Thursday, July 15, 2010

Call for Judgment: Admins should not abuse their powers

Fails 1-9 with a quorum of AGAINST votes. -Bucky

Adminned at 16 Jul 2010 15:02:01 UTC

Remove lilomar from his post as an Admin.

He abused his powers, so he should be exploded.

(I, by the way, step down because I abused mine for my own “scam” earlier.)

Comments

lilomar:

15-07-2010 23:44:24 UTC

If you actually mention how I abused my powers to work the scam, I will comment on that. Otherwise, this is just a drama-post to try and stir up bad feelings, which is unappreciated.

If you really feel that I have abused my powers, then I encourage you to explain yourself, instead of just accusing me.

against

Galdyn:

15-07-2010 23:45:56 UTC

against i think anyone who comes up with a scam that requires admin powers would either make themselves an admin or try and recruit one to help them.

Klisz:

15-07-2010 23:46:09 UTC

You misadminned a proposal.

Klisz:

15-07-2010 23:47:49 UTC

Galdyn: And when they use those powers for a scam, or when that admin uses their powers for a scam, the admin in question would have their powers removed.

lilomar:

16-07-2010 00:02:40 UTC

Darth, it was a CfJ that granted me the victory, not a proposal, and when I enacted it, I believed (and still believe) that all requirements for enacting it had been reached.

If you disagree with that, there is currently a discussion going on about it here > http://blognomic.com/archive/we_dont_need_no_steenking_amulets/ .

Klisz:

16-07-2010 00:07:25 UTC

Sorry; I had forgotten that CfJs can’t be vetoed, and I thought that if your DoV passed you could just veto this.

against and if your DoV fails I will repost this.

lilomar:

16-07-2010 00:14:41 UTC

Darth: No hard feelings. I’m sorry if I snapped at you a little. I was shocked there for a second, I expected opposition to the scam, I just was surprised at being accused of abuse of power.

Qwazukee:

16-07-2010 02:54:53 UTC

against

redtara: they/them

16-07-2010 03:01:07 UTC

against
Not, though, because I think what lilomar did is okay.
I am against admin scams, in general, but I won’t pretend I didn’t take part in them when I was newer to the BN scene and trying to figure out what this game considers acceptable.

I’ve made mistakes. I think I’ve learned from them.

If you de-admin lilomar, I will resign my post on the same grounds as his removal.

dbdougla:

16-07-2010 03:31:36 UTC

against

Bucky:

16-07-2010 03:46:20 UTC

I don’t think the scam vector itself was inappropriate; However, I feel that using the scam to attempt to achieve victory was.  This is part of the reason I normally oppose @s becoming admins during their first dynasty-or-two of activity - fixing the loophole only would be fine, but using it to ruin what was looking like a promising endgame wasn’t.

for , but if this passes I’d recommend lilomar for adminship once he has won a dynasty via an intended channel.

Bucky:

16-07-2010 03:47:47 UTC

tl;dr: Lilomar should be de-adminned not as a punishment but because of lack of experience.

Josh: Observer he/they

16-07-2010 06:17:10 UTC

against Absolutely not.

Purplebeard:

16-07-2010 08:04:46 UTC

against This is ridiculous. I’ve never been against admin scams, anyway. I don’t see why admins shouldn’t be able to use their powers to their advantage once in a while, to make up for the work we do here. Also, if a non-admin ever requires admin powers for a scam, there’s usually an admin around who is willing to help em, so it’s not that big of an advantage to be an admin.

Bucky: I for one would be happy to see this dynasty end now (and would have preferred for it to end when DC left, despite your excellent work after you took over).

I’ve learned not to get too attached to a dynasty anyway; they tend to end at the worst possible time.

omd:

16-07-2010 13:54:21 UTC

against

ais523:

16-07-2010 17:48:33 UTC

against Whether you consider core rules scams inappropriate or not, they have nothing to do with adminship.