User talk:Karmafist: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:23, 14 February 2006

Old Talk Page Skin Template:Radiantsmessage

i didn't say anything in the ArbCom, it was completley unclear to me where/if i was allowed to, and if (doubtful) it would be taken into account. the resolution is bullshit. i'll be sure to support you inf you do chose to reapply for adminship (and i hope you do.) --jfg284.

I agree that it was unfair as well. Long reply at User talk:Karmafist/Archive15 --User:Dr Debug

Just checking back in

Jesus H Christ, looks like I took a break just in time! What a mess. And they're planning to give you the same punishment as someone who indefinitely blocked 1 respected user and 2 admins without good cause?! That's an absolute disgrace. Though I don't agree with you entirely here, I believe Jimbo's leadership is valuable and that Wikipedia should not be trying to head towards a democracy (with parliament, bill of rights etc), your treatment in this case is terrible. Jimbo can make mistakes, and many people supported your unblocking. You just stumbled into Jimbo at a bad time as far as I can see.

Oh well, congratulations on reaching 2000 I guess. The way things are going we're going to need a lot of fresh blood around here to replace those being driven off. the wub "?!" 12:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

desysoped?

You were desysoped?? What the..?? It is so hard to stay on top of everything here. And now Radiant! is leaving. Suckage. *tries to find relevant ArbCom whatevers..* --F a ng Aili 15:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Participant alert regarding Wikiproject on Advertising

The Wikiproject No Ads, created as a backlash against the Answers.com deal, has served an important function in providing a space for users to express their disagreement with the Foundation proposal. While the current controversies about userboxes raise questions about political and social advocacy on Wikipedia, there should be greater flexibility regarding advocacy about Wikipedia in the Wikipedia namespace. Reported and linked by Slashdot and other press sources as a unique and spontaneous occurence in Wikipedia history, it has apparently had some impact as, despite being scheduled to begin in January, not a peep has been heard about the trial and proposed sponsored link since the deal's controversial announcement months ago. Currently, however, there is an attempt to delete the project or move it off Wikipedia altogether. Since the Foundation has provided no additional information and has not attempted to answer the specific questions that participants in the project raised, it is unclear if the Answers.com deal has been abandoned or simply delayed. Until the situation becomes more clear, I believe the group should still have a place in the Wikipedia namespace. Sincerely, Tfine80 00:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom ruling

A sad day. I commend you for your resilience. Haukur 13:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries!!

Hey man no worries!!! As forrest gump once said, "Shit Happens"!! If you need any help with anything let me know! 209.89.24.196 15:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC) and i'm a dumbass, forgot to sign in Mike _{(T C)} 15:36, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might just go make that userbox LOL. Also if you have to reapply for RFA you'll have my vote, and the vote of a lot in the community. I find it sorta annoying that Jimbo is viewed as infalliable, especially since wikipedia is based around every user is the same, and no user is more important than any other user. Mike _{(T C)}

15:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dumbass userbox: {{subst:Userbox |border-c = #000 |border-s = 1 |id-c = #fff |id-s = 12 |id-fc = #000 |info-c = #039 |info-s = 8 |info-fc = #fff |id = [[Image:Donkey_1_arp_750px.jpg|50px]] |info = <center>'''It's ok to be a dumbass'''</center> }} Mike _{(T C)}

16:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sure thing...I guess

May I ask why? I was just triing to help you out. I hope I dint do anything wrong pickelbarrel 15:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could do more

I regret that I could not have been of more help to you in your cause, but I will subside, as is your wish. Hey do you know aht infinity minus infinity is...its a question I cant sem to find an answer to pickelbarrel 20:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia charter

I saw your charter. I am going to put some thoughts together on it tonight (I laud the intention, but don't agree with the implementation - and I promise to be civil in giving my reasons why!). In the mean time, I thought you might be interested in this conversation:Jimbo.

No-one on the thread seems to think this is controversial. I find it positively horrifying. What do you make of it? ElectricRay 17:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find it absolutely disgusting. I'm beginning to wonder if the inevitable outcome of this is a full-blown fork where someone takes the entire Wikipedia database and sets it up somewhere else as-is, with the only difference being no Jimbo and some sort of meaningful process in place that will hold admins accountable for their actions. --Aaron 22:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a very interesting idea, as a matter of fact. I have some ideas about what this process would be, too - somewhat controversially, there'd be pretty much an *absence* of process - the controls would be around registration as a user in the first place, and thereafter sophisticated reputation management - in a nutshell, the same thing that keeps eBay participants honest, and dispensing with metaphysically misconceived rules like "maintain a neutral point of view". I have been discussing the idea on and off (because that's the only way one can communicate with him, as the admins block him on sight) with banned user Zephram Stark. He's an enigmatic and controversial chap, but clearly (a) knows his way around computers (he's very resourceful at evading his block) and (b) despite a somewhat contrary air (he's not always polite - put it like that), also has some very good ideas about reputation management. The discussions we have had are all scattered around the place - I will try to collate and summarise them but, that's the gist. ElectricRay 22:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pleased to hear that. I thought maybe I was going mad. I must say, I'm thinking of getting out of here - if this truly is the regime, then I'm just not going to commit any more intellectual capital to it - I'm not happy to freely give my talents, however meagre they may be, to fluff the pillows of another man's vanity. ElectricRay 18:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

check out this also: part 1 part 2

I will wait and see if Jimbo makes any response, but I really do think I'm gone. The only valid vote is a vote with ones feet. ElectricRay 19:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I'm not so worried about Wikipedia itself becoming some sort of skynet - it might be possible to control this site, but not the whole internet. Ultimately Wikipedia is just another wiki: a dominant one, sure, with a prime mover's advantage, but it is no more impregnable than Pan American. It is reliant on, and (whether Jimbo's acolytes like it or not) answerable to, the whole internet community. If it gets that wrong - if it can't adapt to what the community collectively wants - Wikipedia will survive no better than a colony of dodos who have just spotted a sail on the horizon. ElectricRay 23:05, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

You seriously have too many. All meaning is lost. Nobody is really going to go through and read them. You should snip it down to some essential subset of what you currently have now. Keep only the important and relevant ones; nobody really cares what particular foods you eat and including those boxes just diverts attention from the ones that really matter. --Cyde Weys 21:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nixon.jpg

A userbox of Dick.

You are seriously lacking userboxes. This was an original idea by A Man In Black (See: User:Kelly Martin), but I made it into a userbox especially for you with your favorite color as the background. Feel free to display it on your userpage. Dr Debug (Talk) 05:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your petition is signed

I did so gladly. as far as the answer bewing zero, that was my first guess, but my brother said it was not. Thenb I got to thinking about holding a couple of mirrors up next to each other, resulting in them casting an infinir=te number of reflections. Now if you took one of the mirrors away you would have successfully taken away an infinite number of reflections, but you would still have one mirror left, and it would still cast one reflection. So maybe the answer is ONE what do you think? My brother who is very very knowing presents problems like this to me all the time and I hope with help I can get this one correct. pickelbarrel 22:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pedophilia userbox wheel war case Raul654 23:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

And I'll be first in line to vote Support the moment Karmafist requests reinstatement as an admin. --Aaron 00:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The outcome was as expected. A mockery of process. I'll be voting Support as well for you. Dr Debug (Talk) 00:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You definitely have my support 100%, mate. NSL E _(T+C) 00:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support from me as well, the ArbCom decision was totally unjustified. So what, you undid Jimbo's block: his block was wrong. (Note to self: if the boss wants to shoot himself in the foot, don't take the gun, let him do it). Their decision to keep you desysopped seems like it had less to do with the unblock you performed and more to do with certain people having it in for you. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I guess I'll be voting support too. I know I opposed you in the ArbCom election, but ArbCom and admin are two entirely different things. --Cyde Weys 05:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If only for the fact that the ArbCom and Jimbo are pushing their weight around in a way which is totally unhealthy for the project. I always wondered why so many people left. Now I dont anymore. The Minist e r of War ^(Peace) 12:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
support. The man has a fist of Karma, a Hammer(er) of the Gods. --ElectricRay 00:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And while I'm at it, here's a Barnstar to The Hammerer of the Gods for his heroic attempts to stick it to The Man. --ElectricRay)

Template:Kwelcome

I'm sorry, but I had to vote for the deletion of Template:Kwelcome. It's nothing personal, I just really don't think that's a good way to welcome users into Wikipedia. I hope you understand. --Cyde Weys 04:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this template into your userspace, to User:Karmafist/Welcome. Please, if you could, subst: all the current appearances of the template so the redirect can be deleted. I would do it myself, but you should have known not to put a personal template in the main template namespace. Thanks.--Sean Black ^(talk) 05:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, karmafist. First of all, I want you to know that I respect you as one of the friendliest and most helpful members of the Wikipedia community. And I feel that the Arbitration Committee's recent decision against you was unwarranted and altogether too harsh. That being said, I humbly ask you to please reconsider the wording of your new welcome template. It is very negative, and it introduces newcomers much too quickly to the nasty underlying administrative functions of the Wikipedia community. If you were a new user, would you want to be greeted with a message dominated by negative comments about the infrastructure of Wikipedia, or would you like to be thanked for your first contributions to the encyclopedia? It might be a good idea to mention your new policy proposals in your welcome template. In fact, that might add a bit of a personal touch (which is lacking in most Wikipeida welcomes), but I strongly encourage you to change the wording of your template so as to emphasize the positive aspects of the Wikipedia system, while possibly introducing your ideas to improve it dramatically. After all, we wouldn't want to scare away any potential contributors. --Tantalum T e lluride 06:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Well I for one would want to be made aware that when you enter this place you and your articles can be thrown out on the whims of any authority figure that feels like it without so much as a chance to defend yourself. And that the guidlines are just that, and do not have any neccisary meaning if an administrator decides xe doesnt care for you, your oppinions, or your actions here at wikipedia. If you let everybody know going in that this is not a democracy and that any rules implied are subject to change without notice, then they cant complain if they are booted off for no reason. I no when I was kicked off for a month for being such a jerk I was a little pissed at the system. IF I had been made aware that this was the policy ahead of time I wouldnt have taken it so badly. If you think that this policy may scare off some newcomers, I would fault the policy, NOT the statement of that makes people aware of it. pickelbarrel 07:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive type of vandalism

I wonder if you have any insight on how technically to deal with something. Of course, I told you before that I think semi-protection should be used massively more than it is; but that's probably not going to happen. Anyway, I mentioned this certain vandal that I seem to have attracted via maintaining the Ward Churchill page. The thing that was most troublesome about the vandalism is that this person (under ever changing usernames, but often related names) would blank the page and replace it with, e.g. 500 copies of a picture of Bush.

The result, unfortunately, of this change is that I can never seem to load the diff to see specifically what the change is, presumably because the WP server times out before sending all that graphic data. Some other editors rolled back the vandalism of this type to my user page or user talk page, but I don't know if they had actually seen the diff, or just assumed the worst. The thing is that I can view the diff: "Vandal->Reversion" (because the page itself, below the diff, is reasonable); I just can't view the diff: "Good->Vandal".

I just found an example of the same thing on the Churchill page. A user, "Mr.Trezon" (but it'll be a different name next time), made this change, with the edit history comment like "minor spelling fix" or something innocuous seeming. I simply could not load the diff to see if it really was a proper change or if it was vandalism. As it happened, the same username had made a comment on the talk page that made me fairly sure (overtly claiming to praise Churchill, but obviously meant sarcastically). So I rolled back to the last version, but with less than perfect confidence I was reverting an actual vandal. Once I made the reversion, I could look at the prior diff, which proved my guess correct. But I don't like reverting blindly.

Any thoughts? Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An appeal

Hi Karmafist. Let me start by saying that I respect your support for SPUI. I understand why you feel aggrieved. I understand why you put that code on your page. I will not remove it, as I can see very clearly that your intent is not to troll or to disrupt. However, I still request that you remove the code from your userpage. Apart from anything, it is counterproductive. It reminds people of why SPUI received his ban. It really is not likely to achieve anything productive.

I understand you want to make a stand. Your "manifesto" puts that forward very strongly! I recognise that you feel you have been wronged. However, this statement feels like attempting to make the situation flare up again. It is not the way to complain about maltreatment of SPUI.

I would not consider complaining about your protests against our treatment of SPUI (if you can get your head around that sentence). I am only suggesting to you that your method is not the most productive, and many users are likely to find it annoying. They might even feel that you placed the text there in order to disrupt. I recognise that that was not your intent. But you are leaving yourself very open to criticism along those lines.

I hope you consider my advice.

Yours,

Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I shall reply to you more fully tomorrow. I am currently not feeling very well and am very tired. However, I protest very much at you placing me in a cabal. I strenuously deny it. Beyond that which is natural and inevitable with people in a social group, I do not (and do not intend to) take part in any cabal activities. I am a strong supporter of the influence of the community. However, there are three competing influences: process, community, and product. I am strongly product oriented, with community coming with it, because, without the community, there would be no product. However, I strongly believe the community must have the intent to enhance the product, not to exist for its own right. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

On Feb 25 I will be nominating you for RFA, is this alright with you? Mike _{(T C)} 22:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I also added the dumbass userbox to your userpage =). Talk to you later. Mike _{(T C)}

22:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a mistake or a subtle joke tht you've got "It's ok to be a dumbas" on your user page twice?
brenneman ^{T}^{L} 02:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok to be a dumbass

I'll put the subst here if the box haters decide to delete it for no reason....again...Karmafist

Support of SPUI

Hey! I hope you don't mind, but I copied your "In Support of SPUI" code and put it all on my userpage as well. Thanks for supporting my friend who I've known personally for six years. --Analogdemon (talk) 00:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your quote of SPUI from your userpage. It's inappropriate for reasons that have been made clear elsewhere. As should be clear by now, many of us have no sense of humor about this at all. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 01:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I reverted that removal, for I don't find it inappropriate. I did mention I'd observe 1RR if it got removed again, though, but just letting you know mate that you have my support. NSL E _(T+C) 01:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User pages are not and never have been sacrosanct on this project, and it is a very old principle that our goal of writing an encyclopedia is more important than any perceived goals of providing a soapbox upon which to test the limits of free speech. Yours is not the first user page that has been edited back by others and I doubt that it will be the last. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 02:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this is straight from Wikipedia:User pages. I've removed this. Jimmy Wales, who, despite what you think, has ultimate authority on the project, has made it clear that devisive userboxes are not to be used. SPUI got banned and put on probation for this userbox. None of us are above the law. Bratsch e^talk 03:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because the Foundation Board of Trustees supports him. Because he founded Wikipedia. Because he has dedicated his life and money to the project. Because the community supports him. Because he knows what is best for Wikipedia. Bratsch e^talk 03:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also because you don't have to think for yourself, apparently...

I'm sorry, maybe I'm being dense, but I don't understand what you mean. Bratsch e^talk 03:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to get on IRC or AIM right now to discuss this further? I think that would expedite things. (IRC:Bratsche; Yahoo!IM:talkingbratsche AIM:talkingbratsche GTalk:bratsche1) Thanks. Bratsch e^talk 03:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks for discussing this civilly. I'll talk to you on AIM in a sec. Karmafist 03:38, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So we meet again for the first time!

User: Pickelbarrel seems to think I need to speak with you. I know you have had some recent trouble. Pickelbarrrel seems to think I am the cause of it & has asked me to forgive you for our past conflict and also help you regain your administrator position. I am not sure what I can do to help but I will work with you in whatever way I can. I have already signed your petion but I will do more if you feel I need to. Also thank you for your work with Pickelbarrel. He has come a long way with your help and I think he may go further yet! Lastly since you are the boldest of all editors (bold to the point of being foolish) I will grant you a title ( an honor I have only bestowed once before). From this day forth you shall have by the command of Cenestrad --The Emperor of Wikipedia & Protector of Wiktionary 03:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC) a title of devine right of Karmafist the Bold & Foolish (or Boolish). This title you may use, abuse, ignore or give away as you see fit. This I order for the Common Good. --The Emperor of Wikipedia & Protector of Wiktionary 03:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Jimbo to the Cult of personality article

I'm trying real hard to see your side in this, but I'm quite rapidly coming to the conclusion that you just have an axe to grind. Bratsche can speak for himself but for my part, I'm not doing this to be Jimbo's toady. Rather, I'm sticking up for the project as I see it. And I remember precedents from before you joined, most notably with User:JesusIsLord! (that may not be the exact spelling), where there was lengthy and protracted debate about freedom of speech vis a vis building an encyclopedia. That was almost three years ago and we decided back then that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. We haven't changed our mind. I realize you've contributed a great deal, but I believe that you misunderstand the nature of the project. And while your contributions can and do lead the community to overlook certain indiscretions, you've gone well past that point. If you want to turn into another "Wikipedia doesn't love me as much as I deserve to be loved" flameout, you're already on the path that will lead you there.

I also note that in an edit summary you threatened to create a bunch of socks. Like your edit to cult of personality, this is hardly an effort at the sort of reasoned debate that you claim you wish to be known for.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shame on you Karmafist. This is where you should have added Jimbo; Category:Cult leaders. Next time get it right or leave my kingdom. --The Emperor of Wikipedia & Protector of Wiktionary 04:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got this barnstar from "The Emperor" and immediately thought of you...

I think you've been hurt worse than me by wikipedia pickelbarrel 05:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Esperanzial note...

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Celestianpower ^háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

Hoping to defuse a 'situation'

Karmafist, in the spirit of our last positive interaction, I wondered if I might challange you about Template:Kfwelcome. You are entitled to your views on how wikipedia should be run - but is canvasing ultra-noobs for support the best way to go? It seems to me that a) 'signatures' of the newly arrived hardly strengthen your case b) it could be seen as an attempt to turn noobs into partisans before they've become editors. I don't want this to get nasty and end up as another slug fest, so rather than delete it or do anything to futher antagonise the situation, I'm asking you to have a think about it. Perhaps if you see me as too partisan, you might discuss it with some more moderate wikipedians before you continue to use it. Thanks. --Doc ^ask? 23:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Doc and have replaced your welcome messages with the standard ones. If you want to carry on a war, leave the noobs and the articles out of it and hash it out somewhere suitable. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 23:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As it happens, I was doing something similar to another welcome template of yours. Please think about whether inducing newbies into wikipolitics doesn't constitute WP:BITE. The Land 00:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would be lliing

If I said it didnt bother me alittle bit that you took down the barnstar that I gave you. I was attempting to show how you being ostrisized from the administrator community had hurt you, and that it goes against the "we dont punish, we just do things to prevent" policy they have. I appreciate the honesty, but it would have been nice if you had at least kept it up there for a while to show your pain. But if you like the other barnstars better then I will give them to you instead, although I cant see that It eximplifies your situation quite as well.

File:Sushi4.jpg

A Sushi Barnstar for the adventerous--The Emperor of Wikipedia & Protector of Wiktionary 03:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Douchebag award is supposed to have a slash through it...to show you are NOT a douche bag, but The Emperor wasnt sure how to do that...maybe you could figure it our and send it back to me, as it is I'm kind of embarresed to have a picture of a douchebag for an award, But I appreciate the gesture. ANyway I hope your back to administrating soon...I have tried to talk to people I thought might help...I noticed you started talking to Sam Korn as well. I am sure things will work out for you... I seem have pretty good luck in here so far. 205.188.117.69 23:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks.

No need to thank me mate, I just support your policy because it makes sense. Though I don't want Wikipedia to become just another government, the idea of a more efficient and proven method of administration is very welcome. -MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 01:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which policy is that, by the way? ‣ᓛᖁ

ᑐ 01:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 01:09, 14 February 2006 view source Master of Puppets (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 28,455 edits m Thanks for the thanks. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:23, 14 February 2006 view source Eequor (talk \| contribs) 15,921 edits →Thanks for the thanks.: which policy? ^^; Next edit →
Line 202:		Line 202:

	No need to thank me mate, I just support your policy because it makes sense. Though I don't want Wikipedia to become just another government, the idea of a more efficient and proven method of administration is very welcome. -[[User:Master of Puppets\|Mas]]<font color="green">'''[[User_talk:Master_of_Puppets\|T]]'''[[User:Master of Puppets\|er]] of </font>[[Special:Contributions/Master_of_Puppets\|Puppets]] <sup>[[User:Master of Puppets/Photoshop service\|Peek!]]</sup> 01:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)		No need to thank me mate, I just support your policy because it makes sense. Though I don't want Wikipedia to become just another government, the idea of a more efficient and proven method of administration is very welcome. -[[User:Master of Puppets\|Mas]]<font color="green">'''[[User_talk:Master_of_Puppets\|T]]'''[[User:Master of Puppets\|er]] of </font>[[Special:Contributions/Master_of_Puppets\|Puppets]] <sup>[[User:Master of Puppets/Photoshop service\|Peek!]]</sup> 01:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

			: Which policy is that, by the way? [[User:Eequor\|‣<font size="+1">ᓛᖁ</font>]]<span class="venus">[[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif\|♀]]</span>[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User talk:Eequor}} <font size="+1">ᑐ</font>] 01:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)