Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Bureaucracy _ Stewards/elections 2010
Posted by: TungstenCarbide
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2010
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2010/Questions#Thekohser, entertaining and worthwhile reading as always, Greg.
Posted by: Draim
I just don't understand why the questions keep getting asked......
/me shrugs
Posted by: Eva Destruction
Good god, that candidate list is a wretched mob, even by Wikipedia standards.
How many walls does Razorflame need to bang his head against before he realizes he's never going to grab the (worthless) brass ring?
Posted by: CrazyGameOfPoker
How many times has he RfA'd on SEW, out of curiosity? I lost track around 12.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
I might vote for Razorflame in the hope he wins and finally gets to ejaculate.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 4th February 2010, 5:52pm) 
I might vote for Razorflame in the hope he wins and finally gets to ejaculate.
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 4th February 2010, 8:02pm)
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
If Hivemind is any indication, that's half of the men on Wikipedia.
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE
* Is it true you compromised the English Wikipedia admin account Cool3 in c. November 2009, and used it until it was discovered and desysopped? Majorly talk 20:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
o Further, how much did you pay for it? Do you think that buying admin accounts is conduct unbecoming of a steward? Why or why not? ++Lar: t/c 01:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
"Compromised" is a loaded term, and my wallet has nothing to do with my Steward candidacy. (Unless, that is, Steward bits can be purchased like Wikimedia Foundation board seats can be? If that's the case, how much do I need to shell out for this Steward-level user right?) -- Thekohser 05:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Let's say it more clearly then: Mr Kohs, were you using the account User:Cool3? --Philippe 20:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
o Further, how much did you pay for it? Do you think that buying admin accounts is conduct unbecoming of a steward? Why or why not? ++Lar: t/c 01:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
"Compromised" is a loaded term, and my wallet has nothing to do with my Steward candidacy. (Unless, that is, Steward bits can be purchased like Wikimedia Foundation board seats can be? If that's the case, how much do I need to shell out for this Steward-level user right?) -- Thekohser 05:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Let's say it more clearly then: Mr Kohs, were you using the account User:Cool3? --Philippe 20:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, there's your entertainment for the weekend......
Posted by: thekohser
Hey, I've already done better in this election than ALL of these candidates!
24 biggest fan
AarcnJBishcp
ashena iran
cozzycovers
Cutno
Der.Gray
Doberek
Dochlaggie
Drew R. Smith
efa
Freelancer
Garkeith
Gawrki
Germannoiseunion
ginister
hopytgr
Jwelchering
Lgxxl
mcannac
nicola.tesla.rowe
Ousterscape
Paul2387
patachonf
pelister
Princenoire
Rapomon
Rhserra
سمرقندی
Seth Nimbosa
Sinternational
Strawberries248
Zizo1990
ABN13a
Bruno Borges Alves
darkillo
Data traveler
Deazcue
Djuneyt tr
Don Florinache
dunya
Eseki
Limoke oscar
Nascarfans
sigiuks
TRSK
Wasiakp89
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 4th February 2010, 7:53pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 4th February 2010, 8:02pm)
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
If Hivemind is any indication, that's half of the men on Wikipedia.
I prefer to think its just the folks on hivemend.
Posted by: Sarcasticidealist
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 5th February 2010, 12:30am)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 4th February 2010, 7:53pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 4th February 2010, 8:02pm)
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
Posted by: RDH(Ghost In The Machine)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 5th February 2010, 1:02am)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 4th February 2010, 5:52pm)
I might vote for Razorflame in the hope he wins and finally gets to ejaculate.
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
HE'S GONNA BLOW!
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Fri 5th February 2010, 4:37am)
I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women. I'm afraid that somebody qualified to make the assessment might say it would be a bad place to pick up men, too.
For pedios, though, it might be the happy hunting grounds...Young man!
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Thu 4th February 2010, 11:37pm)
]I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women.
We could put Lar in a wig and a dress and pretend that he's Susan Boyle.
Posted by: RDH(Ghost In The Machine)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 6th February 2010, 3:23am)
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Thu 4th February 2010, 11:37pm)
]I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women.
We could put Lar in a wig and a dress and pretend that he's Susan Boyle.
If all else fails we can whip the horses' eyes and make them dream a dream...
Sorry, Jim Morrison quote I just butchered there...couldn't resist...
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(RDH(Ghost In The Machine) @ Fri 5th February 2010, 11:04pm)
Sorry, Jim Morrison quote I just butchered there...couldn't resist...
Try harder next time, bub.
Posted by: tarantino
It looks like Lar is having a http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2010/Statistics. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
I wonder who the Wikimedia Foundation officials are that select the commission members. Are ombudsmen members voted on by the WMF board? Also it says the "ombudsman's real identity must be disclosed to the Foundation legal counsel." That's a bit different than when they hand out checkuser or oversight. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Identification_noticeboard.
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 15th February 2010, 10:02pm)
It looks like Lar is having a http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2010/Statistics. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
If I am not reconfirmed then when I'm done being an Ombudsman I don't go back to being a steward.
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
Most other stewards just keep their heads down and don't let anyone know what they think about anything.
301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.
Posted by: Cla68
QUOTE(Lar @ Tue 16th February 2010, 4:56am)
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 15th February 2010, 10:02pm)
It looks like Lar is having a http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2010/Statistics. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
If I am not reconfirmed then when I'm done being an Ombudsman I don't go back to being a steward.
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
Most other stewards just keep their heads down and don't let anyone know what they think about anything.
301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.
What percentage is required for reconfirmation?
Posted by: MBisanz
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 16th February 2010, 8:40am)
What percentage is required for reconfirmation?
I thought it was 80%, I also thought that only the votes of other stewards were counted in the final determination.
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(Lar @ Mon 15th February 2010, 8:56pm)
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh?
Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(MBisanz @ Tue 16th February 2010, 2:43am)
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 16th February 2010, 8:40am)
What percentage is required for reconfirmation?
I thought it was 80%, I also thought that only the votes of other stewards were counted in the final determination.
There is no fixed percentage requirement, per se. Confirmation is driven by consensus among stewards. One negative comment could be enough to cause the consensus to come out that confirming isn't a good idea, or 100 negative comments could add up to "nothing relevant to stewardship".
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 16th February 2010, 3:08am)
So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh?
Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.
In fact, you did.
I didn't stand for steward to be popular or to collect another hat. So some opposition is to be expected, and even (when it's valid feedback) welcomed.
Posted by: MZMcBride
QUOTE(Lar @ Mon 15th February 2010, 11:56pm)
And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
Boo! I thought I'd made the first Lego remark on Lar's vote but then saw somebody had three votes above. Terrible.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
Boy, this is a boring election. 
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Tue 16th February 2010, 7:55pm)
Boo! I thought I'd made the first Lego remark on Lar's vote but then saw somebody had three votes above. Terrible.
I think yours may be funnier, if it's any consolation. (not that the other one wasn't funny, mind you)
You may want to look into the "Bonktron" theme (just use Google) if doing rude things with Lego is your taste (not that it's my taste at all, mind you, I just happen to know about that theme)
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
Bonktron?! 
Posted by: tarantino
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 17th February 2010, 2:33am)
Boy, this is a boring election.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewards/confirm/2010#Lar.
So, again, who decided to appoint him as an ombudsman? Cary?
Posted by: Zoloft
QUOTE(tarantino @ Sun 14th March 2010, 4:24am)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 17th February 2010, 2:33am)
Boy, this is a boring election.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewards/confirm/2010#Lar.
So, again, who decided to appoint him as an ombudsman? Cary?
My favorite part:
QUOTE
mreow ! mreoow.
1 agreed (113 didn't mention this).
Darkoneko.
1 agreed (113 didn't mention this).
Darkoneko.
I looked at the so-called uncivil remarks posted and actually thought Lar's stuff barely qualified as 'cranky.'
Posted by: Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Sun 14th March 2010, 9:44am)
I looked at the so-called uncivil remarks posted and actually thought Lar's stuff barely qualified as 'cranky.'
This is Wikipedia. "Uncivil" doesn't mean "rude", it means "disagreed with someone who considers themselves more important than you".
Posted by: Ottava
I was thankful that I could keep the discussion as civil as it was. There was quite a lot of tension on the confirmation page and it could easily have turned into a very nasty fight (which would have had some really bad ramifications).
Posted by: Kurt M. Weber
Crap, you mean I missed an opportunity to run for something?
Posted by: thekohser
So, I did just as well as Lar in the quest for Stewardship?
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 4:35pm)
Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?
Uh wait, I thought you clearly understood that prior to offering up the "bonktron" avatar.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 14th March 2010, 4:52pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 4:35pm)
Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?
Uh wait, I thought you clearly understood that prior to offering up the "bonktron" avatar.
Bonktron was brought up by Lar. And I'm glad I've been reminded of it.
But on my point, there are bigger smear and spin campaigns going on against various Wikipedians than politician, it seems.
Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:43am)
Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?
I'd pay good money to see any of the above happen.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 14th March 2010, 7:42pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:43am)
Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?
I'd pay good money to see any of the above happen.
I never quite thought of Lar in that context. Maybe with the new interest in 3D movies, we can get promote this potential production with the catchphrase: "Lar in 3-D -- Careful, Or He'll Poke Your Eye Out!"
Posted by: RDH(Ghost In The Machine)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 15th March 2010, 4:07pm)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 14th March 2010, 7:42pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:43am)
Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?
I'd pay good money to see any of the above happen.
I never quite thought of Lar in that context. Maybe with the new interest in 3D movies, we can get promote this potential production with the catchphrase: "Lar in 3-D -- Careful, Or He'll Poke Your Eye Out!"
Hey lucky in love, unlucky at Wikimedia...
So con-grats, Lar...
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 6:43pm)
Bonktron was brought up by Lar. And I'm glad I've been reminded of it.
Oh, I see now that he denied the accusation in advance. Odd.
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Mon 15th March 2010, 9:07pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 6:43pm)
Bonktron was brought up by Lar. And I'm glad I've been reminded of it.
Oh, I see now that he denied the accusation in advance. Odd.
I'm curious as to what your issue is, exactly. It's baffled me for a while.
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:35am)
Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?
That is my view as well. It proves that smear campaigns based on untruths work as well on wikis as they do elsewhere. So much for brave new worlds.
QUOTE(tarantino @ Sat 13th March 2010, 11:24pm)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 17th February 2010, 2:33am)
Boy, this is a boring election.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewards/confirm/2010#Lar.
So, again, who decided to appoint him as an ombudsman? Cary?
Are you a Proab mouthpiece all the time, or just most of the time, or what?
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 16th February 2010, 3:08am)
QUOTE(Lar @ Mon 15th February 2010, 8:56pm)
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh?
Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.
I never did it purely for fun.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:22am)
So, I did just as well as Lar in the quest for Stewardship?
Better -- you didn't come out of it in a grumpy mood!
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 15th March 2010, 9:50pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:22am)
So, I did just as well as Lar in the quest for Stewardship?
Better -- you didn't come out of it in a grumpy mood!
Yep. Plus you never had any illusions about becoming (or remaining) a steward based on the good work you'd done in the past, did you?
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 15th March 2010, 11:07am)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 14th March 2010, 7:42pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sun 14th March 2010, 11:43am)
Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?
I'd pay good money to see any of the above happen.
I never quite thought of Lar in that context. Maybe with the new interest in 3D movies, we can get promote this potential production with the catchphrase: "Lar in 3-D -- Careful, Or He'll Poke Your Eye Out!"
Oh Ick.
Talk to MichaelQSchmidt if that's your cup of tea.
Posted by: tarantino
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewards/confirm/2010&diff=prev&oldid=1895617
QUOTE
I sincerely hope this sort of thing never happens again. I'll now go further and say I think the decision was flawed, exceeded the authority of the group, and should be repudiated by the stewards as a whole. A closed process is not what I signed up for when we were discussing this on the mailing list.
"The thing is, the project doesn't DO due process. There is no reason to expect it. This is not a governance experiment, a society, or even fair."
Posted by: SDJ
Glad to see the nonsense and complete lack of transparency, isn't limited to Wikipedia. Congrats to the Wikimedia stewards "council of 5" (or whatever the hell they call themselves) on making one of the strangest decisions I've yet seen.
Posted by: Lar
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 15th March 2010, 11:42pm)
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewards/confirm/2010&diff=prev&oldid=1895617
QUOTE
I sincerely hope this sort of thing never happens again. I'll now go further and say I think the decision was flawed, exceeded the authority of the group, and should be repudiated by the stewards as a whole. A closed process is not what I signed up for when we were discussing this on the mailing list.
"The thing is, the project doesn't DO due process. There is no reason to expect it. This is not a governance experiment, a society, or even fair."
Oh absolutely. Rather a pithy quote, in fact, although I forget who said it.
I just thought it wouldn't come out that way this particular time. Silly me.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Lar @ Tue 16th March 2010, 12:40am)
I just thought it wouldn't come out that way this particular time. Silly me.
Well, they don't like people who occasionally show some integrity. Besides, the old-guard types have always been more interested in revenge than... ehh, pretty much anything else. Why Mr. Proabivouac continues to associate himself with those folks is beyond me, but I suppose most of his behavior has always been beyond me, despite my various attempts to make sense of it in the past. (At least he's consistent!)
Anyway, it's a good example of how there's really no hope for the whole enterprise, so at least there's that.
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 15th March 2010, 11:16pm)
Anyway, it's a good example of how there's really no hope for the whole enterprise, so at least there's that.
At long last.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Lar @ Mon 15th March 2010, 11:06pm)
Talk to MichaelQSchmidt if that's your cup of tea.
I'll make an appointment with L.L. King.
Posted by: Ottava
Does any of this really matter? Lar will still be an Ombudsman for a year so its not like he could have used the privileges. I think it is all moot to be honest.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 16th March 2010, 10:12am)
Lar will still be an Ombudsman for a year...
You almost make it sound like a prison sentence...for the Wikipedia community.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 17th March 2010, 4:40pm)
You almost make it sound like a prison sentence...for the Wikipedia community.
Posted by: RDH(Ghost In The Machine)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 17th March 2010, 4:40pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 16th March 2010, 10:12am)
Lar will still be an Ombudsman for a year...
You almost make it sound like a prison sentence...for the Wikipedia community.
Whatever happened to that hilarious pic, showing Lego Lar in Lego jail?