Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2008-12 bureaucrat election/Auron

I have a question, why do you want to run for Bcat on this wiki, which is run by Anet, if you don't even like[[1]] what they're doing?--DAVA 10:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

ArenaNet doesn't make any decisions regarding the content or general running of the wiki; they leave that to the public. They realized, when they created this wiki, that the GWiki sysops/bcrats had a very solid system going, and so ANet basically just handed this wiki over to them to do with as they please. General consensus has always been to let the public run it, and even up to the top level (Bureaucrats), the public runs it.

They don't choose sysops or bcrats, they don't decide how we format articles, and they, for the most part, don't decide what content we have. They just handed us server space and said "go." ANet's ability to balance a game has no relevance to them hosting the servers for this wiki. - Auron 10:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Good Awnser. Thanks Auron ;)--DAVA 12:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I think a better way to word the question is, Why do you care about a wiki for a game that you think is horrible? 24.144.19.11 04:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrats don't have to care to be impartial. In fact, the more they "care," the more biased they are likely to be. - Auron 08:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I can agree with your statement here, Auron. I believe The wiki is here primarily to catalog Guild Wars for the benefit of Guild Wars players. As such, the majority of users (not necessarily vocal majority) most likely enjoy the game and would prefer the wiki to be written somewhere between a neutral and positive manner. Neutral, of course, should be the preferred. Someone who attempts vehemently to disrupt this tilt based on the users disdain for some action by ANet (nerf, imbalance, etc.), would be treated more leniently by bureaucrats with similar viewpoints during arbitration or other matters. As such, a positive bias could actually be more beneficial to the wiki to keep things running smoothly for the sake of everyone who actually enjoys playing the game and using this wiki as an information repository.

Let me also address this from another angle. I think the intent of the statement by the anonymous user was not that you do not care about the game (ambivalence), but that you care in a negative sense. If you would, in fact, describe yourself as completely ambivalent (which, I think you would agree, most would have a difficult time believing), then I would completely agree that not caring is the best way to be unbiased. In your case, however, I think it is assumed that you care in a negative sense. Regardless, I still would expect that the wiki would run smoother and be more effective at accomplishing its goals with positively biased bureaucrats.

Along those lines, could you enumerate what (1) you believe are the goals of this wiki and its community and (2) how you would be able to represent them in the position of bureaucrat? It would be helpful if you could use examples from your previous tenure in answering the second point. Mohnzh say what? 17:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

No. You can look at past rfas, rfbs, and my talk page archives for any information you want to know. If you were really interested, you'd spend some time looking on GWiki as well. By this point, you either know me or you don't. I'm not here to campaign for myself. - Auron 04:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrats have no 'jurisdiction' over content, so the content aspect of the wiki isn't all too relevant. -- Brains12 \ talk 11:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't claim to speak for Auron, but I'd like to point you to this anyway. Vili 01:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Support

You've got my support more than the other candidates. I'll probably support just you and not all the others during the voting, just to help the ratio. You seem pretty dedicated to the wiki. I'm not sure why you insult your fans, but I am one and will help if I can. -- anguard 21:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The discussion phase is on the 17. Shouldn't we wait 'till then?--ShadowFog 16:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Read the election policy. poke | talk 17:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The discussion phase is reserved for discussion, but discussion is encouraged during all phases. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 17:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Was more of a statement, but okay...-- anguard 22:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Nay

I really think you don't deserve the bureaucrat position. In my opinion, giving my vote to you is rewarding the erratic(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/erratic... just in case) behavior I've seen the past year even towards players (http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Talk:Game_updates/20081113#My_new.2C_REAL_view) asking about the game. Strangers reading post like these(http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Talk:Hero_(title)#Unprotect -Unprotect topic) and then figuring out we have rewarded this individual with bureaucrat position it's not an example to the community. The community deserves better.--ShadowFog 21:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Neither of those posts have anything to do whatsoever with Auron's potential merit as a bureaucrat...unless you mean to imply that Bureaucrat Is Serious Business, so it sets a Bad Example for the New Users if anyone in The Administration makes ironic/sarcastic/funny remarks. Vili 22:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Im not specifying posts as you can see. A sysop with an erratic behavior is not an ideal candidate, I wouldn't give a sensitive seat like bcrat to this individual for his known escapades(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/escapades... learning words is a good way).--ShadowFog 23:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

You know, I'm not a native English speaker yet I know the meaning of all these words you're linking to. IMO you're just antagonizing people by assuming they don't know what simple words mean. Erasculio 23:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Troll troll is troll. You're not even a good one. Stop while you're ahead, honestly. - Auron 04:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

You just called ShadowFog a troll, another NPA by Auron. I know I would not like someone like Auron as bureaucrat. ShadowFog is like everyone, posting discussion why they believe a certain candidate should or should not be bcrat. This is the kind of thing ShadowFog is writing about. I thought your nomination by Mini Me was a joke, apparently by your NPA and history I think you are not capable to be in and handle an arbitration which is part of a bcrat's job.--Wealedout 04:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Am i the only one who remembers that Auron was already seated as bureaucrat before (and even had a couple of rulings done)? I don't think many things have changed from that time up to now in regards of his bcrat qualities (even though i can't say the same for adminship qualities, but meh). About the other topic, let the Block log speak for itself.--Fighterdoken 05:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

ShadowFog has been blocked for trolling. Does that not mean anything to you, Wealedout? - Auron 07:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

An impartial observer would be forgiven for assuming that there's a concerted effort by various parties to ruin Auron's chances in this election. One would also suspect the beginnings of a smear campaign. I suspect that Auron himself doesn't give a toss, but political shenanigans of this nature can be construed as distasteful to say the least. The preceding statement was based on personal opinion and is no way aimed at any specific parties. Disclaimer done - I like Auron :p --snograt 11:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Me been block before doesn't give you any right for that kind of attack. Im posting my disregards towards your nomination of bureaucrat position. You attacking me with the name calling of troller because there's some sense of dissatisfaction from your part in my post, is not an example of a bureaucrat. This same kind of behavior is what Im talking about. A lot of contributions you've made in this wiki has the same if not equal reaction towards other persons, you are known for this attitude, always at the borderline of NPA.--ShadowFog 14:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

You were banned for trolling. Me calling you a troll when it's obvious isn't an attack. It's like someone calling me white - it's so true that it can't possibly be construed as an attack.

You're still trolling. This entire section is a failure troll attempt. It's obvious as hell. If you had any kind of argument you'd have posted it instead of stupid shit like word definitions or links to me telling QQers "bye."

Speaking of which, you don't have the first clue what a bureaucrat does. That much is obvious by how you see the role - some kind newb-helper. Sorry to burst your bubble, but bureaucrats aren't here to care. Bureaucrats aren't here to bawl their eyes out when someone gets offended by an update. Their job is to maintain a high level of sysop quality and oversee occasional Arbitration Committee sessions. Nothing more.

If you have any kind of argument as to how I'd be bad at that, feel free to lodge it. I'm all for hearing valid complaints. Bitching about random posts on random talk pages that have nothing to do with arbcomm or sysops just proves you have no actual complaint and are just trolling. - Auron 15:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, please don't abuse the admin noticeboard any more than you already have. It's not a place for you to go and whine. If you had bothered to read the directions at the top, you'd see it says "Post only issues that require administrative action, i.e. blocking vandals, protecting pages, restoring deleted pages etc." In your case, since you seem to be on a no-doubt righteous crusade to rid the wiki of the evil Auron, this clause applies too; "Mediation requests between users should only be made if a resolution could not be reached between users." And lastly, "As a sign of courtesy, also leave a message on the talk page of any involved user" is added as a finisher. You did none of those. Stop using the noticeboard as a soapbox. - Auron 15:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Read the bureacrat policy before you comment on how bad Auron is kthx. Mini Me 15:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

No,Auron. Does anyone care about your trolling and NPAs? No? That is bullshit. Whenever anyone brings a point against your ideas or against you, you say "stop bitching",you call them trolls, whiners and you personally attack them. That is a pathetic way of defending your arguments. Mini Me contribution to this discussion looks like what would Igor say to Frankenstein, I'm not calling you anything, I'm criticizing your contribution Mini Me.--Wealedout 16:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

^ wat? tbh it doesn't matter if auron is a dick to ppl, borderline npa is borderline, now shut up. --Cursed Angel 16:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I was talking to ShadowFog. Mini Me 17:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Auron, if you disagree that you should not be judge by your obvius behaviour that's your point I respect but just for the simple fact that I believed that a anyone handling committees and been a bcrat should have a low temper and not be volatile when it comes just for simple things like QQs Is something you should ought to respect too. If you disagree on my point of view that's fine but calling me troller and still claiming I'm trolling it's not doing anyone any good.--ShadowFog 18:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Auron shouldn't be judged by his attitude toward "simple things like QQs", he should be judged on how he acts on serious matters, like and such as sysops and arbcomm requests. He's volatile towards whiners and QQs because they're at best useless, and at worse a detriment. Additionally, point me to pages where Auron didn't use solid (walls of) logic to defend his position... I can find a bunch where he did. --Shadowcrest 20:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

ShadowFog, you've already made your point on what you consider to be good traits in a bureaucrat. Let's leave it at that. If you keep responding to provocative comments, they'll provoke you further. And for the rest, his first post is a valid opinion. Auron, come on, stop provoking him. -- ab.er.rant 03:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Ugh..You called him a dick, I did not, Cursed.--Wealedout 19:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Auron is a dick. Yes. Is he still (the most?) capable of being a great bureaucrat? You bet'cha. --Shadowcrest 20:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucracy isn't about being nice, (un)fortunately. Vili 01:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yay!

Me, i like Auron. He created a belief (Shardism) and seems to be knowlegible of the wiki. Gets my vote. --Burning Freebies 17:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Shard created Shardism, so that already casts 50% of your words into doubt. Vili 17:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Lol.BlackBlood 17:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you do some more research before making dumb comments such as these. Mini Me 18:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

GOGO Auron!!!!206.53.17.64 03:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

GWW would be in better hands with you tbh--Relyk 09:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Nah auron has no experience at all right --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Lilondra (talk).

Exactly. He's a decent enough fellow if one avoids getting into policy fights with him.Entrea Sumatae [Talk] 04:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

he should NOT even be a member of this wiki. When he plays the game, he plays it to torment people and try to get himself banned by screaming "I HATE NIGGERS" in all chat in Heroes Ascent (He also whispers people with this comment). Second, he's a complete moron that doesn't know left from right. And thirdly, he lies about everything; he bought an invite into Coloring Book [mad], I know because I'm good friends with the leader and asked him. And he's not a r10 hero, he's r9 after 40months and has never won hall of heroes to my knowledge. Ok, that's all. End rant.--67.240.81.210 03:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

That concerns Auron in-game, not what he does on the wiki. He's proven himself to be a good editor here. -- Wandering Traveler 03:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh no shizzles he's not r10 but r9! Holy SHIT does that make him not a worthy bcrat...Jaian Avery 18:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

That can probably be ignored/deleted/written down as libel. It's NoXify in see-through IP, of course. I don't really think we delete stuff on talk pages, even by blocked users, though. --חיו Chaiyo Kaldor 03:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

We can move it to an idiotarchive :p Lilondra *gale* 08:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Noxify If there are 2 players: Player A and player B.Player A runs Sway,smiteway,gay as master togo way and VoR way.He does nothing but buttonbashing and even wins when he sucked terribly.Because he never had to give a fuck about getting a clean spike or anything he still sucks and only learned how some builds work and some HA maps.

Player B only runs Balance,Manly as chuck norris way and well balanced.He knows everything quarterknocking,positioning,canceling attacks,... And he all learned it because if he shocked a knocked target that target DID NOT DIE and eventually hes team would lose if they made to many mistakes.However he is only r3/unranked/r9/rank w/e.

Every title can be farmed as player A,every title can be achieved as player B.However do titles show how good you are ? NO. They DONT.This is more a rant on general title fuckers then on youre ignorance but w/e Lilondra *gale* 22:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I want to say a few words

On Auron's behalf, he deserves at least this from me.

He is a good admin. No wait, he is a proven admin. Most of the votes I see here are from people who, frankly, are pretty new around here - and none of them know this guy. Most of the arguments against him are direct manifestations of the ego's he has bruised in him glorious career as a bureaucrat. It would be foolhardy indeed to deny him this position when he is one of the few that actually has the ability to perform it.

I voted for you Auron. You're the only one I will vote for. It may be in vain. It may be a waste of my time. Still, I voted for you. -- NUKLEAR IIV 20:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)