GuildWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Auron of Neon (2)

He sells poisoned milk to schoolkids &mdash; Skuld 14:15, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

Personal experience? :)) NightAngel 14:16, 28 March 2007 (CDT)


 * I help him, I should know! &mdash; Skuld 14:17, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * O_o ??? --Lania Elderfire[[Image:Pinkribbonsig.gif|My Talk]] 14:39, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

I'll have to change my vote to conditional support then, as long as he provides proof. NightAngel 15:32, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

Need more admins
I'm not sure I'm right about this but since Tanaric is a bureaucrat and he is nominating someone for adminship, I think he feels that there is a need for more admins as a lot of the admins aren't very active anymore. --Lania Elderfire 15:49, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

Sure, but this has nothing to do with Auron's merits as an admin, unless you're saying the bar should be set lower....NightAngel 16:30, 28 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Here's something that should be clear to everyone: This RfA is about whether Auron would be a good sysop or not. Nothing else. Whether a sysop is needed at all shouldn't affect anyone's vote here. For all we know, they just want the RfA ready for when the need for a sysop arises. Or to put it bluntly, it's none of our business whether more sysops are needed or not, that's for the bureaucrats to decide. All that's being asked from us with this RfA is to voice our opinions on Auron and what kind of admin he'd be. (I'm looking at you, Sigma! :P) --Dirigible 17:04, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Agreed. "Need more admins" is a terrible reason to appoint a particular person. And I wouldn't try to put words in Tanaric's mouth, Lania. Ask him instead. — HarshLanguage [[Image:qswearing_small.png|HarshLanguage]] 18:01, 28 March 2007 (CDT)