Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Eloc Jcg

See Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Eloc Jcg/Archive for Eloc's last attempted at sysophood.--Sum Mesmer Guy 12:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't Eloc have been nominated first and then asked for acceptance, rather than making the RfA before him knowing about it? -- Brains12 \ Talk 12:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Huh? -Auron 12:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ooh thanks. This was just the first page I went to from my watchlist. Didn't see anything under the history of the I nominate section nor the candidate statement, so meh -- Brains12 \ Talk 13:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

K. I was confused for a minute, I thought I had missed your meaning :p -Auron 13:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

This is true, it should be a nomination before the page is made. --Lemming 13:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, did you read the link? - anja 13:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

No :P i did now.... :) --Lemming 13:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Technically, (going by Mr Word Of The Policy):

"RFAs should not be started for:

• someone else, unless there is a clear acceptance in the "Pending nominations" section below. " -- Brains12 \ Talk 13:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I added the link to the page, that should be enough. :) - anja 13:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

If it helps any, I do accept. — ク Eloc 貢 00:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Proxies?

Are unregistered or proxy users allowed to vote? Kokuou 18:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Unregistered yes. Proxies no. It's up to bcratsa to determine which is which. Backsword 18:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to clear some things up, I have no clue who 78.82.74.250 is, but I do know who 68.219.171.154 is. 68.219.171.154 for sure is not a proxy. If needed, I can prove it more. — ク Eloc 貢 01:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No spirit of the policy

I really have to ask about this since it's so shocking. Aberrant said:

... I cannot support someone who prefers a literal interpretation of policy. -- ab.er.rant 15:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Clicking the link the reveals a bullet point list in which you, Eloc, say that policies should be followed by exact wording and not by the spirit that is behind the forming of that policy. Do you understand why that doesn't work? Policies are formed because there is a manner in which we want people to behave. The exact textual formatting of a policy can however rarely be very accurate in explaining what is ok and what is bad. BUT. Even though the text doesn't 100% say that certain thing is bad, the intention behind the policy might still be to say that that particular thing is bad. The intentions are usually pretty clear even though the policy doesn't represent that intention so well. That's why following the spirit of the policy is important and following the exact wording is bad. -- (gem / talk) 20:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do understand why that doesn't work, but a Month ago I didn't. — ク Eloc 貢 01:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

you say you understand, but i highly doubt you do. This seems to be going well though, if having 30 more oppose then support is good of course.72.78.156.208 02:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I get it now. The policys are pretty much just common sense. GWW:SIGN would be like just don't be using an obvious disruptive signature. And GWW:NPA would be something like be nice to other users. That right or am I still off? — ク Eloc 貢 17:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You're getting there. -- Brains12 \ Talk 17:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Tjoek Tjoek!! ~ SCobra 17:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

eloc's train is reaching its destination or what? - Y0_ich_halt 19:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Its the failtrain, so Eloc's RfA has alrdy been on it many times ~ SCobra 21:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL! - Y0_ich_halt 21:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, acceptance is the first step to understanding, and I think you've already gotten past that first step. :) And possibly the second one too, who knows... (no, my whole message didn't make sense to me either) -- (gem / talk) 20:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

um, why not? it made perfect sense to me. well, up to the smiley. - Y0_ich_halt 20:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to mix you all up. Now you are as confused as I am. (or you will be when you read this) -- (gem / talk) 23:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

XD — ク Eloc 貢 05:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

you're confusing me, eloc. please make yourself easier to understand. - Y0_ich_halt 16:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

XD accoring to Wikipedia is "Big grin with tightly closed eyes (almost crying from laughter)". I was XDing at what Gem said. — ク Eloc 貢 03:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Tjoek Tjoek! ~ SCobra 13:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

kinda. - Y0_ich_halt 13:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Next stop: Failtown ~ SCobra 15:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Joke's over, Scobra -- Brains12 \ Talk 16:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

OH NOEZ! - Y0_ich_halt 16:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)