Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2007-08 bureaucrat election/Eloc Jcg

Fascinating. -Auron 17:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think he's kidding -.- -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 17:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

by the looks of it, you might be right >.<--Insane Maestro 14:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

About what now?--§ Eloc § 18:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

So he is nominating himself even after a massive opposiition in the last round and also goes to vote oppose on all of the other candidates. Yeah... -- (gem / talk) 22:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

So? They vote oppose on me.--§ Eloc § 23:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

You see, that kind of thinking is exactly why people will never let you in. If I were you, I would not bother trying again, until you have build up a better reputation, which you just shot with your actions; and get alot more experience first. From what I've seen so far, you provide decent feedback and suggestions, and are very active with your userpage/guild pages. Mainly, your office work is more dedicated to getting your guild recognized, than your commitment to this wiki. Therefore, I oppose. Take a deep breath and accept it. Laura Brinklow 03:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

What you talking about? I do minimum 1 alt-x article each day.--§ Eloc § 03:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

He can vote oppose on anyone candidacy he wants to without getting harassed for it. I don't see you saying something to Tanaric about voting oppose on Eloc. Gem, just go back to taking your little break and stop harassing Eloc, or you'll get harassed back, like you should. --- Raptors

I would like to remind everyone here of GWW:NPA before this goes any further. --Lemming 16:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Raptors. You better go back to take a break yourself. I'm not harrasing him, I'm trying to do him some good. -- (gem / talk) 20:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Gem, not to be rude, but I don't see how you're doing me good. Like, it's not very obvious then. I could care less if I have massive opposition. It's just a game.--§ Eloc § 20:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

"So he is nominating himself even after a massive opposiition in the last round and also goes to vote oppose on all of the other candidates. Yeah... -- (gem / talk) 22:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)" I fail to see how that statement does him any good. All I see is you telling him Hey, dont run its useless, you suck. Thats complete bullcrap. Even if every eligible user on the wiki voted against him for his nomination he can run as many times as he chooses, and he should be able to do that without getting harassed by some girl on the internet. --- Raptors

Consider this warning number 2 about personal attacks, there will not be a third. --Lemming 01:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

"Gem, not to be rude, but I don't see how you're doing me good." <-- Gem is right. His advice is solid and his comment was right on the mark, even if it was sarcastic. As Aiiane pointed out below, voting against all other candidates for no reason is just one of the things that shows you aren't ready for Bureaucratship. And since you don't take the role seriously ("It's just a game."), you will never improve enough to make an effective Bureaucrat. -Auron 01:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Then I guess my new goal will be to disprove you ;).--§ Eloc § 05:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Auron. :) -- (gem / talk) 10:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Feedback

Because the above section I think has gone slightly astray, I'll see if I can start afresh here (although I may refer to a point or two mentioned above).

Eloc, I've voted to oppose your election because I don't feel that you fit the role expected of a bureaucrat.

• Bureaucrats need an in-depth knowledge of wiki policies, and I still have yet to see an indication from your actions on this wiki that you possess such a knowledge of them. It does not have to be perfect (individuals are hardly infallible, no matter how hard they try) but it should be above average.

• Bureaucrats are expected to be able to resolve issues without getting themselves entrenched to a point where they cannot give a neutral consideration of the facts and a fair decision. A number of your comments in various discussions (for instance, "So? They vote oppose on me.--§ Eloc § 23:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)") point towards your having a very vindictive attitude and not one that I find befitting of a bureaucrat. You are most certainly allowed to vote in favor or opposition of whomever you wish, however the reason you give for doing so leads me to believe that you would not make a good bureaucrat.

• Finally, Bureaucrats, being the arbiters of the community that they are, should be liked by the community. Though it's a minor consideration in comparison to the above two, your comment that "I could care less if I have massive opposition" is not something that a wishful bureaucrat should be saying.

My $0.02, if you feel I've been unclear or would like me to expand upon any of the above, you need only ask. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, if I am liked, then I will be Beurocrat because I would get Positive Votes which means I'm liked. So far, seems like I'm not, but everyone deserves a second chance.--§ Eloc § 05:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Eloc, to put it bluntly you haven't done anything to earn a second chance, you still make many of the same mistakes you made before. -- Scourge 05:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm talking about after this election...--§ Eloc § 06:04, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Eloc you seem to have it in your head that the bureaucrat election is a popularity contest, It shouldn't be and I hope to God it isn't. It is about competence, understanding, maturity and level headedness. Obviously having people like you, or your friends voting will help with some votes, but ultimately it should not and probably won't come down to that. --Lemming 11:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

XD, but it is a popularity contest overall. "Finally, Bureaucrats, being the arbiters of the community that they are, should be liked by the community.".--§ Eloc § 20:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to read the sentence immediately after the one you quoted. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 03:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

That is something secondary to everything else. There are plenty of people here that I like but would never want as a bcrat. - BeX 03:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm just going to drop it now. Voting is over and I obviously was far from winning. I may try again next time, or would I have a better chance at becoming a Sysop (assuming I changed my behavior)?---§ Eloc § 05:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Behaviour first, and work on your contributions and editing, as well as creating and participating in good discussions and then people will consider you for sysop. - BeX 07:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with Bex -- I believe the community will never consider you for either of these two positions. You appear to be striving for a title more than anything. Our current bureaucrats and sysops were all valuable contributors to the community as a whole, and they were given their additional duties because of their preexisting commitment. You, however, are not a particularly valuable contributor, and it appears the only reason you seek to become one is so the wiki will award you with a shiny title. I do not believe the community will ever support such apparent vanity. —Tanaric 07:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Very well said Tanaric. -- Scourge 07:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

So just because they were on Guildwiki doesn't mean they aren't the only ones who can become a Sysop here. I also do have a Guildwiki account, I wasn't a good contributor there but here I believe I'm a good contributor in writing articles. And I do atleast minimum, 1 article per day.--§ Eloc § 07:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I think you misread Eloc. No one mentioned GuildWiki. - anja 07:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

"preexisting commitment", what could be pre-existing besides Guildwiki. I've been here since the official release of GWW.--§ Eloc § 07:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Commitment to contributing to this wiki. Every sysop has a great deal of contributions in different areas all over the wiki. - BeX 07:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Then what do you mean by Preexisting?--§ Eloc § 07:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Something that was there before the nomination. For example, Anja is dedicated to improving the armor section, Aiiane and aberrant are involved a lot in policy making, etc. They were all contributing and working a lot long before they were nominated. - BeX 07:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

And I'm dedicated to doing alt-x.--§ Eloc § 07:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent) What exactly do you do with alt+x? The only edit to an article that you did yesterday (19th August) was far from significant here -- Scourge 08:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hold down alt key and hit x. Then hit your enter key.--§ Eloc § 08:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

And that's all you do?... You don't actually contribute anything? -- Scourge 08:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Random page is contributing. If there is nothing to contribute on the random page, I look for red links on the page and then make those.--§ Eloc § 08:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

All I can suggest to you Eloc is to start showing the community that you are dedicated to improving the wiki, and not just by saying you are doing one article edit a day. Sysop responsibilities are a lot more than that, and then you should be contributing as a normal editor on top of it. On a side note, I think most of the sysops here have several thousand contributions. I know a couple (not talking about myself here) that have nearly 10 000 contributions. That to me shows their dedication and how hard they work for this wiki. And then on top of that they are deleting image or blocking vandals.

If you can become an editor like them, and change your behaviour in a positive way, then maybe you can prove Tanaric wrong. Do you think you can do that? - BeX 08:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Eloc, I would like to be a little blunt with you, and just to add a little more to what Aiiane noted above. My oppose vote mainly comes from 2 reasons. The first is already explained by Tanaric. The second is because of a communication problem. I believe that bureaucrats need to explain themselves very clearly and in a mature way, as well as being able to understand what other people are trying to say. Many times, including several on this very talk page, your replies show that you clearly misunderstood the comment that you replied to. Miscommunication is not a good thing for a role whose primary duty is arbitration.

As Bex already explained, there alot more to adminship than contributing content. And one article a day is a good start. Lastly, I just like to point out that I don't think you should keep bringing up total edits. It's somewhat immature. If you have been contributing a lot, the community will notice. If you haven't, they'll notice it too. It's that simple. No need to keep count. -- ab.er.rant 08:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh, of everyone here that could, Aberrant is the one to bring up miscommunication. Out of everyone he is the worst person to talk about this.

http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Talk:Lutgardis_Conservatory#Faction_Farming. --- Raptors

Please don't take this conversation off-topic into personal sidetracks. Make such comments on a user's talk page if you wish. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 19:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Doing it there would be off topic and just trying to cause trouble with no reason. At least here it has something to do with the topic at hand. --- Raptors

This isn't really off-topic Aiiane, it's part of a clarification of my points. If Eloc asked for clarification of your points or disputes them, would that be off-topic as well? As for the link Raptors provided, despite it being on another wiki, I would ask you to first read it carefully. If you're referring to my first response, don't tell me that by reading it you did not realise that I had made it obvious that I did not understand his question and was trying to get further clarification? Sure it was in a rather sarcastic manner and that was like over a half year ago. If it was the second comment, yes, misunderstandings do occur, but not to the extent of having misunderstandings every few sentences or so. Try comparing that to what is happening here. And to make your point moot, in case you missed it, I'm not a bureaucrat here. -- ab.er.rant 02:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think Raptor's comment is so much off topic but if it's taken to the user talk page, it can easily turn into a GWW:NPA problem.--§ Eloc §

Let me go get the firewood... seriously. I think he should get it by now. I see exactly what I've been wanting to see for a long time with many of you. Sorry if I offended you Eloc. Hope this gets resolved quickly so that everyone can move on to the wiki, and stop playing the little circle game. Enjoy it while it lasts. Laura Brinklow 04:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here's my plan, I will start doing more articles once I get my brand new laptop which should have been a month ago.--§ Eloc §

(Reset indent) If you get a paypal account you could probably grab Aiiane's $0.02 and send her a pic of your laptop when you get it. lol ... Well I'm going back to workin' on da wikage. Good luck to ya! Laura Brinklow 04:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, now I've got a real wiki project as people don't consider alt-x a real wiki project. Right now my new wiki project is located here.--§ Eloc § 05:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)