306:
I find PFG to be generated more by politeness on my part, rather than implied threats, actually. :-(. Who do you consider got more politeness (when they were both editing) - Phaedriel or Kelly Martin? Anyway, specifics as to what you did or plan to do? Especially since you claim the
Phantom PFG
354:
Now we're just drifting. Anyway, can you tell me what of the many areas of adminship desperately needing your firm but gentle hand shall be fortunate enough to be graced with it first? What do you plan to do as an admin, eh? If you say "the same things I did before" can you provide a few links,
362:
That's one of the few question which I can't actually give a straight answer to in this case, because of course in reality I don't actually aim to be an admin anymore :-). Imagine I inserted lots of text here about risking RSI by doing hundreds of deletions from AFD and CSD every day, and
275:
people get when they are in the proximity of a flamethrower. Consequently you almost never actually need to use it for the purpose advertised in the glossy brochure. Instead, you can just prop it up against the wall as a kind of magical "politeness field generator", and as such, it's great for
330:
field generator for nothing. PFG is a means to achieve another means, not an end unto itself. :-) At any rate, I shan't be needing it much, since generally just being polite myself works just fine, 95% of the time. (but you did ask what I used ye olde flamethrower for, besides gathering
88:
This user was instrumental in protecting
Knowledge from the attacks of those that would attack it, and by doing actions worthy of trust for handling the tools, Kim has shown that she can handle the tools, especially against those that would attack Knowledge.
267:
want to be an admin, because being an admin is hard work, depressing, and there's no reward. You only get yelled at for making mistakes. But that said, many people will specifically promote those who don't want the job. Life sucks that
279:
I have contributed to featured articles, but haven't written any on my own (too many disputing parties dragging me into mediatons, is my excuse in this case :-P ). Not many people have, in fact. So I'm sort of torn on that one.
363:
politely answering the many DRVs and RFCs per day that that causes. I'd also banninate every single vandal and spammer singlehandedly, as well as revert at least 500 vandalisms per day using Henna's VandalFighter. :-P --
248:
So: What makes you qualified to be an Admin? Why do you want to be an Admin? And what would you do with the Ole Mop N Flamethower (pat pending)? Oh, and while I'm at it, what do you think of
394:
This particular RFA doesn't have a set ending time. Normally you'd want a person to meet an 80% questions-passed threshold. That's one of the nice properties: it seamlessly blends
80:
If you really really think I am a paragorn of sainthood, and really don't have the slightest issue with me, you can also pass me right away, but I wouldn't reccomend it. :-P
77:
My objective is to try and get you to archive the discussion and let me pass. Your objective is to do so only once you are convinced I'd be a decent admin.
293:
you have one. Mine was just gathering dust, so I turned mine in one fine day, and, somewhat surprisingly, no one even noticed the difference!
263:
I've been an admin before and did a good job back then, with few complaints, and most complaints that there were were contested by others. I
387:
How long are you prepared to wait for this RfA to end? And have you been doing productive work on the encyclopedia while waiting? :-)
271:
I occaisionally used the mop to tidy up pages or help with backlogs. The flamethrower is used by proximity, as in you would be amazed how
184:
226:
fragments, using '/' as a separator. If all fragments on one line match, then links to that site are permitted on wikipedia. --
164:
Users making requests to discuss: please keep criticism constructive and polite. Once you have decided to pass, please
74:
Since a discuss is less of a big deal than an oppose, you should feel less worried about starting a discussion first.
51:
166:
196:
406:
204:
71:
I'm running a test. Please ask me questions in the discuss section, where you'd normally oppose.
44:
122:
98:
326:
Of course, politeness is the means that will actually get the job done. It isn't called a
159:
the majority of the requests to discuss, before a bureaucrat will give you the admin flag.
8:
34:
289:
In fact, it turns out that "politeness field generators" will still work if people only
223:
410:
364:
332:
281:
227:
208:
55:
40:
27:
17:
388:
356:
308:
253:
114:
90:
192:
134:
68:
No, I absolutely decline, but this is a test, so pretend I said yes. :-)
399:
249:
113:
I support Kim because of the reasons expressed in my nom; meets my critera.
395:
170:
your discussion, and leave your signature under the pass heading above.
217:
188:
127:
181:
Please outline where you think fair use is justifiable and why.
222:
Took me a second of headscratching. Each line is a sequence of
216:
Do you understand the systax on the whitelist and what it does?
207:, I think I'm going to plead the 5th on this one. ;-) --
63:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
276:
mediating between parties in a dispute. <evil grin>
133:
Yay HOW HE NOT ALREADY ADMIN? Answered my question too. --
130:
01:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC) objection met satisfactory
381:
242:
143:
419:
175:
54:) - I am a great candidate! :-P --
14:
149:The section previously known as oppose
100:§ 00:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
124:§ 01:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
23:
382:request for response by Carcharoth
243:request for response by AnonEMouse
104:
24:
434:
144:Discuss (2 discussions pending)
420:request for response by User 4
26:
13:
1:
359:19:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
58:23:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
367:22:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
335:19:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
311:15:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
284:11:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
256:21:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
230:00:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
211:00:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
176:request for response by geni
155:Candidate: you must address
139:02:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
7:
405:Have I been working? Hmmm,
84:Co-nomination by Gracenotes
10:
439:
391:18:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
203:Seeing the discussion at
413:00:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
307:is equally effective? --
205:Knowledge Talk:Fair use
400:requests for adminship
187:comment was added by
35:Come and participate
331:dust ;-) ) --
224:regular expression
200:
172:
161:
430:
182:
162:
153:
137:
120:
117:
111:I've been bribed
96:
93:
41:Kim Bruning
18:User:Kim Bruning
438:
437:
433:
432:
431:
429:
428:
427:
422:
384:
295:
245:
239:
236:
183:—The preceding
178:
146:
135:
118:
115:
107:
105:Pass (3 passes)
102:
94:
91:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
436:
426:
425:
421:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
403:
383:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
368:
343:
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
299:
298:
297:
296:
287:
285:
277:
269:
258:
257:
244:
241:
234:
233:
232:
231:
214:
213:
212:
177:
174:
145:
142:
141:
140:
131:
125:
106:
103:
86:
85:
66:
65:
30:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
435:
424:
423:
412:
408:
404:
401:
397:
396:editor review
393:
392:
390:
386:
385:
366:
361:
360:
358:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
334:
329:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
318:
310:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
294:
292:
286:
283:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
261:
260:
259:
255:
251:
247:
246:
240:
237:
229:
225:
221:
220:
219:
215:
210:
206:
202:
201:
198:
194:
190:
186:
180:
179:
173:
171:
169:
168:
160:
158:
151:
150:
138:
132:
129:
126:
123:
121:
112:
109:
108:
101:
99:
97:
83:
82:
81:
78:
75:
72:
69:
64:
61:
60:
59:
57:
53:
50:
46:
42:
38:
37:
36:
29:
19:
327:
290:
288:
272:
268:way :-P
264:
238:
235:
165:
163:
156:
154:
152:
148:
147:
110:
87:
79:
76:
73:
70:
67:
62:
48:
39:
33:
32:
411:Kim Bruning
365:Kim Bruning
355:prithee? --
333:Kim Bruning
282:Kim Bruning
228:Kim Bruning
209:Kim Bruning
56:Kim Bruning
28:Kim Bruning
407:I guess so
402:. :-)
389:Carcharoth
357:AnonEMouse
328:politeness
309:AnonEMouse
254:AnonEMouse
136:Wizardman
197:contribs
185:unsigned
167:/archive
157:and pass
52:contribs
43: (
273:polite
250:WP:1FA
47:
398:into
291:think
265:don't
252:? --
119:notes
116:Grace
95:notes
92:Grace
16:<
218:Geni
193:talk
189:Geni
128:habj
45:talk
409:--
280:--
199:).
195:•
191:(
49:·
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.