This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chaser. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
i heard you are free to adopt.I was wondering if you were interested in adopting me. I a lot of questions usually realated to editing or userpages. If you are interested let me know!¤~IslaamMaged12621:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to respond to you all as a group. Unfortunately I don't have the time necessary to take on new adoptees. I regret that I didn't modify my description on the adopters list when I moved, but I'll do that now. In the event that you can't find someone to adopt you, feel free to drop by my talk page for the occasional question. Cheers, folks.--chaser - t10:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
As a Clerk, I thought I should give you a heads up that a proposed decision has already been placed into voting, in which you are mentioned. If you have any further statement or evidence, you should probably submit them as soon as possible. Newyorkbrad17:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I think you, and the committee, would be better served if you can say what you did do while reviewing that unblock request than if you stop at the current point in presenting evidence. Whether you can remember this much later I don't know. If not, how about saying what you usually do when reviewing requests? GRBerry20:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
It's Green Kirby. I'm sorry for all the trouble I've caused in the past few months. I have learned now, but nobody will believe me. And sense I can't persuade you to unblock me, I'll just say goodbye. It's been a real pleasure being here on Wikipedia. It's ashamed I made these mistakes. Hopefully, 3 years from now, someone will unblock me, and I can start over. Well, good bye.69.131.155.72 (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Green Kirby, please don't be too hard on yourself. You're only 13 and have some maturing yet to do. There's nothing wrong with that and it's certainly nothing you should feel ashamed about. Adults are still imperfect humans who make mistakes, too. Enjoy your teenage years. Come back when you know you're ready. Goodbye for now.--chaser (away) - talk18:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Green Kirby 2
[1]
Why are you ingnoring me? I need help. I want to edit Wikipedia again because I really enjoy it. I regret what I did and I really want one last chance. So please, help me. You're still my mentor.69.131.150.244 (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Reminiscing
Hey Chaser. Something the other day had me looking bad at some of the early RfAs I commented on. You no doubt remember the very first RfA I ever commented on. I just wanted to say that in retrospect I was wrong to oppose that one. I don't think my reasons were bad ones - but if I didn't know the candidate at all, and if I had I think I'd have found more than enough to compensate for those worries and would have supported. Anyway, to cut a long story short I think you've been a fantastic admin and wanted, especially with ArbCom breathing down your neck, to say that you have my complete confidence. WjBscribe02:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Me too, Chaser! It's funny looking back on that RfA which actually started a year ago today and what a great admin you have become. I got that one wrong, too. :) Sarah02:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you both for your thoughtful comments. They mean a lot to me these days. I forgot about this particular anniversary, so thanks also for the reminder.--chaser (away) - talk18:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Waterboarding and RfA Lawrence Cohen
Interesting idea I'm floating. Waterboarding is locked down, again, as usual, as the wars continue. Lawrence Cohen has shown himself to be highly constructive and helpful as a participant in the latest round of aggro. Have a look at my talk and the goings on in Waterboarding talk, what do you think? Inertia Tensor (talk) 20:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't have time for new things right now. If you have a specific question, I might be able to help.--chaser - t14:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Chaser, I am slowly becoming more acclimated to the wikipedia environment, but I am still having some trouble. I want to first want to thank you and congratulate you for your effort and work on wikipedia. You really helped me understand how to contribute. I am glad you were one of the first people I ran into. I don’t think I would have continued if I were receiving the type of editing I am receiving now… first. I am getting used to reading more of the comment pages of users. You seem busy and I don’t want to bother you but if you can just point me in the right direction I will do my best to help myself. I am having a hard time contributing articles. They seem to be deleted a lot, even when referenced. I am getting very discouraged. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. VoxNovus (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.
But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.
I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.
But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.
Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version.
Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.
I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes.
Larry Pieniazek
NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with, today it's the turn of the "B"s and "C"s! I'm hoping at least one of you chaps will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but scary! :) ++Lar: t/c17:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:ADM-logo cirR 2CP.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:ADM-logo cirR 2CP.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
){kind=link}