User talk:Typepage

Re:Question
Well alright then, my fears are allayed and I apologize for my paranoia. In explanation, while there was nothing at all wrong with what you did in itself, making proposals for some type of mass desysopping is a favorite thing for returning blocked people to do. So on the off chance that you were one I wanted to send a message that while coming back after a block with a new account is one thing, using that account to campaign for desysops is another entirely. I tried to word it non-offensively, but apparently I failed. Please don't let this turn you off from editing. --tjstrf talk 17:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This may surprise you, but Wikipedia is not actually a democracy. The reasoning is that since we avoid binding decisions as much as possible (we are a wiki, and just like anyone can edit anything in an article anyone can change anything in a policy if they have consensus) running majority votes is counter-productive and stifles what we really want our decisions to be based in: reasoned discussion. (See also:Polling is not a substitute for discussion) Though it operates similarly to a democracy a lot of the time, this is simply because our editors hail from America and other democratic states and are used to using democratic decision-making systems. --tjstrf talk 19:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * To a certain extent you're right, since Requests for adminship in practice requires you earn a 75-80% supermajority of supports in order to pass. But even then people will sometimes be passed with less if the bureaucrat closing the request believes that the opposes were frivolous. (Bureaucrats are basically superadmins who can make other members into admins, and change people's names, and probably a couple of other things.) --tjstrf talk 20:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)