Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Raine Valen

Note: This RFA has been resolved. Please do not add further support/oppose opinions.

Raine Valen

This request is for the sysophood of Raine Valen (talk • contribs • logs • block log).
Created by — Raine Valen 23:50, 12 Sep 2010 (UTC) 23:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC).

Status

Accepted. 18:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Candidate statement

You already know who I am, so I'll spare us all an introduction. You know my attitude, my personality; I won't detail them here for you. What you may or may not be familiar with, though, are my views on a few relevant issues. These are important in your decision, so I will draw them out for you.

I believe that there are flaws with the way that the wiki is being run right now. Many of these flaws, as I see them, largely fall under two very separate umbrellas:

Firstly, bans are not being handed out as frequently as they should be. People get away with too much.
For a recent example, take the drama that's been stirred up over the course of recent weeks. No one has "stepped up" to deal with this problem as it mandates being dealt with (even based on precedent). Is this reservedness, this paralysis when faced with controversial issues, good for the wiki? The obvious answer is "no", and we've all arrived at that conclusion. Yet, still, we exhibit the same behaviors. We've said "no", but, in the long run, we've done little about it.
I'd say no and, given sysop tools, do my best to proactively deal with similar situations in both the present and the future. I believe that this is something that the wiki needs, and I would gladly provide it.

Secondly, the Spirit of the Policy, the idea around which a policy is molded, is not held in as high esteem as it should be.
This doesn't, I think, require as much explanation. However, for the sake of consistency, I'll provide a bit more background. In essence, I feel that there are too many cases where common sense takes a backseat to policy. Unlike the above, I do not need sysop tools to contest this where I can; I am merely stating my view on this for the purposes of character definition.

With these things in mind, let me be 100% clear on this, from the outset: I don't want to be a "glorified janitor". I don't want to coddle or carebear. I want to hand out those controversial bans that other sysops won't.
I do not mean to say that I will not perform my janitorial duties, or that I will perform them with contempt; they are part of a Sysop's responsibilities, and I understand that I would be taking them on. I do not mean to say that I will be a dick whenever possible; if you know me, you will know that I am very civil, for the most part.
What I do mean to say, though, is that neither of those two things would be my reason for taking on the task. I want to be an admin, to keep the wiki running smoothly, to get shit done.

The wiki needs something, whether it comes from me or elsewhere.
I feel that, as a sysop, I'd be better able to provide that "something" where it is required.

I don't want this to be a popularity contest. I don't want anyone to support me because they like me, nor do I want anyone to oppose me because they don't like me.
I want real reasons why I should or should not be a sysop. From both parties.
Similarly, I'd like the bureaucrats to base their decision on the content of the votes, rather than on the numbers. Thank you. — Raine Valen 23:50, 12 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. Aside from the obvious benefits of having an additional sysop, Raine is pretty good at staying neutral. Even though she has her clique, I doubt she would show them any preferential treatment with the banstick. More important, however, is the need for another sysop willing to deal with trolls. The big flaw in the current system is one I'll post on later, but basically, all a troll has to do right now is pester me like Scythe did, and I am unable to act on it. With Raine as sysop, those trolls who target me specifically will be taken care of much faster than they currently are. -Auron 00:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
2. Support. I agree that something should be done. Drama lasts way longer than it should when kicked up. In my experience, Raine has never done anything for malicious reasons and has been helpful and objective in appropriate circumstances. I would say that Raine is rather frank and believe that she will get stuff done if she says she will. –~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) ←♥– 00:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
3. Support. Raine is quite different from auron, and I've heard some arguments that we don't need another auron. Although Raine can be blunt, she is much more easygoing imo, and much less abrasive. We need another sysop, and while I agree with KJ's assessment that Raine's time would be better served on GWW2, the fact remains... GWW needs more sysops. Unlike some of the sysops we have here right now that are perfectly content watching drama spiral out of control until a b-crat steps in to take care of it, I think Raine would be much more proactive. Plus showing consistent neutrality, intelligence, objectivity, and actual care about the wiki is a plus. Finally, Raine is also just a likable and sociable person on the wiki anyway, which may make conflict management more easy for her. --Lania 01:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
4. Support. I think Raine is a pretty cool gal, she kills teh trolls and doesn't afraid of anything. Vald [Citation Needed] 01:29, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
5. Support. Originally I was going to vote Neutral, but Auron's comments on the RFA talk page and Raine's statement swayed me to support. Parsing contributions shows ample evidence of neutrality and rationality, and I agree that something has to be done to stem this current scenario of carebears and out-of-control trolls. Raine knows what she's doing, and I think she'd be very effective in turning this whole mess around for the better. -- Wandering Traveler 02:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
6. Support Generally, a change in policy might seem easier sought out than in a new SysOp, but if there's going to be some handed the banhammer, I'd rather it be Raine. In the matter of general Sysophood, Raine remains neutral during debate, rather unbiased, typically troll-neutral, and goes above-and-beyond to provide a plethora of reasoning to back her case, in any situation she finds requires it. Al in all, I see the makings of a fair and balanced (o baby, multiple entendre) SysOp. -- Oiseau | 03:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
7. Da --Unending fear 04:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
8. Support As per above, in particular per Auron and Lania. King Neoterikos 08:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
9. Support As long as you and Auron don't butt heads too often, I think this would be an okay thing. Auron makes a good point about having someone to ban that isn't him. I don't see you as someone who would misuse or abuse the sysop tools, but I think you shouldn't let your projects spill over into your sysop duties, does that make sense? Don't start any weird ass projects like the ban review stuff. -- Tha Reckoning 12:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
10. Support. I think Auron is right. I don't think I'm going to agree with everything Raine would do as sysop since our styles are very different, but I trust her discretion. Moreover I feel that should I truly disagree with her she'll be open for discussion as she has been. — Why 13:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
11. Support Everything I was going to say has been said above. ShadowRunner 15:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
12. Tentative Support I agree for the most part with what Wyn states below in her Neutral response, but reading through more of your "conversations" brought me from neutral to a tentative support status. --Rainith 16:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
13. Support As per above. --Dominator Matrix 23:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
14. Support If only to get the whole message-board-ness of soooo many of the trolled pages stopped.- TheRave (talk) 11:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
15. Support I may not know who Raine was before this started, but her response to my question helped to clarify who she is, and who she wants to be. I hope that she will read other people's concerns both above and below, and take to heart what this wiki is looking for, and what it fears may happen. Plus, I enjoy a person who's creative/daring enough to use the contraction "wouldn't've". G R E E N E R 18:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
16. Support Agree with Greener --Kniblet Beast 22:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
17. Support. So I finally decided to support. Raine is, in my opinion, one of the best people we could possibly nominate at the moment, as previous events (for example, this guy) have shown we need another sysop with balls, and who can and will block trolls targeting Auron, as he has already stated. Despite being able to ban disruptive users like Scythe when neccessary, Raine has shown she can interact well with other users and be friendly when she needs to be. --neshot. 18:00, 15 Sep 2010 (UTC)
18. Support. She convinced me with the answers given to questions asked. - Mini Me 20:40, 15 September, 2010 (UTC)
19. Support Raine is brave and strong and isn't afraid of anythings. On a serious note one of my favourite people on GW, also shes very active on the wiki and has been for a long time. (She spends more time on wiki than ingame atm... lol) Raine is a fair individual and has the what it takes to squish trolls. --Tyris 21:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
20. Support I'm not very active, so I see very little. I think Raine is incredibly level-headed and agreeable, though, which are perfect merits for conflict resolve. She's also not the kind of type who'll hesitate banning someone in fear of causing wide butthurt, which is very called for. Also does janitorial stuff which is obv. very good. --DANDY ^_^ -- 11:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
21. ...

Oppose

1. Oppose ilu, k? Essentially, Raine wants to jump into the sysop pool with guns blazing, taking out as many "trolls" as possible in a blaze of glory before people realize she has no idea what she's doing. She seeks to emulate certain other hardass parties, believing this is what the wiki needs. She is a proponent of the ends justifying the means, an unconscionable moral relativist. I cannot in good faith support a candidate who believes that there is no place for ethics on a wiki. As thousands of people have said, we don't need another Auron. Addendum: Though I initially wrote the previous post in a state of mild agitation, I have decided to stand by it. Raine's stated views and goals would take the wiki in a direction that I do not want to see, where the baby is thrown out with the bathwater and mistakes are punished instead of learned from. elix Omni 01:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
2. Oppose Is in denial about using mind-altering drugs, but for a couple of dancing cookies I will switch mah vote. On a more serious note, I don't know anything about you, your statement was tl;dr. You seem like a nice enough person, but after reading some other responses I agree that we need a person with some ethics not a ban hammer hard ass. --The Emmisary 01:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
3. Oppose Raine knows a lot about the people on this wiki and cares a lot for them. Unfortunately, that gets in the way of proper judgment. Raine says she wants to do something about the large amount of trolling going on, but somehow I doubt she will do something about the most problematic cases, halting the progress she wants to make. Koda Kumi 11:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
4. Oppose I see truth in both Felix's statements and Koda's. I have no doubt she would use the tools frequently, I just have serious doubts that she would use them in an equitable fashion. -- FreedomBound 23:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
5. Oppose I agree with what Emmett wrote, except the part of trolling being a "major issue"? Which leads me to oppose. Scythe was a 14 year old acting like a 14 year old on the internet, who else are there that Auron can't take care of? I guess it's the right time for popularity contests to give unfit people blocking rights though, this time with hilarious blocking summaries... --Venomoth 13:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
6. Oppose There are several factors involved in my decision: user's general worthiness to be a sysop, user's wiki philosophy, and how will that philosophy drive and affect the wiki. Raine seems to vary between helping users and taking an aggressive tone. Checking back a month or so ago, several of Raine's contribs were semi-hostile or semi-derisive. I believe that recently Raine has improved. Raine's philosophy would fall under the "negative reinforcement" idea. Recently the wiki has had influence from PvX, which has a very strong negative reinforcement philosophy. I don't like that direction and would like to have some more emphasis on positive reinforcement. However, it is a balance between having that kind of philosophy and dealing with trolls. I believe we can deal with the latter without making such a move towards the negative reinforcement. --JonTheMon 14:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
7. Nein: I doubt my opinion counts for much around here anymore, but here goes. Raine reminds me too much of myself on PvX and not enough of Auron. While I agree that the wiki needs another sysop willing to take flak and do hard jobs, I don't think it should be Raine. (I also think you have better things to do with your time, hon.) -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 19:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
8. Oppose As per Jon and Felix. --Kyoshi (Talk) 22:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
9. Oppose After a lot of consideration I decided to oppose. Anyway, I do believe Wyn, Felix and Jon said pretty much what I had to say. - Reanimated X 11:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
10. Oppose X ip 22:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
11. Oppose Per Jon et al. --★KOKUOU★ 17:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

1. See my comments on her Pre-RfA. Karate Jesus 00:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
2. I do not believe Raine is the ideal candidate for what she proclaims she will bring to the sysop team. I agree with some of what she and Auron have detailed; trolling is a major issue, and it's an issue that the current team has collectively done pretty poorly at handling in the past. Raine says that she wants to step up and handle the problem users, and that's fine and dandy... except that is the area that I'm having doubts about. I honestly think Felix's (now-stricken) post had a point. Raine, even by her own admission, would gladly push the limits of discretion, and I'm not entirely comfortable with that; I am getting the sense that this promotion would be a crusade. Raine isn't the person I'd choose to lead a crusade, either; most of the stuff she writes is fairly well-reasoned, but sometimes she posts things that legitimately make me wonder wtf she's smoking.
   I guess this sounds pretty negative, but I'm not opposing because Raine's not a bad choice for adminship, I just don't consider her a great one. And there certainly aren't any better users just sitting around waiting to be nominated... – Emmett 03:28, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
3. Forcibly Neutral. I love you too much to oppose outright, but I am too principled to vote support when I don't believe in it, either. It's a very sad sign that right now someone like Raine would be a good addition to the sysop team. Call it a trump card, if you will: I had hoped that things would someday magically right themselves and the stupid would leave the wiki, but no, that hasn't happened; so, now it's time to pull out the big guns and take out the trash. And that disappoints me. Vili 点 04:29, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
4. Neutral I have for the most part stayed out of GWW politics for the past 6 months or so, but I'm not convinced that this is an appropriate course of action for this wiki. There are too many, imo, questionable opinions from this user to make me fully comfortable with Raine having access to the sysop tools. -- Wyn talk 10:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
5. Neutral Per Emmett. ~ PheNaxKian talk 11:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
6. Neutral <-- - J.P.Talk 20:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
7. Neutral She's shown herself to be good at chatting and writing about Guild Wars. Manifold 22:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
8. Neutral I'm not sure if i'm allowed to vote at all, but since i dont know all the facts, my vote goes to Neutral. Demonic Fahrir talk 12:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
9. Neutral I don't want a wiki war. -- Cyan 13:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
10. Neutral. I can't make up my mind atm, the good don't outweigh the bad, but the bad don't outweigh the good either. - Mini Me 15:59, 14 September, 2010 (UTC)
11. FFFffffff. I hate being a cliche-ass swing voter when an election is close but I don't have enough to go off of here. All I see is a bunch of winking & nodding on who or what gets banned in this 1-term campaign. Real action is a great slogan and an even better quality to actually deliver on but the specifics just aren't there. --ilr 17:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Requests for Reconfirmation

1. Instead of becoming the crazed tyrant that I initially feared, Raine instead transformed into a somewhat malignant lame duck. She rarely does use her sysop tools, but when she does, she does it wrong. She bans the wrong people without examining the situation, protects pages after conflicts are over, rolls back edits without noticing, and leaves sarcastic remarks everywhere while doing it. When confronted with complaints Raine prefers to ignore them or paint them as personal vendettas. While I am glad she did not become an actively harmful force, her current state of affairs is hardly better. elix Omni 21:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
2. More or less what Felix said. I have no issue with inactive sysops, but Raine is not inactive at all - on the contrary, most of her contributions are relatively useless to the wiki and constitute mostly talk page spam. She isn't inactive, she's just not using her tools nearly as often as most other "active" sysops. That wouldn't be a problem on its own; however, as Felix mentioned, the quality of sysop work when Raine does decide to actually do something isn't fantastic. For a recent example, the Lucky article was reported to the noticeboard as a revert war. I did about 2 minutes of checking around and found out that it was 1 user doing the revert warring, so I banned all his socks and told him to cut it out. After the problem had been resolved, Raine protected the page. I'm not sure whether she just failed to read up on the situation or failed to do sufficient research before taking admin action, but the end result was a sub-par use of sysop tools, and it isn't exactly a rare occurrence with this user. -Auron 22:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
3. — Raine Valen 22:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
4. Ryuu  *bite* 22:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
5. – Emmett 22:54, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
6. lets see there was this. she was clearly trolling with her "satire" and then says im the one that needs a ban if i am or am not trolling gg, then there was the hole ryuu thing were she was sticking up for her friend, where ryuu clearly violated the npa.- Zesbeer 23:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
7. First off, I was on holiday when Raine was made a sysop. The wiki isn’t my life so I wasn’t keeping up. Had I been around and noticed Raine’s attempt at gaining sysophood, I would’ve adamantly opposed it based purely on her platform for running. To sum up, “There are too many trolls. Let me smite them with the ban hammer and all shall be well” After returning and seeing this, all I could think of was a guy going into a police station and mentioning his desire to be a cop. “Why do you want to be a police officer?” he’d be asked. “I want to shoot the bad guys” he’d respond and then be asked to leave. That was Raine’s first desire (I wanna ban trolls) and a big red flag. I didn’t care if Scythe had Auron by the balls. You don’t give people (contributors) badges and guns (sysophood) because they promise to eliminate crime (bans) and because the rest of the police force (sysops) is inept.
   
   Fast forward to today. Has Raine proved to be an effective sysop? Has she been the bane of trolls? Not even remotely. She’s been more of a bane to the wiki. What was she thinking when she posted this? Regardless of the intent, discretion should’ve moved her to not post such tripe, knowing it would be inflammatory or least had the potential to become so.
   
   Then there’s this. Raine posts something stupid and then threatens another user with a ban for trolling, even though she admits she doesn’t even know whether said trolling has happened or not. Back to the cop illustration. Picture an officer saying to the driver of a pulled over car “You know I hand out tickets to speeders so let me know if you do, ok?” Not a good use of judgment in dealing with Zesbeer.
   
   Then there’s her ban and subsequent discussion of said ban. Reading that discussion as it transpired was painful. I kept thinking, Raine can’t be as stupid as she’s coming accross. She made a stupid post. What was so hard about seeing that is was completely inappropriate? There seems to be some kind of disconnect between her reality and what actually is prudent.
   
   So back to the trolls. Something I really liked seeing was Salome getting the game update discussions under control. That was on January 6th. Where was Raine with her promise to smite trolls? Where has she been since? I see her contributing a lot of non essential stuff to her namespace but not a whole lot to the wiki. So why does she have sysop tools? What’s she doing now that couldn’t be done without them?
   
   There's a motley of other problems that go with her still not being familiar with her sysop tools. It seems to me that she’s been more of a liability with them, frustrating sysops and contributors alike. Sardaukar 14:03, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
8. My initial reason to oppose was correct. Koda 22:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
9. I agree with Sardaukar. That person couldn't have said it better. Plus some of what Felix said. I feel that people like Greener are better suited for sysop, than one that has caused trouble and not really solved anything even with the tools. Kaisha 22:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
10. Let's get this party started! -Cursed Angel 16:39, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
11. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
12. Hmm, stand in my poison. Morphy 21:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
13. Hong 05:10, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
14. As stated on the talk page when the original vote took place, I feel the Bcrats ran roughshod over a required supermajority and agree that this sysop's term has been "lame duck" at best. This is a rare but clear case where an old war needs to be refought. --ilr 02:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)