RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Results/Archive11

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The nicest bunch of assholes on RationalWiki

Moderators

Future.gif
Moderation
Shills & Whores

OpenSTV ballot readers[edit]

Technical details[edit]

Basic[edit]

Software:
OpenSTV version 1.7 (http://www.OpenSTV.org/)
From https://github.com/Conservatory/openstv. Installed approximately as follows:

git clone https://github.com/Conservatory/openstv.git
cd openstv
python setup.py build
python setup.py install
cd openstv

(run commands as root with sudo if needed!)

Candidates[edit]

The order of names, which if screwed up in the .blt file will bork the results:

#$wgElectionName = "Mods2018b";
#$wgElectionCandidates = array("Bongolian", "DiamondDisc1",
"DuceMoosolini", "Cosmikdebris", "FuzzyCatPotato", "LeftyGreenMario",
"Nerd", "Rationalzombie94", "RobSmith", "RoninMacbeth", "RWRW",
"Scream!!", "Spud");

First count[edit]

To decide mod alternates[edit]

This run is to find the top 8 candidates, who may be mods or mod alternates.

Method:
opensuse@linux:~/openstv/openstv> python runElection.py MeekSTV "/home/arthur/Mods2018ready.blt"

Therefore:
Bongolian, DuceMoosolini, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, Nerd, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud.
May be elected as mod or mod alternate, based on preliminary results.

To decide mods[edit]

This is an re-run to define the top 6 candidates, who will be mods.

Method:
opensuse@linux:~/openstv/openstv> python runElection.py MeekSTV "/home/arthur/Mods2018ready.blt"

Therefore:
Bongolian, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud.
Are elected as mods, based on preliminary results.

And:
DuceMoosolini, and Nerd.
Are mod alternates, based on preliminary results.

Results[edit]

Check back on December 1st, 2018.
  • I have the results file, it will take me a little while to get the results from it, so you shouldn't have to wait that long. — Dysk (contribs) 11:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I am gonna do some sockchecking now. — Dysk (contribs) 12:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Sock check[edit]

I have checked extracted the user ids from the .blt file and converted them to usernames. I have then examined the usernames to see if they are genuine users or not. I don't see any obvious socking. — Dysk (contribs) 17:15, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

openstv is hard to use[edit]

Now I am going to leave this for a day or two and see if I can spot somewhere where I have inevitably bungled everything, wait for Shabidoo to do his count and then the official result can be announced. — Dysk (contribs) 17:38, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Tomorrow. Hope you don't mind but tomorrows a much better day to dedicate time for a count. Until then my sun spotted friend. ShabiDOO 22:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Dysklyver, I've been trying like crazy to install the program on my computer with Lubuntu. I'm a casual linux user and use the terminal very little. I cannot seem to complete this line: python setup.py install
I get the response: could not create '/usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/openstv': Permission denied
Unfortunately I'm really not sure how I could fix this. I tried to find a debian file as those make life easy but I cannot find one. I also cannot find a windows program to install. I also tried a "demo vote" via the website but there is no way to do any batchdata and I'm not sure even if I entered every ballot manually that I'd get the detailed results we need. If so, then I don't mind doing that tomorrow (manually entering ballots online). I'd really like to finish this vote count but I'm stuck at this point and I really don't have more time to dedicate to this tonight. If someone can give me easy to follow advice then I'll try tomorrow evening. If it's not an easy problem to solve, perhaps another user can do the count as well (though again, I'm happy to do it if you think I can do this tomorrow in a timely fashion). Sorry ShabiDOO 23:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Shabidoo You need to run the commands with sufficient perms, either run sudo python setup.py install or switch to root with sudo su and then run it. — Dysk (contribs) 00:22, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Jesus Christ. When I try to switch to root I get this response: D is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Is there no windows version of the program? ShabiDOO 17:26, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh bugger. The fix for the sudo is IMO very technical. I am not aware of a specific windows version, however, openstv is a python program, in theory it will work cross-platform provided you have python on windows, which appears to be possible. The program operation would be the same. — Dysk (contribs) 17:32, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Okay. Will try win right away. 13 fingers crossed! ShabiDOO 17:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I installed python on windows. When I tried to run the script it stopped immediately due to errors in the script, apparantly. :(
Should I just enter the votes manually online? ShabiDOO 18:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
That sounds hard. Do you have ssh? i.e, can you use an ssh tunnel to another machine? ::— Dysk (contribs) 18:23, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey. I found out online you can upload a .blt file, but then it asked me for 10 dollars. As for ssh tunnel, I have not the slightest idea what that is or what it means. I really just use lubuntu because it works really fast on an old laptop. I think at this point I'm totally useless here :( Might someone kindly consider taking over the second count for me? ShabiDOO 18:26, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Well since the method and blt file is posted directly above, I suppose any of the peanut gallery below could do their own count. I will do a second count myself just to get the results posted properly (minus those duplicates) but the basic process is thankfully quite transparent. — Dysk (contribs) 19:31, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Okay. Sorry I couldn't be of any real use. ShabiDOO 19:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

General comments[edit]

I doubt it will change the result but two of the votes have ranked all 13 candidates in the exact same order ("11 9 10 3 2 13 7 12 8 4 6 1 5"). That seems unlikely to be a coincidence. These two were very similar as well:

  • "3 6 1 10 2 4 13 7 11 8 12 5"
  • "3 6 1 10 4 2 13 7 8 12 11 5"

CowHouse (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I knew I had bungled something! Two users somehow had their vote entered twice. Re-runs minus these duplicates furnish the same results: Bongolian, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud; mods. DuceMoosolini, and Nerd; mod alternates. — Dysk (contribs) 17:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@Dysklyver I also noticed there are 42 votes and "sock check" only lists 39 voters. If you remove the two votes that were entered twice that still leaves one unaccounted for. CowHouse (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Assuming that FuzzyCatPotato still intends to immediately resign, which of the alternates then becomes a mod? Asking for a friend. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 18:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Depends, for example if I run the election to get 7 mods, you get the following.
— Dysk (contribs) 18:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
DuceMoosolini would be the first replacement mod. CowHouse (talk) 03:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

So 42 people voted. How many eligible voters are there? Nerd (talk) 00:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Two of those were duplicates so only 40 users voted. I'm not sure on the exact number but they only need to have 75 or more edits and be registered for 3 or more months, so there would be hundreds of eligible voters. CowHouse (talk) 03:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@CowHouse I just looked that our list of registered voters. Not all of them seem active. In any case, I think it is fair to say that voter turnout was low, well below 50%. Nerd (talk) 14:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
The voter registration page is for board elections, not moderator elections. There were 36 votes last year so turnout actually increased. CowHouse (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
My API-fu is failing to get a full list of eligible voters, but I am guessing there are at least 500, mainly because once eligible you stay eligible even if inactive for some time. — Dysk (contribs) 15:45, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@CowHouse Duh! Thanks! Nerd (talk) 15:58, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Dysklyver Is it technically too difficult to keep track of the actual number of eligible voters? I think we should pay attention to voter turnout. Nerd (talk) 15:58, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
The problem is that the eligible user "group" is not a proper user-right so I can't sort by it on Special:ListUsers. — Dysk (contribs) 16:07, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks! Nerd (talk) 16:11, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

RWRW's unexpected victory, subject to final count[edit]

I would hold all knee jerk reactions until we get to the results. But it's difficult for me to believe that given the amount of anti endorsements from potential voters (no small amount) Rwrw would be elected mod. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 23:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Damn Putin at it again.RobSmithGrab 'em by the nob! Nobs for Mod! 23:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Ok, so I will happily admit that my apparent victory seemed unlikely. However, I would like to point out that only 9 of the 42 voters issued anti endorsements. Preliminary checks have stated that no obvious socking was detected. Therefore I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that some people quietly supported me. --RWRW (talk) 23:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough, though don't celebrate just yet, not until the final results. Would suck if they turned out different. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 23:52, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario It is not beyond reason to expect RWRW to receive some votes. And if my suspicions are unfounded and RWRW turns out to be an adequate moderator I will withdraw my objections and endorse them during future elections. But, we shall see. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario Not everyone who voted voiced their endorsements or anti-endorsements. Nerd (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Unfair criticism can engender sympathy for the candidate. nobspiss in my ear 00:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Based on Trump's success, entirely fair criticism can also engender sympathy for the candidate. --Annanoon (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario The anti-endorsements were reflected in the vote. RWRW was a polarising candidate. The votes for RWRW were (out of 40 total votes): 1st (5), 2nd (1), 6th (1), 9th (1), 11th (2), 12th (7), 13th (1), unranked (22). When electing six users, it is easy for the vote to be split among the other, similar users. Using the single transferable vote (STV), being ranked low consistently doesn't matter as long as you also receive a handful of first choice preferences. It is difficult to prevent a token right-wing candidate from winning using the STV system, and I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often. CowHouse (talk) 03:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Nerd: Since I don't know who voted and had little idea who votes and who endorses and how many voters outnumber endorsements, I just went by endorsements and anti-endorsements as metrics.
CowHouse: This makes more sense to me. I don't understand single-transferable system all too well even after reading a bit about it. --(LeftyGreenMario) 207.233.76.9 (talk) 04:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Judging by RWRW's attitude I suspect he will make a rather reasonable mod, you shouldn't judge a person just because their political alignment may diverge from your own. RWRW actually seems to be one of the more modest and humble servants of the Goat Lord, all things considered. - Don Juan (Go diggity) 2:35 AM, 11/28/18 EST
Only three people I considered might be socks (Archiver, Joaquín Martínez, and Blue Sonnet) and two of them didn't vote for RWRW. Since very few people actually voted, the influence of people who did vote is quite significant, and I will point out that perhaps due to not understanding how the STV voting system works (as articulated by CowHouse), several people who anti-endorsed RWRW actually then voted for him, giving him a low ranking which contributed to his "win". Of course this is speculating on the preliminary results, parsing this bunch of numbers is not exactly super easy and I may have screwed up somewhere which changes everything :D — Dysk (contribs) 12:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Dysklyver, ... and who might I be a sock of? t 08:21, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Seriously, your talk page notice just seemed out of place. There wasn't much else to moan about so :/ — Dysk (contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm not a sock, I edit on a Kindle so I get worried about making big edits & breaking stuff... Also am I famous now I'm mentioned on here? Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Probably not, but editing with a kindle is remarkable. I didn't even know that was possible. — Dysk (contribs) 19:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
It's a bloody pain in the arse, I'll tell you that much... Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:25, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Two words: Marcus Cicero. history lesson: he was our biggest ever troll, and was eventually elected moderator. After that we never heard from him again. 109.204.116.189 (talk) 12:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC) (Sophie)
Thankfully I don't see much similarity between "classic cunt" Marcus Cicero, and our dear RWRW. :D — Dysk (contribs) 16:47, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
To be honest I kinda wanted this to happen so I could see how it plays out. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 16:04, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Actually it's very expected[edit]

I don't know if you guys know how ranked choice voting is supposed to work, but part of its intention is to give fringe coalitions a voice. Which makes sense for say... a democratic governing body. Then they're just a representational component of a vote. It's kinda shit for electing cops, where a single fringe voice isn't such a good thing. I mean, I guess you could hope that all the fringes don't ever form a coalition. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of socks ...[edit]

Members of the alliance included TrumpFan101 and Princeps Civitatis.

— Unsigned, by: Joaquín Martínez / talk / contribs 09:01, 29 November 2018‎

  • Goddamn lazy alliance, they didn't even bother voting! — Dysk (contribs) 13:17, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
    • Those traitors! —RWRW (talk) 13:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
      • Where I come from, we hang traitors.--Don Juan (talk) 23:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Complaints it was all done wrong[edit]

I've been here since 2014, and fit all the requirements, and yet I didn't even receive a passing mention. Go figure.--Don Juan (talk) 07:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Not everything has to be about you. 109.204.116.189 (talk) 12:47, 28 November 2018 (UTC) (Sophie)
Alas my method of selecting potential candidates was just to scrape usernames from the saloon bar at the time. Some others added a few I missed, but it was not exactly the most selective or considered method :/ — Dysk (contribs) 12:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
I`m not always very active on RationalWiki, usually I have a big boost of activity then lose interest for a while, followed up by another boost, and then another, and then another, ad infinitum. So perhaps I wouldn't have been a very good candidate, due to my autism I lose interest in things after a while. But, you know, I would still appreciate being listed as a candidate during the next election.--Byron Wannabe (talk) 13:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
It might actually be a good idea to keep a list of potential mod/board members in advance of elections. The nomination periods are kinda short. — Dysk (contribs) 13:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Where would you propose we put such a list? The obvious choice for it would be within the "Moderator elections" section, but even though I`m a Tech I prefer to achieve a rough consensus before doing anything.--Don Juan (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
You don't need to be nominated by another user for moderator elections. You can nominate yourself if you're interested. See Rule 1. CowHouse (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Yeah but if someone else nominates you then you get a reminder that it is happening. 15:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I don't think that keeping such a list is a good idea, nor do I think having wavering interest in RW is a good qualification for being a moderator. Bongolian (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

I do, it helps us keep track of potential mods. If you don't want to be on the list, just say so. It was already made, with myself providing the brunt of the work, Dysklyver providing a few extra names, and Nerd rearranging the sequence of potential candidates to be a mod in alphabetical order. Perhaps we should do a vote on it?--Don Juan (talk) 18:07, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

STV is dumb[edit]

We should form political parties based on slight progress in the way RW works and one based on turning it into Conservapedia, then one for radical forces of change, which will never be voted for. We should also have a system where the person to win particular groups of contributors automatically gets all of their votes even if they voted for someone else, and a "college" of non-editors who inaccurately represent the population of these groups of contributors but are the ones who ultimately vote nonetheless. That will surely fix the problem of people like RWRW being elected as mods. Spriggina (tal) (framlög) @ 23:07, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Are you sure about that?--Don Juan (talk) 23:52, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
In general. I think. When the votership is less than 50 and the winning candidates are less than 10 ... I cannot imagine any universe where introducing parties at this level ... offers any of the good things but gives only all of the ugly elements of party politics. ShabiDOO 10:14, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I would interpret Spriggina's statement as satire on the unrepresentativeness of US Presidential elections, and likely a dig at RWRW's monarchist/Trumpian tendencies, @Shabidoo. Bongolian (talk) 17:58, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Well in that case...LULZ !!! ShabiDOO 22:34, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

If first past the post[edit]

If a simple first past the post had been used for the election instead. We take the first choice votes for everyone and add them up.

Mods
x9 LeftyGreenMario
x6 Spud
x5 RWRW
x4 FuzzyCatPotato
x4 Bongolian
Tied for mod/alt
x3 RobSmith
x3 RoninMacbeth
Alt
x2 DiamondDisc1
Not elected
x1 Nerd
x1 Scream!!
x1 Rationalzombie94
x1 DuceMoosolini

So if FuzzyCatPotato had still resigned, RobSmith would have become a mod too! RWRW would have been elected anyway. Therefore as you can see because there are so few voters, we are forced to use a more complicated system to get proper results. — Dysk (contribs) 11:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@Dysklyver Please, for the love of Goat and Cthulhu, never mention FPTP again. It is inefficient and it's results are sub-optimal. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:09, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
We need electoral reform since highly qualified candidates are passed over. nobs piss in my ear 01:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Announcing my immediate resignation[edit]

Thank you, thank you -- I was an incredible moderator.

The alt-mods are @DuceMoosolini and @Nerd in that order; congrats, Duce (sorry, Nerd).

I'm sad STV allowed RWRW to win but pleased that leftist democratic reforms like STV actually ensure representation of all views.

also pls don't remove my tech perms the filters need fixing sometimes oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 23:23, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, I would've liked to serve with you as moderator. Alas, I guess 'tis not to be, Fuzzy. That said, congratulations to Duce. RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
It's all good, Monsieur Pussycat. See you around! Nerd (talk) 23:44, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I symbolically made you a mod and then not again for the record. — Dysk (contribs) 11:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Second count[edit]

A Mods2018b.blt file was taken from the server, the raw file is shown below, the only alteration has been to regex the user ids of the voters to "[user_id]".

The format of a vote is 1 5 1 13 6 10 2 12 3 4 0 Where the 1 at the start and 0 at the end are padding for the program, and the numbers in between are votes. This example shows that this users first vote was for candidate 5, which is "FuzzyCatPotato", this users second choice was for candidate 1, that is "Bongolian", and so on.

The order of candidates is how they were entered into the array in the server configuration, and for this election is:

"Bongolian"
"DiamondDisc1"
"DuceMoosolini"
"Cosmikdebris"
"FuzzyCatPotato"
"LeftyGreenMario"
"Nerd"
"Rationalzombie94"
"RobSmith"
"RoninMacbeth"
"RWRW"
"Scream!!"
"Spud"

The .blt file must now be prepared, The "[user_id]" parts are removed with regex. 13 6 is added on the top line, the format of this is [number of candidates] [number of seats] so this election of 13 candidates will be parsed for 6 seats (winners). You can adjust the second number to get a different number of seats, eg 7 or 8 seats to determine mod alternates.

At the bottom, a 0 is added on a new line directly after the votes as padding. Then the candidates are listed in the correct order and the name of the election is added on the last line.

In this election we also remove two duplicate votes, caused by some cache issues when the election was starting.

11 9 10 3 2 13 7 12 8 4 6 1 5
1 3 6 1 10 4 2 13 7 8 12 11 5 0

Now install openstv, and run it with python runElection.py MeekSTV /path/to/file.blt and wait for it to output the result.

The top bit of the output is basically an advert, followed by the counting method that the program used, and the finally the winners, who are output in an order based on the original input order. (In this election the original input order was alphabetical, however it can easily not be so.) The output here is dumped as text directly on the command line, if this is inconvenient, specify an output file.

Note: As you can see this is different to the first count, this is because of the duplicate votes having been removed.

Note these two:

1 3 6 1 10 2 4 13 7 11 8 12 5 0
1 3 6 1 10 4 2 13 7 8 12 11 5 0

As you can see, these two "duplicate" votes are not the same, one has to be removed as a duplicate, but whichever you remove, the outcome is the same. "Nerd" and "DiamondDisc1" are very very close on who is the second mod alt.

6 seats = Winners are Bongolian, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud.

7 Seats = Winners are Bongolian, DuceMoosolini, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud.

8 Seats = Winners are Bongolian, DiamondDisc1, DuceMoosolini, FuzzyCatPotato, LeftyGreenMario, RoninMacbeth, RWRW, and Spud.

Candidates in order of overall popularity[edit]

  1. LeftyGreenMario
  2. Spud
  3. Bongolian
  4. FuzzyCatPotato
  5. RoninMacbeth
  6. RWRW
  7. DuceMoosolini
  8. DiamondDisc1
  9. Nerd
  10. Robsmith
  11. Cosmikdebris
  12. Scream!!
  13. Rationalzombie94


— Dysk (contribs) 12:46, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Final results[edit]

Appointed as moderators:

Due to the immediate resignation of FuzzyCatPotato, the first choice mod alt is also appointed as moderator.


Election counted by Dysklyver (Arthur Kerensa) as detailed on this page. — Dysk (contribs) 12:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


Thanks dysklyver for all the tedious work! ShabiDOO 13:37, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! And happy blocking! --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 18:39, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Good election. I lost. Maybe I should scream recount like various politicians have did in the past? I won't though, I am not some nut case. Think I might be the least popular user here? I congratulate the new mods and their goats. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 00:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes it seems that even RobSmith got more votes than you did. Methinks you haven't really inspired people to imagine you as a mod yet :/ — Dysk (contribs) 12:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
This is how Diplomacy dies with applauds. TheDarkMaster2 (talk) 12:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
The immediate resignation of one elected official is rather odd and dubious; what other officials may have acted in collusion to skim and scam the vote? nobs piss in my ear 21:29, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Didn't we already go over Fuzzy's motivations? He stated as such on his talkpage I think. RoninMacbeth (talk) 21:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Poor nobs. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 21:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, see FCP's talk page and FCP's campaign statement, he was running to try and stop RobSmith and RWRW getting a seat. Scream!! also ran for that reason, but ended up with less votes than even RobSmith so was not very successful really. — Dysk (contribs) 22:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations to everyone who won!-DiamondDisc1|1csiDdnomaiD (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Let the bedwetting of the plebs commence!--Don Juan (talk) 22:32, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
He ran as a spoiler, huh? He needs to include "POS" in his candidate bio next time. nobs piss in my ear 03:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Don't act like he sabotaged your campaign or anything, you got 4th to last place and virtually none of the surplus votes went to you. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 16:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I made it to the 23rd of 24 rounds. nobs piss in my ear 01:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)