On 06/04/07, Cool Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think the overall comments on that RFA (troll festival if you ask me
which
you don't) is quite annoying. The allegedly "legit concerns" about the
office in my opinion has no bearing on weather or not he would abuse admin
tools.
I sincerely hope Danny continues to serve us despite us.
- Cool Cat
On 4/6/07, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/5/07, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There are some legit concerns on Danny's RFA,
and a lot of "OFFICE bit
me he sucks", sometimes written slightly more coherently.
WP:IDONTLIKEHIM(HER)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/…
"
1. *Strong oppose* per many of the above,
WP:OFFICE<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:OFFICE>is the antithesis of
consensus
building <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CON>, which is the heart of
Wikipedia. Danny was the tool that implimented this vicious and unfeeling
policy. He's made his decisions, and those decisions are inconsistent with
adminship.
??? I think I just lost what little faith I had in the RfA system. How dare
Danny stop us from getting sued!
Also, what's with the trend of writing 'strong', 'firm', etc before
votes?
Does it actually add more weight to your opinion?