FANDOM


Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Bureaucrat Request - President Augustus
 
Gametitle-Wiki
Gametitle-Wiki

Hi all. I’m applying for the position of bureaucrat.

Disclaimer: This is in no way related to the previous request, and I am completely serious about this.

Autumn crat race pic

Why?

Although not an editor and just a discussions and chat moderator, i feel as though i can be a big help to the community as a whole as a bureaucrat. my edit count is below, and it’s low, but i’ve always been a very community focused person, and i feel that’s where my strong points are. The wiki is more divided than ever right now, and I feel as though I can facilitate changes that are needed, now and in the future, as well as make unbiased decisions while listening to community feedback. The voice of the community would be a top priority for me. It may seem wrong as I’m not an editor but i’m running for bureaucrat, but I believe we’re more than just an editing service now. We’re a community with interaction and social services, which i’m very familiar with. I strongly believe I can help in that regard. I think our current crats are amazing, but none truly have a connection to all parts of the wiki, mainly /d. I’m very familiar with /d and all the people there. I’m also very familiar with chat and the people there. I heavily emphasize the importance of chat and /d. I think they’re very important for maintaining a community and retaining editors. I’d look at the vault as an example. For the most part, they lacked social connections. I feel as if that was a contributing factor to them not retaining editors. The fact that we’re much more active than them i feel in part is due to how we’ve had social aspects. I feel the social aspects of our wiki are extremely important. The social aspects of our wiki also bring in new editors, through both /d and chat, which is another reason why it’s so very important. Thank you all for considering. President Autumn User image president autumn signature 18:57, March 24, 2019 (UTC)

Poll

Poll finished on 7:00 pm March 31, 2019 (UTC).
Poll
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
    • Use # {{yes}} ~~~ if you support the proposal.
    • Use # {{no}} ~~~ if you are against the proposal.
    • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~ if you wish to abstain.
  • Please do not edit other people's votes.

Yes

  1. Icon check Reggie Fils Aime 2 yeah sure why not 👺(talk)
  2. Icon check Laat the Survivor FO76 Single action revolver 19:10, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  3. Icon check Saxhleel12 (talk)
  4. Icon check We could use a community, /d and chat focused bcrat. Not sure how many changes can you facilitate but I'll trust in you with good faith DasisLeni (talk)
  5. Icon checkThe Wandering Dragonborn (talk)
  6. Icon check its no secret that the community has been getting shafted for a while now, so I'd like to see a crat who is devoted to improving tyese issues. - Chris 4 Star Dragon Ball Edit 19:15, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  7. Icon check W.I.G.T.A.I.H.T.W.B.M.G- Trust your going to do good for the whole wiki and extended discussions W.I.G.T.A.I.H.T.W.B.M.G (talk)
  8. Icon check Disgusting promised us a change, he didn't deliver, but i trust you will. CCodyy (talk) 19:23, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  9. Icon check Bazinga Saturn's Mortal (talk) 19:24, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  10. Icon check With love; Silent (˶◡‿◡)(´ ❥ `) (talk) 19:27, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  11. Icon check Force Ghost (discussão)
  12. Icon check UrbanAnge1 (talk) 19:36, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  13. Icon check Bending753 19:40, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  14. Icon check For those who remember me, I have been in this community for a while now, and over these years I have Formed bonds with a lot of you. Me joining the discord only expanded those who I call friends, friends whom I look to when things are grim and who brighten my day by just texting nonsense at each other. I write this from the heart as the recent fighting has lead us to this dark point. This is a declaration of support for Autumn as I believe that he is capable and that he might be able to help the wiki stop this constant squabbling and bring us back together, while trying to reshape how the community and admins deals with disputes and other problems. I stand by his support for keeping an open channel between the leadership and its citizens, this will take the wiki into a better direction. We need the discord as a medium in which to talk/discuss topics regarding the wiki, along with being a great place to develop different ideas, be it a new story or problem solving in real life (it personally has helped me work out several problems and people gave informative input on my company). We have a chance to change the wiki for the better and I believe he is that chance for change, Mr. Horrigan and I stand with you!Lucius Halthier (talk) 19:59, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  15. Icon check Why not? Mr. President is a semi-good person. I trust he will do a good job doing whatever needs to be done. User:ThatRaidingRaider
  16. Icon check Pros vs cons? no cons User:Starkiller111
  17. Icon check LogoMakr 14Z3y6 21:55, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  18. Icon check The Dyre Wolf (talk) 22:02, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  19. Icon check I Suppose. Fo4Sword of Wonders That's why no one will remember your name... 23:27, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  20. Icon check Sure Badassbear9001 (talk) 08:52, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  21. Icon check Only if you make me the official overseer though lol.--Vault-Tec Staff (talk) 03:19, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  22. Icon check--Obamacat.ind (talk) 08:50, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  23. Icon check yeah, I didnt Even know you at all before I joined The discord, but sconce then, I’ve gotten more of a feel for you and your a really great guy, your responsible enough, and you’ve proven that with the E Gov and You’ve beeen a mod for quite a while, I can Barely remember a time when you weren’t, I think It might’ve been back when I first Kind of joined the wikia, but I dont Know, but I just think it’s a good choice for you as beuracrat —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serpentboy12 (talkcontribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~!
  24. Icon check Hauganz (talk) I voted for Disgusting but he failed. I trust you to do it better. I see no other single person more capable for this job than you!
  25. Icon check Jedi4life6 (talk) I think he's qualified to be the bureaucrat of wiki. If he wins, I hope he does well in his new position.
  26. Icon check This seems beneficial. Dimitri Reznov (talk)
  27. Icon check User:Smoky American User talk: Smoky American In light of recent events, I believe Autumn, a /d centered individual could be useful individuals such as myself. I believe that discussions is an important part of the wiki; it aids not only in spreading information it also helps with those who are writers spread content, and those with theories or excursions on stuff explain their position. I have done this many times. Countless others have as well. Autumn is one of the few who would probably actually giving a flying crap about it in relativity to the other moderators and beurecrats. Honestly, that’s the only reason I say yes.
  28. Icon check Enid's Turtle (talk)
  29. Icon check Hans (talk) 20:10, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
  30. Icon check You have to fix this place. Albert Cabbot Cole (talk) 20:33, March 27, 2019 (UTC)

No

  1. Icon cross I suppose there is a reason bcrat is the only user right level without written requirements... AllYourFavorites! (talk) 19:16, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  2. Icon cross I'm kinda sceptical if Aug's right for the role tbh LovinglyGaslight (talk)
  3. Icon cross Moving my vote to no. I'm trying to take the wiki seriously by promoting change and then this happens. Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle 20:14, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  4. Icon cross hard pass especially after recent events (such as handling of the incident with user in discord where the user agreed to stop arguing with you but was still banned), past remarks (such as referring to np users as slurs in other servers), also it’s unneeded, and undeserved for someone who doesn’t even meet admin requirements, and for such weak reasonings. Pedro Washington (talk) 21:00, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  5. Icon cross I see no compelling reason for bureaucrat rights. For me to change my mind, I would want to see more evidence that you have already tried and are unable to drive changes from your current position hence the need for the upgrade in authority. It is all well and good to say "Well when I am crat I will do XYZ" but if you haven't already demonstrated your willingness to try and do that, then those are just words. I am not saying that you have not already done so, but just that it isn't currently evident in your application. For example, there is a current forum proposal re: the wiki and Discord, and I would like to see more substantive comments regarding your ideas other than simply "change is needed" if you are to become one of the leaders of the wiki. --L84tea Tea kettle 22:35, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  6. Icon cross I simply see no reason to vote yes. See my comments below. Change my mind.
    - FDekker talk 22:53, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  7. Icon cross Not convinced. Jinau (talk) 23:30, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  8. Icon cross I was going to abstain, but here’s my two cents: Sorry Autumn. I think you do a great job as discussion moderator, Hell I endorsed you. But the fact is, I simply don’t think you’re experienced enough on all fronts of the wiki to be a bureaucrat. You even admit how low your edit count is, and if there’s a bigger problem that arises, something with fandom itself, I don’t feel we could rely on you to represent us as you simply don’t know the internal workings of the wiki. I think it’s also clear this is a popularity contest. A point I saw brought up in Senpai whatever’s vote is “How many edits do you have?” Of course, there’s also controversy when it comes to discord, which, let’s be honest, is our main means of communication for the wiki. I think our bureaucrats are already fine, I don’t think you really have the means to be a bureaucrat at this time. Simply, you aren’t ready and I don’t know if you could handle it. We’ve also talked plenty of times and I know some other things I’ll refrain from saying that are causing me to vote no. Clollin The Courier (talk) 23:50, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  9. Icon cross I’m sorry, autumn. But I’m voting no for the exact same reasons as Collin. --The Superior Courier (talk) 00:36, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  10. Icon cross Per Collin Sigmund Fraud Talk Contributions 02:24, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  11. Icon cross I don't think you are well versed enough to handle such a position. I am sure you would get bored or over done with the job and leave shortly after. Even if not why should someone who doesn't even edit become a crat? Editing really is the most important part of the wiki so our leaders should be good or at least decent at it and good at handling situations involving it. As much as some of us see the wiki as mostly a forum or chat, that really is the side bar stuff. The wiki itself still gets the most traffic of users reading it and is still the most important part. Anyways, get a few thousand more edits and maybe become admin first and then I'd highly consider it. Jon the Don -JBour53 (Talk to my consigliere) 03:06, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  12. Icon cross you're fucking kidding right? You somehow think YOU'RE the annointed one to lead the repressed masses to some ephemeral promised land? The same masses who exist purely to fuck with others in a perverted attempt to somehow make themselves feel validated by constantly tearing others down? You do realize that the second you become part of the bureaucracy, you simply become a bigger target for them, YOU become THE PROBLEM? And you somehow think you can be trusted with these powers? With the behavior and maturity level you've displayed? I wouldn't trust you to take out my trash. Fudgenuts (talk) 11:42, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  13. Icon cross What are you up to this time? But seriously you're not even an admin yet plus I barely know you. I don't wanna burst your bubbles but you're not even an admin material and now you're attempting to finish Snakes and Ladders from square one in one shot? BC requires more than admin's responsibility. --Kasumi446 (talk) 13:09, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  14. Icon cross Unconvincing. Start small (admin). --ExplorerSmaily (talk) 14:41, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  15. Icon cross I love ya Autumn but... I just don’t think you’re experienced enough for this. Skysteam (talk) 17:51, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  16. Icon cross Absolutely not. You have neither the breadth of experience, nor the editing experience for me to even consider voting yes. Not only have you not been a part of this community for long enough, but your conduct as a chat moderator leaves much to be desired. You're not even an admin, which I would almost certainly look to see before we even think about making you a bureaucrat. I think its somewhat telling that the majority of current active staff has voted no. ---bleep196- (talk) 21:30, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  17. Icon cross Since I've been paying attention to you, I've witnessed you insult another user with homophobic slurs, start arguments that you then shut down through rule 9 when people respond and then ban a person that questions what they did wrong (when normally one would get a third party involved, such as a bureaucrat), refuse to answer basic questions about your actions by saying you only answer to the bureaucrats (who exactly would you answer to as a bureaucrat then?), and accuse sysops that question your decisions of "harassing a minor." This all happening within the last three weeks, so I have no idea what could've been happening prior to paying attention. These actions not only run contrary to what's expected of a bureaucrat, but run opposite of your stated goals of "listening to community feedback" and making "unbiased decisions." Paladin117>>iff bored; 21:42, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  18. Icon cross I don't think so. It sounds like you have a bad track record. You also don't have that many edits (which you yourself said so), and isn't a wiki based on the pages that make it? Why make a wiki, if you're not going to catalog everything that makes up what makes you a fan of said movie/game/book/etc.? Even without said bad track record, you only have "experience" in one aspect of the wiki, and not in maintaining the rest of it (the pages). Also, your speech reminds me of "politician talk": all empty words, no action. Flowery, measured words that go nowhere.Leea (talk) 11:38, March 26, 2019 (UTC)
  19. Icon cross You seem like a good mod, but I feel like going straight to crat might not be a good move. Take it slow. No need to rush. And I just might vote for you next time. I just don’t trust people that rush into things. I feel like they go in with no game plan or any thing like that. I just don’t want your reputation to be ruined. It’s nothing against you my guy. Acj1225 (Acj1225) 8:23, March 26, 2019 (EST)
  20. Icon cross Covonuts (Talk) 16:37, March 26, 2019 (CST) I don't know that much about what you've done, but from what I have seen, you're in no positon for this.
  21. Icon cross no CobaltJack (talk) 18:34, March 26, 2019 (UTC)
  22. Icon cross I do not believe that somone who has previously made a joke about running for bureaucrat is responsible enough to hold any postion with that much power.Thechampion101 (talk) 19:55, March 26, 2019 (UTC)
  23. Icon cross I’m sorry, but being a bureaucrat isn’t something you can do with such an imbalance in experience. I’m sure you’re very experienced with handling the Discussions, but that’s a far cry from overseeing the user rights management process of every usergroup on the wiki. You have fewer than 200 edits; how can you be expected to understand the wiki from an editorial perspective? The cop-out answer is “there are other crats who can do that,” which is not acceptable. You need to be extremely well-rounded to be a bureaucrat, and this is unfortunately not a quality you embody to the extent needed at this moment in time. —Atvelonis (talk) 23:27, March 26, 2019 (UTC)
  24. Icon cross not really convinced. 0xyqyn (talk)
  25. Icon cross Level3Rogue (talk) 06:27, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
  26. Icon cross While it could be argued my vote following an extreme absence absolves me of any say in the matter, I know enough about some of the voters here to know that their judgement is sound and should be heeded. My vote supplements theirs. The Ever Ruler (talk) 17:36, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
  27. Icon crossWell, I was away for a long while and I barely know the people voting yes, the people voting no I'm aware of their existance because of the Discord Server and that some of them are staff, but after reading both sides I decided to cast a no.Mr. Tophat Jones (talk)
  28. Icon cross - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 19:46, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
  29. Icon cross Not even a year of activity. That doesn't sound very believable and trustworthy for a future bureaucrat. Come back with more experience. At least dare me to prove to me wrong, by showing work you do on other sites. ☢ Energy X ☣ 20:19, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
  30. Icon cross Insufficient edit history on the wiki and a history of being banned. -- Bovinejeff (talk) 05:10, March 28, 2019 (UTC)
    1. Uhh. What bans? 寧靜 Fox 05:17, March 28, 2019 (UTC)
    2. There is a notation indicating that on his own user page "Hello President Augustus,you've been banned from Nukapedia chat for a period of 3 days for violating the following rules of chat" If that is not an accurate statement, then that is perhaps an indication of the lack of seriousness required of the position. -- Bovinejeff (talk) 05:25, March 28, 2019 (UTC)
    3. That is his own personal template that he keeps on his user-page for convenience purposes when chat-banning other users. Autumn has both a clean site and chat record. 寧靜 Fox 05:27, March 28, 2019 (UTC)
  31. Icon cross User:PhantomMenace87Sorry, Autumn. You my boy and all; and I know you have the best intentions in mind, but I’m not so sure you’re the right person for the job right now. Being a bureaucrat isn’t some ordinary mod job, it’s the highest position a mod could acquire. At the least I’d need to see 2 years worth of discussion modding to see if they can handle it (and HOW they handle it). I get the community is in a fuss right now, but we can’t just jump on the first person applying to be community leader. Sorry again, Autumn- hope this doesn’t affect our friendship.
  32. Icon cross I was going to vote at an earlier time but I ended up in the hospital due to some injuries. I don't feel good enough in order to leave a long vote, so I'm going to keep it brief. My opinion on this goes along the lines of what Pally and a number of no voters have said. Jgrsoto Coat of arms of Puerto Rico 22:42, March 28, 2019 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Icon neutral As Autumn's semi official lawyer, my opinion ... is neutral. See comments. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 19:55, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
  2. Icon neutral My 2 cents, while it might seem trivial, is that he does hold a good track record _from what I've seen throughout other discords_ and well versed from what goes on in there. That said, the request for a b-crat decision is something to not take lightly and should always represent the leadership and future of the wikia. Honestly the first step should be admin, because from what I've seen he certainly has good qualifications to make that and go on from there. I won't vote no because I see the ideas in it, but I won't vote yes. I say try for adminship and you'll gain great knowledge then be ready for bcrat. Argorrath (talk) 20:15, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
  3. Icon neutral I don't know enough of the issues or how this place works to make an informed vote. I actually know most that have voted yes and recognize about 3 of those voting no. Having read all the arguments, I can't, in good conscious, vote at all. I do hope the issues of the /d get some attention. With more admin or B-crat attention, the activity there could be beneficial to the wiki in general. I think anyone in a position of authority should take their responsibility seriously. --SchlepRock19 (talk) 03:05, March 27, 2019 (UTC)SchlepRock19

Excluded

  1. Icon neutral What is this? Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle 19:08, March 24, 2019 (UTC) - Vote changed.
  2. Icon check Entidade Sombria BWD (talk) 22:34, March 24, 2019 (UTC) - Account does not meet voting requirements.
  3. Icon check I'll take that £50 now. Badassbear9001 (talk) 21:24, March 24, 2019 (UTC) - Vote changed.
  4. Icon neutral Due to Autumns actions in the Discord with Drãgo (Sorry if I misspelled that) I wont be voting yes, But I cant vote no against a friend so I will stay neutral. -Fallout Engineer2600:1:C202:D56:B11F:2D52:61FA:2C5B 18:24, March 25, 2019 (UTC) - Not logged in.
  5. Icon check I'll always vote for you buddy. User:The Beagle King ([User talk:The Beagle King|talk]]) - Not logged in.
  6. Icon cross User: Ulysses the G - Not logged in.

Comments

How will being a bureaucrat actually help you in achieving your goals? On Discord it will only give you a differently coloured name, nothing else. Also what is your opinion on the demands in Dragão's forum thread?
- FDekker talk 19:27, March 24, 2019 (UTC)

I could help in the decision making process. I truly do care about the wikis social aspects and want to see them succeed and not have the chat shut down. I also believe i’ll be good in really listening to community feedback and giving everyone a voice. I really like drag’s forum on the chat changes as per my votes there. They’re well written changes. President Autumn User image president autumn signature 19:37, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
"I could help in the decision making progress." Everyone could. What distinguishes you?
"I also believe ... everyone a voice." Those are empty words. Could you be more specific on what qualifications and skills you have, on what you would change, and what you would do differently than our current bureaucrats?
I don't know who originally said it, but the following words are very much applicable here: "A vote doesn't make you a crat; first you must become a crat and only then do you open a vote." Convince me that you are crat material.
- FDekker talk 19:49, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
Something that distinguishes me is that i know the majority of the regular users very well. i’ve been super active in both chat and /d. Something especially good is that i know the majority of the /d users. The other crats and the majority of staff don’t really know the majority of them, and being such a large part of the wiki, i think that’s especially important to have a connection with /d. I’m fully open to more transparency with all the regular users and believe that’s vital. I can listen to the community and in cases, act on what they want even if i may oppose it. I’m a very active person and I’d always be around, as I am currently. President Autumn User image president autumn signature 20:46, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
How does that make you a crat rather than an admin though? It's not as if admins cannot listen to the community, cannot make decisions, or cannot do any of the things you want to do. I'm still not convinced of why you would need to be a crat—or rather, of why we would need you as a crat.
- FDekker talk 22:53, March 24, 2019 (UTC)

My opinions: Like Dekker, I have yet to see exactly what it is Autumn needs crat for. If I'm reading his request (as it is currently written) correctly, it feels as though his chief written reason (in terms of specific reasons) for getting crat is to singlehandedly attempt to make sure that the Discord will stay open. While many of us agree with that cause, I'm not sure it's really justified getting a crat role. Accomplishing one campaign promise and then going back to normal admin duties, while retaining your crat rights, doesn't sound good to me. Furthermore, even if you did get your way on the Discord decision - it sounds as though you'd like to trample over the other crats' opinions on the subject, which hardly feels like a crat's job.
Next up we have the part about having a voice in crat decisions. My simple take on this: You're already a staff; take part! Ask crats to be a part of discussions, if it's clear there is something you can bring to the table. You don't have to be a crat to do that. And if you think that getting crat will somehow justify your opinion to the other crats - that's a really poor use of the role.
Finally, from Discord chats held in the last few days, I'm under the impression that the crats (and other staff) are still trying to teach you the ropes, and in some cases even still trying to keep you under control.
My final decision: I must remain neutral until I see better evidence of what this role is needed for in the long run. And, for that matter, better evidence that the user in question can get along with the crats he's about to try to join...
Apologies for anything that sounded rude. Just gotta give ya a little brutal honesty for the time being. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 20:04, March 24, 2019 (UTC)

I hear you Nom, and I understand a lot of what you’ve said. First of all, I want to assure you that I wouldn’t trample over the other crats decisions. That’d be terrible. I’d always be willing to hear others opinions and if needed act on a decision that i do not agree with. It’s just a part of the role. Also, my reason for running is not just discord, but that is a hot topic now and I wanted to stress what I could do to help with it, as it’s a very important issue. Long run, I plan on being very active and still being involved with the community, especially /d and chat. I’m very excited to be able to give /d a bigger voice as I feel some count them as “second class citizens” when /d is actually a lovely place with many great users. President Autumn User image president autumn signature 20:46, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
That's the thing. It kind of feels like that in the long run, you'd honestly not need anything higher than admin. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 21:57, March 24, 2019 (UTC)

The community-centric platforms of Nukapedia need representation from users who are both invested in supporting community growth and continuing the operation of the platforms, and that representation cannot come without dedicated, active members at an administrative, bureaucratic level.

While discussing the need for restructure and improvement within the discord server, a disturbing amount of senior editors including both current and former users with administrative roles all but declared the various social aspects of Nuka to be irrelevant or unnecessary. There was next to no formal defense for the platforms from within the administrative staff who were present in the conversation; to his credit Wastelander at least acknowledged the platforms exist, whether there was opposition from other editors or not.

However, given the lengths to which Wastelander highlighted the importance of community and the growth of /d and the discord channel, I cannot help but be disappointed. Look back to the promised enthusiasm and focus, what has happened in the interim for such belief to turn to borderline indifference? Despite running on the platform of growing the community and acknowledging the importance of social aspects drawing in users, those beliefs were never made manifest. And this is not a personal attack on Wastelander or his a specific critique of his politics; as best I can tell, he has been one of the most professional and least volatile personalities involved in the discord hubbub. But with a promise to promote community engagement, only to see it followed with a paltry 4 posts on /d since his successful ‘crat campaign? That does not inspire confidence in him as an adequately invested member of the social community, acting as a voice for us when it matters most.

Expand that examination then to the entire board of admins and ‘crats, and it should be especially noteworthy that only 3 of the active admins have enough /d posts to qualify for the role of discussions moderator with the others almost all falling laughably short. Of those qualified, only Saka has actually made a post this year, with the Paladin and Agent C not having posted since November and September, respectively. Of the ‘crats? There are not enough accumulative posts between the 3 to reach the mandatory minimum requirements. Only Richie has any claim to an established presence on /d. This is not indicative an administration which represents the voice of the community channels, and with the visible disconnect between the editors calling for the executioners axe, believing the removal of the social community to be a far better application of Nuka’s time rather than addressing the actual issues at hand, what should the social community do if not rally behind one of its own?

Most troubling of all, even if only posturing, was the tirade from Gunny in discord earlier this morning. While undoubtedly exaggerated, there was one hint of terrifying truth within his message. Exaggerated or not, he was correct in that ‘crats have the final say in any matter, regardless of the vote. This is not just a popularity contest, rather it is a bid from the social users to have a more measured say in politics of this wiki. Just as Collin and Cor site edit counts as being integral to communications with Fandom, so to do I site the need for a voice from the community, and staff who are editors only, with no intimate experience within the various communal theatres of the wiki. As oft sited as “community” is from petitions for role to the very discussions about Exodus, I find it incredibly odd to downplay the role of the community when it cries out for a representative of its own.

As of right now, there is no one person I can point to and say that he has my back or she understands the issues most important to me as a social user. Dekker, if that is not enough reason to change your mind, I would hope that it is at least reason enough for you to better understand why this matters to so many from within /d and discord. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 00:53, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

I am not Dekker, but I wanted to thank you for that very comprehensive overview of your thinking, Dyre Wolf. I understand where the support and enthusiasm for this nomination is coming from. My concern is that this particular line of explanation is coming from you and not the nominee in his application. You yourself point to the recent bureaucrat appointment as a bit of a let down given the focus of his campaign, but there is no guarantee that this will be any different and I do have some concerns it may set a precedent of "well we just throw more people at the problem because this one says they'll definitely do it". While I cannot say that I am convinced enough to change my vote yet, it's more than I was earlier today. --L84tea Tea kettle 01:42, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
You see, that's the problem. We can't just remove all the other ones who didn't, can't we? We don't have power for that, mainly because the community accepts the situation and doesn't really want a radical change. If we can't kick out the ones that didn't please us, we can only hope and try again. CCodyy (talk) 01:48, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps, but I'd like to ask, what exactly is it that needs to be done? Statements like "we need change" from the crowd sound just as hollow and non specific as statements like "I will give you a voice" sound from the politicians. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 02:24, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── L84tea, there is no guarantee that any prospective admin or bureaucrat, be it this petition or those to come, will live up to the hype generated during their campaign, just as there were no guarantees for past petitioners. The attitude going into any person’s bid should never be based purely on the successes or shortcomings of past petitioners. If the failures of past appointments have been so great that it dampens faith in new, unrelated petitioners, then I would hope we would be having a very different conversation: one concerning those failures.

And while fearing the creation of a precedent which clutters staff is a valid concern, maintaining the status quo does nothing to address the concerns of social users who are forced to sit idly by at mercy of the powers at be, powers which hold sway at an administrative level far above any rights users from the social platforms.

Unlike the previously mentioned ‘crat, Autumn is not a general editor attempting to run on a platform endearing the social aspects; first and foremost, Autumn’s experience is as a member of the social community’s moderators. Of the current moderators, Autumn has one of best, if not the best, ratios of experience to activity (there are more seasoned mods, but few who have maintained the same presence). I do not want to build Autumn up as the end all be all of the community, that would be as unfair to him as it would be anyone who might take me in earnest. But of the names I would suggest as serious, competing appointments, none have the same experience working as a moderator, and I would have a difficult time supporting someone who (in the absence of editing credentials) does not have a background as some sort a staff within the wiki. Honestly, if I had wanted to have seen that treacherously steep uphill battle fought, I would have just run myself.

Nomad, in this case, giving the people a voice is not (or should not at the very least) be a simple display of rhetoric. Please refer to my earlier post concerning the specific make up of the current administration, but the issue at hand is that as discussion concerning Nuka’s approach to /d and Discord unfolds, there is no voice from the community. Yesterday from roughly 1000 to 1200 on the common room server there was considerable chatter where the schism between editors and social users was most evident, and it became clear that the social users were not adequately represented. Autumn’s run is designed to help rectify that discrepancy. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 11:29, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

As much as I like a passionate speech, I still won't support this nomination. Distusting is a mod for three months only, he never promised the mysterious change you guys want, just better interaction, three months is not enough to evaluate a Bureaucrat's job. Autumn in the past has shown inapropriate behavior, specially in the last weeks and days. He admitelly went to another server to call people "faggot retards" so he can avoid punishment from staff, the issue sorrounding me being banned for literally saying "I didn't say anything" which made a considerable amount of staff members to complain, and his paranoid behavior regarding certain situations. Autumn does not has what it takes to become a Bureaucrat and this is obvious.
This seems more like a power grab and a popularity contest more than anything. First because users who aren't even active in the regular wiki, the /d and are not even server active (Force Ghost, Bending753, and deleted vote from Entidade Sombria BWD, BWD's alt; are casting votes, this makes no sense since afore mentioned users ignore most of the votings around and community issues and are active members of the Portuguese Community, not the English one. Second because this is evidently a popularity contest.
What do you want changed? What can Autumn do the three Bureaucrats we already have can't? Why do users who have no relation to the community are voting yes? Why most of the yes votes are empty and void of reasons the user should be a Bureaucrat? There's a Forum Post made minutes before this silly nomination that involved actual changes in the community, this nomination reveals how the community is immature and devaluates the reinvidications made at the Discussions Forum. /d users seem to be being manipulated by a pseudo-populist agenda to acquire power more than anything. Concluding, don't waste your energy typying stuff, Dyre, votings are not just get approved or refused because the Yes or the No won, Jspo, Richie and Dist still have to evaluate this nonsense and they're not insane people to let this pass.
Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle 11:52, March 25, 2019 (UTC)
I am not going to drag Wastelander through the mud; I was only disappointed in his recent showing after the ideas expressed in his own petition. At the very least, he has remained one of the cooler heads (at least in public channels) during the discord on Discord. I will leave my critique of him short but sweet: Wastelander’s campaign set aside the time (and entire final paragraph) to detailing how inactivity is inhibiting the important social aspects of the site, such as /d, from flourishing. I would then expect some level of activity on his behalf on /d; however, there was never so much as a “thank you for your support.” Instead, he has since made as many posts on /d as I have in this single forum, with far less information put to page. Three months should have been enough to at least stop and mingle.
I am not going to address whatever drama you have with Autumn. If Autumn feels this is the time and the place, then I will leave the decision up to him. By and large, I feel your own reputation of conflict with users on site precedes you. If for no other reason than to avoid this forum from devolving into another shitshow, as it has a tendency to, please try to keep your critiques as civil as possible.
There is no reason to believe that either this petition or the Discord forum post must be mutually exclusive, and insinuating that either page harms the other is baseless. Both are responses born from the community amidst the same issues, if anything the posts should lend credence to one another. But your conclusion does touch on one truth, a fear of the community which I echoed in my original post. The final decision is not necessarily a result of votes or community will. In any instance such as this, the final decision can very well be made by the ‘crats regardless of the voting outcome. Looking at these users activity, the current staff does not have the same focus on bolstering the social avenues of Nuka. The core editing staff is well represented from admin-ship to the top, but there is no comparable voice for /d and the users who frequent the social spaces. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 12:48, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── So you think a user who's casually homphobic and ableist with other users is "drama"? This is enough reason to say no because it could have happpened to anyone at any time, the idea that situation was pure "drama" is baffling and boderline delusional. This nomination did hurt the other petition because THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE'S TALKING ABOUT NOW. Everyone forgot about the post that asks for changing and decided to follow the post that won't go anywhere and only massage one's ego.
You're not going to drag Dist, but one of the loose reasons people are voting yes is "dis not doing what he said he would", Autumn made zero promises except "changes", "changes" of what? What needs changing that you can't add a demand over at the other post?
Furthermore, this vote is divisive and shows regular users are in disagreement, that's not what was meant to happen and this nonsensical nomination exposed that.
Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle 12:36, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

Dyre, the deal is that I don't disagree with the reasons for many /d and chat users voting for this. Even as a non-social user I think it's important that there's representation of all aspects of wiki and honestly I couldn't give a proverbial about how many edits the nominee has. What I am not keen on is the fact that you are the one giving articulated reasoning and not the nominee. To be frank, I currently have more reason to vote for you for bureaucrat than Autumn and that bothers me because you're not the one asking for greater rights and authority. --L84tea Tea kettle 03:10, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

In response to all that Dyre has said about me. I never intended to be more active on /d. I'm not opposed to using /d or taking part in that side of the wiki, but it is not generally something that interests me. I quite frankly have not had time for any /d in the last few months either. I have managed to be in the wiki chat for a fair amount though, but not much more than that. I have other things in life I currently have to be on top of, and that consumes a lot of time. There is a reason why we have discussions moderators. I have put my trust into these users, they know the board and the people more than I do. I do, however, still routinely check up on the board to see if everything is in order and in the past months, it has been. I do not believe activity on /d is something I ever set out to achieve, I have been active in the Discord server, and I have indeed made sure things have been going on in a fairer way. People have been allowed to express themselves more freely, for better and (evidently) for worse. I set out to become bureaucrat with the goal of being a leader that listened to the community. A task that would prove very difficult with the gigantic schism that has reached an all time high over the last few months. Because there exists a divide between mainly regular chat users and the moderator team. I think a view of us has developed, one in which we are perceived as elitists that rarely interact with the greater community. This has been a huge misstep from our side. I hope that in the coming future we can be more open to how we do things, take more part in the community and generally be more friendly. I urge all staff to join in on this. But at the same time I ask users to respect the rules. That is what the staff team has to do. We have to follow the rules. Warnings, kicks and bans are not personal. Making the banning moderator your mortal enemy will not solve anything. I think it is very nice that we have a new chance to go over the rules in common to make some much needed amendments with the current forum taking place.

I see some users calling me out as not having delivered on my promises. That is fine, I could have done more. But I would like to add that I have only been bureaucrat for a very busy three months. Change takes time, but maybe I have been a little too slow, I will take criticism for that. At the same time, I do not believe the solution to my shortcomings is to elect someone else that, as far as I can see, runs on virtually the same ideas as I did. Fixing this wiki does, as I have realized now, not require one new leader. It requires a shift in mentality on both sides. DisgustingWastelander (talk) 00:31, March 29, 2019 (UTC)


So this is what it’s come to? We’ve gone from one of the best managed wikis out there to one that doesn’t even bother to post fallout news. We’ve gone from one of the best admin teams out there to one that has gone all the way through avoiding dealing with trolls to actively considering putting them in charge.

In case it’s not obvious, this is my resignation. Guess it turns out all the problems weren’t my fault after all. Damned if I’m going to clean up what you e created. Agent c (talk) 16:50, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

So in the last couple of days, the wiki has lost two extremely experienced administrators, Agent c and Sakaratte, is utterly riddled with drama, and not a single person here appears to have any sort of reasonable plan on how to fix things. Seems an awful lot like TESWiki in January 2015, no? I'm seeing some direct parallels. Anyone else who was around on TES then will see them too.
Admins, bureaucrats, all other staff, please read this document. The exact content, while thorough and worth reading at some point, is not what I'm asking you to focus on right now. Consider the reason that such a document exists; the rationale for every section. Consider the processes used to develop it. Consider, especially, the effects of applying community management theory in an organized fashion to settle a divisive series of disagreements. What wonders could one work with a systematic approach to conflict resolution?
Perhaps it is not my place to condescend. I am but a humble bot operator, after all. But I will say this: the way to resolve differences between users and staff is not to promote users about whom drama swirls, even if they supposedly represent the "will of the community," whatever such vagueries can possibly mean. It would be inappropriate to resort to lowering our standards for promotions simply because it is "a matter of emergency." Reevaluate the interactions between staff and users; most notably, perhaps, the lack of participation in social spheres. If you revise your behavior accordingly, you will be able to settle things soon enough. —Atvelonis (talk) 06:03, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
Agreed with the above. I don't want to promote someone who might help the wiki if it's clear that the opportunity costs can be much greater. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 14:49, March 27, 2019 (UTC)
And here my mom thought that this place had no politics! I told her "hell no" it has just as many politics as the "real world". But back to point, if (at current moment) the votes are even for both "yes" and "no" - especially when there are so many good reasons for him not to be Bureaucrat in the later - I can see tensions on both sides if he does or does not get elected. But why do some people want to go instantly to the highest post? I'm perfectly happy being a Patroller and Poll Host and nothing else. Its about power, I suppose, in the end. Its a shame, really, that wikis can tear themselves apart over these power struggles, as has happened before here (The Vault becoming Nukapedia when much of the original staff left) and now with the loss of AgentC, who had been here even longer than me. Maybe Augustus thinks he can fill that (now vacant) hole, but he'd be a poor fit, based on evidence given. It's just sad, all the way around.Leea (talk) 11:31, March 28, 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 00:08, March 29, 2019 (UTC)

Results

Given the number of no votes vs yes votes, this request does not pass. Richie9999 (talk) 01:50, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

Richie9999's two cents

Howdy folks, how's tricks? Given the number of no votes vs yes votes, this request does not pass, however, I feel that given the number of votes period, I should give more than just a cursory statement regarding this rights request. As was pointed out multiple times, Bureaucrat is different from many of the other extra rights positions on the wiki by its very nature. Bureaucrats not only oversee the user rights process, but have access to the wiki in ways that other positions lack. When one becomes a bureaucrat they are handed the keys to the proverbial castle, it's not a position to be taken lightly or to be given to those who are not qualified. The idea of a bureaucrat running solely to handle things like chat or discussions is an idea that doesn't really hold water with me. I'd argue that if you're looking to be focused on the community, namely with chat and discussions, then being discussions moderator and chat moderator is the way to go, as those positions keep one firmly in the wheel house of community focus with little in the way of editing implications. A bureaucrat must be comfortable with all aspects of the wiki, editing included.

I agree that the community is important, but I feel that it is also important to remember that all aspects of the wiki work together; chat, discussions, and of course the wiki itself. They support each other, each being beneficial to the others, but at the core is the wiki and that cannot and should not be forgotten or downplayed. Without the community, be it on discussions, chat, or the editing community, the wiki would falter and likely fail, but it is worth remembering that without the wiki, the community would not be here on this site, on discussions, on the official Nukapedia discord. Some members might be elsewhere, on other Fallout community sites like No Mutants Allowed, or on the Fallout subreddit, etc, but the wiki is what brought people here to Nukapedia.

All that being said, my final point is this: with this request I saw someone who I felt was in many ways both unqualified for the position of Bureaucrat and not really ready for the responsibility it entails. If you, Augustus, truly feel that the community in chat and on discussions needs better representation, I suggest that you, as a moderator for both those parts of the community use your role to be that representation, both of those are leadership positions as is. Don't run for Bureaucrat because you don't meet the requirements for administrator.

Richie9999 (talk) 01:50, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

DistustingWastelander's rationale

I think the votes speak for themselves, a request with more no votes than yes is hard to let pass, especially when it is a bureaucrat request. While I see the benefit of having a bureaucrat with broad /d experience and insight, I don't think that is enough qualification for a bureaucrat. There is a reason why bureaucrat is admin with a few more privileges, admin requirements should ideally be met before running, this is something I might seek to have added to the rules in the future.

All that aside, I do believe this request, and the other ongoing forum demonstrates an issue that has arisen during the last year, give or take. A schism has appeared between the two user groups on the main wiki and on /d. An idea that admins and bureaucrats are elitist that look down upon the common user. I think this has caused a lot of frustration and I think your request feels like a salvation for many users. You are a /d user, and you know the people on /d. This is somewhere I admit many admins and bureaucrats have fairly limited experience, myself included. At the same time, I don't think the solution to our issues would be to appoint yet another person to a position of power on the promises of change. One person cannot alone change the community, there must be a common agreement that we need to make a change in order for there to be change. You are welcome to help take part in making this change, and for that you do not need bureaucrat. DisgustingWastelander (talk) 21:22, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

Jspoel

I don't really know you, and for the most part have to rely on the comments given here to make a judgment. The balance of votes looks about equal, however, most of the yes votes come from chat and discussion users, while many no votes are from user-rights holders. These last category of votes have more weight and I think they are better argumented. Some of them you wouldn't want to read about a prospect bureaucrat. What you also lack is editing experience to be an allround user. I was surprised with this request, but you were allowed. We'll have to reconsider the prerequisites to become a bureaucrat, I believe. Jspoel Speech Jspoel 21:49, April 5, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+