User talk:Vami IV/Archive6/RfA

My question at your RfA
Hello. I asked a question at your RfA and another user has struck it and is now arguing about it on the talk page. I want you to know it was never my intention to bring any sort of controversy to your RfA. I did not expect a difference of opinion about how RfA is handled to be brought into your RfA like this.

I just want you to know that you can answer or not answer, I am not going to hold it against you either way. I am sincerely curious about what you think, but I am not going to sweat about it. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 00:42, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that the question is inappropriate for an RfA, and also think it's too early to answer. My talk page is a much better forum to ask that question, though. My experience thus far, and knowledge before going on, leads me to think "not really?", and not in my case. I'll expand on this after my RfA, you'd like. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  00:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

My question
I do not consider your answer to be adequate because I was hoping for an explanation of your personal standards regarding copyright enforcement. I hope that you will reconsider and describe your views. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Your thoughts about your RfA
Greetings. I'm sorry your RfA isn't going quite as hoped. Regardless of outcome, there's something I hope you will consider doing, starting now. There's been discussions of late on WT:RFA regarding candidates thoughts on their own RfAs, especially post facto. I'd like to suggest you start a personal blog of your thoughts about your RfA, as it's going on, and through to the end of it 4 days from now. It would be great if you could take that and summarize your thoughts after it's done, and post it to WT:RFA. Such insight into the thoughts of an active candidate could have beneficial effects on the RfA process. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I must decline. This RfA has caused me a lot of heartache. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  18:07, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I’m sorry it’s come to this. If you want a chat, my email is open. Also, I think the community would appreciate a follow up on your thoughts, as per other RfAs, when you’re ready, but nobody's going to pressure you to do it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry about that RfA, it was painful to watch so I can only imagine what it was like from your end. Remember that you have many friends and supporters. - Dank (push to talk) 18:32, 8 June 2021 (UTC) After more review, if you keep adding to your skill set over the next twelve months at the same rate as you've been going, I'll have no trouble supporting a future RFA. - Dank (push to talk) 16:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It's been a painful ride. I was impressed by your growth and willingness to re-evaluate your opinions. It's a shame that some just fixated on your starting point. Take your time to get over it and please, do build on the experience. Cabayi (talk) 18:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry
I'm sorry you were subjected to that. I'm (again) disappointed in our community - take a break, come back to this if and when you feel like it. - TNT 💞 18:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with my friend here. I'm deeply disappointed in our community - especially those that should have clearly known to behave better. !ɘM γɿɘυϘ ⅃ϘƧ  12:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * I would absolutely love to. Felix M. Warburg House, Jewish Museum (Manhattan), or both? – ♠Vami _IV†♠  19:05, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Whichever you prefer. I must say, though, that it's much harder to improve a museum article than a house article, just in my personal experience. Epicgenius (talk) 20:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Really sorry that the RFA didn't work out. I hope you continue to edit and do good work, and I hope that maybe one day you could try to run again.

🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 20:32, 8 June 2021 (UTC) 

Unfortunate
Absolutely disappointed that you had to go through what happened. Social media can be toxic, and sadly Wikipedia often turns out to have at least some characteristics of social media, including, inevitably, the toxicity. Wish you well, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Seconded, but unlike social media, at the end of the day we produce something of value. ORCP let you down and once the toxicity got to a certain level, it looked like people found this to be their source of drama for the week, but thank you for running in the first place and I'm relieved to see this edit summary. (Take as much time off as you need, but when you come back, don't let anyone make you feel embarrassed.) — Bilorv ( talk ) 21:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I also came to express my sympathies for how the discussion fell out. Keep up the good work :) Kingsif (talk) 01:14, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Support
Hi, just noticed that your RFA went a bit sideways, a real shame. As a person with AS myself, I think this site needs more users on the spectrum, especially more in administration. Good luck if you ever run again (it's not something I'd ever fancy, so fair play to you whatever you do *thumbs up*) c87d98b10 21:32, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

for next time
Please don't mistake my views at the rfa as personal. I'm glad you handled things as you did, for it will greatly assist you when you run again. Many good admins have not passed the first time around, 2 years is about the usual interval. Let me know, and I'll consider a co-nom.  DGG ( talk ) 04:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Allow me to express my unhappiness your run was unsuccessful. I also failed my attempt at RfA quite a long time ago. The blessing of not taking on responsibility at that moment in my life gave me the opportunity to develop my editing voice more clearly without the distraction of daily reactivity. I'm still here; you are still here. These days I still fight passing vandalism and try to write about stories which touch my soul. Like DGG above, I believe you may yet impress us with your dedication and persistence (and your D&D savvy). Continue to edit boldly. If I can be helpful, please feel invited to call on me. BusterD (talk) 08:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Withdrawn RfA
Hello, and I see that you have withdrawn your RfA. I know you must feel sad about it, or even angry at me for opposing, but according to some people, adminship is supposedly not a big deal. Isn't it just a few extra buttons? In fact, as seen here, adminship often negatively impacts content creation. Remember, you don't have to be an admin to be one of Wikipedia's best editors. (In fact, you don't even need to have an account to be one of Wikipedia's best editors!) Yours, --littleb2009 (she/her) (talk • contribs) 21:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ma'am, in fact, I feel humiliated, and do not feel this helps. I know adminship confers nothing but some buttons and a week of stress. I was not running for the ability to extract sources for revision-deleted edits myself. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  22:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I am sorry you feel humiliated - that's not good for any person who volunteers their time and efforts, especially one who has contributed as much to this project as you. I sincerely hope that my particular oppose did not contribute to your distress. If it helps you, feel free to give me open and honest feedback, although I would suggest using a PM so that your words can't be used against you. If you don't want to respond, that's also ok. --Find bruce (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Vami IV, I know it may seem unlikely, but I do know how you feel. I supported your candidacy, because I thought you would do well with the mop. It's been nearly six years since my RfA, which was filled with charges of racism, and that flew in the face of my supporters and noms, who are all awesome editors! I look back on it as a learning experience. I still revere most admins, because they have been so helpful and instructive to me. I no longer see adminship as something I want to be; however, I still respect the vetting process at RfA as a measure of the community's trust. While the opinion of other editors can be important, the most important opinion about you is your own opinion, I personally pulled a "Frank Sinatra", I picked myself up, brushed myself off and "got back in the race". As volunteers, we really have to like Wikipedia to continue editing. Even with all its goods and bads I still think this encyclopedia is well-worth improving. Your mileage may vary. Sincerely wish the very best of everything to you and yours!  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 17:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Those are good lyrics. That that song ends with the lyrics "And if there's nothing shaking come this here July, I'm gonna roll myself up and die", though, may again underscore my poor timing. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  21:39, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Such things can happen any"time". They say, "Timing is everything." My RfA was in October, and my timing couldn't have been worse. A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then. Sometimes the best healers are time and distance, and distance is not just a matter of miles or light years. One can distance oneself by diving into the deep waters of work. And 'round here, the best work for me has been mostly gnomish. Never stopped loving this place. Yet whenever I see things like a good editor losing out to poor timing, I briefly want to wring Jimbo's neck. Just briefly, though. Mostly I love the guy for constructing an opportunity like Wikipedia. Funny, I used to sell Britannicas; I have a set and a set of Americana as well. They pale in comparison to this encyclopedia. You might already know about the DoF; that was one of the things that helped me a lot. Hope it helps you, too.  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 01:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Thank you, and of course. There will not be an RfA to distract me next time. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  21:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Here is a kitten to cheer you up after this week's stressful experience.

Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC) 