All posts by Michaelyoda
TheShadowAssassin wrote: Slice was the one who called it a loophole to begin with with his admin RfR
If the people wanted it, and thought you were capable, sure. Like Loney said, we don't even know the context of your demotion. It could have been for anything. Again, I trust the people here not to vote in Nigma just because he had two months of experience. Having two months and putting up an RfR doesn't guarantee rights, it just allows you to make an RfR. Don't act like this has a 100% chance of putting some bad hombre in office.
I mean, I'm totally inactive and stuff, but, from what I gather, what your suggesting a new a completely new idea that would need to be considered in a separate vote. This vote is about certain policies that have specific purposes, but they are worded in such a way that they can be void in the right circumstances. What you or anyone believes the RfR policy should look like doesn't really belong in this vote, as it deals with already existing policy.
IDK if that made sense, but there's my two cents, inflated though they may be. 
</noscript>
I would in theory support it...
...except it would be a right pain finding what and what not to ban. This seems so difficult to accurately define that I'm rather reluctant.
Common sense, perhaps?
If you want to go through the headache of hunting down every questionable word or phrase and then bicker for a week about whether or not it should be blocked, go right ahead.
I'm more interested in how this obscure word was brought to your attention.
...Why?
</noscript>B. Too vague, will make inconsistiency more of a problem than it already is. Just ban the Nazi swatiska, as it's literally the only one we've had a problem with.
And this really needs to be reworded so that it's clear that only imagery would be banned.
Also, "If a user requests that you stop doing something, then you are required to stop unless there is a good reason you should continue. Also, if a user continually makes unreasonable requests, then the situation will be resolved by an admin."
B
But I will add an extra wavey thingamajig in the future.
</noscript>
In all seriousness, this vote is the internet version of grumpy teenagers in family vacation photos.
Loney wins all brownie points.
WANNA KNOW WHAT I SAY?!?!?1
<svg class="thumbnail-play-icon" viewbox="0 0 180 180" width="100%" height="100%"><g fill="none" fill-rule="evenodd"><g opacity=".9" transform="rotate(90 75 90)"><g fill="#000" filter="url(#a)"><rect id="b" width="150" height="150" rx="75"></rect></g><g fill="#FFF"><rect id="b" width="150" height="150" rx="75"></rect></g></g><path fill="#00D6D6" fill-rule="nonzero" d="M80.87 58.006l34.32 25.523c3.052 2.27 3.722 6.633 1.496 9.746a6.91 6.91 0 0 1-1.497 1.527l-34.32 25.523c-3.053 2.27-7.33 1.586-9.558-1.527A7.07 7.07 0 0 1 70 114.69V63.643c0-3.854 3.063-6.977 6.84-6.977 1.45 0 2.86.47 4.03 1.34z"></path></g></svg> This is what I say
Rom- taking it to the next level. xD
Yes please, more independence for mods. They shouldn't feel like they need an admin's approval before they take action - that's something I've seen too much of in the past year. CMs need to be more ballsy and worry less about potential backlash, I'll support anything towards that.
This.
TBH, I think this wiki needs democracy.
While it's not going the way we /all/ want it to go, it would still be nice to have some freedom of choice.
If we get rid of our democracy, the LMBWans will have no say in what goes on here. (Aside from simply asking Admins. But seriously, they're not going to do everything we want.)
Also, am I the only one that finds it funny that a bunch of users on a tiny corner of the internet are fighting about the politics of a wiki like it's going to have a serious impact on the world?
</noscript>
If you read the last paragraph more closely, you'll notice he said nothing of the sort.
While I fundamentally disagree with letting an online community have a say in every little tiny thing that happens I'm not sure after some recent events I trust the admins with more autonomy (yes I'm deliberately vague so don't bother asking me to be specific). B until I find something that sways me but right now I'm not convinced.
B
My understanding is that admins won't have to wait for the community to decide insignificant details, like these: http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:278538 http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:282775
Michaelyoda wrote:
Michaelyoda wrote:
nope, of you're gone youre gone
If I were referring to Bill Clinton, I would just say Bill Clinton. I wouldn't say "Former President Bill Clinton" unless I were introducing him in some news story or whatever. We all know who Bill Clinton is.
- points out every time Bill Clinton is introduced to an audience*
2. If anything, we should have a tag that says, "Former admin". And I don't even agree with that.
That is, if there was a point in your comment, as it wasn't "serious."
No, my reply was purely in response to yours.
Michaelyoda wrote:
Michaelyoda wrote:
nope, of you're gone youre gone
If I were referring to Bill Clinton, I would just say Bill Clinton. I wouldn't say "Former President Bill Clinton" unless I were introducing him in some news story or whatever. We all know who Bill Clinton is.
- points out every time Bill Clinton is introduced to an audience*
2. If anything, we should have a tag that says, "Former admin". And I don't even agree with that.
I responded to the underlying point in your comment.
That is, if there was a point in your comment, as it wasn't "serious."