GuildWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron of Neon

No offense meant, sorry. Its not connected with anything naziish, prehaps bad taste but not meaning anything. See Grammar nazi &mdash; Skuld 08:05, 27 December 2006 (CST)

you edited your comment, that doesn't half make my lolling look bad :-/ &mdash; Skuld 08:10, 27 December 2006 (CST)

I understand the supposed intention, but nothing is as innocent as it looks, sadly. Also, this isn't the first time Auron handles Nazism in a less than serious manner: "Also, when has anyone *ever* deleted votes? That's starting to sound like Nazi Germany or something. ". Deleting votes = torturing and killing millions, spreading death and chaos to an entire continent? Something is out of balance, isn't it? And symbols are powerful, Skuld. They carry more meaning than mere words :( And yes, I edited it because I didn't want a joke to mess up a serious message. This really happened, I didn't make it up out of spite. NightAngel 08:14, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * I'll sum it up: chill out, and learn some facts. If you think all Nazi Germany did was "torturing and killing millions, spreading death and chaos to an entire continent," then you have some reading to catch up on. I won't even get into a political/historical debate, because you don't care about facts; as evidenced by your comments. If you want to challenge me to a historical knowledge contest, go ahead; but if all you want to do is stir up trouble, go find some other talk page to vandalize. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 08:20, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Of course I'm not going to write a dissertation about Nazi Germany, and of course that's a gross oversimplification. But you really want to claim that what the regime did was justifiable? correct? Do you really want to say that the nazi symbol holds no power today? That there are no neo-nazist movements arising, like in Germany? That the idea does not hold sway over some people's hearts, and that it is still a real danger, if nothing else, to the memory of those who suffered? Just look at the mess that is Israel and the region in which it is now for one example of a very vivid result. Of course a simple user box is not going to start a revolution. I still consider it offensive NightAngel 08:24, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * you are just tryin gto use a non-important thing to suppport your negative vote which otherwise is based on personal dislike for the person who has different opinnions in the builds section. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 09:01, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Sorry to butt in here, but Gem, you're being unfair. I see three people, myself included, in the RFA page who mention that particular issue. It's obviously not a "non-important thing" to us, or am I wrong? NightAngel is using that fact to support his negative vote, to show why he doesn't believe this user is appropriate for adminship. If that isn't a legal justification for a vote, then what exactly is acceptable? True, NightAngel might have a "personal dislike" for Auron, but that doesn't mean that his argument is invalid. These attacks towards him are uncalled for.--Dirigible 10:03, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * You can dismiss me as a person, gem, that's your prerogative, just saddens me. Don't dismiss my argument. NightAngel 09:06, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * And your argument is...? Sum it up for me, I'm a simple man. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 09:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * We had our disagreements, you know, and I didn't mind fighting over them, or getting criticized (with reason, on some accounts). And the comment came from a person who didn't like you to begin with, true. I already knew you a little, so I can't claim complete lack of bias on anything I say (on this or anything else, we all have our biases and opinions that color what we do). But this? All this argument... this just makes me sad. Doesn't make me want to fight. :( NightAngel 09:42, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * So... you make a huge fuss on the vote page, for no particular reason (as you stated, you aren't even a practicing Jew, it's just something that somewhat irks you, and only on Tuesdays) and when I call you on it, you fold? I'm looking for reasons why I'm not admin material. Defending a sense of humor and basic userspace freedoms doesn't make somebody a shitty admin, it makes them a user who doesn't take crap. Now, I'd like to know why I'd make a horrible admin. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 09:54, 27 December 2006 (CST)


 * NightAngel, I'm not dismissing you as a person, but I'm dismissing your argument. Just the opposite of what you thought. This whole fuzz is so laughable and irrelevant. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Wow, how offensive. "irks me, and only on tuesdays"? Excuse me? And what, I need to be a Holocaust survivor to find swastikas offensive? Is there a requirement somewhere? I don't know what's so funny, gem. I really don't. NightAngel 10:39, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * I'm not laughing at your thoughts or beliefs or you. I'm laughing at the huge debate that you were able to start with something that really is of no harm to the wiki. Actually, I'm laughing at the whole wiki user base as ALL of the huge debates which wreak havoc in the wiki have been of really wiki-wise irrelevant things that do not concern the wiki as a whole. How does it harm the wiki if Stabber uses multiple accounts for good stuff? How does a swastica in a single users user page harm the wiki? They don't imho. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * I'm not even sure why you act so aggressively against me when I didn't say anything aggressive or negative about you. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:42, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Putting up a swastika might just be bad taste, since you can't really know intent just by looking at it, I believe a comment is deserved, at the very least - and regardless of intent, it's there, and symbols hold power. You might think this argument is ridiculous, but I don't think it is. You try walking in a black neighbourhood with a Ku-klux-Clan costume in Halloween for a quick lesson in the power of symbols. And defending it, and the way he did? That is very offensive. Edit: I was not agressive towards you, as far as I know. But I also don't think this discussion is amusing. NightAngel 10:48, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Okay, if no one was being aggressive, then lets be happy. :)) What comes to symbols, they only have power if you give it to them. Personally I'm never offended by any kinds of symbols. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * You're absolutely right, but "you", in that case, is society, or a group of individuals. Not you alone. Its power and reach comes from the meaning it acquires from a large group of people. It is beyond your reach as a person (or mine) to change the meaning of a swastika NightAngel 11:18, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Yes, it might take a generation or two, but if we continue giving the symbol a meaning, then the meaning will never vanish. If we try to treat it neutrally, then some day it will just be an image among others. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * A valid point. But as I said, this whole thing could have been over in a second. Instead, I'm being repeatedly insulted. My concern has been repeatedly insulted. The userbox reminds you of a time and place where some people had no voice, and no, it isn't funny. Maybe it's just me. If it is, I'll bow to the decision of the majority. But I felt it was something I wanted to call attention to. If everyone else feels it doesn't warrant any further thought, I'll be silent. NightAngel 11:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * I wasn't insulting you or your concern, so you can't really say you were repeadetly insulted. The wiki does not allow many sorts of things on user pages, but unfortunately for you this does not seem to belong to them. If Auron decides to remove the image, it's his decision, but we can't force him. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:53, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * One question: Why didn't you say anything about this earlier? Why only now when Auron is nominated as an admin? If it didn't bother you a lot before, why does it bother you now? Seems like a bad excuse for a negative vote. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:55, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Again with the insults. Please stop. First: I happened across this page while looking, I think, for a list of administrators. I don't remember. From here I clicked on Auron's nickname (which, believe it or not, I had not done before) and looked at his page. Second: I would have voted against it anyway, I don't need an "excuse" for a bad vote. I have the right to vote against it, right? Of course, I'd have to explain why, and we would enter a discussion on the whole builds mess. But then I saw that userbox and it bothered me. So there's the whole story. So let's sum it up again. Yes, as soon as I saw the userbox I commented on it, on your talk page (considering you're one of the few administrators I have been in contact with lately - I thought about Skuld but considered he might have difficulties making an unbiased judgement on the situation. I don't think such is the case anymore). And no, I don't need an "excuse". I had my reasons to vote against it. This came up in the process, and bothered me more than anything else he did, so I commented on it. In hindsight I wouldn't even have mentioned the "retarded" comment, it is less significant. NightAngel 14:01, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * So where did I insult you this time? Lol. :D And a small thing you might have not noticed: The admin request thing isn't a vote as you seem to understand it. No one counts how many yes or no votes a person has. The comments are what matters. Even if a hundred people vote 'no', they don'r prevent nomination if the reason is "his name is stupid". This user box debate seems a little out of place when we are talking about adminship and admin tools. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 14:06, 27 December 2006 (CST)


 * While watching "Recent changes" I spotted this RFA and tried to catch up on the discussion. This is actually the fist I've seen the user box.  In NightAngel's defense, I agree with him on the use of the symbol, it's inapropriate.  I have no objection to the statement "HA Nazi" (I get the joke), but I find the use of the symbol in that userbox to be inappropriate and objectionable.
 * That all said, I think this is the wrong place for this conversation. I think it should be on a user page or even the talk page for the image. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:09, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * Exactly, Barek. The words alone wouldn't have so much impact, if they used, say, some skill icon, for instance. And to gem: You implicitly accused me of having seen the userbox, thinking it was irrelevant, then, when he gets nominated, "using" this "excuse" to villify his character. Is that about right or did I misunderstand? And I have no idea how the process works - I still wanted to have my say. It is other people's jobs to judge if it is irrelevant or not. I'm not judge and jury, I'm just someone who got bothered with something and voiced his concern. I believe I did it without being insulting or overly aggressive towards Auron. Correct me if I'm wrong, it's been known to happen. NightAngel 14:47, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * All: Further discussion on the use of the symbol should be directed to Image talk:NaziSign.jpg, rather than the talk page here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:49, 27 December 2006 (CST)

Comment on Sefre
Just a little gripe Sefre, thinking that other sites and users know their stuff better does not make anyone a bad admin, nor does thinking that a site is inferior. Isn't that like.. extreme nationalism ~.~ &mdash; Skuld 15:57, 27 December 2006 (CST)

Dirgible's Response (moved from here)

 * Here's the thing, you can't just dismiss GW:AGF for the simple reason that it's an accepted policy on this wiki. Nor can you just dismiss GW:YOU, however much you may dislike it. You may believe you're superior to other users who in your view are less knowledgeable about the game mechanics than you are, but here's a surprise fact: you aren't, not in the eyes of this wiki; you are both just editors.
 * So, I am here requesting you to please refrain from breaking any of those policies towards ANY users. If you don't like those rules, feel free to bring your points for discussion on their talk pages. If you don't want to do that, feel free to refrain from editing wiki pages in which you would break those policies. Whatever you do, do not do anything that would be considered an infraction of either of those policies.
 * If, in several instances, I see evidence of a user's stupidity/ignorance/noobness, I will assume they have no idea what they're talking about; to avoid this assumption, don't post in ignorance.
 * You are not Batman and this is not Gotham City. No one fears your vigilante wrath. Show courtesy and respect towards other users. Remember that this site is visited by little kids as well as grownups who have grandkids of their own. It's visited by players that have owned the game for less than a week, as well as oldtimers that have been playing since the betas. By full-time PvErs and RA players, as well as HAers and GvGers. None of them should ever feel alienated from this site because of an exhibition of a superiority complex from your side. If you don't want to share the fruits of your superior intellect in a constructive manner with those editors, at least don't belittle them. And that's what it boils down to in the end. --Dirigible 10:03, 7 January 2007 (CST)
 * Thanks, Mom. Now, to knock a bit of fallacious logic...
 * I dismissed GW:YOU in the Build section because they work against each other (admins and users alike acknowledge that certain wiki-wide policies fail in the build section). I have never dismissed GW:YOU in any other reach of the Wiki in my entire time editing. So "Nor can you just dismiss GW:YOU, however much you may dislike it. You may believe you're superior to other users who in your view are less knowledgeable about the game mechanics than you are, but here's a surprise fact: you aren't, not in the eyes of this wiki; you are both just editors," is a rant made in ignorance.
 * Next, I can dismiss GW:AGF all I want, for a few reasons. I quote from the policy page... "It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow." This isn't Soviet Russia; the policies aren't 100% accepted by everyone, and they don't say "this policy is accepted by everyone" because that would be a lie; I, for one, am a person who doesn't accept that policy (and I have every right to do so). The majority of the policy pertains solely to user reactions to anon contributions (if someone puts false info, assume they did it as a mistake, not to be a vandal). The rest of the policy talks about what might happen if "you assume bad faith...: Personal attacks... Losing sight of the ideal." This might apply to me, except for the tidbit that I don't assume period until I have enough evidence to form an educated assumption.
 * "So, I am here requesting you to please refrain from breaking any of those policies towards ANY users. If you don't like those rules, feel free to bring your points for discussion on their talk pages. If you don't want to do that, feel free to refrain from editing wiki pages in which you would break those policies. Whatever you do, do not do anything that would be considered an infraction of either of those policies." <--- I'm glad you take it upon yourself to right the wrongs of this Gotham City, Mr. Wayne, but if you're going to correct me, please make valid points and don't just shout orders. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 11:00, 7 January 2007 (CST)
 * 1. Policies work throughout the spectrum of this wiki's areas, including the Builds section. Nowhere else is implied anything else but that.
 * 2. In regard to whether policies are dismissable or not on this wiki, you might want to review [Build talk:W/E Starburst_Warrior#Inexcusable... |  this section] . Two admins (Karlos and Fyren) outright warn to never break policy again. And on your very own talk page you are warned by an admin to never break policy again, for it is punishable by banning ( link).
 * Just had to point out those two points, for I believe they are especially important not just for this particular case, but in general for all of us. I won't bother with the rest of what you said, for it's not worth it. I already said what I had to say. Good day to you, sir. --Dirigible 11:26, 7 January 2007 (CST)
 * "1. Policies work throughout the spectrum of this wiki's areas, including the Builds section. Nowhere else is implied anything else but that." ...I can only assume you don't keep yourself updated on [Build talk:Main Page|the state of the build section], but if you want to argue your point, you'll have to be a tad less ignorant.
 * In regard to the W/E Starburst Warrior, you'd do well to read my response; I did nothing there but vote favored. The admins took it as a group effort, and raised the threat to everyone involved, even if we didn't vandalize or dismiss policy. Thanks for your concern and your very selective reading, but if you had any interest besides harassing me, you'd find relevant topics :/ -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 11:46, 7 January 2007 (CST)
 * You say that you can dismiss a policy if you don't agree with it? Definitely not! Even though not all users agree with a policy, EVERY user MUST act according to it. If you don't like a policy, start a discussion to change it, but NEVER break it. After watching how you handle all the problems and discussion that came with this nomination, I'll change my vote to oppose. I hope you'll begin to act according to all of the policies. Even if you don't like them, they are the laws in this wiki. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2007 (CST)