Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept. Thanks, Marcopolo, I appreciate that. ~GoldDean - 16:36, 11 September 2007 (CDT)
I see that people aren't going to accept an experienced moderator when he isn't that involved in the community itself. That should have been obvious on my part. I'm canceling candidacy.~GoldDean - 15:00, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
(your vote here)
Never seen the user on RC. Less than 500 total edits, including his own elaborate user page. Impossible to form any sort of opinion on adminworthiness, so cannot support. BftP 13:35, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
I'm sorry, but you are too inexperienced. —ShadyGuy 13:55, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
Very little activity, almost none on maintenance edits and no examples on good grasp of policies and arbitration. --Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 20:41, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
Per others. 70 or so mainspace edits just isn't enough. BigAstro 01:36, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
Barely any mainspace activity, no proof of the qualities needed in the admins on this wiki. Aberrant's vote says what I'd like to much more eloquently. Lord of all tyria 08:51, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
Has great intentions, but I'm afraid that I don't see you trying to enforce policies or reverting vandalism all that much-- (Talk) (Contr.) 14:43, 12 September 2007 (CDT)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.