Dwarf Fortress Wiki:Request for Adminship/Aescula

Administrator Candidacy Questionnaire

Why would I be a good Administrator?

I know I'm not too well known, but I am an avid Wiki-er, wholly believe in the system, and have even created and administrated a small Wiki of my own. Unfortunately, I was not able to keep up hosting payments, and thus cannot show it, as it's been deleted, probably purged from their systems.

Either way, I know the system, I know the process, I even know a little about the software, both DF's and MediaWiki.

Supporting Evidence

• Special:Contributions/Aescula.
• (As for knowledge of the DF system) User:Aescula

Public Q&A

• Q: What was your wiki about, and what kinds of things did you do with it (besides contributing content and watching RC) that would make you good as an admin? Mason11987 11:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
• A: It was an idea that I called "Wikiverse". It thought of it because I have a friend who delights in building worlds, designing races, and so forth, it was designed to allow people to write about and show any other world they would have liked, without having to also think of storylines and dialogue. In that one, I was a primary template-maker, and honestly had enough on my paws with all of the financial issues and technical issues I was having. However, I did learn a good amount about the MediaWiki software, and know how to do things such as identifying and banning spammers, and so forth, and even successfully fended off a troll attack before it could do lasting damage to the target's reputation.--Aescula 04:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Q: Great, thanks. Sounds similar to my experience, follup up: Did you have any work on using the wikipedia "qif" template or a similar type of template, or using parser functions? I think there is some opportunity here for organization in this wiki with infoboxes for items and world builder gens, or a lot of other things, and those are often really useful for that kind of work. Mason11987 21:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

A: I remember building text boxes, similar to the ones that we have here for metals, stone, and workshops. Also, I'm one who, while not the most innovative, am very adaptive, and can usually come to understanding a language, like MediaWiki's, over a very small span, and then can work it as needed. --Aescula 23:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

• Q:Would you care to make a comment on the recent situation? VengefulDonut 14:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

recent situation? What recent situation? Mason11987 20:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Public Discussion

It's clear that this person inspires an irrational hatred in others. Why doesn't matter. For a lot of you, your instinct in this kind of situation is to root for the underdog, and in general that may not be a bad idea. But think of this case in specific. We are trying to select a person for a position of authority in the wiki community. You want someone who can smooth over conflicts, and based on how we've seen Aescula deal with the situation (that is, by not responding to it in any way) it's pretty fair to say Aescula's competence in this regard is lacking. Pity is not in the best interest of the wiki. VengefulDonut 18:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest that this NOT be a position of authority. Admins shouldn't be "in charge" they should be people who have a very small amount more abilities then the average registered user. They should be given these abilities not because they are good with people or not good with people, they should be given these abilities ONLY if they might provide more benefit to the community with them then without them. I'd like to believe that Aescula is relatively trustworthy. His edits seem like he has an intention of improving the wiki. His comments about his previous experience prove to me that at least he knows what he's talking about and he can provide slightly more use to the community with the admin powers.

I'm not disagreeing with you on what abilities Aescula may or may not have with regard to personal interactions. In fact I'm not even commenting on them. I'm stating the fact that he isn't disruptive means that giving him a handful more tools means the site will be able to improve incrementally, and that's reason enough to do it. Mason11987 20:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Although the position gives no real power over other users, the larger set of privileges serves to make a person look more important. This makes it a position of authority, The kind of person we should have there should be one with good skills at interacting with other people, not a social pariah. VengefulDonut 21:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you are suggesting Aescula is a "social pariah", but regardless...

You suggest that it makes the person look more important. I'm simply stating that is a matter of perception which we can simply change by declaring it is not accurate. If we all agree that admins aren't more important then this becomes a much simpler discussion and the wiki will benefit more because of it. I'm fine with having Briess be an "arbiter" if such a thing is necessary, which I'm skeptical of with such a small community. If we leave it at that then admins are just people who could provide more value because of the options they have been given. Mason11987 ^(T-C) 21:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree that if we all agree, we can squash the idea of importance imparted by admin status. However, I don't agree that we're likely to come to such an agreement :). Changing the perception of a large group of people is a big task. Also, the key role of an administrator on a wiki is an arbiter. The "administrative tools" mainly consist of deleting and locking, and those are practically married to arbitration. What else would you expect an administrator to do? VengefulDonut 22:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, "social pariah" may have been a slight exaggeration, but I don't think it's too much of a stretch. Openly declaring oneself a member of a commonly despised group is an act of severe ineptitude. The only exceptions to this are acts of protest intended to engineer a higher status for that group. I am certain this is not one of those exceptions. VengefulDonut 22:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand Aesc. If you look, she doesn't scream "I'm a furry!" It's mentioned once on her user page. She isn't hiding it, but she isn't making a big deal of it. It's the other idiots who are. It would be like if I said something like "I play DF because basketball is too hard for us whiteboys." and then everyone started hating me because I'm white. (As a couple caveats, I am in fact white, I don't usually get hate for being white, and that's not the greatest example. You get my point though.) Saying stuff like being a "modding hyena" is just who Aesc is. And, I should point out, that is exactly what userpages are for. Who you are. I mean, my userpage has various languages included on it, because I am interested in linguistics. It's who I am, and we shouldn't be eschewing people like Aesc because its who they are. That is just modern-day racism. --Waladil 23:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, it kind of matters as to what kind of a conflict-resolver Aesc is. Wikis need all sorts, from the kind of person who always is there keeping people in line to the kind of person who will wait for people to bicker themselves out, as long as it doesn't cause any real problems. Given that this is an opinion page, things that may be defamatory towards furries here can be seen as acceptable because they're opinions. Stupid and bigoted, yes, but so is every political pundit on Fox News. Moreover, I think it says a lot about Aesc that she isn't getting involved in this argument, because that means that she can keep her peace while other people poke fun at her. If people were saying those same things about me, I'd have deleted the comments, followed their IP's, and stabbed them in their faces. See why I'm not an admin? --Waladil 21:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Votes

Support

1. SUPPORT: I stand in support of Aesc. I've known her for years, and I can vouch for her determination and, above all else, how much time she has on her hands. She'll make a good admin, because, if nothing else, she can always keep an eye on things. --Waladil 13:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
2. SUPPORT: Aescula has my support for admin. She's been all sorts of help whenever I hit a snag with DF. I introduced her to the game long ago, and she's taken to it like a fish to water. Already doing things I didn't know possible. Her eagerness to learn, and determination to master would make her as fine an admin as any. She already has much more technical know how with computers that I couldn't even give a proper name to. A vote for Aescula is a vote for (Insert home country here). --Iaru 19:21, 23 February 2010 (EST)
3. SUPPORT: Would support anyways (as it sounds like she would make a good admin), but mainly im voting to counteract huge sheild calling her a furry with no evidence and voting against her for that. --Greenmeanie 08:15, 25 February 2010
   • SUPPORT: Not for Aesc, I already voted in support of her, but for Greenmeanie for helping fight the stupid rumors about furries! --Waladil 10:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
4. SUPPORT: I may not have much prior knowledge of who Aescula is, but she sounds like she'd know what she's doing, especially on the technical side of things, and I can't see how that'd be bad. --Kydo 15:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
5. Support A person who makes useful edits and isn't disruptive should be given the tools if we have reason to believe they would be more useufl with them. Aescula comments here and contributions convinces me that Adminship could be a good thing. Mason11987 21:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose

• 1. OPPOSE: Candidate said, "had enough on my paws," as we all know, furries ruin everything.^[Verify] --HugeShield 10:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC) Striked by current administrative staff. If you want to actually vote OPPOSE, you are welcome to - don't be ludicrous and offensive. --Briess 02:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
     • If "don't be a dick" isn't a rule here, it should be!Garrie 11:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
  2. OPPOSE: Furries cause drama.^[Verify] Last thing any wiki needs is more empowered furries.^[Verify] Freakazoid 17:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Striked by current administrative staff. If you want to actually vote OPPOSE, you are welcome to - don't be ludicrous and offensive. --Briess 02:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

1. Oppose: I don't want to put up with this kind of shit, so I'm going to act out of self interest here and try to bury the issue. VengefulDonut 14:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Neutral

1. NEUTRAL, but bites all the furry-bashers --MathFox 18:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)