Club Penguin Wiki:Archive/Bureaucrat repromotion

Hi, it's Tigernose. As you know, for the last half year, we haven't been able to revoke or grant rights to any users, and therefore all bureaucratic flags have been rendered useless. But, we need to be prepared when we get the rights back.

The problem is, I personally think the whole bureaucrat right is unneeded. Personally, if there were going to be bureaucrats, I would make all admins bureaucrats. However, we have the problem of unfair promotion. And unfortunately, the system that our current bureaucrats went through to get promoted is outdated, and we need to do some organisation. So, how about, instead of removing the bureaucrat right, we can demote both bureaucrats then have a relection, because there are some great admins here like Seahorseruler and Zapwire who were given admin rights after Sharkbate and Hat Pop were given bureaucratic rights.

So here's my idea:

1. Make a re-election forum. All admins have a section with for and against.
2. People vote for this for a week.
3. The two admins who get the highest votes replace our current bureaucrats.

Remember, Sharkbate and Hat Pop can still retain their positions, they just have to be voted for the most. I think it will give a chance for new users to shine, and for us to elect them using our current adminship system, which of course is an improvement over the untidy old one, where all users who got 3000 edits became a 'crat.

Now I mean no offense to the current bureaucrats, but if they do get replaced, remember that they can still edit as an admin. The only reason I would like a re-election is because personally I think there are better people suited for the bureaucrat right.

Now, if we are going to have a re-election, these would be my guidelines for the willing admins:

• Have an "active" tag on the admins page.
• Have no grudges on anyone, and your opinion won't influence who you promote.
• You're civil, you go by the rules and you're kind.
• Only promote people who won in the RfA page.
• Only demote people after a community vote.

The only reason why I don't like the idea of giving all admins a bureaucrat right, is because some admins may use it unfairly, and it's best to give it to a select group.

Also remember, that we are only going to have 2 bureaucrats, like we already have, but if you want to, suggest a different number.

--Tigernose Chat • Edits 16:30, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

For (2)

1. Maybe Tigernose. - Wompus78 16:20, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
2. Admin and crat rights should be merged. Just demote the abusive people. I agree that the crat right is completly useles. --seahorseruler |Talk (EditCount) Yoshi! 21:46, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
3. --Brookelas ^Talk! I agree with Sea 100%.

Against (11)

1. Have enough crats - plus it's not needed, we have good ones, and most sysops don't need or deserve bureaucrat. --Zapwire (talk/blog/edits) 17:26, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
2. Per Zapwire. The wiki is fine with Hat Pop and Sharkbate as bureaucrats. Dancing Penguin 18:27, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
3. Okay, no, this doesn't seem right. So what if we were elected through the old style? Does it really matter? --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 19:42, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
4. No thank you. Hat Pop's right! ENOUGH CHANGES! THE WIKI IS GOOD ENOUGH... --$harkbate ^Talk2Meh 20:08, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
5. It doesn't really make sense....--Lily⁸⁷⁸⁹ 21:34, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
6. Per HatPop. — Joey ^aa 21:58, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
7. Hahaha, you're kidding me right?--Ced1214^{Talk | #wikia-clubpenguin | ##ced1214} 21:59, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
8. We have enough 'crats for now. --Staffan15 ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:00, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
9. We are doing (no offense when I say this!) so much better with this wiki as it is. Hat Pop & Sharkbate are doing just fine!Europea^{I am so bored right now.......} 22:34, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
10. Tigernose, why do this?? I mean you said the new b-crats should only promote users who have won the RFA, but when did shark or hat pop didn't fallowe those rules? NEVER!--Ratonbat 00:42, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
11. No. --Hal Homsar Solo ^{Dreams of an Absolution} 02:00, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• Hey Zap, I thought you were against Hat Pop being a bureaucrat... Anyway, we're not adding any crats, only replacing. --Tigernose Chat • Edits 17:49, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
  • Two crats? OK... but I'm OK with either, preferably against. This is going to make power hungry people salivate. --Zapwire (talk/blog/edits) 18:11, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
  • You're against my bureaucracy, Zapwire? --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 19:42, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
    • One is enough... plus I don't think you were ready for bureaucrat. Sysop, yes though. --Zapwire (talk/blog/edits) 19:44, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
      • Okay that's enough...This had gone too far! ENOUGH WITH THE CHANGES! Hat Pop and I are both staying bureaucrat! Hat Pop deserved it and was 100% ready for it! She is a great editor, a good helper, never abuses (and if you call the fact that she blocked a lot of people for swearing on IRC abuse, then give your head a shake! She followed the rules!), and she is nice to everyone! How can she not be ready? She wasn't promoted for JUST helping restore the wiki, she was promoted because she deserved it and TS knew she wouldn't break the policy! I knew and still know she wouldn't and won't break the rules or abuse. If you're going to demote anyone, then demote me... --$harkbate ^Talk2Meh 20:07, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
        • Okay... calm down buddy. My first choice would be you anyway Sharkbate, you're active and don't have any grudges on anyone. And I understand you were defending a friend just then, but you scared me there lol. I'm fine if this doesn't go through, it's not my priority even, I just did this 'cos I saw some people arguing about bureaucrats on forums, I can't remember, I think it was the new right forum. --Tigernose Chat • Edits 20:15, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
        • And Sharkbate, would you really go far enough to dismiss every single change in this wiki that might happen (even benificial ones), just for the sake of someone proposing to repromote admins? Remember, it's not like I'm crazy for this to happen, it's an idea, who cares if it doesn't pass. "ENOUGH WITH THE CHANGES!" was going over the top there. --Tigernose Chat • Edits 20:16, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
          • I don't want to be demoted, but if I have to be to make sure Hat Pop doesn't, then so be it. I don't think the changes are bad, but we're doing too many at a time... --$harkbate ^Talk2Meh 20:24, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
            • Here we go again... another oppurnity for Fanon to sink the boat of CPW. Oh boy. --Tigernose Chat • Edits 20:42, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
              • What does the Fanon have to do with this? Dancing Penguin 21:20, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
                • The Fanon has Nothing to do with this! ~sighs~ Look.........Sharkbate & Hat Pop are two of the great users on this wiki. Neither of them should be demoted. What would happen to this place without these two? I don't even want to find out. Zapwire......Hat Pop did deserve to be a bureacrat along with Sharkbate. I don't know who would think that these two didn't deserve to be bureacrats. And honestly, I want these two to stay as they are.Europea^{I am so bored right now.......} 22:46, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Man i hate when good ideas get trashed for no apparent reason. (No offense to hp or shark) but dont be afraid to vote what you REALLY think. If you want to vote for, you can. Theres no consequence for voting for your own opinion. --seahorseruler |Talk (EditCount) Yoshi! 00:45, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

• It's not about how you are promoted, it matters how you handle the powers when they are given. The community all agrees that we have been excellent bureaucrats, and I think replacing us would not make them happy. --Hat Pop ^{Bunny Ears Rule!} 01:30, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Seriously you guys have lost it here. You really don't know where I'm getting at. It would be really helpful if people like Ced, Ratonbat and Europea actually read this through first, thorougly, before jumping to bizzare conclusions.

Let me start off with this: why so serious? It's just a bureaucrat right! It's just a right that allows a certain someone to give rights to another user. It is absolutely nothing compared to adminship (that's why I think it's not needed). ZOMG the whole world will end because Sharkbate and Hat Pop might lost their bureaurcat right!!!! It's just crat flags! If they do get removed, they can still edit as an admin!

“	Sharkbate & Hat Pop are two of the great users on this wiki. Neither of them should be demoted. What would happen to this place without these two?	”
	— Europea

Nothing will happen! They're not getting publishly banished or anything! They're still admins, they're still editing, all that happens is that if they lose the poll they may lose their bureaucrat powers... Think of it as an election! You can still win if you're already a bureaucrat. Plus it's just the bureaucrat right and nothing else. Just because they may not be a bureaucrat anymore Europea, doesn't mean that this wiki will start sinking steadily and everything will go bad! No, the bureaucrat right doesn't affect anyone. All I'm proposing is a sort of re-election! Wikipedia do this every year, is it too hard to ask for a simple election to see who will gain a small right?

If this is too much for some people to handle, then why don't we just merge admins with bureaucrats. Evidently then, users like Europea won't have to worry about the wiki exploding because Sharkbate and Hat Pop aren't 'crats anymore...

I'm going to close this forum, evidently it has failed, but opening a new one: just merge admins with bureaucrats. And I have tons of reason why this would be beneficial to the wiki...

Also Europea, they're not getting "demoted", remember, there's no such thing. These aren't ranks, especially with the bureaucrat right, which has absolutely no affect on anyone at all.

I mentioned Fanon because remember the last time we featured a failing project on the sitenotice. Tons of remarks like "it is good as it is" or "NO MORE CHANGES YOU SUCK". Then Fanon took it a step further by completely exaggerating the simplicity of the realistic situation, and they might do this again with some stupid "save our skins" propaganda.

Anyway, is it too much to propose a re-election. No ones hurt, our current bureaucrats will always be admins, and this is simply a proposal, and not a definete change just because it is signed with Tigernose or Zapwire or Seahorseruler. If this fails, I won't take it to seriously, but only if others won't if it goes through - 'cos it ain't such a big deal dudes. Don't bother to point out my "logical fallacies" either... --Tigernose Chat • Edits 17:27, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to point out my numerous typos though, I had a laugh reading through the above... --Tigernose Chat • Edits 17:31, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

You took the words right out of my mouth. --seahorseruler |Talk (EditCount) Yoshi! 05:50, January 23, 2010 (UTC)