Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Lord Voldemort

My RfA
Ed-- Thank you for your comments concerning my RfA. However, as the page clearly states, Gabrielsimon and me now have a fine relationship. I understand your concerns though. Thank you for your time. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 13:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, I must say, your comment "What is this, a joke?" is very hurtful. I feel, except for the run-in with Gav and Rhobite, that I have been a fine user. Basically calling people (read: me) a joke does not make this the kind of place people want to be around. This community has already lost too many good editors, and this hostile attitude does not do much in the ways of community building. I don't expect an apology or anything. I just want you to know that there has been a lot of talk lately about being more civil around RfA, and a good first step would not be to call someone's request a joke. Sorry to bother you again. Cheers. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 13:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Struck out the verbiage you objected to, but I still don't like your choice of username. Admins need to inspire confidence: a name like "Hypocrite" or "Murderer" or "Scofflaw" would not. You chose the name of a fictional murder (I assume as a joke), and a user with name something like "hypocrite" nominated you with "has spread his Dark Mark far and wide". If you expect serious people to take you serious, please request a name change. I wouldn't mind "Tom Riddle" - that character was not a murderer when he called himself that at Hogwarts. But to get a full welcome from me, you better get with the program more. Uncle Ed 14:06, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for striking it out. Ed, I know you are a very valuable, and highly regarded editor, but I must say, you are losing a lot of respect from me. So now you are punishing me for who nominated me, and how they did it? And you judge people solely on their user name? Tell me you oppose because of the personal attack in my past. Tell me you oppose because of my relative short time period here. Tell me you oppose because I am a crappy editor. Based on you comments, I have a sneaking suspicion that you may not have even read my whole RfA, and may be making decisions prematurely. I do not really have a problem with people opposing me (everyone's entitled to their own opinion), but I do have a problem with seemingly frivolous reasons why. I would almost you rather not write anything. Pull a Boothy and just sign your name. People should judge people based on their edits, not their user names. Someone with the name Angel221 or GoodEditorIAm is not automatically a valued contributor here at WP. I am not here to try to get you to change your vote (it looks like it's headed for "no consensus" anyway), I just want you to hear my concerns. And I need to "get with the program more"? The way you act, it seems like you want me to get with the program a whole lot less. Thank you for your time. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 14:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I thought you might react like this, "punishing me" (to use your own words) by publicly withdrawing your respect from me. If you called yourself Freddy Krueger (sp?) I would also vote against your RFA. There's a limit to how silly we can be on-line, in a serious project like this. You've crossed the line.


 * Apologize convincingly to Gabriel, deal with the name issue, be a little more courteous yourself, and you can gain my trust - if it matters to you. I won't be deciding this issue; I resigned my bureaucrat rights last month. If my words carry any weight, maybe it's because I'm right. Uncle Ed 15:00, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I would appreciate it if you would stop trying to be "holier than thou" . You are just an editor, like the rest of us. Me and Gavin already have a fine relationship. There is no apology needed. And I have not publicly withdrawn my respect from you. I still appreciate you and your work. You are a valuable contributor. I have tried to be very courteous throughout this whole RfA experience. I have had a lot of crap thrown at me (some of which isn't even my fault; Hipocrite nominating me), and think I have handled myself very amicably. You still seem to be judging me on my user name, and not my edits. That is a very bad precedent to set. And you did a nice job of dodging my comments as well. I want to earn everyone's trust here on WP, but I think some of our editors who have been here a while are forgetting the call to assume good faith. Nothing I've said here on your talk page was meant to be offensive to you, yet you feel the need to call me discourteous . Your words do carry some weight, but are no different than anyone else's. In the only interaction I've ever had with you, I have tried to be civil. Yet even before we interacted, you call me a joke. How is that civil? You obviously are voting oppose because of something. I hope it's not who nominated me, or that some of your friends also voted oppose, or truly because of my user name. I don't have much more time trying to talk to you, I just want you to know that I appreciate your want to make WP a serious project, but my user name is hardly the most childish thing going on here. I hope we can continue being, if not friends, at least respectful of each other. Your concerns signify a great love to keep WP a great resource, and a general care for Wikipedia, but I wish you would know that I have the same love, and same care. Thank you for your time. Cheers my friend. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 15:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I suggest you review Avoid personal remarks. I have marked up with HTML strikeout a few phrases which pertain to this policy page. If you are to be an Administrator, you will do will to uphold a higher standard of courtesy than the average user. Uncle Ed 15:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * So you didn't call me a joke? You didn't call me discourteous? Since you are an administrator, I would expect you to be held to a higher standard of courtesy towards an average user (me). You call me silly. You basically say I am a bad editor (the whole "get with the program" thing). And I feel I raised some very legitimate concerns which you still have failed to address. The "holier than thou" comment was in reference to your remark about me being wrong. Listen, I just want to be a good editor here. I do not really care for people attacking my integrity or character. Thanks. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 16:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I think it's a general truth that the more somebody carries on about how badly or unfairly they're being treated in conjunction with their nomination for adminship, the more likely they are to be perceived as being not the sort who ought to be entrusted with such a position. Whether they're right or wrong in their complaints, the mere fact that they're the sort to carry on a grudge match all over the site shows them not to be likely to be calm and even-handed in exercising their administrator powers, should they be granted. *Dan T.* 16:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Dtobias, I will address your comments in a minute on your talk page. Ed-- "Watch the destruction unfold here." It is silly, but do you really think this is that silly? My RfA has basically been destruction. People spitting at me, insults thrown, general "not-nicety". If this is the silliest thing on WP, I will go jump off of a bridge. And besides, it is my own user page. People's user pages can't say silly things sometimes? For some reason, it just seems you do not care for me. That's fine. I have no intention of begging people to like me. You are entitled to your opinion. But please, be kind to future people going through RfA. It is a very trying time for some people, and what you are doing to me does not really make me feel like part of the community. I appreciate your time. Thanks. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 17:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't keep talking to you, if I didn't care. Let me just point out one last thing: I said There's a limit to how silly we can be on-line, in a serious project to which you replied "You call me silly" but later concede, "It is silly, but do you really think this is that silly?" It sounds like you're alternately (1) complaining about the label and (2) acknowledging the label. Now if you become an admin you'll need to be consistent.

I think you might be able to inspire trust, and how you handle all this RFA stuff will determine to a large extent you people regard you in the future. I am not trying to stop you, I am trying to help you improve. But as Chris told his son in What Dreams May Come, you gotta show me more. Uncle Ed 18:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * While I've certainly had enough of this back-and-forth, I just want to say that that one comment is sort of silly, but nowhere near the silliest things here on WP. I don't really like to by stereotyped based on one or two edits. 99% of what I do here is not silly. I am allowed to have some fun, right? Do you go around to the people that Extreme Lesbian Support, or generally half the stuff that gets said over at RfA, and tell them they're silly? I just am seeing a standard for me that is not being held to other people. And like I've said before, I have raised concerns you are not answering. If you feel you have said enough, that's fine, we're done, but I honostly feel there is some sort of prejudice against me. I know my RfA is headed towards "no consensus", and hope in the next few months to "show you more." I appreciate your concerns. See you around, my friend. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 18:39, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Ed. I see there is already an extensive discussion here (which I don't care to read) but I just wanted to drop by and give you my thoughts. I see you are stressed right now, but being hostile, and really, dismissive on an admin request is not a great way to relieve it. That the nominator and candidate acted in good faith is unquestioned. Your demeaning aattitude is really quite unhelpful (reminds me of this). Plenty of others were able to oppose in a courteous and constructive. Especially considering civility was the main gist of your opposition, you may want to think about your words more next time. Thanks and hope you're feeling better! Dmcdevit·t 22:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow, maybe I should've read it, since you just moved to support at the same time I wrote that. Oh well, hope that means you see what I mean. :) Regards. Dmcdevit·t 22:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I changed my vote to support. Uncle Ed 22:52, 3 October 2005 (UTC)