The question to be considered here is not whether a generally reasonable, cooperative, and always hard-working contributor in 172 should be given admin status. The question is why a persistently uncooperative, unreasonable and - let us face the facts here - persistently and unrepentantly dishonest contributor should retain such status. It is a very simple matter: if a regular contributor in good standing like Abe is *not* considered worthy of trust, then it is clearly absurd to *maintain* that same trust in an admin who has repeatedly demonstrated a gross lack of respect both for others here and for balance in reporting. Anyone who has not made themselves familiar with the history of this user should do so: there is an ample number of examples. One need only read Fred's recent comments in this list, and then comare them to his *actual edit record* in "Communist state" to see very clearly that the standard he is asking Abe to live up to is one that Abe generally maintains but Fred himself does not attain, nor even (it seems) aspire to. As a general rule, being trusted with admin responsibility makes people *more* careful, *more* cooperative with others: it sets them on their honour. Fred's recent behaviour is an exception to this, however we should not let that conspicuous exception blind us to the general rule.