|CLOSED, SEE #Conclusion|
- Your Strengths:
- I'm adept at wikicode.
- I am already a rollbacker and (by proxy) a chatmod, and I feel I've done my duty well in those ranks.
- I'm told I have good sense.
- I look at issues and make decisions on a basis of what would be best for the wiki rather than what I want.
- I'm active in Wiki Operations, at least when there is a need.
- I follow wiki policy strictly and inform others when they are not doing the same. Should that method fail, I typically report those users (after two warnings) to a sysop.
- I am versed in copyright laws and could be a great help in keeping copyrighted images off the website.
- I'm a nice person, but will put my foot down when I need to.
- I am on the wiki every day, editing and contributing.
- Your Weaknesses:
- I can be argumentative at times, but I have lately been working to overcome that (especially where project character art is concerned).
- I tend to spread myself a bit far, taking on multiple tasks at once to the point that I may forget about one thing or another.
- I am in college, and around exam time I may be less available than usual.
- I can get caught up in something when I'm having fun, but I've always realized that I need to keep myself together in the end. I have been and will continue policing myself above all things.
- I genuinely care about this wiki, which is odd seeing as when I came here it was simply to change the eye color on Dovewing's page from gold to blue (I've long since given up that argument in favor of more important issues). I can't say much I didn't already say in my request for rollback rights. I'm a well known copyright defender on this wiki, to the point that people actually come to me when there a copyright problem either on or off the wiki. To be granted adminship would actually enable me to act on these requests for action without having to defer to someone else.
- I know that I have not been on the wiki for a year yet, but anyone that meets me doesn't believe it when they first hear about it. I've earned what I hope to be a good reputation among the users of this website, either as a scary person that will jump on someone the second they upload an image that has no place here (though in reality I try to treat those situations with neutrality, explaining the rules to the violator in hopes that they understand and clean up their act) or as a person that can been seen around on the wiki trying to do one thing or another.
- I can't think of a moment in time in which I'm not working on a proposal to improve some part of the wiki. I've been working on a screening process for PCA for well over a month now, which I believe proves that I have patience and know how to work with "wikiocracy" in order to find solutions to problems that I see.
- I'm not afraid to challenge someone I believe to be acting unfairly or outside of the rules, whether they be a simple anon, a regular editor of the website, or even a bureaucrat that could have easily just banned me if they became angered enough (not that I was afraid of that, I always work within set guidelines).
- I think I could serve this wiki well. I hope others believe the same. Thank you for reading my ramblings. No matter how this vote goes, I will continue to contribute to this wiki to the best of my abilities. Shelly For a limited time only 19:40, January 27, 2012 (UTC)
My second will be Wildheart.
- Oh, my. Where to start? Shellheart is amazing. She is dedicated: activity has never been an issue with her, and I don't think it ever will be unless she has a valid reason not to be here when she is needed. Her unfailing devotion has won her well-deserved position in PCA as a senior warrior - a testament to the fact that if she sets her mind to accomplishing something, she will achieve it.
- As my activity on this wiki is centered mostly around PCA, I don't view much of Shelly's contributions outside of that project. However, I can tell just from the activity feed that Shelly is not restrictive in her attention to this wiki. She is quick to report any COPPA violators, and quick to revert an uncontributive edit. She is eloquent and mature in her dealings with other users, and I cannot honestly say that I have ever thought of her nature as "abrasive".
- Shelly is always ready with a diplomatic voice and ways to improve whenever a matter of importance arises. She does not delay in stating her opinions on a matter, but shows responsibility and poise when voicing them.
- Honestly, I don't know how to prove Shelly's awesomeness in any way other than this: look at her edits. Look at the way she controls herself and the way she deals with all of the users of this wiki. Look at her responsibility, her dedication, her maturity, her devotion, and then tell me that she does not deserve this position.
03:44 Sun Jan 29
Sysop/Rollback Vote (Closed)
- Due to lack of 'op votes, this has been opened for Sysops that that do not have a nomination on the table.
- Den/CoSC 16:15, January 30, 2012 (UTC) Shelly's got well developed skills with the wikiocracy, great people skills, and is someone I can support.
Public Vote (Ends 7 July)
- Please check the Voting Eligibility Rules prior to voting.
- Well you all already know my vote. I've said my thoughts about this enough times. I do not support. I see the good intention behind this, but I've seen no proof it can work. To have this be productive as kit wants it to be, they'd have to both have different opinions and still manage to work together without causing a war. All I've ever seen them do is have different opinions and fight, or avoid eachother. And though avoiding eachother can be good and lessen the drama, what would be the point of putting two people with different opinions together, expecting them to balance eachother out, and then they end up avoiding and ignoring eachother? It'd be unproductive, and they don't need to be admins to have separate opinions yet have nothing to do with the other person.
- Quite frankly, Shelly and Cloudy are like gasoline and fire. Put them together and it's an explosion waiting to happen. Why should we choose to put two people together knowing there will be fights and drama? I understand we can VoNC them at the first sign of trouble, but that'd lead to even more unneeded drama. After losing a bureaucrat and having one inactive admin, we're going to need strong admin(s) to keep this place calm and running well. That's something Shelly and Cloudy can't promise. All putting them together promises is drama, which we really don't need more of. Plus, Atelda already has enough on her hands, she doesn't need to have yet another job monitoring these two to see if they can even remotely get along, or breaking up fights. There's no need to put more work on her shoulders and I believe that is what making these two admins will do.
- Also, admins are supposed to be a source of calmness or wisdom in a way when there's fights or disagreements. If we have half the admins jumping in joining the fight, if not worsening it, it will be counter-productive, and we'll no longer be able to count on the admins to break up or resolve fights.
- I feel that we would be much better off getting a different admin(s) rather than these two. There are plenty other users who are active, and promise varying opinions, just as these two do, but without the promise of drama and fights coming along with it. Plenty of users here can help Teldy out, and help settle the wiki after Kit leaves, and would be active enough to be counted on when Teldy can't be here. The best choice in my opinion would be to get different users in here posting up RfA's, and then choose the best fitted. There are plenty fit. So tell me, why would you choose a second best choice by choosing two users who will clash and argue inevitably? There are advantages, but they in no way, shape or form, outweigh the disadvantages, when we can get users just as good in the admin spot(s) instead. In my opinion, this isn't one of those “Oh we'll just give it a shot and see if it works” type of things. If we give it a shot and it fails, that will cause more stress on Atelda and the wiki as a whole, as well as probably Shelly and Cloudy. There's not a good enough reason to make these two specifically, rather than anyone else, admins and have that risk. It's simply not worth it. There's no spectacular advantage of having these two admins instead of other users that would justify taking that risk.
- So that is my thoughts on this situation. I know I may not be able to change some of your minds, but please at least take into account what I'm saying. I don't think this would be a good idea. 03:53, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- Originally, I was going to vote yes...I couldn't see any reason not to vote these two users into the admin position. However, Paleh brings up several valid points that must be brought into consideration. Oil and water don't mix. And, yes, Shelly and Skye have both said that they'd put their differences aside- saying is one thing. Doing is a whole different matter. I'm sorry, you two, but I can't say yes to this. Rainlegs 03:58, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I'm inclined to agree with Paleh. Though Shell and Cloud may be able to work together, the history proves that they haven't been able to. And as Paleh pointed out^^ we others, or have participated in much fights between two.should let other users have a chance to post RfAs of their own; there are many others also fit for the responsibility of being admins, who want the position, and have not had a large part of their history where they have sided against others a lot, or have had participated in many arguments so actively with another. For what I know, though they can't help it at times, it's best that our admins do not take sides of an argument so actively, which is what have Cloudy and Shelly done towards each other. But I understand that people need to voice their opinions, but it's best to do so without causing much argument and anger... 04:05, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- Everything's been said. I really can't see these two getting along, and why choose two users that will cause problems (not saying all the time, but eventually) when we could choose new ones? Sorry. oblivionAudience? 04:17, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- I've had to re-think my vote over and over, and finally I've come to a decision that these two cannot work together. As individuals they are great contributors to the wiki, and not being given admin rights shouldn't stop them from doing what they do best here. There are other users that can handle this posistion more than I think these two could. Sorry Cloudy and Shelly. :c I'm doing this for the better of the wiki and what users can do good and stay open-sided in arguments and discussions. I do enjoy fun...8D
- Okay, lemme just say that one of the reasons I don't support is because this is all going a bit to fast, I believe. We should discuss whether or not new RfAs could be accepted... 17:48, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- Gasoline and fire may not be good combinations at all, but burning/exploding (for a lack of better word...) fire won't (or any fire) be possible in a vacuum. So, pretty much, Shelly and Cloud may not go well together, but when in a position (in this case adminship, which is the vacuum), they should not and won't...argue (explode)...
- Bad wording, but hopefully y'all get my point. So, I change my vote. 18:48, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Stoney, they might have had a history of fighting, but I think under these circumstances they will make the descision to put their differences aside and I think thy will be great admins. -Ducksauce 18:52, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
- Due to the fact that this vote wasn't shared publicly, never was advertised, and only those involved directly in the VoNC even knew about this, I'm going to discuss with Atelda (when she's back from vacation) about having a properly public vote. This is not a vote of the public. There's ONE none-staff vote on this. This does not reflect the voice of the community, and primarily reflects the voice of what I consider "The Cabal". Do not consider this a binding result at this time. Den/CoSC 16:44, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
- While it may not be a binding result at this time, this RfA has been opened long after it's been required to, and I would consider it closed so we can move onto the next course of action. Atelda insert vague subtext here 16:04, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
With six votes of against and only two votes of support, Shellheart will not become an administrator on this wiki due to lack of community support. Atelda insert vague subtext here 22:36, September 22, 2012 (UTC)