Forum:New IRC channel/Votes For Op

This page can be used for voting for/nominating operators for the new channel. All nominees for +F are automatically here, though users may nominate themselves if they wish to. 03:18, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * As a general guideline, successful ops should get at least 65 to 70% support. After two weeks, the votes will be closed by a neutral user. Cook Me Plox 03:46, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Charitwo

 * Support
 * 1) - I've seen very rash actions from charitwo in the past that doesn't live up to standards I believe channel operators should reach. However, charitwo's discussion in the archive and his withdrawal from voting for +F has changed my vote from  to . Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 02:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) - I've known charitwo for quite some time, and while there were instances in the past where his actions were questionable, he has proven time and again that he has learned from his mistakes and is more than responsible enough to have an op role on the channel. -- Skiz  zerz  02:14, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - Charitwo has always done an excellent job in handling his +o and has kept the channel running. I think it is perfectly acceptable for him to keep his +o.--
 * 5) - Charitwo sure dedicates a lot of time running the channel and keeping it clear of trolls. However, his general behavior in some situations is worrying, but I'm gonna support it nonetheless, seeing as the issue isn't too serious. I do hope he can learn from our concerns.  1358  (Talk)  11:34, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - Charitwo makes bad decisions sometimes, but so does everyone else. I see no reason to discontinue his work as op.
 * 7) Per the others, also I wish others do present their concerns to Charitwo and someone third party (same with any other op) when they are raised so people can respond. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) - Established and trusted user --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) - He holds himself in a way that others don't, and he's been a longstanding OP for a while. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) - Per all. 16:33, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) No reason why not, he's efficient and does his current jobs well!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:10, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) - You're a good op. Please work on communication and show that you can change based on what was said in the earlier thread. Cook Me Plox 19:36, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) - Per the others. --Lord of Dark 20:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) - Per the above comments. ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) Trusted user with +o, and has been for a very long time. --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 16) I have no problems with Charitwo as op and he's seemed to have mellowed since I first met him. --


 * Oppose


 * Neutral
 * 1) Neutral. I am quite frankly impressed by Charitwo's withdrawal from the +F nom in response to criticism, and I really do hope that he takes that criticism to heart as much as he says he will. That being said, the past trends of ignoring user feedback are concerning, forcing me to be neutral on this. I also hope that this !vote allows Charitwo to realize that it is not my intention to "push an agenda" here, as I would be opposing per some stupid reason if I wanted to do that. 04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral - He can and can't be a nice user, so I can go either way.

Randomtime

 * Support
 * 1) - Level headed. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 02:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) -- Skiz  zerz  02:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - While I have my doubts about him not being a walrus. He is a good op.--
 * 5) - Per above really. I can trust him with op.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6)  Easily! The best user I can think of - * ~Happy65 Talk My Amazing Blogs ! 07:33, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) - Surelure. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) - Level headed and knows how to keep his cool. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) Of course, this decision is easy, dude's awesome!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) - Per the others. --Lord of Dark 20:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11)  1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  20:15, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) awm52 -- 22:43, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) Absolutely no problems here. --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) - He seems to be great with everyone and there isn't a good reason to oppose.
 * Oppose
 * Oppose


 * Neutral

VegaDark

 * Support
 * 1) - I haven't seen Vega do anything that would warrant him to not have +o. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) -- Skiz  zerz  02:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) - I can trust him with op.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - Surelure. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) - --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - I've never seen him do anything that would make me think otherwise. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) - Per the others. --Lord</b> of</b> Dark</b> 20:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8)  1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  20:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) He'll need op so he can ban people -- 22:44, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) Per the above comments. <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) Absolutely no problems here. --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) - Per above and since his actions seem to be on the good side.
 * Oppose
 * 1) - Per above and since his actions seem to be on the good side.
 * Oppose


 * Neutral

Godisme

 * Support
 * 1) - I haven't seen Godisme do anything that would warrant him to not have +o. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 02:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) -- Skiz  zerz  02:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - My concerns on his +F nomination don't really apply here, since there will be lots of oversight of his actions due to lots of active ops. I would recommend that he take some of my concerns to heart, though, and act on them as he sees fit.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) - --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - He knows what he's doing and keeps his cool. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) Again one of the best guys here!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) - So long as the operators do not have too much blanket authority without oversight, I don't see this as a problem. Please try to make decisions publicly instead of with a couple of users in the channel. Cook Me Plox 19:36, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) - Per the others. --Lord</b> of</b> Dark</b> 20:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) - Per the above. <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) - Absolutely no problems here. --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12)  1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  19:52, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) -- 21:57, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) -- 21:57, November 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) - Unable to handle criticism, both of self and wikia. -  19:54, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * I've seen Godisme admit he was in the wrong at times in the past. I think he is able to handle criticism. --Callofduty4 23:36, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) - Seems to be biased about most situations and this shows lack of concern or co-operation. Not to mention the approval of letting users bad-mouth other users in chat, and encourage it. I don't want to see an OP with this type of attitude towards things. However the support side has some valid points, and until I see an improvement in behavior, I'm sticking to oppose.
 * Tech, I am in no way biased in any situation. You are clinging still to the pokemon wiki incident in which you still believe that Jazzi blocked you and that I allowed people to say mean things about you in chat. The truth is that Crimson blocked you, it was Crimson's idea, he is the one who demoted you as well which was his idea as well. I did not allow users to say anything bad about you in chat. I have no control over what other users say and there has never been a rule against expressing how you feel about someone in chat. The rule is you keep it clean, you cannot swear or post vulgarity. Had someone insulted you and broken these rules, they would have been kicked but there is no rule about people expressing how they feel about another user in chat. In fact, staff have told me that the rules I enforce are too strict and that users should be able to come into chat to relax and say what they will. Also, IRC is a radically different environment to chat. You have never been in IRC and do not know how users act in IRC or how I handle my +o. I think in this situation your bias needs to be called into question. You obviously show a negative bias towards anyone who was around when you were demoted on pokemon wiki.--
 * Actually I am well aware about everything that happened on Pokemon Wiki, which has no case of being mentioned here imo. The fact that you just took the time to attempt to humiliate me says that you just aren't fit to be an OP. And regarding central chat, I have an image of it, so if you'd like to see it, please let me know and I'll be fine with showing you it, but not on this page since this isn't a page to do so. If you have any more concerns, take it to staff or to my talk page. Just because I didn't vote in your favor, doesn't mean you have to question it. I have seen your actions on multiple wikis and I am simply stating that I don't like your behavior and I don't think you should be an OP on the new channel.


 * 1)Comments are allowed!! 2) You are biased over Pokémon!! 3) Stop saying people are humiliating you, it's getting tiresome!! SunXia   (Chat)  02:51, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * You go ahead and keep thinking all of that.
 * I shall and I shan't be alone!! Word of advice, don't criticise if you can't deal with it yourself and paint it as an attempt to humiliate you, honestly the real world doesn't work like that!! Hope you take that advice!! SunXia   (Chat)  03:02, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * So what you're saying is: Leaving an opinion is criticising. I don't see why I would consume that advice.
 * A critical opinion is, yes, a criticism!! SunXia   (Chat)  03:10, November 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Neutral

ZamorakO o

 * Support
 * 1) - I really don't buy either the immature or bad connection arguments, and don't see how they are relevant to whether or not he can kick/ban people effectively. He is a trusted user, and I'm sure that he'll be able to use the tools well.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) - After discussion with Zam, he said he is an op on other channels and that his connection does not stop him from performing his duties as an op. It was commented below as to why he should be given op. THe philosophy many people seemed to be taking in this vote is the more the merrier. So why not Zam? Yes, he can be immature at times but I am sure that he can be serious when the time calls for it.--
 * 3) - I think that the user is very friendly and I don't see how this user could cause problems.
 * 4) I think I made a mistake here and I'm mature enough to admit when in the wrong, so here, go for it buddy, I think you're good hearted and capable and well connection is more troublesome on Chat than in IRC!!  SunXia   (Chat)  03:05, November 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) - Acts immature most often than not. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * - While Zam is not the most mature at times he is fine for the most part. What troubles me is his connection and how much it floods the channel, not really something that makes an op look good.--
 * 1) - Im Sorry Zam, I agree with Godisme here - *<font color="Purple"> ~Happy65 <font color="CornflowerYellow">Talk My Amazing Blogs ! 07:28, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) - Connection. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Per above, no offense intended, good member though!! SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Concerns with connection. Will support later on. -- 21:55, November 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Neutral
 * 1) Neutral - I've never really seen Zam do anything objectionable, barring his explosive connection. I don't really think anything bad would happen if he were an op, but I don't see any reason to op him either.
 * 2) Neutral - Per Moncho. 1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  15:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral - Mainly due to connection troubles, if that was fixed I would go to a support. <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

 * Immaturity can help keep things in a channel light, and stop one from ripping each other's head off from being to serious. As for my connection, if I know how to use the tools, why would it make me a bad op? 02:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Monchoman45

 * Support
 * 1) - Knowledgeable and level headed. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 02:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) -- Skiz  zerz  02:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - Aside from his use of webchat, he knows what he is doing. --
 * 5) - Why not?  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - Surelure. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) - Knows what he's doing, and if he doesn't, he learns fast. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) - only because of his walrus computer.  1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  15:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) Because he is awesome!! Mostly always around too!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) Absolutely no problems here --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) -- 21:53, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) - Very nice user with good intentions.
 * Oppose


 * Neutral

Rappy 4187

 * Support
 * 1) - From what I have observed, Rappy has always behaved in a mature and responsible way when interacting with other people on the IRC. --Gardimuer { ʈalk } 02:01, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) -- Skiz  zerz  02:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) - Rappy has experience and is very helpful on the channel. While not always looking at the screen, he gets back to anyone who pings him and I am sure he would handle whatever problems arise while he is on. --
 * 4) - Why not?  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) - No reason not to. Knows what he's doing and does it.
 * 6) - What Monchoman and others say. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) - --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) - Mature, lurks, and knows what he's doing. He's helpful and always responds to pings. –  Jä  zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) Per what Jazzi said!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10)  Never! He'll be able to kick me!  I mean, sure why not. As long as he pays off his debt. -- 22:41, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ  ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) Absolutely no problems here --Callofduty4 19:43, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) Per Jazzi and Charitwo :) 19:57, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) - Doesn't seem to have issues with others.
 * Oppose


 * Neutral

Jazzi

 * Support
 * 1) - Maturity used to be factor, but Jazzi seems to have control over this aspect at least in IRC. and hasn't used her +o negatively. I see no reason to take it from her. Rappy 01:52, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) - Being a regular in a channel where Jazzi is an op, she knows how to use the +o and most certainly never abuses it. --
 * 3) - Handles both chatmod on central and op in the zeldapedia channel quite well. While some cases of supreme idiocy can get her fired up, these generally are only a problem when the user in question doesn't fall under any guidelines for removal (generally in chat, where COPPA bans are a sin). As the new channel is unofficial and we are able run under our own rules, I don't think this will cause any problems. I think she's more than qualified.
 * 4)  --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) Overwhelmingly support this one!! Clearly some people didn't clearly look at the situation!! Even sannse complimented Jazzi's abilities and how she held herself when the same user started another vile, pathetic and immature campaign to smear her name!! Looking at the actual situation you would actually see who was the immature one and who stood by and allowed a Crat to make his own decision in regards to a smear campaign!! She's very mature and has grown a lot in her time here!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - --Lord</b> of</b> Dark</b> 20:05, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose
 * 1) - Maybe calling it immaturity is bad wording, but I have issues with how she conducts herself when involved in a dispute. Ops should remain level-headed - I've seen and heard the exact opposite coming from Jazzi. A recent example would be around Tech's sysop flag on pokemon.wikia. Sorry, but I just do not have evidence to show that you would remain sufficiently uninvolved (avoiding a COI) in cases like that.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) - I am well aware of Jazzi's tendency to bring her personal feelings into situations, and I do not wish for this to tarnish any decisions she will have to make with +o. --Callofduty4 19:38, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) - Prone to outright trolling on more than one occasion. -  19:54, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - Concerns. Good user, but not meant to be an op. --
 * 5) - Per above. The user needs to control emotions and deal with situations in a professional manner.
 * Neutral

Comments
Perhaps if you used the channel more often, you would have evidence of how I conduct myself. And considering what Tech was doing was straight up harassment and just digging at the points that push me in my personal medical life, I don't think it's a fair thing to judge by that. And in cases where I know I can't back down and take time to myself, I don't back down, but when there are other people and I know they can handle it better, I back down to take the time to myself to avoid the lashing out I can do. –  Jä zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * The fact is that, even without using the channel much, I know how you conduct yourself in difficult situations - and am not impressed by it. 14:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, you don't know. And the fact is, you're going off of a time when I was being harassed and was under enough stress without the harassment. If you used any channel that I frequent, you'd actually know that I can handle difficult situations. –  Jä zz  i  14:12, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah you lack proof dude!! SunXia  (Chat)  15:06, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Tm_T

 * Support
 * 1) - I don't see what presence has to do with anything. Op isn't a position, it's access to a few buttons (or /commands in webchat :3). If Tm_T can be trusted to use those tools well, which I believe he can, then why not?  04:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) - Nice user, may not be the most active person in the channel, but like Aj said, if the user is trusted and can use tools when needed, I don't see why not.


 * Oppose
 * 1) - My main concern with Tm is how little he participates in conversations or is actively on the channel. He does not have all that much of a noticeable presence on the channel, something I think is required of an op. --
 * 2) - I agree with Godisme there, If you participate more in the next few days on Wikia Community Central Chat , I may change my vote . - *<font color="Purple"> ~Happy65 <font color="CornflowerYellow">Talk My Amazing Blogs ! 07:33, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a note, this is a vote for IRC, not Special:Chat. -- 11:04, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes Charitwo, but I dont usually use IRC so if he goes chatting alot on Wikia Chat , then I know that he will be good as an op *<font color="Purple"> ~Happy65 <font color="CornflowerYellow">Talk My Amazing Blogs ! 16:18, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Charitwo's point remains valid - if you don't use IRC, why are you voting for IRC ops? The people who use IRC don't necessarily use chat, and ops on IRC are not necessarily chatmods in chat - simply put, if you don't use IRC, the decision doesn't affect you and you don't have the perspective required to evaluate op candidates logically.
 * 1) Sorry but not really seen him do anything really!!  SunXia   (Chat)  15:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Good user, idles far too often though. -- 21:52, November 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Neutral
 * 1) Neutral - Participation is an issue, but per Ajraddatz above, I do believe he's competent. Nothing bad would happen if he were an op, but I don't see any solid reason to give it to him either.
 * To try answering "why" by what I assume others would think too, it's because I could help covering european office hours, something that I find lacking of cover by VSTF, on central chat and also on #wikia IRC. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:59, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Neutral - I don't see him talk often, but I'm in school so he has the benefit of the doubt, and I'm pretty sure he knows what he's doing. –  Jä zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral - On activity alone, if it were to increase I'd support. <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
Well, I admit I haven't been very active on #wikia lately due to my other duties and simply that I don't feel a need to chip in on every discussion (I still generally read all contents of the channel from during my daytime and most of the night). Nonetheless, during this reduced activity, I'm still on top-10 per the channel statistics, ahead of users like Randomtime and Charitwo for example. I see where Godisme's comment comes from that he doesn't see me being active, as I usually come to the channel saying good morning, being followed by Godisme with "goodnight" (just like today).

I had something else in my mind about this but later I suppose. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:40, November 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I don't think the opposes per lack of participation are particularly fair. As he said GreenReaper's stats has him among the top 10 speakers. You'll also notice his hourly activity is high everywhere except for the 18-24 (GMT-5) period, which is the most active period for the people who are opposing. Also the suggestion of having some ops in the less monitored hours has been brought up a few times. -- Deltaneos (talk) 22:18, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Skizzerz

 * Support
 * 1) While I have some issues with Skizzerz regarding his lack of interest in wikia while on a wikia channel, I think he has shown to be a pretty fair guy and has used his op in the past for good.--
 * 2) - Skizzerz is trusted, and op is no big deal. If he wants to volunteer his time moderating the channel then why not.  04:20, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) - Based on comments. No real reason to remove Skizzerz current +o if there is still an impartial rationale for having them. Rappy 06:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) - Per what I have seen happening in the channel (and explained by him below), I see no reason not to. (: –Tm_T (Talk) 12:56, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) - Skizzerz' neutrality would come in handy --  Random  Time  13:19, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - Seems to be a nice user.


 * Oppose


 * Neutral
 * 1) Neutral - I've never seen Skizzerz do anything bad with op, or frankly anything good. I do think he is capable of avoiding COI actions with op and would be able to use his powers effectively and impartially, but I've never seen him actually use them. I don't really see a reason to take his op away, or to continue it.
 * 2) Neutral - I've honestly never seen him talk, but he does use the channel, so it is a neutral. –  Jä zz  i  13:27, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) 1358  <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  20:17, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) <font face="Trebuchet MS" color="black">ฬ ђ tคlк 23:31, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) -- 21:52, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
I know I am not active at all on the wikis, but I am on IRC pretty much every day and have been for the past few years. I generally only join conversations that interest me, which hasn't been that many recently due to most of the conversations I see when I'm actively browsing IRC have been about help with various wiki things of which I no longer take part in. Hopefully once people start getting the idea that the new channel isn't ONLY for support, I can be a more active member of the IRC community (I must confess that I have no interest left in editing any Wikia wikis, at least for the time being). I have been an op in #wikia since 2007-2008 (don't remember when I first got it since I had it before the switch to atheme services) and most regulars would agree that I haven't really abused my power. I don't end up using it much because other ops happen to be faster to the punch than I am in terms of doing oppy-stuff because I generally try to have a more toned-down resolution of something rather than jumping straight to /kick. I hope you take this into consideration when voting, but ultimately it is up to you (the community here) and I will go with that. -- Skiz zerz  01:59, November 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with most of what you said and what you said above is actually why I oppose. You have no interest in editing at Wikia. You got your op when you were editing at Wikia and have since moved on to ShoutWiki (from what I understand). I am concerned that there will be conflicts of interest. I cannot say that I have ever seen you oper yourself in #Wikia in the year I have been here. That said, you have been active in a lot of disputes and in the channel before/during and after spam raids or when the need to /kick was there... (I am not saying you were 'physically there' as I cannot know that, but you were in the channel). I guess what I am getting at is, the entire year I have been in the channel, you never once used your status to benefit the channel... so I am curious why you still want access. Rappy 02:16, November 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * As with everything I am involved in, I try to keep them as separate as possible. At the time I was still involved with Wikia, I was also involved with StrategyWiki, which could have been technically considered competing with Wikia Gaming and similar wikis. However, I did my absolute best to not promote StrategyWiki when at Wikia, and not promote Wikia when at StrategyWiki. If you look at the few times that ShoutWiki was brought up in #wikia and I have been around (actively participating in chat), you may have notice that around 100% of the time I have directed the users that if they want to discuss ShoutWiki as an alternative for Wikia or whatever, that they do not do so in the channel. As such, while there is a "Conflict of Interest" (and I really dislike saying that because I am still interested in having the Wikia IRC community thrive) due to my involvement at ShoutWiki, I can't think of even one example where I have promoted ShoutWiki or sat back while allowing others to promote ShoutWiki on #wikia. Also, there have been a few cases where I have opped myself on #wikia this past year, and I can provide the logs of them if need be. However, I have many more examples of stopping stuff from happening or resolving something without having used my op access, which would probably not have been possible if those involved did not know that I could op and handle the situation less diplomatically should it escalate to that point. As for me being on the channel when things requiring /kick were happening, I'm probably only on the channel for an hour or two a day physically, the rest of the time is me leaving my client open and connected overnight or when going to class, etc. -- Skiz zerz  02:40, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * EDIT: I see I forgot to answer your question as to why I still want access. While I hinted at one of the reasons above, there are a few reasons why I think the IRC community here could benefit from me retaining my access. First off, there have been instances where I was seemingly the only op online when something was happening, and cases like this will happen increasingly more often the less ops you have. When there isn't any op online and something is happening, I feel that the community is being dealt a disservice because there were not enough volunteers to keep the channel patrolled throughout the day. Second, there is a philosophy on many wikis that you don't revoke access simply because one is inactive, as they may come out from under their rock in the future to become active again. While I have stated above that I have no intentions of being more active on Wikia proper as of now, that may change in the future. As far as IRC is concerned, I haven't really ever stopped being active, I've just been unable to contribute as much as I'd like due to the reasons I've stated above. Third, as you've said yourself you view me to be a level-headed individual, and I'm sure that many other regulars would also share your sentiment based on when I am actively participating in channel. Having more people like that in positions to put a stop to something spinning out of control can help resolve conflict in a way that hopefully does not drive anyone away from the community or cause excess drama, both of which negatively impact the community as a whole and can cause even more toxicity between the op handling the situation in a non-level-headed manner and the rest of the community. I hope that sufficiently answers your questions, and if you have any more feel free to ask. -- Skiz zerz  02:49, November 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Thanks. Rappy 06:02, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Callofduty4

 * Support
 * , why not? 22:10, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Why Not - 22:22, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Nyx-I mean Drkdragonz66. DarkMetroid567 22:23, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Very good and fair user who's always active in the channel. Sp3cSprechen 22:55, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) Callofduty4 is an excellent example of someone who knows how to use +o effectively and fairly. Per Ajr. --Smuff[  The cake is a lie  ] 23:29, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) I'm sure he can moderate well on the channel. Phillycj 23:39, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) - Ok. No reason why not.
 * Oppose


 * Neutral