News from RFA

[Ryuichi]

Strange how far simple reading comprehension and following instructions can get you.

That, plus some furious mashing of the "Preview" button, will generate a fair amount of apparent competence.

[The Blue Newt]

Strange how far simple reading comprehension and following instructions can get you.

That, plus some furious mashing of the "Preview" button, will generate a fair amount of apparent competence.

“This side toward enemy”

[Arishok]

In a bit of a reversal of usual trends, it's gone from 66.6% (38/19) early on to 75% (96/32) now. Far more common for the ratio to decrease than increase, so it's interesting to see a counterexample (if for one day at least).

[Scorpions13256]

I have moved to support. I had a feeling he was editing as an IP, but I needed to hear him say it to feel safe.

[Midsize Jake]

I guess I'd vote for him, if I had an account. Seems like a decent guy, doesn't cause trouble, and knows as much about long-term food preservation as anyone on the website.

They'd be fools not to vote him in!

[Ritchie333]

Some of the opposition, such as the edit-warring and stonewalling at Ariel Fernandez (T-H-L) is reasonable. However, most of it is plain daft.

[Scorpions13256]

In the past few hours, it seems that there are as many new opposes as there are supporters.

Edit: Nevermind. Two people supported SFR in the 5 minutes before I posted.

[Arishok]

In over 24 hours it's gone from 75.0% to 74.7%, with the three-to-one support ratio being almost exactly preserved through more than 50 new votes.

[ScotFinnRadish]

I should have kept a journal of all of the ways my wife has made fun of me and shown disdain for the whole RFA business. The Scottish Finnish Bitch thing has become a permanent staple of her interactions with me, as has telling me to answer for my crimes. Leave a glass in the sink instead of putting it in the dish washer? "Hey, Scottish Finnish Bitch, get over here and answer for your crimes."
At first she thought the idea of bureaucrats was funny, because we had just watched the episode of Futurama where Hermes gets sent in a paid vacation because Bender ruined all his records, and they all had to go to the central bureaucracy to get him his job back. Now she keeps telling me that I'm going to have to appear before the council of elders for my reckoning because I'm not good enough.
There's also the constant, "so they're not going to pay you?" "You're going through all this to do more work for free? You're dumb"
If anyone ever needs someone to remind them that Wikipedia editing is a lame and unimpressive hobby, let me know and I'll put you in contact with her.

[Arishok]

It does seem very likely that we’ll be seeing a second cratchat in a year with this nomination after two years without. 73.0% now with 28h to go.

[SerkaVerduchka]

I never expected to see so much "Oppose: not enough of a slow learner" on an RfA, but here we are

[The Blue Newt]

It does seem very likely that we’ll be seeing a second cratchat in a year with this nomination after two years without. 73.0% now with 28h to go.

xlation: “If you don’t make it, blame RexxS.”

[Scorpions13256]

It looks like there is going to be a crat chat. I think it'll pass.

[Emptyeye]

xlation: “If you don’t make it, blame RexxS.”

I think this is a bit of a different situation than that. For all the opposes of "SFR is a likely sock of someone and is simultaneously too competent and not experienced enough", have there been a lot that imply they would actually be a bad admin if given the bit? Because I remember a good amount of opposes along the "Doesn't have the right attitude for an admin" lines in Rexx's RfA. Heck, even some of the supports were like "I see the warning signs but I'm confident he'll moderate his approach if he's made an admin." from my memory.

[ArmasRebane]

xlation: “If you don’t make it, blame RexxS.”

I think this is a bit of a different situation than that. For all the opposes of "SFR is a likely sock of someone and is simultaneously too competent and not experienced enough", have there been a lot that imply they would actually be a bad admin if given the bit? Because I remember a good amount of opposes along the "Doesn't have the right attitude for an admin" lines in Rexx's RfA. Heck, even some of the supports were like "I see the warning signs but I'm confident he'll moderate his approach if he's made an admin." from my memory.

Yeah even if it's discretionary range I feel like the character of the opposes are very different. They're not the same situation in the slightest.

[The Blue Newt]

xlation: “If you don’t make it, blame RexxS.”

I think this is a bit of a different situation than that. For all the opposes of "SFR is a likely sock of someone and is simultaneously too competent and not experienced enough", have there been a lot that imply they would actually be a bad admin if given the bit? Because I remember a good amount of opposes along the "Doesn't have the right attitude for an admin" lines in Rexx's RfA. Heck, even some of the supports were like "I see the warning signs but I'm confident he'll moderate his approach if he's made an admin." from my memory.

Yeah even if it's discretionary range I feel like the character of the opposes are very different. They're not the same situation in the slightest.

Just because they are not the same sort of situation doesn’t mean that they couldn’t lead to a particular response. It is a Bad Thing to go up before Arbcom, (or even ANI, during one of those times when there’s a group of the usual suspects acting almost like a standing grand jury) right after any complicated mess. The tendency is to slam the next poor bastard with a simple case.

[Arishok]

I think the four consecutive promotions from cratchats prior to this one could feasibly (even if not reasonably) weigh against promotion, especially if the % drops beyond 71 in the next few hours (which is very possible as there are often a few last-minute opposes in close cases for whatever reason).

On another note, the "noooooobody here ever accused SFR of socking, we did no such thing, we just Had Concerns" line that some have taken after seeing the reactions to their mud-slinging is either delusional revisionist history or flat-out BS. They knew exactly what they were saying and how it'd be taken, whether or not they may have convinced themselves otherwise later on.

[Ansh666]

On another note, the "noooooobody here ever accused SFR of socking, we did no such thing, we just Had Concerns" line that some have taken after seeing the reactions to their mud-slinging is either delusional revisionist history or flat-out BS. They knew exactly what they were saying and how it'd be taken, whether or not they may have convinced themselves otherwise later on.

Yeah, pointing out the Eostrix RfA as a reason for being suspicious and then saying "oh but we never said he was a sock!", as if it wasn't obvious to everyone...

[The Blue Newt]

On another note, the "noooooobody here ever accused SFR of socking, we did no such thing, we just Had Concerns" line that some have taken after seeing the reactions to their mud-slinging is either delusional revisionist history or flat-out BS. They knew exactly what they were saying and how it'd be taken, whether or not they may have convinced themselves otherwise later on.

Yeah, pointing out the Eostrix RfA as a reason for being suspicious and then saying "oh but we never said he was a sock!", as if it wasn't obvious to everyone...

You might be underestimating certain wikipediots capacity for unconscious duckspeak.

[Arishok]

The rule that an RfX runs for 168h “plus whenever a crat gets around to locking it” is stupid IMO. I can’t think of one good reason why a borderline candidate should have to wait on pins and needles for in this case probably over an hour so far *solely* because no crat is around or cares.

(It's another thing entirely if a crat makes an active decision to lengthen the RfX; I just dislike the default rule where the discussion continues if no crat takes any action).

[Scorpions13256]

It has finally been closed.

[Fender]

Looks like it's now in crat chat territory. Let's hope the crafts do due diligence in terms of evaluation.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

I should have kept a journal of all of the ways my wife has made fun of me and shown disdain for the whole RFA business. The Scottish Finnish Bitch thing has become a permanent staple of her interactions with me, as has telling me to answer for my crimes. Leave a glass in the sink instead of putting it in the dish washer? "Hey, Scottish Finnish Bitch, get over here and answer for your crimes."
At first she thought the idea of bureaucrats was funny, because we had just watched the episode of Futurama where Hermes gets sent in a paid vacation because Bender ruined all his records, and they all had to go to the central bureaucracy to get him his job back. Now she keeps telling me that I'm going to have to appear before the council of elders for my reckoning because I'm not good enough.
There's also the constant, "so they're not going to pay you?" "You're going through all this to do more work for free? You're dumb"
If anyone ever needs someone to remind them that Wikipedia editing is a lame and unimpressive hobby, let me know and I'll put you in contact with her.

I had much the same when I ran my RfA. I wasn't convinced at that time by the notion that "RfA is broken", but It really has devolved into an appalling process to recruit volunteers over the last decade.

[Provost]

I should have kept a journal of all of the ways my wife has made fun of me and shown disdain for the whole RFA business. The Scottish Finnish Bitch thing has become a permanent staple of her interactions with me, as has telling me to answer for my crimes. Leave a glass in the sink instead of putting it in the dish washer? "Hey, Scottish Finnish Bitch, get over here and answer for your crimes."
At first she thought the idea of bureaucrats was funny, because we had just watched the episode of Futurama where Hermes gets sent in a paid vacation because Bender ruined all his records, and they all had to go to the central bureaucracy to get him his job back. Now she keeps telling me that I'm going to have to appear before the council of elders for my reckoning because I'm not good enough.
There's also the constant, "so they're not going to pay you?" "You're going through all this to do more work for free? You're dumb"
If anyone ever needs someone to remind them that Wikipedia editing is a lame and unimpressive hobby, let me know and I'll put you in contact with her.

I had much the same when I ran my RfA. I wasn't convinced at that time by the notion that "RfA is broken", but It really has devolved into an appalling process to recruit volunteers over the last decade.

And what would you expect from an organization that allows volunteers to be flogged by other volunteers at ANI?

[Giraffe Stapler]

And what would you expect from an organization that allows volunteers to be flogged by other volunteers at ANI?

And, yet, ScottishFinnishRadish decided to do an RFA anyway. I think they will be a reasonable admin, which is why I voted against them. Twice, Once for me, and once for the rabbits, may they rest in peace.

[ScotFinnRadish]

And what would you expect from an organization that allows volunteers to be flogged by other volunteers at ANI?

And, yet, ScottishFinnishRadish decided to do an RFA anyway. I think they will be a reasonable admin, which is why I voted against them. Twice, Once for me, and once for the rabbits, may they rest in peace.

I have two more litters coming in the next few days!

[Hemiauchenia]

Over at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ScottishFinnishRadish/Bureaucrat_chat (T-H-L) currently 3 support votes (Primefac, Worm That Turned, Lee Vilenski), two oppose (Dweller, SilkTork), and 6 pending (28bytes, Acalamari , Xaosflux, Nihonjoe, WereSpielChequers, Cecropia)

[Zoloft]

Over at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ScottishFinnishRadish/Bureaucrat_chat (T-H-L) currently 3 support votes (Primefac, Worm That Turned, Lee Vilenski), two oppose (Dweller, SilkTork), and 6 pending (28bytes, Acalamari , Xaosflux, Nihonjoe, WereSpielChequers, Cecropia)

Update

• Consensus to promote: Primefac, Worm That Turned, Lee Vilenski, AmandaNP, UninvitedCompany, Acalamari, 28bytes
• No consensus to promote: Dweller, SilkTork, Warofdreams, Xaosflux
• Intend to Respond: Nihonjoe, WereSpielChequers, Cecropia, Maxim

[arthur]

If the crats are supposed to be the best there is at judging consensus, shouldn't they be unanimous?

[The Blue Newt]

It’s interesting to me that the discussion includes its first baldfaced Big Lie (T-H-L) so early on: “ the direction the community has given us to expand the discretionary range downwards to 65% in order to compensate for the added scrutiny modern candidacies receive,”

[No Ledge]

It’s interesting to me that the discussion includes its first baldfaced Big Lie (T-H-L) so early on: “ the direction the community has given us to expand the discretionary range downwards to 65% in order to compensate for the added scrutiny modern candidacies receive,”

Please do explain what is wrong about that statement, in your opinion.

[The Blue Newt]

It’s interesting to me that the discussion includes its first baldfaced Big Lie (T-H-L) so early on: “ the direction the community has given us to expand the discretionary range downwards to 65% in order to compensate for the added scrutiny modern candidacies receive,”

Please do explain what is wrong about that statement, in your opinion.

If you think that blindingly, obviously wrong, it should be very straightforward for you to cite some RfCs, discussions, and so forth that support it. Their was community support, in those senses, for 75%, yes. The Rexxs fiasco had many comments regarding the wisdom of going below that. (And, of course, the Eostrix (T-C-L) fisco shows the wisdom of sometimes going above it.)

[Arishok]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%. I do agree that the highly unfortunate way RexxS's adminship turned out in the end has realistically made it extremely unlikely that a promotion at under 65% would be seriously considered by the crats again, at least not without another community RfC changing the range, but of course RexxS was below even the 65% cutoff, being at 64.1%.

[The Blue Newt]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%. I do agree that the highly unfortunate way RexxS's adminship turned out in the end has realistically made it extremely unlikely that a promotion at under 65% would be seriously considered by the crats again, at least not without another community RfC changing the range, but of course RexxS was below even the 65% cutoff, being at 64.1%.

Yes. Evaluating the strengths of the yeas and the nays at that RfC would, in any other context than a bunch of desperate overworked admins reaching at straws, have come down as “no consensus;” a look at the participants hardly suggests wide community oversight. If you mean “community support” as Wiki Newspeak would have it, perhaps yes then, but hardly for actual fucking English.

[Provost]

I think it is wrong to promote someone with the track record of this candidate. We should not be handing out the tools to such candidates.

[The Blue Newt]

I think it is wrong to promote someone with the track record of this candidate. We should not be handing out the tools to such candidates.

While I agree that it is wrong to give him authority there, I suspect I see this from an entirely different viewpoint. After a certain amount of time, and, God forgive me, money (in earlier days), I have been bludgeoned into the realization that WMFlandia is broken beyond feasible repair, and promoting decent, intelligent folk to adminship is putting off not only the inevitable, but the needful.

I’ve seen nothing in this fellow’s “track record” that suggests to me he wouldn’t fit in at the better end of the scale among the existing admins, and be in the 85th %ile of that end of the more active admin spectrum.

[Provost]

I think it is wrong to promote someone with the track record of this candidate. We should not be handing out the tools to such candidates.

While I agree that it is wrong to give him authority there, I suspect I see this from an entirely different viewpoint. After a certain amount of time, and, God forgive me, money (in earlier days), I have been bludgeoned into the realization that WMFlandia is broken beyond feasible repair, and promoting decent, intelligent folk to adminship is putting off not only the inevitable, but the needful.

I’ve seen nothing in this fellow’s “track record” that suggests to me he wouldn’t fit in at the better end of the scale among the existing admins, and be in the 85th %ile of that end of the more active admin spectrum.

Right. As it is the admins are at completely different levels of competency. Imagine they are NFL refs all operating with wildly different ideas about penalties. Shit show comes to mind.

[el84]

Over at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ScottishFinnishRadish/Bureaucrat_chat (T-H-L) currently 3 support votes (Primefac, Worm That Turned, Lee Vilenski), two oppose (Dweller, SilkTork), and 6 pending (28bytes, Acalamari , Xaosflux, Nihonjoe, WereSpielChequers, Cecropia)

Update

• Consensus to promote: Primefac, Worm That Turned, Lee Vilenski, AmandaNP, UninvitedCompany, Acalamari, 28bytes
• No consensus to promote: Dweller, SilkTork, Warofdreams, Xaosflux
• Intend to Respond: Nihonjoe, WereSpielChequers, Cecropia, Maxim

Speaking of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... s/Cecropia

Someone needs to get their activity levels increased before January...

[Ansh666]

Speaking of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... s/Cecropia

Someone needs to get their activity levels increased before January...

hm...
The only other crat chat he took part in was GoldenRing, 2017. There, he noted that the discretionary range was recently moved down to 65-75%. Five years later, he seems to be expressing astonishment that the numbers have dropped so much. Slightly strange, but he's getting pretty old, so I guess it makes sense? dunno.

[Mason]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%.

Correct.

[Ansh666]

oh my god

[The Blue Newt]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%.

Correct.

Do you see any consensus whatsoever there? In normal speech, consensus is a shared opinion, one which all agree with or tolerate (except perhaps for those who are literally mad). What you see there a vote, plain and simple, and one in which a substantial minority strenuously disagree.

It’s also a vote buried deep in the bowels of a garrulous bureaucracy. The idea that the average working “editor” at wikipedia was involved is ludicrous.

[AndyTheGrump]

oh my god

[Mason]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%.

Correct.

Do you see any consensus whatsoever there? In normal speech, consensus is a shared opinion, one which all agree with or tolerate (except perhaps for those who are literally mad). What you see there a vote, plain and simple, and one in which a substantial minority strenuously disagree.

It’s also a vote buried deep in the bowels of a garrulous bureaucracy. The idea that the average working “editor” at wikipedia was involved is ludicrous.

“Consensus” and “community” are but two examples of terms that mean very different things in Wikipedia discussions than they do in real life.

Outside of Wikipedia (i.e. “in normal speech”) one generally doesn’t associate “consensus” with numerical cutoffs.

[Ansh666]

oh my god

To be fair, the explanation makes sense (especially when using a more "normal" definition of consensus), and I'm all for flouting pointless bureaucracy within Wikipedia, but this was frankly just hilarious.

[The Blue Newt]

I assume it's merely a reference to this RFC from 2015:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ange_to_65%

in which, by consensus, the RfA discretionary range was expanded from the previous 70-75% to 65-75%.

Correct.

Do you see any consensus whatsoever there? In normal speech, consensus is a shared opinion, one which all agree with or tolerate (except perhaps for those who are literally mad). What you see there a vote, plain and simple, and one in which a substantial minority strenuously disagree.

It’s also a vote buried deep in the bowels of a garrulous bureaucracy. The idea that the average working “editor” at wikipedia was involved is ludicrous.

“Consensus” and “community” are but two examples of terms that mean very different things in Wikipedia discussions than they do in real life.

Outside of Wikipedia (i.e. “in normal speech”) one generally doesn’t associate “consensus” with numerical cutoffs.

Yepper. That was kinda my point. Wikipedia has evolved a seperate dialect of English. I suspect Orwell could suggest some reasons for that.

Out in real life here I hope that, while we might discuss Wikipedia, we need not have “Wikipedia discussions.” All of that ideoglossia should be put in scare quotes or italics or something, lest we start believing things which are not.

[Arishok]

Cullen has opined on the talk page that Cecropia should hand in the admin and crat bits. Oof.

EDIT: The cratchat and RfA have been closed as successful, though it looks like Xaosflux linked Tamzin's RfA at the top instead of SFR's by mistake. EDIT2: already fixed.

Congrats, SFR.

[Ansh666]

Well, it's been closed, congratulations (or perhaps condolences) to the multinational root vegetable.

[Vigilant]

oh my god

[Vigilant]

Like I said, there can be only one! I'm taking your RFA as spoils from our chess game. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Unexpected Highlander quote!