| Revision as of 20:13, 7 October 2015 editEsquivalience (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,037 edits →Discussion on Eric Corbett's oppose: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:08, 7 October 2015 edit undoGRuban (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers31,515 edits →Discussion on Eric Corbett's oppose: Note that we've had a 13 year old Bureaucrat beforeNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| :::::Eric's comment is more likely to be an ]. But again, I'm pretty confident that no admin will dare to warn or take action against Eric. ''']''' 18:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC) | :::::Eric's comment is more likely to be an ]. But again, I'm pretty confident that no admin will dare to warn or take action against Eric. ''']''' 18:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::Eric is allowed, like any other editor, to state his opinion on a candidate and you should respect his views. Frankly as a parent I make a point of getting my kids away from the computer every day for a time so they aren't socially isolated, so I see where he's coming from. Now ]. ] ] ] 18:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC) | ::::::Eric is allowed, like any other editor, to state his opinion on a candidate and you should respect his views. Frankly as a parent I make a point of getting my kids away from the computer every day for a time so they aren't socially isolated, so I see where he's coming from. Now ]. ] ] ] 18:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
| * Note that we've had ], much less a 15 year old Admin. Apparently worked out fine. Some people are more mature at 15 than others are at 51. --] (]) 21:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:08, 7 October 2015
 | This is an RfA talk page.
While voting and most discussion should occur on the main RfA page, sometimes discussions stray off-topic or otherwise clutter that page. The RfA talk page serves to unclutter the main RfA page by hosting discussions that are not related to the candidacy.
|
Discussion on Eric Corbett's oppose
Note: Per an Arbitration decision, Eric Corbett (talk · contribs) is not allowed to participate in actual RfA discussion (only voting), so he is unable to reply. Esquivalience 20:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Oppose. I will not ask how old the candidate is, I will simply say that I believe that schoolchildren should be focusing on their schoolwork, not wasting their time as administrators here. Eric Corbett 17:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- What evidence led you to the conclusion that Thine Antique Pen is in school? clpo13(talk) 17:09, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Are you this candidate's parent or guardian, Eric? If not, why would you take it upon yourself to dictate how the candidate spends his time? I am certain he does not need your help to manage his time, and adminning certainly doesn't take up more time than content writing. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 17:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric can't comment further, folks, he can vote but not engage. Old story. Montanabw 17:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- That seems counterintuitive. Shouldn't voters be able to defend or clarify their position when asked? clpo13(talk) 17:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Don't worry about it. I'm confident the crats will ignore this "oppose", as it deserves. --MelanieN (talk) 17:40, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Eric is banned from doing so. It's notated here (under his prior username, Malleus Fatuorum). Epic Genius (talk) 17:42, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric's comment is more likely to be an WP:OUTING. But again, I'm pretty confident that no admin will dare to warn or take action against Eric. Jim Carter 18:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric is allowed, like any other editor, to state his opinion on a candidate and you should respect his views. Frankly as a parent I make a point of getting my kids away from the computer every day for a time so they aren't socially isolated, so I see where he's coming from. Now drop it. Ritchie333 18:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric's comment is more likely to be an WP:OUTING. But again, I'm pretty confident that no admin will dare to warn or take action against Eric. Jim Carter 18:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- That seems counterintuitive. Shouldn't voters be able to defend or clarify their position when asked? clpo13(talk) 17:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric can't comment further, folks, he can vote but not engage. Old story. Montanabw 17:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note that we've had a 13 year old Bureaucrat before, much less a 15 year old Admin. Apparently worked out fine. Some people are more mature at 15 than others are at 51. --GRuban (talk) 21:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)