Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Snowspinner

Crossed-out votes

 * 1) Strong Oppose - I'm afraid he won't play by the rules based on what I see at this comment request. He also espouses an "ends justify the means" view of wikipedia and that is very dangerous. - Antimetro 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Account started on January 1st, less than 150 edits. Does not meet criteria. I'm sorry, nothing personal. - Haukur 00:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Moved comments
(147.)Strong oppose. He is controversial and for good reason. On repeated occassions he's blatantly violated Wikipedia policies to delete articles he didn't like which clearly didn't fall under speedy deletion criteria. In WP:COMICS has explicitly stated that he personally is allowed to override consensus whenever he thinks the consensus is wrong. He's had a block on me reversed because it was a) obviously wrong and b) a complete conflict of interest (he refuses to even acknowledge the possibility of a conflict of interest). He has personally threatened to block me for simply inserting a straw poll on a talk page. Read Requests_for_comment/Snowspinner_2 for a good idea of how much he doesn't care about Wikipedia civility and no personal attacks policies despite strong enforcing them. In short, he rules with his temper and not in slightest bit with objectivity. His philosophy is "the ends justify the means and screw anyone who thinks otherwise" (see []). SO many people know he his a problem and should have his admin privileges revoked, it's really just support from a few powerful admins, namely current arbitrators, that he hasn't. Nathan J. Yoder 17:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)