Forum:Should Nx have server access?

< Index | Site-related discussion

Alright, this is your chance to have a say in the matter. This is the job description. Speak now or forever hold your peace. -- Nx / talk 08:38, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you want it, though? Let's face it, server access is never going to be reach the "sysops for all" type status that RW craves. It puts you on a footing that is higher than everyone else. Even if you didn't abuse it there would be a lot of misunderstanding and mistrust of the position because people can't check up on you and feel equal as they can with the sysop position. For most people this isn't a problem because it's just how the world works, but RW isn't Most People. Basically, do you want the continued grief and is the constant update and maintenance of the software worth it? ADK^{...I'll golf your pile of flaming horse feces!} 08:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. I tried to walk away a couple times, but something always brought me back. Once I came back from LANCB because of an email from Trent asking me if I wanted to help with something. The most recent one was because I couldn't stand the technical problems the site was having staying unfixed. I tried to not care about capturebot being broken, but then I eventually fixed it. I guess I'm like an abused wife who keeps going back to her husband. -- Nx / talk 10:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll be frank and say that while you're bold and that's good, sometimes you're too bold in your proactive attempts to fix things, and I'm inclined to tell you to back off. I'm sure you recognize that you can really get in it sometimes, and fan the flames of disruption. That's not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself - we have always treasured our firebrands here. But I have seldom told you to back off, mostly because you already seem like you eat a lot of shit from people despite your immense technical efforts. I mean, we have some other techies here, but no one has your sisyphean dedication to ironing out problems (I'm not competent to judge ability, but you also seem pretty good at it). Your skill is pretty much the same as Ace's goofy entertainment value, in fact - I'd hate to have to tell off either of you.

I guess I'm kind of getting away from my topic though. Because you do have to take a lot of crap and yet you deal with all kinds of stuff. Thinking back, I believe something like a dozen technical questions have been directed your way in only the past couple of weeks. A lot of them probably would have just gone unanswered if you hadn't been around to answer them. That's no small responsibility, buddy: you're a very important part of RW. And for all that I might want to snap at you sometimes, that's a responsibility you shouldn't abandon unless you really have to (if you don't feel you can take the abuse anymore, I'd certainly understand!)

There's a huge sense of entitlement from a lot of users in regards to folks who can do things. The same thing exists with editors like Godot, who plow through improving articles in a way few others can. Don't let the vocal, shrieking minority - who are way more interested in their egos and in philosophies unconnected with anything real - grind you down.--^talk 10:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hm, that is rambling, disconnected, and almost unreadable. tl;dr is this: fuck the haters, rock that code.--^talk 10:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Or, as others have put it, Nolite te bastardes carborundorum. ListenerX^TalkerX 01:11, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

No. Nx has abused this privilege several times in the past and simply can't be trusted with it now. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 09:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Nx is the Nx for the job. My only qualm is his insufficiently superhuman tolerance for faeces-flinging monkeys - David Gerard (talk) 09:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes. 10:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Setting aside grievances with Nx himself, the fact is that I know of no one better for the job. Blue (is useful) 19:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey now, SuspectedReplicant has a name!--^talk 10:20, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Ba-doom, and indeed tish. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 10:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I have spoken. Make it so. --PsyGremlinKhuluma! 11:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

If you want someone who installed CheckUser without any discussion, and who recently installed a new extension of his own creation to restrict editing, again with no discussion - vote yes. As I said: he can't be trusted. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 11:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

The former was a temporary measure because a certain pedantic bitch kept accusing him of running socks, the latter didn't involve server access. And, let's face it, it was to restrict you vandalising that miserable little bastard's page. Nx, like Mei, is useful (but nowhere near as cute) and his usefulness far outweighs his... quirks. Besides, who else is there with his wiki-fu? --PsyGremlin말하십시오 11:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Installing an extension does involve server access - you need to put the extension file onto the server then edit LocalSettings.php to get MediaWiki to load it. Installing an extension without any discussion is bang out of order - it doesn't matter why he was doing it. And "Who else is there?" isn't a reason why Nx should gain this privilege. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 11:50, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

The earliest Abuse Filter is from Nov. 2010. 11:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Err... the plural of "coccyx" is "coccyges". –SuspectedReplicant retire me 12:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Nx does a hell of a lot of useful stuff for the site. He has also made an unreasonable number of unpopular executive decisions about the site beyond any authority given to him & without seeking consensus. What riles me most is the attitude he gives off seems to be that if we get one (the useful stuff) we have to put up with the other (the unilateral changes & petulent behaviour). When called out on doing something unreasonable, rather than acknowledging any fault he usually does something theatrically sulky like LANCB or disabling something else on the site. He seems contemptuous of the idea that he should have to answer to anyone for his behaviour (e.g. see comments here). It would be nice if we could see a more cooperative Nx, but instead we've got the same old dilemna: "Speak now or forever hold your peace" - like we either have to permanently accept Nx with server access & whatever whims he chooses to follow with it, or take it away from him altogether. Weaseloid^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 12:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

And I'm the one accused of not having a sense of humor? Anyway, the position was offered to me under the conditions laid out in the document I linked to. I could've accepted right away, but I chose to ask for input from the mob instead. -- Nx / talk 14:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

My vote is no. Nx constantly abuses his privileges. And a great deal of the shit he does is either not wanted or doesn't require such access. Occasionaluse (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Nx should have server access. But what he's allowed to do with it should be codified, like all other user rights are, and if circumstances arise in which he needs to go beyond those limits, he should at least take an informal poll of the mods. B♭maj7 "If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong." 14:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be a healthy exercise for Nx to drop the shtick and admit that he wants this position as much if not more than anyone wants him to have it. Occasionaluse (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Should Nx have server access? I say Yes. :-) Refugee^{talk page} 16:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Even though we've had our differences, this makes me think he's got a sense of fairness and has the best interests of the site at heart. nobs^{abandon hope all ye who enter here.} 23:05, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Give it to him. He's the most competent and has already proven himself with much work improving the wiki. Also, should we set up a vote? This all seems rather chaotic. The vote wouldn't have to be binding, it'd just be an indication of popular opinion.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone have Tech capabilities? That would alleviate the need to have Nx to have server access. It does bother me when Nx acts like a moderator, which he is not. If anything the Tech role should be accountable to the Moderators. sterile^talk 02:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Being a tech and having server access are completely different things. The tech group is a purely in-wiki thing; server access is granted through the Foundation Board itself. And tech group is already accountable to the moderators, it's just that the mods haven't exercised any of their authority over dear Nx because that authority is so nebulously defined. Blue (is useful) 03:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

All power to the techs! 16:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC) (larron thinks so, too)

Wrong question

You're asking the wrong question. It should say Should Nx be eyeball fucked by a greased Elephant Seal jonesing from severe meth withdrawal. But, anyway - since that is not the question posed I'd say Nx's tech proficiency is most welcome but he should basically quit being a passive aggresive douche nozzle. Oh and people aren't wearing enough hats. Ace^ace 10:15, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, if I'm elected to mod, I'll stop being passive aggressive and start being active aggressive. -- Nx / talk 10:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

And if I am relelected I'll post a picture of my knob. Ace^ace 10:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Just not on my user page please. -- Nx / talk 10:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Maratrean's user page would be ideal for this. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 10:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

A sneak preview

At least mark it NSFW! Think of the children!!!!! –SuspectedReplicant retire me 13:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Is this even a community issue ?

Who has server access in my opinion is none of our business, but that of the board and Trent. If he is abusing the position then they should remove him. If not Nx then who is going to fix stuff. I would hate to see the sites tech support become a popularity contest. Perhaps a different userid for tech work and a sysop id for normal use ? Hamster (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Talked about here. The question really isn't if "we" give him the job but if he takes it, the job has been offered to him, but he hasn't accepted, yet. Nx wrote somewhere (don't ask me where), that he doesn't want to take the job if the community doesn't want to see him having that position. So he's asking it. --★uːʤɱ atheist 14:58, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, although it is a board decision there is no reason why the community should not give input in respect of such a decision.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 15:39, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

What Bob said. I, for one, think that Nx should take the position. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

And why is this an intercom issue? Because it's not. sterile^talk 02:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You just can't please some people. I sent out an intercom and created a sticky thread on the Saloon bar so that people wouldn't complain that they didn't notice it and they were denied their God-given right to have a say in the matter. -- Nx / talk 05:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Nx has a point, despite his rather cavalier way of expressing it. I would probably not have found my way to this page but for the intercom notice. ListenerX^TalkerX 05:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Honestly, this is not a community issue per sé. But I certainly see no reason that the community shouldn't be allowed to have input on the matter of Nx having server access because it is one of the rare RWF items that absolutely intertwines with community politics. The Punk Symphony of Noise ^{Your mental puke relief} 12:50, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I have said it on the RatWiki facebook page and I'll say it again here. Sure. Let Nx have the position. He's a good guy who debugs teh code and doesn't afraid of anything. That being said, before it happens, we should turn the entire site over to Ken

for at least an entire 24 hour period with Capturebot pointed at every change he/she makes. The Recent Changes page alone would be worth it's weight in comedy gold. I promise I'll help clean up. The Foxhole Atheist (talk) 14:20, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

There's no point to this page

Nx shouldn't get server access, proved by this mess. However this position isn't community approved. Trent's offered this position to Nx (for some unknown reason, are techies now an endangered fucking species on the internet?) and there's no good reason for this whole pantomime. It's just an excuse to use the intercom as a site wide "Look at me!" festival. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 14:51, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh my. Someone's still upset they had lost their user rights --User:Brxbrx/sig 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Eh? You must be seeing something on my user rights logs that I can't, because I wasn't even aware that Nx was responsible for that. But don't let me interrupt your pet conspiracy theory. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 15:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I was thinking of the Saloon Bar Putsch. Nah, I don't think what he did was so wrong. He merely enforced the rules. I doubt he'll do it again.--User:Brxbrx/sig 17:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You doubt he'll do it again. I doubt he'll be able to prevent himself doing something ridiculous like that again. I know the only way to be sure he won't is to not give him access. Although bringing all this up is pointless, every member of the site could turn around and say they don't want him to have access and he'd still accept the post. Notice he hasn't put up a single qualifier, no "if ten individual users disagree I won't take it"? That's why this is all an exercise in vanity. It's a few days on Nx spamming his name through the community pages and intercom to have people talk about him to inflate his ego.

I ask again, is there a shortage of techies on the internet? Have they been hunted to extinction by the Great Troll Hunters? Or could we not find a techie that needs to improve his CV and is willing to do the job free? That person wouldn't have history here, so there'd be no arguments or discussions of whether they're trustworthy or not. The decision would be based on their ability to do the job, not on whether or not they'd cause problems in the community which Nx already has. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 18:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think he just wanted community input after all the complaints given by a handful of people.--User:Brxbrx/sig 19:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Declined

I've declined the offer. Thanks for your input. -- Nx / talk 18:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

But why, Nx? I don't understand. You seem well-matched for the position, have the support of the board, and were shown a lot of support here. Sure, some people voiced concerns as well, but you invited them to do so, and obviously not everyone will agree - on anything. Why not accept? Refugee^{talk page} 12:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Bad blood that won't dissipate, I think, between him and various users. I see the validity of his point; I wouldn't want to take on a position of responsibility in an organization with a significant faction that actively hates me, whether or not I caused that hate. Blue (is useful) 12:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Really? Does anyone really hate Nx? Or is there just the disagreement that is inevitable on a wiki, or anywhere for that matter. If there were people who disagreed with you, would you still accept a moderator position? Refugee^{talk page} 12:53, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

(side note to Blue) could you please define "ponit" for me? (your edit comment says 12:49, 19 September 2011 Blue →Declined: Both his ponit and point are understandable) - I don't know this word and want to add it to my word list, but dictionary.com says: ponit- no dictionary results - thanks! :-) Refugee^{talk page} 13:00, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I can point you to a post by Ace McWicked in which he says to Nx, "If you were my penis / I'd cut the fucker off," for instance. SuspectedReplicant expressed his desire to see Nx leave the wiki several times, including here and obliquely above. I can't directly recall other instances in which people have directed hate toward Nx, but believe me, they are both extant and wide-ranging.

I take offense at the implication that I can't deal with disagreement, which is a baseless accusation. I was not saying that I personally am incapable of tolerating dissent, I was saying that I understood why Nx didn't want to have to deal with a slew of insults - regardless, again, of whether or not he has done anything to merit such extreme censure.

I misspelled "point" as "ponit" in my original post, and then I corrected it. Blue (is useful) 19:18, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Stop attributing false motives, please. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:26, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, sorry. Blue (is useful) 19:28, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, recanted that bit entirely. Blue (is useful) 19:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 19:42, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I'd also like to point out I have said various vicious things to friends and non-friends alike. I don't hate anyone. Ace^ace 20:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Again, I apologize. Blue (is useful) 20:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Blue: "I take offense at the implication that I can't deal with disagreement, which is a baseless accusation" - Refugee: Whoa! whoa there horsey... that was not at all meant as an insult towards you. Not an accusation! Nor an implication. That thought wasn't even in my mind (in all fairness there isn't usually much of anything in my mind, it's a lonely place where random thoughts rattle around like tumbleweeds) - it was merely an hypothetical, and not meant to be construed as a criticism towards you at all. Refugee does not make subtle digs at people, or engage in wiki-wars of words, she is incapable of such things and would be sure to be outwitted by even the simplest of editors. :p I am surprised it was perceived as a criticism, as I've always been a Blue-fan, and thought that was evident. But then again, I can see how a mistake could happen, I don't usually express myself well. My failing, not yours. (hehe.. Ace remember when I said at RWW that I couldn't believe you thought that thing you did, and you were like huh? what the heck...are.you.talkingabout? lol) :p The request for definition of "ponit" - I thought there was such a word, but I didn't know it and was sincerely asking for a definition. Not being snarky. Or not intentionally anyway. So, my apologies if it came across that way. Ok, all better now! :-D hugs & kisses all around... Refugee^{talk page} 23:11, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

and hmph. Nx appears to be ignoring my question. Refugee^{talk page} 23:13, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

also, if you don't believe me about the request for a word definition, look here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Refugee it's where I am keeping a list of new words I learn here.. thought I could add to it. :-( wasn't pointing out a mis-spell or whatever, I thought I'd run into another cool new word. Now you owe me one. :-D Refugee^{talk page} 23:18, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

If you've declined do you still want input? If not, is it the norm to turn off the message directing people here for discussion, because if it is I still saw it about 10 minutes ago (until I marked it as read) Nil Einne (talk) 05:09, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The message will expire. It can't be turned off. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Nx / talk 06:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I just wasn't sure of the technicalities Nil Einne (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)