Warriors Wiki:Charart/Membership Nominations

This is where PCA members can be nominated for different spots on the project.

= Senior Warrior =

=Rules=
 * A user cannot nominate oneself.
 * The majority of the project must agree
 * Nomination must be up for at least two weeks.
 * User must accept the nomination.
 * A valid reason must be provided, whether voting for or against.

Successful Nominations

Unsuccessful Nominations

Requirements

 * User must have been a member for at least 4 months.
 * User must have at least six images of their own approved.
 * User must be able to give good, constructive criticism.

Atelda - Nomination ends January 14
Supporting: 22:20, January 2, 2012 (UTC) Against:
 * 1) Since it's now January, and I specifically remember us agreeing to re-open senior warrior nominations on New Years, and since we've lost a couple of senior warriors and a couple are inactive at the moment as well... it's a long time coming. Atelda should have been a senior warrior long ago. She has many, many chararts, all of which I can find no fault with (which is saying something considering how picky I can be). She gives excellent critiques. She is fair-minded and modest. She thinks he does nothing in the project, but each day I see her here helping out. She's a quiet, solid member of this project, an anvil sitting in a turbulent sea and refusing to get caught up in petty arguments. It is to Atelda that I personally go for opinions when I want to propose something for the project, because I trust her judgement very, very much. She's a user that will make an excellent senior warrior, and anyone that thinks otherwise is full of hot air.  05:01, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) I agree with what's been said above. 'teldy, you deserve this.  05:03, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Just because I 'hate' you, doesn't mean I won't vote for what you deserve. <3 Sky  Lather. Rinse. Obey. 05:05, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Shelly took the words right outta my mouth. There's honestly nothing more to say other than, I agree. 05:06, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) I think Atelda deserves it.
 * 6) Atelda should have been made a Senior Warrior a long time ago. Look at how many beautiful chararts she has done, she deserves this! 05:10, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) I agree with everyone here Altelda deserves it and everyone ( 1-6) is right Altelda has worked hard to earn this Autunmleaf 05:14, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) I agree with this. She does amazing chararts like Shelly said (which is good 'cause Shelly and I can bump heads a lot!). She is active, and again, like Shelly said, most of the SW's are inactive or we have lost them. So, Rainy, the new warrior, approves of this message! :) 06:42, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 9) I agree with all those above. She completely deserves this. Besides, better to have too many senior warriors than not enough, eh? Breeze  whisker  15:41, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 10) Atelda deserves this very much. Her chararts are amazing an she is a very nice user. She will make a wonderful SW. 15:55, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 11) I agree with everything that has been stated. 'Teldy is very active, her chararts are amazing, and she is nice when it comes to critiquing others. If anyone deserves to become a SW it's Atelda. Best of luck, 15:59, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 12) Agreeing with everything above. 'Teldy is active and talented. She'd make a very good SW, and she has my full support. 18:40, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 13) I agree with everything stated above. 'Teldy she's active, great at chararts, and, overall, will do a great job as a SW here in PCA. <3 21:48, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 14) Agreeing with everything stated above, Atelda would be a wonderful SW here. =D 22:04, January 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * 15) I also agree, truly, there's nothing else to say. She deserves it, and that's that. :D 22:17 Mon Jan 2
 * 16) Yes. I agree with everything that Shellheart said.  ~Regifloat222  Riverstar, Leader of the Thunder Snipes!
 * 1) Go for it, Atelda. Everything's already been said. 00:34, January 3, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Agree! Atelda makes amazing art. -- 08:53, January 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) of course! 09:20, January 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) I wish you this Atelda! 18:39, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) I dunno if the vote's still going on. -- 21:07, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Comments:

We never agree to reopen nominations in january. I specifically remember say we'll discuss it again in january, and see if we should reopen them. This nomination should be postponded due to a misunderstanding, becuse i still believe we should keep them closed for longer. 05:20, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I recall that in the IRC we agreed they'd re-open in January. Frankly, I see no reason not to since our number of senior warriors has thinned. 05:21, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

No we agreed we'd discuss it in january. I remember becuase I wanted to push them back as far as possible. The fact is going and reopening them on your own isnt the way to do it, but i get it if its a misunderstanding. The project still has way to many leads, and we still need agreement. I do think Atelda would be a great SW, so please dont take it personally, but the project has to many SWs. 05:24, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

The project has grown. The number of senior warriors needs to reflect that. I may have misunderstood, but I say this nomination stays. We lost Rainwhisper, Cloudy and Icestorm are currently inactive. We need another SW. 05:27, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Then say it the right way, open a forum or arrange a lead meeting. Just reopening ther nominations and saying youre right isnt the way to do it. 05:28, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not just reopening and declaring that I'm right. It was my understanding that we'd agreed to reopen the nominationsi January. And it's not like we opened a forum and properly did it when the nominations were closed. We just discussed it on the IRC and declared it. 05:31, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

In fact, here's the announcement you made:

"The other leads and i agree that it would be best if we close the SW nominations until New Years, possibly longer, but we'll cross that bridge when it comes. So everyone be aware that no senior warrior nominations will be accepted until they are reopened. The warrior nominations will go on as they have."

Emphesis on "until New Years". 05:35, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

And another thing. These "lead meetings" either need to either become "project meetings" allowing and inviting the entire project through the news section or they need to stop being a place where things are just decided without the consent of the project. It isn't right, and it isn't how Wikiocracy works. 05:43, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

As much as I want Atelda to be a SW, Icy's right, we said we'd ''discuss' in January, not just open them back up. So this will have to be declined, right? :/ ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕   ☆StarClan be with you★  08:17, January 2, 2012 (UTC)''

Even though I'm not a SW myself, I do remember Ice saying all the SW would discuss it. 13:07, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Again, I quote Iceheart: "The other leads and i agree that it would be best if we close the SW nominations until New Years, possibly longer". Possibly longer indicates that the only thing that could possibly have been discuss would have been extending the closed period. And, as I've already said, we closed them without the consent of a majority of the project, which was wrong of us. I say this nomination stays and that nominations stay open. If the project thinks we have too many SWs and decide to reject a nomination based on that, then that's what will happen, but I've seen no one vote against Atelda, and no one could do so based on that as we've lost a senior warrior since nominations closed and because two of our senior warriors are inactive for an unspecified period of time. You guys have all stated that Atelda deserves this, and there is no reason to end this vote. 14:32, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Atelda deserves to be a senior warrior and that's what matters and what we're voting on on this post. Your lack of communication should not effect that. I'm probably stepping way out of my bounds, but you guys really should fix this (from what I've seen so far in this couple of months I've been here, lack of communication is the main problem in this project, not incompetent apprentices) somewhere else besides Atelda's nomination. Which she deserves. And that's what matters. Breeze whisker  15:41, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Okay so let me get this straght. You decided to re-open them without the consent of a majority of the project, or any discussion what so ever. Mkay good to know, thats cool. I never sadi we were going to close the nomination, i just wish you would have at least tried to consult with someone else before deciding to re-open them, and stop making me look like the bad guy because i called you out on not following "Wikiocracy". 00:18, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

=_= I'm not making you out to be a "big, bad ugly." I opened them because I was under the impression that that had been the agreement. And you know what? You closed them without consent of the majority of the project. If you want to suspend this nomination pending a vote to re-open nominations, I'm fine with it, but it seems that they never should have been closed in the first place. 00:22, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly? I'm tired of the fighting. Best of luck to you Atelda. 00:27, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

This was clearly just a simple misunderstanding. Seeing respected members of a project fight over something as insignificant as one misreading what another said is not a good thing. I think you both owe each other an apology, so show that you're above letting petty bickering govern the project instead of good sense. As for the whole "Lead Meetings" deciding everything, I do agree that a select minority shouldn't be governing your project. The upper echelon should be serving the majority, not themselves. I think suspending this nomination (and then resuming it if they're reopened, later) is the best course of action. 00:36, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

So what's the final decision exactly? I personally think that this nomination should go through, then we should close them till discussed more outside of this nomination. Atelda truly does deserve this, and I see no problem with having one more SW. If the number of SW is that big of a problem, me and Shelly never really should have gone through. But we did, so why not Atelda? So I think this should go through, but this should be discussed as a whole project, on the talk page, and close these down till that's done. ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕  ☆StarClan be with you★  05:10, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Look. We are a project, a community. We have a goal, and PCA can accomplish this goal without having "ranks." We shouldn't be arguing over "how many in this rank, what rank, that one doesn't deserve that rank," and so on. Breezewhisker is right, this project may have accomplished a lot, but we have lack of communication, a weak community. I suggest we start working on forming a good community, it's important. Atelda deserves this, that is why we have SWs, users who have plenty experience and more! Who cares about how many we have? One more won't hurt. Let's start working on forming a good community, where we don't bend rules or argue over silly things. Just wanted to point out what I think. 00:37, January 5, 2012 (UTC)