Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/Endlessdan

Support

 * Don't know what I'm voting for, but stone cold chillin' is gangsta. NO EXPLANATION NEEDED --Bren202 (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Bren202 does not have suffrage --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs (st47) 23:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) Moral Support, for actually wanting to do this. This fellow candidate appriciates your enthusiasm.  Wizardman  00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) &mdash; trey  (wiki) 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) It was very bold of you to do this, and for that, you get my support.  Kwsn   (Ni!)  00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Nice answers to questions. Tim Q. Wells 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Quite sincerely, what the arbcom needs. Breath of fresh air. Martinp23 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) For actually wanting the hellish job that is arbcom (and not being an ego mad nutjob like some who've wanted it) ... you've got my vote.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 00:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) east. 718 at 00:33, December 3, 2007
 * 8) I feel like shaking the tables of ArbCom and electing someone more chill than I could ever wish to be. MessedRocker (talk) (write these articles) 00:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, makes a mockery of these elections. —Random832 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Moral support – Makes these elections less dull. —An im um  §  00:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Yamanbaiia 00:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Even if you don't get elected, feel free to apply some straight stone cold chillin to editing disputes.  Grace notes T § 00:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support conditionally. Extended comments moved to talk page. -- Ned Scott 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Makes a balance for the serious side and a (nonexistent) funny side. Pre  ston  H  01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Moral Support sh  &curren;  y  01:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) --Docg 01:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5)  krimpet ⟲  02:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6)  I did not expect to support. Hús  ö nd  02:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) *votes for straight stone cold chillin* Dihydrogen Monoxide  ♫ 03:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Videmus Omnia  Talk  03:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) :) Snowball support for a guaranteed fail, thanks for the stone cold answers to your questions DUDE. -- Cactus.man   &#9997;  03:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Strangely more with it than many others. Why the hell not? --Bdj 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) He'd only be one voice of 15.  It'd be nice to laugh at ArbCom every now and then instead of always holding my head and crying; an outsider's perspective (as seen in #3  here) would be valuable. --JayHenry 03:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 04:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) You appear to be more sensible than some of the other candidates running in this election.  Spebi  04:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Moral support. I dorftrottel I talk I 05:21, December 3, 2007
 * 15) Strong support. Seems very reasonable. RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 05:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) - Nice enthusiasm. Scar ian  Talk  08:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17)  Neil   ☎  10:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanBealeCocks (talk • contribs)
 * Indented vote. Sorry, but 150 mainspace edits before November 1 are required to vote. — TKD:: Talk  12:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1)  Grue   13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) The enlightened take things lightly. the wub  "?!"  14:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Indeed they do Wily D  15:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) I agree with Kwsn. Acalamari 17:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) support --Rocksanddirt 18:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Moral support OhanaUnited  Talk page  18:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Someone this amusing is surely highly intelligent - ergo will make a good arbitrator. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 18:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. I can understand why people are voting to oppose, but can't understand the lack of a sense of humor of some people. MookieZ 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose through support of this candidacy.--Isotope23 talk 20:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support - fight the Cabal, man! Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Some people take themselves too seriously. Regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 22:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support-Dureo 23:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Support. Will make reading ArbCom decisions much more enjoyable :) Kaldari 00:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) He makes the ArbComm elections not suck. The committee needs diverse points-of-view and humor. Otherwise, it will become a dull and  frustrating place. Any bad proposal can be voted down (as they often are) and he has never been mean-spirited. maclean 01:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support Moral support. Actually, I think making him a clerk could be a good idea if he really wanted to do that. MrMurph101 03:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Making Arbcom a joke you say? Well, I think we already have debacles like Allegations of apartheid and Attack sites to thank for that. --arkalochori <font color="Blue">undefined  04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked indef Secret account 00:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support I like to chill. Atropos 05:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. I love the platform! -- ⁪ffroth 05:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support I love the chutzpah! Xdenizen 05:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support I vote for third-party candidates occasionally, too. --Lukobe 08:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support, just for the attitude. Dan100 (Talk) 13:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Strong Support. We need ArbCom members from outside the wiki-"establishment", who will be genuinely independent. (This is not a joke, it's actually a serious support.) WaltonOne 15:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Go for it. — CharlotteWebb 20:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Moral Support ZZ Claims~ Evidence 20:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe in you Emericanbuddha|<font color="Green">undefined 
 * User does not have the necessary 150 mainspace edits prior to 1st November and as such does not have suffrage. Nick (talk) 00:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Pass the green cookies and warm milk. <font face="Script MT" color="#1111AA" size="2">SilkTork  *<font face="Roman" color="#0ccccc" size="0.5">SilkyTalk 00:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 04:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Grandmasterka supports the "minor party" candidate! This guy has the philosophical prowess and intestinal fortitude I'm looking for, although I love Eli Manning. ;-) Grand  master  ka  06:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support for his adventurous spirit. A much better candidate than some who are making a more conventional run for the position. DGG (talk) 06:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 11:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) 举 Ageru! - Mailer Diablo (talk) 14:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support Paul Beardsell (talk) 15:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support <font color="#008000">semper fictilis 15:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support ROFL. Skinwalker (talk) 18:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support because Endlessdan opposes - consider your vote neutralized. (can't believe I'm hitting Save Page) .... <font color="Maroon" face="comic sans ms">Keeper | <font color="Gold" face="Papyrus">76  19:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) My boy Walton has this one quite right.  Joe 21:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support per User:Secret. His answers to voters' questions put my user subpage to shame.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 02:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Moral Support -- Ferkelparade &pi; 17:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support we need more people like this guy. --Explodicle (talk) 18:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Support YES. Everyone loves a court jester, right? Right?? Nobody of Consequence (talk) 18:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) This chilling of the stone cold, it must happen. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 01:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Redstarsldr (talk) 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Good attitude.
 * User does not have suffrage Nick (talk) 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) moral support, as I certainly agree that "on a whole everyone needs to be chill". -- phoebe/ (talk) 09:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, unlike some others, you don't take yourself too seriously... something that ArbCom needs badly! Lankiveil (talk) 09:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC).
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|18px]] -- My feeling is that a shot of DGAFism may be just what ArbCom needs. This is Wikipedia, not life or death; You get that.  --Ssbohio (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. Outsiders desperately needed. Eliot (talk) 19:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. Yours is the chillin' which will pierce the heavens! --Gwern (contribs) 21:29 7 December 2007 (GMT)
 * 6) Support KleenupKrew (talk) 13:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Word Blahaccountblah (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * User got caught up in the sock net and, thus, can't vote. Harsh. Blahaccountblah (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support --Jab843 (talk) 21:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support, because my stone has been feeling a little warm of late. Ashdog137 (talk) 02:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support - I am amazed to see an ArbCom candidate who not only doesn't take himself too seriously, but in fact has a sense of humor! ugen64 (talk) 06:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Mike R (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support with proviso. I'm concerned about the amount of chillin' ArbCom can take.  As such, I believe that this election should accept 6 candidates rather than 5, and the stone-cold chair would not posses suffrage lest others' votes be overwhelmed. SnowFire (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Strong suppoert. Bacchiad (talk) 04:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose Sorry, but to meet my strict ArbCom voting standards you must have at least 50 edits in the Help talk: namespace and improve your chillin' percentage by 15%. szyslak  09:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support wbfergus undefinedTalk 20:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support, since SPUI isn't running this year, why not!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Support' [maxpower37
 * Less than 150 mainspace edits Secret account 01:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Support. No gimmicks needed indeed! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 05:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Has some strong points. Mrs.EasterBunny (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) straight stone cold chillin support -- Hdt 83      <font color="brown" face="Arial">Chat 05:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support merely on the stance that he was smart enough to vote against himself. --Son (talk) 23:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) &mdash; Coren (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) ragesoss 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Chaz Beckett 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose (my fuller vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No, makes a mockery of this elections This is a Secret account 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Definitely not. Rjd0060 00:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Nufy8 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) futurebird 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Angus McLellan  (Talk) 00:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) – Gurch (talk) 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Hell no. Nick 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Good God, no. <font face="verdana" color="grey">Qst 00:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Mackensen (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Stardust8212 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) <font color = "darkmagenta">Snowolf  <font color = "darkmagenta">How can I help? 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) -- drini [meta:][commons:] 01:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose -- Avi 01:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) <font color="orange" face="comic sans ms">Captain  <font color="red" face="Papyrus">panda  01:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) I thought this was a joke at first. Absolutely not. --Core<font color="#457541">desat 01:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15)  SQL <sup style="color:#999">Query me!  02:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] <font color="Blue">Alex '<font color="Red">fus '<font color="Green">co5  02:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17)  M2Ys4U ( talk ) 02:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Cryptic 02:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Zocky | picture popups 02:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Rebecca 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Oppose Thatcher131 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Icestorm815 02:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 02:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Do not give up on you quest.  I just do not think you are ready.
 * 24) Nor will he ever be. &rArr; <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> SWAT  Jester    Son of the Defender  03:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 25)  M er cury    03:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) GlassCobra 03:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] KTC 03:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) &mdash; <tt>madman bum and angel</tt> 03:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose -Dureo 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) — <font color="#FF9933" face="monotype">xaosflux  <font color="#00FF00">Talk 04:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) —Mira 05:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) I appreciate the fresh approach but I don't think you would make a good arbitrator. James086 Talk &#124;  Email 06:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) <font color="#CC0018">T <font color="#0000C0">M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) --MONGO 06:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) - Crockspot 07:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose — does not seems serious. --Jack Merridew 07:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) If you think your nomination was very funny, you're awfully wrong. Max<font size="+1">S em(Han shot first!) 07:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) DrKiernan 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Who are you? —  Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Stone cold no. --Mcginnly | Natter 10:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) — TKD:: Talk  10:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Are you serious? Stifle (talk) 11:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) I smiled, but sorry, rather have serious candidates elected. --Stormie 11:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Sorry, but that is not a really good way to show your "motivation and determination" as an arbitrator..not funny..-- Cometstyles 12:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Johnbod 12:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Oppose, obviously. Splash - tk 13:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Oppose ArbCom is not a venue for absurdist comedy. Xoloz 13:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Davewild 13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Addhoc 14:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) --barneca 14:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Endless Dan 14:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Preposterous! This card is not ArbCom material!
 * 23) Oppose as per Stormie.  Mindraker 15:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) Oppose Waste of time.Rhinoracer 15:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) Oppose &mdash; Rudget contributions 16:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Not convinced.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Ral315 — (Voting) 16:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Oppose. The last thing Arbcom needs is endless chillin. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Oppose. - JodyBtalk 16:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) Hate to see such a stone-cold guy go down, but you're getting jobbed! Grab a beer and enjoy. -- Marcsin |Talk 17:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. <font color="#008080">Avruch Talk 17:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Avruch does not have suffrage 24.0.64.193 (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) - Philippe &#124; Talk 18:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) This candidacy reminds me of Stephen Colbert's failed presidential bid. Scob e ll302 18:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Ripberger 20:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) I get the joke. In other words, Moral support, but Factual oppose. Thanks, Luc "Somethingorother" French 20:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5)  Pagra shtak  20:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support through opposition to this candidacy.--Isotope23 talk 20:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose Going commando & drinking Heineken is for lamers. ;-) llywrch 21:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose - doesn't live up to Colbert. -- Schneelocke 21:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose but I enjoyed the humour. Cheers.  --Malcolmxl5 21:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) —Ruud 21:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose, come on, fun's fun, but this joke needs to end. <font face="Comic Sans"> Corvus cornix  talk  22:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose. --Pleasantville 22:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) No. Not nearly enough experience; 3700 edits and no mop an ArbCom member does not make. <font color="#FF0000">N <font color="#0000FF">F <font color="#808000">24 (radio me!) 23:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Though I do think ArbCom could use a little more "stone cold chillin"... WjBscribe 23:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Slack statement; did not provide to question about portfolio. &mdash; Sebastian 23:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) EconomistBR 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) No. Arbitration has binding consequences; we need serious candidates. <font color="DarkSlateGray">Horologium  (talk) 01:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Oppose. Yes, we need serious candidates ×Meegs 01:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) I agree with WP:DGAF but standing for Arbcom as a joke? lol:) Me rk  i  n  s  m  um  02:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Oppose. Jonathunder 02:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Jerry  02:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) <font face="Verdana"> Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 03:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) Enuja  (talk) 03:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) oppose. Kingturtle 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) CO GDEN  03:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Oppose, unless you can somehow amuse those on the losing side of ArbCom cases. --<font color="#3333FF">健次 (derumi)talk 03:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) Elephant. --Carnildo 03:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Oppose <font face="Lucida Calligraphy">Greeves (talk • contribs) 04:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Dekimasu<small style="color:darkgreen;">よ!  04:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) <font face="Harlow Solid Italic" color="black">DarkFalls  talk 05:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 31) -- Mbisanz 06:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 32) Oppose --DHeyward 06:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 33) Oppose, Arbcom isnt a hobby, its a terrible responsibility. John Vandenberg 06:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 34) It's funny only to a certain point. Past that, you risk mocking only yourself. —<font color="#0000C0" face="cursive">Kurykh  06:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 35) Oppose, no offense but an arbitrator should be an admin Alex Bakharev 07:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 36) Regretful oppose - though I like your style, that questions page was a laugh I well and truly needed :) Orderinchaos 11:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 37) Oppose: I don't know what kind of stone we'd be chilled to.  I don't want to be pumice.  Geogre 11:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 38) I was really disappointed by the lack of a plan of action of how to bring the stupid flavor. - BanyanTree 12:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 39) Oppose Sorry, but stone cold  chillin' doesn't do it for me. Cardamon 19:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 40) Oppose -- SECisek 19:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 41) Oppose, while laughing merrily.  But in the end, ArbCom is at least moderately serious. Guy (Help!) 22:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 42) Oppose Needs more cowbell <font color="Green">B <font color="Blue">figura (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 43) Michael Snow (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And wear a seat belt when driving dangerously. <font face="Script MT" color="#1111AA" size="2">SilkTork  *<font face="Roman" color="#0ccccc" size="0.5">SilkyTalk 00:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Haber (talk) 01:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Viriditas 02:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Dude. (And in further explanation: Dude. Duude. Dude. Stone cold dude.) --AnonEMouse (squeak) 03:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Weakly opposing all but the 10 candidates I'd explicitly like to see on Arbcom to double the power of my vote. --<font color="#330000">M <font color="#334400">P <font color="#338800">er <font color="#33cc00">el 04:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Didn't offer me beverages. OK, actually, this is not a serious candidacy. Ante  lan  <sup style="color:darkred;">talk  05:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose, though applaud the candidancy. Professor marginalia (talk) 07:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose.Wetman (talk) 08:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Opposition to joke candidacies can be taken for granite. GRBerry 17:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose.Sweetfirsttouch (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose. Does not mention why this is a strong candidate and treats this a joke. -- Kimon <font color="#008080">talk 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) The candidate promises "stone cold chillin", but I'd prefer someone who's not afraid to make use of metals. :) – Black Falcon (Talk) 01:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose - The arbcom is evil, so any candidate who chooses to participate in it in any manner shows poor judgment. Gentgeen (talk) 03:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Just not enough stone-cold chillin. Frozenbrains (talk) 04:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * User had fewer than 150 mainspace edits as of 1 November 2007, and thus lacks suffrage ZZ Claims~ Evidence 04:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose failure to answer key questions, including one important to me. SashaNein (talk) 04:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Poor taste in beers. Kusma (talk) 09:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Dessources (talk) 15:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose nope, nice approach, wrong committee docboat (talk) 16:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Terence (talk) 16:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose not fit for ArbCom based on reply to questions pruthvi (talk) 20:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Law Lord (talk) 21:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose. I usually don't mind humor, but come on... there's a time to be funny, and this isn't it. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 07:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) <font face="century gothic" color="#17450F">Kim Dent-Brown  <font face="century gothic" size="1" color="#17450F">(Talk)  16:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose - as per Orderinchaos.  Hαvεlok   беседа   мансарда  19:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose - second batch of voting, adding some opposes. Frivolous candidacy. Got a few laughs though. Carcharoth (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose(olive (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC))
 * 14) Oppose for giving Crash a 5. It deserves better. :( — <font face="Arial" color="green">xDanielx T/C\R 08:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Oppose Tonywalton Talk 12:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Oppose Showers (talk) 02:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Oppose - it's not life or death, but there are some people for whom ArbCom is important. I'd like to see them elected. Warofdreams talk 18:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) Oppose Luqman Skye (talk) 07:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Oppose --Allen3 talk 16:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Oppose Matt Zero 20:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Oppose --Pixelface (talk) 03:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Oppose--<font color="#ff004f">S<font color="#ff001f">a<font color="#ff1000">u<font color="#ff4000">d<font color="#ff6000">a d e 7  21:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC) - No offense but I read your responses to the questions you were posed and you don't seem capable of answering a question seriously. I want arbitrators to be calm and rational and to take all aspects of the debate/problem into consideration. I don't think "Stone Cold Chillin'"is a valid arbitration skill.
 * 23) Oppose-- There's a time to laugh and a time to chill, to act civilized and act real ill... Come back when you've learned the difference! Eaglizard (talk) 07:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) Oppose per Professor marginalia. KissL 13:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. You iz not serious candidate, and Arbcom are serious matter. MrVibrating (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Less than 150 mainspace edits before November 1st, sorry Secret account 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Has the completely wrong attitude for ArbCom. Arbitration is very serious, and acting in that manner is not appropriate for it. L337 kybldmstr (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2)  Maxim (talk)  00:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose - the littlest answer to a big issue. Rgds, - Trident13 (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose. Joke candidacy. --Muchness (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. Gen. von Klinkerhoffen (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) No purpose except winning. -Pika ten10 (talk) 06:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose Karl2620 (talk) 11:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose. --JWSchmidt (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose --Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose Alex Pankratov (talk) 21:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 22:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Strong Oppose Try not to act silly.-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Oppose. Sam Blacketer (talk) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Moo

 * 1) Some questions cannot be answered. <font color="#0000DD">&gt;<font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i a n t &lt;  17:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Couldn't have said it better myself, Radiant. - Chardish (talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Seriously. --Fang Aili talk 21:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Ditto. Dreadstar †  22:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) The d00d's got bull sized balls for staying in this long. so.. Moo. or Mu. Whichever. ++Lar: t/c 04:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) I'm tempted to support, if for nothing than to see a remedy to the effect of "User:Someoneoranother is reminded to chill out. Like, seriously." Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I would love to see that applied as a remedy. It would make ArbCom more fun. &spades;P M C&spades; 22:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) If I were to support any candidate, it would be you. But I ain't, so I won't. Good luck though. Leithp 13:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * C'mon, mate...you know you want to:)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 22:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) I like pie. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * :{} Fainites barley 23:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Radiant!.  This candidacy is impossible to support --- though I want to.  It is also impossible to oppose though I feel an obligation to do so. --Blue Tie (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) My coin spun swiftly / over and over again / landing on its edge ---Sluzzelin  talk  20:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Meow

 * 1) - Jehochman Talk 16:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Drama is good, yes? Homestarmy (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Straight stone cold chillin?  On my Arbcom election?  It's more likely than you think. Shem(talk) 07:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Meow - there's really no other sensible vote here.  --Hyperbole (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 16:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Precisely. -- \/\/slack  ( talk ) 03:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Bearian (talk) 19:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Risker (talk) 05:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC). I am afraid Xolox is incorrect, Arbcom could very well be considered absurdist comedy on some days.

Rawr!

 * 1) Where's Bishzilla?  Miranda  01:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) 'Zilla can only count to hrair, but probably not 150 mainspace edits. :-( Unless extra good vandalism edits count double. Then  support little Dan. Down with editcountitis! <font face="comic sans ms">  bishzilla     ROA R R! !     08:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC).

Chihuahua

 * 1) We don't need a Roast Beef au Jus, we need a cheese chalupa. Put some more cheese sauce on that chalupa or else! Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 04:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins

 * 1) Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins. DS (talk) 23:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)