SPUI said:
Well yeah, I got comments. Comments that proved to me that the whole system is corrupt. I was hoping that those comments would persuade RickK to rethink his actions, but I can be rather naive at times.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the system." People just give their opinions in a RfC, it's pretty free-format.
You and jondell got five endorsements. RickK made a response that got got one endorsement. SnowSpinner made an outside view that said "Wikipedia would more or less stop running without RickK" and unsurprisingly that got 14 endorsements (it didn't say anything about the merits of the case). jpgordon wrote a pretty neutral suggestion that RickK back off and let another administrator deal with the problem, and this got three endorsements. Mackensen said it was a storm in a teacup and got eleven endorsements. Firebug wrote a response mildly chiding RickK for not acting in the way he did and for not responding to the RfC (he did subsequently respond). This got nine endorsements--including one from you! Kim Bruning wrote another broadly hagiographic outside view that got thirteen endorsements.
This seems like a good haul to me. I don't know what you expected, but there does seem to be a substantial recognition there that RickK is generally a good administrator but he makes mistakes. I think that's pretty fair.
You then wrote a final "outside view" claiming you had been trolled.
So if I did want to attempt to get RickK to stop, what would I do? File an RFAr and hope ArbCom is impartial enough to accept?
What precisely was he continuing to do that you thought he should stop doing? Just deleting some articles? Probably better to take that to VFU.