</p><noscript>
</noscript>
5,988
pages
ALL POSTSNew CheckUsers
<p>Hey everyone,
</p><p>Many of us admins have been talking about the need to modify our current CheckUser group. We've come up with something we think will work better, and we'd like to see what you guys think. First of all, Danielboone6702 has decided to give up his CheckUser rights, due to his semi-inactivity and how few times he actually used it. In his place, we're nominating both BusyCityGuy and Obi the LEGO Fan. I will keep my rights, giving us a total of three CheckUsers. If you have any other candidates for this position, feel free to nominate them here. But please keep in mind that we do require them to be administrators. If you don't have any nominations to make, then please just leave your vote here!
</p><p>If you haven't heard of CheckUser before, or would like to learn more about it, you should check out the Help:CheckUser page. </p><noscript></noscript>
</p><noscript></noscript>
(Edited by Drew1200)
<div class="quote">
<p>TwistedAlpha wrote:
I don't really see why we need three, or even two, CheckUsers. One is enough. It's not like there's a constant stream of people whose IPs need to be checked, let alone enough for three to be necessary.
Oppose to everyone. </p><noscript>
</noscript>
</div>
<p>Actually, I believe Wikia won't allow us to have just one CheckUser. With just one, there is not enough accountability. Having three CheckUsers is the usual number, and it is also the safest. Having two is okay, but having one is not acceptable. I understand your opinion (in fact, I originally thought we didn't need any more CheckUses as well), but we really do need more, preferably three.
</p>
</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>Actually, I believe Wikia won't allow us to have just one CheckUser. With just one, there is not enough accountability. Having three CheckUsers is the usual number, and it is also the safest. Having two is okay, but having one is not acceptable. I understand your opinion (in fact, I originally thought we didn't need any more CheckUses as well), but we really do need more, preferably three.
</p>
(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)
<div class="quote">
<p>Jdude420 wrote:
I support Obi. I'm not sure of BCG's level of activity, but he says he checks here every day and I'm sure he'd check the logs, also for those of you who doubt - BCG isn't exactly the most rule-abiding Admin, but he'd never intentionally abuse his rights, what ever they may be, so I have decided to support him also. <span class="JdudeSig" style="text-shadow:0 0 10px black; color: black;"><i><span style="color:green;">«†J•cI•u•cI•e•420†»</span> <sup>(<span style="color:green;">Wall</span>)</sup></i></span> -Retired Bureaucrat
</p>
</div>
<p>very opinionated. I disagree.
</p>
(Edited by Randomized)
0
<div class="quote">
<p>Obi the LEGO Fan wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">
<p>TwistedAlpha wrote:
I don't really see why we need three, or even two, CheckUsers. One is enough. It's not like there's a constant stream of people whose IPs need to be checked, let alone enough for three to be necessary.
Oppose to everyone. </p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>Actually, I believe Wikia won't allow us to have just one CheckUser. With just one, there is not enough accountability. Having three CheckUsers is the usual number, and it is also the safest. Having two is okay, but having one is not acceptable. I understand your opinion (in fact, I originally thought we didn't need any more CheckUses as well), but we really do need more, preferably three.
</p>
</div>
<p>Agreed that we need 3, but like Jed said, I do not like the idea of BCG being the third. Rio would be one suggestion.
</p>
</p><noscript></noscript>
</div>
<p>Actually, I believe Wikia won't allow us to have just one CheckUser. With just one, there is not enough accountability. Having three CheckUsers is the usual number, and it is also the safest. Having two is okay, but having one is not acceptable. I understand your opinion (in fact, I originally thought we didn't need any more CheckUses as well), but we really do need more, preferably three.
</p>
</div>
<p>Agreed that we need 3, but like Jed said, I do not like the idea of BCG being the third. Rio would be one suggestion.
</p>
(Edited by RePeat)
<p>I say we promote Obi right now, and then maybe wait a while before getting a third. I mean, we lived with just Drew and DB for quite a while, I think we can manage with only Obi and Drew for a while.
</p>
(Edited by Ihaveawiixboxds)
0
<p>It actually has more to do with Wikia than a 'need', which there isn't. Besides, Drew and Obi will use it the most I assume and BCG is just there as back-up and as a third, plus BCG is already a Buro (Which a lot of people still don't know).
</p>
(Edited by Jdude420)
0
<div class="quote">Ihaveawiixboxds wrote:
I say we promote Obi right now, and then maybe wait a while before getting a third. I mean, we lived with just Drew and DB for quite a while, I think we can manage with only Obi and Drew for a while.</div> <p>This sounds like a plan. </p>
I say we promote Obi right now, and then maybe wait a while before getting a third. I mean, we lived with just Drew and DB for quite a while, I think we can manage with only Obi and Drew for a while.</div> <p>This sounds like a plan. </p>
(Edited by RePeat)
<p>I'm neutral on both, meaning I wouldn't mind if either BCG or Obi got Checkuser.
</p>
(Edited by GhostsSpector)
We should probably contact Wikia now.
(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)
0
<p>Despite most of the admins being nominated here, Obi and BCG still managed to get the most support. So Obi and I created two pages to organize the votes. You can seem them here:
</p>
<p>I think Obi is a definite yes. BCG still came out with +5 support, so we'll see what Wikia thinks about him. If you guys are done voting, I'll send this to Wikia soon.
</p>
(Edited by Drew1200)
<p>What happened to the comment I made?
</p><p><span style="color:Green;">¤</span> вυѕў|сϊту|Gυу <span style="color:Red;">¤</span>
</p>
(Edited by ObsoleteUser)