Before starting off this motion of no-confidence, I have a few words I'd like to say... Since I first met Clyde during a time when I was still an anonymous user here at Nukapedia, Clyde had been an active presence and still has a great work-ethic. And when The Vault split off from Wikia, Clyde took the mantel when we were largely leaderless, and helped us get back on our feet. Why am I saying this? Because even after his inactivity and the other concerns listed below, I still, personally, have a lot of faith in Clyde's abilities here at Nukapedia. However, I am still adamant that because of the reasons we're about to get into, that Clyde should, at least for now, have his Special Rights reverted to a lower position. Continuing onwards...
Before starting, I want to reiterate that this is a motion of no-confidence vote.
Since the beginning of last year, I have been hearing many of us in our community noticing Clyde's extended absence, and I have been taking these comments to heart along with my own thoughts gathered as time has passed. As a Bureaucrat, Clyde is in a unique position catered by Nukapedia, making him a de-facto leader with rights and sway greater than most other users and Special Rights holders. As well as the power Nukapedia has given Clyde, Wikia has also bestowed Clyde with Check User rights, which are only handed out to three Bureaucrats tops on any given wiki. Over the past two years, however, Clyde's activity has slipped greatly, to the point now where he rarely ever uses any of his rights, and is no longer able to fulfill his duties properly as one of our de-facto leaders. Now, while inactivity does play a large part in why I have instigated this motion of no-confidence, there are other issues, as well, that I'd like openly critique before moving on to the other statements, and then, the community vote:
-It is commonplace around the wiki for debates and arguments to arise, and a lot of times, these discussions tend to get heated. Many of us are able to resolve our differences, and some of us even take some time off to cool down. But what concerns me in Clyde's case is that he has threatened to leave this wiki multiple times after arguments with other editors (not just an editor).
- Working off of this concern, there are times when Clyde has taken his frustrations out on the wiki after an argument, with an example seen through this edit.
- And my last concern on this topic is that Clyde has had a tendency to take matters way too personally. Every counter-argument seems to set him off, and it ends up disrupting the topics he's a part of. [1]There was even a case where, after having an argument with an anonymous user and being proven wrong, harassed said user to make an account. [2] [3] And it doesn't just stop there: sometimes after an argument, Clyde then goes off into chat, where he has been known to attack the person or people he was arguing with [4]. Everyone vents in chat, but as a Bureaucrat, Clyde should hold himself to a higher standard.
-As a Bureaucrat, the community relies on Clyde to fulfill a leadership position, and this comes with the responsibility of regularly checking through forums and votes - especially votes that are deemed important, and are referred to him through his talk-page. Unfortunately, over the past year, Clyde's attendance on these forums has grown increasingly distant, until now, where we almost never hear a peep from him on forums and votes.
- This, along with the fact that Clyde hasn't even used his rights to patrol edits, moderate the chat, or even use his tools to block vandals and undesirables, shows that he hasn't had a need for the Bureaucratic tools, nor has he been willing to fulfill his Bureaucratic expectations.
- For clarification, Clyde's patrol-log is empty, he has only banned one user in the past 5-6 months, is rarely ever in chat or able to appoint temporary Chat Moderators, has not played a public part in most forums and votes this year, and has only made 696 article edits since the 1st of January, 2012, with most of those edits being minor (less than 50-100 bytes).
I do understand that Clyde has been having real-world issues, and the time that he has to devote towards Wikia has become sparce due to those issues. I can definitely sympathize with that, but at the same time, it also opens up questions into how well Clyde can serve our wiki as a Bureaucrat when he doesn't have the time to remain an active, diligent presence, and has shown that he is unable or incapable of performing his Bureaucratic duties on a consistent basis. I can't speak for everyone else, but I, personally, still have faith in the abilities of Clyde's that I saw from before and right after the split, and I'm hoping that one day he will be able to return with that work-ethic again - which is why I am only wanting him to bumped down to an Administrator position for now. It is for the reasons above, however, that I feel the need to put forth a motion of no confidence. 
Some Assembly Required! 02:16, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
To the community:
Allow me to begin by saying that I've always found Clyde to be agreeable, friendly, and reasonable. I even remember that odd day in a chat debate when he helped me to defend the position I took against the US' granting of amnesty to Japanese Unit 731 scientists in exchange for their biological weapons data. Being one of our most senior members on the wiki, Clyde has certainly served the wiki with integrity for the last few years, both as an administrator as well as bureaucrat.
However, in recent times I cannot help but see Clyde becoming less active in community affairs as well as editing. Now, I realise the very legitimate reasons for this reduction in activity, the foremost of which seems to be a demanding work schedule. Now the last game was released over three years ago, and many other members of the administration have become relatively inactive due to real-life obligations and other matters that require their attention. After all, we are a fully voluntary force, and how active we are here is based on how much free time we have in real life. Also, let it be known that my support of this motion is based on the idea that Clyde would retain his administrator rights, but not the bureaucrat position.
Although in name the bureaucrat position is not meant to be higher than the administrator position, it is clear that they are held in higher regard and as leaders of the community. This is only natural due to them having a higher level of user rights in the first place. As such, a bureaucrat must be a leader of the community at large. In my opinion, being active is an intrinsic component of such leadership, which would indicate a consistent participation in community discussions, administrative affairs, as well as some main namespace editing. If a bureaucrat cannot meet these expectations, I believe it would be best suited for all if they step down. After all, bureaucrats should be held to an even higher standard than administrators since their position is held in higher regard.
It is for these reasons that I support this motion.
To Clyde:
Clyde, I don't know too much of what you think about me, but I can say with certainty that I've always enjoyed your presence on the wiki. I do hope that you can understand the rationale behind my support of this motion. I am not supporting a personal vendetta to depose the king, Clyde, but a bona fide motion to remove the obligations of being a bureaucrat from you. Many times I have heard of your demanding work schedule, and given the growing amount of work I'm facing now, I can only sympathise with you in this matter. And since it seems you are unable to attend to the matters of the wiki with the level of activity a bureaucrat should, I feel it would be best for you to join the admin team, at least for now.
I also realise you've said many times that you do check up on the wiki only to find everything in order. But there have been important discussions from which you've been absent and talk page messages that have not been addressed. To me, a leadership position such as that of a bureaucrat should expect more than just checking in once in awhile. It is clear that Jspoelstra and The Gunny have more time to spend on the wiki, which I understand is due to the different circumstances surrounding each person's real life.
I would also like to ensure you that if you do choose to run for bureaucrat again upon a return to active editing and participation in community discussions and administrative affairs, I would most certainly give you my support. I understand that it is a busy time in life for you and perhaps to be eased of the bureaucratic obligations would benefit yourself as well.
When the community is presented with a special-rights holder who has demonstrated consistently that they no longer need such rights, the community is therefore obligated to demand that the user’s special abilities be removed. In this case, I request that all special rights be removed from Kingclyde for reasons discussed below.
I do not know much about Kingclyde, but from what I have been told, he is an invaluable member of our community and someone who, in the past, has dedicated notable time and energy to bettering Nukapedia’s content and community. Unfortunately, now this vigor is not present; and Kingclyde has become notably less active and as such no longer demonstrates a need to hold special rights.
An argument I’ve heard from Kingclyde when the forum dealing with review for special rights holders was being discussed was that people have personal lives that do not always allow them to edit as frequently as others. The exact quote is:
“The simple fact is that some of the admin staff do not work internet jobs or go to school exclusively and have access to the internet and thus have access to spend most of their time here. Some people have real life jobs and real life stuff. When Fallout 4 comes out my edit count will pickup again for example.”
Let it be known that any argument centered on the principle that people encounter factors in their daily lives that do not allow frequent activity here is an argument in support of removing Kingclyde’s rights.
Unfortunately, this is unfair; some people do not have the same freedom and opportunity to edit here that others do. These people are simply less qualified to then hold special powers at this wiki. We all have personal lives; this shouldn’t be used a justification for the infrequency seen from Kingclyde. He holds the top position here at Nukapedia, and if his personal life can’t accommodate as much time as most of our other special-rights holders, I see little reason for him to keep this ability; after all, we are not obligated to reward those of us who have done good work in the past with special rights. Instead, we give special rights on an as-needed basis, and what we do not need is another user who does hold a constant presence at this wiki. Kingclyde seems to have shown that he is unfortunately incapable or unwilling to maintain a presence here necessary from any user who rightfully holds special rights.
And now to Kingclyde personally:
I must say that I’ve missed many of your major contributions to this wiki in my time here, and I haven’t had many opportunities to have much contact with you. I know that because of this, my words may add extra frustration; I know the feeling when users who seem to barely know you critique what you’ve worked hard to do for Nukapedia. Please know that I’m making no attempt here to disqualify or undermine any of the improvements, achievements, and efforts you have made here; and if the position of Bureaucrat was one that celebrated the accomplishments and labors of a well-respected and significant member of the community, anyone who would try to take that away from you would look a fool. Our issue here is that the Bureaucrat position is something much different.
From the bare-minimum standpoint, a Bureaucrat is a user who has been entrusted by the community to ensure its well-being through the all following tools: 1. the ability to ban users from chat 2. the ability to mark edits as patrolled 3. the ability to roll back edits 4. the ability to delete pages 5. the ability to protect pages 6. the ability to ban users 7. access to technical aspects of the wiki unavailable to users without sysop abilities 8. the ability to regulate special rights to users. More than this, however, the position means that the person who holds it must not only act as a representative of the community to the community itself but also as a representative of the community to other wikis, wiki staff, and other persons not directly affiliated with using this wiki. Additionally, both administrators and bureaucrats have the responsibility to mediate user or edit conflicts; and they must be available to do so.
In your time, you were a prime candidate to be trusted with these powers and implied responsibilities, but, unfortunately, your sporadic presence here this past year indicates that you are at this point unfit to hold special rights. Even dating back longer than that, you seem to make many edits for a few days, and then you disappear; the most basic prerequisite for anyone intending to hold special rights on this wiki is to be here to use them, and you are not; during user-rights requests, for example, your name is not even mentioned when it comes time for bureaucratic deliberations; why should you – unlike the others who hold the Bureaucratic position—be entitled to a free pass while they do the work required of them?
While I do see that you look to revolve problems at heart—like when I was having trouble with SaintPain—during my early time here, you were quick to assert that you were correct, and lost patience very quickly. I understand that you just wanted an answer from me, but you seemed to have one already yourself. While this is in no way the prime reason why I assert that your rights be removed, mediation is the responsibility of the bureaucrat and the admin, and you must be trusted to try to make the right call when needed.
You also rally behind the “People have lives, so they can’t be here” argument, but I have already said; this arguments severs only to harm your cause should you be determined to hold on to your rights. Anything I would want you to read would be in my earlier discussion about this topic.
Please note that this is not an attempt to permanently shut you out from the community. It is my personal hope that there comes a day when you are given special rights once again. But, I feel you have overlooked the community in a time when it is crucial to remain a constant presence here. Anyone can return when there’s a new game; that, of course, is an obvious reason to. But to choose to be here when we don’t have as much content to work with is most admirable, and I am only disappointed to see that someone who I hear was so crucial to this wiki in its early days has chosen to disregard it today.
I would be happy to hear that you plan to return to active editing in the future, but you have overlooked your responsibilities for a lengthy time. This sets a dangerous precedent should we allow you to keep your rights while we still require months of active editing for others to qualify for such abilities.
Nukapedia is seeing I time without any new information from a game, and with the seemingly little attraction there is to a wiki based on a world that hasn’t seen any new major content in years, I am not surprised that even users with special rights are faltering. The truth, however, is that there are activities to participate in at this wiki. From projects to fixing basic mistakes, the call for participation in this wiki is still here; community features as well invite input from all users. There are people here who edit almost every day and put monumental effort to ensure that this wiki continues its strive to be a complete encyclopedia for all Fallout-related information, and for thriving users like them – for a booming community like Nukapedia- to be represented by someone so preoccupied at this time is beyond problematic.
In time, I hope to see Kingclyde return to become a more active member of the community. But this is not something that will happen overnight. There is no reason for someone so now absent to hold any special rights, but should Kingclyde demonstrate to everyone’s satisfaction that he intends to once again become a powerful force in the community, I have no doubts that he can be a Bureaucrat again.
Still pending
Note: We are still waiting for Clyde's defense statement, and so the votes will be delayed until one is received, or until the 16th should a defense statement not be brought forward.
Option 1
- Voting yes is a support to have Kingclyde's position bumped down to the administrator position.
- Voting no means you do not support this option, and either support option 2, or you wish to see Clyde keep his Bureaucratic rights.
Option 2
- Voting yes is a support to have Kingclyde's position bumped down to the patroller position.
- Voting no means you do not support this option, and either support option 1, or you wish to see Clyde keep his Bureaucratic rights.
Comments
Just to reiterate, this vote isn't quite active yet, as we are waiting for Clyde's defense statement. Until then, comments are still allowed, so feel free to go ahead and get your opinions in. Some Assembly Required! 02:19, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
He shouldn't need a defence statement because we shouldn't be demoting him.
He was made bureaucrat after the split for a reason. The guy has a life outside of the wiki just like the rest of us. I know it probably sounds hypocritical coming from me of all people, but regardless. 
02:23, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- What? And we are following policy by allowing him to present a defence. --Skire (talk) 02:26, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm disappointed by how quick we've all become to strip people of their rights, more so if it's to uphold a policy rather than because they've actually abused their power. I might have voiced my concerns with Clyde's role of bureaucrat back when he was first appointed but frankly he hasn't done a single thing to warrant him being demoted, so suddenly calling him into question because of a new rule is a bit of a joke. That's just my view on the matter; don't let it upset you.
02:31, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I can understand. But reading our rationales would show you that this has nothing to do with policy per se, and is far from being "sudden." I will say my reasons and basis may be different from my co-proponents, but we all believe it would be in everyone's best interest if Clyde would step down, at least temporarily. --Skire (talk) 02:33, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I'll admit to ignorance in this case. I saw the title and assumed the worst; considering I'm not around very often I wasn't aware of a lot of the listed concerns. My apologies. Regardless I still personally don't agree with the motion; I think the only time someone should be stripped of their rights is if they abuse them purposely such as deleting pages they don't agree with, protecting pages to win an edit war, or banning a user that didn't break any rules, et cetera. 02:37, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I'll admit to ignorance in this case. I saw the title and assumed the worst; considering I'm not around very often I wasn't aware of a lot of the listed concerns. My apologies. Regardless I still personally don't agree with the motion; I think the only time someone should be stripped of their rights is if they abuse them purposely such as deleting pages they don't agree with, protecting pages to win an edit war, or banning a user that didn't break any rules, et cetera.
- I can understand. But reading our rationales would show you that this has nothing to do with policy per se, and is far from being "sudden." I will say my reasons and basis may be different from my co-proponents, but we all believe it would be in everyone's best interest if Clyde would step down, at least temporarily. --Skire (talk) 02:33, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm disappointed by how quick we've all become to strip people of their rights, more so if it's to uphold a policy rather than because they've actually abused their power. I might have voiced my concerns with Clyde's role of bureaucrat back when he was first appointed but frankly he hasn't done a single thing to warrant him being demoted, so suddenly calling him into question because of a new rule is a bit of a joke. That's just my view on the matter; don't let it upset you.
Yessie, you didn't read any of our points, did you? This is not about inactivity. That's only a very very very minor point here. Some Assembly Required! 02:46, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- Leon from what we talked about this was a bump to admin but now your witch hunt has me possibly bumped down to patroller? And you told me this was not going to be posted until the 16th. Or did I read that wrong?- Kingclyde
- I do only want you down to Admin, along with Danny. Only 69 wants you down to Patroller, and as a backer, he has a right to his opinion on this matter. And I said the vote wouldn't be posted until the 16th. We're waiting for your defense statement first. Some Assembly Required! 03:32, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I do only want you down to Admin, along with Danny. Only 69 wants you down to Patroller, and as a backer, he has a right to his opinion on this matter. And I said the vote wouldn't be posted until the 16th. We're waiting for your defense statement first.
I realize that we still have three days until the voting begins, but should there not be an Option 3: No user rights change? It seems a little unfair that we are only able to vote on how he will be demoted. ~ Toci ~ Go ahead, make my day. 03:42, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- That's what voting no is for. You vote no, and that helps determine whether or not a vote passed. Actually adding a third option seems a bit redundant when you can just vote no on the two actual options. Some Assembly Required! 04:01, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
Ok seriously, what the absolute fuck is the point in this?, i've seen the new policies and personally there not even needed, without digressing too much let me get straight to the matter at hand. When this wiki was split there was no order, the place needed a new leader and Clyde stepped up to the challenge, he put this place on track and patched it up before the shit was going to hit the fan, i may be inactive here so i have no clue how active Clyde is or not but we shouldn't have to have a vote deciding if he should retain his power or not.
The only time someone's power should be brought into question is if there abusing it and Clyde never has, sure you can demote him but does that even matter, your just demoting him to adminship which is the same as being a B-crat just on a slightly lower level, it's a fucking waste of time. I swear it's like everyone around here is so bored that they decided to implicate extra rules to sustain their boredom.The Nemesisx
- What does the new policies have anything to do with this? Some Assembly Required! 04:08, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- Ummm the fact that your basing his demotion off the pretense of following the new polices.The Nemesisx
- Where? Some Assembly Required! 04:12, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- Where?
- You wrote- "It opens up questions into how well Clyde can serve our wiki as a Bureaucrat when he doesn't have the time to remain an active, diligent presence, and has shown that he is unable or incapable of performing his Bureaucratic duties on a consistent basis."
- considering this all came to light in the wake of the whole inactivity policy thing, it seems like your using it to back up your issues with Clyde as though your just following the rules. If you got an issue with him work it out, don't make it a wiki wide issue.The Nemesisx
You can't randomly invoke a vote of confidence with no option to have him keep his rights, you and 2 other people on this wiki have effectively set him to demotion either way it goes, and frankly that's extremely ridiculous. Who are you three to do this?--TwoBearsHigh-Fiving 
04:13, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
- First of all: The vote isn't even up yet. Second of all: It's called voting no. There's no point in adding a redundant vote when voting no is all that's needed to void a vote should there be the quality or quantity of no votes needed. Some Assembly Required! 04:15, January 14, 2014 (UTC)