Meta:Requests for adminship/TyA
I, TyA, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realise that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my tools because I realise that this is a serious offence. If the community finds that I have done so, my tools will be revoked, and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed, 08:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC).
Questions for the nominee
1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
Probs assist with closing threads. I like to think I'm pretty okay with abusefilter and could help out with the global ones.
2. What have been your most helpful contributions to the Weird Gloop Wikis, and why?
Likely running TyBot for the last couple years to help keep GE Prices up to date. I like to think I'm (usually) pretty helpful on our discord server helping out peeps on occasion.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
Likely various discussions relating to the clan raffle, wikian discussions or inactive administrators. I'd like to think in general despite it being an unpleasant discussion every single time any of those topics come up, we still manage to work it out in the end.
Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)
Question - How do you feel about
drama recent conflicts overall in the Discord server that you were involved in to some certain extent? - 08:10, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Bad phrasing is bad. I still disagree that private chats are useless and wrong. Overall the private chats have been beneficial for the wikis. 08:14, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Question - You mentioned some recurring topics have resulted in unpleasant conversation and conflicts between you and other users. I wonder if this suggests you have difficulty accepting consensus in some cases and thus would impact your ability to close threads. Going from memory, I can't think of many examples of you closing policy discussions or anything remotely contentious. As such, do you think you'd be able to remain impartial given some strongly held views and inexperience? cqm talk 17:38, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Those discussions result in an unpleasant experience for everyone involved since literally everyone has a different, strongly held opinion. I do not believe it prevents me from making a decision based on the writings on a thread. These discussions have always been based on personal feelings, such as the "who should have the wikian title?" or "should inactive admins have their rights removed?" discussions. I believe it is better to participate in the discussions rather than refusing to participate in the effort to appear unbiased. 01:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support10:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - Has good knowledge of a variety of useful anti-vandalism tools and procedures due to adminship on both wikis and global anti-vandalism work on our old host. Template:Signatures/JaydenKieran 15:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - Ty has my vote! -22:36, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support - The answers regarding the unpleasant conversations are a bit worrying, but I see no issues with supporting.22:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Support -17:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Support -13:46, 1 January 2019 (UTC)