Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2009-10 bureaucrat election/Auron

Discuss. - Reanimated X 09:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes. End of story. NuVII 12:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

You hate Anet, you hate GW, you say you dont even play the game, and you are the most popular person for sysop on an offical Anet wiki about GW. The blindness of the masses will never cease to amaze me.--71.176.41.102 04:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. One might wonder why in the world he is wasting his time on this wiki anymore. Just for the power trip, perhaps? 24.144.19.225 04:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, lording e-power over a small wiki about a dead video game is definitely my motive. Don't tell anyone though. -Auron 04:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

That's almost as unbelievable as thinking you actually care about the sanctity and community of a website run by a company you hate, about a game you hate and don’t play. Almost.--71.176.41.102 04:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

On the contrary, that isn't unbelievable at all. My last term as bureaucrat was fine, and unless you're suggesting I've forgotten how to do it, I would say that your claim is ridiculous. I hold no ill will towards the community in question, and as a finisher, I've never hated ArenaNet. Your ignorance of me speaks volumes. Then again, proxying to post these comments says more than I would care to know about your intentions, so I won't even bother going into more detail. Auron 04:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh please. I have personally had conversation with you, and read your posts that make your thoughts of believing Anet is filled with incompetent people clear. Over the years you have more than once posted flames and rants about how "Anet cant balance, this game sucks, shitway, etc, etc." For like a year, every time a new gimmick build beat you in halls you came to your user page to rant and moan about how terrible it was, posting screenshots about it as well. You have told me directly in game that you "have no desire to make friends with people in the game" when I tried to be friendly. You probably don’t remember it because it was like 2.5 years ago. You are angry, prone to fits of rage, and tend to resolve every single disagreement you get into with under laying insults, as you just did to me above. You have no tolerance for opinions that differ from yours. As for me proxying, not that you will believe it because you have already made up your mind about me and no force on this earth will change it, but my ISP actually uses a dynamic IP address (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_ip_address). I used to have an account on this site but I no longer use it because I was getting too caught up in wiki politics.--71.176.41.102 04:37, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet's changes = ArenaNet? I have hours-long conversations with Linsey and others on MSN (and occasionally vent). The conversations are civil and free of trolling. If I hated ArenaNet, that would not happen. As you already know, I don't like what they've done to the game - but I don't dislike them. I've never singled izzy out like the masses when a huge nerf came; I know he's got a lot on his plate, and many of the changes that the community wants, he knows about already, and cannot get his higher-ups to approve them. If I hated ArenaNet, I would just be another one of the "omg izzy sucks lol" in the crowd. As reality shows, I'm not. To summarize - their changes show incompetence, and their changes are what I dislike. I am perfectly happy with many of them and converse with them regularly. Reality shows that I don't hate ArenaNet. Is reality good enough for you?

I have no desire to make friends with people in the game. I have no desire to make friends here on wiki. Funny thing though... I don't see how it's a bureaucrat's job to make friends. A bureaucrat is completely impartial in everything he does - promotions, demotions, and arbitration committee rulings. Being friends with everyone would be more of an impediment to that job than would being friends with very few. Stop losing track of what the bureaucrat position is and entails. Bureaucrats aren't people's buddies. They're judges. Not wanting to make friends with every random passerby does not make me any worse of a bureaucrat. If anything, it makes me a better one.

"You are angry, prone to fits of rage"

Have I deleted pages, banned users, or protected articles out of rage? Have I demoted or promoted anyone out of rage? What the fuck makes you think I'm going to start now? You're ranting pointlessly without even staying on topic. This is a bureaucrat election. List stuff that makes me bad at being a bureaucrat or stop wasting my time.

"and tend to resolve every single disagreement you get into with under laying insults, as you just did to me above."

Every single disagreement, eh? I'm not even going to bother responding here, because it simply isn't true. If reality isn't the basis for your arguments, however, don't expect me to take you seriously. When you come in without an idea of what a Bureaucrat is supposed to do and spew a bunch of crap that isn't relevant (or even true, in some cases), you expect me to bother with even a hint of seriousness? No, you're just wasting everyone's time by posting to begin with. When you waste my time, you provoke hostility. Although, since I'm apparently prone to fits of rage severe enough to interfere with my ability to be a bureaucrat, I guess I should ban you or something. Funny how it hasn't happened. Damn reality, getting in the way of your argument.

"You have no tolerance for opinions that differ from yours."

Hahahahahahahahahaha. Really? I often disagree with other people and accept their arguments as valid. Poke, for example, does a lot of stuff with templates that I would prefer he not do, but he explains his changes pretty well and has shut down my arguments on multiple occasions. I didn't want his bot account to get sysop powers, but his arguments were persuasive enough for me to drop it. Aiiane has disagreed with me on a number of things and has shown me her point of view. Binary is another example, although most of our conversations have been off-wiki.

No, the thing I lack tolerance for is ignorance. Differing opinions are fine, as long as that person has sufficient experience and/or research to back up his claims. As soon as a clueless person comes in and starts trying to tell me (for example) that Wounding Strike is balanced without any PvP experience at all, he's reached the end of my tolerance meter. When someone tries to wikilawyer with a policy that doesn't even agree with what they're saying, they've reached it. All it takes for an opinion to be tolerated is experience and knowledge. If someone isn't going to bother learning what he's talking about, why on earth would I bother giving him the time of day? Again, I'm not here to make friends. If he has a point, he can make it. If his point is flat-out stupid or unsubstantiated (or... not based in reality), it is going to be largely ignored. It isn't too much to ask to learn what you're saying before saying it.

I believe you that you aren't proxying. My point, however, is still valid - you don't post from your account because you don't want it tied to your posts. A horse by any other name, y'know? -Auron 05:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Because people's opinions never change over 2.5 years or more. 24.233.254.51 04:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

71, stop talking before you give someone brain cancer. ~Shard 04:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, stop trolling before you get banned from the election pages like you did the Anet staff pages shard. Or at least argue against me productivly.--71.176.41.102 05:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you know about a high profile arbcomm and/or clicked on my name. Should I be more afraid of you now?

You have no idea what Auron's intentions are. The fact that he's here at all disproves pretty much everything you've said so far. ~Shard 05:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, this (http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:Auron/Gimmicks any active post there, sadly he's erased most of the really good ones, its really too bad the shitway one is gone as that was the best example) as well as my own personal experience with Auron are all I need to form my opinions about him. Why do you even care Shard, you know better than anyone that I am essentially shouting in the wind. Auron will win this by a landslide since hes most core memeber of the wiki in crowd currently running. Only reason I am bothering to type this at all is I am having a bout of insomnia.--71.176.41.102 05:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC

Again, you're throwing out random opinions and stating them as facts. Auron is not the "core" of the wiki. He will not win by a landslide. It's fairly obvious you have no idea what you're talking about, but I agree it's caused by a lack of sleep. ~Shard 05:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

To echo Shard here, you're just ranting about stuff you haven't the first clue on. I am not going to win this election. The last election I "won" I didn't even win. You can act like a lone martyr shouting against the evils that abound, but uh... you aren't making any sense. Not to mention you haven't actually said how any of the things you claim will make me any worse of a Bureaucrat, which is sort of the point of this page. -Auron 05:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and User:Auron/Gimmicks/Shitway has never existed. It hasn't been moved or deleted, it simply never was. -Auron 05:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

No one should want a person to be a memeber of Congress if they hate America, even if they are a great politian. So should a person not want you be sysop, since you hate the game. Nonetheless. this conversation went exactly how I thought it would go, and I am satisfied that things have not changed in my absence from this wiki. Neither you nor Shard are capable of having a conversation without filling it with cursing and insults, which is also what wins you so many friends here. As for shitway not existing, I forget what it was then that was you on your ele losing to a trapper team, filled with you screaming "WHAT THE FUCK ANET." I will concide that my knowledge of you is dated, but it certainly appears to still be accurate. I suppose I'll bow to defeat. Enjoy your term as sysop.--71.176.41.102 05:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and for the record I havent used my account in years.--71.176.41.102 05:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

First of all, politicians loving their country and an admin loving the game is a terrible analogy, if you can even call it that. This isn't Guild Wars. This is a wiki. If Auron hated the wiki, you'd be spot on, but you're good at missing details that make a difference.

I'm perfectly capable of having a conversation. When you want to bring something other than ignorance to the table, we'll gladly listen to you. ~Shard 05:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

For the sake of brevity and sanity, and real estate on this talk page, Ill try and be the bigger man here and conced all previous points. Riddle me this then, Sir Auron. You disagree with, from what I can, the vast majority of Anets decisions of this game. You do not like this game. You do not play (from the last I heard) this game. Why do you want to be a judge on a wiki for a, as you yourself just put it "dead game?"--71.176.41.102 05:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

"random red herrings concerning the job requirements of a bureaucrat"

I dunno, maybe Auron wanted to ensure there was more than one viable candidate? One-sided elections are such a bore. Vili 点 05:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I did not seek out the nomination for bureaucrat. I merely accepted it. I accepted it, mind you, with the knowledge that I will most likely lose the election, as I have lost all but one in the past. If the community, however, wants me to serve a term as bureaucrat, I will not tell them no. I can't deny I'd be pretty good at it - but, contrary to your apparent beliefs, I do not go out of my way to "win" the seat. (tbh, take a quick look at the reality of this situation. I would have a much greater chance of winning if I was less of a dick to people. I'm not being less of a dick to people. Do you really still think I'm trying to go out of my way to win this thing?) -Auron 05:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm glad we're electing members of congress here - certainly a flawless comparison. Countries, video games, same shit, right?

"Neither you nor Shard are capable of having a conversation without filling it with cursing and insults..."

I'm capable of having a conversation without filling it with curses or insults. I do it every day. Are you capable of presenting evidence to support your claims that I would make a poor bureaucrat? I'm waiting :D

"which is also what wins you so many friends here"

Wait, what? I'm a mean unfriendly person that isn't interested in making friends, yet my antics make me friends? Im confus. Your points contradict themselves.

"As for shitway not existing..."

I have a total of 2 link hub pages for my rants. You didn't bother checking the 1 other page to find it. This comes back to the whole "not doing your homework" thing - you want to put forth a half-assed attempt and expect me to give it my all in response. Life doesn't work like that.

"I will concide that my knowledge of you is dated, but it certainly appears to still be accurate."

is still waiting for an explanation as to why any of it makes me a bad bureaucrat

"I suppose I'll bow to defeat"

...defeat? This isn't about winning or losing. This is a bureaucrat election talk page. It is about my ability to serve as a bureaucrat and do the tasks expected of one - closing RfAs, serving as a member of the arbitration committee, and now (this one is pretty difficult) using the UserMerge feature. None of what you said relates to any of that. Your entire argument so far has been a red herring. Oh, look, Obama's last name has three vowels, he'd be a terrible president! -Auron 05:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

*Looks over his posts* Nope, no where did I say you would be a bad bureaucrat. These were all things about your character.--71.176.41.102 05:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) "Riddle me this"

I'm offended :< --RIDDLE 05:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! We agree that none of what you posted has anything to do with bureaucrat elections. Glad you came around finally. -Auron 06:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I never denied it. You could read up and respond to the question I posted that does have something to do with the topic at hand.--71.176.41.102 06:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I already did. -Auron 06:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Insomnia clouds the mind and rends the judgment asunder. My mistake.--71.176.41.102 06:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I love the part where 71.176 is clear-minded enough to know that he/she is incapable of making good judgements under the influence of insomnia, yet proceeds to delight the wiki with a spectacular display of red herrings(and retardation). So much drama, me likey. Pika Fan 09:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Nah, Auron just had to tackle my statement that it is almost impossible to convince someone online with a just wall of text. NOW I am confused. Koda Kumi 15:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry, but please try again, this time in understandable english. Pika Fan 16:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I doubt Auron convinced anyone, IP probably still thinks Auron is a complete dick. Jair 18:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

He didn't need to convince anyone, especially all IP said were things totally unrelated to Auron accepting the bureaucrat nominated. Pika Fan 18:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

See, Auron knows when to be a complete dick and when not to be a complete dick. That is a good bureaucrat. --snograt 20:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that, while Auron may not like ArenaNet or Guild Wars, he appears to be interested and at least moderately support of this wiki, for some various reason or other. ··· Danny Pew Pew 20:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

new header

>>>I read Auron's page, and I personally don't see the sense in having someone be a bureaucrat for a wiki that is about a game he or she apparently doesn't like all that much.

"Guild Wars is a bad game filled with bad players. But it used to be good." This is not a direct copy quote, because it is made up of a title and the following text, but it gets the point across. Auron does not like Guild Wars. Auron doesn't like the players of Guild Wars. And since the players of Guild Wars are the ones who make use of this wiki, and are the people who maintain and update the included information, Auron has effectively stated dislike for the community of the wiki. (from http://www.wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_Wiki:About#ArenaNet_hosts_the_site.2C_does_ArenaNet_police_or_control_the_content.3F "ArenaNet agrees with the community on some basic guidelines, ...and then asks the community to administer and moderate the site."

From Auron's user page http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:Auron#Guild_Wars .

"I'm capable of having a conversation without filling it with curses or insults."
And previously in this page,
"Have I deleted pages, banned users, or protected articles out of rage? Have I demoted or promoted anyone out of rage? What the fuck makes you think I'm going to start now? You're ranting pointlessly without even staying on topic. This is a bureaucrat election. List stuff that makes me bad at being a bureaucrat or stop wasting my time."

Technically not filled, agreed. However, why bring up the point about cursing in the same page as a previous curse from you?

"First of all, politicians loving their country and an admin loving the game is a terrible analogy, if you can even call it that. This isn't Guild Wars. This is a wiki."
True Shard, however, it is a wiki about a game Auron hates (now, at least). But it is the same mind set that is the issue. It makes no sense to have someone be a person of authority in a wiki that is about a game that he dislikes.

That government analogy that 71.176 used could have been better. Here is one. It is like having someone work as a person of importance for a company (how about we use ArenaNet as an example) when that person hates that company, or hates what that company produces, and yet wants to sit there and lord over one of few sources of information about that thing he hates.

I agree with you Shard, the wiki and the game are 2 seperate things, but they are closely related. ("ArenaNet agrees with the community on some basic guidelines, ..."the purpose of this site is to document Guild Wars", and then asks the community to administer and moderate the site." Actually having an interest in what you are overseeing actually does make a difference. And that applies as much to the source of the information in the wiki as it does to the wiki itself. Auron's possible position as a bureaucrat in this wiki, I feel at least, would be better filled by someone who is actually interested in and likes the game.

I found some posts in various locations. Since Auron seems to like people to do their homework, I have included the links to show I have done my homework.

(this page) "As you already know, I don't like what they've done to the game - but I don't dislike them."
(from Auron's user page http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:Auron/GuildWarsSucksSoMuch ) "Instead of removing rants and letting them sit in my userpage history, I'll put them here, because most of them have never been fixed - thanks to ANet being absolutely incompetent and focused on the wrong things."
That sounds like dislike to me, calling an entire comapany "absolutely incompetent". And also from the page listed above, but under a link to another page "Andrew Patrick started a guru thread and claimed that he didn't have to take shit from anyone, and that ANet knew what they were doing. He also spouted a bunch of additional shit that was wrong, and he was beautifully countered by JR in this post(see link following this) (which has been removed from the guru thread by incompetent mods who would rather enjoy the taste of ANet's flaccid penis in their mouth than see ANet answer for their failures)."
http://www.finishthedrill.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=523&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Dislike? You decide.

(from http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:Auron/GuildWarsSucksSoMuch/ArenaNet%27s_Community_Relations_failures ) "ANet; work on CR. As evidenced in this thread, not only do your two current CR people not fulfill their roles, they live in denial about what they're supposed to be doing. If you want Guild Wars to be taken seriously by any PvPers, you need to learn how to listen. The best thing you could do right now? Hire Ensign, at least part-time, to serve as a liaison between the devs and the PvP community; Ensign knows what he's talking about, knows more about game mechanics than pretty much anyone, and is a respected member of the PvP community. If you're looking for someone to relay information between the devs at ANet and the PvP community, at least pick someone who knows what they're talking about."

(this page) "Oh, and User:Auron/Gimmicks/Shitway has never existed. It hasn't been moved or deleted, it simply never was."
OK, I will give you this one, because you are right, on a technicality. However, http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:Auron/GuildWarsSucksSoMuch/Shitway does exist, or at least did at one time.

You will probably claim that this has nothing to do with being a bureaucrat, it actually has more to do with showing your dislike for a game (and a company) which this wiki uses as the source for it, and it comes back to having faith in regards to the item (or source of that item) that you are dealing with. Many of them have to do with showing your repeated false statements about your dislike of the company, and the community that makes use of this wiki. Your position as a bureaucrat is to oversee this wiki, and to support the community (including the game players) that make use of it. A community that you have claimed to not like (see your words Auron "Guild Wars is a bad game filled with bad players." makes use of this wiki.

Time and time again, from various sources, direct quotes from and about Auron, and directly and indirectly addressing his or her, I don't know of any other way to put this, but ability to be a proper and effective bureaucrat (basically the same thing as administrator) of this site are questionable. Claim a wall of text if you want, but since this information is all over the place, how else can it all be collected and prove the point except in one fell swoop. At the time of this posting, all of this information was accurate and did exist. Who knows how long it will take Auron to delete these (some of them he or she can't get to) references from the user page.)69.182.188.52 21:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I feel like adding that I, a currently standing bureaucrat, am not currently playing Guild Wars and find myself losing interest in it. I was playing very little at the time I was elected. I won't speak for Defiant Elements, but I was under the impression that he isn't playing much if at all these days. He is currently soundly beating Auron in this election. I don't think that alone is a huge factor and it would appear people seem to agree with me on that point, unless they didn't know. If they just didn't know and think it is terrible, I hope I've shown that someone can do a reasonable job while not playing the game. Misery 21:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You would have been right if a bureaucrat had to like the game. But like admins, a bureaucrats' job is to deal with the users of the wiki. Yes, they are probably GW players, but Auron didn't say "All of gw players suck, fu all." - you have to agree that a majority of all MMORPG players suck fat female monkey balls. You have to admit that you met and will meet players in past present and future that you'll want to reap their heads off and put them in a blender. Yet, when you meet them on the wiki, they're different than in game (most likely). You don't even have to know who they are ingame, or like some users here, they don't even play GW - but they can still be admins and bureaucrat. Titani Ertan 21:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The point is though, Titani, that the community that makes use of this wiki is the players, and that is the point. Auron has stated his or her dislike of that group of people. If they act different on here or not isn't the point. Those same people are still those same people on here or in the game.

The wiki is here for the support of those players, and is kept up by those players. All I am saying is that is why Auron wouldn't be a good choice for a bureaucrat. A person who has no interest, in my opinion, would be a better choice than someone who has stated a dislike for that spot.69.182.188.52 21:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I dunno about you, but I've never seen Auron treat anyone specially because they played gw or not; I'm not sure he has a sure way to know whether we play gw. Whilst Auron's "opinions" seem to offend some Guild Wars players, it didn't stop him doing his job as an admin, and I've yet to see a case of bias or discrimination regarding that, or anything else for that matter. Titani Ertan 22:02, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Frankly, I missed how any of that applies to Auron's ability to function as a bureaucrat.

1. It doesn't matter whether or not Auron likes the game. This is a wiki, not a game. His ability to judge Requests for Adminship have nothing to do with whether or not he is pleased with the state of Guild Wars.
2. ...giving an example of a situation where Auron has cursed doesn't automatically prove that he is incapable of handling things without cursing. I could link to a number of situations where he hasn't cursed. But on the other hand.... what does it really matter if a bureaucrat curses? im confus.
3. As we've pointed out, administrating a wiki has nothing to do with like or dislike of the game. If Auron were applying to work at ANet or the Test Krewe, sure, maybe I'd agree, but he isn't. ArenaNet hardly touches the wiki. They own it, deal with tech stuff, and use the Feedback: namespace. None of which has to do specifically with being a bureaucrat. I'm not even sure you know what a bureaucrat does, really :/
4. No, that's not dislike. Recognizing when something is being done wrong is not the same thing as dislike. If I happen to disagree with my conservatives friends on what issues they're pushing for, does that somehow magically mean that I hate their guts? No.

In short, it sounds more like you are judging Auron on his personality than his actual capability to be a bureaucrat. – Emmett 22:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Guys, you've got it all wrong. Auron doesn't dislike Guild Wars, he's just a tsundere. 99.151.142.67 22:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Oooook. Either way, Auron has been already a bcrat here and did a good job as that, even if he wasn't all that supportive of the game. I would think the same would happend were he to be elected again.--Fighterdoken 22:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Auron,

ilu.

Your friend,

··· Danny Pew Pew 20:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

auron GO GO GO, vote for him :> :3 - Wuhy 01:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC)