[06:05:13] [1/2] @notaracham Hey, would you be interested in being nominated here [06:05:14] [2/2] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Community_Directors/Elections/2026/Nominations [06:05:27] hey fearless [06:06:28] just sniped [06:06:41] 😭 [06:06:48] ykw I should just do it [06:09:40] wait skye [06:09:43] if you're elected [06:09:50] will you be the first female board member? [06:10:08] looks like it [06:10:21] yooooooooo [06:18:16] Will be sleeping then accepting, thank you for the nom, Skye [06:18:34] my pleasure <3 [06:18:37] sleep well [06:19:05] I should sleep to [06:19:12] but doing some patrollin' first [06:19:24] I feel myself being sucked into the VOID [07:06:04] [1/2] might as well [07:06:05] [2/2] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1225560610628964423/1487347025673457694/DA5B6F7E-9CD9-40F9-B587-41C9BCE77587.png?ex=69c8cf5c&is=69c77ddc&hm=668993f2de6c5e723befa8ad7d7e9935d5685599d54464e9b53755fd3426ec97& [07:06:25] what does that say [07:06:41] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Community_Directors/Elections/2026/Nominations check NA's tab [07:08:12] k [07:09:12] fearless care to comment on [[User:Crystalite13/reviews]] [07:09:28] @Arawynn to if you have the time [07:10:58] You forgot to sign btw [07:11:03] oof [07:11:12] Mwah hah hah hahhhh [07:11:15] thanks [07:11:22] FEEEL THE WRATH OF {{unsigned}} [07:11:49] aw [07:11:50] nevermind [07:12:08] hey petra [07:13:01] meant to ask again about editor on miraheze monthly [07:15:17] had to dig thru like a gazillion diffs to mark something [07:22:45] Should there be a reminder on https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Community_Directors/Elections/2026/Nominations that it's not a vote [07:23:04] There is no requirement for more than 2 people to nominate [07:23:32] So we don't need multiple seconds if it's not actually adding something to the questions or discussion [07:24:01] doesn't it say "Two individuals must nominate a candidate" on the page? [07:24:12] or is that leftover from 2024? [07:24:53] It's Skye's case it's fived not seconded [07:25:13] Yes two individuals is said but I think we might need it a bit clearer [07:25:53] They did reach out to me about sending me a draft, so I'm reasonably confident of getting something by the end of the month. [07:26:10] ok nice [16:03:55] The 1m character limit is configurable I think [16:12:34] yeah I think it is but I didn't add any configuration to managewiki [16:26:15] @_arawynn silly ping [16:27:32] <_arawynn> oh sorry, didn'T see that ping [16:27:55] No worries im not good at doing it on IRC [17:16:07] <_arawynn, replying to crystalite13> [1/3] I took a look at them and they're all solid decisions. [17:16:08] <_arawynn, replying to crystalite13> [2/3] With the last one, it's perfectly fine to ask for a second opinion, though I'd decide different from you [17:16:08] <_arawynn, replying to crystalite13> [3/3] Also I noticed that I got very used to the tools Wiki Reviewers have^^I'm not sure if you can see the comments added when the 'forking'-checkbox is checked? [17:49:31] huh [17:52:12] although it is a board decision, is this banned :hm: [17:55:51] <_arawynn, replying to crystalite13> what's the huh about? Why I'd do the last review differently or about the Wiki Reviewer tools/the comments to the check box? [17:59:10] no i dont think i realized that people could...edit the check boxes [17:59:16] my fault! [18:01:41] maybe this could be a thing but prob not during an ongoing election [18:02:12] <_arawynn> For one they can, but as Wiki Reviewer you can also see when they added a comment to the box. For example when people check the "forking" box, they often provide a link to the (usually Fandom)-Wiki they fork from [18:05:21] i see [18:16:08] Btw Crystalite, you may add Bucket extension on our Miraheze monthly March :nomChocoStrawberry: [18:16:26] [1/2] Pulled up a random request to check, looks like we can't see those as community members. [18:16:26] [2/2] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1225560610628964423/1487515727627030598/Screenshot_20260328-181527.png?ex=69c96c7a&is=69c81afa&hm=97f4795017aa134a211b274d3df187d7d486c08a785f2587e90179a356be407d& [18:17:10] can you link [18:18:02] [1/2] I just picked a random in-review request, but here. [18:18:02] [2/2] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:RequestWikiQueue/76804#mw-section-details [18:18:48] <_arawynn> ah then the comments comes from the reviewer tool [18:19:29] Makes sense, to be fair. [18:19:50] Especially with the NSFW one, I'm glad we can't just see that box by accident. [18:30:55] It would be technically out of scope and eligible for closure, per https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Requests_for_Comment_Policy it's better suited to a request for feedback on community portal, as it's both single issue and advisory only [18:41:29] [1/3] Alright, opened one [18:41:30] [2/3] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Community_portal#Requesting_the_Board_for_more_Community_Director_seats [18:41:30] [3/3] hopefully the request is fine [18:47:40] oh yeah that's a good idea [18:52:15] done [18:52:51] [[MHM]] [18:52:52]

[19:24:16] I've left my comment. Sorry for the essay, I was trying to summarise my argument without losing the reasoning. [19:41:43] Thanks for your comments, Sakura. [19:41:59] [1/2] Yeah I saw it, that is fair [19:41:59] [2/2] But I don't like seeing old faces forever, even though they do their jobs really, really well, I want to let someone new become a director and see what they do to improve Miraheze, while still letting current directors stay as-is as they have a massive amount of contribution to Miraheze wholely. [19:42:19] I wonder..were you about to say the same thing? [19:43:36] Again - your statements were valid, but I would like to open up a chance for new people to come up and serve for once [19:44:04] you are speaking like you are certain I won't be elected [19:44:50] I mean...the other 2 candidates are strong as well, so it's difficult to see [19:45:30] [1/2] The thing is that your reasoning makes sense, I'm just concerned that we might lose the ability to reject candidates if we have an increase in places without a corresponding increase in candidates. [19:45:30] [2/2] It's a question of preference regarding which is prioritised, and I'd rather have the chance of no new CDs than the chance of a CD that isn't supported by community consensus but due to a shortage of candidates can't be voted down. [19:45:46] I think the RfF is valid to consider, but I find myself closer to Sakura's view - I don't think we should be chasing expansion solely for the sake of new faces/because there's multiple good candidates out there. [19:46:45] That said, I don't much care for forever-incumbents preventing new folks coming on, so I'd like to put some thought into what we do over time, e.g. shift CDs to appointed to free up new seats, though I'd want that to be done in a way that respects community will [19:46:51] Fair enough then, if you guys would want me to do so I can withdraw the request [19:47:07] Need to put some thought into what that'd look like, but not a today problem. [19:47:32] It's probably next year's problems yeah? [19:48:02] Moreso a non-election-period problem, I'd assume. [19:48:13] Yeah, more what I'm getting at/ [19:49:11] having incumbents for both seats also inherently puts a damper on possible new entrants, so that's a bit of another conundrum [19:49:51] Though...I wonder @raidarr why won't you rerun for director again next year [19:50:16] He's expressed it a few times, but at least at present, his time is being stretched too many directions. [19:50:47] And he needs to put it in fewer places to have the most impact. [19:50:59] I see, though personally it sometines feel like he is more available then some stewards sometimes [19:51:56] That's just the way with volunteer work. [19:52:05] Not everyone can be around all of the time. [19:52:31] @posix_memalign @crystalite13 I wonder have you guys placed the cd elections notice in the m of thw m? [19:52:41] And timezones exist [19:53:01] Also that, definitely. [19:57:15] [1/2] I wonder...why does Miraheze believe community consesus is important enough to be a core part of itself [19:57:15] [2/2] Can't things can be done with discretion if reasonable? [19:58:57] Wouldn't making an rfc and waiting for 5 days take a bit when someone is competent enough and has no issues while they could just be immediately appointed without having to make an rfc [19:59:33] Also not accounting the time it takes for someone to get the roles [20:02:07] Can and should are two different things. Taking unilateral action and/or bypassing requirements for certain things reduces community trust. [20:03:00] Anyway, I need to get back to my day [20:04:53] The question then becomes who thinks it's reasonable. Community consensus ensures that the majority of active users think it is. [20:05:42] We have done unpopular things. We will do unpopular things again. But provided we listen and change course when there's a clear chorus telling us it's a bad idea, we continue to be entrusted with guiding things. [20:06:33] (this goes for most community-elected roles, not just board) [20:07:04] Nope. I just added a placeholder for it. This is important enough to be a headline I think. [20:09:58] Might be worth a site notice on meta as well [20:13:57] do Translators have a role here [20:14:08] nope [20:14:59] interesting [20:21:54] I think the best way to do this is to consider what team you think would bring the most to the board [20:22:33] Having known some of the nominees for quite a while, I have my initial thoughts already on which 2 id be voting for [20:38:55] I have no clue who I'd be voting for tbh, I don't know if I'm eventually just gonna go "yeah that sounds about right" or if there'll be any reasoning [20:40:06] this would be an actual vote instead of a RfP style thing [20:40:07] Fun part is it's not mutually exclusive, one could vote for all three if they wanted to [20:40:47] You absolutely can [20:41:22] Although I'd consider who you want to get the seats and only vote 2 if you are bothered about it [20:41:32] And would prefer someone over another [20:47:37] [1/3] for a time I was 'the' active steward in the periods I was most available, mostly back when I was pretty much the only active one. It became more on and off into 2025 at which point I got into some deeper projects in other circles and those came to chew out what were once miraheze binges. That, some burnout, life being an ass kick intermittently h [20:47:38] [2/3] as put me firmly into semi retired state, because my activity pattern matches the steward who was 'the' active steward before my time; doug, who would come in for intermittent bursts, but lacked the time to hold things over any prolonged period. That's more or less NA among stewards now which is not ideal, but it is traditional. The other doug att [20:47:38] [3/3] ribute was those bursts would get shorter over spans of time which I feel holds in my case relatively well. It is a common volunteer lifecycle