User:Useight/RFA Subjects/Thank spam

Cecropia's late nomination (Archive 17)

I want to thank each and every one of those who voted for me for my nomination for admin. I additionally want to thank those who took the trouble to read through all the material presented to determine whether or not I was fit for admin; and I have to say a special word for those who perceive my political beliefs to be different from theirs, but voted for my anyway because they thought I would be a good admin. This is what civilized discourse and reason are all about. And of course, I appreciate and am flattered by the kind remarks and evaluations many posted.

I also thank those who felt I wasn't qualified where their opposition came from a belief that I didn't have the qualifications at this time to be promoted.

For the very few who voted against me for on a political basis, especially if they thought that they would somehow be defeating my ideas by defeating me, please understand this: The world is bigger than you and me and Wikipedia. As I understand it, this is to be an encyclopedia. I find it an incredibly wonderful concept, which I elaborate on a bit more on my User Page. But you need to know that even a committed ideologue, who might be looking for factual material here, knows bias when they see it. If an article contains bias, and all the bias in an article is on one side, the entire credibility of the project is tainted. So, if you succeed in getting "the last word" in an article; if you succeed in driving off those with other views; you will have won a hollow victory, because the result will look too much like Rush Limbaugh, or Michael Moore, or the official press of a controlled state; so when you win, you lose.

Lastly, thanks to Ed Poor for bringing this all down to earth. Cecropia 03:06, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I apologize for adding an emendation to an already long post, but I wanted to mention this. I thought a number of times of simply withdrawing over the extra week and a half of this process—really, the mighty revert button didn't seem worth what appeared to be character attacks; but on reflection, I decided that if others could spend so much time reading all the material and even exploring my writings, the least I could do was see it through to a conclusion, no matter what it might be. Cheers! Cecropia 03:17, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Cecropia, we did not oppose because of your political views but because of your misbehaviour, shown by a specific example. I however have to admit that when doing this I had not really informed myself enough about what adminship means and to whom it should be granted. And while we continue to sicken each other - at least I guess I also sicken you sometimes - I point out that the only thing close to misbehaviour I have seen from you since was quickly dealt with. Our latest abuses consist of chatting on talk pages, which can also be done without admin rights... Get-back-world-respect 20:42, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Except when there's a full moon... -- Cecropia 14:19, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

---

It's a shame how these polls almost always degenerate into popularity contests. -- Dissident 18:38, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. Even when candidates I support have been turned down, I would say that the majority of the votes on both sides were basing their votes on valid concerns. Granted, sometimes I disagreed, but I always recognized that the concerns had a basis in something real. I think on some occasions popular users get overwhelming support because they're popular, but I have never seen that effect allow the promotion of an unqualified administrator. Jwrosenzweig 18:55, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

My support or opposition is never based on whether I like someone. It is based on their time of service and their behavior. I have supported people I do not like and opposed people I like. Kingturtle 22:37, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I believe the official term for that phenomenon is "transition to WikiDemocracy". anthony (see warning) 21:02, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hey (Archive 25)

I was looking for a way of saying this without having to create a topic here, but I can't think of many different ways of doing that. Anyway, I just want to thank all of you who supported me with my nomination. Really, I appreciate it.

That's all. May you have a Merry Christmas. =]

--Kaonashi/Mackeriv 23:24, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank yous (Archive 34)

I'm all for thanking people when appropriate, but could we please let go of the (reasonably new) tradition of putting a standardised thankyou note on the talk page of everyone who supported your adminship when it is successful? I think we can safely assume you're grateful for your support, and I'm sure there's better things those people can do with their new responsibilities than post messages one lots of talk pages. If people really want to do that, could we perhaps have a "closing statement" section on the RfA template or something? --fvw* 19:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I never bothered to thank anyone, but I am just lazy and unsocial (thanks everyone by the way). I always wonder if the people who get ~80 supports actually thank each one - they must be damn grateful! Martin 19:26, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I've gotten some very nice and personal thank you notes - I thought those were nice.  BD2412 ^talk 19:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

It's how I find out about new admins—my watchlist lights up with all the thank-you notes posted to user pages.

Seriously, put a heartfelt note on your own user page. If you have questions or specific replies to voters' comments, messages, or questions, go ahead and deal with those. There's no need to fire off a fifty or a hundred duplicate messages, though. Once you're an admin, you can stop inflating your edit count. :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

When I thanking people for their involvement in my RfA, I tried to at least personalise each one and copy/pasted nothing. I figure if they took time out of their day to vote (either way) on my RfA, the least I could do was send them along a little gratitude. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:48, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Personally, I think thank yous are a nice touch, even if they're substantially the same. (I still appreciate Christmas cards, even if they were part of a box of 20). Support. ;) · Katefan0^(scribble) 20:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with voldy, I'm up for adminship myself at the moment, and whether I am promoted or not, I intend to thank every voter personally, not using a cut and paste message. As he said, they took the time out of their day to vote on my nom, I can surely take a few minutes to let them know I appreciate it. -Greg Asche (talk) 20:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I thanked every voter (the fact that they all supported is by the by) using a default message but added a sentence or statement or two to the start or finish of each note. No two were the same. It took twice as long hbut I think worth it. --Celestianpower ^hablamé 20:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Kate (or I would, if I got Christmas cards). Much nicer to have your screen light up with orange to let you know that there's a polite thank you, rather than an anon angrily accusing you of admin abuse, or someone telling you that the picture you uploaded three years ago will be deleted unless you supply copyright information. Guettarda 21:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong, it's not like they're forced to. I don't undesrtand, how are we going to enforce the ban on thanking people? WIll be block those who thank???? -- (drini's page|☎) 02:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for all the pufferfish

(Edit conflict) I totally agree with Fvw. There is something about thanking people for supporting that's a little off, IMO. It's too much like implying the person supported to please me, and against their own better judgement as to what kind of admin I'd make. I do realize that's not what people mean, but still. In my own case, I wrote a general note saying I was overwhelmed and grateful for getting such nice, friendly comments on my RfA (i. e., not for being supported). I was, too, the whole thing was just heartwarming--I was awarded a commemorative toaster by JRM, and valued myself so on it that TenOfAllTrades then awarded me the Pufferfish for Most Conceited New Admin. Anyway, I put this note prominently on my own talkpage, not on anybody else's. I reckoned if people wondered what was holding up their thank-you note, they'd come to my Talk to see if I died, and see the message in its pretty pink box. That was appropriate, I thought, though I've always wondered how many people, if any, did see that message of mine. Bishonen | talk 19:48, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

• Denelson83 thanked me for voting, even though I opposed. I thought that was pretty classy, and would have done the same thing. android79 19:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I didn't thank anyone who voted for me, on the basis that they didn't do it for me, they did it for Wikipedia; and the best thanks will be to repay their faith and be a good admin. I like Bishonen's approach though. Rd232 20:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I did thank people and would do it again, but with so many new admins being promoted, maybe we should save the disk space and add the "Closing Statement" section... --Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 21:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I guess I would be for that, and that wouldn't necessarily stop you from continuing to thank close WikiFriends, or the like. I suggest we add it to the template. Any objections? --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 21:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose I object. Then, on one hand, it looks like we expect people to say thank you (for "no big deal") and on the other, it discourages thank yous which have, on occassion, led to productive conversations - or at least amusing back-and-forths. Guettarda 21:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... you may be right. Is there some way we could inform nominees that they could add something like that at their own desire, but not make it standard? And it wouldn't necessarily have to be a "thank you" section. It could be a "I won't mess up" or a "I shoulda got this" section. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 21:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't feel super strongly about this, but I do think a template suggesting that people not thank people individually is a little counterintuitive, considering that Wikipedia flourishes best when lines of communication are open. Should we be encouraging less communication? I realize this is sort of an absurdist discussion, but I just don't see the harm. · Katefan0^(scribble) 22:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

(Unindent) I would feel the same either way. We shouldn't "discourage" it per se, but I know I would've used that place to send a general thank you instead of going into 22 different pages. I like the intimate feeling, but maybe we could save some time and bandwidth this way. --Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 22:05, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

And I had such a nice acceptance speach lined up too — purely Paltrow-esque it was! --Gareth Hughes 22:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Or, you know, people can do as they please. There are contexts in which enouraging and discouraging particular actions makes sense—this doesn't seem to be one of them. Marskell 00:20, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

When my RfA passed, I had 49 supports, and I gave every person a customized thank you note based on how well I knew 'em. I believe Splash and NicholasTurnbull have done likewise with the customized thank you's. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

What would Emily Post say? I didn't feel obligated to thank anyone for their support in my recent promotion. However, I felt a desire to acknowledge those people who voted (support, oppose and neutral). I've not communicated with many of these individuals directly before and sending any sort of message (thanks, hello, howdy) to them definitely opens a line of communication that did not yet exist. I have even received a nice comments back further clarifying their neutral/oppose vote--which made me feel better. Also, these folks often go through a great deal of effort to research a candidate prior to voting--thank them for taking the time to do that instead. Is it necessary to thank someone for voting? I don't think so. Is it polite? Probably. Does it foster the idea of community, communication and comradery? Of course!! >: Roby Wayne ^{Talk • Hist • E@} 02:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I have to admit I like the trend of leaving thank-yous: gives an excuse to leave a personal note in reply for people I may not otherwise run into much, particularly if I have seen them enough to have an opinion on a nomination. I see it more as "thank you for taking the time to look over my contribution history, and for considering me suitable for the position"; the more gracious nominees I've seen have also thanked those who opposed for expressing their opinion and addressed the reason for the opposition. (If you're an RfA regular who doesn't want to be thanked, perhaps a note on your talk page to that effect would be useful.) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:25, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Now, this would be instruction creep gone mad. Some do it, some don't; what's the problem? Filiocht | The kettle's on 07:14, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I enjoy receiving thank yous and given them. I think I've made a few friends that way. I personally thanked everyone who voted on my RFA, not because I felt I should, or that I thought they expected me to, but because I wanted to. I hope people I thanked appreciated it, however reading the above, I now realize that perhaps some of you didn't :( Perhaps I should send personalized apologies to everyone I thanked? In general I think we should encourage thank yous not discourage them. But they should be completely voluntary. The less voluntary the less valuable. So I don't think a "closing statement" section would be a good idea. But I do think we should ban congratulations those just get in the way (just kidding ;-) Paul August ☎ 03:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Naive new admin: I didn't thank anybody personally for voting for me ... Am I gonna get deadminned now ... ? (I should have at least thanked the bureaucrat who promoted me I guess... ) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:10, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Administrative thank-yous (Archive 50)

What's up with all the people using templates to thank people who voted in their RFAs? I realize that votes run in the hundreds these days and it is difficult to thank people individually they way many did back when I ran. Not that it's necessary to thank your voters anyway—presumably they voted for you because they thought you were a good candidate, not because they wanted to do you a favor. But why does everyone use these colored boxes with pictures? And what I especially don't understand is why people feel it necessary to write that their bid passed with a vote of 84/0/1 or whatever. What possible reason is there to list one's final tally on all of the voters' talk pages, except to display one's impressive showing? Doesn't anyone else think it's a bit tacky to do this? — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree it's unnecessary to thank everyone who voted for you. It wouldn't hurt to thank your nominator, but I didn't even do that when I became an admin.-gadfium 06:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree here also. Fine to thank someone if there was some particular reason for a personal thank you on an RfA or RfB, but the impersonal form-letter thank you's to everyone that voted in your Rf* are not necessary. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 06:58, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

While thanking contributors to a RfA discussion is good ettiquette, I personally cannot stand those kinds of thank you's. They are ugly clunky and unnecessary. I have personally de-html-ified any such message I get. In my view, a simple (text) "thank you" will suffice - no pictures, no boxes, and FFS, NO HTML. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

For the past month or so, most of my talk page messages have been RfA thank-yous. My current talk page only consists of them. I appreciate the effort, and approve of their gratitude, but still I feel they clutter up my talk page and make me archive it faster. If recently created admins slowed down in thanking everyone who voted for them, I wouldn't particularly mind. JIP | Talk 07:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I promise not to post any thank you's if I'm ever made an admin. (^_-) --日本穣 Nihonjoe 07:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

JIP, your talk page is hilarious! Back when I became an administrator, only 20 or 30 people voted for me, so it was quite feasible to write individualized comments to each voter. Not everyone was doing it back then, but I wanted to. I think it was because I felt much closer to everyone then; the community was smaller and I was more familiar with the prolific editors. I felt everyone was happy I made it, sort of like a JV athlete who has just made it onto the varsity team, and I wanted to share it with everyone. I do think that thanking your voters is nice, but when it gets into the 80s and such it becomes quite difficult. If I somehow managed to get that much support, I suppose I might leave individual messages for those I felt close to, or who had left substantial comments or support, and so on. I definitely would not use an HTML box, and I definitely wouldn't list my final tally. And if it must be a copy-and-paste message, at least substitute the {{PAGENAME}}. I have things messages like "Thank you Knowledge Seeker/Archive7 for voting in my RFA" and such. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Some of them are rather funny. I particularly like User:Samuel Blanning's one: an example is here.-gadfium 08:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that one's "wish I'd thought of that" great. I'm so intimidated by the thank yous thing that I still haven't written any weeks later. — Laura Scudder ☎ 16:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I've been building a separate archive at User talk:Hiding/Archive RFA. One can see the progression. I remember writing individual notes to all voters of my rfa. Time consuming, but it just felt honest. People took the time to post their individual thoughts on me, I thought it best to return the favour. Hiding talk 09:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I have been collecting mine since I got my very first thank you: User talk:Lar/RFA 1. User User:NoSeptember is also collecting them at User:NoSeptember/RfA_thank_yous, but trying to get them all, not just the ones he received, in support of an administrative information page User:NoSeptember/Admin_user_pages... OK, so there are some people here who don't like getting thank yous? And some (like me) who appreciate them? One more thing to try to remember! Maybe we need a list somewhere of people who don't want to be thanked so new admins can avoid offending them?? (that suggestion is only about 23% serious...) Yeesh. ++Lar: t/c 11:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Some people actually put 'please do not thank me for RFA votes' at the top of their talk pages. Until just recently the 'guide' said, "It is customary to thank all users that voted for you on their talk pages." That has now been extended to include, "...however this is not required, and some users do not welcome such messages." The disclaimer may help, but the 'custom' of sending these out has been established enough that it seems somewhat rude not to. If nothing else to let people know how it turned out so they don't have to track down the nom in the archives if they wanted to know. That said, it does get more difficult to personalize these as the Wiki-population increases and the vote counts go up. It took me all day with just minimal personalization (and none on the pages of people I don't know well / didn't have a response to their RFA comments). I pity CSCWEM if he decides he needs to send these out. :] --CBDunkerson 11:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The more determined people will always find a way; I can't recall who was sending them out, but I saw an edit summary like "RFA thank you (using AWB)" recently ;-) Kirill Lokshin 11:58, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I sent out fairly personalised text thank-yous (it did bump up my edit count a little bit, not that I suffer from edit-countitis or anything), and don't mind getting RfA thank-yous, although I much prefer normal text to all those pastel boxes. In response, I usually send out a congrats to the new admin. I wish mine was as funny as Sam Blanning's. I didn't know it was actually stated in the RfA page that it's customary to thank people: I just thought it was courtesy. Gosh-darn it, it took a while, though! --Deathphoenix ʕ 12:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

If mine goes through, there's no way in hell I can be bothered spamming 110+ user pages with thanks messages. Unless someone wants to make an RFA-thank-o-bot... anyone? Of course, that would make them even more impersonal than they already seem. I think I'll put a section on my talk page, and ask people to put their names there if they want to thank me for voting on their RFA. Proto||type 16:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I see people using AWB for thank yous en masse more and more, so there's always that... --W.marsh 17:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh gosh, that's unnecessary. I only had around 60 votes, so it wasn't so bad (though it still took me a while to thank them). But even if it's courteous to thank people, I will hardly be insulted if people don't thank me for voting for them on an RfA, and I would never opt-in to a list saying that I want to be thanked for voting for their RfAs (which, I suppose, is the whole point). --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Even though I don't need thank yous, I'm not offended by them as Lar suggests might be the case for some people. However, I do have one request for people sending out thank yous: please don't use "My RfA" as the section title; at least put your user name in the section title so that the many thank yous don't end up conflicting on the section anchors, and can be discerned in the TOC. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 17:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

How do they even get the notes out when they have 190 votes? Do they use AWB? — Ilyanep (Talk) 21:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I sent out thank yous because it still seems to be the done thing, and in my case I did have a genuine reason to be grateful as I was promoted with a shorter tenure than average and good faith was definitely extended to me. I put a list of all my voters into my sandbox and sent the messages using AWB. I don't mind receiving "thank yous" as it helps me keep track of who has been promoted and adds a splash of colour to my talk page. That said, I don't feel very strongly about it either way and if the community leant towards it being "a bad thing" that's fine by me. --kingboyk 15:46, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

• Voting should be costly

• Everyone who vote more than 10 times for other admins should start "paying" for it.

• His vote should only count as 1/(#of votes per year he makes -10)

• For his own adminship he should require 80% from the number of total votes when votes from those he voted for only count as 1/3 vote.

Zeq 14:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

What would this accomplish? JoshuaZ 15:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Administrative thank-yous - again (Archive 51)

This issue has been archived - IMO to early.

Voting for someones' RfA is not a personal favour, thus thanking, whether by template or else, is awkward. But I've the impression that a lot of votes are reciprocal, i.e. returns for votes given. I often feel that RfAs are prepared by spending a lot of time on the RfA page, voting at random, merely hoping to reap the harvest. "If you want a hand with anything, please gimme a shout". That's how many "thank-you" templates are worded, and it smacks of corruption of the voting process. I feel it leads to bad decisions. Though at the moment only a funny nuisance, thanking for votes should be strongly discouraged. Maybe reciprocal votes should be devalued. --tickle me 03:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

It would be hard to implement something like that. Participation in RfA has long been something that potential Admin nominees have engaged in, even well before this whole thanking trend started going on. I think it just comes with the system. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I think maybe candidates better warn in advance that they will thank people!!! (except those they know don't want it...) OK, not necessarily. I think thanking is just the polite and thoughtful thing to do. While technically not necessary it's just nice, and it adds some color. I particularly appreciate clever or pretty thank yous, and especially thank yous that go to all commentors, even those that were neutral or oppose, because to me that's showing the candidate wanted the feedback, good and bad. I have never expected any quid-pro-quo for supporting a candidate, although I can't speak for anyone else. I participate in RfA because it's important to the project, not because I want to be an Admin someday in the future (I've moved from probably don't to probably do but that's not relevant). Note: Admitted bias: I collect all the ones I've gotten here. ++Lar: t/c 14:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm of two minds. On the one hand I appreciate all forms of politeness; good manners never go out of style. On the other hand I feel it's inappropriate to take individual notice of a vote. Again, my opinion of an editor improves when I see him thank me for my oppose comment. Yet again, I don't vote as a gift to the nominee; I vote in the interest of the project -- as I see it. I wish thank-yous would come unembellished by cute graphics and clever formatting. I'd prefer to keep the deck clear for action. Another side to the issue of these bread-and-butter notes is: How am I to reply? I reply on my own talk to comments made there; I think it's safe and sane. But I doubt if these instant celebs are checking back on my talk. Should I crank out a cute, clever congrats template to slap on all successful nominees' talk?

Given all the potential headaches of adminship, perhaps the unsuccessful nominees are the ones who should be congratulated -- but that might be taken the wrong way. I'm only certain of one thing: I don't want to see any comment on my talk from a nominee before closing time. John Reid 23:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

RFA Thank yous (Archive 54)

Can we develop a guideline about RfA thank you notes? As it is now, they take up extra time, don't say anything substantial and often use unessary pictures which put further drain on the servers. I'd prefer them to end but would settle for now for consensus that they shouldn't have any pictures in them. JoshuaZ 17:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

What would the point of this m:instruction creep be? I don't particularly care for them, but I don't exactly hate them. If you feel so strongly, just stick a "No RfA thank yous please" sign on your talk page. Johnleemk | Talk 17:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The main concern is the pictures. Use of pictures when we don't need to is a major uncessary drain on servers. JoshuaZ 17:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have anything from a dev to back you up on this? The last time I recall any dev making a statement on image use, brion said we needn't be tightening our belts WRT images. Johnleemk | Talk 17:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Did Brion say that? I'd be highly interested in seeing where he said that. JoshuaZ 17:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I think he said it at the pump, although I'm not really confident about it. Anyway, wouldn't the easiest and best solution be to ask him whether they are a problem now? Johnleemk | Talk 18:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of what brion said it won't make much of a difference considering how many other templates with images are used on talk pages and user pages and the like. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 17:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• I haven't gotten a RFA Thank you notes in over a week so that's starting to fade away. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 17:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

A drain on servers? If you read it once and then throw it into your archives, never to look at it again, is that a drain on servers? Also, does a tree that falls when nobody is around.... NoSeptember ^talk 17:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, brion said that community-use images are not a drain on our servers. Let me see if I can dig up the diff for that. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 19:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

This one? --JoanneB 19:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the pointer. Consider my earlier comment withdrawn. JoshuaZ 20:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

One-place thanks for RfA involvement (Archive 68)

Just a simple one-place note of thanks for all those who were involved in my recent RfA: Thank you!

Best wishes,

David Kernow 15:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)