Guild Wars Wiki talk:Elections/2009-02 bureaucrat election/Wynthyst

Wyn is Win. Just sayin'.-- anguard 21:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

agreed. Wyn for the win. —ZerphaThe Improver 10:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Finally Wyn accepts! I know where my vote is this election.--Burning Freebies 12:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

"Good things happen when you wait long enough". I guess it's finally right, good luck Wyn and I'll cast my vote for you! -- WoB (contribs) 18:48, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I vote for Wyn too!--Unendingfear 02:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

A vote for Wyn is a vote for the wiki's background colors changed to purple! OPPOEZ! (jk, Wyn is Wyn :D) --Shadowphoenix 03:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you have ANY reason for voting support on nearly everyone, or do you vote support just to look "cool", like... always? Mini Me 16:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Who is that directed at out of curiosity, Mini Me? My guess is Burning, only judging by the indent response. --Antioch 17:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

well, yeah? who else votes support for everyone on elections...? --Cursed Angel 19:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wyn is a sysop, which would make her already above a bureaucrat right? — Jon Lupen 23:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Technically bureaucrat is above sysop in user rights. (on this wiki in particular, bcrats are more restricted) --Shadowphoenix 23:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply to Mini Me's comment (because it may have been aimed at me)-I vote for everyone who has decent policies, and has impressed me on the wiki with their contributions.--Burning Freebies 16:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I support Wyn in getting this position. In the time that I have known her she has always done her best to be fair and to make sure that a situation is handled correctly and quickly. - Tesla 11:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Wyn, I like you, I just feel you take some issues too personally for a Bureaucrat role. Biscuits 12:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

NOT supported.

IMO, Wynthyst has done a lot of harm to the wiki community. He has removed a lot of valid skill discussion due to random obscure wiki "rules" that are probably made up anyway, blocks people who don't really deserve to be blocked, and sticks to rules and regulations way too much even if it would be detrimental. Wynthyst acts like a robot programmed by Anet to block anyone who agrees that Anet fails.

(script-Wynthyst_AI)

• ...

Directive 1: Block anyone who posts even non-personal attacks and make it look like NPA violations, even if the recipient of the so-called NPA violation clearly deserves it.

Directive 2: Get rid of intelligent skill suggestions and discussions for "not being in the right page." Do not move them, delete them. This is how Anet would have wanted you to act.

Directive 3: Even if you are dissatisfied with Anet, do not voice it, and discourage others from voicing it.

(Update version 1.01 added) Directive 4: Be a hypocrite. Your Primary Attribute is Hypocritical Strikes. You can now voice dissatisfaction with Anet, but keep blocking anyone else who follows suit.

(Update version 1.02 added) Directive 5: On_New_Input: conscience.clear(); (EOF)

P.S. Don't block me. It doesn't work. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.28.118 (talk).

Lol, ur baed. Didn't you see Wyn raging on Regina's talk about the conga incident and how poor the punishment was? No you didn't because you don't do your homework. Misery 17:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, fixing it

Sigh,I know that this probably will fall on deaf ears, but please can you keep the NPA breaches out of this? If you have valid issues with Wyn's conduct that you feel may affect her suitability for a role, then that is fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion and to voice that opinion. However try and convey them in a reasoned and civil manner. Also in direct relation to all 4 of those points, I would just like to state that imho you are off the mark with each and every one of them. Wyn is an independent minded woman and a person whom I have the utmost respect for. She doesn't play favourites and she approaches every situation from an objective and impartial stance. I am fortunate enough to consider her amongst my friends on this wiki and even with that she has told me off and disagreed with me on many occasions and that is why I hold her opinion in such high regard. As she treats everyone the same. Also for proof of this see my talk page, where Wyn questions my support of anet. That is not the actions of an anet "yes-man". So in closing although you are more than entitled to your opinions, firstly please convey them in a civil manner and secondly please try and base them in historical fact. An election is not an excuse to have a flame-fest on a user. Regards -- Salome 18:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't really see any NPA breaches, except perhaps when he added directive 4, but I agree the IP is way, way off base. Next I'll probably be called a Wyn fanboy, lol. Misery 18:16, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I only saw it after he added point 4 and thus I was referencing that point in particular for the NPA but I agree with you Misery, the rest is way off the mark too. -- Salome 18:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL IP just got banned for being Shard circumventing his block. --JonTheMon 18:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I would like to know what 'valid skill discussion' I removed? If the IP is referring to Izzy's page, I have actually removed very little valid discussion from that page. Any valid skill discussion would have been posted on the skill feedback pages. As for making up rules? The rules of posting on Izzy's page are clearly defined at the top Izzy's page. Anyone that either doesn't bother to read it, or chooses to ignore it will have their posts deleted. Everything I do on this wiki is with the current policies and the over all benefit of this wiki and community in mind. I realize that people who believe people like Shard are in a class by themselves and therefore don't need to follow the rules like the rest of us will never agree with me and that bothers me very little. I have no problem with people not agreeing with ArenaNet, and voicing their opinions about it, as long as those opinions are not filled with insults and personal attacks, which Shard just can't seem to do. I know I have made certain groups of people on this wiki unhappy with some of my actions and that is to be expected, and I live with it, but I have a clear conscience that everything I have done has been for the betterment of this wiki. -- Wyn 18:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course your conscience is clear. You have been programmed to clear your conscience on reading new input. P.S. Don't block me. It doesn't work. P.P.S. I'm not Shard, but I agree with him on many points.

This comment is totally invalid. Even if Wynthyst did do these things, you are doing "bad things" too, like not signing comments, using an IP address rather than making an account before posting, as was suggested to you as you came onto the site.And just because you dont like Wyn doesnt mean she wont win. She has many supporters because of the many projects she does accross the wiki, escpecially making userpage templates and such. Wyn gets my vote because of the great help she has been to me. As for you, take Misery's advice and to homework on the good and bad points of the person if you want persuasion. By the way, thanks for accepting Wyn! Im sure you will do a great job. --Burning Freebies 21:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ooo, it was Shard? Shouldnt you just remove him from the elections if he is just going to circumvent his bans and use this new IP adress to cause arguments that fail anyway? --Burning Freebies 21:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, your points are as irrelevant as the IPs. Misery 23:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay we're now getting a wee bit off track it seems. Wyn has seen the comment and replied to it and the IP came back with no substantive argument, which means that its pretty much settled imho. So lets get back to the main point at hand, the awesomeness of Wyn! -- Salome 15:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

although, unlike the IP, your argument was a compliment and not a personal attack, i think we should try to stay subjective and not favor any side without statement. (i have to admit, i was not really being impartial at the top of the page as well, but you might want to regard it as a rhetorical device to draw the interest from others on this talk to encourage them to participation on wiki elections :P) —ZerphaThe Improver 16:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Would a discussion of "why is Wyn so awesome?" be more objective? jk, i get your point though Zerph. Although I'm guessing you meant objective rather than subjective. ;) -- Salome 17:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

doh! yeah, of course i did^^' —ZerphaThe Improver 12:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You know before making an accusation or arguments like that, you should at least post some kind of evidence backing it up. Up to now, I really doubt she has done any of that. The only directives I see interesting to see evidence are number 1 and 2 because if I'm mad at Anet(directive 3) you can go to forums or just do what others do, create a rant page without breaching NPA. I doubt you will find any evidence of directive 1 and 2.--ShadowFog 00:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

• Sigh* Shard's IP is 72.253.129.90...he hasn't posted anything on Wiki except to decline his nomination. As I've said before, he won't hide behind a sock when he has something to say. I know all of you have a very negative impression of him, and snarky as he may be or extreme as he may be, he is no coward and does own up to the things that spew out of his mouth. In all honesty, he doesn't care enough about Wyn or this election to bother posting in a IP here. (Sorry Wyn...)--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 19:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

questions

What makes you a viable and qualified candidate? What sets you apart from the other nominees that already have bureaucrat experience? --mira castillo 16:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

What makes me qualified? I'm a positively contributing member of the community and I believe I have a solid understanding of the policies that guide it.

What set's me apart? I would say mostly the fact that I still honestly and actively care about the well being of this community. No offense to my fellow candidates, but due to reasons of their own, they have seemingly moved away from active involvement here (as demonstrated by their recent contributions). While activity is not a prerequisite for the position of Bureacrat, I believe should judgment be required by a Bureaucrat, having active, current understanding of the issues and the current state of the community would be beneficial, rather than relying as heavily on history. I also feel able to be impartial in my decision making, placing the well being of the wiki community as a whole at the top of my priorities. -- Wyn 19:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Have to ask. How would you deal with arbitration cases involving people who you've been involved with as a sysop and in heated discussions (and I could think of a few examples for both). -- Brains12 \ talk 19:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

As with anyone, past actions have some bearing on understanding current motivations, however, I, in general don't feel I hold grudges. I feel I could impartially view the evidence presented and make a fair and balanced decision. Of course, should I feel that were not possible in the given case, I would remove myself and allow the remaining two bureaucrats to make the ruling. -- Wyn 20:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I got my question too!

You were an administrator who was very easy to troll (Don't deny it). What is to stop people from trolling you once you become a bureaucrat? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:NuclearVII (talk).

Absolutely nothing. But why people bother trolling anyone is beyond me, also, why you consider me any easier to troll than anyone else also is beyond me since anyone is able to post on any talk page they wish. The fact that previously I have bothered to try to reason with unreasonable people doesn't necessarily make me any more easy to troll than anyone else. -- Wyn 14:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Ease of trolling is derived from how much joy trolls get from trolling a particular person. Certain responses enable trolling while other responses kind of kill it. Misery 14:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah... so I should take a page from Auron's book and just tell them to F*** off? Sorry, not in my nature. -- Wyn 14:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually swearing at them if it's out of your nature would probably amuse them too. Misery 14:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, another one: Why are you making the mistake of assuming logic in other people's actions?

ohhh.... Here is one more: Do you even realize that you're being trolled right now? -- NUKLEAR IIV 14:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You are not very good at trolling. Misery 14:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Nuklear, please either stop trolling or become better at it, either way you are boring everyone. Now shoo. -- Salome 14:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes Nuklear, I do understand you are trolling me, and as Misery has pointed out you are not very good at it, because all you are doing is amusing ME. I'm really not the fool you take me for. -- Wyn 14:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I Back up Wyn's previous comment. --Burning Freebies 16:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how you can back up the last statement, as its more a personal statement of fact and knowledge, not a general purposive statement. How can you back up someone's inner understanding of when they are being trolled? Surely thats just something only they themselves know? -- Salome 17:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I meant when Wyn said "Im not the fool you take me for". I back her up, because she has proved she is not a fool with all her projects on the wiki. --Burning Freebies 21:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

"I'm really not the fool you take me for." Bad grammar doesn't help. (/changes to opposing =P ) --Riddle 06:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

a question

As far as I know (and I could be totally wrong, after all, I have zero administrator experience here) the exact position of the bureaucrats on this wiki is disputed. Some would like to see bureaucrats as sysops with additional rights, some would like bureaucrats to be far more restricted than normal sysops. Bureaucrats have a certain freedom in choosing how active they are in their role of sysop and how strictly they follow the restrictions placed on bureaucrats per policy. My question to you is, would you be a sysop-like bureaucrat, still being involved in day-to-day wiki activities like you are now, would you be a user-like bureaucrat, carefully following all the restrictions placed upon bureaucrats and avoiding to take part in heated discussions as much as possible, or somewhere in between?

I myself see the logic of restricting bureaucrat rights, but I would hate to lose an active and excellent sysop like you are now. Therefore your answer will probably determine whether I support or withhold my vote. Please share your views on the bureaucrat position with us :D — Why 18:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

One reason I chose to accept the nomination this time around is because I do believe that Bureaucrats should play a more restricted role than sysops, and quite honestly, I need a break. 6 months of not having as much of the day to day maintenance work of a sysop while still maintaining an otherwise active role on the wiki sounds good. -- Wyn 23:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

wat

-Auron 21:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

what just happened?.--Wealedout 21:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Why the withdrawal Wyn?--Wealedout 22:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a response to some kind of stress, as she has gone inactive, removed herself from the helpers list and this edit takes her out of the race, apparently. I'm a little disappointed, but I hope she will run in the future. --Antioch 22:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Other priorities have arisen that make this unfeasible for me atm. -- Wyn 22:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay. --Antioch 22:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Dang....that must be bad. Hope you can come back next term, Wyn. -- Wandering Traveler 22:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

/cheer Mini Me 14:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Shame. If you sign up next time, best of luck. --Burning Freebies 21:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, that blows. Best of luck with whatever has come up. 000.00.00.00 23:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)