User:Toomai/Miles-OT survey results

This page shows the results of a survey held in June-July 2014 in response to a heated debate between and.

Everything on this page will be anonymous. For the first two sections, Miles' and OT's results are ommitted. Everything is quotes is direct from a response (and I'll try to avoid taking things out of context while still not including everything); everything else is an amalgamation.

First, before you read anything else

 * 1) If you want to have your responses attributed and no longer be anonymous, say so on the talk page, but in most cases I don't think you should.
 * 2) Don't just skip to the end for the verdict. You'll miss all the actually important stuff (i.e. the userbase's opinions).
 * 3) Don't edit this page, and don't comment on the talkpage unless you want to have your comments attributed. I would very much like to close the book on this thing. (I suppose if another bureaucrat ever reads this he can comment in an "addendum" section or something.)

Compiled opinions of Miles

 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = most unsatisfied, 10 = most satisfied), how satisfied are you with Miles as a user? (wiki skill, edit quality, adherance to policy, general conduct, etc)
 * 2) *Average: 6.7
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.22
 * 4) *Range: 3
 * Miles is seen as a passive editor that mostly helps enforce content policies. He's "somewhat clumsy" and "can come off as whiny", but is also "very experienced as a user" and "beneficial as an editor".
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = most unsatisfied, 10 = most satisfied), how satisfied are you with Miles as an administrator? (dispute resolution, control of bad-faith users, etc)
 * 2) *Average: 4.8
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.50
 * 4) *Range: 4.25
 * Miles is decidedly "a mixed bag" as an administrator. There are no real complaints of him as a janitorial admin, but many feel that's all he's good for. Specific comments include:
 * "Miles seems lazy when it comes to administrating"
 * "I just see Miles as an admin who can delete, merge, split or move things I can't, quicker"
 * "Bad conflict mediation skills, and tends to make actions on whim, then tries to defend them when he's in the wrong."
 * "Perhaps it's unfair to say, as conflicts are quite uncommon, but Miles does feel like any other user sticking his nose in when he involves himself with conflicts and important discussions, rather than an administrator with the ability to cease an argument or provide influential views."
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = not at all, 10 = very well), how well do you think Miles represents the wiki in general?
 * 2) *Average: 5.1
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.75
 * 4) *Range: 6
 * This question was taken in a variety of ways by respondents, so a summary is difficult. Notable notes include:
 * "I feel like his tone in writing is more professional than OT's, which can give newer users a better face impression of him and the wiki as a whole. But once again, his poor decisions weigh against him once users actually know what he does."
 * "Again, I don't really know, I've heard in the past that Miles has been asked to remove "of SmashWiki" from his name I guess because he's not a good representative"
 * "He might be one of the oldest active users but I personally think with how people respect him is rather weak."
 * "Nowadays, Miles is scarce outside of the wiki. He is nowhere to be seen on the NIWA forums, or the respective Skype groups for NIWA. He could be using these outlets to represent himself and SmashWiki, but he fails to do so."
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = would strongly oppose, 10 = would strongly support), would you support a call to remove administrator powers from Miles?
 * 2) *Average: 4.9
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 2.00
 * 4) *Range: 8
 * As can be seen by the range of 8, there is a wide variety of opinions here (as expected of an intentionally loaded question). One common thread is that people think Miles is capable of improving and should put effort into doing so.
 * "while I currently do not remember a time where Miles used his adminship as leverage, contrary to what OT claims, Miles's decidedly lazy adminship isn't exactly what I want on board."
 * "I think if there are things "wrong" with Miles, and he fixes them, he'd be a better admin"
 * "He is the weakest of the admins, and there are superior candidates on the wiki, so if a decent number stepped up to the role, Miles wouldn't need adminship anymore. He wouldn't necessarily need to lose it either, but his lack of administrative presence outside of being a janitor does knock his credit."

Compiled opinions of OT

 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = most unsatisfied, 10 = most satisfied), how satisfied are you with OT as a user? (wiki skill, edit quality, adherance to policy, general conduct, etc)
 * 2) *Average: 8.1
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.07
 * 4) *Range: 4
 * Omega Tyrant is a user of impressive skill and knowledge, but some users seem to feel he may be getting too much of a free pass on some of his conduct because of it.
 * "Aggressive to people who fuck up, but that's about it"
 * "8 counting only edits, as I have respect for his dedication to the game engine and his testing. 5 counting both edits and his (obnoxious) behavior."
 * "Although his edits are few and far between at the current time, they are always notable, and OT has vastly improved the wiki over his period of activity. [...] However, he can't be given a perfect score, because of the way he tries to skirt around policies as closely as possible. He writes insulting messages in such a way that they can't be considered personal attacks. From what I remembered, OT was the only person truly interested in keeping the "SmashWiki is not censored" policy, but it stayed regardless, and he pushes the rule to its very limit, swearing in most arguments."
 * "Knowledgeable in Smash, quite competent, perhaps not in a good way, a bitter user who often reverts my actions much to my chagrin, and I cringe when I see him slam everyone else"
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = most unsatisfied, 10 = most satisfied), how satisfied are you with OT as an administrator? (dispute resolution, control of bad-faith users, etc)
 * 2) *Average: 7.4
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.50
 * 4) *Range: 6
 * As with being a user, people seem to be conflicted over OT as an admin. The general consensus is that, while his "harder style" is sometimes preferred and necessary, there's a lot of dissatisfaction with it in other cases.
 * "Despite his tone, he's good at cracking down and solving problems when the situation calls for it."
 * "If there's conflict, he will put an end to it, even if it means insulting those involved."
 * "because he's simply so discouraging and harsh towards newer users. He'll always set expectations high, and if the new user can't handle it, they'll usually receive a notice about their incompetence. These messages aren't encouraging, or even that helpful. They just point out what the user did wrong, possibly with a swear word or two chucked in there, with no fear of making that user feel bad about themselves. [...] While a user like Toomai is easy to approach, OT is more the "looming thundercloud" type which people wouldn't really want to go near if they didn't know him."
 * "while I feel he can be a bit harsh at points with other users, I prefer his harder style over Miles's less urgent administrating."
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = not at all, 10 = very well), how well do you think OT represents the wiki in general?
 * 2) *Average: 6.3
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 1.44
 * 4) *Range: 5
 * Like with Miles, respondents took this question in various ways that can't really be summarized:
 * "the monstrous walls of text isn't something that I actually want to represent the Wiki"
 * "Has a very distinct, "choppy" writing style that isn't at all professional, and his choice of words boggles my mind sometimes. However, he's usually direct and to the point when in discussion."
 * "If the Smash community thinks SW is a dictatorship, it's because of him"
 * "He's made waves all over the place, including deviantART, All is Brawl, Smashboards, and always gives SmashWiki a handy plug. The general professionalism and competence he displays in these places represents the wiki well, rather than turning it into a laughing stock like Miles (apparently) once did."
 * 1) On a scale of 0-10 (0 = would strongly oppose, 10 = would strongly support), would you support a call to remove administrator powers from OT?
 * 2) *Average: 2.8
 * 3) *Standard deviation: 2.29
 * 4) *Range: 8
 * The high range here is more a product of a single user's vote of 8, compared to a myriad of 0s, 2s, and 5s. Clearly, the community would prefer to keep OT around as an admin despite any negative opinions above.
 * "OT's too effective an admin to warrant a demotion, and I would only support if a admin came along that was a bit "softer" with users."
 * "Good contributor and upholds policy, but is more concerned about upholding his own authority than anything else, and has a negative attitude unbecoming of an admin."
 * "Aggressive to people who make mistakes, but doesn't really do anything terrible."
 * "Pure and simple, OT's flaws are not enough to strip him of adminship, and having him in this position is absolutely beneficial to us."

Other results
Users were also asked a few pointed questions to compare the two admins in question over three hypothetical situations. I don't feel like typing quote marks around all these, so assume they're there.


 * 1) If only one of these admins (and no other staff at all) were to be available in the week following SSB4's release, who would you prefer it to be, and why?
 * 2) *Miles received 5 votes:
 * 3) **Should one of these admins be one of the main contributors on the week SSB4 releases, sorry OT but I have to give it to Miles. Despite his "Needing Improvement on Competitive Smash", I'm pretty sure I won't have any flaws with him using his janitorial tools for all the SSB4 content and the like (He's also seemly more active too). If there is any difficult argument about something in SSB4 however, OT might be the better one for that.
 * 4) **I wouldn't trust either of these staff members to function well in this situation by themselves. However, I think Miles would stay more out of the way, and would eventually drop issues if consensus was against him, and do not trust OT to do the same. For this reason, I would prefer Miles to be the staff member in this situation.
 * 5) **Miles is the one I notice doing the most janitorial work, which the wiki will need more during that week than dispute handling, with new characters and universes being confirmed just then. And while I don’t agree with his viewpoint on the recent Ridley debate, it at least shows his insistence that not even the slightest bit of speculation gets on the wiki, which will also be in high demand.  So, while I don’t consider Miles the stronger admin, he is my pick for this question.
 * 6) **Miles, because at least he won't attack everyone for their actions
 * 7) **In the first week alone, I believe Miles would be more useful, as OT would not have had enough experience with the game to make his usual large, structured edits, while Miles would be able to post an absolute stream of minor-but-useful edits if he so desired.
 * 8) *OT received 9 votes:
 * 9) **Omega Tyrant because Miles would refuse to listen to other users about important stuff without backing up his views, and pin down anything he doesn't like without backing it up or listening to other users.
 * 10) **Omega Tyrant, because I feel he follows it more thoroughly than Miles and will actually play the game to learn about the modes and physics.
 * 11) **Omega Tyrant. He seems to be more knowledgeable with Smash-related stuff.
 * 12) **I would rather prefer Omega Tyrant to be available within the first week of SSB4's release. He is quick to deal with speculation and can differentiate good- and bad-faith edits well. He also seems to be much more of an enforcer of policies, which will be extremely important under Red status.
 * 13) **Probably OT. Although I don't expect either one to actually edit the wiki in the first week following the release, if they actually were to do so, OT has been shown to know more about the inner workings of the games and would be able to more accurately represent the data he discovered.
 * 14) **OT, because he can keep the Wiki in more control and fact check more accurately than Miles has shown himself to do.
 * 15) **With edits becoming more and more frequent in the pre-SSB4 world, I'd rather have OT's more well thought-out decisions than Miles's rather lazy ones.
 * 16) **Indifferent but would choose OT - I just thinks he handles debates better (i.e. getting his point across), and there's never really a problem with his edits in general.
 * 17) **I'd rather have OT for a month after Smash 4's release. He's shown that he can dedicate himself to testing character strengths and weaknesses and gathering empirical and statistical data. If he does the same with Smash 4, we'll have a lot of ground covered for users to refer to, and we can easily determine whether pieces of information added by other users are valid or not.
 * 18) If it fell to you to demote both, either, or none of these two users for one month, who would it be, and why? "Neither" and "Both" are valid answers.
 * 19) *Miles received 2 votes:
 * 20) **Miles because then he wouldn't be able to have everything the way he wants since he can't veto regular users' decisions
 * 21) **in this scenario, I would assume the new admin would be more than capable at administrating than Miles, after which Miles becomes irrelevant. He's a good janitorial admin, but why bother having that when you can get a more well-rounded admin?
 * 22) *OT received 1 vote:
 * 23) **OT, because he needs to take a serious chill pill and stop thinking everyone behaves wrongfully. [remainder of comment removed due to revealing identity of respondant]
 * 24) *Both received 3 votes:
 * 25) **Both. They both have their issues, and a one-month demotion isn’t a bad idea at all.
 * 26) **If it was temporary, I think I would probably say both, mainly to see how the wiki fares without them.
 * 27) **Probably both. I can see the two getting into a huge argument that causes such demotion, which is a case where they both need to sit their asses down and reflect on what they're really doing.
 * 28) *Neither received 7 votes:
 * 29) **I would demote neither, as both Omega Tyrant and Miles are great contributors and know how to properly use their tools.
 * 30) **I would rather not demote either admin for one month. Both are very useful to the wiki, and I believe that they will eventually be able to find middle ground. Plus, if this demotion spoken of would in the near future, as much staff as possible will be needed in the rush when SSB4 comes out.
 * 31) **Should one, both, or neither of them to be demoted for a month, I choose neither. To me I don't feel like an admin demotion is really that necessary and it feels rather uncomfortable at this moment.
 * 32) **I don't think demoting either user would be constructive. Miles is stubborn makes some bad decisions, and Omega Tyrant can be quite harsh at times and has this unnecessary need to always be right, but neither have committed a demote-able offense. They are, most of the time, professional users who are a great help to the wiki. I'm not entirely sure how I would solve the problems with their administration or the fact that they always get into these fights, but I don't think demotion is the way to go.
 * 33) **Admittedly, I don’t follow the drama as much as I should, so I’m saying neither for this one.
 * 34) **Neither, because OT is fine as an admin while Miles has stated that he will work towards change.
 * 35) **Demoting either of these two users for a brief period of time would not be beneficial whatsoever. Miles wouldn't be able to perform his janitorial duties, and OT would just carry on as usual while complaining about how needless the demotion was.
 * 36) *"Both or neither" received 1 vote:
 * 37) **Indifferent between neither or both - if just one is demoted and not the other, then the demoted one would surely bring it up and argue why it was so unnecessary, which would just be even more of a pain.
 * 38) If it fell to you to permanently demote exactly one of these two users, which one would it be, and why? "Neither" and "Both" are NOT valid answers. (Assume they could still re-apply for adminship in the (distant) future.)
 * 39) *Miles received 12 votes:
 * 40) **Miles because OT can deal with other users well, and if Miles was demoted, he would still be able to add content to pages while not being able to do anything that makes him a bad admin (such as abusing his position of authority, deleting and messing with stuff he doesn't know about, claiming he is right all the time without backing it up, refusing to listen to other users' opinions except for admins and bureaucrats, refusing to argue and instead just complaining, having poor judgement, and repeatedly making mistakes over and over again.
 * 41) **If I absolutely had to, I'd demote Miles, since he thinks being an admin means that his edits quash other users'.
 * 42) **Miles. OT does get a little overly angry sometimes, but he still is a very useful contributor, especially in the competitive aspects of this wiki. However, Miles doesn’t really do much other than average contributing. He does seem a little out-of-touch with the Smash community, especially when compared to the other two main administrators (Omega Tyrant and Toomai).
 * 43) **This is a very tough decision, but I would rather permanently demote Miles of SmashWiki. Both Omega Tyrant and Miles of SmashWiki have their upsides and downsides (such as Miles' newfound willingness to admit faults and Omega Tyrant's user-handling), but I would keep Omega Tyrant as an admin by the virtue that he seems to be able to understand users and their edits more (most importantly in faith and in quality), and is quick to take action when necessary.
 * 44) **If you were to demote one of the two permanently with neither and both not being options, which one shall it be? See this is the thing I am scared about, picking one side or another and no option for middle grounds or compromise. To me it is really hard to choose since I myself don't really like how the act as admins. If I were have to choose, it would be Miles. The fact that he is a passive admin can be not so good in arguments.
 * 45) **If I HAVE to choose one, I'd demote Miles. OT shows more competence as an admin.
 * 46) **Miles. I consider Omega Tyrant the stronger of the two users when it comes to dispute-handling and enforcing policy, explaining his arguments fully in serious discussions and only really getting “vile” in cases with repeat-offenders.  Plus, whoever Miles’s assumed replacement is shouldn’t have much trouble with the janitorial work.
 * 47) **Miles, because he needs to show that he can be an admin by today's standards, rather than the past where janitorial work was good enough.
 * 48) **he's a fine editor and I'm sure he's a fine guy. But in the end, his lazy administrating just isn't what we should ask for on the Wiki.
 * 49) **Miles - I overall choose him because while both are known for having debate wars with each other, Miles starts them much more frequently. He started the one on your talk page out of nowhere, and if he is in some other debate and OT refutes his points, he's the one that first mentions the other user speaking in an unnecessary manner.
 * 50) **This is a very tough choice. I'm going to have to say Miles, just because he's worse at handling disputes than OT, makes poor decisions more often, and is mostly just good-faith, but really, it's choosing between the lesser of two evils.
 * 51) **If one admin had to be permanently demoted, it seems obvious to me that Miles would get the axe. Omega Tyrant is a great representative of the wiki who uses his admin status to the fullest when it is necessary, while Miles could easily be replaced by a user who is equally potent.
 * 52) *OT received 2 votes:
 * 53) **If one user has more demote-able offenses, it's Omega Tyrant. Miles has made mistakes, but doesn't intentionally do things that harms the wiki, and generally admits that he has made them. Omega Tyrant, despite being one of the best editors on this wiki and a decent administrator when it comes to most aspects, is a pretty poor authority figure. Users respect their authority figures; authority figures should give a decent amount of respect back to their users, and this is where I feel Omega Tyrant fails as an administrator. For example, I don't think getting angry in a discussion about Pokémon Generation III and telling someone to "fuck off" is appropriate behavior for a administrator, much less attempting to act like it was justified. So despite probably being the better administrator, I feel Omega Tyrant is more deserving of a demotion.
 * 54) **OT, because I think he wouldn't change and would continue to destroy motivation

The subjects on themselves and each other
In here I'll just what Miles and OT said for this survey, with no scores. Questions are same as first two sections above.

Miles on Miles

 * 1) I mostly have a good handle on things content-wise, but I still have room to improve. I tend to be too stubborn and I'm not very knowledgeable in certain areas (Project M and competitive topics in particular).
 * 2) Most of my administrator work has been in maintenance rather than userbase management, though I am working to improve my abilities with the latter.
 * 3) I don't feel qualified to answer this with anything even resembling objectivity.
 * 4) I don't think demotion is a worthwhile step right now for myself or OT.

Miles on OT

 * 1) OT is certainly knowledgeable about many subjects I am not, especially competitive subjects, but his tendency towards disrespect and loss of temper concerns me.
 * 2) General unwillingness to compromise and his common lapses into lengthy tirades are not very appropriate behavior. His general editing work and janitorial work is acceptable for the most part, however.
 * 3) OT giving the wiki (and its administration especially) a poor reputation is part of my concern.
 * 4) As I said above and on your talk page, I'm not seeking OT's demotion. I'm seeking an attitude change.

OT on OT

 * 1) Honestly, my edits are among the best on the wiki, and only you can compete with me for quantitative quality edits, no one can seriously dispute that. The only thing one can really bring against me as a user is my seeming hostile attitude at times.
 * 2) Again the only thing one can really bring against me is the hostile attitude against certain users. The rest of my administrative abilities have repeatedly shown themselves to be, well, great.
 * 3) I'm one of the most respected people in my Smash region, have been developing a following on youtube, and most non-wiki users who have interacted with me have held a high opinion of me. I have definitely done very well in representing the wiki outside it.
 * 4) User contribution wise, I'm a candidate for best on the wiki, admin wise my contribution again has been massive, and I have been overall immensely beneficial to the wiki, not to mention I was a catalyst to getting the wiki out of its rut back in 2010 and was one of the driving forces keeping it up as other non-Miles admins left. Hostility against certain users is not a reason to demote.

OT on Miles

 * 1) Quality wise, Miles' edits are very mediocre, I can't remember the last time he made a real quality edit. For conduct, he repeatedly shows a blatant disregard for SW:1RV and routinely refuses to discuss disputed content on talk pages.
 * 2) Miles is literally good for one thing, janitorial duties, which the wiki has made a point to not promote users for janitorial work. Miles has otherwise shown himself to be lacking in every area, and at times abusive of his power.
 * 3) Miles has completely failed here; on AllisBrawl, Miles made SmashWiki become a complete joke, parading our name around while pulling the same shit there as a moderator that I charge him with here (except even more frequently). Me and PenguinofDeath even once contemplated pushing for his demotion at the time because of how badly he botched our image on AllisBrawl and among the competitive Smash community (we settled for trying to get him to take out the "of SmashWiki" from his name, but he adamantly refused). Outside that, he seemingly doesn't interact with the Smash community at all, leaving him even more out of touch.
 * 4) Already said on the wiki I would have got a formal thing going to get Miles demoted if the wiki didn't have so few admins that it actually needed another admin body around that could handle janitorial duties.

Verdict
One user in particular submitted the following comment after the end of his survey response, which I feel cannot be excluded from this page.

Now I'm going to go freestyle. If you want my honest opinion, I don't think either of these two make for good administrators. Just because they're opposites in spectrum doesn't mean they complement each other and cover for the other's weaknesses.

I can tell Miles has good faith in his edits and is slightly more diplomatic in the phrases he chooses to use in discussion. He's also a good cleanup admin and is quickly there when something needs to be wiped. However, he makes horrible decisions as an admin and really doesn't deserve the tools. He was very vocal in initially opposing covering Project M, for example, despite not knowing much about the competitive scene and how big the mod's fanbase and notability has grown. His lack of knowledge of the competitive scene has also sparked greater controversies concerning the notability of certain smashers or terms used in competitive play. Miles is also pretty whiny and sometimes even avoids the point when confronted with a mistake he has made, and can sometimes even leave bad impressions on newer users that are more disconnected with our community through this. Additionally, although he tries to learn from his mistakes, he keeps making them, and even tried to deflect them onto someone else by bringing up the very argument on which I am commenting about right now.

Omega Tyrant has shown an attitude that is unbecoming of an admin, with his acerbic choices of words and arguments; he can sometimes even come off as "holier-than-thou," making it seem like others are lesser than him if they disagree with him, and focuses on always winning in disputes. It seems as if he wants to let everyone know that he is the "most" intelligent and experienced user on the wiki through literally shoving it in their faces, and it shows in the way he communicates- in arguments, he literally dissects the entire response. He wants to make it clear that every conceivable aspect of the other side is incorrect, and leaves no room for any concessions most of the time- it's just "you're wrong, I'm right. Next sentence, but you're still wrong. You're being dense/an idiot/." However, he is one of our best contributors, gathering data for pages and even debunking priority myths almost singlehandedly. A good contributor doesn't equate to a good administrator, though.

So how am I going to call this? (Aside from "a waste of everyone's time"?) Well I'll start with this:
 * 1) To Miles: I appreciate that you're trying to improve, but a lot of people are saying it's not working, or that it won't help your perceived position as "most disposable admin". You might need to step it up if you want to retain your staff position here.
 * 2) To Omega Tyrant: If you want someone else demoted, then start a public RfD or something to try and get them demoted. "if the wiki didn't have so few admins" is not and should not be an excuse to keep a theoretically bad admin around. Also, while it's true that you probably aren't as bad as everyone remembers you, the worst impressions are the strongest impressions, and you've made quite a lot of them.

To be perfectly honest, I don't expect either of you to lose your bad traits in time for one of you to cross the line. Prove me wrong. Toomai Glittershine The Obfuscating 13:41, 25 July 2014 (EDT)