Floquenbeam RFA: Will he get through?

[mendaliv]

Things are very different there. They already had such a policy, and were just reducing the percentage necessary for the motion to pass. Can you imagine that policy on ENWP, even with a provision that say 90% yes is needed?

Like any good institution founded by Americans, there is layer after layer of protectionism.

That things can be so different on different Wikipedia sites suggests that the WMF is not interfering a lot, other than on ENWP. I don't suppose they're very bothered about the Finnish site.

Well I’m thinking more in terms of the founders who started things rolling.

[Kumioko]

Well he hasn't handed in his bit. I'm thinking it's just a break. I fondly remember Black Kite sticking up for me in my early days on Wikipedia despite taking a lot of heat for it off-wiki.

Yeah. You can't fix stupid and there's a ridiculous amount about at the moment. I think the moment my head really hit the desk was when Bilorv (he of the now-deleted Fram bashing Signpost) accused Floq of being an "attention seeker". I'll no doubt be back when the fuckwittery level has abated to at least tolerable levels.

You may not want to hear this, but I agree with Bilorv. Floq was a long standing admin and knew that there would be severe consequences for overturning a WMF action. Furthermore, Floq, the arbcom and the community at large has no room to complain about the WMF's action towards Fram. They gave that right away when they allowed the WMF T&S section to start performing abusive bans that were based on Wikipolitics like mine, Birill's and even Russavia.

Floquenbeam has a years long pattern of abuse, not the least of which is his routine tendency of telling other editors to F off or go the F away. Simply put, he is an unprofessional, immature clown and is a net negative to building an encyclopedia.

[Jans Hammer]

Well he hasn't handed in his bit. I'm thinking it's just a break. I fondly remember Black Kite sticking up for me in my early days on Wikipedia despite taking a lot of heat for it off-wiki.

Yeah. You can't fix stupid and there's a ridiculous amount about at the moment. I think the moment my head really hit the desk was when Bilorv (he of the now-deleted Fram bashing Signpost) accused Floq of being an "attention seeker". I'll no doubt be back when the fuckwittery level has abated to at least tolerable levels.

You may not want to hear this, but I agree with Bilorv. Floq was a long standing admin and knew that there would be severe consequences for overturning a WMF action. Furthermore, Floq, the arbcom and the community at large has no room to complain about the WMF's action towards Fram. They gave that right away when they allowed the WMF T&S section to start performing abusive bans that were based on Wikipolitics like mine, Birill's and even Russavia.

Floquenbeam has a years long pattern of abuse, not the least of which is his routine tendency of telling other editors to F off or go the F away. Simply put, he is an unprofessional, immature clown and is a net negative to building an encyclopedia.

I agree that he is an attention seeker who has shown a complete disregard for the wider community in his RFA. He must have a towering ego to match his towering reputation and a fanbase to match. Any ordinary joe Admin would have been community desysopped for reinstating Fram. As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged? No better than Floq, or for that matter, Fram. Old time Admins. sticking together. And this is not to support WMF - they are even worse.

[rhinoroars]

Floquenbeam has a years long pattern of abuse, not the least of which is his routine tendency of telling other editors to F off or go the F away. Simply put, he is an unprofessional, immature clown and is a net negative to building an encyclopedia.

what is his previous account and did he fail a RFA before for what.

[10920]

Well he hasn't handed in his bit. I'm thinking it's just a break. I fondly remember Black Kite sticking up for me in my early days on Wikipedia despite taking a lot of heat for it off-wiki.

Yeah. You can't fix stupid and there's a ridiculous amount about at the moment. I think the moment my head really hit the desk was when Bilorv (he of the now-deleted Fram bashing Signpost) accused Floq of being an "attention seeker". I'll no doubt be back when the fuckwittery level has abated to at least tolerable levels.

You may not want to hear this, but I agree with Bilorv. Floq was a long standing admin and knew that there would be severe consequences for overturning a WMF action. Furthermore, Floq, the arbcom and the community at large has no room to complain about the WMF's action towards Fram. They gave that right away when they allowed the WMF T&S section to start performing abusive bans that were based on Wikipolitics like mine, Birill's and even Russavia.

I'd never heard of any of those bans until I stumbled upon WO last month, so...

No one "gave that right away", especially since the vast majority were unaware.

I'm not familiar with any of the bans but Birill seems to think she was banned for "not being a white male" so it's hard to take her complaints seriously.

[Black Kite]

Yeah. You can't fix stupid and there's a ridiculous amount about at the moment. I think the moment my head really hit the desk was when Bilorv (he of the now-deleted Fram bashing Signpost) accused Floq of being an "attention seeker". I'll no doubt be back when the fuckwittery level has abated to at least tolerable levels.

You may not want to hear this, but I agree with Bilorv. Floq was a long standing admin and knew that there would be severe consequences for overturning a WMF action. Furthermore, Floq, the arbcom and the community at large has no room to complain about the WMF's action towards Fram. They gave that right away when they allowed the WMF T&S section to start performing abusive bans that were based on Wikipolitics like mine, Birill's and even Russavia.

Floquenbeam has a years long pattern of abuse, not the least of which is his routine tendency of telling other editors to F off or go the F away. Simply put, he is an unprofessional, immature clown and is a net negative to building an encyclopedia.

Missing the point a bit there. It doesn't matter whether you agree with Bilorv (or even if he's right or wrong), my point was that Bilorv accused Floq of being an attention-seeker when that's pretty much the definition of his behaviour in the kerfuffle regarding the Signpost.

[Black Kite]

As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged?

The guy called me a troll, so I told him to fuck off. He called me a troll again, so I reminded him that I'd already told him to fuck off. He then did it a third time, so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

[Kumioko]

You may not have known but a lot of others did and now they have allowed the WMF to step in and burn any editor they don't like and I have absolutely no sympathy, the community did this to themselves and now they have to live with the consequences.

For the record, my ban was public and I was one of the highest output and most dedicated editors on the project but because I believed admins should have to follow the rules and because some POV pushers didn't want WikiProject United States to succeed, I was banned. Then the WMF banned me to support my bullshit ban on the WMF projects because I refused to let bullies force me out through lies and policy manipulation.

BrillLyle was banned more because she was asking hard questions about how money was being spent in the NYC Wikichapter.

Russavia was banned as a favor to Jimbo because he had an artist named Pricasso paint a picture of him (which was probably the most epic prank I've ever seen BTW).

So again, the community is getting what they deserve! An overbearing WMF putting them in their place because the admins and the Arbcom on Wikipedia are incompetent, unprofessional and they are jeopardizing the integrity of the WMF projects.

[Kumioko]

Yeah. You can't fix stupid and there's a ridiculous amount about at the moment. I think the moment my head really hit the desk was when Bilorv (he of the now-deleted Fram bashing Signpost) accused Floq of being an "attention seeker". I'll no doubt be back when the fuckwittery level has abated to at least tolerable levels.

You may not want to hear this, but I agree with Bilorv. Floq was a long standing admin and knew that there would be severe consequences for overturning a WMF action. Furthermore, Floq, the arbcom and the community at large has no room to complain about the WMF's action towards Fram. They gave that right away when they allowed the WMF T&S section to start performing abusive bans that were based on Wikipolitics like mine, Birill's and even Russavia.

Floquenbeam has a years long pattern of abuse, not the least of which is his routine tendency of telling other editors to F off or go the F away. Simply put, he is an unprofessional, immature clown and is a net negative to building an encyclopedia.

Missing the point a bit there. It doesn't matter whether you agree with Bilorv (or even if he's right or wrong), my point was that Bilorv accused Floq of being an attention-seeker when that's pretty much the definition of his behaviour in the kerfuffle regarding the Signpost.

That could very well be, I don't really know much about Bilorv, I just know a lot about Floquenbum!

[Jans Hammer]

As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged?

The guy called me a troll, so I told him to fuck off. He called me a troll again, so I reminded him that I'd already told him to fuck off. He then did it a third time, so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

Swerving the point like a good ol' Admin! You started the childish behaviour with your support based on opposes. That's you acting like a Prima Donna.

[C&B]

As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged?

The guy called me a troll, so I told him to fuck off. He called me a troll again, so I reminded him that I'd already told him to fuck off. He then did it a third time, so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

Yeah, he's an asshole.

[Poetlister]

so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

Yeah, he's an asshole.

Unfortunately, there's far too much of that sort of thing on WP. Well, if there weren't, we wouldn't be here.

[10920]

graphs!

good chance of 300/100.

A record-setting RfA.

[chad100]

Will they go for a Crat chat ?

292 + 93 + 18 = 403, so Floq has got the record. Another interesting statistic – if this RfA passes, it will be the most-opposed successful RfA (since 2008), with 93 dissenters just beating RexxS' 92 in opposition. It currently has the third-highest number of supports of all time, the highest for a self-nomination and also the highest for a candidate's second nomination. – Teratix ₵ 13:39, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

[Dysklyver]

Will they go for a Crat chat ?

292 + 93 + 18 = 403, so Floq has got the record. Another interesting statistic – if this RfA passes, it will be the most-opposed successful RfA (since 2008), with 93 dissenters just beating RexxS' 92 in opposition. It currently has the third-highest number of supports of all time, the highest for a self-nomination and also the highest for a candidate's second nomination. – Teratix ₵ 13:39, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Very interesting.

[Vigilant]

Over 400 speds all in a tizzy about which aspie gets a new hat on the pretend digital fight club.

[Black Kite]

As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged?

The guy called me a troll, so I told him to fuck off. He called me a troll again, so I reminded him that I'd already told him to fuck off. He then did it a third time, so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

Swerving the point like a good ol' Admin! You started the childish behaviour with your support based on opposes. That's you acting like a Prima Donna.

You do understand that believing that a support based on opposes is wrong is your opinion, not a basic fact?

If I vote for a politician in a 2-horse race not because I particularly support them, but I do think their opponent is worse, should my vote be discounted?

[Bezdomni]

If I vote for a politician in a 2-horse race not because I particularly support them, but I do think their opponent is worse, should my vote be discounted?

Of course not, but most places I've voted you don't get to stand in the voting booth with a megaphone... so I'm not sure the analogy holds. Also, who is running against Floq? JU? And who is funding the campaigns? ^^

[Jans Hammer]

As for your performance - not much better. Silly support citing opposes you disagree with and getting angry when challenged?

The guy called me a troll, so I told him to fuck off. He called me a troll again, so I reminded him that I'd already told him to fuck off. He then did it a third time, so obviously has some sort of short-term memory issue, which isn't my problem.

Swerving the point like a good ol' Admin! You started the childish behaviour with your support based on opposes. That's you acting like a Prima Donna.

You do understand that believing that a support based on opposes is wrong is your opinion, not a basic fact?

If I vote for a politician in a 2-horse race not because I particularly support them, but I do think their opponent is worse, should my vote be discounted?

I am saying that in a highly divisive RfA related to an intensely heated issue, acting like a kid by referring your apparent "loyalty support" for your old friend by referencing 3 strong opposes is assuming that people can read your mind, you are such a big swinging dick that everyone knows you or you expect people to look up your history. You're not that significant.

[Kumioko]

Will they go for a Crat chat ?

292 + 93 + 18 = 403, so Floq has got the record. Another interesting statistic – if this RfA passes, it will be the most-opposed successful RfA (since 2008), with 93 dissenters just beating RexxS' 92 in opposition. It currently has the third-highest number of supports of all time, the highest for a self-nomination and also the highest for a candidate's second nomination. – Teratix ₵ 13:39, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

This doesn't really count as a self nom or 2nd RFA even really. He was basically told he had to rerun if he wanted the tools back and it's only his 2nd nom because he wanted attention.

[10920]

graphs!

good chance of 300/100.

A record-setting RfA.

I just spent a little time down memory lane today and Giggy/DHMO/some other names had an RfA in 2008 which would've easily surpassed 300/100 but he decided to withdraw. That was pretty much the end of him on Wikipedia, unless he's socking, which is always a possibility.

[chad100]

Will they go for a Crat chat ?

292 + 93 + 18 = 403, so Floq has got the record. Another interesting statistic – if this RfA passes, it will be the most-opposed successful RfA (since 2008), with 93 dissenters just beating RexxS' 92 in opposition. It currently has the third-highest number of supports of all time, the highest for a self-nomination and also the highest for a candidate's second nomination. – Teratix ₵ 13:39, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

This doesn't really count as a self nom or 2nd RFA even really. He was basically told he had to rerun if he wanted the tools back and it's only his 2nd nom because he wanted attention.

If the nomination passes by just 76%, one percent away from the discretionary range, that would make Floq promoted an admin again right away. However, the opposing and neutral sides seem to have good points on the nomination, though I've not yet voted. Would bureaucrats instead just disregard the 65~75% range and evaluate the consensus before promoting him? George Ho (talk) 18:05, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
The 65~75% isn't some kind of rule, it's guidance to participants on which RFAs are most likely to be contentious and go to a crat chat (just a couple of months ago we had a RFA which was successful despite scoring below the range). In the case of one as contentious as this, I guarantee that unless it had finished at 100% or below 50%, the crats will read every single support and oppose determining their relative validity; this is why we have bureaucrat closes rather than a straightforward ballot with a pass/fail mark. ‑ Iridescent 18:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
This will certainly go to crat chat regardless of whether it closes slightly above 75% or slightly below - can't imagine a single crat unilaterally closing this RfA considering the amount of controversy. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

[chad100]

(298/97/18); Scheduled to end 19:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Will Crats fail him ?

[mendaliv]

300/97/18
If he fails it’ll officially be the most supported failed RfA. He needs just 16 more supports to match Cullen. That’s all I want to see really.

[Black Kite]

If it stays above 75 it will be passed automatically. If it stays at the upper end of the 65-75 range it will also be passed, I think. It'll need another 20+ Opposes and no more Supports to sink it.

[10920]

Oppose People who come here to concatenate human knowledge may be scratching their heads as to exactly why untold hundreds of thousands or even millions of words have been expended on Framgate, especially when much has been said already about WMF's disconnect from the communities it hosts. Let's put things in proper perspective. Breitbart's story on Framgate managed to generate only 233 comments. Their story on Alyssa Milano's throwaway tweet about next year's U.S. presidential election, a story which is 10 days newer, garnered 13,620 comments. It's a little too obvious that some people are here just to bloviate about administrivia and could care less about content. What's really appalling is that these editors refer to this sort of activity as "writing an encyclopedia", knowing full well that the real world isn't applying any checks and balances because they could care less (as the above example amply demonstrates). If you honestly believe that we're anywhere near close to being "the sum of all human knowledge" or that the project's maturity in that regard is commensurate with the fact that it's been around for 18 years, you're fooling yourself. Period, end of sentence. I would be a lot more active contributor if not for the attitudes I see: the attitude that Wikipedia is just fine if it looks a certain way and if it happens to have sources of some sort, rather than being a concerted effort to present the most credible information on a topic backed by the most credible sources; the attitude that plainly notable topics really aren't notable if the basis of their notability is firmly rooted in the 19th or 20th centuries; the attitude that there are really two Wikipedias, with battleground topics being open to vigorous scrubbing"collaboration" and everything else being merely some individual editor's vanity project (as evidenced by the prevalence of this "my article" bullshit); the attitude that those who have done the heavy lifting in content areas are "second-class editors"; the attitude that it's okay for small groups of editors to hijack project areas and in some cases entire namespaces; and so on and so forth. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 23:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

The best part is he even opens with "People... may be scratching their heads".

[Randy from Boise]

Oppose People who come here to concatenate human knowledge may be scratching their heads as to exactly why untold hundreds of thousands or even millions of words have been expended on Framgate, especially when much has been said already about WMF's disconnect from the communities it hosts. Let's put things in proper perspective. Breitbart's story on Framgate managed to generate only 233 comments. Their story on Alyssa Milano's throwaway tweet about next year's U.S. presidential election, a story which is 10 days newer, garnered 13,620 comments. It's a little too obvious that some people are here just to bloviate about administrivia and could care less about content. What's really appalling is that these editors refer to this sort of activity as "writing an encyclopedia", knowing full well that the real world isn't applying any checks and balances because they could care less (as the above example amply demonstrates). If you honestly believe that we're anywhere near close to being "the sum of all human knowledge" or that the project's maturity in that regard is commensurate with the fact that it's been around for 18 years, you're fooling yourself. Period, end of sentence. I would be a lot more active contributor if not for the attitudes I see: the attitude that Wikipedia is just fine if it looks a certain way and if it happens to have sources of some sort, rather than being a concerted effort to present the most credible information on a topic backed by the most credible sources; the attitude that plainly notable topics really aren't notable if the basis of their notability is firmly rooted in the 19th or 20th centuries; the attitude that there are really two Wikipedias, with battleground topics being open to vigorous scrubbing"collaboration" and everything else being merely some individual editor's vanity project (as evidenced by the prevalence of this "my article" bullshit); the attitude that those who have done the heavy lifting in content areas are "second-class editors"; the attitude that it's okay for small groups of editors to hijack project areas and in some cases entire namespaces; and so on and so forth. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 23:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

The best part is he even opens with "People... may be scratching their heads".

No, the best part is he uses the words "concatenate" and "bullshit" in the same post...

RfB

[mendaliv]

303/98/19. Currently 76%.

Question for RfA regulars: How much of a last-second vote flood should be expected?

[Randy from Boise]

303/98/19. Currently 76%.

Question for RfA regulars: How much of a last-second vote flood should be expected?

The huge flood is up front with all WP elections (including Arbcom). Things trickle at the end. I suppose if it were really close the socks and meatpuppets might come out and pump things up a little, but this one really is not.

tim

[Jans Hammer]

If it stays above 75 it will be passed automatically. If it stays at the upper end of the 65-75 range it will also be passed, I think. It'll need another 20+ Opposes and no more Supports to sink it.

There is no such thing as an automatic pass. Crats will at the very least evaluate at 75% to ensure that !votes are appropriate and will weight. There is of course the possibility of a rouge friendly 'Crat pressing the button immediately. I say good luck with that!

[mendaliv]

Honestly if this passes we should see if Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TenPoundHammer 8 might happen.

[C&B]

If it stays above 75 it will be passed automatically. If it stays at the upper end of the 65-75 range it will also be passed, I think. It'll need another 20+ Opposes and no more Supports to sink it.

There is no such thing as an automatic pass. Crats will at the very least evaluate at 75% to ensure that !votes are appropriate and will weight. There is of course the possibility of a rouge friendly 'Crat pressing the button immediately. I say good luck with that!

They wouldn't need it. At worse there'd be a stink, it would go to arbcom...and arbcom would decline to hear the case on the grounds that it was within the range of a crat's options to do so. So FB would remain an admin and another 20,000 words would be wasted

[Jans Hammer]

If it stays above 75 it will be passed automatically. If it stays at the upper end of the 65-75 range it will also be passed, I think. It'll need another 20+ Opposes and no more Supports to sink it.

There is no such thing as an automatic pass. Crats will at the very least evaluate at 75% to ensure that !votes are appropriate and will weight. There is of course the possibility of a rouge friendly 'Crat pressing the button immediately. I say good luck with that!

They wouldn't need it. At worse there'd be a stink, it would go to arbcom...and arbcom would decline to hear the case on the grounds that it was within the range of a crat's options to do so. So FB would remain an admin and another 20,000 words would be wasted

74% now... 6 hours remaining. I Don't think any of the existing 'cratocracy would be so bold. WJBScribe probably would have - and then referred himself to Arbcom

[Carcharoth]

Smallbones has turned up, right at the end (though I can hardly take the moral high ground there) and opposed on an "editing for pay question" (one of the obsessions Smallbones has, IIRC).

[C&B]

He's answered it now, in what has to be a rather nice nod to his own lack of editing in general, regardless of whether it's remunerated

[Poetlister]

315/110/17, an impressive total, and 74.1%. Surely it will pass unless something incredible happens. But it's not the coronation that Floq must have expected; he has been damaged to some extent by all the opposes.

[10920]

Honestly if this passes we should see if Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TenPoundHammer 8 might happen.

Why is that?

As for the current RfA, the percentage has consistently dropped since the first day.

[Randy from Boise]

315/110/17, an impressive total, and 74.1%. Surely it will pass unless something incredible happens. But it's not the coronation that Floq must have expected; he has been damaged to some extent by all the opposes.

I don't see how he could have expected anything less than a 25% oppose rate. I certainly didn't; the surprising thing was that support was in the 90s for as long as it was. If the community was 95% of a like mind on the Fram situation, it would be over by now with the WMF walking back their overreach. If one spent any time reading the threads, they'd quickly realize that something like 1/3 of the community was happy that the WMF was rolling into behavior issues with their inimitable heavy-handed secret policemen's style...

There are never a lack of supporters of central power and the use of the truncheon -- it's a vital element of Making Wikipedia Great Again. Particularly when central power controls $100 million a year and the other team resembles a herd of cats...

RfB

[Vigilant]

After this shit show is over, someone should start a new RfA for Fram.

Give Fram back his tools over the objections of all of the wikirati.

#FreeFram

[10920]

After this shit show is over, someone should start a new RfA for Fram.

Give Fram back his tools over the objections of all of the wikirati.

#FreeFram

a banned admin?

would be an amusing RfA but I don't think it be allowed to run. Plus, the rules are the candidate has to accept the nomination.

[10920]

It's at 74% and is about to close. Meanwhile, John's RfA is 88% and closed in 8 hours.

[C&B]

Yeah, he's gonna have it easy from now on: everyone'll be looking elsewhere for the next 24 hours. I bet that dumbass even forgets to put the Admin T-shirt on his page

[Jans Hammer]

It's at 74% and is about to close. Meanwhile, John's RfA is 88% and closed in 8 hours.

Pending Close now at 326 116 15 74%
CratChat time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ucrat_chat

[Carcharoth]

People are now seeing socks everywhere... Some have looked askance at oppose voter JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (T-C-L) because they last edited in June 2017, and similarly for support voter Kobnach (T-C-L), who last edited in February 2015.

[Alex Shih]

This was rather swiftly closed, which is faster than any other RfA in my noticeably limited recent memory. I suspect this will be passed along the lines 12-6 without discounting whatever the number of bureaucrats that have voted.

[Alex Shih]

People are now seeing socks everywhere... Some have looked askance at oppose voter JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (T-C-L) because they last edited in June 2017, and similarly for support voter Kobnach (T-C-L), who last edited in February 2015.

Without sounding too much like he who must not be named, I am fairly certain these two accounts have already been checked multiple times by Bbb23 based on my experience looking at CU logs; but with the limitation of the CU tool, it's unlikely any relevant sock accounts can be found, which is why neither of these two accounts have been blocked. Here is the thing though; Bbb23 has participated in this RfA (voting support), so why is it okay for them to continue to CU the shit out of all suspicious accounts participating in this very, very contentious RfA?

[chad100]

Which crats will support him and who will oppose.He has pissed some crats for sure.

Xeno is involved who else (he voted) who else.

Tough one for the crats damned both ways.

[10920]

People are now seeing socks everywhere... Some have looked askance at oppose voter JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (T-C-L) because they last edited in June 2017, and similarly for support voter Kobnach (T-C-L), who last edited in February 2015.

Without sounding too much like he who must not be named, I am fairly certain these two accounts have already been checked multiple times by Bbb23 based on my experience looking at CU logs; but with the limitation of the CU tool, it's unlikely any relevant sock accounts can be found, which is why neither of these two accounts have been blocked. Here is the thing though; Bbb23 has participated in this RfA (voting support), so why is it okay for them to continue to CU the shit out of all suspicious accounts participating in this very, very contentious RfA?

Bbb has nothing on Deskana, who somehow retains bureaucrat/checkuser despite thinking it ok to act in both roles in an RfA...

[Randy from Boise]

Which crats will support him and who will oppose.He has pissed some crats for sure.

Xeno is involved who else (he voted) who else.

Tough one for the crats damned both ways.

If one wants to see the mother of all Hasten The Day shitshows, they're rooting for the crats to supervote against the majority on this one... Jesus christ, can you imagine? I'd set the over/under at 10 administrators quitting.

RfB

[mendaliv]

I'm just happy that this did in fact set a new record for most supports.