User talk:Shadowcrest/policy/RFA

I'm gonna say one thing about this policy right off the bat: it works, it's as simple as that. Don't worry, I'm not quite so egotistical as to believe that it works simply because I authored it or because it's the RfA on PvXwiki (where I'm a Bureaucrat). However, having seen the same fundamental principles at work in three separate RfA policies on three separate wikis, and having observed the high degree of success enjoyed by those policies over the last two years or so, I can state with something approaching absolutely certainty that those fundamental principles work, and work well; in more cliched terms, this policy is "tried and true." I'm not saying that this is the right policy for this wiki (though I'm more than happy to debate its relative merits as opposed to, say, Semicolon's proposal), but I think that people who read this proposal should do so with the understanding that, if nothing else, there is empirical evidence that suggests that it works. Defiant Elements 07:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Please explain how this is at all different from our current policy. Which isn't working. Semicolon (talk) 13:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Who said it wasn't working? The only reason there's even a problem is because the sysops don't want more nominations to go through and they closed them off. It still has not been fully explained to me why that even crossed their minds in the first place, but that's neither here nor there.
 * This is different from your current policy because- though I guess it isn't outlined on the page, maybe it should be- on your RFAs, you guys get crap like: "Strong Support Hes a very nice guy. Nuff said." How does this have to deal with how this user will make a good sysop? If he's too nice, he might not even block people that need blocks! Being able to deal with people is a good talent, but has absolutely nothing to do with how he'll do as a sysop. "He's a talented player, he loves the game, and he has far too much time on his hands." ...so? He's good at and enjoys SSB/M/B, and he has too much free time (though this obviously isn't the case anymore, since last I asked I got responses of "we don't have enough time" yet they refuse to open up RfAs. 2+2=5?) Being good at the game has nothing to do with how well he contributes to the wiki, and even less of how well they will do as a sysop. "Support He has made more then enough contributions." So adminship is a reward for contribs? I got those on 1 RfA. Just one. And those weren't the only ones. I could bury you in similar comments if I had the desire, but I don't. There were one valid comment, which was "He has something which most editors here don't,a brain!Hes very level headed and makes good judgment based on good reasons." A bit vague- and examples would have been nice, but oh well-, but at least it attempts to address how well the candidate will do as a sysop- he'll will probably make just blocks and support them with reason, in the voter's opinion. Great. That pertains precisely to how the voter thinks the candidate will do as a sysop, which is what RfAs should be used for, not a popularity contest backed by a policy-enforced vote count. --Shadowcrest  16:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)