View source for Illerai:Requests for adminship/Towelcat/1

{{Archive}}
==[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]]==
{{Userinfo|Towelcat|links=yes}}

Hello everybody! I'd like to take this time to propose a new member to the Old School RuneScape Wiki administration.

Cat has proven himself to be an excellent editor. His knowledge of regex alone should be proof of this - Several projects laced with lethal amounts of tedium have been tackled by him. Between the shops project, constant template fixes, and anti-vandalism work, it's a no brainer that cat should receive these tools, and another no brainer that he can be trusted with them.

''I, Towelcat, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realise that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my tools because I realise that this is a serious offence. If the community finds that I have done so, my tools will be revoked, and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed, -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 23:30, 26 July 2019 (UTC)'' 

===Questions for the nominee===

'''1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?''' <br />
As far as using administrative powers, it would give me the ability to suspend vandals myself, rather than bugging other people on discord to do it. The same goes for page deletions, though that hasn't come up as often.

'''2. What have been your most helpful contributions to the Old School RuneScape Wiki, and why?''' <br />
The two largest projects were/are verifying-and-documenting all shop stocks within the game, and fixing up various table formatting issues (if not redesigning them outright). Gau Cho was a huge help with the shop stuff, as he whipped up the necessary module and copied the stocks to their respective NPC pages.

'''3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?''' <br />
Haven't been a part of any edit wars yet, thankfully, though there was a bit of silly drama on the discord when I didn't want to stop using the nickname of a certain Mr. Who. I'll admit that was a failing on my part, and I try to avoid any significant conflicts whenever I can.

===Additional questions (asked by the community if necessary)===
* '''Question''' - Could you respond to the incidents (for lack of a better word) raised by Cook? Don't mind if it's here or below the comments he posted. [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 07:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::The reddit comment is definitely a bad play on my part. At the time there had been similar comments that, when replied to, would get only vague replies or no response. 
:::Them: "The official wiki sucks because fandom does <very vague thing here/> better."
:::Me: "What do they do better, and how can we fix the official one?"
:::Them: *radio silence* or "it just sucks"
::At this point I was starting to believe they were troll throwaway comments, but I've since learned (partially due to this commenter's reply) that it's just an ignorance thing. For what it's worth, that comment is nearly three months old at this point.
::With the shop value person on discord, I didn't mean to be rude when saying I didn't read it (I tried to clarify that I ''couldn't find what they had said'', as chat was moving pretty quickly at the time). The XKCD comic was just a bit of banter to try and lighten the mood as it seemed to be a similar issue, and I immediately followed it with "i'm trying to think of a solution though". We came up with three solutions (add a range for shop value, userpage with a custom table, and I gave them my spreadsheet of shop data), [https://i.imgur.com/9uCJNhF.png this happened], and the problem was solved. -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 08:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

* '''Question''' - What does the assumption of good faith mean to you when you interact with others on the wiki and off the wiki on wiki topics? [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 07:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::AGF means what it says, to assume good faith. The times where I've had faux-meltdowns on discord over silly IP edits were never meant to be taken seriously. I know these people don't mean to accidentally mess up pages, and most of the time my "outrage" has been at the numerous visedit bug edits (as I would then go and fix them). Regarding off-the-wiki, see answer to the previous comment. -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 08:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

* '''Question''' - Technical ability is really helpful to have as an admin. However, what sort of soft skills do you think are useful or important as well? [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 07:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::Above all else, try to be friendly. I clown around here and there, but I try to be friendly with it. Aside from the Isobel thing that happened a while ago, I don't think I've been in any direct conflicts with anyone on discord. I've even tried to get people to chill out a few times when they're mouthing off at each other in the #osrs channel.
::When working in a group:
::*General problem solving ability. Rapid-fire brainstorming of ideas and such. Openness to outside ideas is huge.
::*Ability to swallow your pride and work towards a solution you don't personally agree with.
::*Willingness to help other people with their projects.
::*Grunt work is a necessary evil. Everyone has to do their part. -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 08:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

* '''Question''' - Imagine for a moment that you were to close your RfA. Do you think your RfA should pass given the discussion so far? On a related note, if your RfA didn't pass, what would you do from here? [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 10:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::In the current state of this page? Definitely not. Plenty of people have already made up their minds, and it's clear that there's no consensus here. If (read as "when") it doesn't pass, I'd just go back to doing what I normally do. Get mad at outdated page info, fix said outdated page info. Enjoy the company of the other people on the discord. Bug the actual admins whenever there's vandalism or some other annoying admin-only thing. Same ol' same ol'. -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 11:03, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::I disagree with the assertion that people's minds have been made up. I found your responses to my questions thoughtful and balanced, demonstrating qualities I would expect to see in all existing and prospective admins. I'll let others decide for themselves, but I wouldn't write it off just yet. [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 16:33, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

==Discussion==
'''Support''' - As nominator. -{{Template:Signatures/Scuzzy Beta}} 23:21, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - He knows his stuff. [[User:Jakesterwars|Jakesterwars]] ([[User talk:Jakesterwars|talk]]) 00:06, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

'''Not yet''' - Cat is an intelligent and project-driven editor, and he's worked on a lot of important things that hadn't gotten done because they were either too hard or too tedious. He is exceptionally active and knows a lot about many different aspects of the wiki.

That said, I'm a bit iffy on this nomination because Cat has been fairly hostile towards people that he perceives as stupid: [https://www.reddit.com/r/2007scape/comments/bmeav9/remove_nonbis_wiki_its_time/en3548r/?context=3 here] is one example offsite where some misinformed person says they prefer [[Fandom]], and Cat goes a bit overboard. This would be extra bad if there was an admin flair involved, but the bigger issue is that this sort of thing isn't isolated to Reddit -- I've seen a few different times in Discord (either #wiki-osrs or #recent-changes-osrs) where some (usually new) person will do some well-meaning thing on-wiki, and Cat will shit on the thing because it's formatted badly, misspelled, or some other fixable problem. [[RS:AGF|AGF]] is honestly the most important policy on the wiki, and there are just too many times where I feel like Cat hasn't been entirely on board with that.

"Hostility towards stupid people" might not sound like the worst thing, but it's been correlated with a lot of the most problematic admins over the last 10 years. I don't think this is unfixable, and I really would like to eventually support an RfA...but I'd rather see a few months where this doesn't happen, instead of making him an admin first and hoping it just fixes itself. {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 01:33, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

'''Neutral''' — I agree with Cook. Cat is a good editor, a very valuable one, but I have also noticed a few acts of passive aggressiveness and borderline hostility to people. I don't think it is severe enough of a problem that it warrants direct action such as a block, but I believe admins should be on good behavior at all times and inadvertently held to a higher standard, including off-site (at least if it can be traced to them), and as such I'm hesitant to support this RFA until it's at least addressed. --[[User:Julia|Julia]] <sup>[[User talk:Julia|talk]]</sup> 02:27, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

<s>'''Neutral''' - as per Cook and Laagone.  [[User:Shoyrukon|Shoyrukon]] ([[User talk:Shoyrukon|talk]]) 03:27, 27 July 2019 (UTC)</s>
:'''Support''' - Cat's responses are evident of his passion towards the wiki. He has convinced me that as an admin he will be more self-conscious of his interaction with others. That being said, Cat would be a welcome addition as an Admin. [[User:Shoyrukon|Shoyrukon]] ([[User talk:Shoyrukon|talk]]) 14:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - Would Cat use the tools? Yes. Can he be trusted with the tools? Yes.

Cat has repeatedly shown how passionate he is about the wiki, genuinely improving the wiki day in and day out, tackling projects no-one else is willing to. He knows his wiki shit. Those are the main things I want to see from an admin.

As adminship is not about status, and is merely access to tools, I believe that's where this discussion should end, but I'll humour the other topic.

In my opinion, it's frankly preposterous to deny him tools that would benefit both him and the wiki based on one potentially bad attribute. As for the attribute at hand, from what I've seen he's fully willing to work with people after initial comments and he has actually been rather helpful to users in discord when questions have been asked. It should also be noted in the offsite reddit example Cook posted, he apologises for his hostile tone in the same comment thread.

If keeping up wiki-apperances is important to everyone, then he need not have the reddit flair (which was entirely optional to begin with). I'd rather see him be able to contribute optimally and desysop'd should that need arise, than him continuing to go through admins to get menial tasks done. {{User:IN008/Signature}} 15:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
:This isn't about keeping up appearances to external people, it's about making sure that this potentially damaging characteristic is called out early and fixed. I'm wary of drawing too many comparisons here, but being hostile to stupid people/ignoring AGF was basically the ONLY warning sign we had on Ansela or Mol, who ended up doing an incredible amount of damage to RSW's (and in Mol's case OSRS's) community by alienating new people. I don't think Cat would ever intentionally do that, but it's not that hard to see the relationship. Not taking AGF seriously is the only way I've ever seen an admin become a net negative, so I don't think it's unreasonable to focus on this one attribute. {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 16:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

'''Soft oppose''' - I love cat as a person, but idk about admin {{User:Kelsey/Signature}} 12:49, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

<s>'''Closure''' - Despite Towelcat's behaviour towards other people that can sometimes be perceived as aggressive or hostile, I don't believe that this is enough to refuse him the tools; there are no doubts that he would make good use of them and thus, will be granted admin. That being said, I hope that Towecat will go the extra mile to keep this behaviour in check, knowing what being an admin entails and the responsibility that comes with it, as well as how others would perceive him now that said responsibilities are given to him. -- {{Signatures/Spineweilder}} 04:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)</s>
:I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can look at the rest of the discussion and determine there is [[RS:C|consensus]] in favor of sysopping cat. Your closure statement reads more like a measured support based on your own feelings rather than a determination of what the rest of the community thinks.
:During the course of this RfA, there was another incident in Discord that, in my mind, further validated the concerns raised here: [https://discordapp.com/channels/177206626514632704/269673599554551808/605979096505384960 starting here], some random guy came in and asked why we'd removed the store value from item infoboxes. What started as a semi-productive discussion about different shop prices descended into cat and iN008 trolling this guy, telling him his opinion doesn't matter, mocking his idea with an old comic, etc...I encourage you guys to read that conversation and tell me if you think that's how admins should be engaging curious new users. It eventually got back on track, and cat ended up using his copious knowledge of shops to get something useful out of it, but I was appalled by how badly the overall interaction went. I think riblet even ended up apologizing to the guy privately for it.
:I elected not to post that here because I figured the RfA was definitely not going to pass in its current state and it wasn't worth hurting anyone further, but clearly that wasn't the case.
:I realize we don't really have precedent or policy for this, but I strongly urge you to extend this RfA another week. How you ended up finding consensus in favor of a sysop here is very unclear. {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 05:26, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Notice of Intent''' - Due to strong disagreements within the community, this RfA will be re-opened for another 7 (seven) days. It will close on Friday, the 9th of August. --{{Template:Signatures/Scuzzy Beta}} 05:39, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Mild support''' - I was completely unaware what Cook mentioned post-closure had occurred, and I'm inclined to agree that the interaction was quite bad at the beginning (and fairly civil afterwards) after reading the full conversation. I still have confidence Towecat will take extra steps to keep his behaviour in check, so I will give a mild support. -- {{Signatures/Spineweilder}} 05:44, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Not yet''' - People can change, but from the general tone I've seen from cat on Discord, it doesn't appear he's putting in the effort. The "flame now solve later" mentality really doesn't help anyone. Sys-opping him and hoping he improves behavior rather than waiting for him to improve his behavior prior to sys-opping him has greater potential for a bad outcome, and I'm sure nobody wants that. Give it some time. [[User:Nericat|Nericat]] ([[User talk:Nericat|talk]]) 06:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Comments''' - I do not support or oppose because I am not an active editor within OSRS Wiki, but I would like to add a comment. I have seen my fair share of interactions with Towelcat in the discord and I must agree with Cook: the behaviour resembles previous users who, while they contribute a great deal to the wiki, do not have a sensible attitude. Has this ever turned out well? Ansela was de-sysopped after countless issues and threads and quite recently banned from the server - more than seven years after her RfA! Towelcat is not Ansela, but I would like to see Towelcat's attitude improve in the server. I hope he does not make the same mistake other users have made, and I would also like our community(ies) to not make this mistake again. {{Signatures/Haidro}} 06:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Comment''' - I don't think the above example is a good example of any poor intent from cat, certainly nothing that would even remotely constitute trolling. So allow me to try my best to explain why I believe this. 

The issue above boils down to miscommunication from a number factors:
*Discord is real-time chat, not a formal structured discussion.
*Single messages can be taken out of context.
*It's not always obvious who a message is directed towards nor what tone that message is.

A breakdown from my own view:
*Store, Seller and Currency are removed from Infobox Item.
*User joins discord, asking wiki-osrs about the removed parameters, from the get go there is confusion in chat, with several users mistaking it for value.
*Topic of value continues, specifically the relation of value to store prices. Enter myself, seeing the conversation I ping the suitable person to explain the mechanic, Cat who had done a lot of work recently on stores.
*At this point in the conversation, many users are already in agreement that store/seller were redundant due to the new storeline, cat and myself agreed with this sentiment. I myself then noted other flaws with the old system.
*Now for the now infamous "doesn't matter if you like the feature" line from myself.
**Out of context I will not defend my use of wording.
**In context however, I had already noted some flaws and proceeded to note more that outweighed the like for the feature (which at this point, the use case by the user had not been fully explained nor established.)
*From there cat only proceeded to establish what said users use-case was (he was in no way rude or unbecoming) and worked towards the end resolution with those active in the conversation.
**At one point cat posted a meme that reflected the situation, to me this didn't come off as mean spirited but perhaps it did to others. I feel [[RS:AGF]] should be extended to include chat here as this is the only perceivable wrong cat commited during the entire conversation, which definitely felt like an attempt to lighten chat up.

If anyone should reflect on the conversation, it's myself. I definitely could've handled the situation better than I did and made my points in a more polite manner. I'll take this time to apologise.

Beyond that, I'm disappointed in certain individuals who likely haven't read the conversation, and formed an opinion in private chats (or even before this incident). Any comparison to Ansela (or worse) isn't suitable. {{User:IN008/Signature}} 06:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
:"I'm disappointed in certain individuals who likely haven't read the conversation, and formed an opinion in private chats" can you clarify this? {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 07:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - Though I'm a fairly new editor, I've spent some time looking over the UTP violations that have gotten other admins and users into hot water and I honestly don't believe cat is impolite in the same manner as other users who have violated UTP. His sense of humor is extremely dry and sarcastic, and that can come off as abrasive and unprofessional; however, it's something he's clearly been working on and there's never been malice to people in it. Cat has been one of the most helpful editors to me as a new editor, as well, and he's been very approachable throughout the whole time I've been here. With regards to his contributions to the wiki, I think this is an area that everyone has reached a consensus on anyway. [[User:Kanga|Kanga]] ([[User talk:Kanga|talk]]) 09:03, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - They've been able to answer Cam's questions nicely. {{User:TyA/sig}} 11:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - Per Ty, I think his answers to the questions posed have been sensible. {{Signatures/JaydenKieran}} 11:17, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Oppose''' - I am not an OSRS editor but I have seen enough of Towelcat on Discord to know that this is not a good idea. As cat mentions, I have previously experienced this when I made a simple request for him to change a nickname because of some trolling that had been going on of a Wikia editor. There had been a discussion amongst the admins about how the trolling could reflect badly on the official wikis and we had agreed that anyone with the trollish nicknames should be PM'd and asked to change them. Cat was the only person who ignored this request and, when pushed to do so, decided to continue changing to more troll nicknames. When I kicked him for ignoring my request he contacted other admins to intervene on his behalf. Perhaps this is not cat's fault - I don't feel like a good example was set by the friends that cat appealed to in this situation - but given that these people are now supporting this RFA I am worried that there's still some still degree of unhealthy influence going on. That makes me question whether cat would be able to show good judgement as an admin. In any case it is concerning for a potential admin not to see the harm in this situation in the first place, and also for them behave in such an immature way rather discuss the request. 

On top of that there's the generally questionable behaviour show towards inexperienced editors/when conflict occurs. Pretty much anyone can up with a decent answer to a question in a RFA, but their actual behaviour means much more. There's been more than enough instances of poor behaviour (including one not one week ago) for it to be foolish for people to suggest that we should just hope for the best and that this will improve. It doesn't make sense to me to make someone an admin before (unless) that improvement is made. There's more to being an admin than just having a use for tools - having someone as an admin who is unprofessional and hostile to others has the potential to be really damaging to the community. {{Signatures/IsobelJ}} 16:32, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

:For anyone curious, this is the entire conversation between Isobel and myself before I was kicked. [https://i.imgur.com/MXQGLlE.png] [https://i.imgur.com/b7Np6ld.png]
::<code>When I kicked him for ignoring my request he contacted other admins to intervene on his behalf.</code>
:FWIW I didn't contact anyone about being kicked, they noticed it on their own. -[[User:Towelcat|Towelcat]] ([[User talk:Towelcat|talk]]) 18:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Support''' - Cat's been an active and helpful member of the osrs wiki community with a few problems in the past which he has acknowledged and worked through already. From the context of being involved in the disagreement that Cook spoke of, which is the one about store, seller, and value parameters in item infoboxes, I can say that I saw that as an attempt at lightening the conversation and I personally cannot fathom how somebody could interpret it as malicious or rude. [[User:Crow653|Crow653]] ([[User talk:Crow653|talk]]) 16:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
:Let's not whitewash that event. If you try looking at it from a neutral perspective (or that of a frustrated guy trying to get a feature he liked), you'll see 3 or 4 people flaming this guy and representing our community really poorly. It was objectively shitty and clearly was interpreted by the guy it was aimed at as malicious and rude. {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 18:31, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
::Sorry, I'm not trying to "whitewash" anything, I've read through it multiple times now and I cannot see him posting the xkcd as rude or malicious from my attempt at reading from a neutral point of view. Perhaps if I was angry or frustrated about it being removed, I could see it as a bit rude, but even then, the user had been extremely rude beforehand, and with the use case being a fairly ridiculous argument for reinstating it, it all being resolved quickly with a simple change, and both Cat and the user amicably speaking by the end of it(not even 10 minutes later), I cannot see it as malicious. [[User:Crow653|Crow653]] ([[User talk:Crow653|talk]]) 19:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
:::After a couple hours had passed, the guy on the other side of this said the following privately:
:::https://i.imgur.com/Sf9LdYP.png
:::To put it bluntly, that's not really my idea of amicable. {{Signatures/Cook Me Plox}} 19:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)


'''Neutral''' - I'm the "random guy" from the Discord situation. I do think things were mean spirited and I was being trolled at points, however I don't believe it was entirely cat's fault. I think cat is a valuable asset to the community, however I don't like his unprofessional conduct, as the conversation I was having was leading me to the impression that this wiki is run by the admins, ignoring concerns of the community (which I've been informed is very much an impression I shouldn't get). However cat was interested in an actual solution, and we did find one (value). I haven't been here long enough to see behavioural patterns of admins on this wiki, so I'm neutral. In terms of technical ability and wiki goals, I'd say cat wants this wiki to be as great as it can be. [[User:Discordian|Discordian]] ([[User talk:Discordian|talk]]) 21:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Final Notice of Intent''' - Due to the divisive nature of this RfA, and the inherent bias involved, both active bureaucrats (myself and Spineweilder) have elected an uninvolved, unbiased administrator (Gaz Lloyd) to close this thread. This thread will close tomorrow. -{{Template:Signatures/Scuzzy Beta}} 08:04, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Oppose''' - On the one hand, I think Cat's answers to my questions demonstrated qualities I would expect to see in any prospective admin. However, some of the concerns raised here suggest there are still areas to be worked on. While I don't expect an admin to be polished from the get go, I think it's worth taking some time to reflect on what's been said and thus I cannot support something that I feel amounts to brushing these issues under the carpet. I think Cat could be a great, extremely capable admin, but perhaps not quite yet. [[User:Cqm|'''cqm''']] <sup>[[User talk:Cqm|'''talk''']]</sup> 09:44, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


'''Oppose''' - Cat works really hard to improve the wiki and shows it with the quality of his editing. He's one of the better things to happen to the wiki in a while, showing perseverence in the dirtier maintenance tasks and in projects to fix our consistency. He obviously has the technical understanding for what the admin tools would provide.

I would like to see Cat be more careful with what could be perceived as hostile interactions. I think his anger is almost always in the right place (at Visual editor, Jagex's inconsistencies, etc.), but does seem occasionally more directed at what may be a well-intentioned user. For everyone familiar with Cat it's pretty obvious when it's harmless memeing, but in last week's Discord event it was hard to see the line between banter and trolling. Discord discussions move fast, but I believe the right move for anyone - admin or otherwise - would have been to slow down and analyze the situation more carefully. This behavior (and the interaction with a subversive friend group) has definitely upset some of the core wiki community and was never really amicably resolved. It isn't fair to our community to overlook this concern.

It's undeniable that admin has more implications beyond just having the tools. Admins are called upon to settle disputes or interpret policies, are approached by new users for questions, and are seen as representatives of the community's culture. Cat's level responses to the questions above give me confidence that his attitude is appropriate for this position, and that his real focus is on improving the wiki. I would like to see him have more caution for how others perceive playful criticism, and to deescalate situations like those we have seen, before I can support the RFA. [[User:Riblet15|Riblet15]] ([[User talk:Riblet15|talk]]) 22:36, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Closed''' - As mentioned above, Scuzzy asked me to close this as an uninvolved administrator. The supporting arguments are strong - Towelcat is proficient and driven and adminship would augment that for the benefit of the wiki. However, the points of opposition are just as strong - the community aspect of adminship is an important part of being an admin, much moreso in recent years with the wikis' large discord server, increased visibility of admins on reddit, and Jagex encouraging community engagement via advertising OSWF (or shoutouts in general); the examples brought up here of poorly handled interactions strengthen the opposition.

Neither side is sufficiently strong to overcome the other, thus there is no consensus for Towelcat to be made an administrator at this time. {{Signatures/Gaz Lloyd}} 14:55, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

[[Category:Closed requests|Towelcat]]