Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/Rainith/Archive 1
Tanaric's Vote on behalf of the oppressed[edit]
I want to add, for the record, that I find Tanaric's vote (and Aiiane's echoed vote by conjunction) extremely ridiculous. Tanaric, do you know Rainith or not? If yes, do you think he can be a good admin or not? Why are you voting on behalf of those who do not know him when YOU yourself know him and know him pretty darn well? What does he have to show you HERE that he has not shown you in GWiki? Can you elaborate on that? --Karlos 10:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- Our RfA system is majority-based -- you support if you know the candidate but you only oppose if they've demonstrated harm. With this system, it would be easy for, say, a guild to attempt to get all its members appointed as sysops by justifying "I know them off-wiki." It's doubtful that any would vote opposed, if said member had not demonstrated harm. Seeing as very few people seem to recognize Rainith here, yet still nobody voted oppose, illustrates that. Supporting somebody by off-wiki experiences is a precedent I do not want to set. —Tanaric 19:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Appointed for life[edit]
Taken from GWW:ADMIN. :P - BeX 
13:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
RfR[edit]
We don't remove sysops for being inactive. -- Wyn 
talk 02:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- We don't keep them for being active either XD.
- I think you should be well aware by now that a RfR doesn't mean the sysop will be removed, just that he will have to undergo a new RfA if things don't go well.--Fighterdoken 02:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Rebuttal to Fighterdoken[edit]
Just a quick response to your statement that "'The fact that he has not made use of sysop tools in the last year'" you could have at least checked the logs. :P --Rainith 01:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
