Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Brossow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Sockpuppet discussion

I don't think KI was referring to the nominator. I think he was referring to Ford. Personally, I don't think this is a case of sockpuppetry, but more a case of meatpuppetry. Nova SS seems IMO not be be a sockpuppet, nor a meatpuppet [1]. --Latinus 21:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

At the very real risk of seeming argumentative, I can also assure you that this is not the case. But if this is the sticking point for ANYONE, please strike the vote with my full blessing. Having said that, I think it's laughable to suggest that I had someone set up the Ford account last November just to add a single vote to my nomination in February. :-( ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 21:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Not at all - I was thinking that genuine new users don't find RFA until at least a few weeks after they've become regular contributors (not the case with Ford and Dos Jim). Nova SS mentioned an internet forum - there have been similar cases where internet forums have been recruiting grounds for meatpuppets. --Latinus 21:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I know Nova SS from a (the?) Nova mailing list. He introduced me to Wikipedia last year, which is when I began to work on the Nova article. Jim Dos is a friend from the same Nova list whose vote I struck early on. I want it to be known that I went out of my way to ask people NOT to create accounts for the purpose of voting. In fact, this is a cut-n-paste of exactly what I said when my nomination was brought up on the list:

I would prefer very much that you not register simply for the purpose of voting. For one thing, it really defeats the intent of the system in place. For another thing, it'll look really bad for me if a bunch of newly registered people start voting for me. But I do appreciate the thought!

I believe Ford is someone else from the list, though I specifically did NOT ask him for a vote of approval. I did not strike his vote as he is a legitimate editor who has been registered for months. But again, if his vote is an issue for someone, I really hope they'll strike the vote and make their decision based on my strong record here and not on the actions of others beyond my control. I'm trying to be as transparent as possible with this process, which is why I simply struck the votes rather than deleting them altogether, which likely may have avoided these accusations. I felt the need to be completely upfront outweighed any benefit of "hiding" these unfortunate early votes. ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 21:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that this is precisely what BRossow submitted to the Nova list. And I am not a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet (whatever that is!). Nova SS 22:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#"Meatpuppets" --Latinus 22:23, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Looking at both of their contributions (including the 2 AFDs they were both involved in (but had no need to be, because the votes were not close)), the explanation they have given seems more likely than meatpuppetry. NoSeptember ^talk 22:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 22:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that does ring true. --Latinus 22:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prejudicial early votes

Against my better judgment but in the interest of providing a level playing field, I have removed two early votes apparently cast by recently registered friends or acquaintances despite my specific request that this NOT happen. I wanted to leave them in place but fear that their appearance on the page was unduly prejudicial against me. I hope people can now vote based on my record and not on the actions of others. ⇒ BRossow ^T/_C 22:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes,that's why I voted (note that this is not a vote) support now. --Latinus 22:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Experience

Just food for thought: in practical terms, what is the difference in experience between someone with 2800+ edits over a couple months' time and someone with the same number of edits spread over, say, six months or a year? The time spent working on Wikipedia would be about the same either way. The commitment to improving and helping would, if anything, be better demonstrated by the person who has spent several hours a day in many cases than by the person who makes far fewer edits here and there. Many people have had successful RFAs with far fewer edits and, in terms of actual time spent working at Wikipedia, far less practical experience. Again, just something to think about. It's mostly a rhetorical question, though if someone has an answer I'd genuinely appreciate the feedback, because I'm not at all sure I understand some of the opposition here. --BRossow 14:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)