Forum:Adminship Exceptions

If we've all been following the User Rights page, then you know about the recent runs. Now, if you've been paying closer attention, you know that Tech. Wiz. recently ran for adminship. Thing is, Bullet pointed out that Tech. Wiz. doesn't meet the requirements. I told Tech. Wiz. in Chat that if he ran, he'd most likely have my support, unless he did something to screw up majorly. By "not meeting the requirements", he means that Tech. Wiz. doesn't have the needed edits for running. Tech. Wiz. however, has proven himself worthy of adminship, at least in my eyes, and is only 240 edits shy of 500. I personally feel that an exception should be made for him, as he's proven himself worthy of the rights, hell, he proved himself worthy of the rights a while ago, and I'm surprised he doesn't have the rights already. I'm going to suspend Tech. Wiz.'s request for now, until we get enough say on whether the exception should be made or not. I'm also going to allow him to comment in this forum, so he can give his reason why the exception should be made. Rollbackers are allowed to voice their opinion on whether or not the exception should be made, but their vote will not count in the long run unless absolutely needed. --Jäzzi 23:09, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

I usually good at voicing my opinion through examples. Let's say that someone that has 100% use of certain rights had not joined a wiki to edit content, but expand the community, make new ideas, and fight vandalism. They may not have enough edits in content because that's not their purpose on the wiki. But they do help with everything else by asking people with the rights to do it for them. In that case, why wouldn't you allow them to have the rights? This doesn't pertain to me, however it is an example I want to share. I think that a user should only earn rights if they have shown interest in the wiki and it's content and if they have a true need for them. Not to mention that I am so used to doing things an admin can do but I can't here. And I do have the need for the tools. If you are wondering why I am not on our wiki at all times, is because I like to balance the amount of time I spend on the computer, you know what I mean? I will more than happy to answer any of your questions :) Technology Wizard · talk

I also think he's proven himself. He's helpful, active, trustworthy and isn't afraid to voice or try new ideas. If anything, the rules should be used as a guide. Why make exceptions for ban history and nothing else? There's a lot more to take into consideration than the number of edits and the amount of time a person has been here. The ability of the person, the quality of their edits, and their interactions within the community is hugely important; yet that is not mentioned in the list of requirments. Ha, it says a lot that he got 5 votes before anyone actually realised he didn't meet the written requirements! One thing I would suggest is that rule changes for the requests should be agreed upon by all admins before being implemented... otherwise that could get a tad messy. Jazzcookie 00:06, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I feel that if we bend the rules now, other applicants may demand the rule bent later on. There should be rules that can not be bypassed and I feel this is one of them.  Crimsnnavy   C  S  01:23, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with Crimson. I don't think any rules should be bent, I think Tech should wait a little bit, maybe wait until August? --Bullet Francisco (talk) 04:40, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I always love to make compromises however, what would be the difference between now and August? The only thing I would see if a lesser chance against our anti vandalism project and others that have been mentioned. And yes Crimson is right, however (not to gloat) but when have you seen someone with such few edits that could be a good admin. I am not interested the the title and fancy highlight, I am interested in helping the wiki. All I have at the moment is the Rollback button, which honestly, is hardly used since we already have the undo button. I am not requesting rights for my benefit, but for the benefit of the wiki. Technology Wizard · talk

You are a great contributor, no doubt, I'd even go as far as to say your one of the best we have, but nonetheless, future nominees will see that you avoided the rules, and they will try and do the same, can't you wait 30 days (like the rules say), nominate yourself when you are fit for the rules, so there is no confusion? --Bullet Francisco (talk) 15:41, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with Bullet and Crimson. Although you're a great contributor, and you do deserve the rights, but as Bullet pointed out, newer users will see that you got around the rules and will think they can do the same. I think, however, we could make a compromise. We suspend his request till he has the rights and it's been a month since the suspension, we put the request in the archive as suspended, and once it's been a month and he has the edits, we copy it from the archives, and then place it on the requests page. He keeps his votes from now, and if anybody changes their votes from now to then, they change their vote to reflect upon that. --Jäzzi 15:50, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I will change my vote in a month actually, after he qualifies for the rules.--Bullet Francisco (talk) 16:19, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

Do you agree with this compromise though? Your opinion and Crimson's actually matter in this, as you guys are admins. And since Hstar and Ciencia haven't been active lately, it appears it's just the three of us. --Jäzzi 16:22, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with your suggestion that you just pointed out. --Bullet Francisco (talk) 16:55, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

I accept, as long as the nomination is completely suspended, meaning that the timer hasn't continues (the 2 weeks rule). Sadly enough, I will be on wikia as a whole for a minimal time for 1 week since I am going on vacation. I will however try my best to contribute once a day. Thanks for the compromise guys! Technology Wizard · talk

It will be fully suspended. No one will be allowed to vote, or comment on the request as it'll be in the archives. And once you're ready and meet the requirements, message one of the admins to remove it from the archives. --Jäzzi 17:24, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

Does he have to wait out 30 Days at least? --Bullet Francisco (talk) 22:12, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I actually thought that was implied. --Jäzzi 22:43, July 19, 2011 (UTC)