I might vote for Razorflame in the hope he wins and finally gets to ejaculate.

Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?

* Is it true you compromised the English Wikipedia admin account Cool3 in c. November 2009, and used it until it was discovered and desysopped? Majorly talk 20:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
o Further, how much did you pay for it? Do you think that buying admin accounts is conduct unbecoming of a steward? Why or why not? ++Lar: t/c 01:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

"Compromised" is a loaded term, and my wallet has nothing to do with my Steward candidacy. (Unless, that is, Steward bits can be purchased like Wikimedia Foundation board seats can be? If that's the case, how much do I need to shell out for this Steward-level user right?) -- Thekohser 05:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Let's say it more clearly then: Mr Kohs, were you using the account User:Cool3? --Philippe 20:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

If Hivemind is any indication, that's half of the men on Wikipedia.

I prefer to think its just the folks on hivemend.

Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?

I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women. I'm afraid that somebody qualified to make the assessment might say it would be a bad place to pick up men, too.

]I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women.

We could put Lar in a wig and a dress and pretend that he's Susan Boyle.

Sorry, Jim Morrison quote I just butchered there...couldn't resist...

It looks like Lar is having a bit of a tough go at his reconfirmation. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an ombudsman for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.

If I am not reconfirmed then when I'm done being an Ombudsman I don't go back to being a steward.

I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.

Most other stewards just keep their heads down and don't let anyone know what they think about anything.

301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.

What percentage is required for reconfirmation?

I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.

I thought it was 80%, I also thought that only the votes of other stewards were counted in the final determination.

So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh?
Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.

And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.

301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.

Boo! I thought I'd made the first Lego remark on Lar's vote but then saw somebody had three votes above. Terrible.

Boy, this is a boring election.

Lar wasn't confirmed.

So, again, who decided to appoint him as an ombudsman? Cary?

mreow ! mreoow.
1 agreed (113 didn't mention this).
Darkoneko.

I looked at the so-called uncivil remarks posted and actually thought Lar's stuff barely qualified as 'cranky.'

Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?

Uh wait, I thought you clearly understood that prior to offering up the "bonktron" avatar.

Lar admitted on his blog he had a spell when he was throwing his sausage up several highways, I can't quite see the issue. Even if he is the world's biggest sleeze (which he isn't!), it's not as though he's walking into Wiki meet-ups, unzipping his trousers and saying "Get your gums around this for IP data"...is it?

I'd pay good money to see any of the above happen.

I never quite thought of Lar in that context. Maybe with the new interest in 3D movies, we can get promote this potential production with the catchphrase: "Lar in 3-D -- Careful, Or He'll Poke Your Eye Out!"

Bonktron was brought up by Lar. And I'm glad I've been reminded of it.

Oh, I see now that he denied the accusation in advance. Odd.

Am I missing something or was one of the key reasons for Lar's non-confirmation the campaign waged by Proab regarding allegations the former abused his Wikipedia status for his own sexual gratification?

Lar wasn't confirmed.

So, again, who decided to appoint him as an ombudsman? Cary?

So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh?
Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.

So, I did just as well as Lar in the quest for Stewardship?

Better -- you didn't come out of it in a grumpy mood!

I never quite thought of Lar in that context. Maybe with the new interest in 3D movies, we can get promote this potential production with the catchphrase: "Lar in 3-D -- Careful, Or He'll Poke Your Eye Out!"

I sincerely hope this sort of thing never happens again. I'll now go further and say I think the decision was flawed, exceeded the authority of the group, and should be repudiated by the stewards as a whole. A closed process is not what I signed up for when we were discussing this on the mailing list.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?titl...v&oldid=1895617



"The thing is, the project doesn't DO due process. There is no reason to expect it. This is not a governance experiment, a society, or even fair."

I just thought it wouldn't come out that way this particular time. Silly me.

Anyway, it's a good example of how there's really no hope for the whole enterprise, so at least there's that.

Talk to MichaelQSchmidt if that's your cup of tea.

Lar will still be an Ombudsman for a year...