Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →Desysopping proposal: typo? |
Vejvančický (talk | contribs) →IPs: This is getting ridiculous: comments |
||
| Line 404: | Line 404: | ||
::Should they get more than one vote? Because if we allow anonymous and new users to vote then there is nothing stopping someone from voting with their account and then logging out and voting again. Same goes with users created after the RfA. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Black">Chillum</b>]] 21:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC) |
::Should they get more than one vote? Because if we allow anonymous and new users to vote then there is nothing stopping someone from voting with their account and then logging out and voting again. Same goes with users created after the RfA. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Black">Chillum</b>]] 21:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC) |
||
:::That's been a risk since the beginning of voting on Wikipedia. It hasn't proven to be a meaningful problem. [[User:Townlake|Townlake]] ([[User talk:Townlake|talk]]) 02:54, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
:::That's been a risk since the beginning of voting on Wikipedia. It hasn't proven to be a meaningful problem. [[User:Townlake|Townlake]] ([[User talk:Townlake|talk]]) 02:54, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
||
:::To me, both you [[User:Chillum]] and, say, IP 0123456789, are anonyms. --[[User:Vejvančický|Vejvančický]] ([[User_talk:Vejvančický|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Vejvančický|contribs]]) 09:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC) |
|||
::::It has not been a problem because we don't let IPs and new accounts vote. By my memory it has been that way since I was made admin in 2006. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Black">Chillum</b>]] 03:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
::::It has not been a problem because we don't let IPs and new accounts vote. By my memory it has been that way since I was made admin in 2006. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Black">Chillum</b>]] 03:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
||
:'''Strong oppose''' We should be able to distinguish between constructive and unconstructive, rather than base our decisions a priori, on the shape of someone's username. --[[User:Vejvančický|Vejvančický]] ([[User_talk:Vejvančický|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Vejvančický|contribs]]) 09:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Support''' [[User:Chillum]] makes some strong arguments. I certainly believe a !vote should at least be dignified by a registered account. It shows respect to the community. An IP with an edit history of just voting in an RfA is concerning. A voter is a member of the Wikipedia community, who has shown some courage in registering, and showing responsibility for their editing career on WP. An IP, by their very reluctance to register, shows an ambivalence to the spirit of the project, and should not be trusted in such a critical community process as an RfA. Sorry if this sounds harsh to IP's of good will reading. So BLOODY REGISTER! [[Lord Kitchener Wants You|Your Wikipedia needs you!]] :) [[User:Irondome|Irondome]] ([[User talk:Irondome|talk]]) 03:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
:'''Support''' [[User:Chillum]] makes some strong arguments. I certainly believe a !vote should at least be dignified by a registered account. It shows respect to the community. An IP with an edit history of just voting in an RfA is concerning. A voter is a member of the Wikipedia community, who has shown some courage in registering, and showing responsibility for their editing career on WP. An IP, by their very reluctance to register, shows an ambivalence to the spirit of the project, and should not be trusted in such a critical community process as an RfA. Sorry if this sounds harsh to IP's of good will reading. So BLOODY REGISTER! [[Lord Kitchener Wants You|Your Wikipedia needs you!]] :) [[User:Irondome|Irondome]] ([[User talk:Irondome|talk]]) 03:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC) |
||