Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements/Endorsements/David Gerard

Support

 * &mdash;No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * William M. Connolley 23:43, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * David has long had my respect for his ability to describe and understand the various problems at Wikipedia -- his approach to conflicts is very reasonable, in my opinion, and I believe he strikes an excellent balance between assuming good faith (as so many seem to abandon these days) and allowing users to wreak havoc (which also seems prevalent). I believe his intelligence and his ability to collaborate would be of real help to the Arbitration Committee. Jwrosenzweig 00:09, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
 * Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, beyond the shadow of a doubt. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 22:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Shorne 03:20, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support very much. Rdsmith4&mdash; Dan | Talk 00:37, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong support. i agree with everything William Jwrosenzweig says above Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:15, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * David Gerard has earned my endorsement.   – Quadell (talk) (help)   04:43, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support.  I respect his fairness and judgement.  -- Antaeus Feldspar 05:10, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, unconditionally, support. It was a shame there wasn't an extra spot for him last time. Ambi 05:16, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:58, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, qualified, came in third last election. Fred Bauder 20:05, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Of course. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 03:30, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Mackensen (talk) 10:00, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. While I haven't worked directly with David here on Wikipedia (except to note that he has reverted a few of my edits ;), I have seen his work in a number of Usenet groups where he has shown intelligence & insight concerning many issues. I feel he would be an asset to the Arbitration Committee. -- llywrch 17:05, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support JFW | T@lk  17:42, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 04:20, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Strongly support GeneralPatton 03:12, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Taco Deposit | Talk-o Deposit 16:21, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Strongly support. Excellent candidate. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:55, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 00:19, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. --mav 17:54, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * SweetLittleFluffyThing 21:17, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Oppose - Has nominated some unsuitable people to be sysops. Example --Rebroad 17:24, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The above link isn't an example of David nominating an unsuitable person to be a syop :-( Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 21:01, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I am very puzzled. Very Verily 05:57, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * So am I. What link is this? - Ta bu shi da yu 12:56, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I suspect Rebroad might have meant this link. -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:24, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)