Probably better not. Too abrasive and confrontational. Also anyone who subscribes to the myth that "we don't need anymore bureaucrats" is better off as a non-admin. I'll make an exception and say "we don't need anymore admins". Majorlytalk15:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thank you for your opinion and you are definately more than welcome to have a differing opinion than me, thank you for your comments. It's just a shame that a differing opinion is held up as one of the reasons to oppose. -Djsasso (talk) 15:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous reason to oppose, completly different things admins and bureaucrats (may as well have just bureaucrats if they're the same thing). This isn't the first time your comments are pretty harsh in an Rfa, (I'm not asking you to re-consider your vote) but maybe next time you could not be so aggressive just because you failed once. Yotcmdr=talk to the commander=17:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree with alot of what you said there is no reason to get hostile in this Rfa, he has had his say and made his point. Let's let him be. I don't wish my Rfa to become a heated drama debate. -Djsasso (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I know. Just saw too many Rfa's here get a little out of hand. So if I can help it I will nip it in the bud before it starts. -Djsasso (talk) 18:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Er, I have never failed an RFA, Yot. This is not a ridiculous reasons to oppose either. Perhaps you should be a little less harsh. Majorlytalk23:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means the RfB you failed. (ie you said no to me since I said no to you) Whatever your reason I think you are entitled to it. -Djsasso (talk) 00:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent). You're such a hypocrite, Majorly. I thought you wanted "new year, new you". Obviously this is the not the case. Your oppose is petty and vindictive. May I also remind you that when I oppose your RfB, you went on a tear promising you'll do no wrong with tools and if you did, you'd be stripped of them. Now you show up with an argument that we need no more admins since DJSasso opposed your RfB. --Maxim(talk)03:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And your own petty and vindictive argument on my own RFB was basically claiming, without any evidence whatsoever, that if I was promoted I would abuse the tools. If I had been promoted, we wouldn't need another bureaucrat. Majorlytalk13:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please say exactly what you think, Maxim. Can I not oppose without people resorting to childish namecalling and accusations of bad-faith? Majorlytalk13:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Completely outdenting) Majorly, while I do understand exactly where you are coming from, your reason for opposition is, in my mind, childish, which is something that I do not want to see from an administrator. You saying that anyone who says that we don't need anymore bureaucrats on this site is better off not becoming an administrator is very immature and is definitely not a very good reason for opposition of an RfA. Are you going to just oppose every editor that applies for adminship in the future who says that we don't need anymore 'crats because there isn't enough workload for the 2 active ones that we have already? Think about this before you answer, because after a couple of comments made by you, I am starting to respect you less and less. Razorflame03:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Majorly, take it easy. I was referring to your Rfb you failed. And you would oppose Malinaccier if you really thought your reason was valid. It's completly mad. YOu say we don't need anymore admin and yet you support another Rfa running at the same time. Make your mind up, I think Razorflame's right, my confidence and respect in you is getting smaller and smaller. Yotcmdr=talk to the commander=11:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I said specifically "I'll make an exception". I support Mal because in my experience he is friendly, helpful and hardworking, and doesn't auto oppose RFBs. Majorlytalk13:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
