Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2009-04 bureaucrat election

100 edits, right?--Unendingfear 00:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

100 non-Guild/User/ArenaNet-space edits, yes. -- Brains12 \ talk 00:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I wonder how many I have =|--Unendingfear 01:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

It looks like you have just barely enough, maybe. Vili >8< 01:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

=D--Unendingfear 02:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, so far I'm predicting a quiet election with no big upset and a usual candidate winning. Not that that's a bad thing, mind you. --Antioch 04:50, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

A usual candidate tends to win when there are no unusual nominations, yes. Vili >8< 04:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Do edits on talk pages for those pages count? ~Shard 05:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

RE:Shard - Nope, that's still within the namespace of those places. --Antioch 05:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I meant for the allowed namespaces. So do arenanet talk, main talk etc count? ~Shard 05:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk in mainspace and other eligible namespaces do count AFAIK. --Antioch 05:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet talk, Guild talk, and User talk don't count. The rest do. -- Brains12 \ talk 15:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Is there a faster way to count, other than going down the contribution list?--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 18:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Poke/GWWT, at the bottom. You've got 59 valid contributions afaik. -- Brains12 \ talk 18:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I wonder...

Who to vote for, Wyn or Plingggggg? Both have helped me out alot...--Unendingfear 14:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Being bcrat is not limited to helping out, so you shouldn't base your decision on that ;) Also you can simply vote for both if you like.

And I expect some more nominations within the next days, this is just the beginning.. poke | talk 14:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok =D--Unendingfear 15:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, yo can vote for as many people as you want, but only once per nominee. --Burning Freebies 17:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

This election is for one Bureaucrat. I appreciate that my contributions are, as yet, too few to allow me the chance to vote in this Election and I don't want to put a spanner in the process BUT I wonder (lol), is it right that those who eligible to vote can vote for or against more than one (and even every) candidate thus, in effect, having more than one For and Against vote? Surely each voter should only be able to vote once for one candidate and only be able to vote once against one candidate? It does not appear very democratic like it is! Bearz 09:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

It is not democratic at all, it is a popularity contest. Popularity contests do not have to conform to any particular style of voting, and this point has been debated ad nauseam in the past.

However, logically, it makes no difference. Your suggested system allows a user to show support for only one candidate, and once he's chosen, he is in essence voting against all the other candidates. The current system allows users to judge the merits of each candidate individually, and decide whether or not that person is qualified to serve as a Bureaucrat. Wikis are more complex than a simple democratic institution, and the style of voting is more complex to match.

That's all in theory, of course, because most people aren't smart enough to understand what "judging candidates by their merits" means so they just vote for who they like and vote against who they dislike, without taking a minute to think deeply about what being a bureaucrat entails. -Auron >8< 09:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Auron, so its not much different then from political Elections where popularity seems to be the best reason for voting for the winner! Bearz 10:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Question to technical guys...

Why has the main notice that appears on every wiki page disappeared? --Burning Freebies 15:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing because you clicked the "dismiss" button. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

It pops up again when the election stages change. — Jon Lupen 16:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

@Brains-i didnt press dismiss. --Burning Freebies 11:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

You have to, to make it disappear. Otherwise you don't get that cookie that removes it. poke | talk 12:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

o_O

I haven't heard of like 4 people on that list. I haven't been off the wiki THAT long...-- anguard 15:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, these Wynthyst and Brains12 characters are complete unknowns. How do they expect people to vote for them? Backsword 15:46, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Not them, fool. Venomoth and Lacky. lolwut.-- anguard 16:19, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Venomoth and Lacky have been around a while, but i havent heard of them either. If you look on Lacky's RFA page, most people say they dont know him, so youre not alone. I havent heard of Misery either. --Burning Freebies 15:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

That's because no one takes the time to GET to know me. -- §Lacky§ Talk 03:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The burden is on you to make contributions that get you noticed, not on us to notice you, and, frankly, you haven't done much that has been especially noteworthy as of yet. I encourage you to rectify that fact. *Defiant Elements* +talk 03:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Let's be honest this is going to be a two horse race as it stands. -- Salome 11:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat elections seem more like "which sysop can go on a 6-months holiday" elections these days. — Why 13:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that sounds a just about right. --Antioch 14:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

There was a certain ring of truth to what Why said their. :) -- Salome 19:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Winding down

Brains    29
Wyn       25
Misery    21
WT        2
Cursed   -26
Lacky    -30
Shard    -30
Venomoth -31

Currently so far. If my math is wrong, feel free to edit this.--Antioch 18:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Misery has a lot more than I expected. I need to hang around more so I can figure out who the hell people are.-- anguard 19:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Brains 27, Wyn 26, and Misery 21. A 1-vote difference if the votes don't change in about 10 hours. -- ab.er.rant 13:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Misery has a lot more than I expected. I am pleasantly surprised. Half of Salome'sWhy's predictions might come true, it looks like a sysop will get a holiday, but I think this horse scared a few punters who made early bets. Misery 13:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooops, falsely attributing Why's comments to Salome, I'm bad at that. Misery 13:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I was actually thinking about supporting you too Misery, but I decided supporting 3 candidates didn't make much sense. Next time maybe ;) — Why 14:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that supporting the top three candidates seems like a bit of a wasted vote, so no hard feelings at all. I haven't decided if/how I am going to vote yet, but in the past I always voted to increase the chance of the person I wanted to win most of winning, which could involve opposing someone I don't think would do a bad job, I'm a manipulative person who likes to work systems though. Misery 14:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Wasted vote? You can vote for/against all of them if you want, this isn't a one vote per customer election. There are no wasted votes. -- Wyn 02:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's how you're supposed to vote, Mis. The system is designed so that strategic voting allows an absolute system to reflect relative preference. Backsword 07:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with Wyn and agree with Backsword, but I won't press, people can vote however they damn well like. Misery 07:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Brains: 28
Wyn: 27
Misery: 21
WT: 2
CA: -26
Lacky: -30
Shard: -31
Venomoth: -32

Correct me if Im wrong.... |Cyan LightLive!| 14:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Holy heaven! Gray error boxes here too? O.o |Cyan LightLive!| 14:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

And now they are gone -.- |Cyan LightLive!| 14:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Its a conspiracy. — Why 14:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Results

If nothing changes, that are the results:

• Brains12: 41/14 = +27
• Wynthyst: 41/15 = +26
• Misery: 33/11 = +22
• Wandering Traveler: 16/13 = +3
• Cursed Angel: 3/30 = -27
• Lacky: 1/31 = -30
• Shard: 2/34 = -32
• Venemoth: 1/33 = -32

It is still a hour left though, so good luck :P poke | talk 22:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes -

• Brains12: 41/14 = 27

Considering how close this election is, do we want to go to a second voting round? -- Brains12 \ talk 00:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Cba. -Auron 00:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Good point. -- Brains12 \ talk 00:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Cba? Care to explain for those not in the know? — Jon Lupen 01:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

w:CBA, #1. I think Plinggg won. — Why 01:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Consensus based assessment? Well, why not?--Antioch 01:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. — Jon Lupen 01:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well it is cutting it pretty close by only one vote... I say we go another round... but that's just me --Shadowphoenix 02:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Close only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades, and atomic bombs, as the saying goes. I can see why you would want to go another round, but in my personal opinion, it's not needed. You still have a winner. — Jon Lupen 02:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Reset Indent. I agree there is a clear winner. Drogo Boffin 03:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

{{ri}} Agreed, the winner is the winner even if by one vote. Unless he wants to withdraw, good luck on your vacations, Brains XD.--Fighterdoken 06:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Would agree with that. poke | talk 06:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations Brains. Thanks to my stupid computer, I didn't even get to vote... go figure. -- Wyn 07:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Well done to everyone for participating, and well done to Brains for winning. Best of luck in your new position. --Burning Freebies 10:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

lol i facepalm whenever i read any of your comments... --Cursed Angel 10:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You're not the only one. Mini Me 13:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The vote tally is not a draw, Brains12 has less opposition, and Wyn already consents to Brains12 being declared the winner. So, yea, gratz Brains12 :) -- ab.er.rant 01:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)