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

Discussion

Please place your discussion about Lacky's Bureaucrat nomination on this page under this. -- §Lacky§ Talk

You have a penguin in your sig therefor you have my vote xD Nah tbh I dont know you going to check your edits a bit :) Lilondra *panda* 10:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

lolMini Me 11:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

For a second I thought this was Eloc (from the signature)...

Btw. do you actually know what a bureaucrat is? From your text, you only would like to become a sysop which is something completely different. See Guild Wars Wiki:Adminship. poke | talk 12:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Considering you've opened an RfA, do you still want to run in the bureaucrat election? -- Brains12 \ talk 14:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated myself for both. -- §Lacky§ Talk 03:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

You know you'll lose for both... right? Mini Me 10:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Why does your first comment on this talk page refer to yourself on the third person? And just because you want to try something new today doesnt mean you could win. You need proof of hard work through contributions etc. --Burning Freebies 15:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Lilondra, I thank you for your comment. Penguins are indeed awesome. Poke, Eloc helped me with the signature a little because I thought it looked cool. I have just changed it around a little. As for what I think a Bureaucrat actually is, check my answer under Brains12's question heading entitled "Bureaucrat". Mini Me, whether I lose or not, I shall still have a great experience from them. Also, I do not think that you can predict what's going to happen. There is possibly others better suited to the role, but we do not know as the votes have not been tallied yet. Burning Freebies, I put it in third person because I can and also it's so that people know that it's my nomination discussion page, in case they have several Internet tabs open that are the different candidates pages. I could have possibly put "my", but I decided to put it in third person. Is it such a crime to put it in third person? -- §Lacky§ Talk 01:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it just isnt really proper Engish grammar. Not that its necessary, but odd. Best of luck anyways, and ignore Mini Me, hes an annoying troll who likes sending abusive comments to me all the time. --Burning Freebies 15:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't meant as a trolling comment. I meant it more as like "maybe you shouldn't go on with this". Mini Me 16:09, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

(Reset Indent) I know that it's not "proper" English grammar, I just think that it adds some...finesse, if you will. I shall change it however if you so wish. Regarding the Mini Me comment, I shall keep it in mind, considering he opposed my RFA just because he likes bold letters. Not really a reason to oppose now eh? Mini Me, whether the odds are in my favour (I am Australian so that's why I use the "u" in favour, but I am not just going to change it in every article) or not, I shall continue this until the voting is over and we see who has been elected. This is a great experience for me. -- §Lacky§ Talk 00:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

And Really Burning You Bring it on yourself Wild 04:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat

How would you define the bureaucrat role? -- Brains12 \ talk 13:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Define the word define. I take it you mean you want to know what I think a Bureaucrat is/does, and the responsibilities that come with it, correct? -- §Lacky§ Talk 01:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

He means what would you do. ~Shard 01:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

"I hope that I am elected". Looks like that wont happen. But at least he will get more supporting votes than i would. --Burning Freebies 19:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Lol, cant even vote for himself. --Burning Freebies 12:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It's sick

how you people all jump the new candidate. Care to discuss the candidates that have a chance of winning? This page is tooo loong already.

Seriously though, there are more intelligent questions here than on, for instance, Pling's page. Isn't that a bit weird? — Why 18:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we're trying to get a feel for the new candidate? --Riddle 18:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Pling has already been asked the intelligent questions in times past. I don't care if a candidate is "new" to the field as long as they are equally qualified. Vili >8< 22:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Why, it's ok, I don't mind, although I know what you mean what with all the myriad of questions on the page, but don't worry, it's nothing that I can't handle. Hazing normal happens to "the new guy". Also, I do have a chance of winning. Everybody who runs has a chance, some just might be higher/lower than others. Also, there is nobody called Pling on the candidates list? Vili, I assure you that I am equally qualified, if not more so. -- §Lacky§ Talk 00:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Pling is Brains12's other nickname. --71.246.218.44 01:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahh ok, thanks. -- §Lacky§ Talk 03:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

"Vili, I assure you that I am equally qualified, if not more so." Care to substantiate that comment? *Defiant Elements* +talk 03:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

In the interest of providing a constructive format for getting to know you as a candidate, here's a list of questions that I (and others) have asked candidates (usually first time contenders) in previous elections.

• 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?

*Defiant Elements* +talk 03:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Good questions. --Burning Freebies 14:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)