Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2011-06 bureaucrat election
Why no discussion?[edit]
- Stage 2: (June 20, 2011 – June 22, 2011 11:59 PM UTC) Discussion
- Users are encouraged to ask questions of the candidates regarding their candidacy and suitability and the candidates are expected to answer these queries in a timely fashion. Users on both sides are expected to give convincing arguments as to the suitability of a candidate and to debate the relative merits of various candidates. These reasons and arguments may be used as a means of persuading other users to change their position. In addition, these discussions play an important role in determining elections with very close vote tallies. While informed criticisms (preferably backed up by links to evidence) are welcomed, unwarranted personal attacks are not. Candidates are allowed to campaign for themselves during this stage.
At the end of this stage, a summary of the discussion should be compiled to quickly identify all major points for consideration. (source)
There was no discussion during stage 2 for Aiiane and pling. Aiiane seeks re-election, so the merits of her latest term are an obvious topic. These candidates, both incumbent bureaucrat and former bureaucrat, are controversial: in stage 1 several people participated in the discussion. The roles of the participants were, roughly and subjectively sorted, defending the candidate (+), opposing the candidate (–) (neither indicates overall support or opposition!), neutral (o), and personal attacks on commenters (PA).
| Aiiane | pling |
|---|---|
Aiiane + misery - Kaisha - (blocked) Felix Omni - (threatened with block) TEF + Salome +, PA on Felix Omni Auron + , PA on Felix Omni Cyan o, PA on Felix Omni Sardaukar PA on Felix Omni Reanimated X PA on Felix Omni, Kaisha pling o Gares o JonTheMon o Tanaric o Some could consider these personal attacks: Auron's block threat was commented upon by Felix Omni ("slathering me with disdain"), misery ("bordering on sysop tool abuse"), and Kaisha ("insulting and disparaging"). Greener instituted a "downtime" on 15:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC) that was set to last to the end of the stage; he did not post the expiry date explicitly. |
pling + misery - TahiriVeila - (blocked) Felix Omni - Briar - Kaisha - (blocked) poke + razor39999 + Aqua + TEF + Hong + Sardaukar PA on TV Cursed Angel PA on TV |
Kaisha and Tahiriveila vocally opposed during stage 1; they are now blocked, and likely unable to vote. Felix Omni was threatened with a block. The personal attacks on them were not reprimanded in any (public) way.
The wiki has failed to have an open and two-sided debate about these two important candidates.
I am looking forward to the summary of the discussion. --31.150.4.13 22:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- "There was no discussion during stage 2 for Aiiane and pling." We're still in stage 2. That means you're free to continue discussing if you wish, although it looks like everything that needs to be said has already been said. -- Hong 23:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Neither of the users were personally attacked, and no, permanently blocked users and users who abuse the Wiki Email feature and get blocked for it will not be able to vote. Felix will, of course, be able to vote - the warning was simply to stop standing on a soapbox, demanding evidence from everyone in the discussion, and not offering any himself. -Auron 23:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is also important to note, that the first stage actually already encourages discussion as well. And as both of your mentioned pages show, it happened. If with that everything is said, the discussion phase is not really needed. It is just a "safe buffer" for candidates that get nominated just before the first phase ends. poke | talk 01:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is less often that everything is said and more often that discussion is forcibly discontinued. Unfortunately, there is almost always something left to be said by somebody. Were discussions not so forcibly discontinued, they would continue forever or for far too long. I consider two discussion phases necessary in that the second phase hints at wrapping up whatever wasn't from the first, or issuing warnings and unfortunate blocks to those who face difficulty in letting go. Greener's ceasefire of sorts is well-placed but gives justification to a second discussion phase. Without the option of this second discussion phase, Greener's proposal would likely have stirred up twice the drama (by raising cries of censorship and the like). This second discussion phase is necessary for everyone to return with cooler heads, make their points, accept or agree to disagree with those points made, make their final decisions, act on them (through voting, of course) and finally shut up so this election process can conclude. Greener's proposal is an intermission, not a curtain call. Teddy Dan 20:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I chose to let the Aiiane discussion rest after multiple parties, including Auron, expressed their concern that it was no longer productive. I ceased partly out of courtesy and partly out of agreement.
elix Omni 20:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- I chose to let the Aiiane discussion rest after multiple parties, including Auron, expressed their concern that it was no longer productive. I ceased partly out of courtesy and partly out of agreement.
- It is less often that everything is said and more often that discussion is forcibly discontinued. Unfortunately, there is almost always something left to be said by somebody. Were discussions not so forcibly discontinued, they would continue forever or for far too long. I consider two discussion phases necessary in that the second phase hints at wrapping up whatever wasn't from the first, or issuing warnings and unfortunate blocks to those who face difficulty in letting go. Greener's ceasefire of sorts is well-placed but gives justification to a second discussion phase. Without the option of this second discussion phase, Greener's proposal would likely have stirred up twice the drama (by raising cries of censorship and the like). This second discussion phase is necessary for everyone to return with cooler heads, make their points, accept or agree to disagree with those points made, make their final decisions, act on them (through voting, of course) and finally shut up so this election process can conclude. Greener's proposal is an intermission, not a curtain call. Teddy Dan 20:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is also important to note, that the first stage actually already encourages discussion as well. And as both of your mentioned pages show, it happened. If with that everything is said, the discussion phase is not really needed. It is just a "safe buffer" for candidates that get nominated just before the first phase ends. poke | talk 01:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Few hours late[edit]
JonTheMon won. 
elix Omni 03:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
| Candidate | Supporting | Opposing | Vote Tally |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aiiane | 14 | 21 | -7 |
| Emmett | 14 | 10 | +4 |
| Infinite | 9 | 18 | -9 |
| JonTheMon | 28 | 10 | +18 |
| pling | 27 | 12 | +15 |
A close one. Grats, Jon! --mendel 09:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
