| abstract
| - Notice that no know one likes the nominees for Rollback? Collector1 Indeed. And the main reason is "not enough edits". Shadowmaster (Contribs) I like me (I'm a nominee) File:Jman98 uploaded this!!!!!!!.png ~Jman98~ 02:35, December 17, 2010 (UTC) Nobody likes the nominees cuz of "not too many edits", and I find this to be a stupid and illogical reason, it depends on the QUALITY of the edits and NOT the quantity of it. Toa Fairon (Contribs AWA) Exactly. A vandal could make 4000 edits, but their edits do not allow them the position of a rollback, because none of their edits are helpful. Shadowmaster (Contribs) @TF:Exactly correct. Jareroden97 01:59, December 18, 2010 (UTC) It was never was about edit count. If I could, I would change my vote for Jman now... --ThatDevilGuy 06:04, December 23, 2010 (UTC) Quick question, shouldn't TF and BG be demoted by now? They never edit here anymore. They've done really nothing to contribute to the wiki since they've been promoted. They just randomly went inactive. Sure, they've signed in, but they have completely forgotton about CBW. But, whatever, I guess. Because it seems people are still hesitant to demote them. File:Jman98 uploaded this!!!!!!!.png ~Jmanliciousness~ 04:29, June 4, 2011 (UTC) BG blocked a vandal. Twice. TF handle the D.c.c. situation quite well. They. Have. Contributed. And they both have lives. And they both deserve the job. Sure, they're not completely inactive but they're not useless. Period. --ThatDevilGuy(Administrator) 05:08, June 4, 2011 (UTC) They'll have to be demoted soon, if they don't edit. Necessary, according to the rules. But we should notify them beforehand. Shadowmaster (Contribs) 05:10, June 4, 2011 (UTC) @ThatDevilGuy: Yes. But how long ago was that? And plus, they are active, just not here. I'm pretty much saying they ditched CBW for some other wiki. File:Jman98 uploaded this!!!!!!!.png ~Jmanliciousness~ 05:19, June 4, 2011 (UTC) TF contributed about a month ago. And not just one edit. By the way, "They've done really nothing to contribute to the wiki since they've been promoted." I was replying to this. They. Still. Did. Stuff. A bureaucrat should leave the message, and we'll see what happens. And Wikia-official inactive admin time is 3 months. --ThatDevilGuy(Administrator) 05:28, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Like I said, they ditched CBW for another Wiki. What do you not understand? File:Jman98 uploaded this!!!!!!!.png ~Jmanliciousness~ 05:33, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Hmm. What would happen if I left a message for them on their talk pages, eh? THEY'D SEE IT AND RESPOND. Just because they don't edit, doesn't mean they don't visit the wiki and try to help out. --ThatDevilGuy(Administrator) 05:39, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Then by all means talk to Fairon, TDG. I'll contact Biogecko myself--I have his e-mail address. Let's see how they respond. Slicer Out 06:15, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Will do. But: He has edited in the last few months. --ThatDevilGuy(Administrator) 06:22, June 4, 2011 (UTC) So, Jman, are you saying that Gecko and Fairon are still active on a different Wiki, and that it's the same one for both of them? Which Wiki is it?
* I don't see why people need to be demoted if they don't edit. It does no harm if they do have the powers but have stopped visiting for whatever reason. They may be back... -- "You've got to say what you say don't let anybody get in your way." -- CJC 15:59, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Well, Jman and SM seem to want 'em gone. Also, I should add that the inactive time is two months, not three. Slicer Out 16:06, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Then why not have some community vote about it ;) -- "You've got to say what you say don't let anybody get in your way." -- CJC 16:09, June 4, 2011 (UTC) @Baterra: They don't edit on the same wiki as eachother most likely. I don't know what wiki's they are editing, but it shows that they've signed in a few days ago. So, it's obvious they are just editing other wiki's and forgotten about CBW. File:Jman98 uploaded this!!!!!!!.png ~Jmanliciousness~ 21:33, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Actually Jman, the "last signed in" feature is wrong. If they have auto-signin on, it is very inaccurate. --ThatDevilGuy(Administrator) 07:39, June 7, 2011 (UTC) Jman, just to let you know on a hand of the situation of last month, I do take the time to read this Wiki, but I do have a life, ever heard of it? Besides, I sign up regularly (about once or twice every week) to check up on the situation here, and I would never ditch this Wiki for another one, so keep it clean about that one, and, I still have a job to hold here. I know, Fairon, I was an idiot. I shouldn't have assumed. And I have a life too (Big revelation. XD), but I still make time to do stuff here. I expected you to do the same. But that was rude of me to assume you ditched the wiki, and I'm sorry. —Jamn liciousness 09:27, July 10, 2011 (UTC) Your apology is well accepted, my friend. What is ready, according to you? I'm just wondering. And not to be offense or a try hard (Which I am acting like for some reason. :s) but J97 joined in January 2010, and promoted in July. That's little more then 6 months worth. And I've been here for a year, and I have also made some edits that really did well for the wiki. Like, I categorized 200+ pages for CBW to help get it's spotlight. I've done a lot to help this wiki. Which is why I feel I am fit. But like I said, I don't want to seem like a try hard. And like I also said, I'm just wondering. —Jamn liciousness 16:23, July 12, 2011 (UTC) Nothing against any of you, just that I believe three is enough for now. (Me, B1202, Pepsi) If one of us get's demoted or promoted, then I will think about changing my vote. —File:Jman98's Sig Image.gifJamn liciousness 00:30, January 11, 2012 (UTC) I have to agree with Jman. The only fault in the current rollback team is Pepsi's partial inactivity, but he seems to be growing a bit more active. If in any way one of the current rollbacks is demoted or promoted, I'll change my vote for one of them. Otherwise, though, I really don't see a need for 6 rollbacks, since the wiki is doing well with 3.
* I'd just like to bring to attention that I have returned from inactivity. Cola99 03:10, January 12, 2012 (UTC) I agree with the others, I'd love to get promoted, but I think 3 rollbacks is plenty for now. Combat Robotic Prototype 11 03:13, January 12, 2012 (UTC) @TDG: Why not? I'm mad, I just curious. Do you think that I am unqualified? PepsiCola99 01:50, June 18, 2012 (UTC) I don't think you're qualified (not offence, just in my experience you're not ready). I don't think the admin team needs a replacement to SA - we can do fine with four admins. But eh, you'll get the spot anyway. --http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110823111447/custombionicle/images/4/43/TDG.gif (Talk) 08:07, June 19, 2012 (UTC) The staff isn't exactly on its toes, and it hasn't really for a while. Varkanax is active during the day, TDG at the night, and CB's only active at the night and due to his circumstances, his activity has been dwindling, and my activity has been dwindling due to my own reasons. So there's really only 2 really active admins, and there's rarely two admins on at the same time. Usually, there should be 2 or more admins active at the same time. Shadowmaster (Contribs) 18:20, June 19, 2012 (UTC) Hey guys. Posting this as the top comment so people actually read it. I'd just like to point out that you can vote for multiple users in the same category, in case that wasn't clear. The only voting restriction is that users cannot vote for themselves (also new users can't vote). Shadowmaster (Contribs) 21:20, November 11, 2014 (UTC) I love the enthusiasm of all the people who've nominated themselves for rollback above me. Here's the thing. Rollback is primarily an honorary position given the low rate of vandalism (though it might rise now that the toys are coming back). I feel like administrative positions are those that are actually important these days. Slicer (talk) 01:21, November 10, 2014 (UTC) While I see your point, I think it's unwise to promote people from no rank to being an admin without them having been in the staff for at least some time. That was one of the reasons I took down my application for it. We need experienced, mature, active and responsible people as admins. And I think it's a good idea to "test" people first before they get a more serious position here. --File:SigVorred.jpg 04:42, November 10, 2014 (UTC) I agree, but that doesn't mean you can't be promoted straight to admin. If you happen to be like Bob/BTD, who was an admin on CHFW and a couple other wikis before being promoted here, and you happen to be trusted by the current admins and such, you could easily be promoted straight to admin. But if you lack said experience or trust, then you're right, Rollback would be a good first step. Bobdo was a Rollback as well, at least for a week :D --File:SigVorred.jpg 05:30, November 11, 2014 (UTC) He was? Huh, I thought he went straight to Admin. While that may be true, Slice, and the admin roles are the only ones to be considered in a leadership capacity, Rollback is still a highly necessary position for a wiki's functionality. We need them to tag stubs and patrol edits just as frequently as an administrator would. With Rando looking to step up to admin and with Echo1 still deciding what he wants to do, FireDrag1091 may very well end up being our only Rollback. These are positions that need occupation. Also, yes. I applied for Rollback in March. It just so happened that, during that same voting session, Varkanax39 was demoted. With the position available I decided to go for it. This was, however, after about a week's time. Seems legit. And thanks for clarifying.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)