| Revision as of 01:06, 28 May 2009 editDougsTech (talk | contribs)10,191 edits add← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:27, 23 September 2011 edit undoSalvio giuliano (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators49,151 edits mfd closed as keep | ||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Although I get tired of explaining it over and over and over, I carefully review and consider each administrator nomination on which I vote. I do not oppose candidates who may be good administrators. However, I have high standards, and will oppose candidates if there seems to be any chance that the candidate will be a bad administrator. Once appointed, administrators are very hard to remove |
Although I get tired of explaining it over and over and over, I carefully review and consider each administrator nomination on which I vote. I do not oppose candidates who may be good administrators. However, I have high standards, and will oppose candidates if there seems to be any chance that the candidate will be a bad administrator. Once appointed, administrators are very hard to remove. We need to keep bad administrators from being appointed in the first place. --] (]) 20:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 10:27, 23 September 2011
Although I get tired of explaining it over and over and over, I carefully review and consider each administrator nomination on which I vote. I do not oppose candidates who may be good administrators. However, I have high standards, and will oppose candidates if there seems to be any chance that the candidate will be a bad administrator. Once appointed, administrators are very hard to remove. We need to keep bad administrators from being appointed in the first place. --DougsTech (talk) 20:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)