opening comment contained little substance, I had no choice but to use inference, and that's what I inferred. Why else would the fact that they (as in 3/4) are American be relevant? Unless you actually meant that it's refreshing in the good sense (i.e. you approve that they are all Americans for some reason or another), which would probably be worse. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Or we could take everything super seriously and never even think it was just a funny comment? :P - anja 20:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the problem is that even if I don't take the comment seriously (i.e. I interpret it as sarcasm/an attempt at a joke), it comes off discriminatory anyway, and that makes me frown, even if it might be funny. Anyway, elections are srs bsns. Vili 20:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, Anja :) -- Brains12 \ talk 21:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I blame those asian-european-canadian defeatists all bowing out before the elective battle even starts! --Xeeron 23:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Aber wasn't even allowed to bow out, he was just thrown out. Clearly discrimination vs Asians. Backsword 04:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yea! I got thrown out even before knowing I was in. -- ab.er.rant 06:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Excuses! --Xeeron 10:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I could always nominate myself in the interests of diversity, but I wouldn't get elected and it wouldn't change anything. Misery 10:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You sound like France, Misery. Diversity ftw and all that -- Salome 12:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol?

Wait, is this for real? Elections for a silly wiki site? Sure I love this wiki, and I go here to get all my info... but really, elections??? I loved reading all the discussions and seeing all these people bickering on who's qualified and who's not. Funny stuff right there... Btw I'm probably gonna forget I put this 'topic' here, so feel free to yell at me in my talk page. Hold on... I might forget about that too because I don't update it often... --Lustre Of Havoc 12:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I know what you mean. Too often do people forget that this is just a small wiki about a video game. -Auron 12:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

There is an administrative structure to this silly wiki, I mean, who do you imagine does all the maintenance, solve user disputes, etc? It is a site run by the guild wars community, and the administrators are chosen by the community. How do you think that happens? Draw straws? You can find out more on the About Guild Wars Wiki page. And coming from one of the admins that's funny Auron. -- Wyn 12:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I always knew wiki sites had people that ran them and the community did all the adding... Never knew it was so... political... Waste of precious time if you ask me! --Lustre Of Havoc 12:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

So how do you propose we choose admins in a less political manner? Not being picky here, just curious as to your ideas on this. -- Salome 12:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I was going to say we Cincinnatus it, but that'd require a Senate or some Consuls, which would also involve politics. So we'll just have to settle for Auron's subtle mocking. — THARKUN 14:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed which is rather funny considering how many times he ran for election. ;) -- Salome 14:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't take an administrator to solve user disputes or carry out maintenance. And I don't think straw-drawing is the only alternative to elections, votes, and politics - once upon a time (yes, I'm using the "it worked on GWiki" argument), a couple of bureaucrats oversaw sysop actions and promoted/demoted them as necessary. It was a simple system, yet it was still effective and it worked. -- Brains12 \ talk 15:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Auron is god on PvX. He used to have to share heaven with Defiant Elements, but DE got bored of being a god. Misery 15:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It gets boring being all-powerful after awhile. The temptation to abuse your powers is sooo strong. ;) And you know, while I miss the symbolic power of bureaucracy, to be honest day-to-day life is exactly the same as ever. The office looks a lot more impressive to those who aren't in it. Vili 22:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

We could always sell seats, I suppose. xD --Antioch 16:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I say we put every registered users name in a hat and the first one we pick wins! --Shadowphoenix 16:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Woohoo...*starts making multiple sock accounts* -- Salome 17:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Or... The person who owns the site can just hire people? Volunteers? If someone does a sucky job, kick em and pick someone else... Seriously you make this longer than it needs to be with an 'election'.--Lustre Of Havoc 23:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not a person, it's a company. Who outsight said they don't want to be involved in the running of the wiki in that way. - anja 23:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Which actually is why we have such processes that are that democratic. poke | talk 23:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I say people should be working on making this wiki a little cooler looking. All these people and all they do is talk about stuff that doesn't matter. Like this whole discussion! Anyways, would anyone hate me if I hired someone to create like a way better looking skin for wiki? I probably wouldn't waste my money on it, but would anyone care if I did do that? --Lustre Of Havoc 00:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I like monobook.. :/ poke | talk 00:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:Mypage/monobook.css and Special:Mypage/monobook.js, unless you meant to *totally* redo everything Vili 00:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

We need more <blink> and <marquee>, then we'd be a stylish website. — THARKUN 06:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't work on IE, unfortunately (one of the things it does right!). Vili 06:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

As Vili said, you can make your wiki skin whatever you would like by editing your css file. To get a global change would require you to open a discussion, probably on the Guild Wars Wiki talk:Community Portal and make a proposal, and then discuss it and reach a consensus, which will take a minimum of, at a guess, 6 months. I personally like the monobook skin. And no Tharkun, we don't need more <blink> or <marquee>. :P But none of this really has anything to do with the election, so I would suggest if you wish to discuss it further you take it to your talk page. -- Wyn 09:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Can anyone take a screenie of the monobook skin? If I don't like it then I don't have to bother doing all the changes... --Lustre Of Havoc 10:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The monobook skin is the current skin this wiki uses. -- Wyn 11:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

...Then why the heck are people talking about how to change it to that and stuff? Talk about leading people to believe there's a cooler skin out there when there's not. --Lustre Of Havoc 22:26, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

← moved to User talk:Lustre

No, they didnt lead you on, you're just not following. If you amend the pages those links link too, then you can set up your own colour scheme EDIT: or you could just click "my preferences" and then click "skins" and choose an already made colour scheme. -- Salome 00:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Salome... follow the MOVED TO link if you want to continue this conversation..... -- Wyn 00:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry my bad, completely missed the link. -- Salome 00:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

A preemptive grats, Tanetris.

I think it's clear who will be taking the seat at the end of this stage. Grats. :) (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Good that I didn't save yet and checked if someone else was faster:

• Tanetris: 35/4 = +31
• Aiiane: 22/7 = +15
• Loves to Sync: 4/27 = -23

Winner is Tanetris, objections? poke | talk 00:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

None. --SilentStorm 01:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that my vote should be worth a million making Loves to Sync a clear winner. Other than that, no objections. Misery 01:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

A pretty clear result. --Xeeron 01:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's "preemtive", Aiiane - it's February 28th and after the voting stage, so it's pretty much decided already. Also Poke, I don't think objections would matter. :P -- Brains12 \ talk 01:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It's a deciding winners phase, and it lasts one day; so we have to do something, or at least make it looks as if there would happen something on that day. Also the objections are rather on the results, because theoretically it could be that I missed 123 supporting votes for Loves to Sync which would have made him the winner :P So bla bla bla... poke | talk 01:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Congrats tane! -- Salome 10:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratualations Tanetris. Hope you do well! --Burning Freebies 11:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)