Difference between revisions of "Forum:New Admin vote"

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 24: Line 24:
*'''For''' - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] 21:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''For''' - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] 21:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''For''' --{{User:02barryc/Signature}} 21:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''For''' --{{User:02barryc/Signature}} 21:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''For'''. --{{User:SonicChao/sig}} 22:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:20, 15 January 2007

Forums: Index > Village Dump > New Admin vote (talk)
Note: This topic has been unedited for 4714 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

Hello, and welcome to the "New Administrator Vote" voting page. Here, registered users will be able to vote on current users for an administrative position. This round of voting will only result in one new administrator. As there are only four {4) nominees, please limit yourself to only one vote for the user you believe is MOST qualified for the position of sysop. After a period of time (probably 2 or 3 days), the user with the most votes will be sysopped.

Please keep in mind that sysops votes will count twice as much as registered users (as they will better know, from experience, which users have the qualities required to be a successful sysop). In the score counter, this will show up as 2 points per admin vote, and 1 point for user votes. If an op wishes to vote for two users, they may split their vote in half using weak for for two users. Please: NO against votes. If you don't wish to support one specific nominee vote for another.

All comments should be directed to the talk page.


Flyingfeline (TalkContribs (del)EditcountBlock (rem-lst-all)LogsGroups)

Score: +18

Zombiebaron (TalkContribs (del)EditcountBlock (rem-lst-all)LogsGroups)

Score: +18

Braydie (TalkContribs (del)EditcountBlock (rem-lst-all)LogsGroups)

Score: +16
  • Nominated by a net of 5 admins, with no against votes.
  • Strong For -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 23:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For --Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 00:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For. Tough decision. HOMESTAR ME!!! TURTLE ME!!! t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 00:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For, tough decision indeed.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 01:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For, and I would vote for all four if I could.--<<Bradmonogram.png>> 02:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For Continually impresses me with the amount and quality of his work. He makes me feel inadequate, as well. That has to count for something. Right? --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 15:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For Yeah Braydie! Stop doing so much work at QVFD! User:Kjhf/sig 15:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For ENeGMA's inadequacies. Keep up the psychological terror, Braydie!--Procopius 17:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For. Tough choice, but I know and trust him the best. I do wish I could vote for all four candidates, though. goshzillacorrespondence 18:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For A very hard working individual who deserves this very much. --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For A very helpful chap indeed. Good man. --AtomDsig.png 19:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • for. wasn't an easy choice, but Braydie is the best man for the job - jack mort | cunt | talkKodamaIcon.jpg - 20:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For - David Gerard 21:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • For The GPF always supports its members. Oh yeah, and he's pretty helpful too. --LordKaT

Olipro (TalkContribs (del)EditcountBlock (rem-lst-all)LogsGroups)

Score: +5