Club Penguin Shops:Council/Archives/2017

From Club Penguin Shops
Jump to: navigation, search
ShopsCouncilLogo.png
Here are the archived council proposals and their outcomes from the past.
20142015201620172018

January 2017[edit]

Approved[edit]

Denied[edit]

Demote Mario Rk from his Chat Moderator Position and Remove Chat Moderator Position (0)[edit]

Topic added on January 7th, 2017.

Topic will be removed on February 5th, 2017.

Mario's been a pretty inactive chat moderator lately and he is very bad at chat moderating. I have noticed he gives some users exceptions, and this is REAL, to doing what they want, like Chill57181, who constantly breaks the rules from what I see and goes unpunished. And it isn't just now, it has been like that for months and it's a tremendously big problem: Chill spammed 30 lines "LEGO BATMAN" because he was excited about a game, I don't know. Mario Rk let him go and didn't punish him at all. Anyway, this isn't "personal beef" but we have had enough chat moderators and we don't need chat moderators anymore. This position is absolutely useless now and I would go as far as to removing the whole position as well. Please vote on this bill carefully. Democracy matters! --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 17:12, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

For (5)[edit]

  1. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 17:12, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  2. --Santa Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall NO. Chum Bucket The Quackworks Merry Walrus 18:39, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  3. --NevadaFlag.png Yoshi11 | Yes! 21:36, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  4. Agent Isai Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! 19:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  5. Penguinpuffdude File:Hiking.jpgWe're going to crash land into SPRING! 09:04, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Against (5)[edit]

  1. Mario Rk was here! 18:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  2. CK 19:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  3. --Snowstormer (TC) 19:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  4. -Wonderweez Talk 19:22, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  5. --User:EDFan12345 19:23, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  • The position itself is useless at this point, at least until user activity exceeds five people. --NevadaFlag.png Yoshi11 | Yes! 21:36, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
    • We have user activity exceeding five people on IRC though. --Snowstormer (TC) 20:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Am I allowed to vote against on this? If so, I totally am. Also if I'm demoted who else is gonna have the patience to update the topic every day to show you the weather day today? I mean, sure Chill COULD but it wouldn't be as good so. Also "inactive", plz. 2-week vacation is just a 2-week vacation. Calm yourself Mario Rk was here! 18:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • We can have dead right groups, it's not like they're hurting anything. As for Mario personally, he's been on vacation for Christmas, give him a break ("inactivity"... lol). The LEGO BATMAN thing (if it even happened) was minimum 4 months ago and I haven't personally seen him do anything to 'abuse' his rights. While Chill and Mario are goofy, and friends, they're mostly unbiased imo. CK 19:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Love how you all vote in favor of abolishing chat moderators and demoting me but now when I propose it it's suddenly the worst thing ever! You're totally fair CK and Mario. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 19:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • http://shops.clubpenguinwiki.info/w/index.php?title=Club_Penguin_Shops:Council&oldid=208248#Against_.284.29 You voted in favor of this Snow. Suddenly, when I propose it, you vote against? Pathetic! --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 19:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Why are you for this now? Because you're salty about your rights being taken away and Mario's being kept, that's why. Also when Isai voted against you went off on a salt-rant but then when he changed you said "thx". Hypocritical of you in all ways. I always supported having a vote on the moderator's rights if the position was abolished, I never supported demoting all of them. I also would have voted for keeping Mario. --Snowstormer (TC) 20:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
      • When I say you lie all the time, you know very well what lies I mean! --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 20:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I'd like to point out that Mario's so-called "inactivity" was merely him going on Christmas vacation for a few weeks, something many admins before him have done, and he's back now, so does it really matter? He also informed me and several users (including you) before he left. The Lego Batman thing you like to keep bringing up was forever ago. For some backstory, CK was listing some games on Steam that he got to play for his channel, one of which was Lego Batman, which I was really excited for him to do and spammed the channel (not my proudest moment, I admit). CK's first Lego Batman video was uploaded on November 24th, 2015, so it was no later than that and is basically a non-issue by this point. If you'd like to give more examples of Mario letting it slide, feel free to do so, but I don't think you should be relying on something that happened over a year ago. I'm staying neutral purely on the grounds that I still don't think this position is needed anymore. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 03:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
    • This has got nothing to do with how he moderates, when did I ever say that? He is a great chat moderator but the position is stale by now. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 18:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
      • You said it in this topic. "Mario's been a pretty inactive chat moderator lately and he is very bad at chat moderating. I have noticed he gives some users exceptions, and this is REAL, to doing what they want, like Chill57181, who constantly breaks the rules from what I see and goes unpunished. And it isn't just now, it has been like that for months and it's a tremendously big problem: Chill spammed 30 lines "LEGO BATMAN" because he was excited about a game, I don't know. Mario Rk let him go and didn't punish him at all." --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 21:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Please compare these two images: http://imgur.com/a/C5umo I can't upload them to the site, uploading is down for some reason --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 18:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Okay. People who voted for or were neutral on the original vote are against now. You were against on the original, and now you're for it. How come they're not allowed to change their opinion but you are? --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 15:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
      • I don't matter to you right now. Why are you dodging my question? --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 18:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

April 2017[edit]

Approved[edit]

IRC activity in the voting policy (+2)[edit]

Topic added on April 26th, 2017.
Topic will be removed on May 10th, 2017.

Shops the wiki and Shops the IRC channel are very different places. Most users who edit the wiki barely use the IRC channel, and most users who use the IRC channel no longer edit the wiki. Because of recent changes to the voting policy, changes to the IRC channel can now be made through wiki votes that allow users who rarely use IRC to decide what happens, while leaving most of the users who use it on a daily basis with no say in what happens on their channel.

To fix this issue, I think that a decent amount of IRC activity should allow users to participate in Shops votes. Of course, you may turn my previous example back on me: now users who don't edit the wiki can swarm a vote and change the way a wiki that they don't use runs. I have a solution for this as well. My proposal is that users who are active on the IRC channel should be allowed to participate in votes that would directly affect the channel, and only those votes.

--Chill57181 Talk Contribs 22:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

For (4)[edit]

  1. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 22:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  2. CK 00:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  3. --Snowstormer (TC) 16:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  4. Mario Rk was here! 23:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Against (2)[edit]

  1. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 11:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  2. --Quackerpingu Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall The Quackworks Quackerpingu 12:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  • This sounds better than Pen sliding those changes into the policy like he did. Although referring to his changes, he pretty much alienated all but a few people who have edited Shops, and will solidify just about all votes as inconclusive unless one or two people voting will count as a majority now. CK 00:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • To be clear, Pen did not change the policy. He simply felt that the results of the prevous "repeal the chat mod position" council topic was unfair, so I therefore changed the policy requiring users to have an active bank account. I won't be voting until I get some further details and whatnot. --NevadaFlag.png Yoshi11 | Yes! 01:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • This is the beginning of a tyranny of the majority - this is unfair, and allows people to control the entire wiki without editing the wiki at all. This idea is wrong, Chill. It's wrong because it will expand your powers, let people who never edit decide site policy, and it will arguably destroy the wiki. Mario was fairly demoted... but you suppressed his demotion a few months back despite a clear majority vote in favor of his demotion and the dismantling of the redundant chat moderator system. Please Chill reconsider this topic and stop showing off and behaving like you're a dictator when really the site policy prevents you from being one... --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 12:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
    • I already explained in the topic that this can't happen. The point of this change is that users active on the IRC but not on the wiki can still vote, but only in matters that would directly affect the IRC channel. So if you were only active on IRC, you couldn't vote in topics that would change wiki policy or to promote/demote an admin or stuff like that. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 13:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
      • I did read the post entirely. I understand it and I believe it would be harmful. What you mentioned did happen, is happening, will happen and will be happening and it will enable tyranny by IRC users on this wiki. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 14:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
        • How is it harmful to allow IRC users to have a voice in things that affect their channel? If anything, I think it's more harmful that a bunch of users who barely use the channel would be allowed to make changes to it without letting the people who actually use it on a regular basis have a say. Like I said, users only active on IRC won't be allowed to vote in anything that doesn't affect the channel itself. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 14:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
          • It's not their channel. It's the community's channel. Simple answer. Long answer: The community is the one that should vote on and dictate how the community's IRC channel is supposed to be like. Just so you know, you dislike Miron, but if Miron was unbanned and let back on our IRC and he talked often, he would actually be okay and allowed to vote according to your standards. Do you regret your idea now because I know you dislike Miron? But, this is the community's IRC channel and the community, not IRC, should be the one that has a final say. Being active on IRC shouldn't matter. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 14:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
            • Except there's one problem with that: like I said earlier, the community on the wiki and the channel is vastly different. Most users of the wiki don't use the IRC channel, and most users of the IRC channel don't use the wiki. I feel that the fate of the channel shouldn't be decided by people who rarely use it, just like you don't want the fate of the wiki to be decided by people who rarely/don't use it. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 14:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
              • Then that's just sad. It's sad our entire community is consisted of people who only chat on our IRC and never edit and never even edited (like Miron, Ed, Weez). I don't want the fate of the wiki to be decided by the people who rarely use it, which is why this proposal is, in my view, nonsense and giving power to non contributors. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 15:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I should accept the fact that anything I am ever against will always pass and anything I am ever for will always fail because lazy, inactive users like Mario, CK, Ed and Snow will always vote solely to "make me salty". Oh well, this is the end of the wiki. --Penstubal (Talk) (Edits) 10:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  • A lot of the "for" votes are invalid according to the policy. Don't count them. --Quackerpingu Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall The Quackworks Quackerpingu 12:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Denied[edit]

Community Discord (0)[edit]

topic added on April 6 2017

hey all Mahna Mahna here again after like, what, a hundred years Rick and morty and uh like we should make a community discord or something cause like its way more convenient than the IRC and stuffs.

Dead community press f to pay respects --I'm Mahna Mahna. Talk to me. What have I done?. Visit my under construction Megamall. 08:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

For (1)[edit]

  1. --CPRussia.pngBelarus flag.jpgSlender Talk to me 16:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Against (1)[edit]

  1. --Quackerpingu Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall The Quackworks Cheap Store Chum Bucket QuackShopQuackerpingu 14:04, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

May 2017[edit]

Approved[edit]

Delete the non-existent bank account notice (+1)[edit]

Topic added on May 24th, 2017.
Topic will be removed on June 7th, 2017.

To make organization easier, I think we should delete the non-existent account notice and all redirects to it. This was used for the bank archive template when an account did not exist or had no activity that month. However, I think keeping an inactive account as a redlink would be an easier and more recognizable indication that nothing happened. We also haven't been actively using this redirect since 2012 because we're lazy and/or just forgot to. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 16:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

For (2)[edit]

  1. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 16:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
  2. Lollipop 386 Lollipop386 Lollipop 386 Talk Cont Items Mall 23:05, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Against (1)[edit]

  1. --Quackerpingu Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall The Quackworks Quackerpingu 07:32, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  • Alternatively, we could replace each link in the {{BankArchive}} template with this code: {{#ifexist:Club Penguin Shops:Bank/{{{1|Example}}}/Apr17|[[Club Penguin Shops:Bank/{{{1|Example}}}/Apr17|Apr]]|[[Club Penguin Shops:Bank/Non-Existent Account|Apr]]}} (replacing "Apr17" with the actual month and year), so that it automatically links to the non-existent notice, and no redirects would be needed. Or we could do something similar to that, except there would be no link if it doesn't exist. Lollipop 386 Lollipop386 Lollipop 386 Talk Cont Items Mall 23:05, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, the idea is to make an inactive month distinguishable from an active month. I like your idea of replacing it with no link, though. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 14:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
      • Actually, now that I think about it, removing the link altogether would make it a lot harder to archive bank transactions. --Chill57181 Talk Contribs 15:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I have spent a lot of time creating these redirects, so i don't want my work to be destroyed. --Quackerpingu Quackerpingu (talk). Quackermall The Quackworks Quackerpingu 07:32, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Denied[edit]