Forum:We really need new admins

<<< Back to The Administrator's League • <<< Back to Forum

I know you guys have heard this a bajillion times by now, but we really need new admins. Many of them. I'm not sure if you noticed, but the featured user wasn't updated since last month. And the "week's" featured article hasn't been updated for at least two. And the Illogicopedian Times? It hasn't had a new issue since September. So we really need new admins. In fact, I think we should make everybody who visits here regularly an admin. (That is, me, Colonel Sanders, The Bard, Gruntled, and a few others I can't remember right now.) ~[ths] Keeper of the Bloodwine 23:46, 12/04/2011

Blah blah blah perfect ratio blah blah no need new admins blah blah status quo blah blah quit whining. There. I saved Athyria the breath.--Colonel Sanders 02:18, 5 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

I agree, really. This wiki's getting bigger by the hour - and we need more admins. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 07:43, 5 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Ann Elk? Monsignor Onslow Peaches - Speak slowly into the tube 15:09, 5 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

But if we get new admins, then we'll need new vandals to ban~ --Nerd42 15:25, 5 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

I've said it before and i'll say it again, we do not need any new admins, unless we witness a significant rise in activity and users, which won't happen for a while yet. I appreciate you all want to be admins, but take it from a four-year-long non-admin editor of this site, asking isn't the way to go about it. If we were to select a new sysop, which I would personally be against, we would only need one.

Also:

• Regular users have the editing rights to change the featured user, and are encouraged to do so.
• The featured article does not need updating regularly, though a month probably should be the maximum time for an article to be on the main page.
• The Illogicopedian Times has never been run by the admins; it has always been produced by normal users, and is not editing protected.

Hope this hasn't sounded too moody, but I thought i'd clear things up. Adminship-hunting has long been a tradition of this site--Ben ^Blade 17:43, 5 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

@Ben Blade Okay, I have an idea then. How about we tell them that if they update the IllogiTimes regularly, we can make them admins? Like holding a carrot in front of a horse. ~[ths] Keeper of the Bloodwine 23:38, 12/05/2011

@Dan Are you calling me a horse? My Name Is Kırby/My Name Is Earl - herp-derp I did <insert name here>'s mom!

No, he's calling you a carrot, you hippie vegetarian. --Nerd42 21:10, 6 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Wow Ben, you make a pretty compelling argument for not having another admin there! To be truthful, I've been sorta leaning towards appointing a new sysop for a while now, if only to update the features. I see constantly refreshed main page content as an integral part of getting activity up again - even though we aren't necessarily the most active wiki in the world, we should pretend we are, at least on the landing page. You really need Sysop privileges to do this, because the featured article template is locked. I'd be interested to see if Seppy and Nerd are still averse to drafting in fresh blood. Illogicopedia's dynamic is changing and I think we should embrace it. -- Hindleyak  Converse • ?blog • Click here! 15:11, 7 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, the yak makes a compelling argument... new, excitable blood could do us good. Except there's one slight problem with which I find myself concerned: If we op someone else, we might wind up with someone like me. That would be bad. Very, very bad. ~ 20:19, 7 Ditzimber 2011

Op me! I have opposable thumbs!--Colonel Sanders 12:02, 8 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but are they also oppable thumbs? ;) -- Hindleyak  Converse • ?blog • Click here! 21:10, 8 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but of course! They op on Ameriwiki all the time!--Colonel Sanders 21:23, 8 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Could they op on my cat? She wants a back rub. ~ 18:35, 10 Ditzimber 2011

Sure they could. They are running out of things to op.--Colonel Sanders 20:13, 10 Ditzimber 2011 (UTC)

Meh

I've retracted my argument about the ?times. It's gotten a new issue, but only because Kirby and I wrote all the stories. ~Runner-Up 22:17, 01/05/2012

Which is exactly how it gets new issues. Most excellent. ~ 23:20, 5 Jeremy 2012

Yay. Finally. ~ The Bard of Illogicopedia 15:53, 9 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Yet another point of view

All this talk of admins, eh? Well, were this a wiki of serious purpose with a large number of -pedians, it's obvious that privileges like adminship should be closely guarded and be granted to a small number of trusted people. I have watched and learned from the likes of Uncyc, having been an admin there, and I concluded that, if anything, they might be a bit lax in granting privileges.

In the case of we, the few and proud, I think there are different considerations. The fact that we are small and relatively slow to change the front page makes me think that if I were given the job, I could make changes when inspired without having to go to someone else for assistance. Being a layabout, I do not claim that I would make sweeping and numerous welcome changes and additions to our dis-organization, but on those few occasions that I feel motivated, I'd be able to make it appear as though we have more people and activity. If a few more were given the same, these changes could be multiplied, making us even more dynamic in appearance.

I only advocate these "promotions" for those trusted by the existing cabal. Assholes could be quickly dealt with, since we are so small. In any case, I am not advocating for anyone in particular, just suggesting that a few of us be given ops, even if temporarily, in order to make us look better. Monsignor Onslow Peaches - Speak slowly into the tube 05:52, 10 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Ah, an excellent speech there. Pity we ain't taking on new admins right now, eh? :(

I dunno though. I'd like to hear some other potential admins' statements/manifestos/whatever, then we'll see if the assmins as a whole are persuaded. -- Hindleyak  Converse • ?blog • Click here! 21:44, 10 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

The way I see it remains to be seen, but barring intoxication causing me to become inactivate again when term starts back up (which it won't do this time, well, it really really shouldn't) I think right here now at this minute we're doing pretty well for admins. Hindleburger patrols the site on a daily basis, Seppy and Athyria have a constant vigil on what's going on from IRK, and should my recent activity be anything to go by then I guess I'm around too. Basically what I'm trying to say is what needs to be done on the site seems to be getting done in a fairly timely fashion, and making ouselves up another admin doesn't seem to be much of an issue at the present moment. Also, adminship seems to be synonymous with a descent into inactivity and retirement so its probably better if we don't let the userbase take that kind of a hit right now :P Testostereich • (ballsack) 21:56, 10 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

I still think we should op this guy, regardless of how utterly useless he may be. The only thing that has really changed since the last time I said that is now he seems not entirely opposed to the idea. ~ 00:34, 13 Jeremy 2012

Op Grunty? That could be interesting.....very interesting. He was an admin at Petey, right? I'm an admin on what, three or five other sites (Ameriwiki, SEU, Illogicomedia, Knowino, RW [with extra privileges on A Storehouse of Knowledge]; yep, 5)? When there are no (or few) users on the site, as is the case on four of those sites I am teh adminz of, there really isn't much to do with your kool banhammer or page burner. In fact, the most I've done with my admin tools is revert wandalism and burn spam. Anyway, back to the point, more ops could be interesting, though it seems to go against the status quo of this site (which Seppy and Athyria seem to especially be in love with) is to op as few people as possible. My point: do as you please.

Though, another interesting proposal could be is to create a subgroup of users (as we have on SEU, or perhaps closer to the groups on A Storehouse of Knowledge?) to be able to block vandals and revert/delete their crap (to stop McAustens, ACarThatDrives, spammers like Hamilton63 who made me replace their stuff with political nonsense due to the lack of admins on the site) and be only able to use those privileges for that. It's an alternative to new ops.--Colonel Sanders 12:06, 13 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

There isn't much to do on a wiki where there are a lot of users, either. Adminship ain't a joking matter, except when it is, but usually it's just keeping things going and generally not making a fuss about any of it. It's not worth a fuss. Neither are testicles, when they do their job properly. Why is fumigation so underrated? ~ 04:34, 15 Jeremy 2012

I wanna be an admin

So frikkin' bad, right with all the editing privileges I never had... - NotReallyMyUsername t c u 16:45, 12 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

NO. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 07:40, 13 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Same goes to you, IM...--Colonel Sanders 12:37, 13 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

I don't wish to be for now... Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 09:00, 14 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

@Island Monkey @Colonel Sanders I believe Kirby was making fun of the lyrics of a Bruno Mars/Travie McCoy song. I don't think he actually wants to be an admin. ~Runner-Up 23:51, 01/14/2012

I should be an admin

I'm totally awesome and stuff, see. ~ 17:50, 14 Jeremy 2012

Whuh?--Colonel Sanders 18:59, 14 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

That was what some of us like to call a 'joke'. ~ 04:16, 15 Jeremy 2012

That was what I like to call mutiny.--Colonel Sanders 14:05, 15 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Admin? What's that?

I was recently smacked over the head with a frying pan 14 times, I'm having trouble remembering the cryptic roots of the word "admin". —rms talk 04:57, 15 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

*hits rms with a frying pan* What about now? ~ 05:13, 15 Jeremy 2012

Admin: unpaid slave who kills spambots and vandals--Colonel Sanders 14:05, 15 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Whatever an admin is, I remember being deemed one. Now then. Does this make me the king of the internet? —rms talk 17:13, 15 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Yes. ~ 14:39, 16 Jeremy 2012

No I should

I'm prettier than all of you. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 07:37, 16 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Hope we never employ some Uncyc guy like you. *waits for the explosions* Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 16:37, 17 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Naturally. The Uncle Pete users will burn crap like there's no tomorrow. Did I mention Petey deleted Ronald Reagan???--Colonel Sanders 16:55, 17 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

We also deleted over 9000 images. ~ 18:36, 17 Jeremy 2012

Fascinating, but make me an admin. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 08:12, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Athyria should be cowroped and dragged for all the images deleted. Seems proud of it, which is twice as weird. Frosty, I hereby annoint you an admin, with all the powers thereof including the power to marry people, like a ship's captain, and the power to loook around and see things. That is all. 'Aleister 10:02 18-1-'12

RUN! It's gonna blow! Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 15:47, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Think of the copyrights! ~ 16:03, 18 Jeremy 2012

Indeed! Otherwise I'll have the force the MPAA to make everything CC-BY-SA. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 16:14, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Actually I think we should make the dancing cows admins, sadly however they seem to disagree with the idea. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 21:08, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Great, does that mean I get to be an admin? I'm likely to be absent a lot, which I understand is a requirement for seasoned admins. (Do you prefer basil or curry powder?) simsilikesims 23:44, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Make admins out of all the existing admins

We need new admins when the existing admins feel that the amount of work they find necessary to keep the site looking nice and shiny outweighs the level of commitment they feel like putting in. Thus, the number of admins needs to be proportional to activity and as I understand it, activity right now is a slow but fairly steady trickle, which is fine with me.

But in order to make us all feel better, let's make all the admins admins. --Nerd42 19:13, 17 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Bleh, I agree. I have to say to Kirby, IM, and all them other users who want to be admins: it isn't a bowl of cherries; it's more like a bowl of jalapenos. As an admin on uhhhh... 6ish sites (SEU, Knowino, Illogicomedia, RW, RWW, Ameriwiki, somewhat on aSK), it ain't all it's cracked up to be (especially on backwater wikis, which five of those sites are), because really, there ain't much to do besides burn spam and stuff. ?Pedia does get a lot of spam, and it would be nice to have more people to clean it up; it can take a day or more, and I think two pages I QD'd still haven't been taken care of. Being an admin sounds cool and all, but it's actually a lot of janitorial work. No, really. WP and RW don't call it the mop and bucket for nothing. But, really, it does seem that the ratio is fine now. Granted, Some admins aren't particularly active right now, and stuff gets taken care of slowly. I've suggested a subgroup like on aSK and AW to give the cream of the crap of the userbase extra rights (block [only for blatant vandalism and trolling; misuse results in heavy sanctions], rollback [which every IOTM winner has anyway], and delete [for QD crap]); essentially some extra tools to keep the site clean with absolutely no authority attached, to deal with the likes of Hamilton63 spam characters and McAusten/ACarThatDrives types. Of course, this proposal will likely never be considered seriously, since I'm an idiot. But really, these buggers really irk me. We should be able to keep stuff up. Or let Athyria do it; she's awesome like that. Or something. But, I digress. I was making a point of sorts, but I forgot.--Colonel Sanders 21:33, 17 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Agree. I have no actual interest in being an admin though if there were subgroups I would be more keen. I don't want the whole thing, though I as I stated I am quite keen in having deletion rights. We just need to wake up the server guy and get more people on board with this idea. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 15:59, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

But I don't wanna be an admin! I wanna be a spammer and vandalise pages like youuuuuuu! -- Hindleyak  Converse • ?blog • Click here! 17:46, 18 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Why would you not want to be an admin? Admins make the best vandals. After all, admins have the power to kill the entire wiki. ~ 18:43, 18 Jeremy 2012

I agree. --Nerd42 02:03, 19 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

And how many wikis have you killed? ~ 03:44, 19 Jeremy 2012

I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself. --Nerd42 04:16, 19 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

I killed New Conservapedia. Put some evil JavaScript stuff in their central JS file. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 15:32, 19 Jeremy 2012 (UTC)

Still, my point is that we need new admins when the existing admins say we need new admins, not when the community decides, because adminship is not an award for being a great user, it's a means of keeping the site from having it's head a splode. I should know. I'm a sucky user and a sucky admin. --Nerd42 02:14, 1 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

Its. ~ 16:35, 3 Farbleum 2012

Temporary admins, because Athyria can't be Goddess

Athyria isn't a goddess. At times like this (when we have been bombarded with spam) we either need to slap another admin's ass and get them to help the poor old girl or hire temporary admins. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 07:34, 3 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

Hi. You mean a Goddess, right? Because that's what I am. ~ 16:35, 3 Farbleum 2012

Whoops. I can't be politically correct all the time. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 18:44, 3 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

Apparently you can't be correct, either. ~ 18:57, 3 Farbleum 2012

Wrong. Sincerely, islandmonkey - go speak 20:05, 3 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

The monkey stand corrected, the goddess is a goddess, but not the goddess, and "ain't talking about Fontana!" ain't a meme. Juxtaposeur 01:03, 5 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

I'm an admin half the time. Time my shoe, phantom. —rms talk 04:11, 6 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

If you really want more admins, then recruit more vandals for them to ban

Yes. --Nerd42 16:49, 7 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

No. Get rid of all admins, promote me to bureaucrat and arm me with witty banter. My 9-9-9 plan to zombify vandals with my own little fugu recipe will then unfold, unfurl and undulate. Like monads, I am one. Monsignor Onslow Peaches - Speak slowly into the tube 17:04, 7 Farbleum 2012 (UTC)

We got new adminz, therefore this forum is null and void

M'kay?--Colonel Sanders (talk) 01:48, 5 Arche 2012 (UTC)

@Colonel You… They got Gruntled, didn't they? I knew it. The werewolves got Gruntled. None can be forgiven. It was the only way… ~Runner-Up 04:31, 03/05/2012

Very true. He was worthy. We weren't. It's just how the noodle pinches...or something. Maybe you can try again in two years, when they promote the next admin. Alas for me, I'll be ever-closer to the menace called "graduate school" in two years....--Colonel Sanders (talk) 11:30, 5 Arche 2012 (UTC)