Voting:
A: Yes, unblock it NAO.
B: No, keep it blocked. THINK OF THE CHILDS ZOMG
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS
All posts by LondonDauntlessCorvair963
A. If you were banned you shouldn't have taken the chance even if you didn't know being banned would result in loss of rights.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Keplers wrote:
I think this could also be said of presidential elections...
LondonDauntlessCorvair963 wrote:
GuacamoleCCXR wrote:
Just because an admin is elected doesn't mean he will perform well. Sure the people who vote can infer to the best of their ability, but who really knows what a future admin will be like?
ZXSpidermanXZ wrote:
I understand what you mean, but the point isn't that I think our admins are incompetent, the point is 1: it takes too long for the admins to go through the process of demoting. 2: The community has no say in it.
The community has a say in it because it elects the admin team, and contention 1 is flawed. There's a reason by representative democracy is a thing, instead of just having a crapload of referenda. GuacamoleCCXR wrote: B. If our admins are too incompetent to decide which CMs need to go, then we've failed as a community anyway.
That's funny, I was originally gonna say something about Bush in that. Are you a wizard?
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
GuacamoleCCXR wrote:
ZXSpidermanXZ wrote:
I understand what you mean, but the point isn't that I think our admins are incompetent, the point is 1: it takes too long for the admins to go through the process of demoting. 2: The community has no say in it.
The community has a say in it because it elects the admin team, and contention 1 is flawed. There's a reason by representative democracy is a thing, instead of just having a crapload of referenda.
GuacamoleCCXR wrote: B. If our admins are too incompetent to decide which CMs need to go, then we've failed as a community anyway.
Just because an admin is elected doesn't mean he will perform well. Sure the people who vote can infer to the best of their ability, but who really knows what a future admin will be like?
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
FortressOfNight wrote:
9 months is kind of a long time, relatively speaking. I've had this account for a shorter time than that.
LondonDauntlessCorvair963 wrote: Edits mean experience, but mods don't moderate articles, they moderate chat. If they demonstrate proper behavior for a while in chat (2 months seems really short. I'm thinking at least 9 months, but obviously some exceptions can be made.), I think it should be OK.
But you are the same person as BM, so that wouldn't count in my book.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Edits mean experience, but mods don't moderate articles, they moderate chat. If they demonstrate proper behavior for a while in chat (2 months seems really short. I'm thinking at least 9 months, but obviously some exceptions can be made.), I think it should be OK.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
TheRealIndianaBonesSulfrix9 wrote:
A Walruse wrote:
A. People who vote B are plain selfish and undemocratic. If you don't want words unblocked, that's absolutely fine, but if you vote B because words might get unblocked /via community vote/ you're putting your own self interest over basic democratic values.
Per this... I have already voted but still per this
A. People who vote B are plain selfish and undemocratic. If you don't want words unblocked, that's absolutely fine, but if you vote B because words might get unblocked /via community vote/ you're putting your own self interest over basic democratic values.
Same
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Madkatmaximus wrote:
i c wat u did there
LondonDauntlessCorvair963 wrote:
Gorillaz1121 wrote:
A
Your vote makes me feel good.
A
If you get this reference, I will marry you, even if you are a guy.
How did I know you would get it zomg
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Gorillaz1121 wrote:
A
A
Your vote makes me feel good.
If you get this reference, I will marry you, even if you are a guy.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Why is this even a question? Don't we have freedom of petition in this country?
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Does anyone ever go "France, ITALYANDSPAIN"
No.
They don't.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
*quoted text removed by Administrator due to being unnecessary*
I vote to remove. Completely useless, it is.
(Edited by administrators)
Drew1200 wrote:
We recently voted on the removal of CheckUser rights from some of our inactive administrators, arriving at the consensus to open those two spots for new administrators. Please use this thread to vote for up to two new CheckUsers. Four administrators volunteered for the job, so please restrict your voting to the candidates listed below:
We recently voted on the removal of CheckUser rights from some of our inactive administrators, arriving at the consensus to open those two spots for new administrators. Please use this thread to vote for up to two new CheckUsers. Four administrators volunteered for the job, so please restrict your voting to the candidates listed below:
Current Votes
(Alemas, update this for me please)
- Jdude420: 5
- Alemas2005: 25
- Agent Spy: 8
- Madkatmaximus: 12
Mad? Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad...
+1 from me.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Vonness11` wrote:
BCGirl said he can't because he doesn't have an iPod iirc, and I think he can't log in on her iPod or something?
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
Vonness11` wrote:
Thing is, BCG can't even get on the wiki anymore.
Neighbors wifi he can get on. LegoSuperBowser wrote:
I mean, that's one of the reasons some want another user to have the rights instead of him, because you or BCGirl have to actually mention the wiki IRL to him if something calls his attention.
Eagleeyedan wrote:
Shall I alert my brother and ask his opinion? I support it as well, I'm surprised y'all let me keep my admin status ▂▃▅▆▇█▓▒░Eagleeyedan▒░▓█▇▆▅▃▂
If you actually have to "alert" him about it, why bother? Shall I alert my brother and ask his opinion? I support it as well, I'm surprised y'all let me keep my admin status
▂▃▅▆▇█▓▒░Eagleeyedan▒░▓█▇▆▅▃▂ I mean, that's one of the reasons some want another user to have the rights instead of him, because you or BCGirl have to actually mention the wiki IRL to him if something calls his attention. Thing is, BCG can't even get on the wiki anymore.
BCGirl said he can't because he doesn't have an iPod iirc, and I think he can't log in on her iPod or something?
"BCGirl said he can't"
I almost spat juice all over my screen.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
I'mDivergent wrote:
</noscript>
Remember Petition to Remove MLP emotes?
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
@LDC: Ale mas made community threads before that have been well received, so unless you're using sarcasm, (which I think you might be I'll post this anyway) you're wrong. 
</noscript>
I thought I made it clear that it was that thread that I was referencing, but I guess not, LSB... :P
Anyways, Div, thank you for noticing. :P
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Alemas2005 wrote:
So we've recently been having a bit of a dupe problem. With certain users creating dupes by the bucketloads, we need people who can effectively check whether any new account is actually legit or a dupe.</noscript> We need more than ever active CUs on chat.
So we've recently been having a bit of a dupe problem. With certain users creating dupes by the bucketloads, we need people who can effectively check whether any new account is actually legit or a dupe.
"But we have CheckUsers!", I hear you say. True, but only Drew, BCG, and Obi have CU rights. And the last two are both inactive. And a Wiki can have a maximum of 3 CUs. Drew pops in every now and then, but BCG and Obi are completely inactive.
We need two open slots to cope with the problem. Therefore, I propose that we remove CheckUser rights from BCG and Obi to free up space for someone else. We can't have only Drew doing all the CheckUser... checks.
</noscript> We need more than ever active CUs on chat.
Current Votes
Support removal of CheckUser rights from BCG and Obi: 16
Reject removal of CheckUser rights from BCG and Obi: 0
Wow, something made by Ale that is actually well recieved.
Seriously though, I vote yes, we should remove it. Power is no good if it isn't regularly exercised.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
Alemas2005 wrote:
So it's been roughly 6 months since I, Agent Spy, and Ireithien got promoted to admin, and roughly 3 months since Mad got promoted as well. My question to you, the community, is:
So it's been roughly 6 months since I, Agent Spy, and Ireithien got promoted to admin, and roughly 3 months since Mad got promoted as well. My question to you, the community, is:
How have we done, both in general and individually?
(This is on a scale from 1-10, with 10 being the best.)
Mad: God
Liam: Could be more active. 8.
Ale: "...Your weed must be good." -My mind when I see Ale do anything.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
</noscript>
Bible = Christianity. Therefor it would go against the bible, not Christiantiy. And also note that I picked a race that wasn't around back then.
</noscript>
..I'm just pointing out that it's ironic you implied racism was bad, and then implied it would go against Christianity for Jesus to be Mexican.
</noscript>
P.S,
We better stop, this is irrelevant to the thread's purpose.
</noscript>
If the Bible is Christianity then why is it not going against Christianity...? *Kills myself*
And Jesus was born in the Middle East, which is technically in Asia. Jesus isn't freaking white. Hell, Jesus could be a black dude for all I care, and only the KKK would give a crap.
(Edited by LondonDauntlessCorvair963)